Movement Delay

[brytta.leofa]

What's the reasoning on command delay being after vs. before movement?

How would it affect things if the delay were split evenly between them?  Consider a total movement delay of two seconds:
t = 0: You type "e".
t = 0: Displayed in your room: "The tall, muscular man walks east."
t = 0+: You're still in the same room.
t = 1: You move one room east.  New room displayed to you.
t = 1: Your arrival message displayed in the new room.
t = 2: You can initiate movement again.

What is the optimal timeline for these events?

[staggerlee]

Moving the delay would end spam-walking.   Whether or not that's intentional, I think that would be an incredibly positive thing for everyone in the game - raiders, militia, and pretty much everyone else.   It wouldn't take any longer to get anywhere, but it would force you to actually see the room and type the direction rather than inputing a movement string and getting up to grab a beer.

To clarify I'm suggesting a scenario in which the delay is the same length, but happens before movement.

[Sephiroto]

I like having the option to spam walk.

[staggerlee]

I like having the option to spam walk.

That may be true, I'm sure quite a few people do.  That's not really an argument for it though.

The question regarding it (like any piece of code with dubious functionality) is:
1) What does it contribute to the game?
2) Can it be eliminated without detracting from the enjoyment of players?

Brytta sorry if I'm side tracking your thread, I came to the code discussion to ask basically that question and found this thread.  I suspect that the heart of your question is much the same, though somewhat more technical.

What is the optimal timeline for these events?

I'd like to see that vary depending on terrain and conditions, personally.

[brytta.leofa]

Moving the delay would end spam-walking.

How so?  Because of how commands stack (or don't)?

My own intention wasn't to stop spamwalking, but to give people a very brief chance to target you after you "start moving," rather the current situation where it's a fait accompli by the time the message is displayed.

I'm not sure how I feel about ending spamwalking.  It's very convenient given how spread out the cities are, but I can see the benefit even for my own immersion of avoiding it.

[staggerlee]

Moving the delay would end spam-walking.

How so?  Because of how commands stack (or don't)?

I was assuming that with the delay moved the string would be interrupted, but the more I think about it the more convinced I am that my assumption was wrong.

My own intention wasn't to stop spamwalking, but to give people a very brief chance to target you after you "start moving," rather the current situation where it's a fait accompli by the time the message is displayed.

I'm not sure how I feel about ending spamwalking.  It's very convenient given how spread out the cities are, but I can see the benefit even for my own immersion of avoiding it.

Yep. Immersion, and the possibility of being interrupted are exactly why I'd like to see spam walking stop.  The current situation isn't really fair to those that might want to interact with you, whether for ill or not.  The downside is of course the inconvenience, but I'm not sure that's a compelling reason for it to persist.

[brytta.leofa]

Anti-spamwalking: Add an additional delay when multiple move commands are queued that increases with the number of abutting commands.  Spamwalking a couple rooms has no penalty, but it gets obnoxious quickly.


But rerailing mine: anybody see a downside to a targeting window between the movement echo and movement actually happening?

[nyrk]

Anti-spamwalking: Add an additional delay when multiple move commands are queued that increases with the number of abutting commands.  Spamwalking a couple rooms has no penalty, but it gets obnoxious quickly.


But rerailing mine: anybody see a downside to a targeting window between the movement echo and movement actually happening?

Actually it makes sense, In fact your potential attacker should have an attack bonus, since effectively you are turning your back on them.

[staggerlee]

Anti-spamwalking: Add an additional delay when multiple move commands are queued that increases with the number of abutting commands.  Spamwalking a couple rooms has no penalty, but it gets obnoxious quickly.


But rerailing mine: anybody see a downside to a targeting window between the movement echo and movement actually happening?

Actually it makes sense, In fact your potential attacker should have an attack bonus, since effectively you are turning your back on them.

I'm inclined to agree.   Add a delay as they leave room to allow time for a coded response, possibly with bonuses to the attacker.

However:

I prefer the idea of eliminating spam walking to a coded interruption of movement or bonus to the attacker.    Eliminating spam walking encourages interaction.   A movement delay that allows for a coded interruption encourages code use without emotes or dialogue.  I'd like to be able to step out in front of someone and swing my club around menacingly, not see someone and spam out hit target as fast as I can.

[nyrk]

Well yeah,
If you are in a room with a potential mugger, you face off, sizing each other up and questioning each others ancestry.

If you are trying to evade them you would flee the room, (or sneak off)  not just walk out of it.

Turning your back and walking out of a tense situation is a bit unrealistic.

