[CF-Devel] Change in equip method.

[Mark Wedel]

David Hurst wrote:

>>
     
      RE using multiple weapons at one time:  I agree the correct way to do it 
     
     >>
     
      would be for each weapon to have its own weapon speed, and each attach only 
     
     >>
     
     has the benefits of that weapon.  However, that would require some fairly 
     
     >>
     
     extensive changes to the attack code.  Perhaps if we want to seriously look 
     
     >>
     
     into using 2 weapons, we should look at such a change.  But it certainly 
     
     >>
     
     makes things more complicated.
     
     >>
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      I would think it is worth serious contemplation.
     
     

  Put it on the TODO list :).  I'd have to look at how the current attack code 
works - depending on its current state, it may not be quite so hard.  Hmm. 
Maybe if I ever fix the weapon speed/real speed problem, I could fix it also.

  However, you also get what may be some odd situations, eg, I 4 armed creature 
that wants to use a sword as one attach and karate (or claws) as another.  I 
just envision that trying to do this opens up a huge can of worms.  I'll be 
happy to just allow 2 handed weapons.


>
     
     
     >
     
     
     >>
     
      My personal thought is to change this so that you are equipping something 
     
     >>
     
      but there is a choice of more than 1 item to unequip, the server then 
     
     >>
     
     informs the player that 'you either need to enequip a or b' type of things, 
     
     >>
     
     instead of making that choice for the player.  Thoughts?
     
     >>
     
     
     >
     
     
     >
     
      ok, except that this will add time to equiping, I would rather see some
     
     >
     
      sort of clever binding ability 'apply <shield>,<sword>;apply <bow>. This
     
     >
     
      would basically switch between a sword and shiled (or just sword/shield)
     
     >
     
      to a bow and back. The apply code looks to apply the object, if it is
     
     >
     
      already applied it unapplies and the reverse. Which items it applies
     
     >
     
      would be based on the easiest way to do it, but a predictable one. Ie,
     
     >
     
      highest in inv. (If this was used I would like to see the ability to
     
     >
     
      rearrange your inv) or possibly the highest locked item.
     
     

  Some people have commented that the fact that you can current switch which 
suit of plate armor in the middle of battle isnn't all that realistic, and it 
should take some time to switch.  I'm not quite so sure on that - this probably 
boils down to the realism vs fun factor.  This is one reason I play without the 
longer spell casting times - it isn't very fun to cast a spell add have to 
literally wait a couple seconds before you can do something again, same for 
switching items.

  Note that there are command line ways to equip and unequip items (apply -u and 
apply -a I think, might also be unapply).  So you could certainly do something 
like 'unapply bow; apply shield; apply sword' and bind it to a key.  Note that 
this now takes 3 actions to perform that switch, instead of it all happening in 
one (you could also have the reverse, 'unapply sword; unapply shield; apply bow').

  Note that the names are simplistic in the example.  The code really looks for 
the item as named, so it might be something more like 'unapply elven longbow; 
apply holy shield; apply demonbane'.

  Note that may be inconvenient if you constant switch between preferred items. 
  (eg, I want to be using that dragonbane right now, not the demonbane). 
However, if applying a bow automatically unequipped your shield/weapon, that 
would be no different - you either need to find your appropriate weapon, or have 
multiple bindings.


 If the extra time such a binding takes up (3 ticks instead of 1) was a really 

big concern, the time charged to the player could be reduced to be half an action

or something like that (there is no requirement that all actions take one action 
- one action is really just the baseline to move one space - many of the 
administrative commands actually have no time associated with them (eg, who, 
maps, etc)