Battle Arena - Survivor

Discussion in 'Accepted Ideas' started by Deltan, Mar 23, 2012.

  1. Battle Arena Response

    Hook it up!
  2. stupidity rules

    stupidity rules New Member

    optional or not there will be those who think it's unfair. I normally only play LCN so bring it as it may fall! i am willing to join in on it. Just would like to be there for the competition. Try to make it interesting though. We have a bunch of stuff on LCN now that is flaky at best... i.e. the lottery that not a lot of people get to win. the speakers that not very many people use... had a proposal up about that but haven't heard anything on since I posted it. UFF Viper!
  3. Bubba

    Bubba Member

    I think this is a good idea. A few concerns would be...
    1. Death in battle arena should not take away XP like it does in regular game
    2. Stats should be separate from regular battle stats
    3. Should be a free for all, including armada/guild/etc
    4. When a player is in battle arena, they should be hidden in regular game so that rivals can't kill you when you are working in this area of the game
    5. I think limits on number of attacks or rather time limits on number of attacks should also be implemented so that it discourages automated systems
    6. Hopefully this will really be to the death and no hospital visits
    7. If this works well, branch it out to include armada battle arena where one armada can challenge another for a certain time and all armada on at that time battle each other to the death.
    8. I don't really want skill points or favor points awarded, only cash and XP.
    9. IP checking should be done to prevent those with multiple accounts, so in other words, limit the number of IPs in battle arena to one IP at a time. This will also discourage those with log ins of others from having multiple players in the same battle arena.
    10. Maybe have stats like the armada/etc so that a player shows # of 1st place, Top 3, Top 10, etc.
    11. The "rolling" should be done at start of battle arena and set for duration of that battle arena, instead of new roll each battle event (attack or defend).
    12. The start of the next battle arena should be a set time from the end of the previous one. So if one person is left standing and the arena is over before the time is up, the next one should start at a set number of hours after that instead of just starting based on when the arena would have timed out.
    13. A chat or message feature would be good
    14. Adding a message in the regular system to request another player to join you in the battle arena
  4. pineappledog

    pineappledog Member

    1. It will all be seperate from the looks of it, when you die then you are out of the arena not dead in game.
    2. Stats will have to be the same as your regular character otherwise every single player with have zillions of attack and health and none of anything else.
    4. Pretty sure you will still be able to attack in the arena still if you are in the hospital in-game if it is seperate
    9. The level requirement should do that, how many people have more than 1 account over those level requirements really? Also, I really dont think that using multiple accounts would help you in this arena system!
  5. juanmmatam

    juanmmatam Member

    I believe that this is discriminatory for the lower levels (which by far are more than the higher....)

    What about creating different arenas for levels 200 to 500, 500 t0 1000 and so on...
  6. Kel the Merciful King

    Kel the Merciful King Well-Known Member

    7. If this works well, branch it out to include armada battle arena where one armada can challenge another for a certain time and all armada on at that time battle each other to the death.

    Very interesting!!!
  7. pineappledog

    pineappledog Member

    I disagree, in every game you play you will unlock extra features as you go along. Saying having a level restriction on it is discriminatory is like saying Havana, Paris and Dublin are discriminatory against everyone below level 2000.

    If there were nothing advantageous to being higher level then there would be no point in levelling. If it was just for the top 100 levels I would agree but the vast majority of active players are above the set levels that have been put forward. That said, perhaps they could be changed to (level 750+ for VC / PC, 500+ for LCN, 300+ for ZS) to open it up to a wider group of players whilst still maintaining some attainability (if thats a real word :D)
  8. This idea just seems like a way for higher level players to beat on lower level players.

    Kendall's already stated that the higher levels would have a higher chance of success than a lower level anyway.

    I don't like randomness. I hate playing Odin's Runes for the simple fact that when I get a King and guess "Lower", it pulls this random lucky crap and gives me an ace. Usually when I have 41/42 hands won, too.

    I don't like building my character and barely losing a fight repeatedly simply because of a "random" attack bonus. I don't like trying to kill people with axe slaps and getting a "random" 1 damage.

    In a game of strategy where you make an effort to build your character to be the best, randomness is lame as all hell.

    But hey, as long as the option remains optional.

    But I gotta ask. If the players participating in the Battle Arena are removed from play from the original battle lists, would that not then kill the original battle mechanics of the game if the majority of the player base participates in this?

    -Pumps health to blast Bosses-
  9. AndeeLee

    AndeeLee New Member

    interesting for sure

    as long as when in the battle outside attacks from the regular game play could be cut off preventing you from dying while trying to battle, that would be awesome. As far as check IP's for multiply account players or people signing on others accounts for them, I think that should be done often with or without this. Since it is against TOS of kano and FB. Love to see how this may work, sounds fun. :)
  10. Let's hope that you're the only one in your household that plays the game then. Otherwise there's going to be a lot of pissed off family members when they realize that only one person per household internet connection can play the Kano games.
  11. polishpimp

    polishpimp Well-Known Member

    Definitely an interesting idea.....Sounds like it may be fun but I do have a few questions and or concerns.

