making raiding fair

[HTX]

Thanks, Captain Obvious. 

Doesn't make their suggestions any less valid.

Personally, unless my character is overly cocky, or an extremely proficient fighter, they'd probably seriously contemplate just giving in to a mugger's (or a raider's) demand. Yes, I know OOCly it's easy to escape, but my characters, you know... tend to have a natural aversion to pain? And therefore will think twice before risking getting stabbed or bashed by doing something stupid whilst getting mugged/raided. In my experience plenty of players will react realistically to a mugging/raiding attempt, in accordance to their character's personality; I think people too often underestimate the roleplaying ability of our players.

[Eyeball]

Everyone keeps going on about how it's twinkish to flee when a raider "enters the room" and how they should stand and emote instead.

There's the whole problem.  "Enters the room", i.e. suddenly, without warning, teleports into sword reach of your throat. This is hardly fair either.

The corollary of allowing raiders to set traps and such is to give travellers fair warning of their approach and time to flee.

[Rogerthat]

THIS is hilarious, i didn't even read the other post. But your asking to MAKE raider fair? Raiders don't have to emote, nor do the prey, if you feel hmm, I cant think of the word, look around more often, make sure noone is near, if someone is near get the f*** out of there. Have more people with you. Be trained. I dont know there is so many other options.. Sigh. 

[HTX]

Yeah, but the thing is, in my experience, thugs/raiders who insta-attack are very, very rare now-a-days. In fact I'm not sure if I can think of a single case off the top of my head right now (not in recent times anyway). Ditto with insta-fleeing victims. So, to not give people the benefit of the doubt isn't fair.

Anyway, as a (potential) victim, you have the upper hand because it's easy to flee before you lose all your stun or HP. So therefore, if someone insta-attacks you unrealistically, it all comes down to code and mechanics and you shouldn't be ashamed to spam-flee yourself. I find that your raiding/mugging attempt is much more likely to be successful if you play the scene out rather than jumping on the 'kill' button (unless you've got uber stats/skills/something else up your sleeve), and hey, the scene will be more enjoyable. So what if, say, one in fifty victims insta-flee, just file a complaint via the request tool and go about your day.

[Eyeball]

if you feel hmm, I cant think of the word, look around more often, make sure noone is near, if someone is near get the f*** out of there.

This isn't really how the senses work in real life, is it? I don't have to consciously think "now I'm going to look", "now I'm going to look", "now I'm going to look".. I just do. Even if I watch in the game, it can only be in one direction unless I type constantly.

It's ridiculous that out on a flat, open place like the salt flats, a raider can move into striking distance before the traveller will even notice. The code gives raiders a ridiculous advantage already. But people are only talking about how victims can spam flee.

Raiders should have to chase down their victims (i.e. win a race or follow until the victim is exhausted) or use some sort of tactics like hiding on a road or track until someone comes by and spring up around them.

[Spice Spice Baby]

Anecdotal evidence isn't always the most useful thing, but I'll toss this out there: I have never had a bad experience when playing a victim and I have only ever had one person no-emote spam-flee from me as a raider.

[HTX]

Anecdotal evidence isn't always the most useful thing, but I'll toss this out there: I have never had a bad experience when playing a victim and I have only ever had one person no-emote spam-flee from me as a raider.

I agree with this observation. Anecdotal evidence or not, I think your stance is logically sound. I've yet to see sufficient evidence supporting the claim that "most people insta-flee/attack" (if you think otherwise please enlighten me, though I doubt anyone but imms willing to go through the time-consuming task of digging through logs would have reliable access to such information). So therefore the burden of proof rests on those making the unsupported claim, not those taking the negative stance (ie. you and me). Which is why I think this line of thought...

Since you never know when a raiding candidate will actually RP with you or not, sometimes you just lay the smack down to ensure you get something to take home to ma'.  Shoot first, RP later.  This can suck, especially if you're on the receiving end.

...Is not always the most sound way to look at things. Put some trust in your fellow player, and you may be pleasantly surprised.

I do still agree that a threaten command would put such fears and doubts to rest, however.

THIS is hilarious, i didn't even read the other post. But your asking to MAKE raider fair? Raiders don't have to emote, nor do the prey, if you feel hmm, I cant think of the word, look around more often, make sure noone is near, if someone is near get the f*** out of there. Have more people with you. Be trained. I dont know there is so many other options.. Sigh.  