This also would make raiding a bit more realistic, since the raider can shout out "drop you pack",  the potential victim now has an incentive to negotiate/create a scene, since he now has a coded chance of being back stabbed as he leaves.

[brytta.leofa]

The tall, muscular man walks north.
> guard north
You prevent the tall, muscular man from walking north.
The tall, muscular man walks south.
> guard south
You prevent the tall, muscular man from walking south.

Holy cow, that's actually incredibly...different.

[Qzzrbl]

I like this idea.

[nyrk]

You could of course emote grabbing the person's arm and yanking them around.
like like like

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I would miss spam-walking, but I could see great things coming out of it.

[KIA]

They've had this system for years on Harshlands I think. I think its a bit spammy, personally.

The guard skill (for instance 'guard east') can be used by anyone, even those without the skill, to stop anyone who is not sneaking or walking, temporarily at least, until they change their movement speed. Having the skill high enough will also slow people down. Is there something wrong or weak about this skill, or is this a different issue altogether?

I'm not understanding the problem.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I'm not understanding the problem.

Having a chance to react before someone leaves.

Nothing would get spammy. All that would happen is delays would be moved around.

[Tisiphone]

NPCs would need to be dealt with. While much more "realistic", I'd prefer not to lose more characters to raptors because the move lag happened beforehand, rather than after.

[Delstro]

How about...

When you are in a walking status, the delay happens before you actually move rooms.
When you are in a running status, the delay is after you physically change rooms.

In this way, you couldn't walk away from a raider, but you could still flee and survive.

[Yokunama]

Not trying to be negative or anything....
What if theres a chance that I will need to log out an I will not be able to do that, because I have my movement delayed for 20 rooms or so?

[brytta.leofa]

Not trying to be negative or anything....
What if theres a chance that I will need to log out an I will not be able to do that, because I have my movement delayed for 20 rooms or so?

Typing "stop" ought to purge all movement delay, including additional, hypothetical, quasi-punitive spamwalking delay.

[KIA]

Ok, delays would be moved around! I understand.

This is in line with a code change to the HIDE skill a while back, where a delay was added while you 'search for a place to hide'. Before that, you just typed hide and a super ninja wisked you away immediately.

[brytta.leofa]

NPCs would need to be dealt with. While much more "realistic", I'd prefer not to lose more characters to raptors because the move lag happened beforehand, rather than after.

Add a short delay between the first combat message ("$sdesc attacks you!") and the first round of combat, during which flee can be used or a delayed movement command can continue.

Sandy Wastes [NSFW]
  A yellow-bellied raptor stands here, looking clever.
> run; e   (t = 0)
You speed up to a fast run.
You run east.
A yellow-bellied raptor attacks you! (t = 0.5)

Atop a Star Dune [NSFW] (t = 1.0)
> e
You run east.
A yellow-bellied raptor arrives from the west. (t = 1.9)

Rocky Wasteland [NSFW] (t = 2.0)

Mind you, I don't want to turn Arm into a twitch game; but, arguably, this sort of calibration makes combat less twitchy than before.

[Yokunama]

Not trying to be negative or anything....
What if theres a chance that I will need to log out an I will not be able to do that, because I have my movement delayed for 20 rooms or so?

Typing "stop" ought to purge all movement delay, including additional, hypothetical, quasi-punitive spamwalking delay.

I think theres some misunderstanding. Theres 20 rooms until I reach my quit location.

[Yokunama]

NPCs would need to be dealt with. While much more "realistic", I'd prefer not to lose more characters to raptors because the move lag happened beforehand, rather than after.

Add a short delay between the first combat message ("$sdesc attacks you!") and the first round of combat, during which flee can be used or a delayed movement command can continue.

Sandy Wastes [NSFW]
  A yellow-bellied raptor stands here, looking clever.
> run; e   (t = 0)
You speed up to a fast run.
You run east.
A yellow-bellied raptor attacks you! (t = 0.5)

Atop a Star Dune [NSFW] (t = 1.0)
> e
You run east.
A yellow-bellied raptor arrives from the west. (t = 1.9)

Rocky Wasteland [NSFW] (t = 2.0)

Mind you, I don't want to turn Arm into a twitch game; but, arguably, this sort of calibration makes combat less twitchy than before.

Thats a bad suggestion to combat.

Anways, isn't there some delay already in place, making some people, mounts, and objects faster than others? Why do we have to make it longer?

