A Sugestion for real wars to work out, I think it should be simple as that: Just need to give more cl.sc for the clans which has real wars, like 4 cl.sc or more per win.
Heres: If you war with a clan which is in top 10, u get 4 cl.sc per win, and if you war a clan which is in 11 place or lower u get 2 cl.sc per win.
We all know how fighting whores is easy so maybe the number should increase to even 6 cl.sc.
Well you have my idea, discuss it and develop it :)
I think its cool becoz it might work out, the leaders should always watch out their clans to stop whores getting in, but if they do get in, it wouldnt last long becoz clan would drop from top 10. And it wouldnt be so easy to get into top 10, and I think there would be actually a REAL competition.
|
Besides it wouldnt mean that top 10 clans should only war each other, they could have the mixure in diplomacy, but the thing is: if you want to fight whores pay it with lower cl.sc
|
Id actually be for 6 cl.sc fighting bots in top 10 clan, and 3cl.sc for hostile. And for fighting other clans (out of top 10) it would be same old system 2/1 cl.sc In this case even hostiling and fighting top 10 clans would bring more cl.sc than fighing whores.
|
oh and I like it becoz, top 10 clans would always be a target, and thats how it should be. OK enough from me lol
|
< combo breaker
I put my support behind honorable FNIX.
~Tito
|
|
|
All for it.
I think the clans position should be relative though. In the hay-day of Bots2, there were 300+ clans. Not only top 10 should give extra CS.
How about making it similar to the way bots fight? If you challenge a higher leveled player, you get more XP. The same could go for clans. If you target a higher ranked clan than yourself, you get more CS.
That way it doesn't matter if i'm ranked 134th. I can target a mid level clan at rank 80 and also enjoy CS bonus.
This automatically means that the #1 clan cannot get the CS bonus. Which is cool, i think. Makes it harder to keep first place :)
|
|
|
The old Bots2 situation:
No matter the clan's ranks, hostile would give you 1cs per win, and war 2cs. It made no difference whether the #1 clan would be at war with a clan ranked 299th, or 2nd.
Optional new situation:
We're looking to get 'rank difference' into the equation, right? If you hostile a higher ranked clan, that should give more cs than hostiling a lower ranked clan.
We could use a multiplier to 'correct' the amount of cs a win would give. I was playing around with numbers, and a linear formula didn't seem fair to me. How does this sound?
1 + ( [rank enemy clan] - [rank your clan] ) * ( ( [rank enemy clan] - [rank your clan] ) / 20 ) ^ 2
Since there's a exponent involved, it gets out of hand real quick when the difference in rank gets higher. So the outcome should be capped. A hostile situation should be between 0.5 and 2 cs, and a war should be in between 1 and 4 cs.
This shows the outcome between differently ranked clans;
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=QgyXz4Xa
The multiplier-column shows the outcome of the formula above. The two columns to the right are the capped cs for hostile and war. So, if you target a clan close to your rank, the cs will be (close to) the same amount as you'd normally get. If you target a clan 6 or more ranks down the list though, your cs earnings are cut in half. And wouldn't that suck? ;)
|
I agree with your idea mate !
|
Lets say you have a good build and can win 50% of your fights against a closely ranked clan giving you and your opponent clan the same cs as each time you lose they are gaining cs, whereas fighting a whore clan, even though you might get less cs per fight, you will gain it quicker and you wont be giving cs to a closely ranked opponent clan.
|
also, if jans index is left the same, then clans that fight whores will have a major advantage in ratio over clans that fight other real clans
|
I'm all for getting rid of jans index - I think it's bad.
So far as forcing 'real wars' - not sure it'll work very well... or that it's a very good idea at all.
I mean, the top whore clans often end up in the top 10.
...and ratio whores are too important anyways - not sure that we could incorporate something like ratio into figuring clanscore without just making ratio whores too important in a different manner. Granted, there's a bonus of using ratio whores for clanscore and that'll lessen their ability to create the insane leveling.
So yeah, I see this as the kind of thing Jans would love because he can think of ways to manipulate the game. I would also enjoy that, tbqh. But I don't think it would be an honest answer to anything or even healthy for the game.
|
Me-index shouldnt be reintroduced.
And you're right, shoegazer, it'd still be very hard to compete with clans that fight whores. But i agree with Fnix that there should be a reward for targeting higher ranked clans and a penalty for targeting lower ranked clans.
The basic principle here is this; should a win on a clan ranked higher than yours be rewarded more?
