Thoughts on further PvP improvements.

[Corrupt Shadow]

Interesting. Why lambda if I might ask?

[Ryme]

see the button in the armory for the joke about the lettering. Lamda for victory!

[zillow]

Possibly a Rare item that can be used in the pvp. Or would that make those lucky enough to get one too powerful?

[MagiNinjA]

A rare would be nice, actually. Rares aren't too bad to get, so I'd say it's fair game.

[Corrupt Shadow]

Maybe an option to opt out of PvP?

I only say so because since I'm out of adventures today, I'm getting my ass handed to me. My PvP rank is already at 68!!!

[Corrupt Shadow]

I got my ass reamed, and now I can't beat ANYone at all. This sucks.

[Ryme]

ah, give it a little time. Other than the turns you spend, it doesn't affect anything. Your rank doesn't affect your abilities, so having been knocked down in rank isn't hurting your chances to win. If anything, it gives you an edge due to stuff I'm not gonna explain yet.

If it's really broken I'll fix things, but 4 hours later is too soon to make that call.

[MagiNinjA]

Pffft. Man up. This is PvP. You're fighting people, not AI. They think like you and react to your actions. This isn't just an adventure zone. It's a cyber war!!11111

Really though. Man up. No offense, but it's PvP. Srs biz.

[Olaf]

Suggestion: A page at the arena to tell you how you've done instead of message spam.

[Strlikecrazy]

I agree with Olaf. But its quite fun, i like the shop concept.

As regards the items, i think they are great - vast array of styles. But the weapons bore me a little.

But early days and its a great start

[malk-a-mite]

Another vote for some other way of announcing the wins/loses when you aren't the attacker.

The message folder spam is a bit much.

[bazfum]

I'm a little confused about the PvP-specific equipment. The text of the locker room seems to indicate that you have to equip what you want to fight in when you are attacking. The PvP manual page seems to indicate that the locker room equipment is use for both attacking and when attacked. Could this be cleared up? Thanks.

[MagiNinjA]

It's both. Just think that the locker room has 3 components, your attack procedure, defense procedure and the equipment you use.

There is the equipment you wear, which is applied to both offense and defense. There are also percentages you can set in your locker page, which is meant by attack and defense.

Does that make more sense?

[Olaf]

Currently, equipment in the locker is used for all PvP fights. It was previously how you're saying, and just hasn't been changed in the text.

[Ryme]

Sorry, the manual is right, the page is wrong. I had to change strategies midstream and forgot about the text.

@CTID: I think given a little time knowing what equipment your opponent is wearing would give you an instant win, so having that stuff listed is too much of an advantage. You can somewhat extrapolate based on the messages and displayed stats, so if you lose the first time you'll have a better attack the second time.

I also realized that I'm not quite calculating rank gain/loss right, and I'll be fixing that shortly. It's giving too much credit to high-ranked defenders, and too little credit to low-ranked defenders.

I've also had at least a few comments that maybe defenders shouldn't get lamda tokens, to prevent the temptation to multi abuse or otherwise cheat. Obviously I'd crack down on multi abuse anyway, but it may be a valid point. You can gain many times the number of tokens as the defender than you can earn as an attacker. If anyone has strong feelings either way, let me know. Otherwise I may change that. Or at least greatly reduce the odds of winning one (to 1:10, say, instead of 1:1).

[MagiNinjA]

But doing that would demote defending as a plausible strategy.

Also...the big cool thing about KoL PvP was that you basically had no idea what buffs your opponents had, even though you could discern some of their strategy because of their equipment. I really liked that aspect. It makes you think before you attack.

[Ryme]

Also, I've had a ton of people point out that this is open to multi abuse, because you could have your multi lose to you repeatedly to give you lamda tokens. To this I say, yeah, but that's cheating and punishable with getting your butt kicked out of the game just as much as if your multi sent you chips.

Please, please don't multi abuse, people. I want you to have fun. I don't want to spend hours scolding people and telling them they're not allowed to play anymore because they're dirty, rotten cheaters. Nobody's happy with that.

[neocamp22]

A computer program that affects PvP? Oh, and a leaderboard should be put up at some point.

[Ryme]

Might be a useful addition at some point. Except that since it pulls items from your inventory, then you'd need two of everything--or be willing not to duplicate items in the outfits--to set up what you wanted.

Also, I'd still be working on it instead of letting you folks beat each other up. Some heroes you are. Heh.

[TheK3vin]

How about an item that shortens the duration of PvP fights, like a TH version of Hatorade?

[Hannahmaus]

Hatorade just gives you an extra fight at the cost of 1 spleen. Is there something that shortens fight duration? And how would that work, or help?

[MagiNinjA]

It would have to be a -time item, since that's what determines fights. But K3v just means something that will give you more fights. Maybe a PvP equipment type. Who knows!

