Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 11:03:35 GMT -5
I was contemplating on a specific combat system at one time. The system is nothing new, the character has specific attacking/defending/whatever abilities linked to what skills they have and have a generic round time between 'all' actions, and separate round time for each individual action, some slower, some faster. That system isnt new.
What I was pondering about is "pacing" setting. The more skilled a character is in combat, the more control he has over pacing. Pacing setting lets you set how long the roundtimes are between combatants. So a newbie would only have 'standard'. Someone moderate would be able to have 'hurried', and an expert would have 'slow-time'. For example.
So when two or more combatants are engaged with each other, all combatants are set to the slowest setting any one of them chose.
This doesnt give any particular 'bonus' to the extremely skilled person. But does slow combat down to allow them to orient themselves more, possibly use more skills that they have access to, not because their roundtimes are shorter then others, but because they've got more real life time to formulate a strategy and react. Or in other hand, it can quicken a fight up, in case you're mowing through a cockroach infestation.
There would be settings that would allow one person to give up their own setting. Say someone unskilled agreeing to 'hurried'. And there would be skills that would temporarily, speed up the pacing despite other combatants wishes. Ale backstab and a flurry of blows, but if it doesnt secure quick enough, then you're shit out of luck and the time is slowed back down to whatever setting is slowest.
Too complicated, you think? Unnecessary?
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516 
|
Post by Jeshin on Mar 20, 2015 9:59:25 GMT -5
Random Questions
1. What kind of illegal/criminal/pirate-y things would you want to be able to do in a spacefaring scifi game?
2. Do you believe that enslaved/kidnapped roles be that short-term or long-term are fun for the right people and should be supported?
3. What kind of tools/gadgets/equipment would you most want to see in a spacefaring scifi game?
|
|
|
|
Post by nyrsucks on Mar 20, 2015 20:25:12 GMT -5
Random Questions 2. Do you believe that enslaved/kidnapped roles be that short-term or long-term are fun for the right people and should be supported? I've always wanted to do the old cliche escape from prison thing. They toss you in but if you can manage to escape (it is hard but not impossible) it'd be sweet. Especially if there were multiple people populating the 'rinth/prison environment. |
|
|
|
Post by lyse on Mar 21, 2015 12:33:42 GMT -5
Random Questions 1. What kind of illegal/criminal/pirate-y things would you want to be able to do in a spacefaring scifi game? 2. Do you believe that enslaved/kidnapped roles be that short-term or long-term are fun for the right people and should be supported? 3. What kind of tools/gadgets/equipment would you most want to see in a spacefaring scifi game? Not sure how much this'll help, but there used to be a lot of Star Wars muxes that had spacecraft, space combat, trading, etc. Might be able to get some ideas from those, if there are any left. There wasnt much roleplay, because people basically flew around, trading and in space combat all the time. So I guess, if you're going in that direction, maybe station or planet based would be ideal. Then you could have smuggling and all of those types of things going on...criminal faction, law faction etc. There also used to be a Wing Commander game that had a great story arc by the way, that at some point had a portion of the human players enslaved by the Kilrathi. This is one thing I think Arm did right and why it was so memorable, the occupation was a short term thing, but it generated a lot of rp. I think slavery/oppression is great short term, but then it becomes cheesy at some point. Tools and gadgets, I tend to like my sci-fi conceivably realistic, so no phasors or sonic screwdrivers. Railguns and bullets...yes please. |
|
julio
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 270
|
Post by julio on Apr 8, 2015 23:14:14 GMT -5
I look forward to this.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Apr 9, 2015 16:27:40 GMT -5
We're into week 6 of development and will be making an announcement May 1st regarding our web-presence and other projects. We're currently tackling movement and combat, the big 2, with other portions of the game already mapped out in a high level waiting for us to get to them and finalize the ideas.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Apr 13, 2015 10:58:09 GMT -5
Question: Should MUDs only provide rules that are enforceable? Should they provide 'guidelines' for things they cannot hope to actually enforce?
Example: If a game had a rule "No OOC coordination for IC meetings." that is essentially unenforceable.
Example: If a game had a rule "Adhere to OOC/IC separation when it comes to knowledge and character actions." this is enforceable presuming a game has some way of logging players (which all games do via the runlog).
