PDA

View Full Version : Sabotage Costs



iNTERNET
25th May 2011, 05:51 PM
I think that the cost for sabotaging should reflect on TBG , not sell off value.
EX: I have 25 mil tbg. Every sab i do can cost 4-6 mil.

Vrasp
26th May 2011, 02:19 AM
And when you sabotage someone and do 2mil damage to them?

iNTERNET
26th May 2011, 04:18 AM
Touche'.
But still. Sabbing someone and getting more than two tbg's of repairs is kind of hard.

Vrasp
26th May 2011, 09:05 AM
Yeah definitely, but I think another problem with this is that if repairs become a percentage of your TBG, it severely limits the number of sabotage attempts you can make in a single day, since if it's, say, 1% TBG per sab...that means you can sab 10 people (assuming you don't mind spending all of your TBG on repairs), etc.

I'm not really sure how it works now (seems to be a percentage of your spy weapons' value), but I really don't have many problems with it. I think if it were capped at ~20-25% of the damage you deal (rather 40+, not sure where it caps exactly, but I've taken 40%), or capped at some percentage of your TBG, that'd be nice, I just don't think making it a direct percentage of your TBG is the way to go personally.

colleca
26th May 2011, 04:15 PM
I think sabotage costs should be raised, but for the same reason that sab turns were added to the game.

My thinking is that either of these factors (Sab turns or higher sab costs) prevent people from random sabbing or attempting to bully players without alliances.

However,
I do not believe that sabotage costs should be increased for sabbing people with Low sentry compared to their Sell off Value.
These would be your people with nothing but DA like:
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=23481

or accounts almost entirely SPY or SA like:
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=127
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=10545

Those people are making a conscious choice to play that style of account and there are risks and rewards to playing those styles of accounts. Tweaking it might give preferential treatment to a single type, so in this matter I believe that sab costs should stay the same.


What your really shooting for is making the costs too damaging for people to:

attempt to bully players without alliances for no reason
frivolously sab others to raise their sabotage totals to get on Top Sabbers


But at the same time not weakening these players abilities to defend themselves. Raising the sab costs would not change wars, as both alliances would have to contend with the proportionally higher sab costs.

Vrasp
26th May 2011, 04:54 PM
I think sabotage costs should be raised, but for the same reason that sab turns were added to the game.

My thinking is that either of these factors (Sab turns or higher sab costs) prevent people from random sabbing or attempting to bully players without alliances.

However,
I do not believe that sabotage costs should be increased for sabbing people with Low sentry compared to their Sell off Value.
These would be your people with nothing but DA like:
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=23481

or accounts almost entirely SPY or SA like:
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=127
http://ruinsofchaos.com/stats.php?id=10545

Those people are making a conscious choice to play that style of account and there are risks and rewards to playing those styles of accounts. Tweaking it might give preferential treatment to a single type, so in this matter I believe that sab costs should stay the same.


What your really shooting for is making the costs too damaging for people to:

attempt to bully players without alliances for no reason
frivolously sab others to raise their sabotage totals to get on Top Sabbers


But at the same time not weakening these players abilities to defend themselves. Raising the sab costs would not change wars, as both alliances would have to contend with the proportionally higher sab costs.

Mmmm.... I think this has some pretty significant knock-ons. What about one main account sabotaging another main account? What about mid-sized accounts sabotaging other mid-sized accounts? Common opinion is that repairs are too high already. I mean, yes, this would make sabotaging weaker accounts less viable, but it would also make sabotaging in general less viable.

Additionally, sentry is already considered the most valuable stat in the game. A setup like this just reinforces that notion by making it even more difficult/less beneficial to sabotage people with high sentry.

If the goal is to deter people from sabotaging new/weak accounts, bringing back sabotage turns or just inflicting higher repairs against targets whose SOV are either below a certain threshold or significantly less than the saboteurs is probably closer to the way to go.


I guess this reverse doubles effect idea is kind of neat, but I'd like to see you counter my issues with it.

Also: you's trollin'

t0msky
26th May 2011, 05:44 PM
I think that the cost for sabotaging should reflect on TBG , not sell off value.
EX: I have 25 mil tbg. Every sab i do can cost 4-6 mil.

not feasible, take you for example, you got sells to boost your account beyond your tbg can manage, is it fair for you to have that boost without the penalty ?

colleca
27th May 2011, 10:30 AM
Mmmm.... I think this has some pretty significant knock-ons. What about one main account sabotaging another main account? What about mid-sized accounts sabotaging other mid-sized accounts? Common opinion is that repairs are too high already. I mean, yes, this would make sabotaging weaker accounts less viable, but it would also make sabotaging in general less viable.

Additionally, sentry is already considered the most valuable stat in the game. A setup like this just reinforces that notion by making it even more difficult/less beneficial to sabotage people with high sentry.

If the goal is to deter people from sabotaging new/weak accounts, bringing back sabotage turns or just inflicting higher repairs against targets whose SOV are either below a certain threshold or significantly less than the saboteurs is probably closer to the way to go.


I guess this reverse doubles effect idea is kind of neat, but I'd like to see you counter my issues with it.

Also: you's trollin'

"What about one main account sabotaging another main account? "
There wouldnt be a difference. Both mains would have to contend with the proportionally higher sab costs. The main with the higher spy would have higher sab costs but would potentially be able to deal more damage.

