Forums

Broken PvP mechanics

Quick find code: 322-323-229-66012020

of 9
Fenforge

Fenforge

Posts: 2,557Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Ability to teleport on the same tick as being teleblocked.

Removal of teleportation whilst in combat within the Wilderness. ( 5 tick delay after last combat hit. )

Obtaining a skull from attacking a player just as they teleport without doing any damage. ( Not even hitting a 0. )

Ability to box NPCs without the attacking player being able to override the NPC, which was possible with magic in Classic.

This could extend to simply making the perimetre of the Npc's walking radius to that of multi instead of single.

Single zones would still remain, just now ie ; The Wilderness Graveyards wouldn't be used as an O.P escape route. Same with Green dragons & numerous other spawns.

This'd be only applied to the Wilderness. Some Npc's walking radius's may need to be altered in order to prevent O.P farming methods. Howbeit, even if some are farmed more easily, ie ; Magic axes, the balance would come from the extra Risk which would remove a good chunk of the expected profits.

Bots would find this a major issue.

-------------------
The other alternative would be to allow players to be attacked by 1 Npc & 1 player in Single zones, if the engine allows for it.



Ladder & cave entrance abuse

Wilderness ladders & cave entrances are continually abused to wear down the 10 second combat time to aid players logging out.

Put a 5 tick delay on both ladders & cave entrances after the initial entry or climb.
MP1 ... ?
Cancer Cure Hits the Market! Car-T Cells Youtube.

14-May-2018 05:02:35 - Last edited on 06-Dec-2018 12:59:54 by Fenforge

Maat
Oct Member 2018

Maat

Posts: 4,331Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fenforge said:
Ability to teleport on the same tick as being teleblocked.

Probably an engine limitation. You could argue to delay teleportation by 0.6 ticks, but that would ruin more than it would "repair".

Fenforge said:
Obtaining a skull from attacking a player just as they teleport without doing any damage. ( Not even hitting a 0. )

I wouldn't mind seeing this changed, but a skull is supposed to be the result of your intention to kill another player. And again, this might be an engine limitation.

Fenforge said:
Ability to box NPCs without the attacking player being able to override the NPC, which was possible with magic in Classic.

I get where you're coming from, but since we're no longer in Classic and overriding single-way NPC combat has never been possible in RS2, this isn't an integrity issue. Since far less than 75% of all players are PKers, this would never pass a poll.
My suggestions:
Crystal bow spec | Carcass carving | Wildy PvP Treasure Hunt | Construction: Bricklaying | Anti-safing food

15-May-2018 16:26:41

Fenforge

Fenforge

Posts: 2,557Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Maat said:

Probably an engine limitation. You could argue to delay teleportation by 0.6 ticks, but that would ruin more than it would "repair".

Maat said:

I wouldn't mind seeing this changed, but a skull is supposed to be the result of your intention to kill another player. And again, this might be an engine limitation.

Maat said:

I get where you're coming from, but since we're no longer in Classic and overriding single-way NPC combat has never been possible in RS2, this isn't an integrity issue. Since far less than 75% of all players are PKers, this would never pass a poll.


You seem to have an understanding of the engine limitations that the Unity 5 product offers, perhaps you could show some examples why these requests may not be possible?

I do like to go by the belief that anything is possible with a computer/program.

Though these are the main reasons why I get so annoyed with this game, & perhaps why Andrew Gower is building his new engine from scratch?
MP1 ... ?
Cancer Cure Hits the Market! Car-T Cells Youtube.

16-May-2018 03:32:34

Reminiscon
Oct Member 2016

Reminiscon

Posts: 3,297Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
People boxing monsters in pvp is an integrity issue. Because it makes PKing solo almost impossible, and that's a bad thing.

Support.
Long live the Wilderness. Long live risk vs reward in PVM. Long live 2006.

16-May-2018 08:28:56

Maat
Oct Member 2018

Maat

Posts: 4,331Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fenforge said:
You seem to have an understanding of the engine limitations that the Unity 5 product offers, perhaps you could show some examples why these requests may not be possible?

I'm not familiar with Unity 5, but I do know the basics of engine programming. Logically, a game's requests and its accompanying if-statements are handled before the actions themselves. Since RS runs on a tick system, this delay could be up to 0.6 seconds.

I'll try to visualize what could be the case for the teleblock issue. For clarity, I'll measure the time in ticks ("0t").


Player A casts teleport between 0t and 1t.
Teleblock check returns "false".
Action queued and to be issued at 1t.

Player B casts teleport between 0t and 1t.
Action queued and to be issued at 1t.
From 1t onward, player A's teleport requests will have the teleblock check return "true".

Since player A's teleport request was handled before 1t (before receiving the teleblock), player B's teleblock was not checked. Therefore, player A's teleport is not interrupted.


Hope that makes sense!


Fenforge said:
I do like to go by the belief that anything is possible with a computer/program.

