Esano2011-07-26 05:40:39
Regarding the stuff about losing honour if you lose an election - if this is introduced, you should be able to resign during elections (you can't currently) so if you go AWOL and get challenged in that time you can step down and not lose honour.
Elostian2011-07-26 08:10:43
QUOTE (Arel @ Jul 26 2011, 05:25 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
you can choose your publisher IRL.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Arel2011-07-26 15:09:50
QUOTE (Elostian @ Jul 26 2011, 01:10 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Maybe I should change that to "You can publish on your own via an eReader."
Aramel2011-07-26 23:18:16
QUOTE
o The position of Most Honourable Family will now be retained by the
current winner in the case of ties.
current winner in the case of ties.
Nice! What does this mean in the event of a three-way (or more) tie, though?
I.E. House A has 200k and is MHF. Houses B and C also have 200k but are not MHF.
Say House A manages to lose some honour. Now you have to choose between House B and C. Let's say B gets it.
Now, A gets back their 200k honour. So now it's B at the top, with C and A beneath.
Now suppose B loses honour, for whatever reason. Does A get it, or does C? Because if A gets it, then essentially House C is screwed, since we're back to where we started, and as long as there are two houses before it, with the position of MHF alternating between the two, C will NEVER get MHF. I dearly hope that this will not be the case, but would welcome clarifications.
Ixion2011-07-27 01:18:26
Answer is D Aramel- it's nonsense to have a cap and/or no sort of reset.
Eventru2011-07-27 02:41:38
Resets are silly. Why do families suddenly go from 'respected and renowned' to 'who the hell are you guys?'.
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
Ixion2011-07-27 02:47:12
QUOTE (Eventru @ Jul 26 2011, 10:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Resets are silly. Why do families suddenly go from 'respected and renowned' to 'who the hell are you guys?'.
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
Caps also screw over the highest honor family, aka Kalas, because we'd still be 20-30k ahead of everyone else still if there were no caps. Instead it's now a game of who can prevent a single decay or loss to stay MHF, which is silly and -massively- unfair to non-blood houses.
Xenthos2011-07-27 02:49:09
QUOTE (Ixion @ Jul 26 2011, 10:47 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Caps also screw over the highest honor family, aka Kalas, because we'd still be 20-30k ahead of everyone else still if there were no caps. Instead it's now a game of who can prevent a single decay or loss to stay MHF, which is silly and -massively- unfair to non-blood houses.
Eh, not sure that'd be the case unless you had a few more epics in the wings. Ysav'rai was definitely outpacing Kalas in terms of day-to-day gains, Kalas was staying ahead by cranking out tons of epics (which is completely valid! It definitely worked).
That said, the cap is a bit funky (and / or low).
Ixion2011-07-27 02:56:06
I see how you would see it that way. D'Cente had no output because Munsia was shrubbed (she gets like 3k a day by herself, 33% to us), we have multiple epics waiting, I backed off since I knew we'd hit it first, etc etc.
A debatable point with no right answer, but the simple fact is Ysav'rai and Kalas would still be struggling for it to this very day instead of the aforementioned.
I'd dare to say every player I've talked to thinks the cap is silly.
A debatable point with no right answer, but the simple fact is Ysav'rai and Kalas would still be struggling for it to this very day instead of the aforementioned.
I'd dare to say every player I've talked to thinks the cap is silly.
Diamondais2011-07-27 03:00:32
It's a bit low, but I wouldn't want to go back to the days where one family has such a huge lead on everyone else that there's no hope in ever getting past them.
Shishi2011-07-27 03:14:02
QUOTE (Eventru @ Jul 26 2011, 07:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Resets are silly. Why do families suddenly go from 'respected and renowned' to 'who the hell are you guys?'.
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
Caps are necessary just to prevent one family from going so far ahead it can't be caught up with.
Though I suppose could do something where if you're most honourable family and you have more than x% of the honour of the 2nd place family, your honour gains are drastically reduced (ie /10 or /100).
