WCS item pickup

[maynard]

Bad idea, IMHO. Would be way too easy to become OP and collect enough items. No good reason for this.

way 2 abandon your opinion cause zero disagreed lol...

Well first off, this is warcraft, not WoW. I dont recal loot in warcraft

lol? you serious? fail...





I have no issues with this idea, provided it's properly set up... if the same items are basically just getting moved around from player 2 player via a person dying... the concept of money and it's value in the server will be diluted. something needs 2 be set up where items are only transferable X amount of times after X amount of rounds and have a % chance on if it will even work trying 2 pick up the items.

[XX0wnsXY]

way 2 abandon your opinion.

Lol keepin it real with maynard!

[Blackmage]

Actually this would help for balance in a way b/c when a losing team kills someone on the winning team that has a bunch of items it allows transfer to that player. I think it should only work as a chance and or only after a player has had items for x rounds and then if they die they drop items, this makes it so that items do not drop from noobs but from pros sort of like beating a boss.

What do others think about this b/c I actually like this more than the pricing solution as it is very easy to implement and it still requires skill for players to get an advantage. Also there is a number of ways to balance this out and I like how it feels rewarding to the players who happen to kill that pro with all the items and to the pro they are moved into more like a boss in a typical rpg.

Well, first, this seems to require more luck than skill. It requires getting the last hit, on a player with useful items, at a time when they can drop the items. As it seems the assumption is it also gives them right away it also requires that you can survive to put these items to use, given firefights, revives, and other shenanigans. Also, if you include luck based drops, well, there you go.

I also don't feel it is as efficient at balancing the game as the cost reduction, because it requires a lot of things. That the winning team is using items, or useful items. Items such as claws are great on human and jack, meh on many races. That people who can use the items get the kills, be it because of kill stealing, the enemy getting away, awp on a stick, or just racial restrictions. Yes, this point could be largely solved by teamwork, but let's face it, if we had teamwork, we wouldn't NEED more balance. On the other hand, cost reduction just requires your team getting stomped, and helps the entire team, which is something else this fails to do.

I'm wondering what you were thinking about with X. Because, in three rounds of winning, I can afford an ankh and two random other items. Many races only need one or two items, or spawn with guns, so can afford to die every 2 rounds. If X is too large, it can encourage shock troops to dump items after they can replace them. If it's 1 round, the losing team will be supplying the winning team with items. This also can encourage more farming by an main objective sided, dominating team, "don't kill him, next round he drops his items".

However, I do like the idea, I just don't like it as THE "balancing" mechanism. Maybe add in a bounty system for players with kill streaks too, so you get something that will last if you kill the "pro" players. Or give the player the money equivalent, or a percentage, of the items the dead person was holding, or split it between the team/alive part of the team. This idea would solve a number of problems. Janky or class based builds (sock + claws on a spiderman), helping the full item'd players who kill the dominating players, not losing items just as you get them.

However, from the programming standpoint, go for whatever will work :P

(joke)If items are really the problem, just restrict the number of items each player on the winning team can hold or let the losers keep items on death (/joke)

I have no issues with this idea, provided it's properly set up... if the same items are basically just getting moved around from player 2 player via a person dying... the concept of money and it's value in the server will be diluted. something needs 2 be set up where items are only transferable X amount of times after X amount of rounds and have a % chance on if it will even work trying 2 pick up the items.

Based upon what Zero said, either this shouldn't happen except in a very close game, because you'll need to survive a bit with the item for it to transfer, which normally doesn't happen for the losing team or, like you said, it'll be percentage based. Players don't normally survive round in a row (with a few exceptions such as mr. I don't actually have to do the objective) unless they are on the winning team, so as long as the number of rounds are long enough, unless there is a very odd perfect sequence, item trading won't happen very often.

[Erdenay]

way 2 abandon your opinion cause zero disagreed lol...

