The End Game

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I've noticed often the way several people's actions tend to occur at the same tick of the game.

What if combat were the same when someone died? If they got off that slash just as you cut them down, in the same breath, you might say? For example:

Code Select Expand

You do unspeakable damage to the grey man.
You do unspeakable damage to the grey man.
The grey man chops you very hard.
The grey man slashs you hard.
The grey man collapses to the ground.
Your vision goes black.

[Forty Winks]

What happens when you parry your opponents attack and attack at the same time?  :wink:  Current way the code works seems alright as it is.

[Cegar]

What happens when you parry your opponents attack and attack at the same time?  :wink:  

Then it is called a riposte.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

What happens when you parry your opponents attack and attack at the same time?  :wink:  Current way the code works seems alright as it is.

Ripostes happen now.

Code Select Expand

You deftly parry the grey man's slash.
You dodge the grey man's slash.
You lightly cut the grey man's neck.
You lightly bludgeon the grey man's head.

That's a parry and the effect of a riposte, when it happens all in one tick.

What I am suggesting is letting a dying character get off that final attack, even if you kill him, IF it happens in the same tick. I am suggesting that two people should be able to kill each other IF things line up correctly.

[Fnord]

What I am suggesting is letting a dying character get off that final attack, even if you kill him, IF it happens in the same tick. I am suggesting that two people should be able to kill each other IF things line up correctly.

While the technical aspect of what you're describing confuses me (fortunately we have super ninja robot zombie coder imms that no doubt get it), the concept sounds like a cool addition. Double KO FTW.

[slipshod]

I see what 7DV is saying, and I agree.  Even if it's not a situation where each fighter kills the other in the same final tic, you could have times when one is knocked out of stun points and the other is killed, or one is mortally wounded and one is knocked out... or one is killed and the other it knocked to a dangerously low health themselves.
It would make aftermath of battles more interesting, and add to the panic.
Imagine how fast your pulse would race if you and your attacked knocked each other out in the desert and you were waiting to wake up before him and crawl over there to cut his throat.

As it is everything else in combat happens in the same round, except for when a blow that drops one fighter occurs, it prematurely ends the full play of the round.  And it wouldn't always work to the winner's disadvantage.

You do unspeakable damage to the grey man.
You do unspeakable damage to the grey man.
You swiftly doge the grey man's attack.
You deftly parry the grey man's attack.
The grey man collapses to the ground.

Look at that flailing desperation on the way down

Editted to add:  I see the logic behind the current system, too.  I like it both ways.

[Cegar]

How cool would it be to finally kill that damn scorpion, only to have it flail out with its dying breath and poison you? Not sure how realistic it would be, but it does seem to be drawn out quite a bit in movies, books, et cetera. Interesting idea.

[LoD]

I'm not a fan of implementing some notion of desperation lunges, death throes, or heroic final strikes.  

The code already determines the pace and frequency with which each of the combatants move, why should the end be any different than the beginning or the middle?  The code isn't concerned with being fair or dramatic, so why would it suddenly change course when the fight drew to a close?  During the course of the fight, I might attack 15 times and my opponent 8 times, yet we're supposed to have an equal opportunity finish?

Reaching 0 health can symbolize a great many things; blunt head trauma, severed arm, internal bleeding, failed organ, collapsed lung, blood loss, or a host of other deblitating conditions that can result from stick each other with sharp objects.  As others have mentioned, this seems inspired by watching the last 5 minutes of a dramatic samurai film.  It makes for a dramatic finish, but it's not something that applies to every situation.

-LoD

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

LoD, maybe you better read my proposal and my examples again.

I'm also not really influenced by the last five minutes of a samurai movie, and I also don't happen to be a fan of some notion of desperation lunges, death throes, or heroic final strikes. I was looking at how the code tosses all actions into a tik sometimes and how it doesn't other times, and then suggesting that IF A TIK THAT WOULD ALLOW YOU BOTH TO ATTACK HAPPENED TO OCCURRED WITH THE KILLING BLOW ON YOUR PART, IT SHOULD ALLOW BOTH FOES TO ATTACK, EVEN IF ONE WAS DYING.

