Evade and Dropped Weapons
Description
It seems that evade gets a check before the attacker/defender's weapon status checks. Don't have a log handy but, when ranking against skeletons, they will evade a disarm from a PC even if they have already been completely disarmed. Also, as Istilion, an assassin got me to drop a weapon, and he evaded my first impale, even though I had no weapon. My second one checked normal and it gave me the wield a spear dumbass echo. If I remember right, the same thing for dirt kick, it will check against your evade before it checks whether or not you're blind. Sorry I don't have the logs.
Carrion Fields on 2007-05-08 07:35 UTC
Automatically imported from the legacy bug board forum.
Daevryn on 2007-05-14 21:30 UTC
Subject: That's correct. (n/t)
.
Igsoeh on 2007-05-15 11:58 UTC
Subject: RE: That's correct. (n/t)
Can I ask why? Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
Sebeok on 2007-05-16 20:10 UTC
Subject: RE: That's correct. (n/t)
Because doing it any other way would be a billion times more work, is my guess.
Daevryn on 2007-05-16 21:23 UTC
Subject: RE: That's correct. (n/t)
That's most of it (in my mind), the rest being, the status quo rewards you for paying attention, which isn't an all bad thing.
Guy on 2007-05-16 22:17 UTC
Subject: Doesn't that open it up to abuse though?
It just sounds like you guys are too lazy to move around the way some of that stuff layers.
No offense, but it sounds like in previous history stuff like that bites you in the ass.
Sure as far as I can think, it limits it to spamming evade up quickly, but who knows I'm not really a bug abuser. I'm sure the russians can come up with something better. If you give them enough time?
Just my 2cents.
Zulghinlour on 2007-05-16 23:59 UTC
Subject: Lazy?
It would fundamentally change the way combat is done if we made this change (honestly, it would be easier to just scrap everything that we do in combat today and re-write it from scratch to fix this problem). This is probably a thousand times more work than the dual-wield work I did. There is no way I want a part of this one.
No idea what you mean by that.
Guy on 2007-05-17 00:42 UTC
Subject: Well there are a few ways to do it
Most of them do require some sort of restructuring, if CF still resembles what it spawned from.
After giving it considerable thought on a solution...
I realise lazy is far from the right word, I'm looking more for a word that explains how you wouldn't want to scroll over pages and pages of code interjecting a evade check after the skill checks to see if it can be done in the first place
IE
(Do_impale
Check wield for spear
check to see if they know impale
If you've come up with a better way to do this.. I'm impressed. everything else I threw around sounded just as hopelessly tedious.
(On other solutions, maybe a table of some kind? But I was still stumped how to come up with quick way to check to see if you can do said skill without just Fing writing the checks into the table)
Anyway I realise my previous reply was more than a bit critical, but I still think you could abuse it with some thought.
PS as for stuff that has been shortcutted before, I can't think of a specific example, and if I do I'll probly just email you? I hate mangling the bugboard with a vague (And still currently only supported in my head) arguement =P
Klaak1 on 2007-05-17 02:23 UTC
Subject: I think what he means
Is that if evade is being checked before checking to see if the attempted skill can even be used I(i.e. dirt kicking at someone when they're already blind), then two people could get together, blind each other, and then spam dirt kick as fast as they can. Each time they attempt to dirt kick, evade gets checked, then dirt kick, the person is told, "He's already blind," therefore, does not get lagged from the attempt, and just dirt kicks again immediately. And the process repeats. As such, evade can get checked about 10 times per round, and people spam practice evade to 100% very quickly.
I think this is what he's referring to when he says:
"it sounds like in previous history stuff like that bites you in the ass."
Klaak
Zulghinlour on 2007-05-17 03:23 UTC
Subject: RE: Well there are a few ways to do it
Yup...this is exactly what we'd have to do unless we wanted to re-write the combat code. Pasting in an evade check into every single skill we have in the game is going to take more time than re-writing how combat works (okay...maybe not that much time, but I'd rather invest time in re-write then tedium).
I agree, I'm sure there are ways. The playerbase always proves me right :P
I get what you're saying now.
Valkenar on 2007-05-19 19:46 UTC
Subject: RE: Well there are a few ways to do it
Though I know nothing about the code, isn't there already a test_bard_distort() before every skill? Couldn't you just:
Search: Test_bard_distort();
Replace; Test_bard_distort();\nTest_Evade();
Daevryn on 2007-05-19 23:40 UTC
Subject: Nope:
Check it sometime. You can disarm empty air on someone who doesn't have a weapon.
Daevryn on 2007-05-19 23:42 UTC
Subject: I brought this up in a conversation with Valg the day we put evade in
And basically, I came to the conclusion that it was better for most of the players if I took 1 hour to put in logging that would catch that exploit and another minute to deny each character that did it, rather than take 100 hours to fix it right and then skip out on 1000 hours of CF coding because I'm too burned out to care.