It was done due to a few things:
I) I never thought anything like that would be implemented.
II) Didn't quite work out some of the mechanics that Zero suggested - which would make it work okay.
III) Not like my opinion means anything anyways

(In other words - it wasn't because Zero disagreed - it was because I'm blind, dumb and couldn't properly see how this could make the server better. If someone would have suggested the same thing, I'm fairly confident I'd have changed my opinion to that as well)

[CYBER]

1- Zero, how would you go about restricted items on a race? Would you allow for example a vaga of picking up a helm or claw from a random leading enemy?
Or would it just look for items that are compatible?

2- Does loot drop from people who have been ALIVE for many rounds? or have been on the WINNING TEAM for many rounds? big difference. Or perhaps, imo, it should drop only from the top 3 players on the other team? Making everyone want to target the big guns rather than worrying about the backseat riders on the other team?
What if loot drops if a player has killed X people in X rounds minimum? They get flagged by the loot system, when Then when they die, they drop loot for the killer.

3- Bane brought up an interesting point, who gets the loot? the killer? or anyone near the body's radius? Or whoever did most damage to that player? or both? Because kill stealing is not something we want to promote in wcs like in gg...

Suggestion:
I would suggest that if the looting system triggered on a pro's death, a tiny 25ft white ward or smthn would appear on the victim's dead body and stay active for 5 secs only. First to get in it gets a random compatible item from him. And if another teammate walked in it before it disappeared, they get 1 random item of the REMAINING lower tier items that the player held on him when they died? This way, it would favor the player who was near the enemy rather than someone 100 ft away, seeing as they had more of a risk factor, without completely denying the partner with another loot.

Also, I would suggest that the loot system only procs at the death of the top 3 out of 20 of the WINNING team's players. Making them a primary target.
I see it many times where the loosing team focuses on a few lame players on the winning team, and call it a day... but this way, it might favor ppl working together to take out the big badies first to get stronger.

[Blackmage]

1- Zero, how would you go about restricted items on a race? Would you allow for example a vaga of picking up a helm or claw from a random leading enemy?
Or would it just look for items that are compatible?

I'd assume it'd be whatever happens when you switch to a race while holding a restricted item (can't remember what it is, but I remember it happens).

top 3 out of 20 of the WINNING team's players.

heh

[Spasm]

My opinion is it's a bad idea because then everyone would be rolling items almost constantly. Now the money sink of items is cut big time and when the winning team does happen to lose a few people, the next round they will get a kill or two and max items. The sword works both ways. This idea will devalue items since everyone will have them almost all the time. I personally don't think helm and lace being more common then they already are is even close to a good idea. I like the choice of either a lace or a rifle at the round beginning, it adds skill to the game.

ZERO many things have been discussed to fix this issue of team stacking and something like this would not resolve the issue, it may even make it worse and imo would lower the skill ceiling of the wcs server.

The /scramble idea someone posted would work great.
Forced auto assign would work great.
Remove level cap would help.
The idea in admin section would work great.

The heart of the team balance issue is everyone knows everyone in the WCS server. Some people do not enjoy losing and always join up with people they consider great players. 9 times out of 10 if I join a team first all the good players and/or regulars will stack my team. The new people of the wcs server either auto or get sent to the other team because usually people will wait it out.

I would rather it be forced auto assign then an idea like this even hitting the server.

[Wolfenstinger]

The only downside to this is that... well, I don't like playing with items personally. Especially on Vagalion at least. The reason behind it is so when I tele around and cross paths with another vaga that may have a necklace of immunity, they keep going and I just chill. Other reasons behind my no items play, but that's just one of the few.

So, perhaps a way we could also destroy the items or be given the option to take the item if we want it?

[maynard]

people need 2 realize this idea just hit the table... asking specifics on how it will work is pointless as it's an idea that literally just came into play.

I have no problem with the idea and am fine with it, but it most deff wont fix team stacking.

[DJ_MikeyRevile]

Any variant of this idea would be nice to come home too. +1

OP add a poll.