no
[UNAC] Suggestions
- Thread starter Green Knight
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
You don't just "no" that.Amaranth the Druid said:
They are now out of the tourney making their vote irrelevant. At the least re-do the vote or something.
The vote was already in favor of the 200%, but apparently a majority by 1 isn't enough to warrant a change. The vote would now be 5-3 in favor of the change...
Does it have to be 8-0 for the change to actually happen or something?
200% or riot.
ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ200% or riotヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ
ACanadianPolarBear
Sergeant Knight
200% makes me have more fun
Teams should just play under 200% anyways.
ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉ200% or riotヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ﾉArys said:
Your original msg was hurtful
Cradoc
Grandmaster Knight
Problem with 200% is that once you get the higher tier armor. You keep a much larger % of it. So once you kill someone they mostly still have the mail(or other higher tier armor) because they are keeping it. Then players who are utility(support) get nothing. You could get a great round out of a player on Nord first round. Gets 4 kills and lives. The next round he dies but gets 2 kills. He still has higher tier armor on 3rd round. On the old system. He would lose that higher tiered armor for Round 3. He might have that armor on 4th round if you win. I'd like to keep the punishment on teams losing the round.
If you still want to play with Combat Gold, do 150%(150-125 whatever suits your fancy) and 200 Round bonus. Would think it'll be less gold than before but not so much keeping it.
If you still want to play with Combat Gold, do 150%(150-125 whatever suits your fancy) and 200 Round bonus. Would think it'll be less gold than before but not so much keeping it.
My biggest peeve with our current system (100% Combat 100% round) is that it rewards players too much that could've literally done nothing at all and get 500g. Also, it seems just too op especially for swadia.
After thinking about this for a while I've come to believe that a better compromise would be something like 100% combat and 50% round. It would reward people for staying alive (but not 500 gold worth) and also still give killers some gold too.
50% = 250 a round? x 8 = 2000g for an ace (instead of 4000g under our old system). By keeping gold limited, it lessens the eqiupment gaps between teams on the next round and also I believe it would make the game more competitive. So less snowballing = a more even 2nd round and more likely that comebacks can happen, I think this "comeback" theme fits our community well since we already do it with our rounds too.
I hate comparing Warband to any other game out there, but even League had to lessen turret and kill gold at one point because teams were snowballing too hard off of those things alone.
After thinking about this for a while I've come to believe that a better compromise would be something like 100% combat and 50% round. It would reward people for staying alive (but not 500 gold worth) and also still give killers some gold too.
50% = 250 a round? x 8 = 2000g for an ace (instead of 4000g under our old system). By keeping gold limited, it lessens the eqiupment gaps between teams on the next round and also I believe it would make the game more competitive. So less snowballing = a more even 2nd round and more likely that comebacks can happen, I think this "comeback" theme fits our community well since we already do it with our rounds too.
I hate comparing Warband to any other game out there, but even League had to lessen turret and kill gold at one point because teams were snowballing too hard off of those things alone.
ACanadianPolarBear
Sergeant Knight
John got a nice idear der
>inb4 we have to test it
I mean, I know we should test things before implementation, but I can't think of how it would directly impact the course of the game so much that it needs weeks of testing to see what changes it brings about. Who knows, but I doubt it really needs much testing to see the differences that would occur. Just look at the mathz and you pretty much get the idea.
Yeah, we tested the 200% rule and MAJORITY of the teams liked the change.
If we don't go with what the majority wants, at least go with a compromise.
If we don't go with what the majority wants, at least go with a compromise.