What about mid-sized accounts sabotaging other mid-sized accounts?

Again, those who banked spy would have higher sab costs but could deal more damage. I think half of the complaining comes from people who dont or have never tried to sab with 1 or 2 spies. It seems that when you do you have a higher probability of getting 0 sab repairs when u do so. Plus, as u said in the war thread: Higher spies vs Low sentrys on most of the sabs pay 0 repairs.

I mean, yes, this would make sabotaging weaker accounts less viable, but it would also make sabotaging in general less viable.

Well for the first, thats the intent. The idea is not to punish new players/low ranked players. These people already have such little to do with wars and if you 0 out there accounts most of them just rage quit. For the second, I think sabotage damage is quite high actually. If you get too big and big accounts like yours wail on the small accounts, those small accounts stop growing period. Good for big accounts, bad for small accounts.

A setup like this just reinforces that notion by making it even more difficult/less beneficial to sabotage people with high sentry.

That would be the point of sentry right? People who bank sentry cant bank as much SA/DA/spy which means they take a loss on that already (They cant slay as well, bank as well, or sab/recon as well as others)

If the goal is to deter people from sabotaging new/weak accounts, bringing back sabotage turns or just inflicting higher repairs against targets whose SOV are either below a certain threshold or significantly less than the saboteurs is probably closer to the way to go.


Probably. But, I do believe there needs to be special treatment for single stat whores who ignore the need to bank sentry.

Also: you's trollin'
:badger:

OutlawDragon
27th May 2011, 06:33 PM
Probably. But, I do believe there needs to be special treatment for single stat whores who ignore the need to bank sentry.

I just want to respond to this 1 thing before I get to all of the other bad idea's. W.....T.....F? Did you really just say that? People should get special treatment and help just because they supposedly play stupidly. (its almost impossible to damage an all SA account) But if someone wants to be stupid and buy 100% DA they shouldn't get helped for playing stupidly.

Sab Costs are already WAAY to high. They should be taking out completely or reduced to 1-2% of the damage you do.

colleca
27th May 2011, 07:19 PM
OutlaW, read my first post. I'm in agreement with you, I say special treatment because I would argue the current system doesn't penalize these players for choosing to bank none or close to none sentry.

Vrasp
27th May 2011, 08:53 PM
OutlaW, read my first post. I'm in agreement with you, I say special treatment because I would argue the current system doesn't penalize these players for choosing to bank none or close to none sentry.

Your system doesn't penalize them either, it penalizes sabbers when people do buy sentry.


A setup like this just reinforces that notion by making it even more difficult/less beneficial to sabotage people with high sentry.

That would be the point of sentry right? People who bank sentry cant bank as much SA/DA/spy which means they take a loss on that already (They cant slay as well, bank as well, or sab/recon as well as others)


Yes, that is the point of sentry, and it already does a fine job. I don't see why we need to increase repairs for sabotaging people with high sentry; decrease against people with lower sentry, maybe. The point of sentry is to protect your own account, not to deal damage to other accounts. If you want to damage other peoples' accounts, buy spy or strike.

Also in your previous response to me you left out the counter to "common opinion is that repairs are already too high."

colleca
1st June 2011, 02:15 AM
"Your system doesn't penalize them either, it penalizes sabbers when people do buy sentry."

You know that is the point of sabotage costs right? The game needs (and has) a mechanism for avoiding people from sabotaging everyone in the game. You let accounts like Narnia and yours go wild on the general RoC population without a consequentially high sab cost on your end, people will quit.

This is my opinion. This stems from my belief that if people cant build up their accounts or fight back when sab chains or accounts like yours pick on them, they lose interest in the game. This is already happening. Many sabbers are leaving because Sab costs are mispreportionally high when sabbing low sentry to high SoV ratios (They are worth alot, but they dont have alot of sentry).

Fix this. Make people who chose to not buy sentry get punished by the fact that sabbers pay smaller repair bills.

However, DO NOT PUNISH PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY BUY SENTRY.

Im out of here.
:badger:

Vrasp
1st June 2011, 04:39 AM
"Your system doesn't penalize them either, it penalizes sabbers when people do buy sentry."

You know that is the point of sabotage costs right? The game needs (and has) a mechanism for avoiding people from sabotaging everyone in the game. You let accounts like Narnia and yours go wild on the general RoC population without a consequentially high sab cost on your end, people will quit.


Pretty sure sabotage costs have nothing to do with your target's sentry currently, so no, I don't think that the point of sabotage costs is to penalize sabbers when people buy sentry.




This is my opinion. This stems from my belief that if people cant build up their accounts or fight back when sab chains or accounts like yours pick on them, they lose interest in the game. This is already happening. Many sabbers are leaving because Sab costs are mispreportionally high when sabbing low sentry to high SoV ratios (They are worth alot, but they dont have alot of sentry).

Fix this. Make people who chose to not buy sentry get punished by the fact that sabbers pay smaller repair bills.

However, DO NOT PUNISH PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY BUY SENTRY.

Im out of here.
:badger:

So basically, let the sabbers continue to do what they already do and sabotage people with weaker accounts? Sounds like a plan.

People who don't buy sentry are already punished by the fact that people will get in more times against them than they would against someone else. Sabbers are punished when people buy sentry when they fail an attempt and still take repairs.

Aaaaand people who buy sentry are most certainly not punished for doing so by any game mechanic.