This is the same principle as the XP formula. Winning from a higher leveled bot gives more XP. No one questions that logic, right? It only makes sense to do the same with clans and cs. The only question that remains is 'how much?'.
|
I question the bloody logic, jans.
And I think you have to know better.
C'mon, I've said time-and-time again that the game is too hard for new players.
If you did what you're proposing then it would be IMPOSSIBLE new players in young clans. And all you'd be doing is making whore clans even more important.
Personally, I have no problem clanscoring from a whore clan for awhile and would prefer it. And that's all our clan would end up doing. We'd clanscore just enough from our actual clan (probably on a ratio whore in the actual clan that would be removed at end of month) to make the whore clan relevant. Wouldn't be barely any work at all, of course, as we all remember how very little clanscore was needed to make a clan a top 10/top 20 clan.
Of course, you could go to the extreme with this idea and make it a huge reward to fight top clans... but then you're giving those top clans far too big of an advantage and that's an even worse idea. Yes, you'd certainly encourage the top clans to think about fighting each other. But there'd end up being only the top clans and anyone thinking of making a new clan would be SOL - as no top clan in their right mind would give them a war. That would mean any new players would quit within days of making their clan - seeing their plight as hopeless (which it would be).
You know as well as I do, that games like this are all about the best way to "cheat the system" and manipulate things. Well, if this is so, then why do you constantly pretend to ignore this fact when introducing ideas?
Many ideas, such as this one, would just make this game even LESS accessible to new players. Those ideas aren't healthy for a game.
|
No it's the other way around, this would make it easier for new clans.
Starting a new clan wouldnt require 'assets' such as whores to start competing. Lower ranked clans would get THE SAME amount of cs from HOSTILE as top rank clans would get from WARRING a lower ranked clan. How's that for better odds? That would have been impossible in the old game.
And if whoreclans make it into top 10, that's just a sign the game is too inactive. I can't remember that happening when i used to play. Not that it would be a bad thing btw. When difference in rank becomes a factor to deal with, players will find new strategies. The rank of the whoreclan suddenly matters, so yea, it would need some cs in order to gain better cs from. Which is fine. I'm not against whores, but it shouldnt be rewarded the same way as fighting actual bots.
|
Oh i just had another idea. Maybe the clan's rank doesn't need to be involved afterall. Like XP, the amount of CS could also depend on the number of STRIKES and BLOCKS in a fight.
Long fight = more cs
Short fight = little cs
Much simpler :)
|
Result of that will be high dex whores with shields and lower lvl weapon.
~Tito
|
Quote: "Jans - We could use a multiplier to 'correct' the amount of cs a win would give. I was playing around with numbers, and a linear formula didn't seem fair to me. How does this sound?
1 + ( [rank enemy clan] - [rank your clan] ) * ( ( [rank enemy clan] - [rank your clan] ) / 20 ) ^ 2"
Holy fuck Jans are you kidding me? I find 'keep it simple' is a good premise to keep a game accessible to a wide range of players.
Mal you are presupposing that JI will still be used. Remove JI & simply use cs as the measure. This way the newer clans without high lvls & ratio bots also have a shot.
The most salient point in this thread is shoe's. Sure you may get let's say 6cs for real war, but during the time taken to fight a 'real bot' which could beat you a good percentage of the time, a whore could be raped multiple times for consistent wins. So still to maximise cs a whore would be attacked.
|
We are having a discussion and rising ideas to make game alive. Theres no point in brining back the game which noone plays. Id really like to see atleast 150 players online all the time not the pity 15-30 we had at the end. Whores and whoring killed the game if you dont understand why well I really wont explain.
To shoe: yea perfect build bots probobly wouldnt win more than 50% of the fights, but thats why Im talking about using INT as a stat for weapons or arrmors, to mess up bot biulds, so there could be less perfect builds bots.
Anyways, the more realistic idea is: if you lose a battle fighting in real wars (which would be called "war" if the idea will happin) your opponent gets 0 cl.sc, Only you fighting and winning brings cl.sc losing doesnt bring clan score neither you or your opponent. In this way clans or whore clans wouldnt get extra cl.sc from your work.
Seriuosly are you so loving your ratios? keep the ratio of 17 fighting real bots, now that would be an achievement
|
@Rose: Have you ever seen the other formulas of the game? What's so weird about this one? And what does it even matter? You don't need to be able to understand the workings of a combustion engine to be able to drive a car. Same thing here, it's not like players would need to memorize the formula to be able to play.
