Consider System wanted

[Madcrimson]

Hi!
I would like to have a consider system like most online games provide to allow me to judge the strength of an enemy before I attack it.

[Moogie]

I\'d like this also, but it would have to be fairly sophisticated. After all, PS is not geared solely towards killing stuff, nor do we have overall \'levels\', just skill levels.

The system would have to firstly read the creature\'s core statistics- strength, agility, and so on. These things would, realistically, be immediately visible traits on any person; someone with high strength will have bulging muscles, someone with lots of agility might carry themselves with great balance and speed, etc. From this, a description of how the character appears can be formed.

Skill levels are much harder to judge. How can you know if someone is an expert Axe weilder if they\'re currently unarmed and not fighting anything? In my opinion, skill levels should be generally ignored by the system because of this. However, if the character IS currently weilding a weapon, a description of just how confidently he is holding it might give you some clues as to his skill in using it.

To take this further, the value or quality of the weapon, and the height of its requirements to weild, could also add to the final description. Someone holding a simple woodaxe is either not very strong, or too poor to buy something better. But if another guy is showing off his diamond-encrusted Adamantium Great Axe of Death, then you can be pretty sure he is both incredibly strong and incredibly wealthy.

Summarising all this, the system would give a description that may look something like this:

\"The Ynnwn before you flexes his rippling muscles, the Two Handed Demon Axe he weilds grasped firmly and confidently in his powerful hands. His stocky frame is rigid, and you wager that you could easily outrun him if he decided to turn on you. But if he caught you, he\'d likely squash you like a bug!\"

[elscouta]

If you only want a consider system and don\'t care about how the player can be aware of the opponents\' strength (and i think this is better, or players will whine when they got killed by this small fluffy rabbit which was in fact The Mighty Rabbit Of Doom), the easiest would be that devs add a physical power/magical power/agility&speed key in their monster file for the hints. The problem is moved to how to estimate the player strength, but this should be easier (you can even skip that part, and as in the description Moogie posted, describe the monster power and let the player estimate his strength alone).

[Under the moon]

Scrawled by me in this thread
Skill is relative. That is the key. Lets take three guys. One is a bit small- but wiry, one is fairly fit, and one is bulked up. Each is going to have a different reaction to the others. The wiry fellow will look at the fit thinking, \"He is a bit of a threat.\" He will then look at the bulked and say, \"There is no way I can beat him.\" The others would have similar reactions based on how the others look. Numbered levels would work fine here.

But this is only based on strength. Now we need to take the other stats into the equation. Lets give the wiry fellow high dex, intel, and some martial arts skills, while giving the brute high strength and stamina, but lower intelligence. The fit fellow will be a master chef who is rather good with an ax and has keen intuition, but has low speed. Now tell me who is the higher level?

BEEP! Times up. The answer is any of the above. You could consider each one superior to the others. But what really matters is how they perceive each other. They see not levels, but text describing the others. This is how it would pan out now:

Wiry looks at Fit: [text] Ben looks rather fit, though not too quick on his feet. He handles his ax with familiarity.  [text]

Wiry looks at Brute: [text] Joe is very strong and large. His eyes are a bit vacant, his movements clumsy.  [text]

Fit looks at Wiry: [text] Smooth, quick movements show Tom\'s true danger. Your size gives you an advantage.  [text]

Fit looks at Brute: [text] Joe\'s mass makes him a threat, but he may be easily fooled.  [text]

Brute looks at Wiry: [text] Tom is quite small, but quick. No match for your strength.  [text]

Brute looks at Fit: [text] Ben\'s strength is a small threat. His ax is a danger.  [text]


If it came down to a fight, that is how the others should see each other.

Could work the same for mobs. Intuition would be a good skill to have when approaching strange \'small fluffy rabbits\'.

[Madcrimson]

Well, of course it would be really nice if the devs could solve the big problem of making machines understand... but I don\'t really believe this is going to happen within the next decade.

So I\'d go for a simple solution: Let targetinfo give a simple estimate like:

* this opponent is no match for you
* this is fairly easy
* well, you should win, but one never knows
* watch out, this will get tough
* run or die

I think, this roughly covers the con steps most games offer.
ATM I have to approach an enemy in PS, try to kill it an run if it didn\'t work.
So far I did not stumble into a one-hit-kill but sometimes its a bit annoying to go, try and wait several minutes to regenerate after you failed.
Since the mobs only walk fleeing is easy - but I guess that will change in the near future.

So far,
Mad Crimson

[Moogie]

Madcrimson: Yes, but how could it judge what\'s powerful or not? Based on what skills? Can a cook consider another cook for how good they are at cooking?

