24 replies to this topic

[Sarah]

Add to deaths by players... Why? I didn't die to a player, I died to a potion. Should be changed.

Post your opinions.

[CaptainWinslow]

agreed

[ice_cold]

you died trying to pk someone, in turn pking yourself. as well, it negates the other perons ability to pk you even if you are at 5hp when you kill yourself. leave it the way it is.


Edit: this should probably be in suggestions.

Edited by ice_cold, 30 March 2010 - 05:57 PM.

[Apocalypto]

i knew it was that way in the begining, but i thought it was already changed... either way i dont think it would hurt to be changed at all considering it isnt a death by player any way you look at it... but at the same time it could be debatable since the % to die isnt that high, and usually when you drink one it results in a player kill...


i would agree it should be changed though.. especially if its not much of a hassle


edit:discussion seems fine to me...

Edited by Apocalypto, 30 March 2010 - 06:00 PM.

[Peacemaker]

It adds to death by players cause you were killed by your own self. You drank the potion therefore you died. Your choice to drink it. You caused your own death. So you killed yourself. Thats why its a death by player.

[Freek]

It adds to death by players cause you were killed by your own self. You drank the potion therefore you died. Your choice to drink it. You caused your own death. So you killed yourself. Thats why its a death by player.

Lol @ this coming from the guy who wants them changed back.

[Sarah]

It adds to death by players cause you were killed by your own self. You drank the potion therefore you died. Your choice to drink it. You caused your own death. So you killed yourself. Thats why its a death by player.

Okay so if I walk into a death trap it should be a death by player since I caused my own death? Lol...


Yeah this could have been in suggestions but I wanted to discuss why it was this way

[Yggdrasill]

Obviously if I kill myself I've killed a player also...so I want +1 player kills!

[Sausage]

You don't kill yourself. Noone kills you. The potion kills you.

Why is there a number added to death by players? I have no idea...


Supported.

[Apocalypto]

since my vote was a little wishy washy, i support it being changed...


pete's logic is unbeatable... it should be +1 on both or neither, right?

Edited by Apocalypto, 30 March 2010 - 09:56 PM.

[IXThunderDomeXI]

I think staff should create a character named Nightshade_Elixer and it gets +1 pk everytime you die by a nightshade

[Apocalypto]

^ that actually would be bad ass lol...

Edited by Apocalypto, 30 March 2010 - 10:23 PM.

[Kalypso]

death by player should mean exactly that,

maybe there should be another category for just Deaths, either by monster, potion, trap.

[Prototype]

Grenades count for death by player tho, so there's that. It's like throwing a grenade on yourself..or perhaps not. I like it better changed tho.

But I'm sure you all know after a few days this thread will be dead again, why the player base never formed a priority list on changes they'd like most beats me. Although it probably has something to do with the whole every-man-for-himself aspect of the community and their biased looks on things (heh, see, you guys aren't the only ones who can use that )

[Yggdrasill]

I've asked for JLH's (non-existant I believe) to-do list like we used to have back when the game started on multiple occasions if that counts :-P

[Prototype]

His doesn't matter, 1a has its own, as does main staff, rarely that things get done tho. I'm just saying, what's the point of these threads if you as players aren't going to keep track of the things you actually want. Now it seems like a bottomless pit, every week new suggestions, but they get forgotten about in a few anyways, so no real motivation to make them happen as it doesn't seem to be of much priority.

I'm not saying that if you make such a list that it will get done, but it at least sheds some light on what (in its totality of all suggestions) actually gets the most backing.

There are two ways you can look at getting what you want, either you suggest as much as you can come up with and hope something sticks, or you -discuss- things and then suggest the few that you think are worth it. With the little time Admin has (I'm guessing), you better make it count.

I'm talking as a player btw. I'd have all these suggestions that got some backing grouped up and made everyone order them for themselves, then out of that form a superlist. When new suggestions come, players discuss them, and if deemed fit, they would decide a place on the priority list for it. Kinda odd, that with quite a bunch of people left clinging to this game and wanting improvements, they do so little to actually have a chance of making it happen. Having a good idea, then posting it, is hardly what one can call effort.

Post, discuss, abandon... sounds like a sure way to get nothing done in the end.

[Apocalypto]

I can see your point. But devastate was pushed for since thieves hit lvl 35. Which has been for the majority of the servers existence. So im just saying that although that is legitimate in theory, things like that are probably why.


edit: heh, i said in theory twice

Edited by Apocalypto, 31 March 2010 - 03:24 AM.

[Yggdrasill]

I'd love a suggestion as to the format of (or means of creating) this priority list. I mean, the forums are a joke. There are always going to be spammers and naggers about every little thing so a forum post containing it would be silly imo. I could see the wiki being a viable choice, but I know nothing about wiki language and don't know if anyone even still has the means of sending out the invites needed to sign up (no idea on this one really.) So where does a list like this start?

I believe it was Trev that used to go through the topics and pull out the supported idea. But this comes back to whether or not the player base of a game really knows what is best for the game...and I sincerely doubt in a huge majority of the cases that the player base has any idea what the game really needs or what the game needs most severely.

I feel like I'm pulling a Maarten with a hopeful beginning and then a dashing of hopes and dreams But I'm just thinking while I'm typing this so feel free to bash as is necessary.


Edit: btw this was a /hijack

Edited by Yggdrasill, 31 March 2010 - 01:11 AM.

[Walt]

I noticed this happening shortly after the shades were nerfed and just figured it would be the same as a grenade death in the grenade vengance. I don't like it perticularly, but just took it with a grain of salt, as shades give me an advantage to either now 1) kill multiple characters becuase I used them, or 2) risked drinking a bad one and getting a mark on my dtp list.

Changing it back would be nice, but if not, it's part of the game now, and is a "use at your own risk" sort of thing.

[Apocalypto]

Changing it back would be nice, but if not, it's part of the game now, and is a "use at your own risk" sort of thing.

Thats pretty much how i was thinking.

[Freek]

I can see your point. But devastate was pushed for since thieves hit lvl 35. Which has been for the majority of the servers existence. So im just saying that although in theory that is legitimate in theory, things like that are probably why.

This. And it got backing from almost every player. Including those who didn't play mages.

[Yggdrasill]

The counterbalance for OP things shouldn't be more OP things...it should be a "nerfing" of the original OP thing. Just imo and btw...

/doublehijack

[Apocalypto]

Devastate wouldnt be overpowered imo. It would be a cobalt equivilent for mages.


/hijackback

Edited by Apocalypto, 31 March 2010 - 06:18 AM.

[Sarah]

Off topic much?

[Apocalypto]

Off topic much?

Staff did it!!


lol, and im pretty sure the concensus is by far for it being changed, but it probably wont be considered important (as it kind of isnt) and wont get changed. So why not promote something much cooler in the first place? haha jk..

but anyone that uses them will more than likely think they shouldnt count as dbp

as anyone that doesnt use them, and doesnt think that logically that it isnt a dbp, would be for it staying the same

Edited by Apocalypto, 31 March 2010 - 06:47 AM.