|
Post by Aslan Cross on Jan 5, 2005 18:41:44 GMT -5
Blind deploys can be interesting in certain events, but I'm against enforcing it as a standard rule.
|
|
|
Post by Trigger on Jan 5, 2005 18:43:17 GMT -5
We could test it out in the PA. * Volentrees himself to try this puppy out *
|
|
|
Post by Avitar Diggs on Jan 5, 2005 21:08:07 GMT -5
If you all read my post completly, I only suggested it as a secondary mode of gamepaly, not to replace the current rules...
Anyway, yes. i'd like to see a fight done with blind deploy and would be more than willing to try it myself.
|
|
|
Post by Berrik on Jan 6, 2005 2:22:42 GMT -5
As for the new dodging thing, I've encountered two main problems regarding it: 1) tanking > dodging, and 2) PC-based (X) attacks instantly slay non-SR pilots. As for 1), personally I think we've performed enough nerfs on the SR classes to pretty well even out the line between tanking and dodging. With Dairyoku no longer sticking permanently, Greater Perseverance is no longer the be all end all make-SRs-immortal seishin it was before. I think we should just leave this matter alone and let the current system get tested out in the real world before we decide to do anything else with the matter. For 2), I still don't quite understand why the Hangar mods haven't taken their Magical Pikopiko Nerf Hammers(tm) to the various abusable PC-based (X)es, such as San Ryu Kon. Converting some of them to new (R) attribute currently undergoing massive debate might help this (for those not in the know, (R) is to # multihits as (X) is to x multihits.. in other words, an (R) functions like an (X) except you only have to dodge once to completely dodge an (R) attack). And finally, about a blind deploy script.. It sounds like an interesting idea, and with a few tweaks I'd be in favor of it, but making blind deploying the rule would basically ruin alot of the fun in the SC, as you're basically throwing evo series out the window, and weaker evo units would never get used.. I'd be fine with making it an extra stipulation, like with the size rules. Also, I'm not too keen on forcing complete blind deploys each time blind deploy is used.. maybe the script can be set up to allow for certain sections of deploying remain visible but others to remain hidden (for example, your unit is visible but your pilot class and your items are not)? I can definitely go for making blind deploys optional.
|
|
|
Post by Rekan Yuusha on Jan 6, 2005 7:10:29 GMT -5
Aren't EVO series what the SC mods have been complaining about clogging the queue for ages now? Besides, it's not like you couldn't just use the same mech for five fights.
Though, actually, blind-mech deploys could actually be rather bad, due to the fact that there's no way at all to judge the sides to be completely unbalanced without actual mod approval to the things before every fight. Or something.
|
|
|
Post by Avitar Diggs on Jan 9, 2005 2:34:20 GMT -5
Though, actually, blind-mech deploys could actually be rather bad, due to the fact that there's no way at all to judge the sides to be completely unbalanced without actual mod approval to the things before every fight. Or something. Either the deploys are sent to a Mod via PM to check both deploys, or the script is written in such a way that moderators can se the deploys so long as they aren't participating in the fight.
|
|
|
Post by Arad Baranga on Jan 14, 2005 4:33:59 GMT -5
Here's an alternate idea to make dodging more palatable:
How about, at the end of battle, regardless of how many PCs you spent, you lost your entire PC limit (or 10 PC if equipped with Tem Ray's Circuit)? Suddenly, there is no reason not to dodge, no reason not to use your PC abilities or weapons, and very little reason to give up without putting up a fight. As well, the guy who tanks loses just as much as the guy who dodges. Also, it would encourage people to actually use 100 PC limits.
So it suddenly becomes somewhat harder for people who lose fights more often. So what? It's not that much harder if you use the 100 PC limit, and you would lose just as much by actually fighting your hardest. It's not like it hurts these people all that much anyway, unless they aren't managing their money very wisely, or bite off bigger fights than they can chew.