@Fnix: i like your solution to the problem Shoegazer addressed; opponents no longer gain cs from fights lost. Simple enough :)
@Whiners along the line of "people would still attack whores even if it gives less cs". So maybe they will. So what? With fatalistic reasoning like that, we'd still be thinking the earth was flat. It's just a matter of tweaking the numbers. If 5 or 10 cs isn't worth it to challenge a bot that fights back, then maybe 100 cs is.
I'll say again:
No one expects to make much XP from a 0.1 bot that's lower than you.
So WHY should the SAME fight give FULL CS?
The only answer i've read between the lines is something like: 'because its always been that way'. Which has never been a good reason not to change things up. In fact, the opposite is true. Precisely this moment is an excellent opportunity to correct a few flaws the old game had. This is one of them.
I'm still on the fence though what should affect the amount of cs. Difference in rank, or length of fight? Or both? Fuck it, why not both. The XP formula takes both into account as well.
|
I'm gonna reply some now. :)
I like the formula you came up with that crazy formula jans. Neat. If you get 1.3 cs, why not just times everything by 10? "GuYS, I goTs 195,438.47 ClanSscore!!11!". The older people who don't pay attention right now will be like "wtf, when can you get .47 cs?". The point of this beta right now is iron out the huge bugs. The clan rankings isn't a big deal. If you want to start a new clan and be first. Work your ass of and get there. If you are on the same playing field as a 5 year clan with lvl 160 and 8.0 ratio, then wtf is the reason for being in a clan for longer than a month? Each people could start their own clan, cs for a hour a day, and win. Simple.
How is the game hard? I've never understood that. Mal, the game involves some simple numbers, create a good bot, join a clan, win. Easy. I've tried to start WoW, it seems all the complicated to me. For some people it is the opposite way around. You can't suite everyone like Ender has already stated.
I like the idea of having extra cs per fight, 100? no, maybe 10. Getting more cs for more hp guys is dumb, make some hella easy 200 con whores. Simple. Getting more cs for higher higher is dumb, have your whores fight a few super crappy bots, to keep the ratio to the optimum size. I think you should get more cs for what jans is thinking up there. With the ranks being figured out.
-Alan
|
I realised the caps were a bit conservative. This seems better;
http://pastebin.com/raw.php?i=1SqvM6Uz
The length-of-fight multiplier should be simple enough;
cs * ( [strikes it took to kill opponent] / 10 )
A 2-strike whore in a clan 5 ranks down would give: 0.28 cs in a WAR
An opponent in a clan 10 ranks up, which took 15 strikes: 5.25 cs in HOSTILE
This, combined with the modification a challenged opponents no longer gains cs if the fight is lost, should be enough to level the playing field.
|
Yes Jans I have seen the other formulas, however I do not need to consider them every time I'm choosing an opponent. Sure your formula is making the maths geeks cream their pants, but for the average player it is just too complex.
I really do not like how a vocal minority are trying to impose their will onto the community. I believe the game should be played however the person chooses to play it. Different people derive satisfaction from different things. So what if someone wants to mindlessly hit easy bots to rack up cs if that's what motivates them?
The key to keeping everyone happy is choice.
& wtf at no cs from an attack? So you attack me when I'm offline, assuming we are at war, I win & I get no cs? Ludicrous. I'm also at a loss as to how that would discourage whoring ...
|
If you win while your offline you get the win, its not like you earned anything you got your win and free exp, clan score should be something you did yourself, this system would stop whore clans hitting top ranks. This seems to be logical to me.
|
'imposing their will'. Jesus christ. We're discussing a possible change to the game, not planning a coup plus a genocide to top it off.
My problem with easy whores:
- It's bad for the game; new clans have a much harder time getting started, because they need to build or buy whores before they're able to compete. It forces players to join one of the established clans.
- In order to have a shot at competing, the old way forced clans to use whores
- It's impossible for normal players to keep up with autoclickers. Let's not kid ourselves, of course they will be used again. With 1-strike whores, that's 2cs every 2 seconds, consistently.
I'm all for 'more options' for players. The old situation doesn't provide many though, just one: get whores, or you dont stand a chance.
LETS BALANCE THINGS SO THERE WILL BE OTHER OPTIONS
I'm not trying to solve the autoclicking problem. And i'm not trying to outlaw whores either. If someone wants to get a insane ratio, he should knock himself out. But really? Should a win on a 1-strike whore be REWARDED the same amount as a tougher bot? There's only one logical answer to that.
|
I agree to what Jans said, and we have our ides how to do that.
