[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by Do you know of any muds which don't use an element of chance in their combat system?

There is a text-based gaming/role-playing environment called Rings of Honor which operates a dueling system based on three matrices(one for weaponed combat, one for magic, one for bare-fisted combat), each based around 14-commands and not being able to use the same command in succession. So for each round, the combatants face each other having each chosen their command/"move", and the matrix results for any two pairing are the same every time. The system then allows for the fighters to emote/roleplay the results.

This is the closet MUD/text-mmorpg combat system I can think of to what you are asking, and what would be considered chess-like. However, the focus of the game, as you can see, is on roleplay;

Why? Because few PKers would want to use a system that so removes the element of random. I enjoy the system for its ability to integrate PvP and roleplay, but it is not a system that I would ever introduce outside of a mini-game on a MUD.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by I disagree - without any element of chance the games becomes boringly predictable. When I play chess with people I either always beat them or always lose to them (with very, very rare exceptions).

That's a pretty personal preference. I mean, the reason I love chess is because it's entirely about skill and because you cannot get screwed by random chance. Chess has survived as one of the world's most popular games for hundreds of years for a reason too, which says that it's probably not boringly predictable to at least some segment of the human race.

You can argue that the only reason people still play it is that it's not been solved, but then, checkers has been solved and lots of people enjoy checkers.

--matt

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by Okay...it's just you replied to a post in which I pointed out how the points you listed could just as easily be integrated into an automated combat system, by building the scripting options into the mud itself. This would allow the automated combat system to cover all of the differences you listed between it, and a manual combat system in which scripting is the most effective strategy.

Ah, I think I see what you mean. But you see, the most crucial turning points in a fight in that system happen when the script doesn't anticipate the MUD well enough. If the script was brought into the MUD itself an integrated, that would eliminate the imperfections that under normal circumstances make the difference between win or lose. I'm starting to realize what an odd relationship it is and how difficult it is to put into words though..

Originally Posted by If mud clients support scripting (which obviously they do) then so can the mud server itself. It's not going to be any harder than writing the support for a client, and in many cases will be much easier (because the built-in version has direct access to information which the client doesnt't).

But the point is preciesely that clients work with imperfect information and as such make mistakes. The best scripter is going to be able to deduce the best amount of information from the MUD. There are actually player abilities (illusions) that can send fake input to an opposing player.

There are also many situations that aren't very practical to script, there are hidden effects that the player might want to react differently according to many, many variables - including their knowledge of the personality of their opponent.

Originally Posted by Well the 'loyal' is presumably a mob that would use its own automated combat AI...I'm not sure if I'd consider that to be part of the player (and obviously mobs need to be automated if you want them to fight).

I guess I'll give a better example then. There's an ability called 'shine' which once turned on, will do damage to the opponent every 10 seconds. It's an ability centered on the one using it and only works so long as the character is alive or until he/she turns it off.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by Donathin wrote: Quote Then, on a MUD such as Utopia, everything becomes so verbose and so many things are happening at once, that scripts become even easier to confuse. I don't follow. The more verbose a text MUD is, the bigger the advantage scripting is. No human can even come close to matching the ability of a computer to speedily parse text messages coming through in a known format.

Yes, the computer can more immediately respond to the incoming text, but between anti-scripting measures, the importance of timing, and the fact that a good PvPer sees how your script works and therefor gets a one-up on your script, there are many reasons why scripting is just not sufficient in designs that take client-scripting into account.

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,16:45) Originally Posted by I'm talking about taking a fully manual combat system, one that does nothing without player input, then building a client script which processes data from the MUD via triggers and sends in input instead of the player. The combat system is incredibly complex, more than most people can possibly handle with just aliases and macros. That's why people end up making automated scripts to take some of the load off. The point of my previous post, in-line with response to this post, is that MUDs which require client-scripting triggers to PvP means that you aren't doing something right. In Utopia, one of the fastest, most verbose, most intense PvP systems I've played - scripting is not required. In Everwar, scripting is -not- required. If advanced scripting is required in any PvP game in order to succeed in combat, I'd challenge the designer of that combat system, stating that making your system that complex does not serve you if you force your players to no longer take responsibility for all elements of their own PvP. As far as flame-baiting, I won't respond to that(I felt like the topic subject itself was flame baiting, hence my post). As far as Clandestine - yes, like many other successful MUDs, it is a descendent of DIKU; however, as many MUDs have proved in the past - good coders can take the DIKU combat system and mold it many different ways. If you did not even bother to combat, or level, or PvP, you really have no right posting incorrect assumptions involving another MUD up. That, is flame-baiting, effendi.