The problem with this approach, Rogerthat, is that the code doesn't always enforce realism, and probably can't ever 100% enforce realism, because there's simply far too many variables to take into account when deciding whether something is realistic or not. Therefore, it's up to the players to use judgment on whether something is realistic and acceptable from an IC point of view.

A single desert room is huge, and as mentioned, it's unrealistic to rush in and start attacking without an emote because the raider might be on one side of the 'room' while the victim is on the other... And even if you take into account time compression in Armageddon, it's unrealistic to instantly attack the moment you enter the room.

Also, as the victim it's simply common courtesy to throw in an emote before fleeing if the raider goes through the effort of throwing in emotes. You've got to understand that as a roleplaying game, it's not a race to see who can manipulate code and game mechanics to 'win' like in a Hack 'n' Slash MUD; think of this as writing an interactive novel rather than trying to win via the code. Although immediately running away from anyone you encounter in the Wastes isn't, in itself, unrealistic or wrong, if you don't at least throw an emote out there it just reeks of raping the code mechanics to your advantage, when the game by its nature strongly discourages that (when possible). Here, we care about narrative, not winning (hence the reason many players go through the effort of fleshing out their characters and giving them flaws, even if it doesn't support winning it's all about the story which unfolds). Also, it doesn't take long to type out:

emote immediately wheels his mount around in alarm and slaps its flank, running in the opposite direction of ~the-dude-who-just-entered-the-desert-room.

Especially if the other person goes through the effort of throwing an emote out and acting realistically, too. That way, the other person can see that your character is, indeed, running away immediately, but it doesn't look like you're trying to forgo the story in order to get a coded advantage, either. It requires a degree of trust, but I believe the playerbase (generally) has enough maturity and roleplaying ability to deserve such trust.

[FantasyWriter]

Just out of curiousity, I have two questions.
There are to anyone who wants to answer them:

1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I would assume that these two issues aren't nearly as big an issue IG as they are on the GDB.

[Cutthroat]

Just out of curiousity, I have two questions.
There are to anyone who wants to answer them:

1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I would assume that these two issues aren't nearly as big an issue IG as they are on the GDB.

1. Once. About two years ago I was attacked just two rooms away from the gates of Allanak, after a few combat rounds told "Gimme yer lizard", and died. This happened so early that I actually respawned. I've only been raided once - after that I was smart enough to take reasonable precautions before going out, like any good Zalanthan would.

2. Almost every time I've tried to approach someone, it's up, up and awaaaay. However, a precious few times people stick around, it often works out very, very well for all parties involved, and I think that those players that ran away probably wouldn't have provided a good scene if they had stayed.

You are probably right though. It's not that big of a deal. The honor system works quite well, and if people start randomly running, there are plenty of coded ways to make a person stop.

[brytta.leofa]

Just out of curiousity, I have two questions.
There are to anyone who wants to answer them:

1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I've been raided thrice.  Only once did the "raider" attack without any interaction beforehand, and I'm pretty sure it was a hapless newbie (I spam-fled, of course).  One encounter I "won."  None was fatal.

I guess I've never, per se, raided anybody.

[Gargath]

I enjoy playing raiders. I am also not one of those people who shoot you with an arrow of death from a room away or walk in and smush you.

I tend to enter a room and have an enjoyable RP scene. The last five times I raided someone, it didn't even come to combat. They coughed up the loot without any blood loss. Out of the last ten times I raided I can only think of one time when someone ran away without so much as an emote. It is double-edged though, when you let people live rumor spreads pretty quickly and, as someone said in a different post, all of a sudden greeber #10983 happens to rub elbows with someone important. Depending on how you like to play, this can be enjoyable and involve some cool plots or a real bummer.

Raiding RP has been very enjoyable over the years and I really do find it a shame that people feel the need to attack (or run) without any RP.

[Gunnerblaster]

You want Roleplaying!? FINE!

Code Select Expand

>charges wildly at ~man, swinging ~sword over ^me head and yelling loudly in a viking-like war cry!

