Increase/Decrease KO Protection for nuggets

DeletedUser563

Derek1982 said:
..
Click to expand...
There is no road of ideas. Dueling and fort fighting is in no way connected. Do yourself a favor and study a basic logic course. I would recommend the languages of logic. What your saying is not logical. The faulty argument is that ko protection must be not increased or decreased for an exchange of nuggets lets call it conclusion F but your submission is that in future another idea will get submitted for allowing fort protection submission A. Since any submission must be related to the conclusion your logic FAILS. In other words 5 + apple != the color purple OR beer drinking men and the inflation rate in China <> My cousin Fred has a hot girlfriend.
 

DeletedUser14006

Jakkals, god gave you two ears and one mouth for a reason.

I am done debating this flawed idea as you get personal each and everytime someone does not 100% agree with what you are saying.
 

DeletedUser563

What god would that be Derek and how do you know im not a one-eared , 2 mouthed person. And what has that got to do with anything anyway.

saying a persons arguments is illogical is not getting personal. How is it personal. The idea is not flawed your logic is flawed. Disprove me in a logical manner. I dare you.


Not using examples:

Player A - I am so tried of being dueled, I am not specced to defend myself, I wish I could pay 15 nuggets to prevent folk from dueling me. - SUBMISSION A

DOES NOT EQUAL OR RELATE TO

Player B - I am so tired of folk stealing my forts, I am not specced to defend them, I wish I could pay 15 nuggets to prevent folk from digging on them. - SUBMISSION B

THEREFORE

Submissions A + B

DOES NOT EQUAL

CONCLUSION: DO NOT ALLOW PLAYERS TO DECREASE /INCREASE KO PROTECTION FOR NUGGETS.

THEREFORE Argument Submission A + Submission B = Conclusion = NOT TRUE
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Actually it's more of a slippery slope fallacy.

But still, I don't really like dueling and don't like being dueled, but I don't have a problem with the system as is, even with quest KO duel protection gone.
 

DeletedUser23629

Agree with elm, rebow, and derek. Implementing this idea would lead to further mayhem and more stupid things real money can buy. It's a FREE game for a reason. I am a premium player, and I respect players who aren't. If this were put up to vote, I would not chose yes or no.
 

DeletedUser563

Whatever , slippery slope fallacy , illogical. Derek tries to tank my threads and I tank his. Its therefore not a issue of logic slippery fallacy or whatever. He knows exactly what he is doing and I know exactly what he tries to do.

It does not change anything if you have no problem with the current system. You really dont need to use it. At first it will be a guilty pleasure for you peterkk. Then later on you will be a ko protection junky. Later on you will sell your sister's monitor to finance one more month of ko protection.Then... optional includes limited and capped increases. None that have a problem with it has even considered that. Also its not cheap. Some may love it none will be that much affected and like reducing travel time you might later on introduce it as your own seldom used strategies.
 

DeletedUser

Go play sim city

This whole idea is about as pansy as it gets. While we're at it, why don't we just stop dueling altogether.

If this idea is implemented, you will be taking away a big part of the game. Duelers duel for many reasons. Some being xp, money, stats, war, or just to keep the motivation down.

Everyone has to earn money somehow. Some work jobs, some do quests, and others challenge them to a duel to steal their hard earned money. If dueling is a player's primary source of income, that would be like making it where a worker could not get money from doing jobs, or a quester whose questing was limited.

However another reason players duel is to lower the hp of hp tanks before a fort fight. A fort fighter tank could use this feature to protect himself from duelers of the enemy side. This would take out a strategic action of the game away.

By building your character in a manner that does not give him benefits in duels, you are aware of what you are taking on. And furthermore, by joining a town with such a character, you know the dangers that you face.
There is a solution for a nondueling character build residing in a town. They may place a bounty on any dueler who attacks them. By placing a wanted dead bounty, the player will have a bounty over his head and many players will attempt to attack him.
In addition to placing a bounty over the dueler's head, ask for help from your town mates.

I believe your idea is not something that will add to the overall goodness of the west. It would actually hurt the west, by nerfing the amount of players that a duelist can fight. If you want to play a non pvp game, try sim city or farmville.
 

DeletedUser563

are you a little rainbow. stop changing the color of your text please.:mad::mad::mad:S T O P I T!!! Most naysayers arguments goes something like the following analogy"because you can reduce travel time in worlds like arizona and Colorado using nuggets .. all battles will be filled" Which is just not true. Because players will be able to increase their duel protection only means you will have less time to duel them and that say 5% at most wont be available to be dueled The argument is almost like at time x i will be able to duel player y at location z. The only things that changes is that you will now duel player n. But since you can never predict that at time x you will duel player y at location z. It is not the end of dueling. Dueling will increase by allowing duelers to lower their ko protection time. All that your eliminating is mostly unwilling participants. And stop using terms like nerfing. Lowering, reducing is the proper English.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Ok, I'm against this idea as player that doesn't duel or uses nuggets (by choice - I see it as hard mode).

As a non-dueler: If duelers could duel constantly it would make my game-life harder, the way it works now is perfect, I get dueled when I am in range (since I'm uninteresting for political reasons), but I fly under the radar most of the time. If duelers could duel more (especially zero mots) I would be in range more often as they would require more targets.

As a non-nuggeter: This would be the first premium option that effects me directly, the other premium options make the users of those options being able to do their thing easier, but the game is still the same for me. If this was implemented I would become a target more often just because I don't use nuggets (both because duelers can duel more and because other non-duelers can stay protected longer).

This idea receives a big no from me, actually so big that I will ask everyone I know ingame to come here and vote it down if it goes to a vote.

/Edlit
 

DeletedUser9470

meh you are only doing well cos no one cares anymore about dueling.
you didnt do well before? it was too complicated to work out?

no one duels today because there is no interest, like i said, go flip a coin.
build a dext build and win everything!
whatever man.
 

