DeletedUser
Do you think you can just have a "run in" with a spectre? Leave. Now.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Do you think you can just have a "run in" with a spectre? Leave. Now.
DeletedUser
I was just wondering. We spend all this time dissecting every minor potential issue that might conflict against our quality of amusement, or the sense of realism. How often do the developers design these new features around the advice of players? Are they really going to incorporate a sheriff's office with a jail cell? Or the means and mechanisms to bust a prisoner from that cell? Or a town watch occupation?
I would say that the time needed to implement all the necessary features to make the process of robbery possible would be so great, so complicated, that it would be prone to many failures or open to exploitation.
That is one flaw of any bare complex entity - that the failure of one part could lead to the collapse of the entire device. Therefore it is best to keep things simple, as the fort battles. Avoid unnecessary additions that could leave the addition demanding more. More features and more features to maintain its operation until this becomes a game within a game. If it is required that this feature be so complicated, then I consider it most wise to leave the feature out entirely.
I would say that the time needed to implement all the necessary features to make the process of robbery possible would be so great, so complicated, that it would be prone to many failures or open to exploitation.
That is one flaw of any bare complex entity - that the failure of one part could lead to the collapse of the entire device. Therefore it is best to keep things simple, as the fort battles. Avoid unnecessary additions that could leave the addition demanding more. More features and more features to maintain its operation until this becomes a game within a game. If it is required that this feature be so complicated, then I consider it most wise to leave the feature out entirely.
DeletedUser
Guys the guy above me is correct and that has to do with almost every thread lol.
Deleted User - 1278415
I was just wondering. We spend all this time dissecting every minor potential issue that might conflict against our quality of amusement, or the sense of realism. How often do the developers design these new features around the advice of players? Are they really going to incorporate a sheriff's office with a jail cell? Or the means and mechanisms to bust a prisoner from that cell? Or a town watch occupation?
.
Funny you should ask that if you ever read through the Beta World forums you might see they are discussing that subject for a possible future update coming to a browser near you.
And Ideas are now being submitted to the Developers... where as they were in limbo for the past few months since Gem left... so it is good that we are discussing ideas.
DeletedUser
Wow! Well that's great! That would be a great addition in and of itself, and it would make this idea much more feasible.
DeletedUser
plus 1% to 50% to the town member's bank account.
If i understand this correct this kills the idea for me. If you put money in the bank it should be safe no matter what happens. Could very easily be taken advantage of with towns teaming up and robbing one towns bank day after day after day. I like the idea as a whole but i can not support it while money that you have saved for can be taken from you with not alot you can do about it. Say you are saving to respec and have like 100k and your town gets robber. Potentially you could lose 50k, which is usually a few weeks work. Town treasury would be fun but when your taking weeks of work away from someone it no longer fun. Plus with this one bank robbery could easily get into the tens or even hundreds of thousands.
DeletedUser
Ice Hawk that's why you won't put the money in the bank but will buy and keep items in your inventory.
And that's where this whole thing fails. We'd get an useless addition to the game since you can't rob anyone's inventory by any means.
But 36 "pro" votes against only 19 "contra"... This will go to devs' desk. Let's see will they accept this killer of the "bank the money from anywhere" nugget feature.
And that's where this whole thing fails. We'd get an useless addition to the game since you can't rob anyone's inventory by any means.
But 36 "pro" votes against only 19 "contra"... This will go to devs' desk. Let's see will they accept this killer of the "bank the money from anywhere" nugget feature.
DeletedUser
I seriously doubt the developers will allow this feature to be implemented with the ability to steal money from a player that has banked, add to that that is possibly a substantial sum. It would cause people to quit having their savings repeatedly taken away from them. It dosent matter if everyone voted yes i am willing to bet alot that if this was implemented it would not allow peoples bank accounts to be robbed.
Also i voted needs more work, although it really doesn't. Counting the it needs more work votes its 28 against and 37 for. A difference of 9 which all in all is not that impressive. I am confident that without being able to rob from peoples bank accounts the vote would be drastically different with only a few no and almost all supporting it.
Also i voted needs more work, although it really doesn't. Counting the it needs more work votes its 28 against and 37 for. A difference of 9 which all in all is not that impressive. I am confident that without being able to rob from peoples bank accounts the vote would be drastically different with only a few no and almost all supporting it.
Last edited by a moderator:
DeletedUser
If you aren't stealing from a player then the who the hell are you stealing the money from? The town treasury is a collection of the entire town's donations, its comparable to stealing from everyone at a single time. To create an artificial bank from which to steal would remove the entire criminality affect of the enterprise.
