The colour codes are simply sent to your client like anything else - your client will then usually change colour instead of displaying the code, but if you're logging the data you'll probably see them in full (things like "<ESC>[0;1;32m" for green, "<ESC>[0;1;33m" for yellow, etc).

It's fairly easy to script if you know what colour code you're looking for. It gets a lot more complex if the colour codes change each time, though, as the script would then have to read the entire thing and try to work out the odd colour out.

Matt;

Yes, what I tried to insinuate before was that there is a certain element of randomization with color and ascii and an ever-changing nature about elements of the map that make it more difficult to script. I did not say it was impossible, only more difficult than most systems.

I am quite good at scripting(your insults are unfounded, yet predictable), and merely challenge you, Matt, to put your money where your mouth is. If you can create a design for a combat bot that could fight as well as a human player, I would be very impressed. I'm sure it's not impossible to script certain elements of the system, but it is assuredly not made easy, nor would scripting be as helpful with the system I've designed as it would be other systems.

So, let's avoid further flaming and needless rhetoric. If this is a subject which really interests you, show more than a repeated and easily counterable argument and do the work. Or let's agree to disagree on whether or not scripting is a positive force in PvP. Mmmk?


------

KaVir;

Exactly.


Though I've admittedly not taken this much into account, I'm not sure that an action/strategy based survival-horror text-rpg would offer much interest to blind players to begin with. If it did, there are steps we could take to make it more accessable to them upon request.

Well, in response to the last post, regardless of who it was... The difference between having a scripting language within the game itself, and saying that if a player wishes to script that he needs to do so with his client is a pretty major one... Some players don't have access to / don't use clients which are capable of scripting. This brings it down to a pretty undesireable result, that being that those players that have the money to purchase a more advanced client (which may potentially be needed for a particular scripting level/ability/tool), may have a significant advantage over the other less-financially capable players. Setting that aside, the more advanced scripting requires a level of knowledge of basic programming (or at least some logical sense in terms of computers). A player's computer-related knowledge should not have an influence on his fantasy character's ability in a game. Scripting within a mud, however, can be well documented and easily adaptable for that particular mud's needs, and thus be user-friendly enough that no player suffers an injustice solely due to his potential incompetancy in certain real-life areas.

Setting this aside, there really isn't such a thing as complex AI. This may very well be deemed a matter of opinion, but I certainly wouldn't see it that way. AI is basically, at this point, and especially in regards to MUDs... a grouping of if statements. But in any case, I really don't know what my point is here anymore, as my post is mostly detached... I don't mean to be argumentative, so I apologize.

-Jess

The ability to script has zip to do with the amount of money someone has. There are free, powerfully scriptable clients out there. TinyFugue is available cross-platform.

Yes, I'm an idiot. It was a response to the last post on the first page (of ~15), which I thought was the most recent post. You have permission to forget I exist now. *smile*

Best of Luck,
-Jess

No, do not feel sheepish at all, you made good points that I agree with, fundamentally. If a combat system heavily benefits from scripting, it gives the advantage to people who can code and are good at scripting and programming. However, not all PvPers are(nor should they be required to be) computer programmers or good at scripting. MUD Combat, in my opinion, should be about gameplay and interface and choices - and it is, again, in my opinion that heavy combat scripting harms these elements.

The IRE combat system isn't 100% scriptable really. For example, playing a Mage on their game Imperian I use a mapper program that displays an ansi map of my area, and set up my room effects and walls in such a way to plan for when an attack comes and was able to kill several people by myself with good consistancy. Use the "fog" spell so that I know what is in each room and they don't, bwahaha. While most of the stuff in their games can be scripted, they wouldn't be popular if it was 100% scriptable.

While a scriptable fighting system is certainly lame, in the_logos' defense (I haven't read this whole thread, can you blame me? But from what I glean from this page) when he started his game and its fighting system front ends and scripts were nowhere near as common as they are today.

I am working on a fighting system idea that has moves all with their own cool downs (kind of like DotA, the wc3 map if any of you play that) and the ultimate moves look like the normal moves when you start doing them but have a much longer cool down and some random factors. Since moves are not completed instantly, classes have 1-2 quick moves that exist to stop a larger and stronger move from completing, and the goal is to make them waste their quick stun moves on what is not really your big attack and then finish them off with a small luck factor thrown in. I have high hopes for it, though I am having trouble making different classes unique within this kind of plan now that I've designed like 5 classes and want to design 5 more.

