Mounts

[FiveDisgruntledMonkeysWit]

To get back on topic... I would personally like to volunteer my services (whatever they might be) to the mounted combat project. Project Cavalry, perhaps? Here's how I see it working...

What I would like to do, personally, would have a command that went something like 'pull reins <target>'. And it would only work while mounted (whistling to your erdlu and having it tear up a guy is sort of ludicrous... From what I understand, people normally issue commands to their pack animals by shifting their weight, kicking it's side, that sort of thing. Therefore, your mount could only 'attack' while you're on top of it. This would prevent rangers with packs of ninja-erdlus, as AC mentioned).

Anyways, a player would type, while mounted, something along the lines of 'pull reins gith'. For the sake of example, let's say he was riding an inix. He would type 'pull reins gith', and it would run a check on his ride skill. Depending on the outcome, you would then get a result like;
'A brown inix solidly stomps a hunch-backed gith's head.'

Or you would get something like;
'A brown inix raises it's foot, but then puts it back down, staring blankly into space.' You know, a 'failure' message.

Furthermore, mounts would have different attacks depending on their species, and some types would be more effective than others, or have different strengths. Slow, heavy hitters like warbeetles and inixes would do significant damage, but might miss a lot of the time. Erdlus, sunbacks and the like should hit more often, but shouldn't be as lethal as the big boys. Kanks, I agree with AC, should be more or less useless in combat (except for the charge skill, that is). Mekillots... Well, I'll leave that up to your own twisted imagination. :wink:

The only problem I see with this is that the inix might -continue- to attack the gith, which I think is bad. I think the player should need to type 'pull reins gith' again and again, each time checking his ride skill, and bucking him off when appropriate. I sincerely hope something like 'hit <target specified>; disengage' for the inix can be coded in, triggered by the 'pull reins <target>' command (I have little to no knowledge of the game code, so I'm not sure how feasible this might be).

As I said, this is a project I would be -very- interested in working on, and I'll even spear-head it, if there are no other volunteers. Some things I would need to get started would be...

-A reply from the Imms, as to whether my idea of 'hit <target specified>; disengage' is feasible or not
-Main description examples of pretty much any mount you can muster
-Opinions from players and staff as to what different mounts should attack with (does a sunback to strike out with it's mouth, it's foreclaw, it's tail? All of the above?)
-Opinions from players and staff as to what a mount's strength should be (should inixes do more damage then erdlus, but miss more often?)
-Pretty much any ideas from anyone relating to the project
-How I should write out these scripts, and submit them

You can reach me at undaunted06@yahoo.com

Long live Project Cavalry!

[Lazloth]

help skill_charge

[Anonymous]

Thanks be to Lazloth.

[Malifaxis]

I don't agree with the height thing, and honestly I believe that mounted combat is fine the way it is.

That's the summary of my post, here's the reasons:

Mounted Combat should be extremely hard to master, as it is.  Swinging a weapon at someone of any height without getting your bug or lizard to freak out would be a challenge.  Kanks, as I have figured, are naturally skiddish creatures.  Compound eyes pick up most everything possible, so you swinging a huge freakin sword over it's antennae and head is going to be frightening.  Keeping it under control would be tough.  It would naturally wish to move away from any threat, and a perceived threat upon its back... well, get a job at a rodeo if you can hang on.  Keeping a bug the size of a Yugo calm, while smoking your opponent in the melon with a big freakin stick... that takes some mad phat skillz, yo.
As for lizards... reptiles, in general, are attracted to fast motion.  When they detect fast motion, if the motion is caused by something smaller, instinct tells it to devour.  If larger, instinct says run.  An inix is going to recognize a gith as a natural predator, and is not going to want to try to devour it.  A half giant?  No freakin way.

As for the half giant height thing, I look at it this way:  There is a trade off to being able to rip a full grown baobab from the ground and slam someone with it... it's not just the agility negative, it's the fact that those arms, when they swing at you, are easy to step within the range of.  With a high agil low height player, that's one hell of a hand hold.  Grab one of the passing armor straps, swing up on to the arm, and climb up on to its shoulder.  I, as a player, have never been comfortable with emoting a strike before it lands... I always wait for the location and damage code, and then emote around that.  

