Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: Why have a combat state?

[clawrenc#cup,hp.com]

In <3.0.32.19970424121605.00683f30#mail,tenetwork.com>, on 04/24/97 
   at 08:12 PM, Jeff Kesselman <jeffk#tenetwork,com> said:

>(2) Enagagement is an important concept for battle strategy.  You CAN
>still have engagement in a one-state if that state is always in
>combat time (see (1))above), but someone was mentioning "just wlakign
>off" so I thought i shoudl mention it.  Engagement simulates the fact
>that seriosu combat is a constant give and take of offense and
>defense, if yo udrop your defenses, even foir a moment, yer gonna get
>tagged.

Having a binary engagement state (in-combat or out-of-combat) also
obviates (or at least reduces) lesser forms of engagement, such as
passing spats, displays of force, etc.  I like the idea that there can
be an I-am-fighting state as maintained by the character-internal
flag, but that for general manipulation, especially for less dedicated
affairs, the situation remains fluid.

-- 
J C Lawrence                           Internet: claw#null,net
(Contractor)                           Internet: coder#ibm,net
---------------(*)               Internet: clawrenc#cup,hp.com
...Honorary Member Clan McFUD -- Teamer's Avenging Monolith...