November 27, 2006 at 5:04 pm #5031
We all know that i love truces…
and don’t lie, i’ve see you all truce at least once..
(never seen paris truce, but all others yes…
yes the1, u 2)
anyways, i thought that it would be a good idea to implement
a trucing button with which everyone can officially accept
truces with others and loose money in case u kill the one u truced with,
but gain money if you two (or three ,or more) are the ones who survive longer than the others in a specific round…
not sure if i made myself clear but you can probably get something out of what’s above…
the betting mod
is also something that could be cool to have in version 42…
plz add ur comments and suggestions…
if an admin likes the ideas above plz tell the developers … bye bye
PicciNovember 27, 2006 at 6:52 pm #36193
i voted for no
i think its a nice new idea but i beleive that it would open up a can of worms
imagine two friend or three or more as your suggesting come on at the same time they always truce, this will of course make there odds a lot better at killing everybody and personaly it will not be fair 1 truce maybe but 2, 3 ,4 that just making the game not fun anymore.
also when those 2,3,4 ppl are left they have to kill each other so then they will lose money and if they dont want to lose money then they will keeping skipping goes until the end of the round and this again would be real annoying
i realy dont think this will workNovember 27, 2006 at 7:39 pm #36194
I think it’s a nice idea. Imagine a little message popping up:
“Player93” would like to call a truce. Do you accept?
I thought maybe even having the facility to buy/sell with the people you’re truced with. Or if that’s too complicated, maybe just a little flag that shows two players are truced and a small health increase each. (‘Course there’d also have to be some negative consequences to balance it out : ) (like, perhaps if your partner’s killed, you also loose a kill point.)
Overall though, I’m afraid I have to agree with clown boy. Huge can of worms. A feature like that could change the game completely. So for the question: Should it be implemented? I had to vote no. Then I thought about it some more and decided I probably shouldn’t have voted at all. So consider my No vote retracted : ). I abstain.November 27, 2006 at 7:55 pm #36195
…1 truce maybe but 2, 3 ,4 that just making the game not fun anymore.
how about making it so u can only truce within a certain radius?November 27, 2006 at 8:15 pm #36196
this idea was first proposed here
also, we arn’t ready for a poll because the idea needs a lot of work.
an “official” truce would need to be obvious to all players. It might help reduce how annoying it is when players truce by introducing a penalty for killing your ally, however that will lead to players still doing verbal truces. limiting the number of truces allowed does the same thing.
a truce interface will create a headache.November 28, 2006 at 11:29 am #36197
i meant it that if only trucers are left they are “allowed” to kill each other without the need of skipping to avoid losing money
anyways it seems like the trucing interface wouldn’t be such a great idea.. what do u think about what was said above on the trucing only allowed in a certain radius ?
also, truces could appear in a corner and shown to everybody as soon as they are confirmed …
anyways, i saw the other topic about it and it seems to be on the same exact thing, so i’ll abandon it and …
what does everyone think about the Betting Mod ? where a player can bet his/her money when dead at the end of a round ?
btw, money betting should be limited to 1$ less of who is winning the round, so that people would not be able to win only by betting… <– not so clear eh'…
(this betting thing has come up widely during the last games so if there is no topic about it i’ll turn this one into it…plz tell me if this has already been discussed somewhere else in the forum, thx)
so, betting mod ?….
PicciNovember 28, 2006 at 1:47 pm #36198
as i said before in the game, i don’t like this idea; as laptop observed here; kids plays this game; adding a betting feature would make it even suitable only for a mature audience IMHONovember 29, 2006 at 9:22 am #36199
can’t resist a comment here. i’m not convinced betting’s a good idea, but…
I don’t think the mature audience thing needs to be an issue (all sounds very grown up). Any features that fall into a grey area in that respect, should be made so they can be switched off. They needn’t be turned on in the main servers.
The children thing: My take is, a game where you liquefy your opponents with acid isn’t for children anyway. (It’s not the gore (scorched doesn’t have any), it’s the concept). And I just can’t resist contradicting young damage : )November 29, 2006 at 11:52 pm #36200
i agree with bd, kids can be influence to easily by something like this, and i no a lot of players that already have kids that are watching there dads play and even playing themselves.
we would be setting a bad exampleNovember 30, 2006 at 1:16 am #36201
to those that think betting is such a bad example, wtf is a mortgage, or insurance, or hell mortgage insurance? (seriously wtf is mortgage insurance 😆 ) Its a freekin bet!
Teach your kids to handle their real money and let them bet the BEJEEZUS out of their scorched money. 😀November 30, 2006 at 10:35 am #36202
Regarding the possibly corrupting influence on kids — this is a game with way less moral or ethical issues than dozens of other games.
Concern about corrupting children because of possible betting aspects? Ridiculous. All games — including classic family & children board games like Monopoly, Life, Yahtzee, etc. — are based on balance of gameplay — balancing risk versus reward. Player A performs action X with risk R to hopefully gain positive value V without incurring negative loss L.
But we’re worried that making side bets & truces in a fictitiously violent, artillery game will somehow be the factor that corrupts children?!
Children are much more aware of what is play & what is real & the lessons that are common between the two. Don’t you all remember learning these lessons through games when you were kids?November 30, 2006 at 4:35 pm #36203
someone other than me voted yes….
so it’s apparently something like 2-6 ?…
oh well, it could’ve been worst…
maybe we can try a betting mod on a specific ” Bet & Truce @ Picci’s Server” and see how it goes…
as soon ad i get some time off from this stupid IB high school (probably in june :P) i’ll give it a try…
and great ideas,
thxNovember 30, 2006 at 4:38 pm #36204
Well i dont think the moral thingy is a serious issue, betting with pretend money is totally different to real money, but you are right about how easily childern are influenced (i mean, when James my 5yr old is watching, im not allowed to kill anyone with the Sonic the Hedgehog tank becaues he loves him so much!), but more practically how would it be implimented? At the moment a game with 12 players is often very slow due to buying timeouts, lagging players the usuall ‘Player9((pending)Spectator)’ lagging the game even more so now we need an extra 30 secs for betting? I dont think so. Scorced can be a complicated game as it is, betting may just make the whole thing messy!
I do like the official truce idea but can also see the flaws!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.