The fact that so many people support this idea, implies that they support reality over peace of mind. They understand that life in the west consists of ups and downs; depending entirely on the skills one possessed, one could take advantage of various enterprises for personal gain. Theft is one of those enterprises. Why do you not complain of fort battles? Is that not an elaborate act of theft, to steal a fort of another town? To duel a player does that not inflict harm and also lead to the theft of a portion of the player's funds? Just as one can take measures to reduce the harm inflicted from dueling, one will be able to take measures to remove the harm inflicted by theft, or even to make it practically impossible.
What you are criticizing here is not a flaw in the idea itself, but a personal preference. You do not want to lose your money, you do not even want the possibility to exist, despite reality and history. And you find it perplexing that the majority does not think as you do. Nonetheless, the majority would love to take your money and does not care if you are struck with grief in the process.
The fact that so many people support this idea, implies that they support reality over peace of mind. They understand that life in the west consists of ups and downs; depending entirely on the skills one possessed, one could take advantage of various enterprises for personal gain. Theft is one of those enterprises. Why do you not complain of fort battles? Is that not an elaborate act of theft, to steal a fort of another town? To duel a player does that not inflict harm and also lead to the theft of a portion of the player's funds? Just as one can take measures to reduce the harm inflicted from dueling, one will be able to take measures to remove the harm inflicted by theft, or even to make it practically impossible.
What you are criticizing here is not a flaw in the idea itself, but a personal preference. You do not want to lose your money, you do not even want the possibility to exist, despite reality and history. And you find it perplexing that the majority does not think as you do. Nonetheless, the majority would love to take your money and does not care if you are struck with grief in the process.
DeletedUser21320
You do not want to lose your money, you do not even want the possibility to exist, despite reality and history. And you find it perplexing that the majority does not think as you do. Nonetheless, the majority would love to take your money and does not care if you are struck with grief in the process.
If you want reality, then if you are caught robbing a bank, or another player, you, and everyone on your IP, should be permanently banned from the game. You think everyone in Boot Hill died of natural causes? And the threat of real consequences is what prevented everyone from picking on the weaker folks. That's called "civilization".
Because the robbers in the game are specced for dueling, there usually isn't much the victims can do. There are no consequences. Compare that to real life, where I could take a gun and shoot you in the back, or when you are sleeping in town (even without any "skills" on my part) and my problem is solved - permanently. I only have to hit you once, and I can scarcely miss from a foot away if you are asleep.
Sure, it's fun to steal and rob when the worst that can happen is that you get KOed and can't duel for 48 hours. But if you are going to ruin the game for others, you need a few more consequences for you.
Think about this: what if all the victims quit the game? Who would you rob? Only other bandits. And in the newer worlds, where would you spend the money you did steal, if no one built buildings?
DeletedUser
Right! But to compare the loss of 6 hours worth of work to indefinite removal from the game, that's an immense exaggeration. There are numerous features in this game that inflict misery upon the player: if you're a worker and you get dueled, losing a fort, your town being victim to incessant attacks, being knocked out while working (does that happen?). Its these ups and downs that make the game interesting. If there is no risk involved then there's no sense of fulfillment in the game. You need some sort of a balance; you don't deny a feature entirely because you don't like it.
I believe the consequence that I had provided makes the most sense: a week imprisonment (can't work or anything), 2 days required, after that your town mates can bust you out.
I believe the consequence that I had provided makes the most sense: a week imprisonment (can't work or anything), 2 days required, after that your town mates can bust you out.
DeletedUser21320
I believe the consequence that I had provided makes the most sense: a week imprisonment (can't work or anything), 2 days required, after that your town mates can bust you out.
Of course *you* think that is sufficient punishment. I think removal from the game is a realistic way of simulating being shot dead for thievery. Why do you "deny a feature entirely because you don't like it." to quote someone else?
DeletedUser
Oh I like this! See, now we're making some progress. Reasoning in action.
I agree that it would be realistic. But imprisonment would also be realistic, whilst not removing an individual from the game. I recongize that this is, first and foremost, a game and the priority is amusement, thus we don't want to remove anyone from the game-besides, they can't buy nuggets if they aren't playing. It is for this very reason that I want this feature to be implemented-because it would be fun! Just as dueling is fun for the dueler and miserable for the loser. Just as fort fighting is fun for the winners and miserable for the losers!
As I had stated previously: The consequence that you have provided, indefinite removal from the game, is far too extreme considering that the most an individual can acquire from the robbery is a couple thousand bucks.
On another note: I am not denying the feature because I do not like it. What I like or do not like is irrelevant. We are here to reason about this idea and by doing so we shall improve it to the greatest extent of our abilities, and, if deemed necessary, we shall discard it entirely. I have deemed this consequence of yours faulty for it is an extreme and unorthodox form of punishment applied in a medium whose primary purpose is amusement.