[Nez]

I like spam walking. It allows me to emote during situations where wasting time to emote would mean certain death or atleast some amount of bodily injury. And even in situations that arent so dire. You can spam walk and talk. go north 5 times. Type out a sentence and say it. Go north 5 times, type out an sentence and emote it. And it also helps when the path is long and boring, and the lag is hurrendous.

But ... if the spam walking issue is 'not' removed, I like the idea. Only thing that I am unsure of, is the whole "walk inside, insta attack" scenario. Since the delay after entering a room would be smaller, while no greater warning is given (The first part of movement echoes in the room you're leaving, not entering). Though I suppose, there could be a toggleable command that would allow people to see others approaching.

Attention
You are now paying attention to people coming and going around you.

The tall, muscular man is approaching from the north.
(short partial movement delay)
The tall, muscular man walks in from the north.

It 'could' be spammy, but ... it's toggleable. So ...

[brytta.leofa]

Thats a bad suggestion to combat.

Can you be more specific?  I'm not suggesting increasing movement delays, but possibly rearranging them.

I think theres some misunderstanding. Theres 20 rooms until I reach my quit location.

You're arguing against preventing spamwalking altogether?  I'll leave that idea's defense to its more vigorous proponents.   My idea on the subject was that movement delay might be longer for spamwalking than it is otherwise.  Either way, you could certainly walk/run the 20 rooms without queuing the commands in the same time you can currently.

[evil_erdlu]

I believe what Yokunama means is, when he needs to quit urgently, typing "4n5ese" and then queuing a "quit" is useful sometimes.

[elvenchipmunk]

If I type east, I would like to move east immediately. I don't want to wait for a delay to kick in, and then move east. I see no reason for a delay to be added before moving into a room. The delay afterwards works fine I think.

As for guarding, well, pick one direction, guard it, and if the target doesn't walk (or run/sneak/fly/whatever) that way then tough luck, I say. If this were implemented and there was a delay before moving, who's to say that the guarder should be able to block someone from leaving? How would that even work? The only time that should work occurs when the guarder is closer to the exit they would like to guard, which is already represented by pre-guarding an exit.

One more thing. I don't think spamwalking should be limited in a coded fashion. A responsible player does not spamwalk when they shouldn't (in the wilderness, chased by raiders and such), whereas a player who is not responsible will likely get a comment from staff or a player complaint, and upon receiving said comment/complaint will likely think twice about spamwalking in certain situations again. So once again, I don't think any coded restrictions should be placed on spamwalking.

My answer is no, I do not like this suggestion.

-Elvenchipmunk

[jhunter]

I -hate- "delay" move "delay". It just simply makes movement too slow and clunky for my tastes. It is the number one irritation I had with SOI. It just simply felt like it took too long to move anywhere. I'm already running into enough time constraints playing Arm as it is now days. I don't need things to go even slower.

[Tisiphone]

No one is talking about going slower. The proposal is simply to take the delay that happens after movement and make it happen before, rather than after.

[brytta.leofa]

Or splitting it between the before and after points.  But again,

No one is talking about going slower.

[flurry]

NPCs would need to be dealt with. While much more "realistic", I'd prefer not to lose more characters to raptors because the move lag happened beforehand, rather than after.

This, and NPCs that flee on sight would be an issue, too. I'd hate for hunting to become that easy, or sneak/hide to lose some of its worth.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

NPCs would need to be dealt with. While much more "realistic", I'd prefer not to lose more characters to raptors because the move lag happened beforehand, rather than after.

This, and NPCs that flee on sight would be an issue, too. I'd hate for hunting to become that easy, or sneak/hide to lose some of its worth.

'IF' and 'ELSE' checks are your friends in these sorts of situations. I agree about losing characters to NPCs, but 'IF' and 'ELSE' checks ought to do the trick.

[staggerlee]

No one is talking about going slower.

Actually I was.
I'd like to see it slowed down and spam walking ended, and despite the horrified responses that the idea receives still haven't heard a good counter argument.
... but I was derailing Brytta's thread and it isn't the question on the table. There's merit to the original idea.

[brytta.leofa]

I'd like to see it slowed down and spam walking ended, and despite the horrified responses that the idea receives still haven't heard a good counter argument.

The problem I'd have is that maps are inherently calibrated to a certain range of movement speeds.  People in 'nak, for instance, who are based in the Byn, the Merchant's Quarter, or the Noble's Quarter already spend a fair chunk of time just walking between their "day" schedule and their "night" schedule.

Cut road length in half and it would be a different story.

Melding with my idea: I don't think a pre-movement delay should ever be very long, regardless of the size of the total delay, lest it start to feel laggy and painful.