If height modifiers ARE added (I am not saying they should, but if they are) I would highly suggest height mods being applied both ways.  Harder to hit a big guy in the head, but overall, easier to hit a big guy.  Easier to hit a short guy in the head, but overall, harder to hit a short guy.

Tell me the truth, do you actually ever want to piss off Joe Pesci?

[Rindan]

I like mounted combat as it is, especially now that there is change skill.  In general, in Zalanthas mounted combat is risky.  The animals commonly used for mounts simply don't take well to it.  They are either too damned big to be effective (inix), or too skittish to be worth while (kank).  I think that it adds flavor to the game that when two groups meet bent on killing each other, everyone jumps off their respective mounts and charge for battle in light armor and sharp weapons.  A few might eventually learn to master mounted combat, but they are the exception rather then the rule.

[Kill4Free]

Kanks . . . no. The advantage of kanks is that the keep going and going and going -- kanks are the energizer bunnies of Zalanthas. Besides, I've had kanks attacked and they kind of suck as fighters anyway

Actually my kank was attacked several times, and it almost singlehandedly destroyed a pack of jackals.  I was helping it, but I didnt do near its damage, as it was doing grievous wounds almost every hit.  Although I did fight kanks as well, and to me chars, they rarely did more then solidly, so I think their combat abilities are better suited against beasts.

[Armaddict]

Yes, kanks can fight pretty well, contrary to popular belief.  Don't believe me?  Attack one with a newbie warrior.

[Xygax]

Let's move this discussion away from the IC details of how well various races/breeds/etc. fight, please.

[Armaddict]

I would think most anyone who uses a kank (the majority of the pc population) would very likely know, but very well.

[Quo]

Why does 5dmw's post sound so much like too many episodes of 'Fury' to me?
IRL, most mounts have a nature or rather escaping a threat than turning to fight as long as escape is still an option. In Sweden it has been tried to train elks in the past, for their unique abilitity to move without sound. The project was abandoned, since it proved impossible to get them used to gunfire. With horses, it's possible to get them to trust a rider enough to make them stay in combat, and even carry their rider. It's on the top end of the 'skilllist' though, to get a horse to assist in combat though, and they won't just stay and fight while their master keeps whistling. Part of the problem is staying mounted while the animal is moving in fight - which is far from the fluent and rhythmic motions with which distances are covered. The other one is to overcome the animals fear and instinct, and the last one to train the actual movements themselves. Not every horse can master it, and not every rider.
So what about Zalanthan animals? There may be a few possible mounts that are not bound to run. If their instinct is telling them to fight, a rider might in fact have a hard time to stay on top, and even less of a chance to land any blow of his own while his mount is raging at an opponent. Let's assume you're riding a (coughs) mek. If their killer instinct would take over, does the rider feel safe himself still? What if he doesn't manage to remain mounted? Won't he get attacked as well while his trusty mounts eyes are still covered in that red haze?
Like other animals that can be trained for combat, the more ferocious they are, the more of a chance that their instincts take over. There has been more than one of those gen-deficient fighting dogs that are so much en vogue nowadays who attacked a master or family member.

Quo

[Agent_137]

I hate kanks, they have too many advantages.

I'd like to see mounts with clearer advantages and disadvantages instead of everyone riding kanks and then the one crazy person who rides something else just to be different.

I'm reduced to making up IC excuses for not riding a kank . . . like they smell, are stupid, and they smell.

[Armaddict]

I'd rather hear those reasons than 'it doesn't fight as well' or something stupid like that.  Kanks seems to be the all-around best -traveling- mounts.

Other mounts are used for specialized reasons, usually.  Which is kinda nice.

[Larrath]

Superstition can be very useful for this.

"You know, I heard that riding kanks makes your package smaller."