Forum
SOLUTION: THE END OF ALLIES!!!
|
maxhazy wrote
at 12:06 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT
3 Ideas that will put an end in allies:
1)What if we COULDN'T SEE THE NAME of the players we're playing against? Than allies couldn't know who's his/her partner in the table. 2)Not only that but also, if THERE'S NO CHAT, then there's no way they can even stabilish a code to know who they are... 3) Also, if we're sent to an random table based in points, there's no way allies can even know where they are. Like this: If player 1 want to play in alliance with player 2 in a 0 points table... And they're sent to a random 0 points table... The plan is over... Even if they're by luck sent to the same table, there's no way they will know it because of the first 2 ideas... I stopped playing kdice after I realized the allies... as well as lots of people. But if these ideas were used... Everything would be different. Of course that will be bad to people who likes to talk during the game or make truces during a match, but is surely an efficient solution... What do you think? EVEN IF YOU DON'T AGREE, WE COULD SPLIT KDICE IN 2 PARTS... THE PART WITH THE NEW IDEAS, AND THE PART WITHOUT THE NEW IDEAS. Either way, have a gg. Cheers Max Hazy |
Replies 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 12:07 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT When I say Allies, I mean PGAs.
|
|
potato27 wrote
at 12:15 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT Thanks for this great new idea that nobody has thought of yet
|
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 12:23 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT If you're being ironical, the ideas still haven't being used... have they?
|
|
fiero600 wrote
at 12:49 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT lol ironical
|
|
IIIllIIIll wrote
at 1:28 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT Max, I totally agree. Don't let Potato or Fiero trash you .. they HATE these ideas because they would blow at this game if they were put in place.
My thoughts are: 1.) A good idea, I never thought of that but if its possible.. that would be EXCELLANT! 2.) A MUST! There should be NO CHAT BOX! ESPECIALLY IN TOURNAMENTS! It's ridiculous how quickly people will flag (verbal) or truce in a tourny. No one plays this game by themselves anymore.. its always teams and it always starts at the f'in chat box. 3.) Great idea as well, but how many random tables will there be at 2am est? If you for example had 3 random 500 tables it may take 2 hours to fill a table. Other than that, its a great idea! On a side note, Id love to see a "flag box" in place of the chat box. In my view a "flag box" would basically have 6 flags with the 6 corresponding colors next to a flag. If you want to flag someone, you click the flag next to there color and BOTH YOURSELF AND THE PERSON YOU FLAGGED TOO CAN NO LONG ATTACK EACH OTHER. If I had a dollar everytime I would flag (VFlag or real flag) and got attacked to see "sorry didn't see" typed in Id be a billionaire. This could be abused by people suiciding and than flagging of course so some kind of program that wouldn't allow you to flag a person for atleast 1 rd after attacking them would have to be developed but I think its doable. |
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 2:04 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT Wow "L", the flag box concept was outstanding!!!
About the question on idea "3", we shouldn't worrie about amount if the tables with people had "priority" you see... In the case of 500 tables, if the first person was randomly putted in table "37" (not that the person know it), then the next ones would come to number 37 too. But they can't control the table they're going to even with "priority" because they don't know how many people form the line until the next random table. Until they know it by going there, they'll lost the track of the table cuz it have no name or number to mark it. The idea is to form lines with people after they choose what kind of table they want (0 points, 100 points). So, 500 tables should not be a problem). It still make it virtually impossible for them to go there. There's also idea 4 and 5 that comes to mind: 4) The colors and position are random as soon as you enter the table. That way, even if the PGAs describe the table they are to confirm they're there, they will not know who they are. Cuz in their page, they'll always be number 1 player with color they prefer. (Since there's no chat box, we could have a new feature to take place and actually help couldn't we?). If they even dare to describe the table they are at and talk by MSN or something the time they're playing, we could even try a number 5: 5) The formation of the lines of people for the table should be "TIME BASED" and not autamatic. That way, even if PGAs click the kind of table they like at the same time, they will have to wait about 30 seconds until the line is formed and then mixed. That's it... no more PGAs... If they do want to pga, they will have to spend a lot of time just to get together in a table... and lost time in play to confirm the're there and who they are will annoy them or even blast their games... IF THE ADM THINK ABOUT IT, A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T PLAY ANYMORE BECAUSE OF PGAS, BUT IF THERE ARE NO LONGER PGAS, THAT MEANS MORE PEOPLE WILL PLAY... AND SURELY MEANS MORE MONEY SINCE IT WILL BE WORTHY TO PEOPLE THAT REALLY APRECIATE THE GAME. No more to say... It's up to you... |
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 2:17 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT Talking in a pratical way... we wouldn't see tables with how many people on it. We would see lines being formed and how many points the lines of people will represent. Ex:
Line for 0 points: 9 people waiting, 17 seconds remaining to form a table. Line for 100 points: 4 people waiting, 8 seconds remaining to form a table. And so on... People who haven't being selected for a table that have passed already should rise the percentual for being choosed on the next table... that way nobody would keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting because there wasn't enough people to form a table... Poor PGAs... I already feel sorry for them... If they insist to get together, every 5 games we play, they play one... and badly played cause they still have to know who they are DURING THE GAME. Either they will lost time, or lost points... =( |
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 2:42 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT Note: Dividing amount of people in lines per table would be faster.
|
|
Shevar wrote
at 3:33 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT guys, i love the ideas and im sure it would be a great improvement, but it wont happen unless you knock on Ryans door and put a gun to his head.
|
|
|
maxhazy wrote
at 9:10 AM, Monday September 7, 2009 EDT As I told... That means more money. When Ryan started this game, that means he saw potential for it somehow (for amount of players, or money, or something). If he did had the effort to put this game in practice, and he agree it would be good for the game in both ways (player and money), why wouldn't he have the effort to change for better if he had the effort to start it?
I still have a hope... But if that don't happen, I'm sure somebody will copy the idea and do it better just as they did with games like "Tatic 100 Live" that was copyed and turned into the better "Tatics Arena". If you think about it, kdice is only a multiplayer copy of "Dice Wars", shouldn't be hard to some developer to take it to another level... All they need is space. |
