| Author | Losing battles intentionally should be stopped |
|---|
| to shokuka: good idea! |
why punish losing intenionaly (against npcs)
the reason why people do it is becuse otherwise you cant be compeditive
(any player willing to spend that long at lv 1/2 to become fraction skill 9 [2900points] deserves to be unbeatable at 0.44 thats 6591 lost battles at most 48 battles a day so 137 days for one faction)
why not instead making winning worth while ie *2 or even *4 current skill points reward for winning (but i get the feeling thats never going to happen) |
most probably robai means this one.
http://www.heroeswm.com/forum_messages.php?tid=1838617
its about wild_shooter.
its up to them to lose intentionally in hunt. if in PvP, that can be misunderstand as contractual combat even if it is not. but in hunt (esp without assistance), no problem.
they who do this have big patience, so they do deserve it.
To be honest, i also want to lose in 2nd attempt of army so that in the 3rd attempt i only need 2 kill, for example 1 hobgoblin to win the battle in 3rd attempt. only by killing 1 hob i finish merc quest, get 1 skill pt(because 2nd attempt will give u 0.49-0.5 pts if u do this) and 1-3 exp. do i break d rules?
And if losing in hunt give less skill points like 20 said, that i don't really agree, bcause skill faction progression is slow even if it goes like this. what will happen if that idea is used? Maybe, im a noob, but 130 mino for DE level 6 is medium threat, but i call 4 assist n we barely win the battle. if we make just 1 mistake we would lose. if we lose, will we get only 10% skill? |
why not instead making winning worth while ie *2 or even *4 current skill points reward for winning
Good idea, yes, winners should get much more skill points!
Even 10 times more!
Anyway, winning should be much better option than losing!
wild_shooter is nothing compared to this player:
http://www.heroeswm.com/pl_info.php?id=4385827
:)
I'm sure there are more such players and the number of such players is increasing.
My point: why this game is made so that losing is good and winning is bad?
to iron_eagle:
To be honest, i also want to lose ...
See? Exactly my point! Players shouldn't want to lose battles!
This game have incorrect name "Heroes of War and Money". It should be renamed to "Losers of War and Money" or something like that, because only the Great Losers are best players in this game. :) |
you pay ppl to choose you for a hunt to get a higher huntersguild and faction level
they lose to get a higher faction level
whats the deal?
just stop complaining.......whiner... |
Ah.. one argument more:
there people who donate to the game..
they have diamond upgrades..
those who doesn't have high racial skills have low chances against them |
you pay ppl to choose you for a hunt to get a higher huntersguild and faction level
Yes! It costs me gold! So, what's wrong with that? Actually my service is required only 1-3 times per day - its just nothing.
just stop complaining.......
This is a suggestion, not complaining! I'm doing hard work and trying to show the right direction for creators of this game.
And I'm asking a simple question: why this game is made so that losing is good and winning is bad?
In HoMM losing is really losing. Here losing is winning. Why?
BTW, Sven91, what are you doing in this forum? Have you any opinion? If so then I'm open to hear it. Or you are just spamming here? And I have noticed that most of your posts are just a pure spam (you have nothing to say, but you say something anyway).
to Erlemar (26):
So the only way for players is this: they MUST lose most of their battles?
I'm not saying anything against people who donate this game. It normal, they have to have some reward (even give them skill points if needed), but this have nothing to do with my point: winning battles should be much better option than losing. |
looks like the game has the principal "learn from failure(loses)"
...skill faction progression is slow...
a quote from my own post.
why not instead making winning worth while ie *2 or even *4 current skill points reward for winning
Good idea, yes, winners should get much more skill points!
Even 10 times more!
if it goes like this, then skill progression will b fast, and yes, i will not intentionally lose any battle. but it is not, so right now i only do that on merc quest armies and not the others, tough sometimes the army take reta from my unit n die in 2nd attempt.
but in EFO or BB, i guess this idea can't be used. because the real winner of the game is the one who kill most units in the battle (just my opinion, cuz they are honorable warrior), not the one sitting in corner and watch people fighting each other (coward), then attack only in a few turn then win the battle. the coward one doesn't deserve 2 win.
