Duelling changes - The West Beta!

[DeletedUser36979]

Why push a bounty? easy, it is not my money, so if I can use that to pay for an item, why should I do a money transfer?

 

[Deleted User - 1693871]

People still dont seem to understand. Why would you push bounty if you can easily give money to other player, isnt it logical that one rule cancels other out? Why go trough trouble of fixing the duel to get certain amount of bounty when you can simply send the money?

As I already posted earlier in this thread, the bounty is not the player's own money! It's someone else's money. Money transfers are the players own cash. Someone might have a $50,000 bounty and only $10 in their bank account.

Wonder is right. Players are asking the questions because they do not want to end up being caught out by some interpretation of the rules and banned. Remember when the money transfers were brought in, all the discussion in here about what was bannable or not? Until there was then a definitive statement that clarified matters completely.

Of course there are still some who KO themselves on other players rather than job KO. Makes me wonder how those instances are dealt with as there are no clear answers here.

 

[Ripwise]

We don't really care about how the rules are interpreted, merely that staff tells us about it. Using duels to self-KO is most likely going to be a new thing due to the removal of job-KO, we just don't want to end up banned because some staff member looks at your duel and says it's some kind of pushing. All we want is security really, it shouldn't be so hard to bring.

Why push a bounty? easy, it is not my money, so if I can use that to pay for an item, why should I do a money transfer?

As I already posted earlier in this thread, the bounty is not the player's own money! It's someone else's money. Money transfers are the players own cash. Someone might have a $50,000 bounty and only $10 in their bank account.

Wonder is right. Players are asking the questions because they do not want to end up being caught out by some interpretation of the rules and banned. Remember when the money transfers were brought in, all the discussion in here about what was bannable or not? Until there was then a definitive statement that clarified matters completely.

Of course there are still some who KO themselves on other players rather than job KO. Makes me wonder how those instances are dealt with as there are no clear answers here.

There is no interpretation needed. To push a duel both sides have to collaborate for one side to get money, meaning, one having the bounty has to strip his clothes and send stances to the attacker which is bannable. This was already said in this thread so i dont see what is the problem.

 

[DeletedUser]

...
One crazy idea I had was why not lower the damage done with duelling mot? Say 100-75% full damage, 75-50% mot 90% damage, 50-25% 80% damage and 25-1% 70% damage. These are just numbers taken out of the sky but it would be another downside for ZMT.
.....

This. Great idea. I would take it to the same place as jobs like someone else posted nd maybe be a bit more strict: At 100-76%, you get full benefits. At 75-51%, you do 75% of the damage, get 75% of the XP, get 75% of the bounty and or cash. At 50-26%, you get 50%, and then finally 25%.

This would have the net effect of driving duelers to seek out high targets (since if you only get a limited number of full-value duels, you're gonna want to make it worth your while). It would also still have the intended effects on ZMD (although admittedly, this way they would be back to the option of slowing their growth, so you might still want to look at raising the 1% minimum to a higher number).

Of course you should also make it like a job, namely that if it takes 10 minutes to do a duel, it should cost you 5 energy, like jobs do today. This way an experience dueler can get 4-5 duels at peak efficiency...

+1 rep to Dr Roth, great suggestion.

 

[DeletedUser34295]

There is no interpretation needed. To push a duel both sides have to collaborate for one side to get money, meaning, one having the bounty has to strip his clothes and send stances to the attacker which is bannable. This was already said in this thread so i dont see what is the problem.

I think the whole point is that if I have a bounty on my head, and I then strip down/wear no weapon in order for my friends to knock me out, with the sole reason that I want to be KO'd so I can get protection, what will happen then?

The problem is that there's now a new game element (duel self-KO) and what we want to know is how (or even if) you are going to try and separate these things from one another. Basically what we want to know is: will you be able to separate these things? And what we want to know is: if you can't in fact separate these things, will you treat them all as bounty push or not? Seriously, it's not that difficult to understand that we want to know whether we risk getting banned or not if we use self-KO, and you (the staff) for some reason can't seperate self-KO and bounty push and will interpret it all as an illegal push action or not.

