DeletedUser
Love this idea, bring it on.
DeletedUser
Hate to be the naysayer here, but I have to say I think this is a bad idea for several reasons:
1 - it's only good for dueling classes (seriously, who cares if you win a dueling contest for builders)
2 - Some of the best threads in the forum are the best duelers in the game talking down to each other (like the BCS system, it leaves you completely unsatisfied and yet it makes for the best football discussions ever)
3 - it doesn't do justice to the different types of duel builds, i.e. regular vs. resistance, since I would think that endurance would be a necessary part of the tourny and there's no way the mid and lower levels are gonna make it more than a few rounds unless they're resistance, unless you start off each round with your health topped off, and then that would defeat the purpose of the endurance aspect which is the only way I can envision a true resistance dueler winning.
4 - Who would end up being the challenger? Having a better tactic or appear would certainly determine whether I was going to challenge someone or not. So the soldier would lose their tactic benefit if challenging?
5 - You would ultimately lose many of your best duelers because once your at the top and there's nothing left to do then what? I'll tell you what, you leave.
Now, not to leave you guys empty handed, may I suggest something a bit more practical. How bout card tournys instead, bring your own money (items too?)
1 - it's only good for dueling classes (seriously, who cares if you win a dueling contest for builders)
2 - Some of the best threads in the forum are the best duelers in the game talking down to each other (like the BCS system, it leaves you completely unsatisfied and yet it makes for the best football discussions ever)
3 - it doesn't do justice to the different types of duel builds, i.e. regular vs. resistance, since I would think that endurance would be a necessary part of the tourny and there's no way the mid and lower levels are gonna make it more than a few rounds unless they're resistance, unless you start off each round with your health topped off, and then that would defeat the purpose of the endurance aspect which is the only way I can envision a true resistance dueler winning.
4 - Who would end up being the challenger? Having a better tactic or appear would certainly determine whether I was going to challenge someone or not. So the soldier would lose their tactic benefit if challenging?
5 - You would ultimately lose many of your best duelers because once your at the top and there's nothing left to do then what? I'll tell you what, you leave.
Now, not to leave you guys empty handed, may I suggest something a bit more practical. How bout card tournys instead, bring your own money (items too?)
DeletedUser
1 - it's only good for dueling classes (seriously, who cares if you win a dueling contest for builders)
You can try as a builder or adventurer. I think it should be about duellevel. So a Builder with duellevel 125 should be as good as a Soldier of duellevel 125. And Builders can build the town and duellers want tournaments. It's just fair as well.
2 - Some of the best threads in the forum are the best duelers in the game talking down to each other (like the BCS system, it leaves you completely unsatisfied and yet it makes for the best football discussions ever)
Why not make it a possibility to duel each other. If you want to keep it a mystery if you're better then someone else just don't join the competition. You can duel other players anytime so you can always settle differences already.
3 - it doesn't do justice to the different types of duel builds, i.e. regular vs. resistance, since I would think that endurance would be a necessary part of the tourny and there's no way the mid and lower levels are gonna make it more than a few rounds unless they're resistance, unless you start off each round with your health topped off, and then that would defeat the purpose of the endurance aspect which is the only way I can envision a true resistance dueler winning.
Ofcourse Health should be topped off again before every round. Cause otherwise it would be impossible for ranged duellers since they have less health normally.
4 - Who would end up being the challenger? Having a better tactic or appear would certainly determine whether I was going to challenge someone or not. So the soldier would lose their tactic benefit if challenging?
I don't think soldiers should lose their Tactics bonus. It's part of their class. Everyone is free to pick the soldier class. And I believe there should be 2 rounds. If I was competing I would attack once and defend once. That should pull it straight.
5 - You would ultimately lose many of your best duelers because once your at the top and there's nothing left to do then what? I'll tell you what, you leave.
Those people are called quitters. If you have the crown. You gotta make sure you keep it.
