3 or 5 attacks per day- slightly more realistic.

[N-Aldwitch]

I'm proposing that the combat system be changed from being able to attack anyone once a day, to being able to attack anyone 3 or 5 times full stop.

This means, you have the choice of striking the same person 3 or 5 times over, or 3 or 5 seperate people, either way it is capped out.

The reason why I said 3 or 5 is so you can negotiate what is better.. What I was thinking was, 3 attacks go without tiredness, (well, slight tiredness), the fourth increases tiredness by an excessive amount, and the fifth makes you almost worth nothing in regards to combat damage due to tiredness. No more than 5.

Comments? It's slightly more realistic than striking someone, waiting a day, then striking them again.
'Just hold still. You seem to be protected by a big red bar that tells me I can't attack you for one day.'


Oh ladies and gentlemen- also, don't you hate it when you're about to execute someone in a prison.. but you miss! It is embarrasing, after doing all that RP, why the hell would someone miss anyway during an execution? 'Oh sorry mate I'll be back in a day, I missed! Woopsies!'.. so yeah it also patches that up.

It also stops crazy newspawns from bashing the entire town. Now, before you complain that if a newspawn gets a strong weapon, they could kill someone.. Tell me- why are we preventing something that does happen in real life, a 20 year old killing someone?

It should be possible, difficult, but possible, to kill someone in one day. Not 5. That's a little silly.

So yeah hopefully you see how this patches things up.

[Seeker]

I like this idea.
I think 3 attacks will be suitable, it makes the murder situations more realistic instead of having to roleplay over a number of days. Assasinations will actually work this way instead of having to drag people into buildings hoping that everyone else outside won't break the lock before you're finished.

[Kreed]

Yes, remove the imposed limit altogether and make attacks limited by tiredness and based on each characters strength. So that each attack is less effective.

[SekoETC]

Argh fuck, no. We already have the tiredness. It already stops you from hitting the whole town. If you implement this then you gotta implement automatically hitting back as well, since suppose you had an enemy whose name you didn't remember too well, or whom you didn't notice when arriving to town. Or suppose they arrived after you'd gone to bed.

Once you went to sleep, they could easily murder you without you doing anything in your defense. If they strike you once, there's a chance of missing, and even if they damaged you bad, they still couldn't kill you. An expert fighter does not stand still when assaulted by a thug or three.

[Averus Wolfmaster]

Well, theres no good explanation for attacking once per day too. Its almost imposible to find a good explanation to this problem. I think 2 attacks can be good.

[SekoETC]

Yeah, if those two attacks are separated by 12 hours real time.

The reason for the limit is that people cannot babysit their characters 24 hours a day. Sure most of our characters are nice people who don't have to be afraid of being assassinated, and some of the nasty ones are lucky enough to have minions. But if you're a lonely fighter then you really couldn't stop anywhere overnight without having to worry about being slaughtered.

[Averus Wolfmaster]

I see your point Seko, but one attack per 12 hours as you said is not so much and certainly not too much.

[tiddy ogg]

No. It's against the whole principle of the game.
I'm all for people playing their full 200 minutes, but the majority of the world can't, and the game is promoted as a slow , "few minutes a day" thing, so, as Seko says, you must give the defender a chance.

[Averus Wolfmaster]

Well, your propably right guys, generaly its good like it is.

[Sicofonte]

Exactly, if all the people playing Cantr were online 24/7, then ok, let's attack 100 times in a day (or just one time, but powerfull enough to kill someone in a blow).

But most people playing Cantr can't connect as often (me between them). This change would mean dead for all my favourite chars before next Monday.

[wichita]

I would rather see auto retaliation to help free up the realism.

[tiddy ogg]

The problem with auto-retaliation is in situations where people are sparring. Presumably auto would use the best weapon available at max force, which isn't what's required here. Ditto if you slap someone to try to wake them up.

[Sicofonte]

The problem with auto-retaliation is in situations where people are sparring. Presumably auto would use the best weapon available at max force, which isn't what's required here. Ditto if you slap someone to try to wake them up.

This can be fixed too, and it is not a real problem.
Even in RL we can find those situaation in which you play a "joke" on a friend and he gives you back a blow.

[deadboy]

I do not like auto-retaliation, but I am for a attack max. I like the idea that you can hit one person 3 times in a day, or 3 people once in a day. For one thing, this gives a group of people attacking a single person with healing food far more of an advantage, as right now the defender gets hit by each person, say there is five of them, that is five times, and he attacks all five of them, that's also five times

Whereas with this he would be attacked 15 times and attack back 3 times. Now I'm sorry but if 5 men with swords gang up on you this is perfectly realistic, and therefore interesting politically and fun warfaringly.

It would -not- give a massive advantage to suprise as you seem to think, because you are forgetting that if five people attacked a town they could still only attack 15 times between them, not each person 15 times, and therefore perhaps in a large town attack everyone once a day. Therefore, it is good as it makes large battles more like an attacker to each defender, or two attackers to each defender, rather than one big all on all.

And about people not being able to log in often, frankly, if one person can attack you three times a day, it is going to take -minimum- two days, if you have no shield, or are highly unlucky, -and- they have a very powerful weapon. However, it is more likely to take three days. Now I'm sorry, but if you are in threat of being attacked and you do not log in for three days and there is also noone who wants to protect you, do we really care if that character gets killed? I mean, characters are meant to die, so stop being all -NOOOO- my character died I'm quitting. The game would be boring if everyone lived forever because there would be no fluxes in power and therefore no game.

I think that we should set it so that each character may attack three times a day and no more. Not at each person, but in total. Three is, in this case, the magic number

[Liljum]

I do not like this... I like it as it is.

This game is as i whant it, killing-spree free.

If you wish to kill a whole town you have to work together with someone else... As i like it. No one should be a "one man army".