Actually, it's quite fun. A lot of players seem to think so too and the combat system is one of the biggest draws for IRE games. So while you're free to disagree with the designer, you can't disagree with the results.

And I have every right to write off a MUD for being Diku based if I find Diku based MUDs to be hopelessly outdated. You on the other hand have no right to accuse me of being zealos and ignorant because I don't happen to agree with most of what you tend to say.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by But the point is preciesely that clients work with imperfect information and as such make mistakes. The best scripter is going to be able to deduce the best amount of information from the MUD. There are actually player abilities (illusions) that can send fake input to an opposing player.

This is another example of scripting falling short (which is the reason why systems should encourage not needing or using scripting).

I cannot tell you howmany times, on howmany MUDs, I have used restrung items, custom-designed food, emotes, titles, etc/etc/etc to use people's scripts to make them do whatever I wanted them to. Whether it was confusing a pursue script to walk an opponent into a trap, or deciphering their triggers to disband their group, or getting them to attack their allies - I could write for hours about all of the ridiculous things I have done to people's triggers in MUD PvP.

So in some way, I do sort of enjoy scripting - but only because I enjoy confusing and abusing other people's scripts.

Granted, good scripts are more difficult to confuse - however, all scripts have weaknesses and a good player-killer will exploit that. The less abusable the script, likely the less effective it becomes in most cases, also.

I do not enjoy games that encourage scripting for combat success, however, because the most exciting elements for good PvPers come from split-second decisions and instinct and creativity. You remove some of those instances, and you are removing the best thing about MUD PvP in most good PvPers' eyes(that I know from various surveys and discussion in MudCons and MUD Festival topics).

It is possible to become indistinguishably as fast at PvP as a computer, on nearly every MUD. I type between 140-180 WPM depending on how worked up I get while typing, and constantly get accused of using triggers and scripts merely because I PvP/react/pursue extremely quickly.

Why require or encourage scripting?

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by It depends entirely on the combat system. Perhaps every point of damage applies a tiny modifier to your ability to hit and/or inflict damage? Without the element of chance, this could well change a successful hit into a miss, depending on the weapons you're using and the way you're using them.

Well, most combat systems won't in fact have correlations between all those variables. In turn that means you won't have to consider every possible permutation, but instead only ones you deem meaningful - which is a complex task in itself.

And while chance can provide a big element of excitement for some players, it can also cheapen the experience for others. If you did everything right and still died because of chance, that tends to bring you down quite a bit. Well, maybe I'm making an assumption here, but some players do feel like that. A minimal component of chance does make for a good ingredient in a combat system, of course.

Originally Posted by Precisely - just as with chess - because you've taken away the element of chance and turned it into something predictable.

Well, I'm actually pretty sure players would make perfect AI systems if they could. There's a limit to what most people are willing to invest in respect to time and effort when it comes to things like this, even if some players are very motivated. And in the end a perfect system gets torn down after the next major change in the combat code. It's just not very practical, but I'm pretty sure the desire is there.

Originally Posted by Do you know of any muds which don't use an element of chance in their combat system?

I don't know any myself. Well, maybe on that odd DBZ MUD, but I hadn't gotten far enough into it to find out. I do know I try to avoid combat systems that are dominated by chance, but I don't mind ones which are mildly supplemented by it.

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,17:14) Originally Posted by But the point is preciesely that clients work with imperfect information and as such make mistakes. The best scripter is going to be able to deduce the best amount of information from the MUD. There are actually player abilities (illusions) that can send fake input to an opposing player. This is another example of scripting falling short (which is the reason why systems should encourage not needing or using scripting). I cannot tell you howmany times, on howmany MUDs, I have used restrung items, custom-designed food, emotes, titles, etc/etc/etc to use people's scripts to make them do whatever I wanted them to. Whether it was confusing a pursue script to walk an opponent into a trap, or deciphering their triggers to disband their group, or getting them to attack their allies - I could write for hours about all of the ridiculous things I have done to people's triggers in MUD PvP. So in some way, I do sort of enjoy scripting - but only because I enjoy confusing and abusing other people's scripts. Granted, good scripts are more difficult to confuse - however, all scripts have weaknesses and a good player-killer will exploit that. The less abusable the script, likely the less effective it becomes in most cases, also. I do not enjoy games that encourage scripting for combat success, however, because the most exciting elements for good PvPers come from split-second decisions and instinct and creativity. You remove some of those instances, and you are removing the best thing about MUD PvP in most good PvPers' eyes(that I know from various surveys and discussion in MudCons and MUD Festival topics). It is possible to become indistinguishably as fast at PvP as a computer, on nearly every MUD. I type between 140-180 WPM depending on how worked up I get while typing, and constantly get accused of using triggers and scripts merely because I PvP/react/pursue extremely quickly. Why require or encourage scripting?

