NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Joshua Randall" data-source="post: 4987360" data-attributes="member: 7737">One thing that is going to be very, very hard to simulate is the dynamic nature of combat priorities and the fallability of humans.For example, if the party's wizard starts getting attacked by a monster, even if the optimal choice might be to let the monster beat on the wizard for a while, I think that 90% of real groups would send a meatier character over to help out the wizard. (A defender would be ideal, to mark the monster so it can't attack the wizard with impunity.)So now you've got to take into account movement -- the fighter has to go over to where the monster is attacking the wizard -- which could provoke OAs from other monsters. You've also got to decide what the wizard does: does he shift back and target the monster with a ranged attack? Or stay in melee to flank with the fighter? And if so, does the wizard actually attack the monster with a presumably feeble melee attack, or does he use Aid Another?It would be very interesting to know what the optimal choice is in this sutation (monster breaks away to attack the wizard):1. tell the wizard to tough it out himself2. send the fighter to rescue the wizard, then3a. wizard shifts back and used ranged attacks, or3b. wizard stays in melee and uses melee attacks, or3c. wizard stay in melee and uses Aid AnotherMonte Carlo would be a good way to figure out which of the above is optimal (assuming we can agree how to measure "optimal"). But I fear the complexity will rapidly overwhelm things.</blockquote>

Verification