DeletedUser
Together, we can consider the idea to the smallest detail. But the developers change everything. There is no need to argue.
DeletedUser563
I do not agree gotsman what you will be doing if you leave this idea as is and vote it in , in the hope that the developers clean it up is giving them very mixed signals as two community will have voted in the idea to lose their entire treasury since that is one of the key elements of your idea. I have since started a discussion of this general idea to try and work out all the kinks in what is a vastly complex idea which most Op's fails to grasp.
http://forum.the-west.net/showthread.php?t=50692
http://forum.the-west.net/showthread.php?t=50692
DeletedUser
Very good.
I like the idea to rob all the money in the treasury if it unprotected. It's realistic.
I can offer to split the money in several bank safes.
For example, the
Safe (Level 1). = 0 $ (in the bank $ 100,000)
Safe (Level 2). = $ 10,000 (2 x $ 50,000)
Safe (Level 3). = $ 20,000 (3 x $ 33,333)
Safe (Level 4). = $ 50,000 (4 x $ 25,000)
etc.
To the attackers robbed all the money ($ 100,000) they need to blow up by dynamite the four safes (4 x $ 25,000).
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Smallpox is realistic, it doesn't mean it's fun or good for the game. Permadeath is also realistic, but I don't think it should be implemented.
DeletedUser
I understand your irony.
I like realism. But without the extremes, of course.
Some players do not like realism.
The truth is in the middle.
DeletedUser
I.e. you want realistic when it gets you a couple million dollars, but not when it's negative. Your windfall is the bank owners' smallpox.
DeletedUser
I will say from my own experience: two million in the treasury there is only one way: the players leave the game and sell their clothes. Easy money! two million earned by dishonest labor.
So silly to cry, that this money will be stolen.
Now I say it's silly to compare the battle for the fort and bank robbery. Soldiers at war fighting for his country and family (alliance or city), and robbing banks for money.
Many players leave the game because that they are bored. Play Wild West must have the spirit of the Wild West.
Bank robbery should be interesting and profitable, and not child's play in the Barbie doll.
You are trying to impose restrictions on the idea of robbing a bank. Then lost the excitement and sense of team play.
If you do not want to have robbed the treasury, then quickly spend the money out of it. Or keep the money for the personal account of the character. It's very simple.
It is better to help in the development of the idea, and not to put obstacles in the form of his discontent.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
$2 million which doesn't do a lot of good. If the players had quit and transferred it to a player for 1 cotton in would be pushing. You basically want to do just that, give it to players instead of just having it sitting mostly useless in the treasury. Incidentally, it would also be exploitable by having a player who's planning on quitting joining a small town by whatever pretense, depositing it in the treasury, telling you it's there, and quitting.
DeletedUser
look, personally, I agree with Jakkals on this, this would destroy small towns, Gotsman's main argument for justification of emptying of the treasury is that big towns don't need it, well small towns do! this would enable massive towns with HP tank players to farm small towns building up their treasuries as they try to construct their town. ultimately I think this would get all the players in small towns exasperated, and possibly end up with them leaving the game whilst everyone in the big towns sits back and gets free money.
this could work, but it needs a lot of adjustment.
I think that Jakkal's earlier proposition that you could raid the banks of NPC towns is a much better idea, and is the route that this idea should take.
this could work, but it needs a lot of adjustment.
I think that Jakkal's earlier proposition that you could raid the banks of NPC towns is a much better idea, and is the route that this idea should take.
DeletedUser
There could be some sort of 'noob protection'. Say, towns could only be robbed from 75k points up or having, at least, 25 members.
As said this suggestion needs a lot of tweaks so it is both fun and fair.
DeletedUser
You are wrong to think that small towns are vulnerable!
First, small towns have a little money.
Second, a bank in a small town also has a NPC-guard.
Big cities are more attractive for the robbery.
I really do not like the idea of the NPC-towns. Let's abolish the duel between the players, 'cause we have the NPC-characters!
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Wrong, just being a small town doesn't mean that your treasury is empty.
A:
so we have player towns with NPC guards? going to full on NPC towns isn't exactly a big leap is it?
B: why don't you like it? perhaps you'd like to provide a more concrete suggestion before dismissing an idea.