There's no way to prevent scripting in a MUD. If a player can figure out what's real output then a player can get a script to do it. IRE games allow some classes to show three lines of player-inputed text to the opponent and systems are as prevalent as ever.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by And I have every right to write off a MUD for being Diku based if I find Diku based MUDs to be hopelessly outdated. You on the other hand have no right to accuse me of being zealos and ignorant because I don't happen to agree with most of what you tend to say.

Yes, you have the right to write off a MUD without playing it just because it is derived from DIKU (even though DIKU is very moldable and can show great variety). However, doing so makes you look ignorant and zealous. I did not accuse you of being ignorant and zealous in my previous post - you made the connection from my words to how other people would like interpret them yourself.

In short - don't post a flame-baiting comment about a MUD's combat system that you haven't even played. I've played three IRE games and am familar with its combat system - so if/when I speak of why I do or do not like its system, I speak from experience with that individual game. If you DO post a flame-baiting comment about a MUD's combat system that you haven't even played, expect someone to raise an eyebrow at you and think you are bias or ignorant for your commentary.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by There's no way to prevent scripting in a MUD. If a player can figure out what's real output then a player can get a script to do it. IRE games allow some classes to show three lines of player-inputed text to the opponent and systems are as prevalent as ever.

You can implement code to reduce player ability to script.

You can make certain kinds of scripts/bots be illegal, and then enforce(it really is not that difficult to tell when someone is using a script).

You can discourage your players to use them.

You can do many things to reduce scripting in MUD PvP instead of encouraging it.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (Hadoryu @ April 10 2006,17:21) There's no way to prevent scripting in a MUD. If a player can figure out what's real output then a player can get a script to do it. IRE games allow some classes to show three lines of player-inputed text to the opponent and systems are as prevalent as ever.

That is completely true. If a player can tell the difference, so can a script. If a player can't, then neither can a script. In either case, the script is minimally equal to the player.

--matt

[Hadoryu]

I never said Clandestine was bad for a Diku MUD. I said it was yet another Diku MUD - meaning it has a Diku based combat system. Unless that is a false statement, I don't see how you could assume I was flame-baiting.

Originally Posted by You can implement code to reduce player ability to script. You can make certain kinds of scripts/bots be illegal, and then enforce(it really is not that difficult to tell when someone is using a script). You can discourage your players to use them. You can do many things to reduce scripting in MUD PvP instead of encouraging it.

You cannot reduce a player's ability to script. You can place punishment on people you consider to be scripting, which is going to be completely arbitrary since you can never have concrete proof. You can discourage it, but you can't completely get rid of it.

In the end that's a wrong way to go about it - hunting your own players for a vulnerability you left in your system. If you don't want scripting to make a difference, design the combat system to not benefit from it particularly.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by That is completely true. If a player can tell the difference, so can a script. If a player can't, then neither can a script. In either case, the script is minimally equal to the player. --matt

I'm curious if you, yourself, are an experienced PvPer, Matt?

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by In the end that's a wrong way to go about it - hunting your own players for a vulnerability you left in your system. If you don't want scripting to make a difference, design the combat system to not benefit from it particularly.

As I've stated, that's what we do - our system does not encourage scripting. I was merely giving you a few of the many options you have when trying to reduce or weaken reliance on scripting for PvP. Scripting is not "illegal" on Clandestine, though it is discouraged and there are coded measures to dissuade its use. I have played MUDs, however, where scripting was illegal.

On many PvP-focused MUDs, people who use bots are generally flamed by the other players for being lazy or lame, anyways. It is a pretty widely-accepted idea that relying heavily on triggers and bots reduce the amount of the PK-Rush in combat which makes PvP more fun for most.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by You can make certain kinds of scripts/bots be illegal, and then enforce(it really is not that difficult to tell when someone is using a script).

It is fundamentally impossible to tell except where the script lets you due to incomplete design.

Simple case to demonstrate:
I get hit by poison.
The cure for poison is eating a 'whatnot'.
I eat a 'whatnot' or my client trigger does it for me.

The MUD receives 100% identical information from the client regardless of whether I pushed a button myself or whether my client trigger outputted the command for me. You can look at delay times, etc etc, but those are all easy for a script to fake.

