Dog Pile Solution

[Qzzrbl]

This is kinda starting to spiral out into two different topics entirely.

The thread was originally made to discuss ways of making group-on-group combat make sense.

So let's discuss that?

We don't care about lone Amos getting roflstomped by a handful of PC raiders-- dumbshit should've known better than to have traveled alone in the first place.

We care about big group 1 fighting against big group 2, and how to make it seem less like every single person in either group is taking stabs at the two people that typed "kill otherguy" first.

Unless I'm mistaken.

[LauraMars]

Something I don't think anybody has mentioned is that NPC dogpiling or musket lining does happen regularly, and is often a big cause of player death - often newbie death.

If there were a hard-coded limit to how many ENTITIES could attack you at once, it would probably, as x-d says, not affect pcs that much, because purely pc dogpiles don't happen that often.  It might, however, keep Talia the Newbie Merchant from dying at the gates of Allanak to 20 half giant soldiers because she made a stupid typo and kicked her friend Amos or didn't know about the spice thing and doesn't have her nosave on for some stupid reason.  She still probably wouldn't survive, but she might have a couple more seconds.

[X-D]

At which point, some method of making it at least partly random on targeting past 1-2 would I think be your easiest and most realistic bet.

Laura, I have mentioned NPC piling many times now actually, and Will be the first to agree that it needs a total revamp...on that I do not care if they get hard caps or the ability to  autoassist limited, something...but yes, More deaths caused by that then anything...least stupid/needless deaths.

[Harmless]

OMG, IntuitiveApathy mentioned time dilation, and I REALLY want that.

I think everything would go better in massive combat if i was able to consider my decisions carefully.

I hope this one gets seriously considered! (I didn't read everything else in this thread)

[X-D]

I am considering the idea still...I am not totally against it...though I think such a thing should not go more then say half normal speed...I can think of problems as well, but the idea has merit.

[LauraMars]

Time dilation?

MATRIX EMOTES

>emote In slow motion, @ bends backwards, cloak flowing majestically, the swing of an obsidian sword passing inches from ^me nose.

[Delirium]

Time dilation?

MATRIX EMOTES

>emote In slow motion, @ bends backwards, cloak flowing majestically, the swing of an obsidian sword passing inches from ^me nose.

YES PLEASE

[Qzzrbl]

Time Dialation might be a bit more trouble than it's worth-- at least for Armageddon....

Time Dialation works in Eve Online because every star cluster is on its own server, which allows them to slow time down without affecting anyone elsewhere.

Seeing that our Ginka is on a single machine, things could get problematic.

[Harmless]

Those spoony tavern sitters and indie grebbers will just have to experience their life in slow-mo for a while, out of consideration for all the PCs struggling not to die.

I think it's fair.

[Morrolan]

Ehrmegerd! Brttle Lerg! (only regular, and applied by staff)

EDIT: Not against this idea, actually.

[Potaje]

This is far over a year old and all pcs are dead now and nothing to it is icly sensitive.

I once road out with two others another warrior and a ranger.

We came upon 16 plus spiders.

The ranger went link dead at the beginning and the two warriors pulled all the spiders on the ranger to themselves.

On of the warriors died, but killed at least five spiders first.

The surviving warrior killed all the other spiders.

Yea got to low hp, but still, this is to illustrate that stacks of 10+ can be faced.

Spiders as most know are no slouch to face either.

Granted towards the end the ranger did reconnect and assisted the warrior. But there were only three or four spiders left by then.


(edited to add) I am intrigued by the Time dialation, it would be good to have some moderated speed. Am I right it simply slows all aspects of the process down but holds no other change than that.

What I found in large group battles was the buffering of commands entered. inputting something like a coded attack secondary skill or even flee and it not being processed for what seems several turns.

[Refugee]

I'm intrigued by the time dilation idea too.  Like most of you, I suspect, I've been attacked, typed in a command, and had to sit and watch blow after blow take my PC down without the command ever being processed.

It's all part of the game and I've always accepted it, but if there was something that could be done about it, that would be great.

[Twilight]

Time dilution could be made a global command, it would only really be required at combat orient HRPT or RPT anyways.

I don't like the idea of hard limits, partly because you can't set a hard limit that would work for NPCs.  Any hard limit would have to be applied to both PCs and NPCs, partly because of things like NPC soldiers.  Take a 50 day old warrior and put them against 10 spiders and it is different than 10 gurth.  Same with PCs.  Put that warrior against 10 warrior that have been around a bit and it is a drastically different outcome than putting him against 10 merchants.  The only way to let that level of skill on the people trying to gang up on the one person count is to not have that hard cap.