DeletedUser
NPC towns would solve a lot of the issues I have with the idea, since it wouldn't be exploitable, it would bring more consistent returns, and towns would be less subject to depredations by those Ned Kellys who are online when everyone else is offline.
DeletedUser
There is no need in the NPC-towns, because that game has a job: "Rob a bank"
:laugh:
Of course not.
The young towns are usually not rich.
I'm tired of explaining.
The NPC-guards at the bank can be strong or weak based on each individual situation. There is no guarantee that any attack would be robbing the bank. Maybe 20% of the attacks will end successfully. Maybe 10%. Maybe 50%.
But not 100%!
NPC-guards have to be a serious obstacle.
I find it difficult to offer a more concrete suggestion because of difficulties with the translation.
You are writing a difficult phrases for automatic translation. Write simple. I'll try to explain again.
So, what are you worried?
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
I am WORRIED because this idea is about greed, nothing more, nothing less.
DeletedUser
Love is the best 
DeletedUser
Time to bring this back to surfaceSummary:
A small town of what Gotsman meant was a town with players of low levels and the founder with a little higher level than the others. This is why they have less money. He didn't specifically meant a new town. He meant a small town.
If players find a big towns are too attractive, they keep attacking the same old town, greed.
NPC guards are based on their own level and work just like normal players but controlled by automatic.
A small town of what Gotsman meant was a town with players of low levels and the founder with a little higher level than the others. This is why they have less money. He didn't specifically meant a new town. He meant a small town.
If players find a big towns are too attractive, they keep attacking the same old town, greed.
NPC guards are based on their own level and work just like normal players but controlled by automatic.
DeletedUser
Typically, new small towns have little money to the treasury. Cause all the money spent on construction of buildings. And these cities are not attractive for the robbery.
Today the old town with a one resident, and the treasury in which there are two million dollars of course the most attractive to the robbery.
Do not cry for you for your two million in the treasury, if the bank is robbed! It's just a game.
Greed is based only on the presence of money in the treasury.
The NPC-guards are in the bank and shoot the nearest attacker.
Health for NPC-guards = Health for robbers.
I suggest something like this:
The number of attackers depends on:
1) the level of bank
2) The amount of money
If the amount of money in the treasury exceeds a certain limit, the attacker is allowed to add a few gamers.
-------------------------------------
A) If the bank has the first level, and money in the bank no more than $ 1,000, the limit of two robbers. The Bank has one NPC-guard.
Robbers:
The first robber is level 38, has 600 health points, and has a rifle.
The second robber has 30 levels, has 500 health points, and has a harquebus.
NPC-guard:
has 1100 (500+600) health points, and has a Precise rifle (38 level).
-------------------------------------
B) If the bank has a fifth level, and money in the bank more than $ 100,000, the limit of the robbers: 12 (10 +2). The Bank has five NPC-guards.
Robbers:
12 players. The senior has 80 levels. The total number of hit points = 12,000.
NPC-guards:
5 guards X 2400 health points (Total 12000). All the guards have Precise Winchester (level 78).
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
Some towns don't construct... Because they are founded ghost towns
DeletedUser
In a duel winner-take-third of cash. Maybe in a bank robbery do the same? Third part of the Treasury (-33%).
-----------------------------------
I can suggest five possibilities:
A) The robbers take all the money from the treasury. (100%)
B) The robbers take away one third of the available money from the treasury. (33%)
C) The robbers take all the money from the Treasury that exceed the established limit. The limit depends on the number of residents and the level of the bank. (100% - X)
D) The robbers take a fixed income from the Treasury. (Treasury - limit)
E) The robbers take a fixed income, but not from the Treasury. (Wages)
I do not like options D) and E), but maybe you will like.
-----------------------------------
I can suggest five possibilities:
A) The robbers take all the money from the treasury. (100%)
B) The robbers take away one third of the available money from the treasury. (33%)
C) The robbers take all the money from the Treasury that exceed the established limit. The limit depends on the number of residents and the level of the bank. (100% - X)
D) The robbers take a fixed income from the Treasury. (Treasury - limit)
E) The robbers take a fixed income, but not from the Treasury. (Wages)
I do not like options D) and E), but maybe you will like.