By being in prison for two days without the ability to work, one will practically lose the same amount of money that one could have acquired by robbing the town or working for those two days. And if no one removes the prisoner from the confines of the cell, then one will lose a very significant amount of money over the span of the week.
I agree that it would be realistic. But imprisonment would also be realistic, whilst not removing an individual from the game. I recongize that this is, first and foremost, a game and the priority is amusement, thus we don't want to remove anyone from the game-besides, they can't buy nuggets if they aren't playing. It is for this very reason that I want this feature to be implemented-because it would be fun! Just as dueling is fun for the dueler and miserable for the loser. Just as fort fighting is fun for the winners and miserable for the losers!
As I had stated previously: The consequence that you have provided, indefinite removal from the game, is far too extreme considering that the most an individual can acquire from the robbery is a couple thousand bucks.
On another note: I am not denying the feature because I do not like it. What I like or do not like is irrelevant. We are here to reason about this idea and by doing so we shall improve it to the greatest extent of our abilities, and, if deemed necessary, we shall discard it entirely. I have deemed this consequence of yours faulty for it is an extreme and unorthodox form of punishment applied in a medium whose primary purpose is amusement.
By being in prison for two days without the ability to work, one will practically lose the same amount of money that one could have acquired by robbing the town or working for those two days. And if no one removes the prisoner from the confines of the cell, then one will lose a very significant amount of money over the span of the week.
DeletedUser21320
Just as fort fighting is fun for the winners and miserable for the losers!
As I had stated previously: The consequence that you have provided, indefinite removal from the game, is far too extreme considering that the most an individual can acquire from the robbery is a couple thousand bucks.
But both people choose to be in the fort battle. Not the same thing at all. Don't change the argument.
If I'm doing a job, and you cost me the Ring or Treasure that I might have earned, and cause me to lose all the money and XP I should have gained, either of which might mean leveling up for me, I don't think a couple days of your time is a fit punishment. In real life, you wouldn't make it to your second day of confinement. Trust me on that.
If I have saved for several weeks to get the $20,000 I need to buy the items for a job, and you take some of it, so that I can't buy the stuff, and lose the chance to do a timed quest, the same thought goes.
There is more than one way to play this game. People who want to role-play and quest can choose to not join a town, and not get involved with "dueling". Any suggestion that takes that game possibility away from players is a bad idea.
DeletedUser
Actually that example is very relevant. Because people do not choose to get their forts attacked. And I don't think anyone chooses to get dueled, either. I don't know how you reached the conclusion that both sides are looking forward to participating in fort battles.
See now the argument you are providing is whether or not its morally sound to steal. That's entirely beside the point. Entire towns spend thousands of bucks and numerous resources building up their forts only to get it stolen.
"...cost me the Ring or Treasure that I might have earned, and cause me to lose all the money and XP I should have gained, either of which might mean leveling up for me, I don't think a couple days of your time is a fit punishment."
Well sure it is! You aren't going to lose all of your money and I don't know how you reached the conclusion that you will lose experience. You aren't being knocked out. I recall there being a cap on the amount of money you can steal. You can make that money back in a short period of time. In fact dueling would be much more harmful to you then being robbed. Because the thief is going to steal a little bit from every person in the town...versus taking a very large portion of a single player, and also facing the risk of losing all your energy and money if you're knocked out.
"In real life, you wouldn't make it to your second day of confinement." I'm not sure you mean by this. If you're saying they'd hang you for stealing a century and a half ago, then perhaps you're right. But I think we sort of settled the issue that this is not going to be even remotely realistic- i realize that realism is not a priority in this game from another thread.
The example you have provided is insignificant and irrelevant for it has an extremely small probability and the same argument could be provided against dueling for dueling can knock someone out and they would be unable to complete a timed quest or accumulate funds to purchase items.
See now the argument you are providing is whether or not its morally sound to steal. That's entirely beside the point. Entire towns spend thousands of bucks and numerous resources building up their forts only to get it stolen.
"...cost me the Ring or Treasure that I might have earned, and cause me to lose all the money and XP I should have gained, either of which might mean leveling up for me, I don't think a couple days of your time is a fit punishment."
Well sure it is! You aren't going to lose all of your money and I don't know how you reached the conclusion that you will lose experience. You aren't being knocked out. I recall there being a cap on the amount of money you can steal. You can make that money back in a short period of time. In fact dueling would be much more harmful to you then being robbed. Because the thief is going to steal a little bit from every person in the town...versus taking a very large portion of a single player, and also facing the risk of losing all your energy and money if you're knocked out.