Get it?

It's no special move at all. It's combat, and it's coincidental, and I'll thank you to stop looking at my ideas as inspired by anything other than my thought process, unless I specifically state otherwise.

The code already determines the pace and frequency with which each of the combatants move, why should the end be any different than the beginning or the middle?

This is the key. When what I say should occur would occur would be when and if the code decided that both of our actions had occured at the same tik in time, such as...

Code Select Expand

>This is your prompt.
You deftly parry the grey man's attack.
The grey man barely misses you.
You lightly slash the grey man's shoulder.  <------[ Two attacks happen here ]
The grey man deftly avoids your slash.

>This is your prompt.
You deftly parry the grey man's attack.
The grey man grazes you on the neck.

>This is your prompt.
The grey man dodges your slash.
The grey man deftly parries your slash.

>This is your prompt.
You graze the grey man's neck.
You do unspeakable damage to the grey man's head.
The grey man's chop hits you hard in the head.    <---- [The code rolled two actions to happen here ]
The grey man's hammer hits you square in the neck.
The grey man crumples to the ground.
Your vision goes black.

>This was your prompt.

[LoD]

Get it?  

It's no special move at all. It's combat, and it's coincidental, and I'll thank you to stop looking at my ideas as inspired by anything other than my thought process, unless I specifically state otherwise.

Yes, I get it.

This assumes that these 'tiks' represent a simultaneous attack.  A RL second would be much shorter IG, so these exchanges could be interpreted as attacks that happen closely enough to be represented in the same "tik", but are not simultaneous.

The process you're suggesting actually does occur when the first attacker does not land the killing blow, so we're talking solely about the situation when the first character lands the killing blow.  My opinion is that a killing blow would easily change the strength, accuracy, direction, or position in such a way that any assumed simulatenous attack would be rendered useless or ineffectual.

You assume the code as disallowing the swing of the deceased simply because they were killed first, and that the order of events exist in the same moment.  I argue that the code, as it presently stands, implies the attacks are -not- simultaneous, but a rather quick exchange with a defined order of attack.  And also that a "tik" in combat does not necessarily represent the "same breath" because of the difference between the RL and IG passing of time.

That said, I could see three potential outcomes of the suggestion:

:arrow: Nothing happens.  Combat "tiks" aren't considered simultaneous events and/or the death blow would render the second attack ineffectual.

:arrow: The second attack is implemented because it is decided that "tiks" are simultaneous.

:arrow: They implement a chance for the second attack to occur after the death blow, representing the possibility that the moment happened "in the same breath".

I believe this particular part of the code is fine as it stands.

-LoD

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I will certianly agree that the code is fine as is. This is more of a by-suggestion, something I thought might bear merit. If, as you argue, a tik is not the same moment in time but instead a period of time that is too close to be represented further, then I understand an aversion to the idea.

That said, I like my idea. Heh.

I just like the idea of two mortally wounded foes lying in the desert, their players nervously hoping they recover before the other, the sheer agony when one or both die, the curiosity when a traveller happens upon them, etc, etc, etc....

[Xygax]

An idea like this would present some interesting coding challenges because of the way the combat system works currently (and frankly because of the way the game's main-loop works currently).  When you die, you are immediately (ie., at the instant your death is calculated, as opposed to later on in what Vemonz is calling a "tick") removed from the game world and replaced with a corpse object.  If you would have had an attack opportunity later on in the same tick, you no longer exist to allow it to be calculated.  We could, I suppose, keep a queue of who died in the current tick and flush it out at the end of the tick, replacing dead people with their corpses as appropriate, but it could yield other weirdnesses that shouldn't happen, and I'd be leary of making a relatively fundamental change like that without a very strong argument in favor of it.  It's pretty low "bang for the buck", given that in most combat situations, a victor is clear well before any death-blow is struck, and the "death throes" opportunity is very rarely going to do anything beyond giving the victor a few more bruises (if the blow lands at all, which -- since you're dead -- it should probably have a much lower chance of doing).

It's an interesting idea, though, and I do see the aspect of realism in it.  Very rarely is death an instantaneous thing as it is represented to be in the code.

-- X