 

[DeletedUser22685]

This. Great idea. I would take it to the same place as jobs like someone else posted nd maybe be a bit more strict: At 100-76%, you get full benefits. At 75-51%, you do 75% of the damage, get 75% of the XP, get 75% of the bounty and or cash. At 50-26%, you get 50%, and then finally 25%.

I don't like the idea of motivation impacting on your ability to perform a task. You can still perform a job at low motivation, you just don't get as much money or exp. I'm all for motivation affecting both money and exp in duels, but I don't think it should make it so that it becomes harder to actually win a duel as your motivation decreases.

That said, if we were to discuss the possibility of something like this, I think 75% is far too high to start affecting performance. Any active dueller who's not intentionally attempting to gain maximum exp should duel enough to keep their motivation at or lower than 75% almost constantly. It's even easy to reach 50% without trying to, but at least that threshold would be a lot easier on the motivation buffs.

 

[DeletedUser36979]

There is no interpretation needed. To push a duel both sides have to collaborate for one side to get money, meaning, one having the bounty has to strip his clothes and send stances to the attacker which is bannable. This was already said in this thread so i dont see what is the problem.

Thank you. So next time someone wants to use their bounty as part of payment, they just have to make sure not to tell the other person about stances or when they attack.... and if asked be sure to say it was a self-KO

Thank you for making that legal

 

[DeletedUser8627]

As I already posted earlier in this thread, the bounty is not the player's own money! It's someone else's money. Money transfers are the players own cash. Someone might have a $50,000 bounty and only $10 in their bank account.

Wonder is right. Players are asking the questions because they do not want to end up being caught out by some interpretation of the rules and banned. Remember when the money transfers were brought in, all the discussion in here about what was bannable or not? Until there was then a definitive statement that clarified matters completely.

Of course there are still some who KO themselves on other players rather than job KO. Makes me wonder how those instances are dealt with as there are no clear answers here.

Very good point! But from the support side of the game it is very difficult to answer such questions since we deal with cases individually. If a player is reported or we find suspicion on their account, we will look at all factors around the transaction (Bounty being taken) before we will take action against the player. With these type of offenses, they differ from player to player.

Our rules are also written in such a way that they come across bland and open to interpretation. We have reasons for this and not willing to provide players with too much information so they could find loopholes and cheat. Plus, if we write an extensive rule handbook - it's going to be the size of a mini bible and probably not be read anyway.

If you need any clarification on a specific rule, best you either send in a support ticket or PM me directly on the forum. Include a detailed scenario and I will happily check and let you know if we would allow it or not.

 

[Deleted User - 1693871]

Thank you Twista, I'll do that later.

 

[DeletedUser34295]

Very good point! But from the support side of the game it is very difficult to answer such questions since we deal with cases individually. If a player is reported or we find suspicion on their account, we will look at all factors around the transaction (Bounty being taken) before we will take action against the player. With these type of offenses, they differ from player to player.

Our rules are also written in such a way that they come across bland and open to interpretation. We have reasons for this and not willing to provide players with too much information so they could find loopholes and cheat. Plus, if we write an extensive rule handbook - it's going to be the size of a mini bible and probably not be read anyway.

If you need any clarification on a specific rule, best you either send in a support ticket or PM me directly on the forum. Include a detailed scenario and I will happily check and let you know if we would allow it or not.

Thank you for clearing up both part of the question and giving guidance as to how to proceed. Much appreciated!

 

[DeletedUser34315]

This. Great idea. I would take it to the same place as jobs like someone else posted nd maybe be a bit more strict: At 100-76%, you get full benefits. At 75-51%, you do 75% of the damage, get 75% of the XP, get 75% of the bounty and or cash. At 50-26%, you get 50%, and then finally 25%.

This would have the net effect of driving duelers to seek out high targets (since if you only get a limited number of full-value duels, you're gonna want to make it worth your while). It would also still have the intended effects on ZMD (although admittedly, this way they would be back to the option of slowing their growth, so you might still want to look at raising the 1% minimum to a higher number).

