DeletedUser
Keighlon; that is something that could add to the depth of the gamplay 
DeletedUser
i know. thats why i think its a good idea, but only if its done right.
DeletedUser
All these difficulties to springing people from jail sound like a challenge to me. the fact that small towns benefit from it is appealing.
DeletedUser1105
To prevent one aspect of abuse I think a standard rule should be that you cannot collect the bounty on a player if you have been a member of either a) the town placing the bounty or b) the player with the bounty on his heads town in the last 14 days.
DeletedUser
Good idea consider it in the final proposal
Not sure what we will do about family towns. In practice it would be pretty easy because they don't make a secret of it....but inevitably it is leaving something to the discretion of some kind of administrator. i don't like all those appeals type things. In a way, if family alliances were formal within the game, this would become easier. At the moment i don't have an answer to the problem of this.
The question is then; will this give family towns a significant advantage? My gut instinct is that it won't. in the end families are often more trouble than they are worth. I can see this being the kind of thing that actually causes 'family' arguments because, at the end of the day, it is one player who collects the reward and NOT the family.
Not sure what we will do about family towns. In practice it would be pretty easy because they don't make a secret of it....but inevitably it is leaving something to the discretion of some kind of administrator. i don't like all those appeals type things. In a way, if family alliances were formal within the game, this would become easier. At the moment i don't have an answer to the problem of this.
The question is then; will this give family towns a significant advantage? My gut instinct is that it won't. in the end families are often more trouble than they are worth. I can see this being the kind of thing that actually causes 'family' arguments because, at the end of the day, it is one player who collects the reward and NOT the family.
DeletedUser1105
I cannot see it working for family towns either.
All they would be doing if they broke someone out of jail or collected the bounty would be taking money from one family town to another. They can do that anyway (and without having to KO one of their players) by moving towns and donating money.
**
I agree with the other point raised though. If you have to get everyone in town unable to duel to free someone, it would be very easy to create a multi-account and put a level 1 player in your town. Never have to work or do anything, just log in every now and again to keep the account from being deleted.
How would we stop that?
All they would be doing if they broke someone out of jail or collected the bounty would be taking money from one family town to another. They can do that anyway (and without having to KO one of their players) by moving towns and donating money.
**
I agree with the other point raised though. If you have to get everyone in town unable to duel to free someone, it would be very easy to create a multi-account and put a level 1 player in your town. Never have to work or do anything, just log in every now and again to keep the account from being deleted.
How would we stop that?
DeletedUser
Is it that easy to multi-account? and if it is doesn't it already ruin the game in other ways? That is a question by the way.
DeletedUser
If You see a value in cheating You will find a way . It doesn't matter how difficult it is , If there is precieved gain , it will be done .
DeletedUser
OK then how about all the players over level 20 duelling have to be defeated?
DeletedUser1105
That would be a good solution. And therefore you must have a level 20 duelling level in your town to place bounties?
DeletedUser
Most towns have that so yes.
DeletedUser
i think that the minimum level of bountied person needs to be level 20, and that the person breaking the criminal out of jail must be within dueling level of the criminal. this is why. dueling to break someone free is a must, but there are restrictions to dueling currently based on level. to stop people abusing by making lvl 1 guys and what not, you have to ko everyone in your dueling range, not everyone in town. but to stop uber lvl 45 duellers from going around breaking everyone out of jail, the dueller has to be within dueling range of the criminal, so its more of a fair fight. that stops big cities with high lvl players from picking on lower lvl guys, AND stops high lvl duellers from abusing the system. does that make sense?
DeletedUser
that is a good idea like for my town a dueling town
DeletedUser
I can see the reasoning here . The "criminal" had to be within dueling range of a large enough section of the town to be a royal pain else wise they would not have posted the bounty . The catch with doing it this way is that it actually makes the "break out" easier . If You are only counting a portion of the town for KO or sleep prior to "criminal" release .
DeletedUser
Meh, I so know I'm going to jail the minute this idea is implemented lol
I still like the concept, but I fail to see sufficent proof against abuse.
I still like the concept, but I fail to see sufficent proof against abuse.
DeletedUser
but like you said oakley, he had to be a royal pain to merit being bountied, so he must be within dueling range of most if not all of the town members. that means anyone trying to break him out would have to fight most of the players, and it means the devs wouldnt have to alter the system they already have in place.
DeletedUser
Exactly , what we're looking for is an addition to the current system .
Not a complete reworking of it .
Not a complete reworking of it .
DeletedUser
OK well you guys seem to have it nailed there. Not sure how it needs to be worded to get your intention across. I guess this isn't going forward any time soon anyway. At the moment we are voting on things like 'do you want the game to lag less' and 20% are still voting against it!
DeletedUser1105
Why is this on the 3rd page?? Bump!
DeletedUser
Great idea!!!!