"In real life, you wouldn't make it to your second day of confinement." I'm not sure you mean by this. If you're saying they'd hang you for stealing a century and a half ago, then perhaps you're right. But I think we sort of settled the issue that this is not going to be even remotely realistic- i realize that realism is not a priority in this game from another thread.
The example you have provided is insignificant and irrelevant for it has an extremely small probability and the same argument could be provided against dueling for dueling can knock someone out and they would be unable to complete a timed quest or accumulate funds to purchase items.
DeletedUser
I never said its a bad idea all I said was that one part of the idea was bad. However the one part that is bad outweighs the good. With dueling there are safeguards. There is a level limit, the fact you can bank money, the 48 hour period were you cant be dueled, and you can't be dueled while sleeping. With robbing the banks these safeguards no longer apply. Nothing is safe and you can lose quite a lot in the blink of an eye. Lets get an example a new player come in the game and starts saving money for an item. Lets say they get to 10 thousand saved their banks get robbed and they lose half the money. I would exit the page and never come back to the game, chances are so would quite a few new people.
In dueleing the risk is close to equal to the reward. You can be koed, you lose hp and and you can lose money that you have on you. On average you gain between 0-200$ per duel. There are cases were you can make a couple thousand but there are ways for the person you are dueling to prevent this.
With robbing from players bank the risk is no were near the reward. You can take weeks even months of works in a few minutes. While if you fail you get koed, or a few days in jail. The earning potential is not equal to the risk. Quite simply this feature would be fun but with being able to steal up to 50% of a persons money it would ruin the game for quite alot of people.
In dueleing the risk is close to equal to the reward. You can be koed, you lose hp and and you can lose money that you have on you. On average you gain between 0-200$ per duel. There are cases were you can make a couple thousand but there are ways for the person you are dueling to prevent this.
With robbing from players bank the risk is no were near the reward. You can take weeks even months of works in a few minutes. While if you fail you get koed, or a few days in jail. The earning potential is not equal to the risk. Quite simply this feature would be fun but with being able to steal up to 50% of a persons money it would ruin the game for quite alot of people.
DeletedUser
Safeguards could very well apply.
Perhaps we could implement a 48 hour no robbery bit on the town. I just realized that realism is not a priority, so I don't see why we couldn't.
"You can take weeks even months of works in a few minutes."
How long does it take you to make a couple thousand? The average profit i get from clearing forest is 500, a little bit more for silver mining. So if I have 100% motivation initially, I could make well over 1800 in 8 hrs. I have no idea how you reached the conclusion that we'd be destroying weeks or months worth of work for a single person. We're only taking money. And its a little bit from every person.
The more time you stay in the bank, the more you can take, but the greater the probability becomes that you'll get caught.
I think its the exact frankly regarding the risk and reward. Two days or more without working is a serious punishment for me, considering how much money i could make.
The probability of getting away with robbing 50% of everyone's money is practically impossible, less than 1%. >>>You need to take into consideration that the thieves are aware of this probability.<<<
That immensely low probability would discourage practically every thief, and those who go for it regardless will lose.
Furthermore, we'd incorporate measures to prevent people from being robbed, its this entire cops/robbers bit that makes it so interesting. Town watches, sheriffs, outposts, etc.
Perhaps we could implement a 48 hour no robbery bit on the town. I just realized that realism is not a priority, so I don't see why we couldn't.
"You can take weeks even months of works in a few minutes."
How long does it take you to make a couple thousand? The average profit i get from clearing forest is 500, a little bit more for silver mining. So if I have 100% motivation initially, I could make well over 1800 in 8 hrs. I have no idea how you reached the conclusion that we'd be destroying weeks or months worth of work for a single person. We're only taking money. And its a little bit from every person.
The more time you stay in the bank, the more you can take, but the greater the probability becomes that you'll get caught.
I think its the exact frankly regarding the risk and reward. Two days or more without working is a serious punishment for me, considering how much money i could make.
The probability of getting away with robbing 50% of everyone's money is practically impossible, less than 1%. >>>You need to take into consideration that the thieves are aware of this probability.<<<
That immensely low probability would discourage practically every thief, and those who go for it regardless will lose.
Furthermore, we'd incorporate measures to prevent people from being robbed, its this entire cops/robbers bit that makes it so interesting. Town watches, sheriffs, outposts, etc.
DeletedUser
There could be some sort of ko punishment or you can't rob or duel for twenty four or forty-eight hours or something like that.
DeletedUser
Love love love this iidea
DeletedUser14882
Could we do it only on some worlds? On one world I'm a dueler, but mostly I'm just an adventurer putzing along at my quests. I don't want the social interaction of defending my bitty town from bank robbers. Being dueled is trauma enough.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Share: