Posted by Drifter on June 6, 2000 at 19:29:50:
In Reply to: while you're suggesting... posted by SphereMaker(IMM) on June 6, 2000 at 17:11:47:
How about implementing a system where only four characters may attack a single target at a time? One for each cardinal direction, maybe 5 if one is flying or swimming. This proverbial group of 10 spamming bash could not be sure which of their attacks would land, perhaps leading to a non optimal tanking situation. or would this make it to difficult to kill certain quest area mobs?
> Of course, it's not that simple. Some targets will be out of range, some targets may be occupied with other melee, etc. (unless you want to make the decision process purely random, which seems a little funky).
>
> I agree with you that having (let's say) a group of 10 go attack another group of 10 -- which inevitably leads to two dead group tanks -- isn't a good way to resolve combat. In fact, if we wanted to be really clever, we'd look at the odds and then determine group morale (then match morale checks against either the leader or the tank's charisma to see if you really are excited about following them into combat), place a limit on the number of attackers per target (based on character sizes, numbers and types of weapons, environment), randomize based on targets in range, and figure out a clever way to handle groups that would avoid the randomization by following (instead of grouping) and all spamming "bash TARGETGUY" and reverting us back to the old way of doing things anyway.
>
> Nah, we're not that clever.
>
> Think maybe we've talked about this behind immortal doors at some point...?