>bash man

>kill man

>begins chopping wildly at ~man after driving ^me shoulder into !man, sending !man sprawling! (If I succeeded)

[UnderSeven]

The problem with this that I see is that there is the assumption in the start that emoting = role play.  It doesn't.  The raider enters, and sure they toss out an emote about entering and then the victim tosses out an emote about running and lets just say that these are two people who would of otherwise insta-attacked and spam fled.  All we did by adding a rule of engagement is that now instead of insta-attacking and insta-fleeing, they'll do it after tossing out an emote.  They're still doing the exact same thing they were before and probably will try to bend the rules to their favor, ie the attacker will have a trigger that attacks the moment the victim emote comes out and the victim will have a carriage return inserted after their emote followed by a flee path. 

This rule of engagement suggestion literally changes nothing.  The people who want to role play raider/victim role play will still role play it and the people who don't, still won't.

And on another note.  Rules of engagement are not a good idea IMO.  They add hands of god to the game that don't necessarily make any realistic sense or have any baring on the world.  It just opens up the door for endless bickering about who did or did not follow the rules well enough and was x emote good enough?  How many words does the emote have to be?  How long can the victim wait before emoting before the attacker can attack anyway?  What if the victim deliberately holds off on emoting to do some commands that the attacker won't see, such as psi or waiting to regen just a little more moves. 

Frankly I think the only way this works is the way it works currently.

As an aside, I'm heavily turned off by games with rules of engagement.

[Synthesis]

Approach code.

Intra-room location grid.

[Cerelum]

Approach code.

Intra-room location grid.

No Accursed Lands... NO!

[Synthesis]

Approach code.

Intra-room location grid.

No Accursed Lands... NO!

Baby. Bathwater. Figure it out.

What I mean to say is:  is there something in particular about approach code and intra-room grids you find objectionable, or are you committing a fallacy of division?

[FuSoYa]

Approach code.

Intra-room location grid.

No Accursed Lands... NO!

Baby. Bathwater. Figure it out.

Are we talking about Rain Man when he says... "HOT WATER BURN BABY!!!"

Brandon

[Sephiroto]

Just out of curiousity, I have two questions.
1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I'll share my experiences with you, FW.

One of my least favorite raiding experiences was the time when this dude quit out in the middle of the desert.  *Poof* Gone.  Lame.
A couple of us got positive account notes for roleplaying it out well and the person who quit out got some negative notes for being a douche.

I also dislike when people spam run away and subsequently quit out (often in unusual or unsafe locations) to evade law enforcement or raiders.  This happens somewhat regularly when raiding.  This happened on numerous occasions while hunting down a Dragonsthrall Servant.  Please don't do this.  My LEAST favorite raiding experience was when I tracked one said Dragonsthrall Servant to a cave after a confrontation in the desert.  It turns out that they had quit out just moments before my arrival.  Lame.  So, I take it as they're hiding.  I set traps and wait around.  Well, that person logged back in 5 minutes later to some nasty surprises.  Instead of playing it out or running away, they ran to the -next- room, which was also quit safe, narrowly avoided combat, and logged out -again-!  This time they didn't log back in for many hours.  I didn't want to wait around for this person, so I left.  I never submitted a complaint, but this pissed me off.  Uncool.  If you want to run into the city and wander around, great.  If you want to run to the Byn compound for safety in numbers, great.  Don't run to a secluded cave and "hide" (logout) from someone who would more than likely find you there if you stayed logged in.

As a raider I've had people turn tail and run without emotes many other times, but over 10 years I've never kept track of numbers.  There are well-played and poorly-played raidings.  It's probably 50/50.

Being raided:
I have been attacked on several occasions in the past 10 RL years with no tells or emotes.  I do not typically mind this, but it doesn't make for a very well-played scene and it isn't my favorite situation.  When this happens I calm myself by thinking, "Tembo don't emote, why should another PC?"  Tembo are on a mission to eat your face.  We get no warning for tembo approaching.  No delay.  No time to run.  We get claws to the neck and face.  So I expect that if a PC is on a mission to render you prostrate, not emoting is A-OK.

I often find myself running away from raiders out of OOC instinct.  I try hard to defy that and encourage roleplay encounters and I really hate when people run from me when I raid.  More than once I've actually -turned around- and went back torward the raider in hopes that there would be an adequate scene to follow.  A similar situation happened in a non-raiding environment between my Sorcerer about 2 years ago and a Tuluki hunting party.  After he bolted, he lingered 2-3 rooms away to give them the opportunity to pursue.  They never did, but I wanted them to have the opportunity to engage or be diplomatic.