To dragonrose: In the way you think the game should be all the same as it was, well you sure saw how did it end up and it will be the same if nothing changes.
Whores and whoring degenerated the game. WTF some of the people having 100 or more bots of whores or other bots to rape their own whores. Is it a competition fighting your own bots? It was a competition for 5 or alil bit more players which had bought or made up hundreds of bots and played with each other.
It was somekind of monopoly, well i say its not fair the game should be enjoyed for everyone.
The most important thing is what ender thinks about this it is hes game tho and whatever he decides.
|
I'm not proposing to keep the game as it was, for instance JI should be the first thing flung on the scrap heap. i just do not like the fact that you are trying to force 'real wars'.
It was tried several times in B2 & only a few people took part. Even within the participating clans many players simply chose not to play during 'real wars' months. You wouldn't know this FNIX as your clan resolutely refused to take part ;)
That's not to say I'm disregarding 'real wars' as an option. But it should be just that an option that you choose to pursue.
& I guess we have extremely different views on why the game degenerated FNIX, because I really do not see whores as the primary cause.
If you are truly serious about creating an even playing field, the easiest way to do that is to scrap diplomacy and the bonuses that come with it. Plus make all bots you attack yield cs (within the level limits of course).
Online attacks should give you nothing though. No xp, kudos or cs.
@Jans. I still love you hun, just do not fully agree with what you are trying to achieve here.
|
And what did destroy the game? Autoclicking? It was just the result of pointless - who click the most wins competition.
yeah this game was about who click the most all the time. But theres a diffrence between 500 and 100 000 clicks per month isnt it?
Anyways if the game will be the same, fighting whores and stuff, Im sure the public secret of using autoclickers will be upon us again.
|
The purpose of any game is to be the best at it. So yea, you can say 'people have the choice to have real wars', but they cannot possibly win the game with it. That's why it didn't catch on when it was tried voluntarily in bots2. It didn't count. Only official ranks count.
I agree with Fnix whores eventually killed bots2. Of course there were other factors such as floR not caring anymore. But whores + autoclickers took out the fun and competition. Autoclickers will always remain a problem, but they shouldnt be able to outperform a human player by a factor 100!
Scrapping diplomacy settings is an option though. Kind of communistic really. Suddenly you can't have whores exclusively to yourself anymore. I kinda like that.
Pros:
- new clans no longer need to get whores first
Cons:
- this wouldn't change the 'injustice' of getting the same amount of cs for every win, no matter how much of a pushover the bot is.
- this would still give cheaters a huge advantage, harvesting cs from easy whores at lightning speed
So personally i still prefer the idea that the amount of cs should depend on the clan's rank and length of fights. That way there are only pro's.
The reasoning this is 'too complex for players' is absurd. Everyone understands a 5.0 opponent gives more XP than a 0.1 does. The same logic applies here. Target high rank clans = high cs. Aim lower = low cs. That can't be hard to grasp for newbies. If necessary, the hostile/war list could show the cs multiplier, so it's clearly visible with every possible opponent (with 3 diplomacy slots, there's only 3 possible multipliers - they dont differ individually per opponent!).
@rose, i love you too, but this is the SUGGESTIONS forum where POSSIBLE changes and additions should be ENCOURAGED to be DISCUSSED. Playing the nazi card is lame.
|
@Jans : "So personally i still prefer the idea that the amount of cs should depend on the clan's rank and length of fights. That way there are only pro's."
Who taught you that? Nothing can have only pros. Every system is flawed, no matter how big it is. I still like the idea of getting more cs for a higher ranked clan, but what about the first ranked clan? They still only get 2 cs per win. So...It is easier to get to rank ~3, then what? The idea of having more cs for a longer fight, i still don't like. If i make a rushed bot (something with around 40-50 base con) around level 130, And i lose, should a 'regular' bot get less cs? Even though my bot is good? It i fight them, I get more cs, unfair? I think so.
@FNIX : Whores weren't the only thing destroying the game like Rose has said. A/C's, inactivity from FloR, nothing new in the game, that's what destroyed it.
@Rose : I can't get my head around you trying to keep whores, Yes you csed on blue for Acedia, which was around 50k? You trained and trained. You hopped clans for the higher avg level. You had a ~1.0 ratio on your level 380. It didn't win tournaments. Did you cs back in the day with Krenshaw Crew? Sorry, I just can't figure it out. The game needs to change.