[Barsook]

Time dilution could be made a global command, it would only really be required at combat orient HRPT or RPT anyways.

That would work.  Maybe make it a request thing for combat RPT's.

[IntuitiveApathy]

Time dilution could be made a global command, it would only really be required at combat orient HRPT or RPT anyways.

That would work.  Maybe make it a request thing for combat RPT's.

Eve also has something where the people who run the game can reinforce a specific server node if they anticipate (based on player input?) that there's going to be a large battle in a certain place.  

Extending that idea to Arm, maybe something similar could be done with Arm to avoid the problem of having to slow the entire game down for everyone else not involved in the HRPTBATTLEFORTHECRAZY - perhaps in these rare and exceptional circumstances, participants could be ported over to a mirrored and/or room-limited separate gameworld server with Time Dilation activated, so that the battle could be worked out.  Once the battle is complete, everyone could be dumped back to the main game world again.  Yes, this could introduce potential problems, but I think it could be worked out with logging and careful staff supervision, which I assume goes on in these HRPTs anyway.  Already with this last HRPT, it seemed that staff did their best with trying to create a sort of controlled situation to set up the big showdown, trying to introduce some sort of order and fairness into the whole thing.  This is something I'd never seen before, and certainly had some merit, and at the very least the right intentions I think.   This separate "battle server" is just one potential workaround for the time dilation slowing the entire single-server gameworld issue, I'm sure there's other potential solutions as well.

[Refugee]

Hmmm.  I like that idea.  Battle Server!

[janeshephard]

There's one quick solution to dogpile. Limit 3 people against 1 in any fight. If you assist in it it just tells you there's no room to fight.

NPCs would just loop until they get in on the action. PCs would do the same or consider other targets.

[Barsook]

Hmmm.  I like that idea.  Battle Server!

+1

There's one quick solution to dogpile. Limit 3 people against 1 in any fight. If you assist in it it just tells you there's no room to fight.

NPCs would just loop until they get in on the action. PCs would do the same or consider other targets.

+1

[Marauder Moe]

I don't like a hard limit.  A soft-capped re-direct makes more sense.  Something like:

0-3 attacker: no restrictions
4 attackers: 20% chance the next combat initiator is re-directed randomly within the target's follow group
5 attackers: 40% chance...
6 attackers: 60% chance...
7 attackers: 80% chance...
8 attackers: 100% chance...  (making 8 the real hard cap)



Here's another idea: a minor change to "rescue".  Make ">rescue" with no targets automatically attempt to pull 1 random attacker off the person in your follow group who has the most attackers on them.

[Barsook]

I don't like a hard limit.  A soft-capped re-direct makes more sense.  Something like:

0-3 attacker: no restrictions
4 attackers: 20% chance the next combat initiator is re-directed randomly within the target's follow group
5 attackers: 40% chance...
6 attackers: 60% chance...
7 attackers: 80% chance...
8 attackers: 100% chance...  (making 8 the real hard cap)



Here's another idea: a minor change to "rescue".  Make ">rescue" with no targets automatically attempt to pull 1 random attacker off the person in your follow group who has the most attackers on them.

That might work better (both ways)!

[Morrolan]

You smack the ranger-sarge's inix, who's following him!

[Marauder Moe]

It would probably be fair to exclude mounts, I suppose.

[Fnord]

I'm still in favor of the D&D/Pathfinder solution, which is depending on the attacker's size Y and the defenders size X, then Z number attackers can dog pile the defender.

Archery could have a percentage chance of friendly fire depending on the extent of the dog pile and the archer's skill. A master archer should be able to pull a Legolas and stick two arrows in X's ass, no matter how many people are beating on him.

Code Select Expand


Defender dwarf/human/elf/mul (small / medium) 8 normal size PC's or 4 half-giants could beat on the average PC.
YYY
YXY
YYY

Defender Half-giant (large) 12 normal size PC's or 6 half-giants could beat on the average half-giant.
YYYY
YXXY
YXXY
YYYY


[janeshephard]

If Amos was walking home after work and a group of elves attacked him only a fraction of that mob would have any chance to actually hit.

I think simulating that would be a great start.

[X-D]

You all should maybe watch some jump in vids or something...Maybe cops beating vids. All I know is the hard cap suggestions are the least realistic suggestions offered....and/or would be pointless anyway.