Subject: "RE: Clarification" Previous topic | Next topic
Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend CF Website
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #17084
Show all folders

ZulghinlourTue 20-Mar-07 09:35 PM
Member since 04th Mar 2003
9792 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list
#17197, "RE: Clarification"


          

>In my previous post I tried to give detail explanations how
>wield command are supposed to work. At first glance it may
>look complicated (though actually it is simplier than the
>current system).

That is one opinion Chaining however many commands together doesn't make things easier for someone completely new to the game in my opinion.

>So now I feel that is also useful to give
>overview and some clarification to my proposal.
>
>First of all, metacommands described in my proposal are
>virtual commands. They can be mapped on real commands the way
>implementator is choosing.
>For example, "primary" command may be implemented as "wield"
>and "offhand" command may be implemented as "dual".
>
>Below I will give some quick comparison for my proposal vs.
>the current system so you would see that proposed syntax is
>not more complicated.
>
>

>My proposal        What is does     Current system
>primary <weapon> wields
>primary wield <weapon>
>offhand <item> wields
>offhand dual <weapon> or
>wear <item>
>remprimary removes
>primary remove <weapon>
>remoffhand removes
>offhand remove <weapon/item>
>
>
>So you may see that in 99% of cases 99% of characters will
>work with four commands. Right now they are already working
>with similar four commands which are less clear because of
>many possible outcomes.

And that is the idea behind changing wield to always work. 99% of the time, 99% of the characters (all of which have wield) will have an expected outcome of success.

Dual-wield will not always have an expected outcome of success given that the biggest bonus to defenses is based on the primary wield. A dual-wield will provide some bonus, but it is better to guarantee the primary in any situation in my opinion.

I also don't think you need to have specific remove functions just for your primary/dual/held items.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!

  

Alert | IP Printer Friendly copy | Reply | Reply with quote

HOT TopicHow do you want wield to react? [View all] , Zulghinlour, Wed 14-Mar-07 10:41 PM
Reply Dual wield helpfile looks outdated, DurNominator, 21-Mar-07 06:46 AM, #31
Reply Has this gone live?, Tac, 20-Mar-07 08:13 AM, #24
Reply No, it has not., Zulghinlour, 20-Mar-07 10:39 AM, #25
     Reply FNCR, Zulghinlour, 20-Mar-07 08:43 PM, #26
          Reply Cool thanks! nt, Tac, 20-Mar-07 09:01 PM, #27
          Reply RE: FNCR, Isildur, 20-Mar-07 11:52 PM, #29
Reply Wield command ANSI standard, Dwoggurd, 17-Mar-07 02:59 PM, #11
Reply RE: Wield command ANSI standard, Gabe, 19-Mar-07 10:13 AM, #12
Reply Heh, Dwoggurd, 19-Mar-07 12:15 PM, #13
     Reply RE: Heh, Gabe, 19-Mar-07 12:20 PM, #14
     Reply Problem is, Dwoggurd, 19-Mar-07 03:30 PM, #17
          Reply RE: Problem is, Gabe, 19-Mar-07 08:43 PM, #19
               Reply You may notice, Dwoggurd, 20-Mar-07 03:35 AM, #22
     Reply RE: Heh, Valguarnera, 19-Mar-07 01:07 PM, #15
          Reply Actually, Dwoggurd, 19-Mar-07 03:21 PM, #16
          Reply Some implementaion notes, Dwoggurd, 19-Mar-07 03:39 PM, #18
Reply Nice idea, however it needs one more additional command..., DurNominator, 20-Mar-07 01:31 AM, #20
Reply Answers, Dwoggurd, 20-Mar-07 03:33 AM, #21
Reply Clarification, Dwoggurd, 20-Mar-07 04:26 AM, #23
     Reply RE: Clarification, Zulghinlour, 20-Mar-07 09:35 PM #28
          Reply Re, Dwoggurd, 21-Mar-07 05:05 AM, #30
Reply I would prefer, Dwoggurd, 15-Mar-07 11:30 AM, #3
Reply RE: I would prefer, Zulghinlour, 15-Mar-07 05:08 PM, #4
     Reply Re, Dwoggurd, 16-Mar-07 05:34 AM, #5
          Reply While a stochastic dual wield function would be fun,, Marcus_, 16-Mar-07 07:19 AM, #6
          Reply RE: Re, Isildur, 16-Mar-07 10:34 AM, #7
               Reply Say no to AI, Dwoggurd, 16-Mar-07 11:51 AM, #8
                    Reply RE: Say no to AI, Isildur, 16-Mar-07 01:17 PM, #9
                         Reply yes, Dwoggurd, 16-Mar-07 01:42 PM, #10
Reply RE: How do you want wield to react?, Isildur, 14-Mar-07 11:56 PM, #1
     Reply I don't care either way, Zulghinlour, 15-Mar-07 10:27 AM, #2
Top General Discussions Gameplay Topic #17084 Previous topic | Next topic