@General people and such : Real wars wasn't used because it wasn't official and it didn't get rewarded, like Jans has said. It needs to be rewarded if Ender wants it. He did update his site to 'reward' Real Wars. Whores don't need be outlawed, just harder to make. The weapons a whore gets to use needs to be ~75% of their str/dex. If this goes into effect, there needs to be more 'pure' weapons. Like 400str,0dex or 0str,400dex. You can't just change a huge aspect of the game, it will change the entire game forever.
-Alan
|
@Jans : "So personally i still prefer the idea that the amount of cs should depend on the clan's rank and length of fights. That way there are only pro's."
Who taught you that? Nothing can have only pros. Every system is flawed, no matter how big it is. I still like the idea of getting more cs for a higher ranked clan, but what about the first ranked clan? They still only get 2 cs per win. So...It is easier to get to rank ~3, then what? The idea of having more cs for a longer fight, i still don't like. If i make a rushed bot (something with around 40-50 base con) around level 130, And i lose, should a 'regular' bot get less cs? Even though my bot is good? It i fight them, I get more cs, unfair? I think so.
@FNIX : Whores weren't the only thing destroying the game like Rose has said. A/C's, inactivity from FloR, nothing new in the game, that's what destroyed it.
@Rose : I can't get my head around you trying to keep whores, Yes you csed on blue for Acedia, which was around 50k? You trained and trained. You hopped clans for the higher avg level. You had a ~1.0 ratio on your level 380. It didn't win tournaments. Did you cs back in the day with Krenshaw Crew? Sorry, I just can't figure it out. The game needs to change.
@General people and such : Real wars wasn't used because it wasn't official and it didn't get rewarded, like Jans has said. It needs to be rewarded if Ender wants it. He did update his site to 'reward' Real Wars. Whores don't need be outlawed, just harder to make. The weapons a whore gets to use needs to be ~75% of their str/dex. If this goes into effect, there needs to be more 'pure' weapons. Like 400str,0dex or 0str,400dex. You can't just change a huge aspect of the game, it will change the entire game forever.
-Alan
|
wtf Alan? Learn some bots history & then ask me that question again.
Jans I realise this is about suggestions. I just think that your field is a little narrow. You are recommending a path that will appeal to a select few.
|
I'm 90% sure more people will enjoy this kind of clan competition over the old way.
Maybe it's something that could be tested and evaluated during open beta?
I'm curious to what Ender thinks.
|
Rose, help me out? Don't act like Ftp and ignore something I say.
I'm not here to fight or nothing. I hoped you didn't take it like that.
|
She had a top 10 cs bot on green for like 89 years or something, phoenix flame? had a log with cute little flames i believe, god alan don't you know anything
|
OH damn...Forgot that was her.
And that purple whore clan?
|
yeah I can't recall the name of that right now, i forgot she was in acedia :s
|
Sorry Alan, put my crankiness down to hormones :P
& I'm not necessarily advocating whoring as tbh I'll probably only train ^^
I just think that the more variety there is in the game the more chance there is of longevity and greater appeal to a new player base.
Why can't B4 cater to all with cs races, real wars, tournaments, training, PvE etc.
|
What if there was an option to be a 'real wars clan' when you make your clan?
So, There could be two 'official ranks'.
One for normal clans, one for real wars. The real wars could follow a better formula that still goes with what jans is going for. It needs more tweaking. Real wars would need hella strict rules too.
|
|
|
Haha, this thread is awesome. Plenty of complaining about bots2 and little progress on bots4. Now, as for FNIX's and Jan's original ideas, I can't say I like them. Real wars should be kept separate from regular whore-fighting competitions. It's simply a balancing. No real war participant would be able to gather hundreds of thousands of clan score that whore fighting clans do per month no matter if you gave them 2 cs per win or 20 cs per win(ok, for 25k cs they would have 500k cs but still). A real war participant that has gotten 50k+ cs in the month deserves to be respected as or more highly than a clan that has gotten 3 million jans off whores. So real wars should be kept separate in order to keep them above the other competition, a "tournament of champions where only a few people make the difference" of sorts.
As for any comments on how to get people back in the game, it's truly not that hard. You advertise. You have a respectable owner that updates the game and keeps it fresh. You have people and clans that welcome new players into the game. You have events every so often. The reason why there used to be 150 people online at a time was that the game was new, being updated monthly with new stuff, had events like rape day every month, and had respectable clans that didn't cheat. There also used to be something called competition. When you used to hit a level 120 "whore", that bot had gold katanas with a stupid amount of con. It took you like 10 minutes to get 20 cs. There was no such thing as a one hit whore. I could go on all day why the original bots2 was better than the bots2 near the end but I should really get back to work :P
Oh and hi FNIX, how have you been? ^_^
~Zal
|
Like i said, You should be able to be a permanent real wars clan or a regular clan.
|
Why should you get more cs for fighting a higher ranked clan then yourself? It's game breaking.
|
For the same reason you get more XP for fighting a higher level opponent.
|
Completely different things.
|
Different things, but the same principles apply.
