Forums-->Ideas and suggestions-->
1|2
| Author | Rematch option in hunts |
|---|
-1
no comments | Nah, losing is part of the game. There's a reason why luck and morale exist.
Let's say you won because of luck. Should your opponent (the hunt) get to play you again without luck? In the end, if your opponents get lucky, you can also get lucky, and it balances out. In fact, the only way to solve the problem is to eliminate morale and luck, and that isn't going to happen.
If it's because you made a mistake, well, that's why you don't have a timer in solo games. You have all the time in the world to think. Made a mistake? It's probably your fault. It isn't the computer's fault, because they're trying to win at all times.
Losing happens all the time. It would be nice to not make mistakes, but then again, it would be nice to level up every 20 battles because that would allow us to have more fun (more units at higher levels), but that's another topic. | I told ya, things wont work.
Rather like have a rematch which gives u 0 XP and FSP but makes u lose durability.
Its like pay in the form of durability for a rematch . . . but u get nothing but just u know nxt time how to play the game. | #8
Thank you for your comments, I missed it earlier. You are one of the few people here who understand my post and the reasoning behind it.
#22
Thank you for your comments too. I understand your point about losing. However, in case you misunderstood my suggestion, let me clarify it more. My idea in no way changes the losing part of the game. Your combat log would still show 2 matches, the original one which you lost, and the rematch (if you took it). Don't forget, you can lose the rematch too. And if so desired, the rematch could also offer no reward whatsoever (no gold, exp, or skill points), so that the motivating factor in taking a rematch would only be to test out another strategy and/or to kick the opponent's rear for kicking yours earlier, to put it crudely.
As for whose fault it is if you lose a hunt, I am not concerned with that, whether it is yours, mine, poor luck or whatever, and it has nothing to do with my suggestion. So what if it is my fault? We all make mistakes, and I've already explained the purpose in the paragraph right above this. We play this game to have fun after all, and I don't see how my suggestion would ruin that, but enhance it instead. Plus, you are not forced to take the rematch if you don't want to. Now, before someone accuses me of contradiction, I believe that yes, you CAN take something seriously and have fun while you're at it.
I am realistic enough to know of course, that this won't be implemented. But I just thought I'd vent my feelings and see how many might feel the same way.
Surprisingly to me, almost no one here does. When I play chess online, a lot of my opponents who I defeated would like a rematch, especially if the game was a close fight. I can only surmise that the majority of the players here take their games a lot less seriously than I would have expected. Not that that's wrong, of course...just pointing it out. | #23
Rather like have a rematch which gives u 0 XP and FSP but makes u lose durability.
Its like pay in the form of durability for a rematch . . . but u get nothing but just u know nxt time how to play the game.
Yes, I'm glad you at least understand what I'm saying. To me, the rewards for the rematch aren't important, and there is the penalty of losing artifact durability like normal hunts. The rematch just presents an opportunity for testing a different strategy and/or revenge for your loss earlier. It's that simple, really. | There are easier ways to check for strategies. For example, you can check the hunter records for their battles, and emulate them.
If you want to have revenge for your loss, well, you'll just have to live with being unable to do that. Win your next hunt to make you feel better. | #18
Now now, how did I self-justify my mistake when I agreed that the wordings that I put forth were "smart-alec" as you put it. If you have been offended by my wordings, I apologise. But I would like you provide me an explanation and clarification on what your initial statement meant, without any reference from to any post after post2:
I know I would play the same battle again if it's a match I know I can win.
How would this statement look to you? I can't speak for you, but from my perspective, it looked like you only want to engage in battles that you can win. Not that its wrong, but my understanding of the mechanics of this game tells me that there's a big mismatch between your expectations of the game as per your statement and what this game offers.
In any case, your idea for rematches is akin to a request for battle-simulation, except that your idea is much more targeted @ particular hunts. I'm still not bought in by your idea, since refinement of hunt tactics becomes a robotic process of rinse and repeat if rematches were available, which turns would make the hunting process a linear process. | Its always annoying when people give you -1 and you feel like their reason is irrelevent or foolish, but try not to be so defencive about it. Try to rather thank people for their critisism and then explain with better detail what your trying to say, it will make it a lot easier to understand this thread without having to read every post if you just have one clear and detailed post.
As for the idea, i would give it a +1. The durability loss is not an issue, because if you don't want to lose durability, don't click "rematch". Furthermore, i think it would be interesting to be able to rematch things. For example, say you go into battle the first time forgetting a vital artifact, like a ring of doubts or something. Wouldn't you be upset if you lost a battle by only a few troops? i recently lost to 244 poisoners. Although i took my approach to the full extent, i fear i took the wrong approach. Some of you may say "thats your fault deal with it etc." but everybody knows nobody can win all their hunts all the time. Lastly, lets be realistic, how many times do you actually get a hunt that would go into the records if you won it? personally i haven't once, but if i had, i wouldn't even take the rematch after losing, because quite frankly it takes a lot of time and skill to get onto the top hunters list.