Getting a client to operate completely autonomously is, of course, pretty difficult and currently impossible if it involves any sort of free-form communication, but there is simply no way for a MUD to tell if someone is using scripting assistance (which is what I assume we're talking about here, given the current impossibility of fully scripting a believable character).

--matt

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,17:32) Originally Posted by That is completely true. If a player can tell the difference, so can a script. If a player can't, then neither can a script. In either case, the script is minimally equal to the player. --matt I'm curious if you, yourself, are an experienced PvPer, Matt?

If you have a point, you'd be best served to just spell it out. Instead of baiting.

And your suggestions, while they would be well-received, are nothing new. They've been tried and they don't work.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,17:32) I'm curious if you, yourself, are an experienced PvPer, Matt?

Yes, I am. I also designed Achaea's PvP system, of which Dr. Bartle said, "Few virtual worlds with an immensely complicated combat system avoid being completely dominated by it -- Achaea is the best-known exception."


--matt

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,17:34) It is a pretty widely-accepted idea that relying heavily on triggers and bots reduce the amount of the PK-Rush in combat which makes PvP more fun for most.

Well, this I certainly agree with, but players in general (not all players, to be sure), value winning more than the rush. Or rather, they get a bigger rush out of winning with scripts than they do not winning as often without scripts. One might view that as a shame (I kind of do), but human nature is what it is. I fought against scripts for years in Achaea, going so far as to try and hold combat tournaments where scripts were banned. It eventually struck me that it's just not possible to ban them and gave up at that point.

Scripts are extensively used on the IRE games and whether you or I might personally prefer people not to use them, there's not much question that lots of people love the IRE combat systems, scripts and all. To each his own eh?

--matt

[DonathinFrye]

My question to you wasn't whether or not you developed a PvP system, as most of us involved in this conversation have experience with that, obviously. I could respond to the name-dropping, it just isn't necessary.

My point was to say that your line of thinking is similar to many lesser experienced PvPers I run into, who are very logical and mathematical in their approach to player-killing.

My point was that if you are experienced in player-killing yourself(not design), then you would probably have experienced fighting PvPers who dominate via creativity and instinct. Without fail, I have never played a good PvP game where the best scripter or best mathematician dominated everyone else.

There's a reason for that, and that's my point. My push is that a system should encourage creativity, instinct, intuition, groupwork, leadership, suprise, etc - the system should push the biggest rush possible, and that by actually discouraging scripting, you offer your players more responsibility for their actions and therefor more danger and more rush.

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,17:52) My question to you wasn't whether or not you developed a PvP system, as most of us involved in this conversation have experience with that, obviously. I could respond to the name-dropping, it just isn't necessary. My point was to say that your line of thinking is similar to many lesser experienced PvPers I run into, who are very logical and mathematical in their approach to player-killing. My point was that if you are experienced in player-killing yourself(not design), then you would probably have experienced fighting PvPers who dominate via creativity and instinct. Without fail, I have never played a good PvP game where the best scripter or best mathematician dominated everyone else. There's a reason for that, and that's my point. My push is that a system should encourage creativity, instinct, intuition, groupwork, leadership, suprise, etc - the system should push the biggest rush possible, and that by actually discouraging scripting, you offer your players more responsibility for their actions and therefor more danger and more rush.

I'm an experienced PvPer and I was the one to make the initial statement. I also stand by it, precisely because of my experience.

There are many possible ways to show your talent in a competitive game. Why you consider "reflexes" to be superior, I don't understand. And making scripting part of the fight in no way limits creativity.

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by Scripts are extensively used on the IRE games and whether you or I might personally prefer people not to use them, there's not much question that lots of people love the IRE combat systems, scripts and all. To each his own eh?

Lots of players love Midievia's combat system and lots of players love combat in Aardwolf, and many other large MUDs. Part of the reason is the size of the playerbase itself and not necessarily the PvP system. Rarely in PvP/PK forums or conventions or development threads is IRE's combat system brought up as an influence for creating a good PvP MUD.

Obviously it works for the purposes of you making a lot of money, but that does not make it the best product out there, nor does it mean that MUD-PvP should encourage scripting (or a PvP system that encourages scripting) merely to appease the players as a whole, as opposed to those dedicated soley towards PvP.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by My point was that if you are experienced in player-killing yourself(not design), then you would probably have experienced fighting PvPers who dominate via creativity and instinct. Without fail, I have never played a good PvP game where the best scripter or best mathematician dominated everyone else.

