Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Badges

Anette ✭✭✭

About

Username
Anette
Joined
Visits
89
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
421
Posts
695
Badges
18
  • Re: I HEART

    I have been having a lot of fun RPing with @sarrius, lately.
    SarriusKrysalissDreacorDruu
  • Re: Mudlet Scripting

    Dreacor said:
    How can I do the next thing: Attack with EQ and BAL and next attack is with only EQ, then again with EQ and BAL and then again only with EQ? So I'd attack with those two rules rules every other attack. All help is appreciated.
    So if I understand you correctly, you are alternating attacks between one that needs EQ+BAL, and one that only needs EQ?

    What I would do in that case, is remember the last attack with a global variable with something like LastAttack.  Then call a function on receiving EQ that checks what the last attack was:
    -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    -- function: AlternateAttack
    -- Alternate between an attack that needs EQ *and* balance, and one that
    -- only needs EQ.  Call me from the equilibrium recovery message for best
    -- results.  Returns the attack we did if we attacked, false if we did not.  
    function AlternateAttack()
       haveBalance     = gmcp.Char.Vitals.bal or false
       haveEquilibrium = gmcp.Char.Vitals.eq or false

       if (LastAttack==nil) then
          -- first attack
          if (haveBalance==true and haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>"
    return lastAttack else return false end elseif (LastAttack=="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") then -- second attack, just EQ if (haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ-ONLY ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ-ONLY ATTACK HERE>" return lastAttack else return false end
       elseif (LastAttack=="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") then -- third attack, EQ+BAL if (haveBalance==true and haveEquilibrium==true) then send("<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>") lastAttack="<PUT EQ+BAL ATTACK HERE>" return lastAttack else return false end end
    end
    I wrote this up entirely now, and haven't tested it, but it should put you on the right track in terms of the logic at least.
    Dreacor
  • Re: Raiding

    I kind of don't see the point of this.  Yes, yes, a locus for conflict, I do grasp that much.  But speaking as someone whose health has had her popping up irregularly at best lately, I'm never around when it's going anyways, and this really isn't the context I'm speaking in here.

    The context I'm speaking in here is the larger one.  Allow me to expand.  This feels like filler.  It's a holding pattern.  Something to do when there's nothing else to do.  And having that is great, I guess, but where's the overarching aim for all of this?  To do this systematically, you'd basically need to give it the kind of consequences that'd make the game un-fun for anyone not from Antioch right now and as is, we already have that to a degree in losing the city tutors - especially since the novice tutorials basically end up pointing you towards resources you no longer have as a result of those going missing if another city captures them.

    Okay, so Antioch is basically sitting on the lion's share of the objectives ... now what?   They defend them indefinitely?  That's ... going to get boring after a while, I imagine.

    But that's my two cents as someone who hasn't been around much anyways, so take it for the ignorant hate speech it probably is.  I just don't see the appeal to this and any larger opprotunity it has seems squandered.
    TheophilusAodanWyll
  • Re: Obeslisks, Outposts, Guards, Raids, and XP.


    Not sure about that. You shouldn't need to have both the investment in experience and artefacts that I do to go assassinate someone in a city, IMO. That might be an unpopular opinion, but I think it should be doable by anyone with a reasonable amount of game knowledge and a class that makes it viable (assassin, predator, etc). Definitely shouldn't be easy, but there should be a pretty large margin between 'impossible' and 'difficult'.

    Full on raid, probably not.
    We're basically agreeing here since I was meaning a raid, not "I want to punk someone who has a monolith who's sitting in Kinsarmar" or the like.
    Septus