Furthermore, watch what you are saying in the forums. Many people may take great offence to statements like "i will not fight with a 12 year old" or anything of the likes... | -1
because : i cant see any reason, why this is needed
a) if you lose a hunt, you can do it again with same amount / units, like it has been mentioned allready
b) if its a mg quest you lose, you can get it later again, with same amount / units
c) if its a player versus player battle, well just ask for rematch with privat mail
d) ambush system (caravans) decrease / increase difficulty with lose / win, so its not possible there at all
just my 2 cents | #26
There are easier ways to check for strategies. For example, you can check the hunter records for their battles, and emulate them.
True that, but if you're talking about the record hunts, then sometimes they just can't be emulated, due to differences that may exist in everything, such as AP used, faction skill points, enemy numbers, and even enemy stack configurations.
If you want to have revenge for your loss, well, you'll just have to live with being unable to do that. Win your next hunt to make you feel better.
Lol yes, that's the only thing I can do now anyway ;p
#27
Now now, how did I self-justify my mistake when I agreed that the wordings that I put forth were "smart-alec" as you put it. If you have been offended by my wordings, I apologise.
By saying you quoted me without taking my words out of context. In any case, thank you and apology accepted.
How would this statement look to you? I can't speak for you, but from my perspective, it looked like you only want to engage in battles that you can win. Not that its wrong, but my understanding of the mechanics of this game tells me that there's a big mismatch between your expectations of the game as per your statement and what this game offers.
Yes, you understood my statement correctly, I much prefer to fight in hunts where I feel I have a higher chance of winning than losing. I think my approach to the game is different from yours, and you may be more prepared than I to sacrifice time and gold (artifact durability) to push the boundaries of what you can win and what you can't.
In any case, your idea for rematches is akin to a request for battle-simulation, except that your idea is much more targeted @ particular hunts. I'm still not bought in by your idea, since refinement of hunt tactics becomes a robotic process of rinse and repeat if rematches were available, which turns would make the hunting process a linear process.
You raise a very valid point here, something no one has brought up before this. I agree, the refinement of hunt tactics is made easier and faster with the availability of rematches. My opinion is that even without rematches, the same process of refinement happens, but at a slower pace. The question is, which would we want? This becomes a more subjective matter, but now your argument has good justification and is perfectly acceptable as well.
In any case, thank you for the valuable input. If this was what you had written in the first place, there would have been no cause for me to get offended, and you would have no need to apologise for anything at all.
#28
Its always annoying when people give you -1 and you feel like their reason is irrelevent or foolish, but try not to be so defencive about it. Try to rather thank people for their critisism and then explain with better detail what your trying to say, it will make it a lot easier to understand this thread without having to read every post if you just have one clear and detailed post.
I agree that I may have been defensive, but I didn't expect to receive some of the replies here which left me exasperated. Nonetheless, I was never against dissenting opinions, provided they came with some reason and sense.
Wouldn't you be upset if you lost a battle by only a few troops? i recently lost to 244 poisoners. Although i took my approach to the full extent, i fear i took the wrong approach. Some of you may say "thats your fault deal with it etc." but everybody knows nobody can win all their hunts all the time.
These are my sentiments exactly as well.
Furthermore, watch what you are saying in the forums. Many people may take great offence to statements like "i will not fight with a 12 year old" or anything of the likes...
Agreed and understood. My apologies if anyone was offended by my rash comment.
#29
because | Looks like my post above got truncated...
#29
because : i cant see any reason, why this is needed
You are absolutely right, in the sense that it is not *needed*, hence I also admitted that it would not be implemented. I only thought that it would at least make hunting slightly more fun and interesting.
a) if you lose a hunt, you can do it again with same amount / units, like it has been mentioned allready
Yes, however I have also mentioned earlier that it may take a very long time for the same match-up to come around again. Whether the player wants to wait for an indefinite amount of time or not is a subjective matter, but I do state clearly that I personally would prefer not to, given the option.
b) if its a mg quest you lose, you can get it later again, with same amount / units
c) if its a player versus player battle, well just ask for rematch with privat mail
d) ambush system (caravans) decrease / increase difficulty with lose / win, so its not possible there at all
I agree with all the above. But then again, I believe I did emphasise quite clearly that the rematch option is only for normal hunts and not for any of the above.
just my 2 cents
Thank you for your input. |
1|2Back to topics list
|
