You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: INTERACTIVE BATTLE TOURNAMENT - IBT#4 IS NEARLY HERE, ARE YOU READY?
I accept the nomination for field judge, thank you @lordnigel.
One question to ask at this point: Is PvP eliminated completely for this IBT?
Thanyou for helping, will be much appreciated - Well cryptonik is certainly keen for it. I don't think we need too...but how to handle.
So here is a scenario..
I am an archer and I enter Stage one and face a sand witch who has a power level of 3.
There is no special field bonus or special circumstance thing impacting me for this stage.
I'm feeling cocky so I go for a straight attack Bamn! @archs (the quick/standard attack bot) rolls me a 2..
Damn I lose a life...
So I try for a Big risk hits @archmul (the Mighty blow/ attack bot) rolls me and damn something crap happens and I died...
So i have one life left, I know Joe the Wizard has a +1 dagger but they already declared.."I have finished the level" OR they have started attacks in the next level (having defeated the foe in previous level)...hmmn doesn't feel right I can attack them for it as they are gone...I guess if your quick enough to challenge someone before they leave...but I doubt this was happen? maybe it could....What are your thoughts?
I agree, practical PvP would be extremely limited in the first 6 stages -- and it might as well be tossed out altogether, because the most likely usage would be for manipulations between players plotting together.
Joe the Wizard has already left, so that challenge would not be recognizable. Now let's say someone has finished the stage but hasn't left, and a rival attacker catches them and issues a challenge. The defender always has the right to choose to accept or decline the challenge. If the defender's +1 dagger was bought from the item shop and wasn't used on this stage, their only logical choice is to decline.
Where things get interesting is if the +1 dagger is used and already in play (whether pickpocketed or declared used after being purchased). Never mind the fact that the dagger would help the defender and that the attacker could potentially lose a life. The question is: under what circumstances should the defender be willing to accept this challenge?
The answer is... only when both the attacker and defender have an agreed-upon arrangement. This agreement will most likely take one of two forms: (1) the two "rivals" are willing to "help" each other out as necessary through PvP, depending on stage/class rules at various times throughout the tournament, or (2) attacker bribes defender and agrees to pay a portion of the attacker's share of that stage's spoils to the defender if they succeed.
Considering what happened in the last IBT, I think it would be better to reduce the chance that you get confused and tripped up by your own rules and game mechanics. So let's just eliminate PvP this time around.
I'm also thinking Gobbo now is only summoned by a 1 rolled with a standard dice.
So continuing scenario above I give one last shot against sandwitch, so I go Wham @archs (the quick/standard bot attacks) this time I roll a 1.
Man...I'm having a bad day...rather then losing though @gobbo is instant activated and rolls against you. lets say he rolls a 2. So I guess you must defend now, and I guess you can choose which ever you want a standard or mighty bot...so I go I try @archmul...Bman I roll a 8 (because this is really what the mighty bot is for, like a last ditch effort). I kill Gobbo. So I guess I can then launch the !pickpocket against him...and wham get a +3 to player roll...Sweet no need play on as no matter what I roll/do I will now beat foe...IF i dont get something good or that definate I get to have another shot against the Stage foe...However if Gobbo kills me, I lose a life and game over...
Hoping this is making sense :)
Gobbo sneaks in and steals all the dice.
He laughs like a jerk and throws a die.
The sneaky git rolls a 1.
Based on all this, is PVP gonna work? or should we reserve simply for boss round, where everyone attacks each other for ownership of castle and treasure chest.. (like IBT#2 I'll partner people off for 3 rounds...type thing...not sure yet.)
I liked how IBT#3 went. Just make items single use.
That way people get weeded out going into the boss round.
I thought the last round was pretty epic. There where a lot of surprises.
I think I get the Gobbo mechanic that you proposed. The issue here is that in the scenario you described, the sand witch has already taken your last life before Gobbo could get involved. But if that roll of 1 came on the first or second attempt... Gobbo as you described makes perfect sense.
Yeah what I would do though is not display that you rolled a one..it would basically just say your attack was so lame, the sandwitch laughed and before she could kill you Gobbo jumped in...I wouldn't mention it was a 1..Just say it was just such a lame attack not worth mention haha..who wants to roll a 1 really. But cool sounds like this is a good use for the Gobster!
Well here's another idea. How about when you pickpocket, Schopenhauer sometimes randomly doesn't drop an item but forces you to be challenged by gobbo by calling his username instead?
This would eliminate the need for you to do it manually, plus we can tweak the probability for gobbo to appear as we like.
Also >>> Botception :D
Haha what do you guys think? @aussieninja @lordnigel
Interesting, It would certainly bring Gobbo in more...but maybe there can be too much Gobbo haha..In theory I'm not opposed as long as it had a funny bit of text and similar to rolling a 1..could say something like "You went to steal from the foes pocket, but stubbed your toe and fell on your face. Gobbo seeing this was compelled to attack you..." and just make it a rare event..:). The issue is people have to run !pickpocket again after to see what Gobbo dropped...so it might be getting too many bots popping haha.