| May 10 - 10:54:42 |
|
| Post Reply | Post new topic | Page: 1 |
| Force lower rank people to shoot first in duels. | Started by: enkindle on Jun 02, '16 09:46 |
|
Right now, the majority of the use Duel sees is just one person giving a friend a free kill. I was thinking if one person is 2+ ranks lower than the other, it will only allow the lower person to shoot first, or at the same time. But never second. |
|
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I 100% agree with this. |
|
| Reply by: Azazel_Nox at Jun 02, '16 09:54 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
This would be alot more interesting, so i would like to see it. |
|
| Reply by: TIIYAH at Jun 02, '16 09:57 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Love it. |
|
| Reply by: Maya at Jun 02, '16 16:36 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I don't know why this wasn't implemented earlier. Great idea enkindle. |
|
| Reply by: LucaRossi at Jun 02, '16 16:53 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I feel we need to factor in the gun somehow (but without tipping their hand). A Capo with 400 kills can run circles around a Consig with 115, despite being much lesser ranked. (Or some other measure of work put in) |
|
| Reply by: Squishy at Jun 02, '16 23:08 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
We could simply do, if their raw gun (before any bonuses) is 3x larger. That doesn't really tip a hand too much. |
|
| Reply by: enkindle at Jun 03, '16 03:04 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
LucaRossi, we actually discussed this issue when we built Dueling but could not come up with a reasonable solution. Now that this idea occurred to me, it seems painfully obvious. |
|
| Reply by: enkindle at Jun 03, '16 03:05 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
How exactly would that work though? Would there just not be an option to select for you to shoot first when setting up the duel if your gun is more than 3x bigger? If so, people could quite easily get at least a 'minimum' amount for everyone in the game just by checking if the option is there. I would like it that if you did this it wouldn't actually reveal anything about it - as in, allow the person with a 4x bigger gun to choose to shoot first - and then it's not revealed that actually the other person is shooting first until the announcement of the duel. So essentially, no information is revealed until someone is definitely gonna end up dead! |
|
| Reply by: UnderwearBuddy at Jun 03, '16 09:53 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
UnderwearBuddy, yeah, that would be a good plan. |
|
| Reply by: enkindle at Jun 03, '16 10:59 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
can you not just remove the +1 to the gun if the player is -2 ranks?
or just remove it, full stop? if players want the free kill, let them risk the WB death for it and shoot the player like an ordinary mia/ria |
|
| Reply by: muhammad at Jun 06, '16 18:32 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| How about taking away the option of who shoots first. Just have two options the coin flip which leaves it down to luck and the option to shoot at the same time | |
| Reply by: Jax at Jun 06, '16 19:10 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I like this idea! |
|
| Reply by: KarmenKayne at Jun 10, '16 22:16 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I think you should just remove the +1 for duels, as previously suggested. Duels are not there to increase your gun. They are there to settle something. Really, if someone is duelling for the right reasons, they don't care for the wackstat they will or will not gain - only for the result of killing or being killed. |
|
| Reply by: Borya at Jun 21, '16 13:39 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
muhammad, Borya, overall I like this a lot more than my original idea. It solves all the problem without risk of revealing anything. |
|
| Reply by: enkindle at Jun 21, '16 20:05 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I'm down for either removing the +1, or... only giving the +1 in the following scenario:
Winner gets a +1 if they both shoot at same time. Winner gets a +1 if loser shot first.
This way there is still reward, but only with a little risk.
Or... just get rid of the +1... I'm down for either way. |
|
| Reply by: Squishy at Jun 22, '16 08:16 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Get rid of the +1. I've never been a fan of it getting +1 anyway since it doesn't use a timer at all and doesn't void pros. |
|
| Reply by: UnderwearBuddy at Jun 22, '16 20:29 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Getting rid of the +1 is a great suggestion, in my opinion. |
|
| Reply by: Keats at Jun 23, '16 00:04 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
Either remove it or do as Squishy suggested would both be suitable things to do.. That way they have to work a little for the +1 |
|
| Reply by: Vincent-Valentine at Jun 23, '16 02:01 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
|
I think you should keep the +1. If someone is so thirsty for the +1 let the little guy shoot first and they get it. IF they don't want to take that chance of dying they first and they dont get the+1. I think it would be better that way rather than just not getting a +1 for anything . DONT GET RID OF THE ALMIGHTY +1 |
|
| Reply by: 21Savage at Jun 23, '16 09:19 | |
| Report Post | Tip |
| Post Reply | View All Threads | Page: 1 |
Minimum $20,000