Of course you should also make it like a job, namely that if it takes 10 minutes to do a duel, it should cost you 5 energy, like jobs do today. This way an experience dueler can get 4-5 duels at peak efficiency...

+1 rep to Dr Roth, great suggestion.

This would be a terrible idea. You'd be so ineffective as a dueler that you'd be limited to ~5 duels a day!
That's why high level duelers hated the current system; because of how few duels you actually got to do(due to lack of targets, but if this change would be implemented, it'd be due to being unable to have a hope of winning).

 

[DeletedUser]

Meh, so change it to just lose xp and cash, not so much the damage bit. Wait, in other words, keep it the way it already works?!? What...? Did we just prove the current *new* system, as planned, is already good?!?

See... See what I did there...

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually, the current duel system just drops experience and duel experience based on motivation.

A good change would also have it drop cash as well based on duel motivation. That would be consistent with the job system as well.

 

[Reyne]

I see your point. I understand it can be annoying or even frustrating if you get dueled. But if we take a look at the larger picture, this is a role playing game. It is situated in the Wild west. Even back then you had the choice if you wanted to work, build or attack a fort. The one thing you could not always control was the action of others. If someone decided to shoot at you, you couldn't say that you opted out of it or anything like that. So in this aspect it is logical you can get dueled even if you don't want to.

You can leave the part out where you get dueled and be townless, but then you must miss out on the benefits of the town as well. Just like a famous dutch football player once said: "Every advantage has its disadvantage."

Then call dueling in the game what it truly is. Bushwhacking, ambushing, etc. Because dueling requires two people calling each other out on the middle of a dusty Main Street (if you're going with the Hollywood version, which has played up dueling more than it ever really occurred) and not while an unarmed farmer was digging potatoes.

I wouldn't mind the no job ko protections if there were alternatives offered. Get rid of the mortician. The stats would be skewed with all the deliberate ko's.

Leaving town is not a viable option for people who enjoy other interactions. We would have no forums, no alliance, no alliance chat, and few people would be ranked for battle even if they did try to walk there to sign up (no town, no alliance. No alliance, no remote sign-in).

No everyone wants to spend all their nuggets on buffs. Not everyone has great gear. My dueling has crap gear and weapons, and seldom wins. I feel like I have to apologize to my victims because they didn't asked to be bushwhacked.

And yes, I have always accepted that dueling was part of the game. I have done the part where I set my job queue, then dress for dueling. Still get my behind beat. I would just like to see something offered in the way of a solution before the rug gets pulled out from under our non-duelers.

Because option to opt out of PvP is absurd. Quests for example demand you to participate in PvP so complete opt out is impossible and jumping in and out of PvP into PvE is something that is done daily.
.

And that irks the crap out of me. All those new quests, and especially the Main Quest line quest all require some sort of dueling or KO's. It does NOT make sense to me to give questors new quests that require dueling (even KO's!) when they aren't duelers but questors!
or
Oh, and that brings me to another point. My non-duelers never really used the job KO bug very much until it became popular for duelers to camp job sites for the very purpose of dueling people working on quests. The chance of going to the middle of the map and working for HOURS to do complete a phase of a quest without getting dueled is slim to zero. You can't go to Waupee's Village or the Ghost town for the dailies without duelers waiting for you. If you want to call me a whiner because I'm sick of people looking for easy money and experience, then so be it.

 

[Snr Sarg]

People still dont seem to understand. Why would you push bounty if you can easily give money to other player, isnt it logical that one rule cancels other out? Why go trough trouble of fixing the duel to get certain amount of bounty when you can simply send the money?

Simple really.

Bank transfer requires you to use your own funds, bounty push is using somebody else's funds

Actually, the current duel system just drops experience and duel experience based on motivation.

A good change would also have it drop cash as well based on duel motivation. That would be consistent with the job system as well.

Agree with all those points.

Leaving town is not a viable option for people who enjoy other interactions. We would have no forums, no alliance, no alliance chat, and few people would be ranked for battle even if they did try to walk there to sign up (no town, no alliance. No alliance, no remote sign-in).

