Sparring

[Bug]

Okay, okay, I know that many dislike the very concept of sparring - but this is the truth in the life of any warrior character - you have to spar. There is just no other way for many to get that fighting skill up to notch so they can challenge that wonderful bug outa the gates.

Sparring is a very valid training operation, when not abused, and if roleplayed out. And i figure it had been around for a while.

Then why is there a complete lack of any coding for it? The way it works now you actually have to attack the character and then flee to break the fight. That dont make a bit of a sense, most spars are friendly, with smiles and comments being thrown across. You dont have to flee for the other person to agree to stop fighting.

Can something special be designed for that?
Say, get Spar and Stop commands. Spar, you enter a spar combat - all the same, except Stop is available. By typing stop you both stop the sparring round without anyone fleeing.

Can we please please get this done? :? Current sparring model is just plain silly.

[Agent_137]

interesting, you would need both chars to agree, like:

>spar joe
Waiting for joe's confirm.
>
Joe confirms the spar.
>kill joe
. . .


Joe sees:
>
Do you want to spar with bob?
>yes
Spar confirmed.
>
Bob attacks you.


But then, you could just not do all this, flee, then walk back in acting like you just stepped out of the sparring circle.


Personally, I don't think spar code is worth it. Yea, flee is annoying, especially when you PANIC YOU CANT FLEE in a spar, but at the same time, it's free flee training, which you'd have to practice otherwise! MWHAHAHA.

[Cenghiz]

...it's free flee training, which you'd have to practice otherwise! MWHAHAHA.

I missed playing wit you, Agent137

[X-D]

But then, you could just not do all this, flee, then walk back in acting like you just stepped out of the sparring circle.


Personally, I don't think spar code is worth it. Yea, flee is annoying, especially when you PANIC YOU CANT FLEE in a spar, but at the same time, it's free flee training, which you'd have to practice otherwise! MWHAHAHA.

Yup, I think people often forget flee is a skill some classes get.

For the most part during sparring people are able to overlook the fact you fled from the room and go with the emotes...IE..Roleplay:)

[Krath]

True true to what X-D said. I think it would be nice if the disengage command was changed.
There is a change target for the main fighters, why not disengage as well, for them. I would assist
with the coding if the IMMS wanted.

[X-D]

Hhhmm, I like that disengage does not work with primary combatants.

[Forest Junkie]

Hhhmm, I like that disengage does not work with primary combatants.

I agree.

Code Select Expand


>kill twink
>You slash a twink's head, doing frightening damage.
>You slash a twink's head, wounding him.
>A twink disengages combat!
>Think Sumuma...
>kill twink
>A twink disengages combat!
>ooc Stop it got-damnit!


Yeah...I definitely agree.

[flurry]

It might be nice if you could "flee here", which would effecitvely work like disengage (but for primary combatants) if successful, but with a flee check.

(On the other hand, it's never really bothered me the way it works now for breaking up sparring matches.)

[Mr.Camel]

I think allowing one to disengage from an opponent when said opponent has mercy on would solve it. Merciful opponents do allow you to flee, afterall.

[Larrath]

When I play a raider, I do not always kill my victims.

In fact, I rarely ever kill anyone because I'm such a big wimp, but whatever.  Thing is, not wanting to kill does not mean I will let them get away.

I see no reason why this needs a command, though maybe one that would allow the primary to disengage would be nice.

[The7DeadlyVenomz]

I think allowing one to disengage from an opponent when said opponent has mercy on would solve it. Merciful opponents do allow you to flee, afterall.

Actually, this is a very good idea.

[Bushranger]

There is just no other way for many to get that fighting skill up to notch so they can challenge that wonderful bug outa the gates.

This is not quite true and I do not believe every fighting character would train by sparring, especially against family members or tribe mates. It seems many people overlook the uses of the teach command so to refresh your memory:

http://www.armageddon.org/cgi-bin/help_index/show_help?teach

One could always instruct people on how to do something with a lecture or demonstration of some sorts and then use this command. I believe this is especially true for your example of hunting bugs and other non-humanoid creatures. Does fighting against a human really prepare you for fighting against giant cockroaches or schoolbus sized lizards?

Bushranger

[Forest Junkie]

I think allowing one to disengage from an opponent when said opponent has mercy on would solve it. Merciful opponents do allow you to flee, afterall.

Actually, this is a very good idea.

Same here. It would solve the problem of having to "flee" in a normal sparring session. Kudos Camel.

[Agent_137]

I think allowing one to disengage from an opponent when said opponent has mercy on would solve it. Merciful opponents do allow you to flee, afterall.

Actually, this is a very good idea.

No, no, please, this precludes the "I will kill you but I want to RP first" option.  Sometimes you might want to attack some one with mercy on, so you can talk shit when they're lying down mortally wounded, then kill them.


Just have disengage for the primary combatant work anytime, checking flee skill. That's all. No big deal. It'd be flee, but instead of FLEE <random direction> It'd be FLEE ROOM.

Hell, that could even be the command. "FLEE ROOM"

[creeper386]

I beleive it's been brought up before a flee room or something similar in one way or another and noone liked even the slightest idea of it.

Disengage shouldn't work if someone is attacking you. You should have to flee. Disengage shouldn't work with mercy on. I have mercy on alot, doesn't mean my character is letting them walk away, means I'm not trying to kill them. And mercy doesn't allow flee to work any better that I have seen so it shouldn't allow you to just stop combat.