One notable thing about raiders is that, in my experience, magicker normally announce their presence and RP'd very well.  I suspect this is because magickers generaly are very confident because they can easily maintain the high ground.  I like this.  Or it might be because they're bored, and killing you in a few seconds really isn't that fun.

[HTX]

You want Roleplaying!? FINE!

Code Select Expand

>charges wildly at ~man, swinging ~sword over ^me head and yelling loudly in a viking-like war cry!

>bash man

>kill man

>begins chopping wildly at ~man after driving ^me shoulder into !man, sending !man sprawling! (If I succeeded)

I'm not sure which post you was responding to, but if it was mine I'd to point out that I was discussing what's makes a good "narrative" in a roleplaying intensive game (not necessarily good "roleplaying", because as previously pointed out, emoting doesn't necessarily = good roleplaying). I was also discussing what is realistic.

Also, I wouldn't do what was described in that example in a desert room, personally, if that's what you're suggesting. In a more enclosed or smaller area, perhaps, but in a desert room if my character were to charge another, I'd throw an emote in and give a lengthy pause. Why? Because realistically speaking, the victim would have a chance to turn around and flee during such a long charge through a desert room (unless they were on foot or on a significantly slower mount). Due to an unfortunate lack of code enforcing realism in such cases, the raider also has to take into account realism. Yes, it might mean the victim would escape, but an open charge through a desert (or other open, large expanse of land) should not be effective in the first place for the raider, and I can see the merits of an approach system in such cases. Sneaking, hiding, traps, arrows or casually approaching a victim without arousing suspicion should be the most effective means.

Just my opinion, anyway.

I'll share my experiences with you, FW.

*snip*

I noticed your examples were very old (some as old as 10 RL years you said?). Do you have more recent examples? The playerbase seems to have changed and matured over the past 10 years, so experiences which are up to a decade ago can't be used to draw conclusions, really.

The problem with this that I see is that there is the assumption in the start that emoting = role play.  It doesn't.  The raider enters, and sure they toss out an emote about entering and then the victim tosses out an emote about running and lets just say that these are two people who would of otherwise insta-attacked and spam fled.  All we did by adding a rule of engagement is that now instead of insta-attacking and insta-fleeing, they'll do it after tossing out an emote.

See my above argument (and note that not once did I claim it was good "roleplaying" - notice that I use the words good "narrative" and "story" instead). Yes, the outcome may stay the same, and I have no complaints about that. But the difference is that a story unfolds, rather than a couple of people seeing who can mash in commands the fastest. Armageddon is very much an interactive story, so this can only be a good thing. A few emotes thrown out makes things much more entertaining, then just the spamming of commands.

I do agree that we don't need an official "rules of engagement", however. Especially a needlessly complicated one. But I'd hope we as a playerbase can draw lines and come to a general conclusion on what is realistic and what isn't, as well as what makes a good story and an entertaining game, and what doesn't. Unless (or until) imms implement a threaten and/or approach system. Although I recall imms saying flat out that there would be no approach system in Armageddon 2 (don't recall them justifying their decision, however).

Just out of curiousity, I have two questions.
There are to anyone who wants to answer them:

1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I would assume that these two issues aren't nearly as big an issue IG as they are on the GDB.

1.) None, I don't think. Although I once had an assassin backstab me in a desert room without a single emote. Although he was hidden, and in my mind I pictured it as the assassin hiding behind a sand dune until I passed by, then stepping out and planting a knife in my character's back. Not unreasonable nor unrealistic, though emotes would have been nice.

I only have been raided a few times, however.

2) I have mugged and raided at least a dozen times in-game. I don't remember anyone ever spam-fleeing, although my memory has become cloudy.

[jhunter]

1. Once or twice have I been attacked without any thing other than:

The scary, hooded figure enters from the west.

The scary, hooded figure looks down at you.

The scary, hooded figure viciously slashes you on your head, doing frightening damage!

2. I've lost count of the times as a raider that people have immediately left the room before I could even attempt to interact with them or left the room as soon as I started rp'ing out that I was going to rob them.

[Synthesis]

Approach.

Intra-room grid.

All of this "Boo hoo, a dude on foot can't outrun a dude on a mount," and "Boo hoo, a raider appeared from the east and magickally was in striking distance," and "Boo hoo, I was close enough to chop a muthafucka with a bone sword but he magickally teleported 1 league away with the flee command" bullshit would be put to a well-deserved and elegant end.

