Player to Player Collision

[CJC]

Glenn the Great brought up a valid issue here (http://armageddongames.net/showthread.php?95104-READ-ME-Introduction-to-Shattered-Earth&p=892011&viewfull=1#post892011) that needs to be discussed in a place that isn't the "Introduction to Shattered Earth" thread.

Here is the problem:
In choke points, an ornery player can simply squat and prevent access to entire sections of a map.



Here are the proposed solutions so far:
Tim : Don't map any narrow passages when constructing the game.

MasterSwordUltima : Disable player collision so all players can ghost through any other player.

ctrl-alt-delete : Include a jump command that lets players 'hop' over other players.

Gleeok : Include an idleness check for all players. If the player has not moved in a long time (say, a minute), collision with them is disabled.

franpa : Player pushing, if a player is standing still and another player tries to move past, the first gets pushed in that direction.

CJC : Combination of Gleeok's, Franpa's, and MSU's ideas. If a player presses against another player for five seconds, the two switch positions.


This thread is to discuss the solutions, suggest alternate solutions, and remove the cold empty feeling from this sub-forum so that other members are willing to post suggestions.

[MasterSwordUltima]

Although Tim's suggestion would be great, it's simply not possible with the Final Fantasy style tiles we're using. Doors are almost universally 1 tile (as are players).

And I'm sorry ctrl-alt-delete, I can't be bothered to add a jump button/command when I feel there are other features that hold priority at the moment.

Btw, thank you for finally utilizing this forum. :smoke:

[Nicholas Steel]

franpa : Player pushing, if a player is standing still and another player tries to move past, the first gets pushed in that direction.

CJC : Combination of Gleeok's, Franpa's, and MSU's ideas. If a player presses against another player for five seconds, the two switch positions.

I feel these should be treated as separate ideas that would work best when used in conjunction with each other.

[Tim]

This is true. But it still should apply for dungeon-esque maps... Unless we want our players to get swarmed and trapped by mobs. (I'd laugh though.)

[MasterSwordUltima]

I personally liked the tight squeezes from the Freeport Tunnel back in the day. But that was me.

[Glenn the Great]

The only idea floated so far that I think is any good is the one where Player A pushes against Player B and then the two swap spaces.
This could create an interesting puzzle game out of moving idle players into inhospitable locations.
Something to think about with this idea: Should players be allowed to push each other out of the way during combat? If so, it could create an interesting team dynamic (off-tanking), and a PvP dynamic (fighting over access to a mob's loot drops).

It would be too much of an aesthetic sacrifice to impose a "no 1-tile-wide pathways" rule on the map design, and there'd still be the issue of two players teaming up to block a wider pathway.

I don't think the jump command is a good solution because there are going to be odd player/world placement situations (ie: idle player is in a T-intersection), where it would be ambiguous as to where the jumping character should land.

I'm not a big fan of the no-collisions ever idea because of the technical consequences of players stacking on top of each other.
It would mean a lot of things for gameplay: X-vs-1 combat with mobs, targeting, PvP.

[ctrl-alt-delete]

The only idea floated so far that I think is any good is the one where Player A pushes against Player B and then the two swap spaces.
This could create an interesting puzzle game out of moving idle players into inhospitable locations.
Something to think about with this idea: Should players be allowed to push each other out of the way during combat? If so, it could create an interesting team dynamic (off-tanking), and a PvP dynamic (fighting over access to a mob's loot drops).

It would be too much of an aesthetic sacrifice to impose a "no 1-tile-wide pathways" rule on the map design, and there'd still be the issue of two players teaming up to block a wider pathway.

I don't think the jump command is a good solution because there are going to be odd player/world placement situations (ie: idle player is in a T-intersection), where it would be ambiguous as to where the jumping character should land.

I'm not a big fan of the no-collisions ever idea because of the technical consequences of players stacking on top of each other.
It would mean a lot of things for gameplay: X-vs-1 combat with mobs, targeting, PvP.

For the record to put it to bed, the jump thing was a joke.

Other than that, you've really thought this through.

Why not put the spin in place with insert thing to further use? If you're standing immediately next to somebody and spin in place, you swap places?

[Nicholas Steel]

The only idea floated so far that I think is any good is the one where Player A pushes against Player B and then the two swap spaces.
This could create an interesting puzzle game out of moving idle players into inhospitable locations.
Something to think about with this idea: Should players be allowed to push each other out of the way during combat? If so, it could create an interesting team dynamic (off-tanking), and a PvP dynamic (fighting over access to a mob's loot drops).

It would be too much of an aesthetic sacrifice to impose a "no 1-tile-wide pathways" rule on the map design, and there'd still be the issue of two players teaming up to block a wider pathway.

I don't think the jump command is a good solution because there are going to be odd player/world placement situations (ie: idle player is in a T-intersection), where it would be ambiguous as to where the jumping character should land.

I'm not a big fan of the no-collisions ever idea because of the technical consequences of players stacking on top of each other.
It would mean a lot of things for gameplay: X-vs-1 combat with mobs, targeting, PvP.
I was thinking more like "Player A pushes against Player B and Player B simaltaneously pushes against Player A, they both swap positions." and "Player A pushes against Player B who is idle, Player B is pushed along the tunnel."

Of course the latter part of that leaves a problem for narrow corners.

[Glenn the Great]

I was thinking more like "Player A pushes against Player B and Player B simaltaneously pushes against Player A, they both swap positions." and "Player A pushes against Player B who is idle, Player B is pushed along the tunnel."

Of course the latter part of that leaves a problem for narrow corners.

Yeah, the narrow corners thing is why I think that swapping is the way to go.
I'm not sure, however, that Player B should have to be idle for swapping to work... being the devious bastard that I am the first thing I'd do is set up a looping keyboard macro that keeps the game from thinking I'm idle.
Of course there is always the ability for staff (if present) to intervene in such cases, but I think that a well-designed mechanic is one that minimizes the need for staff intervention.

Speaking of staff intervention... in MSU's beta from earlier this year I set up a keyboard macro that allowed me to farm weak mobs while AFK. Worked like a charm until I came back and found that I'd been insta-gibbed by MSU.

[Nicholas Steel]

I was thinking more like "Player A pushes against Player B and Player B simaltaneously pushes against Player A, they both swap positions." and "Player A pushes against Player B who is idle, Player B is pushed along the tunnel."

Of course the latter part of that leaves a problem for narrow corners and T intersections.

This issue in bold, is resolved by simply letting players move diagonally. Castle of the Winds, an old Windows 3.1 game lets you move diagonally so it can totally be done! It even let you engage in melee diagonally.

[MasterSwordUltima]

But I have absolutely no intentions of adding 8 direction movement anytime soon.