If you're looking for XP, who are you going to train against? Infant? No, you pick the trainbot that gives you the most XP. Sure, it's harder and the fights take longer, but the incentive of more XP makes it worth it!
But when it comes to clanscore, all of a sudden, nothing matters anymore. Level, ratio, damage, fuck all. A bot like Infant gives just as much clanscore as Scorpion X. Where's the incentive to aim high? For cs, you have to aim as LOW as possible.
That doesn't strike you as odd? It does to me. I think it's weird players aren't challenged to fight a bot they can take on, and gain the most cs from. But they're actually encouraged to attack the most defenseless bots possible. Why waste time with long fights if the reward is the same?
And because fights need to be a short as possible in order to gain the most cs, the 'real winners' are autoclicking cheaters. No human player can harvest clanscore at the pace they can. This kills the fun and competition.
I'm not saying we have to get rid of whores. But to prevent Bots4 from the same faith as Bots2, i AM saying we have to get rid of 1-strike-whores.
|
Though there are some good ideas in here, I think there are some absolutely terrible ones in here as well.
The worst one has got to be trying to link earned clanscore to the rank of a clan.
For the record, I'm not against changing the game.
I'm just against implementing bad games that don't actually fix problems of inaccessibility to the game.
Off the top of my head, if you really want to just start discouraging whores... you could make them a huge pain in the ass to own.
What if you only bots that logged in within the last 72 hours were fightable? After awhile, people with over 100 whores are bound to hate their life. At the very least, THEY won't have much time to clanscore (or anyone else in their clan that keeps those whores logged in), as they have to spend so much downtime re-logging crappy bots. And sharing passwords to keep them logged in, of course, will eventually catch up to them when they get sabotaged.
Bots with less than a .5 ratio can get clanscore but they can't give clanscore? Obviously, there will still end up being ratio whores in that scenario... but their importance for leveling other bots would be diminished and they'd have to be used for actual whores for the general public.
I say 'general public' because, of course, bots shouldn't be allowed to be unfightable in the same way, so that people can't try to use their whores only for themselves.
Of course, they can downrape and then re-equip back to good weapons... but I LOVE FNIX's idea that only bots that make the challenge should be rewarded with clanscore and bots that win when challenged should not get clanscore. And that would also have the nice benefit of stopping the downrape. Also, if we're trying to encourage 'real wars' then I want bad bots to be a pure liability and ratio shouldn't factor in with some silly jans index. As such, why allow bad bots that occasionally get clanscore because so many people fight them contribute at all?
Hardly proposing any of these changes at all.
But I think 'simple is good' is a good mantra here and I'd much sooner adapt changes in this direction than anything else I've seen.
|
I don't making bots unattackable that havent been online recently is a solution. A) it would mean a lot less targets to fight. People take breaks or go inactive; their bots would become unattackable quickly. That's frustrating to remaining players. B) for cheaters it's an easy thing to bypass. Create a script, feed it the logins and passwords, and an infinite number of whores could be logged in & out daily, to keep them activated. (this won't be a problem though if the captcha is added to the login procedure)
And i don't think ratio was mentioned as a variable to determine cs. I didn't consider it for the reason you mention. In my mind, only 2 things could be used to affect the amount of cs; the length of the fight, and/or the difference in rank.
easy whore in a lower clan: little cs
tough guy in a higher clan: more cs
Personally, i like the 'longer fight = more cs' the most, because it slows down autoclickers to human speed.
I'd prefer the rank-difference to play a role as well, but that's because i'm advocating real wars over whores, and i realise that's a personal preference. And since i don't participate in neither the cs race nor the actual fighting, i shouldn't be too persistent.
|
|
|
Less targets is good if you're advocating "real wars" and think that only worthwhile targets deserve to be fought anyways.
Would be much better to try and naturally steer people into such a direction, than to just create conditions that they want to "break the game" and find "unfair" methods to whore if it's not the overall intention of the game anymore.
|
not quite sure what everyone has scared about cl.sc and wars & all .. but i miss that , reckon its better than this energy stuff. csing every month had some excitement to it and all. it was better like that :)
- pravin .
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