Perhaps some sort of 'spar' code would be nice where either person could disengage, but it's not really necessary. Noone pays attention to the fleeing from a room in sparring anyways. So, it's just fine as long as you remember to walk afterwards, that sometimes causes problems.

As for the teach command. It is hardly useful. With most of my new characters I get the, 'You already know the basics so this doesn't help worth shit' when they try to teach me. Or at least that's my assumption. Because otherwise it says, 'So and so teaches you whatever' or something. Teach doesn't help too much. At least from what I've seen. It should be revamped to be more useful I think, but that's a different subject.


Creeper

[jstorrie]

a) Sparring feels realistic enough to me right now.  Just make sure you have mercy on and you break off your attack realistically (ie, long before your opponent is spouting blood and down to a dozen hit points).  I've seen characters be killed accidentally by merciful sparring partners, but hey, serious sparring isn't always safe, right?

b) I would like to see the disengage skill altered so that you could stop attacking a primary opponent, but he or she would continue attacking you until they also typed disengage.

ie

>kill joe

You horribly wound Joe with your steel katana in the face.

Joe soundly smacks around your plastic riot shield with his extra-large feather-duster.

>disengage

You cease your attacks against Joe.

Joe takes a swipe at you with his extra-large feather-duster, but misses.

(Joe types disengage)

Joe ceases his attacks against you.


If disengage was coded this way, you could realistically, for example, train a much poorer warrior by taking up a 'defensive stance'.  Or you could make sure your brawny half-giant thug didn't knock out that templar who just ran you through with her sword, while a dozen soldiers had your arms pinned back and shackled.  etc.

Using disengage in this manner would of course need some reasonable amount of lag as well.

[Agent_137]

but then you have to have the ability to defend but not attack coded in.

Much easier to code just do "flee room," in my limited knowledge of coding.

But i could be wrong. Either would work just fine in my book.

[Kalden]

I like "flee here" a lot. After all, each room is a square mile. What kinda twink flees a whole mile in a few seconds?  :roll:

[Lazloth]

I beleive it's been brought up before a flee room or something similar in one way or another and noone liked even the slightest idea of it.

I had to dig it up;  I don't think it was disliked that much, just low on the radar.

[Morrolan]

I liked <flee here> when it came up before, and I still do.

But...it should have at least as long a delay (after) as kill, kick, bash, disarm, backstab, and all those other ways generally used to start combat.

Otherwise, a nice little macro like <flee here; kill elf> could be used for a free atack.  If the same delay as other combat commands were attached, it will probably only be used for sparring and raider-rp.

I would like to see <flee here> as an RP tool.  Also, as a way to stop fights (at least temporarily) in closed rooms.

Perhaps even simply the same movement lag that <flee> has now?  Or double that...what you would get with <flee e;w>.

Morrolan

[Agent_137]

Perhaps even simply the same movement lag that <flee> has now?  Or double that...what you would get with <flee e;w>.

Morrolan

Please? Please? This would be beautiful, and untwinkable.

Please?

[jhunter]

flee here


hrrrmmm...


I like the idea...ONLY as long as there is a good delay to it AND the difficulty to flee but remain in the same room is higher than fleeing completely away to another room.

[Agent_137]

flee here


hrrrmmm...


I like the idea...ONLY as long as there is a good delay to it AND the difficulty to flee but remain in the same room is higher than fleeing completely away to another room.

Why would it be harder to flee back 10 feet instead of 1 league?

[jhunter]

Because your still staying close enough to them that it would be easier for them to stay on your ass. Your not beating feet to get as far away from them as possible, trying to get just out of reach of them. I would think this would be more difficult.

[Agent_137]

Because your still staying close enough to them that it would be easier for them to stay on your ass. Your not beating feet to get as far away from them as possible, trying to get just out of reach of them. I would think this would be more difficult.

Perhaps, but I don't think is would really help with anything.  You gotta look at the primary use of this. Sparring, and a few other rare RP scenarios.

Why should it be more difficult to step backwards out of a circle? I think the delay would be enough, but honestly, as long as this gets in, i don't really care the how of it.

[jhunter]

Well, because people would probably also use it in non-sparring situations, in which case it should be harder to get away but remain that close to them.

Got to look at the whole picture, not just in the sparring aspect of it. Like someone else already said, without a delay and such it's subject to twinky use in non-sparring situations.

In those situations I think it should be more risky to attempt than just running the fuck away.

Yes, while sparring they're not going to chase you out of the circle...but in serious combat situations...are you going to just let them back off and stand just out of reach? Probably not.

[Agent_137]

Yes, while sparring they're not going to chase you out of the circle...but in serious combat situations...are you going to just let them back off and stand just out of reach? Probably not.

True enough, but as an attacker, i'd rather see them in the same room with a huge delay than in another room with half the delay.

I mean, with the delay of "flee e, w" for "flee room" I don't see how it could be twinked. at all. No need to make it harder to do.

See where i'm coming from? I mean, I understand your point from a realistic view, but imma have to side with playability on this one.

[jhunter]

In this situation, I don't see any reason that this is less playable to make it function more realistically.

If the dificulty was higher, theoretically it would be easier for more skilled pc to get back just out of reach of a lesser skilled one and harder for the lesser skilled to get back just out of reach of the greater skilled.

I would just be extremely annoyed to see a lesser combatant jumping back easily out of reach of a more skilled one to talk, it just shouldn't work that way and since it's not something that's already in the game I'd rather see it come into the game as realistically as playably possible.