Of course, anything is possible. But once you're past the early stages of engine development, this becomes increasingly difficult as more and more content depends on its logic. It would take many hundreds of hours of setting up test cases ("where could it go wrong?"), actual testing and adjusting the newly written engine code to make sure these changes don't cause any major bugs in other parts of the game.

You could compare it to making changes to the inner structure of a skyscraper after it has been built.
My suggestions:
Crystal bow spec | Carcass carving | Wildy PvP Treasure Hunt | Construction: Bricklaying | Anti-safing food

16-May-2018 14:25:02 - Last edited on 16-May-2018 14:27:40 by Maat

Fenforge

Fenforge

Posts: 2,557Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Maat said:

I'm not familiar with Unity 5, but I do know the basics of engine programming. Logically, a game's requests and its accompanying if-statements are handled before the actions themselves. Since RS runs on a tick system, this delay could be up to 0.6 seconds.

I'll try to visualize what could be the case for the teleblock issue. For clarity, I'll measure the time in ticks ("0t").


Player A casts teleport between 0t and 1t.
Teleblock check returns "false".
Action queued and to be issued at 1t.

Player B casts teleport between 0t and 1t.
Action queued and to be issued at 1t.
From 1t onward, player A's teleport requests will have the teleblock check return "true".

Since player A's teleport request was handled before 1t (before receiving the teleblock), player B's teleblock was not checked. Therefore, player A's teleport is not interrupted.

Could the teleport phase not be extended to that of :


("0t")("2t") ?

Whilst the player casting teleblock would only be subjected to that of :

("0t")("1t") ?
Maat said:

You could compare it to making changes to the inner structure of a skyscraper after it has been built.

We could always build around the existing structure in order to make these changes?
MP1 ... ?
Cancer Cure Hits the Market! Car-T Cells Youtube.

16-May-2018 14:44:35

Maat
Oct Member 2018

Maat

Posts: 4,331Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fenforge said:
Could the teleport phase not be extended to that of :


("0t")("2t") ?

Whilst the player casting teleblock would only be subjected to that of :

("0t")("1t") ?

It all depends on when the conditions for an action (teleporting) are checked. If it happens the moment the player clicks on the spell, the only result of bringing the teleport phase to 0t-2t is a delay in the teleport itself, which wouldn't make sense.

However, if the teleport request's condition checks could be moved to 1t, it could technically work. However, could you imagine how gimmicky and "unnatural" it would feel to be teleported another 0.6 seconds later?

Fenforge said:
Fenforge said:
You could compare it to making changes to the inner structure of a skyscraper after it has been built.

We could always build around the existing structure in order to make these changes?

Well...

Imagine all actions of the entire game going through the same single piece of base code that says "check conditions, add the resulting action to the queue of actions for the next game tick". It'd be very inefficient, if not virtually impossible, to make an exception for teleportation only. For every action, you'll have to check whether or not the request is for teleportation or not, which would severely impact the code's performance.

Even though it may seem like a small change, it would require tons of effort to be done efficiently. I can remember JMods saying that implementing the name change feature, something that seems so simple, was one hell of a difficult task.
My suggestions:
Crystal bow spec | Carcass carving | Wildy PvP Treasure Hunt | Construction: Bricklaying | Anti-safing food

16-May-2018 15:11:29

Fenforge

Fenforge

Posts: 2,557Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Maat said:

It all depends on when the conditions for an action (teleporting) are checked. If it happens the moment the player clicks on the spell, the only result of bringing the teleport phase to 0t-2t is a delay in the teleport itself, which wouldn't make sense.

However, if the teleport request's condition checks could be moved to 1t, it could technically work. However, could you imagine how gimmicky and "unnatural" it would feel to be teleported another 0.6 seconds later?

This would only need to be implemented when a player is in the Wilderness or a PvP world, to avoid the " unnatural " feel.

Though I'm guessing this could be quite a headache, as with what you've typed below.
Maat said:

Well...

Imagine all actions of the entire game going through the same single piece of base code that says "check conditions, add the resulting action to the queue of actions for the next game tick". It'd be very inefficient, if not virtually impossible, to make an exception for teleportation only. For every action, you'll have to check whether or not the request is for teleportation or not, which would severely impact the code's performance.

Would it be possible for the engine to double check the teleport action, which would result in a double tick? ( 2 x 0.6 )

& still the teleblock spell would only need to be checked once. ( 1 x 0.6 )
MP1 ... ?
Cancer Cure Hits the Market! Car-T Cells Youtube.

16-May-2018 15:29:32

Maat
Oct Member 2018

Maat

Posts: 4,331Adamant Posts by user Forum Profile RuneMetrics Profile
Fenforge said:
Would it be possible for the engine to double check the teleport action, which would result in a double tick? ( 2 x 0.6 )

& still the teleblock spell would only need to be checked once. ( 1 x 0.6 )

Honestly, I don't know. I have no idea how the engine actually works. :P
My suggestions:
Crystal bow spec | Carcass carving | Wildy PvP Treasure Hunt | Construction: Bricklaying | Anti-safing food

16-May-2018 15:34:57

Quick find code: 322-323-229-66012020Back to Top