As far as the difficulty involved in coding such a thing, I'd like to abuse the memory of JFK:

We choose to implement approach code. We choose to implement approach code... (interrupted by applause) we choose to implement approach code in 2.Arm and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.

To those raiders and victims struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledge our best efforts to help them help themselves, for whatever period is required — not because Accursed Lands may be doing it, not because we seek their playerbase, but because it is right.

Edited to add:  Here's another one, because this is kind of fun.

I have, therefore, chosen this time and this place to discuss a topic on which ignorance too often abounds and the truth is too rarely perceived — yet it is the most important topic on earth: the intra-room grid.  What kind of intra-room grid do I mean? What kind of intra-room grid do we seek? Not a half-ass measure built on artificial delays on combat commands and movement lags....I am talking about genuine intra-room grids, the kind of intra-room grid that makes spatial relationships on Zalanthas worth roleplaying, the kind that enables raiders and victims to clearly identify their position in a room's three dimensions and to approach, raid, and flee realistically — not merely an intra-room grid for players of Accursed Lands but an intra-room grid for all men and women — not merely an intra-room grid in our game but an intra-room grid for all MUDs.

[Fathi]

1. How many raiders have you had attack you without a single emote or "tell" before hand?

The only time a PC of mine has ever been attacked without a single emote, it was when a half-giant militia PC entered a room and insta-subdued her. Not really a "raiding" scenario.

2. How many times have you raided and your victims spam-fled?

I played a mage that used to mess with people in the wilderness in various non-lethal ways. One guy ran off the second I dropped an echo about magickal stuff happening, but I can kinda understand that.

[Cerelum]

The only reason I say no to approach code is because in the current ARM game it would take too long to get "right" I've played in games where they had this and it either depended on skills of movement or race to close the distance.

So you would get some people who went only certain races in the race instance, so they could always jump people before they could run away, or keep running them down.

Or you would get people who twinkishly ran all over the world as much as possible to raise that skill SO high that you would be standing on the northwest part of the grid, and they would come in the southeast side of the grid (Whole other side of the room) do sprint, kill person and they would charge across a football sized area in two seconds then decapitate you.

If there was some way to level it out where someone who twinks their skill up, or so that certain races didn't get OMFG fast speed, then I would be all for it.  Do I think that's possible, maybe... Do I think it's possible in this codebase of this game, no.

[Synthesis]

Does it not make sense that it might be exceptionally difficult to actually get away from a desert-elf on foot, out in the desert?  

That's the entire point of approach code coupled to an in-room grid:  if you're fast, you're fast, and if you're slow, you're slow, and the code reinforces this with the appropriate consequences.

That is, if you're slow and you get caught out in the desert on your own by someone who's fast, you can't simply 'flee' and be leagues away by the time their 'attack' delay has worn off.

Another very nice change would be to get rid of "hard" delays, and implement "soft" delays.

So, after backstabbing someone, you wouldn't be able to utilize another combat command without some delay, but you could still flee/draw weapons/say things/rescue your friend/etc.

Of course, with an in-room grid, the 'flee' skill itself would have to be reworked.  I'd suggest making it an evasion or dodge-like skill that reflects your ability to avoid being injured while someone is chasing after you with a weapon.  Hell, you could even add something like a trip or obstacle function to it, so you could delay your pursuer (that is, increase the distance between you and him to a point where combat is no longer feasible).

The only problem I can foresee with an in-room grid is the playability factor vs. the realism factor.  If a desert room is a league square, that's an awful lot of space to cover...so what's the appropriate amount of time for someone to walk across it on foot?  If it's too short, potential raiders can just set their speed to "run" and hope to close the approach distance before the target can type a direction command in.  If it's too long, people will piss and moan about how long it takes to travel.

Then again, it would be awfully nice if being wounded on certain locations actually had consequences, and you could specifically target or defend those locations.  Get hit really hard to the arm, and you lose your weapon/shield.  Get hit really hard to the legs and take a penalty to your offense, defense, and movement speed.

Of course, then armor would have to actually, y'know...be as protective as the descriptions really advertise.  It's a lot to think about, but that's the only way raiding will ever be "fair" where "fair" means "realistic."

[musashi]

I think a threaten type command would be a much better solution all around.