You can try as a builder or adventurer. I think it should be about duellevel. So a Builder with duellevel 125 should be as good as a Soldier of duellevel 125. And Builders can build the town and duellers want tournaments. It's just fair as well.
2 - Some of the best threads in the forum are the best duelers in the game talking down to each other (like the BCS system, it leaves you completely unsatisfied and yet it makes for the best football discussions ever)
Why not make it a possibility to duel each other. If you want to keep it a mystery if you're better then someone else just don't join the competition. You can duel other players anytime so you can always settle differences already.
3 - it doesn't do justice to the different types of duel builds, i.e. regular vs. resistance, since I would think that endurance would be a necessary part of the tourny and there's no way the mid and lower levels are gonna make it more than a few rounds unless they're resistance, unless you start off each round with your health topped off, and then that would defeat the purpose of the endurance aspect which is the only way I can envision a true resistance dueler winning.
Ofcourse Health should be topped off again before every round. Cause otherwise it would be impossible for ranged duellers since they have less health normally.
4 - Who would end up being the challenger? Having a better tactic or appear would certainly determine whether I was going to challenge someone or not. So the soldier would lose their tactic benefit if challenging?
I don't think soldiers should lose their Tactics bonus. It's part of their class. Everyone is free to pick the soldier class. And I believe there should be 2 rounds. If I was competing I would attack once and defend once. That should pull it straight.
5 - You would ultimately lose many of your best duelers because once your at the top and there's nothing left to do then what? I'll tell you what, you leave.
Those people are called quitters. If you have the crown. You gotta make sure you keep it.
DeletedUser
That wouldn't be fair at all. I'm usually a dueler that goes on the offensive alot and over the past year I've racked up a dueling level thats nearly 40 levels higher than my real level on two worlds. I would defiantly not enjoy being matched up against a level 70 or 80 soldier with the same dueling level as I have.
Besides, what If I'm matched up against some level 80 pure builder/adventurer?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Gravvity, I think that you missed the majority of what I was saying.
1- obviously you can try, but train robber's point is also valid here along with what I said before, who cares if your the best 'dueling builder', your still a crappy dueler or you're a ninja builder and therefore probably crappy at both dueling and building
2- I'm not sure what you're talking about here other than you can already settle differences, so what's the point of having a tourny then?
3 - my point here is that if endurance is not a part of the tourny then it will favor regular duelers over resistance, but if it has endurance then it is the opposite, favoring resistance. Your response does nothing to remedy this.
4- sure 2 duels would settle it, except for the obvious: when you win 1 and lose 1. perhaps you could get around it by using damage differences, but then you've eliminated the whole point in my opinion, cause you wouldn't have actually won every duel in the tourny and yet you could still win based on the random damage factor.
5- just talking from experience here. once you've reached the top and you realize that there's nowhere else to go on this hill then what? you go somewhere else. call it what you will
1- obviously you can try, but train robber's point is also valid here along with what I said before, who cares if your the best 'dueling builder', your still a crappy dueler or you're a ninja builder and therefore probably crappy at both dueling and building
2- I'm not sure what you're talking about here other than you can already settle differences, so what's the point of having a tourny then?
3 - my point here is that if endurance is not a part of the tourny then it will favor regular duelers over resistance, but if it has endurance then it is the opposite, favoring resistance. Your response does nothing to remedy this.
4- sure 2 duels would settle it, except for the obvious: when you win 1 and lose 1. perhaps you could get around it by using damage differences, but then you've eliminated the whole point in my opinion, cause you wouldn't have actually won every duel in the tourny and yet you could still win based on the random damage factor.
5- just talking from experience here. once you've reached the top and you realize that there's nowhere else to go on this hill then what? you go somewhere else. call it what you will
DeletedUser
I prefer the french version of the tornament.
Deleted User - 819397
I like this addition to make this all work well. Don't inconvenience the weaker people by forcing them in order to participate to fight the harder people. Although, perhaps judging based off of a combination of dueling points put in and dueling level might be better...workers can own the dueling field as well.
