Combat Rewrite II

[Miri]

I voted for 3 as well. I like the current system, I think it just needs a few changes and option 3 should be enough.

At first I wasn't sure about the auto-atack thing, but it really seems like a great idea for countering psychopats terrorizing towns from inside their barraged huts.

[Snake]

I like my psychopats inside barraged huts, so I voted 4! Yes I did!

[Mykey]

I voted for 3 as well. I like the current system, I think it just needs a few changes and option 3 should be enough.

At first I wasn't sure about the auto-atack thing, but it really seems like a great idea for countering psychopats terrorizing towns from inside their barraged huts.

I love psychopaths... but I like the auto attack because to me it makes sense. If you swing your battle axe at me I`m sure as hell going to swing back, only an extreme pacifist or someone mentally challenged wouldn`t.

On the downside after more thought it makes slavery a problem... slaves don`t strike back at all, ever.

And a problem for law enforcement, If the criminal wants to give up assaulting an authority figure won`t help them....And will tiredness be a way to cheat the system? Attacking a man with 4 characters and he auto attacks making him completely draggable? I may have to change my vote. I don`t know.... I like the current system, in my opinion tiredness just needs to be reduced to half or a quarter. Engagement makes sense and it being a project or like a project makes sense... A near death state giving you a chance to heal before being killed while you`re not even logged is definitely a must.... 1 or 2 just may be a better option... Ithink I`m over thinking this, in any case I hope we don`t rush the change, a lot of minor details need to be known.

Yeah I had to change my vote to option number 2 it seems better because of unknowns.

[SekoETC]

The person being attacked should know it's an auto attack? For what reason? I guess that the auto-attack should apply even if the attacker is the one entering the room. There should also be a way to get rid of the auto-attack if you change your mind or the situation changes. If more than one person is auto-attacking, then I think that the attacks should happen in order of who chose to auto-attack first.

Suppose someone spawns as a newspawn thief and gets away but someone marks them to be killed on sight. Years later the ex-thief ends up in the same town as the person who had set up auto-attack on them, gets auto-attacked the moment they see each other. You don't remember the person, maybe you ask them why the heck did you attack me? or maybe you just strike back straight away. Maybe you brought some friends and they'll attack to defend you because the attack seemed completely unprovoked. But if you could see that the attacker was using auto-attack, it would reveal that the person won't be immediately able to explain why they did it and might make you more likely to give them time to wake up, rather than hitting them back as quickly as possible.

It would be good if there was a list that could be viewed and you could remove people even if they weren't present. Actually, I think it would be good if you could view a list of everybody you've ever named, since at least I tend to record information about people in their descriptions and it can't be accessed in any manner if the person is not present or appearing on your events page. That way you could add auto-attack on people you met over a week ago if you receive a word that they committed crimes in another town, or add more details about them.

[cooldevo]

On the downside after more thought it makes slavery a problem... slaves don`t strike back at all, ever.

I would hope that you are not talking about slaves in real life because you are horribly wrong on that point. Or maybe just the way you'd like slaves to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_rebellion

[Mykey]

On the downside after more thought it makes slavery a problem... slaves don`t strike back at all, ever.

I would hope that you are not talking about slaves in real life because you are horribly wrong on that point. Or maybe just the way you'd like slaves to be?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slave_rebellion

Well I mean, someone playing a slave and trying to stay alive. Without help from other slaves and this works for prisoners too, you wouldn`t want to auto-attack, it may get you in big trouble.
A single counter-attack, and a revolt are two different things entirely. A single slave or prisoner doesn`t constitute an uprising or revolt in my opinion.

[EchoMan]

Years later the ex-thief ends up in the same town as the person who had set up auto-attack on them, gets auto-attacked the moment they see each other....

The auto-attack could have a limited time span.

[Chris]

For those who don't like auto-attack... what else is there? In the current system, you as a player have to watch your character every damned second to keep him/her safe. That just isn't in line with the rest of Cantr's slow pace. So we can either slow combat down a lot, as with the "combat as a project" proposal, or we can make defense automatic like a reflex.