Here is how Utopia does this exact kind of strategical thing. Each class' special "stun" move varies a little in its affect, therefor giving a bit of variety to that particular sect of skills. The combat system's very complicated, but let me attempt to explain one of the more simple concepts with this sort of thing on the MUD.


Valq and KaVir are PKing each other. Valq's "groove bar" has been building everytime he's blocked an attack and is finally full. He performs the groove-special "Critical Halo" which will make his attacks do 2x damage for the next 20 seconds. KaVir has been waiting for this and immediately performs his move "capedrive", which launches Valq high into the air for a set amount of time, rendering him unable to attack.

A strategical counter on Valq's part could've been this. He fills his "groove bar", but instead of immediately using "Critical Halo", he uses a common shield technique called "Lunar Shield", which makes him immune to all non-luna-element based damage for about 40 seconds. To keep Valq from pulling ahead during this time of near invulnerability, KaVir uses "capedrive", launching him into the air. When Valq lands and the fight begins again, he uses "Critical Halo", and follows that up with one of his class' powerful weapontech "long cool down" attacks, dealing 18ish million damage(or something) instead of 9 millionish damage.


Okay, so none of that gave you information to solve your issue with varied classes and stun skills - only background on the basics of the concept on Utopia. What we did was introduce a lot of different status affects all similar to stun in execution. There are stunning attacks that literally stun an opponent, capedrive which launches an opponent into the air(keeping them from attacking), freeze-skills which pulls a Mortal Combat Sub-Zero, Tripping, Time-Freeze, Eclipse, Blind, etc/etc/etc. Each one would execute a bit differently, and each would generally have a cooldown time that differed slightly(2-3 ticks usually).

We then added "defensive skillbuys"(you gained a skillbuy every 4 "pks", but had to alternate spending them on offensive and defensive skills) that would make you immune to these stunning attacks. So let us say that you spent one one the skill "Quick Recovery(or the like)" which makes you immune to the attack "stun". Even being immune to "stun", though, wouldn't make you immune to "capedrive". This system made each class stand out in execution and style, and allowed for more individual player customization.

Also, it would be unlikely that someone would quickly become immune to all forms of stun(or even many) as there were dozens of different classes and other important things to spend skillbuys on as well.

Food for thought, if any of that helps you get an idea of things to try.

Wow great conversation and I enjoyed a referenced sequay to the mudlab.org piece.

A few key points I'd throw out.

No one mentioned Backgammon.   While computers are now better than humans I bring it up more not for AI issues but as an example of ditributions of skill and wins.   I iw as plying someone via computer who had a script running and was substituting the scripts moves, well the might be "cheating" but at least I'd have the joy of playing a game as best I could against a computer and depending on my "luck" (of dice) I could still win.    

My skill would be competintg against a bot but the distibution of wins wouldn't be zero sum like chess... so still interesting but not really fair for the oponent to have "bragging rights".

Put skill differences, attribute and poseesion differences and you influence sot of "how lucky the dice were.   In desgining the algoriths you can dampen or highten the  luck.  Luck in a single game of backgammon is pretty pronounced but  dampened if loking for a winner with a first to 6 win s.

But really CronOs nailed it I think,  we get down to issues of "how fast you type" vs "how good of a coder" you are...BUT.

Even in "real time" games there is balance and equilibrium recovery which in many senses makes the combat "turn based" albeit with overlapping turns.

If the waiting periods were doubled for all actions so that moderate typers could do just as well as the fastest typers would that make fighitng more deterministic that equally super fast fighters against each other?

I think the adrenalin rush is the dopamine boost from the unknown.    And while some people want the most frantic paces others gain more adrenalin rush from a slight delay between anticipation and results.  

I think, that " rush " of skill comes from your reactions and choices versus the opponent not really on how the oponent came to his moves.    

Its only the ego,  the bragging rights that are biased.  and issues of "fairness" in regard to the stategic issues of what they get for winning.   In the mind of the creator of the game its sort of arbitrary whether to favour eye hand coordination of the subscriber or the ostensible eye hand control of the character.  

A deaf mud player should be able to play a  character that hears well,  shouldn't a slow reactioned player be able to play an extrondiarly dexterious player and have the players skills used optomally?   Or should it?

It is about fun and while I want a generally real time game with awareness and quick witted responses part of the game but I'd be happier with fighting being a bit more backgammon like with maybe 10 seonds to move or lose your turn , wher it doesn't take long to think of a pretty good move but not like chess where a hasty move will often completely undo you.

