GuildWar Improvements

[drah]

a) Ability to give permission to deputy ranks to propose/accept a guild-war.

(When the server crashes guild-wars are deactivated and quite often the guild-leaders aren't on-line to restart them.) - It could also be viable for lesser members to start a war, especially in guilds that have two ruling ranks (the leader rank and another rank for deputies who can act on their behalf)

b) A command to target the nearest member of an enemy guild.

For battles involving opposing guilds, it'd make things much easier. eg. "/target the outlaws"

(these are just things that have been mentioned during the Sapere Magi / Outlaws war.)

[zanzibar]

a)  I didn't realize this.  Is this true?

b)  No, because it isn't realistic.

[bilbous]

(b) is no more unrealistic than any other targeting. Target has a limited range anyway. The only problem that I can see with it is that for spellcasting purposes it is problematic being able to target something not in sight. Nothing inherrently wrong with the idea. Did you have other objections to it?

[Idoru]

I dont see much difference between using a /target Drah and a /target the outlaws, both seem equally 'unrealistic',  but then again so does walking using your fingers

[Suno_Regin]

How is that unrealistic? Is it more realistic to click your opponent? No.

We use an OOC battle system, we don't actually jump into our character's body and slash their sword for them, we click something and click a button and have them attack. What he's suggesting is a simple shortcut to add to this click-click-attack system, so it's simply a click-attack system. Nothing he suggested is any less realistic than what we do to target already. It's the same as in a duel, using a shortcut to target and attack them at once.

[drah]

At present the most efficient way I've found to handle multiple opponents is "/target none" followed by "/target any" in the hope that they're the nearest thing to me... but without them being close enough that it's too late.

I could setup shortcuts specifically to target their members instead.. but then I'd have 8+ shortcuts for that.

But this wish/request would allow us to efficiently target the enemy even when other target-able objects are nearer (and without having to setup shortcuts for each enemy combatant).

It's no biggie... just it would be more reliable in the heat of battle than "/target none" followed by "/target any" seems to be.

[Gondric]

1. is very very annoying is there some way the devs can store the war info like everything else on the server until it is cancelled this would make it a hell of a lot easier.
2. good idea i thoughtve that erlier and wondered if there was one already. now i no theres not.

[Nikodemus]

I think the new command for targetting isn't that needed. Clicking enemy to target is quite enough. The problem is that clicking something in PS you can be never sure if the game react. There is nothing what inform you that you can actually click and i'm not sure if somewhere in the proces some delay would be involved. Because PS has a lot delays caused mainly by lag i gues and which look more like a bug, than intended way.

[drah]

When you've got 4 or more people dueling you at once, especially all in close proximity... taking a second or two out to click on players... is suicidal.

[Nikodemus]

2 years ago playing GuildWars when it was possible for free, i can't remember this being the way you described. Moving a mouse and clicking was always taking less than a second.
In PS it would be exactly the same. Of course you need to have your hand on a mouse, what isn't always that way in PS. Here, functions of mouse are greatly decreased, enough that often i don't use mouse at all, even if i think it is real bless in games.

Drah, if you think this is suicidal, you probably haven't played a game where clicking to attack was done in an efficient way.

[zanzibar]

It isn't realistic to know someone's name and guild just by looking at them.  It's DEFINATELY not realistic to autotarget people based on guild when you're surrounded by people.  That person could be behind a wall and you'd still autotarget them.  It isn't at all realistic.

[bilbous]

Don't gangs usually wear their "colors" when they go to war? This is so they don't accidently attack their own and to gain notoriety among the bystanders. Selections that are out of sight is endemic to the targeting functionality. I am certain it would not be too easy to fix this or it might have been done by now.

As far as clicking on something if a character is selected the status window will show his name and current hit bar. If it is an object you will still see its name. Lag can affect this process however and having the selection appear there does not always mean you are considered to have a target.

[drah]

@Zanzibar..

In the war we're in (Outlaws and Sapere Magi) ... we all know who our enemies are.  (The 'war' as I describe is techically a guild war for 2 weeks followed by the real war ("final battle") itself)

So being able to glance at a viable target and lash out at them in this instance is completely realistic.

As Bilbous mentioned.. and as was apparently true with ancient/medieval battles.. opposing sides often had colors or uniform of some sort that would help distinguish them.

There's also something else to consider besides realism... playability.

I know a lot of people want to emphasize realism... and roleplaying... but playability, intuitively and ergonomics shouldn't all be shunned because of that!!!

[Nikodemus]

But you told exactly nothing how to solve the problem someone is behind a wall and there is no chance to see the uniform or whatever^^
Clicking is best way i can see. Only at current stage of PS it is harder to implement, coz it need few other features first. (look above) + mouselook with click interaction.

[socia]

hmm those who say "click on enemy to target and than attack" realy should start dueling.. Drah is one of best suelers in ps, his point is right. When you are in war you exactly know who your enemy is...