As for being active vs. asleep, we could make it so that only characters who have had their players log on recently (e.g., within 48 hours) get the auto-defense. It does seem strange that a completely comatose character would be hitting back.

Honestly though, I actually kind of like what Chris suggested better than the three proposed in the poll, with the exception of his 4th statement. The lock thing sounds kind of weird the way he put it. If there's a lock, it should be picked or broken. Not... simply gotten past. So maybe a picking option?

Thanks for the endorsement. As for getting past a lock, have you ever watched a prison escape movie? They don't get out through the main gate past the searchlights and guard towers and razor wire. They dig a tunnel. So even in the most disadvantaged situation -- much more so than Cantr characters vs. a lock -- people circumvent devices meant to keep them in/out.

[Mykey]

2. Will training be one of the attack options? I don't like to incapacitate my opponent each time I want to wack him with a pillow.

Yes

Can training, regardless of the system introduced be resolved instantly please? Or will we have to wait, as if it was a normal attack?

For those who don't like auto-attack... what else is there? In the current system, you as a player have to watch your character every damned second to keep him/her safe. .

So all thieves will now be considered guilty of assault too? That`s my only concern. That and getting killed by a slave driver, for hitting back when I didnt make that choice.

[Piscator]

The reason why weapons would have to be equipped is to avoid unvoluntary counter attacks. If you select a weapon or ready your fists, you counter-attack. If you don't, you don't. The attacker would be able to see which option you chose and would know what he'd have to expect.

[Mykey]

The reason why weapons would have to be equipped is to avoid unvoluntary counter attacks. If you select a weapon or ready your fists, you counter-attack. If you don't, you don't. The attacker would be able to see which option you chose and would know what he'd have to expect.

Ok good, is a mixup between these 3 suggestions possible? I personally like parts of all 3, like the near death states and ransacking KO`d people. I`ll switch my vote back to 3 since this is the case.

[SekoETC]

I don't remember there being a mention of auto-retaliation, at least in option 3. Option 1 seems too complicated to work out and I don't like option 2. Option 3 was giving people a chance to hit that guy who's barricaded himself in a building or one who docks to town ready to attack and undock within seconds. Of course the attacker could also choose his targets while in the building or on his boat, but if he only picked two or three targets (that's what I did with my character when attacking Olip forest because only then you can have considerable damage), a chance is those people wouldn't be present by the time you dock/exit the building, resulting in you not auto-attacking anybody while the people in town only have one person to target, or you'll auto-target everybody who was there last time just to play it safe and end up attacking so many that your tiredness will reach 100%, making you unable to use your shield against the town people's auto-attacks that were scheduled later than yours. I think this could bring a whole new level of strategy and planning to the game.

[Mykey]

I don't remember there being a mention of auto-retaliation, at least in option 3.

quote="Suggestion 3"]- Weapons and shields (and armor) are equipped RPG style. When a person attacks another character, damage is applied to both parties depending on their current equipment and stats.

Isn`t this the same as a counter attack?

[Doug R.]

Years later the ex-thief ends up in the same town as the person who had set up auto-attack on them, gets auto-attacked the moment they see each other....

The auto-attack could have a limited time span.

When discussing this proposal, I always assumed that the auto attack would be like a project, in that if the character moved, it would be canceled automatically. In that way, auto-attacking would only work for a passive character.

[Doug R.]

I don't remember there being a mention of auto-retaliation, at least in option 3.

quote="Suggestion 3"]- Weapons and shields (and armor) are equipped RPG style. When a person attacks another character, damage is applied to both parties depending on their current equipment and stats.

Isn`t this the same as a counter attack?

I never, ever understood it this way, and I don't think it was ever meant to be taken this way. I certainly wouldn't have given it my endorsement to go public if that were the case. GAB, can you weigh in please, because if that is what it means, I have a big problem with it. If that's not what it means, we need to either clarify or remove the language.