Plus, there are enough non-SC ways to make money these days, and there's the SCEX, so it's not like it'll put a huge drain on peoples' incomes.
|
|
|
Post by Rekan Yuusha on Jan 14, 2005 5:53:26 GMT -5
Alternatively, we could just make them not cost ANYTHING, and get mostly the same result. Though I'm not sure if the motivation difference there would be a huge problem or not.
|
|
|
Post by Arad Baranga on Jan 14, 2005 5:59:20 GMT -5
Nah. I kinda think that loss should factor in somewhat. It makes the battle more pressing. I know that I don't want to lose and be out of a hundred PCs for nothing, so I'm going to do the best I can to pull out my victory, and the fight is more exciting. Reward without risk is kind of hollow. As a referee I don't like how people want freebies more often, when like I stated they can make money just fine off of things other than fighting.
|
|
|
Post by Rekan Yuusha on Jan 14, 2005 6:23:26 GMT -5
True enough. Though I'm not sure that not going FULL POWAH is much of an issue, here, it's a start, at least. XD
|
|
|
Post by Mechalomaniac on Jan 14, 2005 13:35:39 GMT -5
Like I mentioned in channel last night, I don't like that idea at all. I just think it would alienate too many people. It would also severly reduce the number of SAWM fights people do sinc they stand to lose so much more money. Furthermore, 100 PC limit fights favor tanking classes over dodging classes (which this system already does).
I much prefer the other road of having dodging not cost anything, and subsequently lowering the rewards fights give to equal to the PC limit.
|
|
|
Post by Tavish on Jan 15, 2005 2:53:15 GMT -5
Maybe if it wasn't the whole fight amount, but instead, an ante. 10%, 20%, 30%, even 50%. Such a wager would guarantee some sort of loss from an SC fight, possibly making the PA look more appealing.
|
|
|
Post by Mechalomaniac on Jan 15, 2005 3:47:46 GMT -5
How does this sound?
Split the PC pools. Dodge Pool, and standard PCs used for stuff like PC based weapons, abilities, and the like. Dodge Pools are set as a fight stipulation much like now. The other PC pool equals 50% of the Dodge Pool. Thus in a (now standard) 150 PC fight, they would have 150 PCs to dodge with, and 75 PCs to do other stuff with. The Dodging PC doesn't come out of your pocket at the end of a fight. The other pool does. This has several benefits.
Since dodging doesn't actually cost you money, people will fight harder, and overall we'll see some more intresting fights. There is still some risk involved. Heck you might even go with Kait's or Tavish's idea and have this as an ante (though I'm not really fond of that part).
Oh and this is a side effect, but the lower PC limit for weapons will help tone down all those nasty PC-based (X) attacks.
|
|
|
Post by Blaine Kodos on Jan 16, 2005 10:14:45 GMT -5
I have to poke in here and point out a problem with the "lose all your PCs because you lost" idea.. say you're in a standard (30) Mothership. In a standard 100 PC match, you have 3 dodges. Let's also say you have no PC-based abilities, either inherently or pilot-based. Now if you lose, you're effectively being stripped of 10 PCs that you had no possible way to spend in the first place. Now, 10 PCs doesn't sound like much.. but let's take another situation.
A Dynamic class has been tanking for a good portion of a match. He's already hit full Ki-ai from a multi-hit weapon, and he's running out of tankability. The same problem as earlier now arises, where he has PCs he just can't use. With a dodge cost of 26 (using Getter as my example), he has 3 dodges with 22 PCs remaining. So he would also be stripped of 22 PCs should he lose.
I'm not saying the idea is flawed because of this entirely, but I'm just pointing it out.
|
|
|
Post by Arad Baranga on Jan 16, 2005 14:06:41 GMT -5
Yeah, that doesn't matter too much. Part of the point is also to make it so that if you lose, you're evenly penalized whether you can dodge or can tank, because as is it's kind of lame with only being able to be penalized for dodging, and that's part of why folks don't like to dodge.
|
|