Death

[CRX687]

Suggestion: Each time a unit falls in battle, there is a 10% chance (20% for dragon) that it dies....

by "dying", I mean it becomes unusable for the next 3 non-clan battles a player participates in or 6 clan battles (2-1 ratio).



Reason: VARIETY!!

this forces players to get creative, make their own forms, use those drops that have been rotting in their inventories, makes it so that not every freestyle/turtle game has a similar look and feel. (Admit it, you know that 80% of golds either use some simple variation of that same side anti, a mostly frontline rush with busher, mud, a few knights, scout, dragon, and maybe wisp or dsm; and even turtles come in a few standard looks these days)

This also forces players to try different strats, so the best players will be the ones that can roll with ANYTHING, not just "oh, I won't play you because you don't use the units my form can handle"

[OxaD]

Eh, I see where you're comming from, but no, good thinking and all, but no ;)

[Hellblazer]

Hm... a recooperating state to force people into changing things up. Well, it is an interesting idea, and I see where you're coming from because playing certain people may get boring after a while, but I believe taking away a small portion of the free will in this game is a no-no.

[uniquinous]

I think this is the wrong way to go about achieving a good idea. I would prefer some command which calls out set specifications for a match. So right before two people enter this specific kind (both need to agree to beforehand), the server informs them "________ may not be used" or "you can not put any units on the back line to start" or "5 unit match". Something random, but fair for both players. That would show who is truly tactically advanced :p

Good idea, but I don't exactly like the setup.

[BaxVarlet]

Golds will just jump greys for the next 3 battles to get them back.

[steve12]

Or...clannies could just surrender to each other 6 times in a row. I think this idea is an interesting one, but people could just revive their units in a cheap manner (in less than 5 minutes), which therefore eliminates the purpose of implementing this rule. Good attempt, though.

[Dresicos]

Maybe you should have to gain 10 stats or lose 10 stats to get it back :D

[Ol' Time]

This would be a little hard on greys considering they only have 12 units + drops, which they may not have.

[CRX687]

Or...clannies could just surrender to each other 6 times in a row. I think this idea is an interesting one, but people could just revive their units in a cheap manner (in less than 5 minutes), which therefore eliminates the purpose of implementing this rule. Good attempt, though.

yeah, that's why I made clan battles count as 1/2 of a normal match, but if that's the case, the effect would be the rise of active clans, which I wouldn't mind either.

Golds will just jump greys for the next 3 battles to get them back.

Golds can always jump greys... it's always been a self-enforced system, so this shouldn't really change anything. Though I do like the stat idea - units "die" until 8 of your stats change hands. or something to that effect.

I think this is the wrong way to go about achieving a good idea. I would prefer some command which calls out set specifications for a match. So right before two people enter this specific kind (both need to agree to beforehand), the server informs them "________ may not be used" or "you can not put any units on the back line to start" or "5 unit match". Something random, but fair for both players. That would show who is truly tactically advanced :p

Good idea, but I don't exactly like the setup.

having people agree beforehand ruins the entire purpose of this, because those players would simply not agree. Unless when two people jump onto an arena, there's a certain percent chance that they would be taken to the setup screen and given a specification.

This would be a little hard on greys considering they only have 12 units + drops, which they may not have.

Greys are demo accounts for trying the game... it doesn't matter how anything "affects the grey game"... if anything, this would be more incentive to go gold.

[Megabyte]

nice thought towards a goal, but bad idea in practice


A new grey would have a 1 in 10 chance of losing a critical piece, while having pretty much no backups to work with.

Say they lose their scout, cleric, or a knight. They've just been put at a horrible handicap, whatever the strategy ideas could be thought up.


This is just an example, not to be taken as a sole reason :p Similar concepts and precepts can be applied to grey and golds equally.

And your anti-grey attitude is not quite true, to an extent. Things that would guarentee an unenjoyable grey gaming experience (especially for first time players), inevitably hurt how many new golds are created.

TAO is a business, and the anti-grey ideology extends from that grey players don't pay-to-play. They cannot be simply discluded from the picture entirely, however, as inevitably the incoming greys are the potential for new revenue for TAO. As they are the only source for future revenue, they need to be preserved to some extent.