Are both acceptable, both unacceptable, one acceptable and the other not?
|
|
|
|
Post by BitterFlashback on Apr 13, 2015 23:20:05 GMT -5
Question: Should MUDs only provide rules that are enforceable? Should they provide 'guidelines' for things they cannot hope to actually enforce? Given my endlss rantng about rules, i suspect you know where i stand. One page. all the rules on there. Anything not on there isnt a rule. No vague rules wherever it can be avoidd. etc etc. Really, I should just dump them all in one thread. |
|
japheth
staff puppet account
Posts: 31
|
Post by japheth on Apr 14, 2015 0:46:36 GMT -5
Question: Should MUDs only provide rules that are enforceable? Should they provide 'guidelines' for things they cannot hope to actually enforce? Example: If a game had a rule "No OOC coordination for IC meetings." that is essentially unenforceable. Example: If a game had a rule "Adhere to OOC/IC separation when it comes to knowledge and character actions." this is enforceable presuming a game has some way of logging players (which all games do via the runlog). Are both acceptable, both unacceptable, one acceptable and the other not? I'd argue that your second example is unenforceable by the standards of your first example, because it requires you to know what was going on inside someone else's head. But practically, you CAN enforce whatever rule you want. There are only degrees of enforceability, not absolutes. I think guidelines are helpful so long as they actually reflect the standards by which people are expected to act. The problem with a lot of guidelines and rules is that they are laid down as the law and then enforced extremely sloppily or even corruptly. Having a few guidelines as opposed to rules or even rules that are not greatly enforceable, but sticking with the principles and being transparent about it is probably the best outcome, in my opinion. |
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Apr 14, 2015 1:00:39 GMT -5
Assuming a bog standard runlog, you can determine if IC information has been passed to that character. So to example, John tells someone Mary is the super secret assassin (which is correct) and he's passing along this information as if he's 100% sure. Well no one has told John this, Mary has not interacted with John at all, John has no thinks or feels indicating any suspicion. That would be a pretty good case to watch someone for further actions with no IC links.
So in the instance of people acting with no IC information to do so, you have enough cases of that and you lay it out. If someone can explain it away, sure great, but if not then it's at least an evidence based approach to enforcement.
An easier example is, John logins and walks to exactly where Mary is to save her from a mortal wound. There's no attempt to RP Mary shouting or contacting John via some means.
|
|
Jeshin
GDB Superstar
Posts: 1,516
|
Post by Jeshin on Apr 30, 2015 20:27:40 GMT -5
redshiftmud.com/Baaaaaa. dum.... Baaaaaaa. dum... Badum badum badum badum. There's your sneak peek, don't forget the announcement May 1st!
|
|
julio
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 270
|
Post by julio on Apr 30, 2015 21:11:02 GMT -5
You're killing me!
|
|
julio
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 270
|
Post by julio on May 1, 2015 12:54:02 GMT -5
redshiftmud.com/Baaaaaa. dum.... Baaaaaaa. dum... Badum badum badum badum. There's your sneak peek, don't forget the announcement May 1st! It's may first! |
|
|
|
Post by sirra on May 1, 2015 14:08:15 GMT -5
Question: Should MUDs only provide rules that are enforceable? Should they provide 'guidelines' for things they cannot hope to actually enforce? Example: If a game had a rule "No OOC coordination for IC meetings." that is essentially unenforceable. Example: If a game had a rule "Adhere to OOC/IC separation when it comes to knowledge and character actions." this is enforceable presuming a game has some way of logging players (which all games do via the runlog). Are both acceptable, both unacceptable, one acceptable and the other not? Yes. Ideally, you only want rules that are enforceable. It's kind've like the old saying to never give an order you know won't be followed. Never make a rule that you can't do something about, if it's broken. That said. Rules on forums and online games are always best when kept to the most simple and pivotal. For example, Armageddon has a few core rules, and then literally hundreds of little shitty rules which aren't actually spelled out anywhere, except as a flippant mention on ask the staff, or a brief PTA given eight years ago, which is still somehow treated as ironclad and something everyone should know about. Like don't punch verrin hawks, or whatever. Stuff you never find out until it comes up in account notes. |
|
julio
Displaced Tuluki
Posts: 270
|
Post by julio on May 1, 2015 14:56:46 GMT -5
Don't bandage scrab.
|
|