I understand ur point robai, but as long as the rules goes on like this, i'll keep do the battle my way. if the principle used in this game is "learn from failure" then i shall follow even tough only in army battle. If only the principle change become "winner deserves more", but i don't think this will change |
a combat level2 with 2 skill faction level is weaker than a combat level2 with 7 skill faction level.
and the only way to be combat level2 ans skill level7 is...to loose your battles.
it means that, whith the actual system, winning battles make you have a weaker hero than loosing battles.
it's an absurdity, that's what Robai is trying to explain to you.
but 90% of peoples here don't seems to understand him...
it's ideas and suggestions here.
the purpose of this section is to let players say what they would like to be improved/modified in the game.
Robai's suggestion is very good: winning must be better than loosing.
It's impossible to have any argument against this suggestion.
His idea is good, that's all, stop arguing against him.
You'd better help him to find a solution to this problem.
this game really needs improvements: a game where loosers are awarded and winners punished can't be a good game. |
Wow, what a surprise!
Karsot, thank you for complete understanding and support!
I was already thinking that I'm fighting alone here :) |
Frankly I like being skilled and I like training with side quests like hunt / hunt assist /merc quest more than pvp even when pvp has higher bonuses,
I would not appreciate nerfing hunts,
Giving more skill points to winners is better than removeing skillpoints from losers, skillpoints so long to obtain already. With more skillpoints winners train faster than losers, there will no point in losing anyway when you can train faster with ideas like training battles from Robai.
http://www.heroeswm.com/forum_messages.php?tid=1835051 |
I think change game rule this time is bad thing.
Old character(always lose) will be strong.
Some player(like me) is not intend to lose,
but the numbers of mob in hunt become too huge so easy.
My idea is offering combat level/exp reset(to lv 1, exp 0) potion in shop.
It costs a lot of gold or some diamond.
It reset the number of hunting, too.
Players can keep their old work(faction level/points) and can
play with new faction without create a new character.
Admin will sell much more diamonds with this potion.
Everyone will be strong if he spend money and many time. |
| Wow! Wow! Wow! Too much writing in one post. My head almost blew up psychologicly. I'm not entirely sure how this is a suggestion? But what I say is that someone can have 0 winning battles and 10000 losing battles and still be in the top 100(as if anyone has that knid of time). I think its just their choice of strategy that best suites them. |
| well, losing in a hunt doesn't hurt any1 |
What I'd like to see is some form of gladiatorial combats, where everyone puts some money into a pot and then fights for it. In a duel, winner takes all. In a group game, paid out in same ratio as XP is awarded.
It would be one way to gain money; it would also encourage fighting to win.
Not sure if this has been discussed or not, but forum search seems to alwys dump me at Google... |
for iceraven:
3.20. Any kind of payment for combat is forbidden. Rewarding a player for losing or promising such reward for losing, entering or quitting combat will be considered as contractual combat |
for iceraven:
that would be a perfect way to "wash" the money from multichars, since if the battle isn't staged obviously, it's very difficult to prove anything, so your idea, unfortunately, won't work. |
| AH well. Thanks for the replies, and reasoning. |
But I think their big faction levels are reward for their patience to lose for 1000 times.
-----------------------------
My 2nd suggestion here:
a new battle option
players with:
75% or more wins in one room, (battle and hunt)
50%-75% wins in one room, (battle and hunt)
25%-50% wins in one room (battle and hunt)
0-25% wins in one room.(hunt - patient people only)
0-25% wins in one room.(battle - stupid people only)
patient people/real losers in lowest room, and real fighters and heroes will be in top room. =)
I think this is one way to sort fairer battle, because 1 stupid players(could be seen with many defeats against people) can destroy a team. The patient people should fight with their own kind because of higher faction level. |
Robai afraid that some loosers will beat his records in hunt =) Loosers will become winners. And powerfull winners. But...
Hunting guild give +n to attack, laborers - +n to defend. And what wizard have from it? Almost nothing. So elf can work and hunt and be strong than wizard can work and hunt to be weak. I think here need some changes, than players will not lose to be strong.
And one more thing. Players increase their parameters by work, hunt, MG, TG etc... even play cards. They waste time for it. But to get high lvl in raciall skill need much more time. And all this time only thing what player see - "you were defeated". And be only lvl 1-2. So i think they want some reward for their time. And some people here want to not give them that reward, just because they dont want to leave record table. I think it is not right.
And... you can do the same to win.
they spend month to get some results and now close it? Say that all they done - is for nothing? |