I may be wrong, but pretty sure a townless player can now sign in to a fort fight remotely.

Not that it makes much difference mind you, I still agree that leaving town is not a viable option for most, nor should it be encouraged by the game's representatives.

And that irks the crap out of me. All those new quests, and especially the Main Quest line quest all require some sort of dueling or KO's. It does NOT make sense to me to give questors new quests that require dueling (even KO's!) when they aren't duelers but questors!
or
Oh, and that brings me to another point. My non-duelers never really used the job KO bug very much until it became popular for duelers to camp job sites for the very purpose of dueling people working on quests. The chance of going to the middle of the map and working for HOURS to do complete a phase of a quest without getting dueled is slim to zero. You can't go to Waupee's Village or the Ghost town for the dailies without duelers waiting for you. If you want to call me a whiner because I'm sick of people looking for easy money and experience, then so be it.

Couldn't agree more with these two points.

 

[DeletedUser]

any news about update on beta ?

 

[DeletedUser22685]

I wouldn't mind the no job ko protections if there were alternatives offered. Get rid of the mortician. The stats would be skewed with all the deliberate ko's.

You've been playing since 2008. I find it hard to believe that you don't remember what it was like before job KOs were a viable option or when duelling was actually popular. As such I fail to see how you can be under the impression that the removal of job KOs makes it impossible for you to avoid being duelled.

The mortician is completely irrelevant. I don't know why you're focusing on that point. Stat padding has not been and will never be taken into consideration as a legitimate argument for or against a change. Aside from that, the morticians of almost all non-duelling towns are already a long way in the red and therefore have 0 duel points in the rankings, so even with intentional losses there will be no negative effect unless you're seriously worried about the numbers alone, in which case I don't need to say anything more.

Leaving town is not a viable option for people who enjoy other interactions. We would have no forums, no alliance, no alliance chat, and few people would be ranked for battle even if they did try to walk there to sign up (no town, no alliance. No alliance, no remote sign-in).

This is ridiculous and I'm tired of seeing it used as an argument. You've just listed many of the advantages that come with being a member of a town, so why is it unthinkable for there to be a single disadvantage in the form of incoming duels? The duelling system was designed the way it is with that specifically in mind. I don't know how many times I've made this point now and I haven't received a single response, which says a lot about the validity of the claims I'm arguing against. Even if you are a member of a town there's a completely viable workaround if you're willing to put just a small amount of effort into being able to play the way you'd like to play. I really don't think it's too much to ask. After all, we rarely get something for nothing, which is what people seem to be expecting.

 

[DeletedUser]

Simple really.
Bank transfer requires you to use your own funds, bounty push is using somebody else's funds

but that somebody else could just send you his/her money via money transfer, you don't need to bother through duels.

As for cash award dependant on motivation, i agree it would be really good idea, BUT make it so if you have 100% motivation then you take all the cash from other player's hands, not only 1/3 as current maximum.

 

[DeletedUser34295]

but that somebody else could just send you his/her money via money transfer, you don't need to bother through duels.

As for cash award dependant on motivation, i agree it would be really good idea, BUT make it so if you have 100% motivation then you take all the cash from other player's hands, not only 1/3 as current maximum.

That's not how they meant, but I'm not sure I'm allowed to specify what they meant here on the forum since it's against the rules.

-

Also, I like the idea of motivation having bigger effects on duels. Not to mention, it appears a lot of people here are keen on how things should be "just like in the real west" and well, in real life the motivation has a big impact on how well you perform a task. If you're tired and unmotivated, you're slower, less careful, less accurate and so forth. So it's not an unrealistic idea that lower motivation would equal lower damage/xp/cash reward for duels in the proposed way. Though, I think that's for a different topic/idea topic.

 

[Nisa]

We would have no forums, no alliance, no alliance chat, and few people would be ranked for battle even if they did try to walk there to sign up (no town, no alliance. No alliance, no remote sign-in).

Everyone can remote sign-in.