How quick?  How many options?  while I'm a slow typer I do ok at ping-pong which is quick, and tricky, even though my eye hand coordination isn't all that good.

Within a real time fight system the nuances can be massaged by easy but less than optimum defences responces and slowing things so that those with average reflexes could play their characters to fuller potential.

You generally have to find a balance or at least an equillibrium:
If the fighting is too slow it won't appeal to many people who like a dynamic kind of fighting.
If the fighting is too fast it won't appeal to people who like to use more strategy to win instead of pure reflexes.

Scripting in a way alleviates the second problem, a player can design their strategy before the actual fight happens so they can get both. Of course, the pace is too fast, players will all but be forced to resort to scripting to respond to such a player.

Generally, the depth of combat is determined by the variables (or states/afflictions/whatever) and the excitement by the pace. Too much of either and you're veering off the golden middle.

A note on variables though, they can be done well and they can be done badly:
- badly if all the variables are very uniform and disconnected from each other, meaning each must be addressed in a simple, linear fashion.
Example of bad variable:
- being rendered prone is always a detriment and is unaffected by other variables. Obviously all you ever need there is to mechanically input 'stand' or somesuch.

- Good variables connect to other variables in non-uniform, sometimes non-intuitive ways, eventually forming a web of dependancy that's non-trivial to decrypt, meaning an 'optimal decision' is not always present or obvious.
Example of a good variable:
- being rendered prone can be detrimental or advantageous (i.e. being prone means you can be hit more easily or grabbed, but it also means you'll be missed by certain attacks) and is dependant on other variables (i.e. broken legs, dizziness, paralysis) that either must be cured before the state of being prone can be reversed or can cause the state of being prone.



Or something like that.

Yes, I think your points on the balance on complexity and speed is right on both in terms of generating excitement and or turning a whole supposedly role immersal environment into a challenge of reflexes.


Your bring up a point with the 'prone" issue that helps me express something.

A highly skilled knight should know get up if it falls, and a human running a knight should really need to gag it from getting up.

Without some scripting the thing decays for me. Giving a adept speed player an edge is one thing but I'd think it should be fairly simple to be able to play at 70% of potential.

A good User Interface goes a long way with that sort of thing in "video games" or WoW type graphical games.

Similarly I think your point on the complexity brings up another issue, Complexity and no-intuitive combinations really still tend to be "knowledge" based while I think a good combat system might bring in more "connect four" issues rather than discovery. Even if connect four is a "solved" game, the level of computer knowledge to make scripting highly advantageous and the mistakes until perfecting a code would be long enough so to only be a huge issue if you wanted to keep the system static for many years and those that cracked it , shared (and a file was copied an copied) so that lots of newer players could arrive at perfection without the costs of the learning curve.

Well, when you think about it, a great many graphicals games incorporate these features already.

Fighting games the strategical elements of checkers/chess (positioning, offensive/defensive stragegy), the simple reactions of Pong (this one's obvious) and the RPS elements (typical hi-low game, etc).

FPS games also combine the aforementioned in different ways.

The problem in getting all of that into a MUD is the way the medium is limited. There's no hand-eye coordination to speak of, there's hardly any precise timing to speak of and where pure reflexes are concerned - it's completely scriptable. You're left with strategy (which some MUDs have done well) and RPS. The problem is that when you take out the second element, the game starts looking more like a game of cards rather than a fight.

So the question is for me, how do you replace this most dynamic element of graphical games - hand-eye coordination and reflexes? Or is there something else that can make up for it?

There is only no hand-eye co-ordination on a MUD if you design there to be no hand-eye co-ordination. That, like any combat decision - is just a decision. World of the Dead, for instance, is entirely based on hand-eye co-ordination. Clandestine also requires hand-eye co-ordination. Most MUDs require some, but if you want more - it is just a design choice to make.

-----

If you want favor scripting for slower players, as I've said before, then do it for the right reason - you are playing a heavy rp-focused and you don't want player speed to affect character speed(immersive environments should be on a level playing field so that players can feel like they are actually really "one with their characer").

However, if you are creating a combat or player-versus-player focused MUD, then I maintain that you want to give as much benefit to the more skilled players, which includes the players that have better reaction speed, instincts, and typing skill.

Can you elaborate on that a bit? How does that work? I was referring to something that had a mostly physical aspect, motor skills and such - aspects common to video games.

Usually anything that requires any sort of speed from the player can be scripted, so I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Did someone come up with a combat system that can't be scripted, yet forces players to exert themselves in typing speed and reflexes?