[MUD-Dev] Re: There can be.. only ONE!
J C Lawrence
claw at under.engr.sgi.com
Wed Apr 22 11:56:41 New Zealand Standard Time 1998
On Sun, 19 Apr 1998 08:11:53 PST8PDT
Matt Chatterley<matt at mpc.dyn.ml.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Apr 1998, J C Lawrence wrote:
>> On Fri, 17 Apr 1998 15:36:38 PST8PDT Matt
>> Chatterley<matt at mpc.dyn.ml.org> wrote: > On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, J C
>> Lawrence wrote: >> On Wed, 15 Apr 1998 19:27:02 PST8PDT Matt >>
>> Chatterley<matt at mpc.dyn.ml.org> wrote:
>> >> The result is that from a player perspective the world has a
>> chance >> of totally changing all about them every twenty minutes,
>> but they >> are guaranteed that *within* that 20 minute period the
>> world will >> remain relatively constant. This effectively fracts
>> the game into >> segments each a multiple of 20 minutes long, each
>> segment being >> based on a new world map.
>> > Hmm, quite interesting.
>> The intentions are to emphasise the ability of the players to adapt
>> and quickly orient to become most rapidly combat ready. In such a
>> world a tightly coordinated *team* of such players would be a
>> fearsome opponent.
> Very much so. You rapidly switch the situation which they are in,
> and then leave it for a period of time. Their ability to react to
> the changes, reorganise, be able to defend themselves, and then be
> able to go hunting. Good coordination becomes key.
You are reading mine mind. Exactly. The addition of the team
coordination etc abilities I described a couple posts ago would make a
make such a team a fearfsome opponent. I can easily envision such
teams coordinating to herd players en-masse into dead ends for easy
cf The Running Man.
>> Thought: Possibility of dividing team kills among members?
>> Straight division of kill count by membership poses obvious
>> problems (I join successful team and then go hide for the duration:
>> I still profit.). Possibly divving or awarding kills among all
>> team members within a radius defined by the victim's score?
> Ahh, but if the information about the kill is made public to that
> team, say via their comm-system, whatever it is (after all, we are
> taking reasonable liberties with reality already - take another one
> to improve this):
> %101hz%: UggUgg slays Ooble, bringing glory to the team!
> Then UggUggs points for killing his victim are divided amidst the
> team. If certain team members are not seen, and never named, other
> members may decide that a spot of 'justice' is in order, and evict
> them forcefully. OTOH perhaps players who are nearby etc and appear
> to have been giving an 'assist' should also be named. Hmm, perhaps
> just giving points to those is a good idea..
I'd suggest an in-team ranking and stat command which reports the
recent kill histories of all team members, the membership list etc.
The idea of two or three large (50+ members each) and well coordinated
teams duking it out is rather attractive. Of course the "generals"
will be forced to lead from behind to even attempt any sort of
Note: If successful as a game I predict third-part clients to enhance
>> Nahh. Everybody is *ALWAYS* anonymous _except_ to members of their
>> own team.
> So the notion of 'names' doesnt even exist, except within teams?
My tendency would be for the global score board etc to list "names",
but for individual characters in-game to not resolve back to their
"names" except for team-mates.
J C Lawrence Internet: claw at null.net
(Contractor) Internet: coder at ibm.net
---------(*) Internet: claw at under.engr.sgi.com
...Honourary Member of Clan McFud -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...
MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.
More information about the MUD-Dev