Posted by Falstaff on August 08, 1999 at 03:37:02:
In Reply to: Sounds like something to maybe pursue (at least I wouldn't mind it). posted by Vrishnar on August 07, 1999 at 16:48:59:
There is nothing inherantly wrong with the system now, the problem lies more in the assumtions that the computer is making. It is possible that you want to kill one person, so you get 3 people to beat him to death before attacking the others in his group. (Probably because he is the most dangerous.) It is posible now, however, to aim at a different person that the "primary attacker" when defending. Dirt then k 4. or whoever.(there are other ways to do this, this is just the simplist one that comes to mind) Users just don't think to do it now. The only problem I see with the code is that if an assisting attacker is getting beat on from the side, he doesn't stop attacking the primary attackee and defend himself. Almost an Autodefend concept. if x and y are attacking t and all of a sudden r attacks x, you'd think that x would like to defend himself against the new attacker more than he is, and that t and y would concern themselves with one another more than r and x, until someone falls and priorities can be reassigned. Deep thoughts for a Sunday afternoon.... Falstaff