    For starters, I m wondering why the price to participate would be dependent on ones income, it just seems as if everyone should pay the same amount. For example.....If player A pays 500k and player B pays 5000B doesnt player A stand to gain more for doing the same thing? A players income does not always reflect ones level or the strength of their account. I have the highest income in myspace VC but I am not the highest level theoretically....I could be paying more than others yet not have the best odds of winning because the the highest leveled player has the potential of having more skill points to allocate towards attack or defense which is the biggest factor in who wins or loses a battle. It would really bite if having a high income actually worked against someone, I know lots of players with powerful accounts that purposely keep their income low.

    "A player’s max attack is the sum of all of their attack points. We will take into consideration all of your equipped items(which will have a modifier to make them more powerful), all of your equipment brought to battle (Weapons, Warriors, Gear etc.) as well as your total personal attack strength and your total attack boost %. There will be no Critical Hit Bonus Attack."

    Why would there be a "modifier" to make items more powerful?

    My biggest concern would be whether or not things/numbers/players are being "handicapped" in order to level the playing field. Nearly every aspect of the games have some type of limit/restriction or penalty that comes into play at some point to "level the playing field". Good examples of this would be the bounty delay and attack/slap damage limits being based on the lesser of the players health. Its never made sense to me that I can do way more damage to a more powerful player than a lesser player. Seems to almost defeat the purpose of getting stronger.

    The Randomness of the "roll" also concerns me. If its anything like the randomness of an axe slap or punch then i wouldnt be to hip on the idea especially considering the difference in price one has to pay based on income. The fact that a level 5-9k player with uber high attack can slap/punch someone for 1 damage is just simply ridiculous. Not only should the targets defense come into play......but there should be a minimum as to how little damage one can do based on level or attack. Once again the lesser of the 2 players health should not be the defining factor. A player should be doing more damage to a lesser player than a more powerful one...not the other way around.

    "a modified version of their regular health"? Would this modification of health be in line with the regular diff between the 2 players health? So if my regular health was 50k more than my rivals.....would there be a similar diff in my arena health? I would certainly hope so.

    A couple of other questions......

    Could we attack each player multiple times in a row? Meaning could i just keep attacking over and over until they were dead?

    Whats to keep players from tag teaming others?

    If each player has an attack and a defense roll.....what happens if the player that i attack isnt online or paying attention? Do I have to wait for the results? can i move on to another player?

    Will we be allowed to attack all those in the "arena"....even clan and guild members?

    Approx how long will a competition be?

    Would we still be able to complete other gaming actions while competing?

    Would we be able to see all other participants health remaining?

    I will hold on some more questions for the moment in hopes i can get these answered first. Like I said....It sound as if it could be fun. I eagerly await your reply. TY.
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2012
  12. Deltan

    Deltan Member

    Yes, participation is optional.
  13. Deltan

    Deltan Member

    Level requirements are not set in stone yet, this is very much the idea phase.
  14. Deltan

    Deltan Member

    Great feedback in general everyone, I don't have many answers as yet for people, but we'll be taking all input int account as this awesome feature moves forward.

    Just wanted to re-iterate, it's being brought to the games to create a new way for all players to interact with each other and give higher level players a new challenge. It's our goal to make it fun and challenging for all, regardless of level.
  15. MWAS Neo

    MWAS Neo New Member

    How cool will this be!! Superb idea guys.. im in :)
  16. Pretty impressive idea. Seems like a lot of details will have to be worked out but sounds like a wild idea and I really am impressed that something such as this is even in the idea stage and a possibility for the games. Will there be a way to keep refreshing the battle list we get or are we given a random initial list of clans and have to work through them one by one? Will there be a possibility of folks attacking certain clans even though they are not on their random list via a shortcut to their profile? That's the only new questions I have so far. Ideas such as this could restore my curiosity and bring me back into the game. I guess time will tell. Happy Gaming.
  17. Lawskar

    Lawskar Member

    I am pleased the admin team are attempting to move the game forward and it would be step in the right direction.. The season long battle format at the moment has a serious imbalance in my opinion. It is weighted too much in favor of the higher levels and as a corollary they in turn generally gravitate towards one another making kick ass teams. Was definitely put off when being bountied by the big boys and then in turn being collected by either themselves or team mates. Thus the top 3/4 spots are virtually guaranteed even before the week kicks off..Yawn!!
    I like the idea of a randomly generated model which by its very nature would be more equitable. It would definitely give the rest of us a better chance. I'd go a step further and randomly generate teams for all individuals who click to enter the competition. So the match up would include teams consisting of both higher and lower levels. This system works very well in other online games. At present the idea still looks as if it has an inbuilt mechanism to provide fodder for the uppers.. An attack stat of 10,000 v 1000 defense would still give an advantage of 10:1??
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2012
  18. It would be extremely difficult to ever be the "sole survivor" against these higher level clans that have in excess of 100K health and who knows what their attack and defense are. I'm a bit curious if the random battle list will be filled with close matched clans at first or will a very low level clan have a possibility of showing up right away on these higher clans lists? It really doesn't seem like their will be many different winners of this arena. I'm guessing that the top 20 or 30 clans will always be the sole survivor and will discourage a lot of clans from ever joining. With the randomness of attack and defense there will be a minute chance of actually winning a fight with one of these very high clans but wouldn't the outcome still always come down to a very select few clans who have mega health?
  19. Susan Patrick

    Susan Patrick Member

    Like & Rated
  20. Lowie

    Lowie New Member

    Sounds good! Very good!

Share This Page