[KaVir]

Strip away the random element from a combat system, and there will also be as many possible states as there are possible combinations of stats, hp, mana, action points, weapons, weapon positions, pieces of armour, available actions, etc.

The random element simply renders these states unreliable - you can no longer work in terms of absolutes.  You can't guarantee victory through a specific sequence of actions.

Try playing a game of chess, except that each playing piece has a combat value (Queen = 9, Rook = 5, Bishop = 3, Knight = 3 and Pawn = 1).  Every time one piece tries to take another, both players roll 2d6 and add the combat rating of their playing piece.  If the attacker wins or draws, then they take the defender's piece, otherwise their own piece is destroyed.

Now see how effective the computer AI is.

[Hadoryu]

I think you lost me this time. 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 MUD's combat system is completely manual, it's the players who use automation by scripting their own actions. You can't simply take the automation from the client and put it into the MUD, because the scripting is done via an imperfect medium - the text the MUD sends isn't always clear about your status or about what's going on, it's up to you to think of a way to catch on to the real state of things. Also, the point at which a player loses is usually when their system fails - be it because a trigger doesn't fire, because their curing priorities aren't good or because they allowed themselves to be brought into a tactically disadvantaged position.

I don't think there are two scripts out there that are the same. It's a very big task to script everything and most people don't, most people just script enough to get them by. Putting a player-made system into the MUD itself wouldn't accomplish much, simply because no system is perfect and because the conversion would likely be too difficult.

I mean like a passive effect that you toggle and then it keeps going. For instance, you can order a loyal to attack your enemy, the loyal needs no further input from that point on, but you keep fighting manually yourself.

[Hadoryu]

But very few of these actual states would be meaningful. Your current health for instance has little bearing on your weapons, so you don't need to consider that correlation. You do need to consider your health in correlation with the capability to restore it (if for instance there's a buff that's stopping you from doing so).
You could potentially reduce every possible combination to a reaction, but that's completely impractical.

You could potentially create a perfect computer AI to do the fighting for you, but doing so is impractical - it's a mammoth task and it's not necessery.

If you add an element of chance to a combat system then obviously that's going to play a big part in the outcome. However, that isn't usually a favorable way to do things, I feel, since it punishes good tactical decisions unnecessarily. Obviously a perfect AI won't always win if there's chance involved.

[Hadoryu]

That's pretty blatant flame-bait there Donathin, but I'll indulge you anyway.

I logged into Clandestine, made a character through the painfully familiar process and then got the painfully familiar question of "What weapon do you wish to use?" I checked score and realized I was playing another Diku derivative.

Are you now telling me that the combat system suddenly stops being Diku based after the 50th level?

[DonathinFrye]

There are many ways to discourage scripting in your MUD. We've introduced several anti-scripting measures on Clandestine MUD for PvP that have created a history of environment where players do not rely on scripts and rather reflex and action in combat. There have been times where we have toyed with advanced scripts for fun, in order to see how they would react in our larger group on group battles, and while possible, it is not truly a feasable ploy;

Beyond just the fact that Clandestine(and I'm sure we're not the only MUD) employs anti-combat scripting measures, we have a very intelligent PvP base. An intelligent PvPer on a MUD such as ours would be able to tell that an opponent is using a script, and then take measures to abuse others' scripts (and if the scripter were able to avoid abuse, still take advantage of knowing how they can force an opponent's script to flee/do other things).

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.

In the end, when I give seminar or write articles on MMORPG and MUD(it is particularly true for MUD) PvP, the element I always stress will serve your player-killing efforts more in the end than anything else is creativity and psychology.

You cannot really compare PvP to chess - one has no element of random, the environments are totally different, one introduces many more than 2 versus players, and reaction-time means everything in PvP. On a good PvP MUD, the player should be getting the same kind of adrenaline kick that you got when you went to the arcade and played Street Fighter II, or when you go out with a group of friends to play paintball.

[KaVir]

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.

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).

Many muds already have scripting languages, so from a technical point of view it shouldn't require much effort to add this sort of support. Of course you might not want hundreds of players using the server to do their number crunching, and you quite possibly don't want to encourage people to use scripts instead of playing themselves, but there's no reason why it couldn't be done - and a number of ways in which it could be used for the benefit of the mud (perhaps as an admin tool).

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).

[DonathinFrye]

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.

[the_logos]

Hadoryu wrote:
I like to refer to that as 'changing the landscape'. Every move in chess substantially changes the landscape that you're playing on. I'm trying to take advantage of that kind of idea, with some randomization involved, with the new combat system for Midkemia Online, but it remains to be seen whether it'll feel fun or not. I only designed the high-level system and the Midkemia team is doing the rest.

As Kavir pointed out, every change changes the landscape, but there's a pretty long continuum there between trivial changes (such as losing 1 hp in Achaea's combat system) and massive changes (making virtually any move in chess) to the landscape. I think the thing to do is mix up moves of small consequence with moves of large consequence.

--matt

[KaVir]

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.

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

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).

Can you imagine how dull it would be to play a combat system like that?

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

[the_logos]

Donathin wrote:
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.

You absolutely can. The principles are exactly the same on a fundamental level. Further, reaction times don't mean everything in PvP unless that's how the PvP system is designed. Many of them are designed so that reaction times are important, but that's a design decision.

--matt

[DonathinFrye]

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]

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]

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..

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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.