This concept would discourage new players from sticking around based on their initial experiences, hence fewer golds. I would even venture to say that the concept would drastically reduce the incoming golds, as the turnover for new greys would dramatically drop. At least, I wouldn't have stuck around if out of the few useable combinations of units I had was destroyed by a non-useable unit for several matches.

[CRX687]

nice thought towards a goal, but bad idea in practice


A new grey would have a 1 in 10 chance of losing a critical piece, while having pretty much no backups to work with.

Say they lose their scout, cleric, or a knight. They've just been put at a horrible handicap, whatever the strategy ideas could be thought up.


This is just an example, not to be taken as a sole reason :p

meh, I don't really care about greys... this game wasn't designed for them.

But you do have a point. Some pieces = more critical than others. So that would be solved by having the "death" occur at different probabilities for each unit.

[Megabyte]

meh, I don't really care about greys... this game wasn't designed for them.


re-read my edits, your ideology is flawed

[CRX687]

re-read my edits, your ideology is flawed

I understand what you're saying.

I just don't think three games is that long a wait. I was trying to find a balance between enough of a deterrent to make ppl want to make new forms and not enough of a deterrent to make things unplayable. But also keep in mind that all the other greys will be under the same limitations, so the "usable" combination of forms and units will increase. hence, a grey without a cleric for a few games will also be playing other greys without knights, scouts, etc, meaning the lack of a "key" unit as of now will have different implications to the validity of a form. So a certain grey may lack a knight, but the average opponent will also be lacking something or other.

Say every grey starts with default. At a certain point, the system will be that 10% of greys are missing a scout, 30% a knight, 10% a witch, 20% a pyro, etc... aside from those that are missing the cleric, who's the say which of the others are at a disadvantage and their form is "unusable"?

As you seem to understand, the purpose of this is a make people get creative...

[Terps rock]

I say new Server!

[Ol' Time]

Greys are demo accounts for trying the game... it doesn't matter how anything "affects the grey game"... if anything, this would be more incentive to go gold.

No...not really...Many greys are experienced and intinmate players, it's not like they're inferior because they don't pay for the game...:dry:

[Terps rock]

No...not really...Many greys are experienced and intinmate players, it's not like they're inferior because they don't pay for the game...:dry:

So we aren't saying they aren't respected, we are saying that the "buisness" of TAO doesn't care as much about them. As long as this can increase the incentive of going gold, without too much loss of potential customers coming in... It could be cool.

[Megabyte]

No...not really...Many greys are experienced and intinmate players, it's not like they're inferior because they don't pay for the game...:dry:

demo doesn't equal inferior...

But other than that, it's essentially correct. The model of TAO is that the grey's are demo accounts, meant to give players a taste of the game and encourage upgrades.

Though I should add, they ARE inferior for not paying for the game. All other things being equal (which they aren't anyways, but let's pretend a perfect world), they are an inferior account in comparison.

You're working with a weird concept of greys/golds = people types...but they're account types, not people.


Edit: sorry if that seemed anal retentive reply, but poor communication where the user seems to be getting lost within their misconception should always be corrected in my book

[CRX687]

You're working with a weird concept of greys/golds = people types...but they're account types, not people.


psh... I wouldn't trust my kids with grey people, but gold people, on the other hand...

[mantis33]

What the...??? :confused:

Come on CRX, I expected better out of you. What kind of idea is this? :(

[CRX687]

What the...??? :confused:

Come on CRX, I expected better out of you. What kind of idea is this? :(

what's wrong with this idea? You know I can't stand it when every person I jump uses one of 4 forms.

[Megabyte]

what's wrong with this idea? You know I can't stand it when every person I jump uses one of 4 forms.

it's more amusing to me because it's always been taht way :)

[Terps rock]

What the...??? :confused:

Come on CRX, I expected better out of you. What kind of idea is this? :(

One of the best ideas I heard in awhile, but I think you should get all your units back if you win;)

[CRX687]

it's more amusing to me because it's always been taht way :)

that's why we need to make some changes.

Golds are clearly the superior color! Let's go grey bashing! RAWR!