DeletedUser14006

Jakkals said:
And come thursday probably only one of my main premium characters currently will reap the reward of my very hard earned work. The others wont. I wont go into a frenzy or anything. Just accept it and go ahead with my life.
Click to expand...

If you cannot handle criticism do not post ideas ;)
 

DeletedUser563

Its because I didnt try. Ok in the spirit of christmas. This will be my final posts. My previous post was a bit nuggetist(similar to all the ist's) So I deleted it. Winning at duels is still possible winning all day constantly doubtful. I also wonder if they switched one switch to the left rather than to the right on this server as you can duel a guy and win 1900 vs 450 two hours later you duel him again with the same clothing he all the time offline and he win 1000 to 500.

About you non nugget folk. How would this idea sound without nuggets. So lets increase / decrease our KO protection for free for how long we want. Hurrah jolly good idea old chap or are you of your nugget my man. I have posted here for 477 times. i know how ideas must sound or what requirements they need. If I say with nuggets it wasn't even really thought out by me. I insta -added it to the idea. bOOM 2 seconds whole idea worked out. 10 hours later still arguing with the folks without nuggets. Just like if I read out any idea of yours I can instantly work out amendments and stuff like that. Its because Im the last of the ideas bots.:p
 

DeletedUser

Jakkals said:
are you a little rainbow. stop changing the color of your text please.:mad::mad::mad:S T O P I T!!! Most naysayers arguments goes something like the following analogy"because you can reduce travel time in worlds like arizona and Colorado using nuggets .. all battles will be filled" Which is just not true. Because players will be able to increase their duel protection only means you will have less time to duel them and that say 5% at most wont be available to be dueled The argument is almost like at time x i will be able to duel player y at location z. The only things that changes is that you will now duel player n. But since you can never predict that at time x you will duel player y at location z. It is not the end of dueling. Dueling will increase by allowing duelers to lower their ko protection time. All that your eliminating is mostly unwilling participants. And stop using terms like nerfing. Lowering, reducing is the proper English.
Click to expand...

Ok, so you go from calling me a queer to saying I use bad English. Based upon your writing, I doubt that English is your first language. So please, do not criticize my English, when your English is not perfect either. And that last sentence you put had awful grammar.

My point was that hp tanks would use this so that they would not have their hp ran down before a fort battle. Lowering, or "reducing" the hp tanks' health prior to a fort battle is a tactic that is used by smart players. So it would take away another aspect of dueling being useful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser563

No I said stop writing in multiple colors. most of us have sensitive eyes and wont be able to follow you if you write this way. I selected over all of your text to drown out the color. Use proper English rainbow != queer. It refers to the multiple colors of your text which looked like a little rainbow. If you are using it as an expression for a :censored: . STOP IT!!
Only an inexperienced player will think that attacking an hp tank will be even possible or a plausible long term strategy. Perhaps all of your hp tanks is inexperienced as well. Is nerfing a official word in the English language. I know woot woot was last year accepted. But anyway the word irritate me. I dont see that many hp tanks with lower hp at fort battles. So your efforts is minimal so eleminating it will change a non event in the game. Most of the naysayers anyway chose to overemphasize and blow up some perceived elements. Like the end of dueling etc.. For the record you all don't know what your talking about. I'm tired of explaining this to you. You will never have my and some others knowledge about what adding such an element to the game will accomplish and what effect it will have.

Still the only way I use rainbow:A rainbow is an optical and meteorological phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines on to droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere. It takes the form of a multicoloured arc. Your text took the form of a "multicoloured arc". Get it! The fact is that you missed this obvious analogy. I also checked under disambiguation and found not even a remote use of this word in your context. For the record I dont care in what manner or form you use the english language.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Jakkals said:
No I said stop writing in multiple colors. most of us have sensitive eyes and wont be able to follow you if you write this way. I selected over all of your text to drown out the color. Use proper English rainbow != queer. It refers to the multiple colors of your text which looked like a little rainbow. If you are using it as an expression for a :censored: . STOP IT!!
Only an inexperienced player will think that attacking an hp tank will be even possible or a plausible long term strategy. Perhaps all of your hp tanks is inexperienced as well. Is nerfing a official word in the English language. I know woot woot was last year accepted. But anyway the word irritate me. I dont see that many hp tanks with lower hp at fort battles. So your efforts is minimal so eleminating it will change a non event in the game. Most of the naysayers anyway chose to overemphasize and blow up some perceived elements. Like the end of dueling etc.. For the record you all don't know what your talking about. I'm tired of explaining this to you. You will never have my and some others knowledge about what adding such an element to the game will accomplish and what effect it will have.

Still the only way I use rainbow:A rainbow is an optical and meteorological phenomenon that causes a spectrum of light to appear in the sky when the Sun shines on to droplets of moisture in the Earth's atmosphere. It takes the form of a multicoloured arc. The fact is that you missed this obvious analogy.
Click to expand...

Since I have thought more about your idea, I think that it is not as bad as I thought it was. I partly was confusing your thread with John Cena's. I would like to make the suggestion, that the nuggets needed to do what you are talking about goes up like skill point respeccing.
 

DeletedUser22575

I am not going to bother arguing the "slippery slope fallacies" here. I will make this simple. IMO this idea is garbage.
 

DeletedUser563

tjtuttle so my idea is garbage. I value you for your contribution. Does that mean your vote is a NO? meet me on chatango and i will give you my unedited reply sometime.
 

DeletedUser22575

Jakkals said:
tjtuttle so my idea is garbage. I value you for your contribution. Does that mean your vote is a NO? meet me on chatango and i will give you my unedited reply sometime.
Click to expand...

Let me help you out here. No to this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top