[TheK3vin]

Yeah, that's exactly what I was thinking. Caffeine that gives you an effect which shortens PvP fight duration.

[MagiNinjA]

That'd be neat.

Also, for the leaderboard thing...Calvinball. Plz. Such. Win.

[Cristiona]

Hatorade just gives you an extra fight at the cost of 1 spleen. Is there something that shortens fight duration? And how would that work, or help?

FWIW, KoL PvP used to cost adventures too, so I suppose a -time item would be like old skool Hatorade.


Also, "FWIW, KoL PvP" sounds like a code.

[Ryme]

After some thought I've adjusted the system so that defenders have 50% of the normal chance to get a lamda token if they win. Mostly this is because you can be attacked many times more often than you can attack, but also in part because I think you really should have to attack some of the time to make good progress in PvP.

I've also added a cap of 10 attacks (win or loss combined) from one person to another in one day.

[Ryme]

I've adjusted the arena's list of random players to show people close to you in rank (within 25% either way, and for top ranked players it just shows the top 10 so you can target them).

I know there were requests for searching by rank. I think the addition below would give me all I'd personally want, but if this doesn't cover it, what would people like to see in terms of a rank-based search?

[Ryme]

Also added some protection to limit the extent that high ranked players can attack low-ranked ones. Right now it's still pretty broad, because I don't know if or where ranks will settle down. I'd rather be too open than too restrictive at this point.

Rank of 500 or less can't attack anyone with a rank less than 1/2 of their own.

Rank of 501+ can't attack anyone under rank 300.

Low ranks can always attack people of higher rank. The rules are there to prevent people "being mean" rather than "being stupid."

[neocamp22]

What do I want to see for searching?

I want to be able to put in a rank and see all players above that rank, going from lowest to highest. I also want to be able to restrict searching to those who I can still attack that day.

Especially now that I don't have that random list to refresh, and I need to find more marks than just the ten that show up :/

[Ryme]

Er, will the top 25 help tide you over instead of the top 10?

[Satan]

Sorry to bother, but instead of Top X, why not just select all above 300 with a limit of like 50?

[neocamp22]

Ryme, if you skim this post, or skip it entirely, you will be dismembered. With a hatchet. A dull hatchet.


Tournaments:

Every Frayday, tournament applications are open.

While in a tournament, you cannot attack in pvp, or be attacked in pvp, other than within a match...

There would be three options.

Code: Select all

Choose your wager:
1k
5k
25k

That many chips would then be deducted from the player.

Then, all the 1k people would be listed by rank, and be divided into groups of 16 (Size could be increased to 32 or 64 with more people playing, later on), so that tournaments are between similarly ranked people. The same process would occur for the 5k bracket and the 25k bracket.

Matches would be distributed randomly.

Each tier takes one day. Each person can initiate one fight against their opponent within that day. Here's how to determine the winner.

Code: Select all

Player A Wins/Player B Loses - Win to Player A
Player A Wins/Player B Ties - Win to Player A
Player A Ties/Player B Loses - Win to Player A

Player A Ties/Player B Wins - Win to Player B
Player A Loses/Player B Wins - Win to Player B
Player A Loses/Player B Ties - Win to Player B

Ah, but what if both players get the same result? In that case, there is an simulated fight between the two players, using each player's percentages to simulate the fight. Ties would be redone until a winner is found.

What if one or both players don't make an attack? If only one player (call him player B) does not attack, then a fight is simulated between the two players, as if B had initiated the fight, and the final winner is calculated as above, using the result of the simulated fight as B's outcome. If neither players attack, then a single simulated fight determines the outcome.

Winners of each tier would progress to the next tier, until a single winner is found. That winner would receive the entire pot for the tournament. For example, if he was in a 5k tournament, with 16 people, he would get 5k*16=80k, minus a fee for the house, say, 10%. So, he would get 72k.

For 16 player tournaments, with a 10% fee, here is what the pots would be:

Code: Select all

1k - 14.4k
5k - 72k
25k - 360k

Problem: What do you do if you don't have a multiple of 16 people in a bracket?
Good, but complicated fix: Grab a couple random pvpers with similar ranks to that specific tournament that is not full, and automate some computer players, using those stats,items,percentages. Note that win/losses against a computer player would be determined solely through the normal players attack, there would be no need for a fight from either side.
Easy fix: Refund ten percent of the excess players' money and register them for the next tournament automatically. Or give them all their money back and take off 10% of the cost when they next register.

[Satan]

This tournament thing sounds like a good idea to me. Might give an extra incentive for pvp, too.

[neocamp22]

I've never heard of this neo guy before, and he sounds pretty immature, but this idea of his is awesome.