I am not part in an active family, and probably won't ever participate in this part of the system on my main, but this is really a cool idea. Though I'd take it further.
Remove the cap, and after families get beyond the families behind them a certain point they start gaining less family honour for each action.
For example family 1 gets to 200,000 points, and is 50000 points ahead of every other family, they start gaining slower,
Family 2 starts catching up to family 1 getting to say 180,000 points they start slowing down to almost the same amount as family one
Family 3 is still working really hard and starts catching up as family 1 and family 2 are duking it out, and slowly work their way up into the rankings of slower family honour gain
Then family 4 just got greathouse and starts working it's way up and eventually reaches into the higher numbers to catch the first 3 families
family x is the last greathouse to catch up to every other family and honour gains for all the families start being normal again.
Etc... Of course the numbers I was pulling out are just pulled out of thin air, this also sounds kind of complicated, but it is more fair to new families joining in on the action, to catch up slowly over time.
Silvanus2011-07-27 03:14:11
Whats the point of being anything other then Blood House? The only loss they'd lose is if A. Someone leaves the family or main city its pledged too (Malarious was an extreme example where everything from Magnagora that he cared about was gone or was leaving, and/or this really just encourages alt-abuse in my opinion, but we'll see what happens), or B. They lose a ranked spar, which they should never even take the risk of. While every other type of house has C. Wanton killing incurs a minor loss (where blood gets a boost). In reality, the only option for a Blood house is A.
Also, what's so wrong with having more then one city have a Council member? Just make the code check for instead of 2 or 3 council members to kick out, it requires a certain amount of percentage. Even though right now, it is pretty fast to get to 150k needed to appoint a council member, perhaps increasing the current cap so it takes longer (or decreasing the amount gained from each thing, or incurring greater losses for certain defeats, i.e. being descended, losing an election, other ideas that I can't think of right now).
Just some new ideas and a few tweaks there and the family system would go from good to excellent.
Also, what's so wrong with having more then one city have a Council member? Just make the code check for instead of 2 or 3 council members to kick out, it requires a certain amount of percentage. Even though right now, it is pretty fast to get to 150k needed to appoint a council member, perhaps increasing the current cap so it takes longer (or decreasing the amount gained from each thing, or incurring greater losses for certain defeats, i.e. being descended, losing an election, other ideas that I can't think of right now).
Just some new ideas and a few tweaks there and the family system would go from good to excellent.
Ixion2011-07-27 03:14:51
QUOTE (diamondais @ Jul 26 2011, 11:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It's a bit low, but I wouldn't want to go back to the days where one family has such a huge lead on everyone else that there's no hope in ever getting past them.
That's always going to happen unless an effective scaling is built in, certain people will push the limit and others will be lazy- natural order.
Talan2011-07-27 03:28:27
I still like the idea of tallying the total honour gained annually or biennially and awarding MHF based on that. It would be blind, as well (unlike the chase to the top, we wouldn't be able to track each other's gains), which could make it interesting.
Another alternative is to make it so that houses at the cap have to pass a greater monthly threshold or else risk losing honour. It's 100 now for everyone. Perhaps for houses at the top it could be 500 (as an aside, consider this for blood houses in general, as they lack the neutral killing malus)?
At this point there is no incentive for those houses who have reached the cap to do anything except not lose honour, which as repeatedly noted is easier for some types of house than others.
Another alternative is to make it so that houses at the cap have to pass a greater monthly threshold or else risk losing honour. It's 100 now for everyone. Perhaps for houses at the top it could be 500 (as an aside, consider this for blood houses in general, as they lack the neutral killing malus)?
At this point there is no incentive for those houses who have reached the cap to do anything except not lose honour, which as repeatedly noted is easier for some types of house than others.
Sylphas2011-07-27 04:41:45
It really does need to be set up as a rolling average of honour gain, instead of any hard total, capped or not. We've seen it where one family just runs away with it, and now where there's a cap and this silliness. Calculate it yearly based on who had the most honour gain in that year, or something equally simple. If you keep working, you stay on top, if not, you slip down.