I'm quite experienced in player-killing myself, but that's really beside the point. The fact is, scripting is simply faster than a human. If something is parsable, it is scriptable. Text that gets communicated in a known format is exceptionally parsable and thus exceptionally scriptable. If reaction times are an issue (and you stated that you believe that PvP comes down to reaction times), humans lose even worse than in chess.

--matt

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by There are many possible ways to show your talent in a competitive game. Why you consider "reflexes" to be superior, I don't understand. And making scripting part of the fight in no way limits creativity.

There are many possible ways to show your talent and reflexes is merely one of those. And scripting limits a lot of things, most importantly, it reduces the amount of responsibility you take for PvP, therefor limiting the rush and the notion of danger. This is a topic that gets brought up in PK threads and conventions again and again and again, and the same thing is concluded.

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by Rarely in PvP/PK forums or conventions or development threads is IRE's combat system brought up as an influence for creating a good PvP MUD.

Do you have data on this? Or is this completely anecdotal?

Originally Posted by Obviously it works for the purposes of you making a lot of money, but that does not make it the best product out there, nor does it mean that MUD-PvP should encourage scripting (or a PvP system that encourages scripting) merely to appease the players as a whole, as opposed to those dedicated soley towards PvP.

So a system which makes the players happy.. isn't a good one?

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by Lots of players love Midievia's combat system and lots of players love combat in Aardwolf, and many other large MUDs. Part of the reason is the size of the playerbase itself and not necessarily the PvP system. Rarely in PvP/PK forums or conventions or development threads is IRE's combat system brought up as an influence for creating a good PvP MUD.

Oh? Darn, I guess I didn't realize people didn't like our PvP combat system.

--matt

[Hadoryu]

Originally Posted by (DonathinFrye @ April 10 2006,18:03) Originally Posted by There are many possible ways to show your talent in a competitive game. Why you consider "reflexes" to be superior, I don't understand. And making scripting part of the fight in no way limits creativity. There are many possible ways to show your talent and reflexes is merely one of those. And scripting limits a lot of things, most importantly, it reduces the amount of responsibility you take for PvP, therefor limiting the rush and the notion of danger. This is a topic that gets brought up in PK threads and conventions again and again and again, and the same thing is concluded.

It most certainly has no effect on your responsibility when it comes to PvP. The actions of your script are the actions of your self.

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by Lots of players love Midievia's combat system and lots of players love combat in Aardwolf, and many other large MUDs. Part of the reason is the size of the playerbase itself and not necessarily the PvP system. Rarely in PvP/PK forums or conventions or development threads is IRE's combat system brought up as an influence for creating a good PvP MUD.

Well! That sure puts me in my place doesn't it! Some people on some random PvP forum somewhere aren't talking about our PvP system but the creator of MUDs is in his published book on MUDs. Consider me suitably chastised. Next time I'm speaking at a games conference, I'll be sure to look for you in the audience.

--matt

[cron0s]

Originally Posted by I'm curious if you,yourself, are an experienced PvPer, Matt?

In Matt's defence, I can say that in his time he was probably the top PvPer on the mud Avalon.

Originally Posted by I also designed Achaea's PvP system

Based largely on Avalon's of course...

[DonathinFrye]

Originally Posted by I'm quite experienced in player-killing myself, but that's really beside the point. The fact is, scripting is simply faster than a human. If something is parsable, it is scriptable. Text that gets communicated in a known format is exceptionally parsable and thus exceptionally scriptable. If reaction times are an issue (and you stated that you believe that PvP comes down to reaction times), humans lose even worse than in chess. --matt

A client-script will always react and act in the same way, whereas a human will not. I react and PK indistinguishably as fast as a script, so it is possible to improve your reaction time to the point where you should not need scripts. However, the predictability of a script allows for me to decipher how an opponent's script works, walk them into traps, plan against them, and do some pretty funny things to them in general.

After now 14 years of PvP (I started at age of eight, mercilessly killing other people instead of the monster in Hunt the Wumpus until nobody would enter "The Cave", then moved to the then-free Gemstone games), I cannot even begin to count the number of times and ways that I have seen scripts get people killed. There's a reason for that.

Beyond just the feasability of a heavy-scripter PKer against a flexible, strategic, creative, fast-acting PvPer; this goes back to the center of the current discussion which is that it is possible, at the designing table, to focus your PvP system on the things that give the players the most rush, and to discourage elements that take away from that (including reliance on scripting).

[the_logos]

Originally Posted by (cron0s @ April 10 2006,18:11) Originally Posted by I also designed Achaea's PvP system Based largely on Avalon's of course...

Some elements are certainly heavily influenced, much like Avalon borrowed heavily from previous games.