Passed Bartbot: Hideouts [updated]

Would you like to see this in game?

  • Yes

    Votes: 81 55.9%

  • No

    Votes: 64 44.1%
  • Total voters
    145
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Diggo11

Diggo11

Well-Known Member
Do you think the duelling part is to advantageous?

Anyway I think it should be separate to luck. But now in hindsight should I reduce how much the values can vary from 1-20 to 5-15?
 

DeletedUser

No. I think there should be some 'impossible' types of hideouts to find and some easy hideouts to find.
 
Diggo11

Diggo11

Well-Known Member
I'm still not sure about the duelling bit. And a Hideout approximately once every 5 jobs is too advantageous so I'll change it to 5-15%.

@ BartBot I'm not sure about everyone here but I think I prefer it by labour points. This means that there is only one hideout per job, which is one of the things that made this compromise so widely accepted.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

oh, im sorry, i thought id read that post before somewhere, maybe form someone else or from the same person but revised. my apologies, it looks alright i guess...
 

DeletedUser

ALRIGHT??? For all my work? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Please criticize my work for improvement-- and by the way, Diggo's revisions are fine.
 

DeletedUser

I don't like the idea that if a person cannot duel because the duelling levels are too far apart, that it automatically goes to the higher levelled player.

I am also of opinion that even the simplified version, might be quite complicated to implement, but that is exactly as I said, my opinion only.
 

DeletedUser5046

emperor wes said:
I don't like the idea that if a person cannot duel because the duelling levels are too far apart, that it automatically goes to the higher levelled player.
Click to expand...

well it doesnt actually goes to te highest lvl player...atleast you can still work as normal after trying out..and you can have an info about te shed..of who temporarily own it
 

DeletedUser

angelaiah013 said:
well it doesnt actually goes to te highest lvl player...
Click to expand...

Diggo11 said:
Ok so to write a refined summary:
If one players duelling level is to high for the other the weaker player automatically loses the duel. If it happens to be a townless player they automatically lose too, but none of the changes mentioned below are enforced.
Click to expand...

I think the "Addition" part may make it quite complicated, and strongly favors stronger players to get use of the hide-out. The main part looks OK and fairly straightforward to implement. In this case I am not sure that there will be that high value on finding a hide-out however.
 

DeletedUser5046

emperor wes said:
I think the "Addition" part may make it quite complicated, and strongly favors stronger players to get use of the hide-out. The main part looks OK and fairly straightforward to implement. In this case I am not sure that there will be that high value on finding a hide-out however.
Click to expand...

tat's te reason why they want it to be implemented..so peeps will do their best to get to te top...to be able to duel those strongr players..besides their is a normal system after te duel(te owning duel)
 

DeletedUser

Great minds think alike :)

Edit: Is this squared up enough to be put for a vote?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser5046

im te first to vote !!!! :D

say yes say yes!!!

*i want to go fight and own te teddy!!!!*
 

DeletedUser

Gem made an ity-bity mistake: b]...[/b] instead of the regular BB-Code :)
 

DeletedUser5046

but we cant see who voted anymore...:(

we have to wait till te poll is closed i think
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top