Aramel2011-07-27 08:39:07
Oh, I hadn't even considered that everything except blood house has honour loss for wanton killing. That's just silly, it means only blood houses can ever stay on top.
*peer*
Edit: I like Sylphas' idea.
*peer*
Edit: I like Sylphas' idea.
Saran2011-07-27 09:03:40
Why am I expecting politics posts about a collection of gossipy socialites having an event every year where they discuss the various families? >_>
Eventru2011-08-01 21:31:11
I've been picking through some things and found a few answers:
If 3 families are at the honour cap and the most honourable loses, the title falls to the family with the most wealth (gold in the family bank account).
Even if passed in honour, you keep your family's seat on the council until the other family takes the seat (by appointing someone). It'll now (soon) be stripped automatically if you've just lost Most Honourable to a family of the same city.
I'm going to look at a few other changes, as well.
If 3 families are at the honour cap and the most honourable loses, the title falls to the family with the most wealth (gold in the family bank account).
Even if passed in honour, you keep your family's seat on the council until the other family takes the seat (by appointing someone). It'll now (soon) be stripped automatically if you've just lost Most Honourable to a family of the same city.
I'm going to look at a few other changes, as well.
Silvanus2011-08-01 21:36:44
QUOTE (Eventru @ Aug 1 2011, 04:31 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I've been picking through some things and found a few answers:
If 3 families are at the honour cap and the most honourable loses, the title falls to the family with the most wealth (gold in the family bank account).
Even if passed in honour, you keep your family's seat on the council until the other family takes the seat (by appointing someone). It'll now (soon) be stripped automatically if you've just lost Most Honourable to a family of the same city.
I'm going to look at a few other changes, as well.
If 3 families are at the honour cap and the most honourable loses, the title falls to the family with the most wealth (gold in the family bank account).
Even if passed in honour, you keep your family's seat on the council until the other family takes the seat (by appointing someone). It'll now (soon) be stripped automatically if you've just lost Most Honourable to a family of the same city.
I'm going to look at a few other changes, as well.
Yay! Thanks.
I like the addition of adding in if someone Suicides you lose honor, but are there going to be any other additions soon to be a way of losing honor? Still, the one way that d'Murani has lost honor the most has been those random times where Thoros goes and kills some people. Examples I could think of is someone being descended (and why doesn't someone being Ascended give honor?), losing an election that you don't resign from, failing to defend your city from external threats (for Blood and Honor houses), or other ideas I can't think of.
Eventru2011-08-01 21:55:07
QUOTE (Silvanus @ Aug 1 2011, 05:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yay! Thanks.
I like the addition of adding in if someone Suicides you lose honor, but are there going to be any other additions soon to be a way of losing honor? Still, the one way that d'Murani has lost honor the most has been those random times where Thoros goes and kills some people. Examples I could think of is someone being descended (and why doesn't someone being Ascended give honor?), losing an election that you don't resign from, failing to defend your city from external threats (for Blood and Honor houses), or other ideas I can't think of.
I like the addition of adding in if someone Suicides you lose honor, but are there going to be any other additions soon to be a way of losing honor? Still, the one way that d'Murani has lost honor the most has been those random times where Thoros goes and kills some people. Examples I could think of is someone being descended (and why doesn't someone being Ascended give honor?), losing an election that you don't resign from, failing to defend your city from external threats (for Blood and Honor houses), or other ideas I can't think of.
I'm removing the honour loss in killing for non-blood houses (but letting blood houses still gain honour that way). Descending sounds like a good one, though I'm not so sure it's always a dishonour ('retiring' and so forth seems less dishonourable than, say, quitting without letting the city remove you).
I'm open to ideas on 'failing to defend your city from external threats', though - what particularly? My biggest concern would be forcing families to lose honour while they're not online and so forth.