[Xordan]

I think it would be nice to have some kind of skill for this, or use a stat. When you examined a creature you would see a description of the creature/person. The better this skill or stat is, the more detailed the description for the monster/person. It wouldn\'t tell you the stats, but it might give clues on how dangerous the creature looks. This of course wouldn\'t always be accurate You may stumble across a creature that looks harmless, but insta-kills you

[zinder]

Im also for regulating the quality with an extra consider skill.
As for gathering the actual data, you could use something like the following.

MyStandTime = MyHp / TaDpt
TargetStandTime = TaHp / MyDpt

TaHp - target hp
MyHp - my hp
MyDpt - my average damage per tick with actual equipment (includes chances for a hit, targets armor => depends also on target)
TaDpt - average damage the target can inflict on me per tick
 
Now compare the standtimes. If MyStandTime is way higher than TargetStandTime, im a pretty sure winner. If both StandTimes are close, its open. If TargetStandTime is way higher than MyStandTime, i better run.

To add the little unreliability Xordan wants, you can add a random number from [-a,a].
The described formula would work pretty well for melee, and probably ranged, too. For magic it needs to be abit more elaborate. You need to take into account mana consumption and  spells can change the values used in the example formula.
It doesnt take the stands into account. And possible future special moves are also outside the scope.

EDIT That is a very simple way to judge combat efectiveness. Another way to produce the consider result can be looking up the skill the target has for its actual equqment and judge the quality of the equiqment. The quality of the judgement is influenced by your own skills in the regarded areas. So if your target runs around with bakery tools, you get an estimate of his qualities as baker.And the better a baker you are, the more accurate your estimate. You also can combine both ways.

[acraig]

I think the big value in something like this is for grouping.  Basically if you are a group leader and looking for a powerful master of the ways you want to make sure you are getting it.  So the player would \'allow\' the group leader to see their stats to get a good idea of their skillz.

[Merak]

I agree with you, concerning the fact that it is impossible to say who is stronger if several skills are considered. Also, a command should give an hint to the player, but this should not be failsafe in order to allow errors of judgement and bluff! Else, PS would be boring to death.

For example, if you are not skilled in swordmanship, how can you be sure that this guy twirling his foil in front of you is a great ?p?eist, a bluffing guy or just an actor ?
Also, if you are an actor, it could be interesting for your survival to pretend being a strong guy...

So, I propose you three complementary systems to deal with this:

First, as it is described in http://www.planeshift3d.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=15765&boardid=11&sid=3c281405147f5e4b4a8b375d0f0ee011#0, to modify Description panel to have a multi-level description (immediate, full, hidden, and background) that could be editable by the player. Immediate and full contains things he want to be openly visible, hidden description would be displayed only if a perception-test succeeds (automatic roll of the server when the player displays the regular description).
Of course, it requires the player be honest; but if he does not, it\'s only bluff...

The second system, as Xordan says, would be a command to test one skill of the target. The answer would be with words and no numerical stats.
An important point would be that the result of this command would be obtained by a roll based on player\'s skill opposed to target\'s skill, plus perception, minus target\'s acting or concealment. This would allow to be fooled if the player is not observant enough and if he\'s not skilled himself in the field he\'s trying to guess. It would also allow the target to pretend be more or less skilled than he really is.

)Joe> /sizeup cooking
)Test{(perception + player.cooking) / (target.cooking + acting + concealment)}
)Test failed
)=> Bob has no talent


Third system as propose Acraig, a player could on purpose demonstarte his ability to another, either by doing something (killing one tefusang in 3 seconds withouth the left hand), or using a  special command:

)Bob> /demonstrate cooking
)>> Bob\'s cooking level is 14
or
)>> Bob shows you his cooking talent, which is far better than yours!

I think that all these three mechanism are important for a rich roleplay.

Originally posted by Xordan
I think it would be nice to have some kind of skill for this, or use a stat. When you examined a creature you would see a description of the creature/person. The better this skill or stat is, the more detailed the description for the monster/person. It wouldn\'t tell you the stats, but it might give clues on how dangerous the creature looks. This of course wouldn\'t always be accurate You may stumble across a creature that looks harmless, but insta-kills you

Originally posted by acraig
[...]the player would \'allow\' the group leader to see their stats to get a good idea of their skillz.

Posted elsewhere about multi-level descriptions
http://www.planeshift3d.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=15765&boardid=11&sid=3c281405147f5e4b4a8b375d0f0ee011#0

[Madcrimson]

I think the problem here is a dispute of playability versus realism.

IMO a game should always focus on playability because its made to be fun. If you want more realism, stop using fixed spawn points where monsters pop out of thin air to wait for their slaughter...

I started thinking up a more dynamic and (hopefully) more realistic way to populate a virtual world together with some friends of mine but we didn\'t have the time to further our little project along.
Also we had a lot of trouble to get cristal space or ogre running in the first place - so my greatest respect to the devs at this point

Regards,
MC.