August 12 2005 10:29 AM EDT
I was sitting here calculating, once again, how much time I had before my BA capped. Honestly I don't think it's long enough for me to do anything worth while and I'm feeling more like my account owns me rather then me owning my account.
I would really like it if the BA cap could be moved up just a bit. I know 160 has been a number with a long tradition, but I don't see any reason why that number is that much more important then others. If it could be 50 BA higher I would feel so much more at ease when I sleep, go out, or go to work. This is what a 210 BA cap would amount to:
7 BA refresh: 3 hr 48 min --> 5 hr 00 min
8 BA refresh: 3 hr 20 min --> 4 hr 22 min
9 BA refresh: 2 hr 57 min --> 3 hr 53 min
10 BA refresh: 2 hr 40 min --> 3 hr 30 min
I remember what it was like to finally move up to 7 BA refresh, and it felt much better then 8 BA refresh only because I had more time before I capped. Yet, I could be having so much more fun playing this game if I could be living my life at the same time.
August 12 2005 10:31 AM EDT
I couldn't agree more.
I concur. It would also help generate more money into the game.
August 12 2005 10:34 AM EDT
I entirely agree with Vestax. I dislike sitting and waiting for BA, but if I don't, I waste a pretty large bit. I'd like the BA cap to be just slightly higher as well, as I can then go do something for a while and come back without having wasted a lot of BA - for example, I live about 30 minutes basically from civilization as we know it, and when I go do something in town, I spend quite a bit of time doing it. Anyways. My point is that I'd like a higher BA cap as well.
I would appreciate it a lot.
August 12 2005 10:35 AM EDT
you want CB and a life?!?!?!? LOL.
I've never understood why the cap is 160 except:
The current cap time for 8 BA just about covers the half a working day. So if I'm really busy at work I can use up my BA at the start of the working day, work for the morning and have another 160 ready for my lunch break, then work the afternoon and use another 160 at the end of the day before I go home.
And nobody can say I use up BA when I should be working....
August 12 2005 10:36 AM EDT
Yeah, but that's what makes the good players good, they spend more time with the game.
August 12 2005 10:41 AM EDT
That is a skewed view on it, the good players have the ability to spend more time in the game because they have access to the internet from work by some means.
Not everyone does, this doesn't make them a 'bad player'.
For me 160 BA is just right or maybe I'm used to it. more BA means more time on CB. More money means inflation. My daily routine is similar to Johnnywas and 160 BA is just perfect.
August 12 2005 11:08 AM EDT
You can still keep your daily routine. Nothing says you have to wait until you cap the BA until you use it. Other people however work 8 hour days. As for the inflation deal, it not just more cash, it's more xp as well and with more xp people use up more cash. That is why Jon wanted them linked in the first place. Solving the inflation 'problem' is far beyond how often people fight.
August 12 2005 11:59 AM EDT
I think this is a really great idea. Often, I have to go out somewhere for like 4-5 hours, and of course I missed like 100 BA or so. Sometimes I even mad when I came home late because I missed BA, this seems getting worse, might just quit if my life gets very busy. =/
as you can see from my experience, more BA so you can live your life just doesnt work...=/ You still have to spend more time using that much more BA, when you could rather be spending it doing something productive...=P This also meaning Jon might have to raise the buy BA cap as well.
August 12 2005 12:47 PM EDT
One idea that springs to mind is;
Stop basing your life around CB you nerds.
August 12 2005 12:50 PM EDT
ouch, that's harsh
August 12 2005 12:53 PM EDT
how an option to choose your own refresh rate?
along with your chosen rate would come the effects on your rewards, and to prevent abuse whenever you decided to switch, the worse awards would persist for a few hours if you were switching to a higher regen rate, and if you were going then the lower rewards would take effect immediately. (hopefully that makes sense...)
that way people would not have to worry as much about "wasting" BA.
Or maybe the lower regen rate is supposed to be the reward for getting to the top? I don't know when it was implemented nor the reasoning, perhaps someone CB-older can explain.
August 12 2005 12:56 PM EDT
mrwuss that is heresy. CB has always given hugely disproportionate rewards to the most obsessive geekiest creatures of all - campers.
/curses, spits, and, and goes through cleansing ritual
August 12 2005 1:20 PM EDT
I Love this I ideal =)
This game should reward those who play more each day as it shows they are committed, if the cap was raised then people can go away and actually sleep! yet still come back and be able to use exactly the same number of ba.
You should have to make sacrifices if you desperately want to use every single ba each day or it just wouldn't be a "true" competitive game.
if one must increase the BA cap; I must nominate 161 as the new number...
c'mon, seriously; I'm yet to see a logical arguement to this question except for "I'll do better out of this"
I get to log on usually for every BA between when I wake up and when I sleep... when I miss BA it's due to real life things that are (generally) more important.
By raising the stored BA limit
People will log in less; or just chat more
More money and more XP will enter the economy
Casual (non-24 hour players) will gain more $$$ and higher PR; meaning more people with more money after proportionally less rare items --> high inflation
Hardcore (24-hour players) will be proportionally worse off for they can't sacrifice any more time for extra benefit
Increasing the time length to get BA would just annoy people; unless rewards were to scaled to match this. This IMO is the best and most balanced solution; for it doesn't have the same drawbacks of vastly increased liquid capital, but seems to be less preferred.
August 12 2005 2:31 PM EDT
How is this idea any different than saying, "My strat is broken, help me! IMBALANCE!"
Or, as mrwuss put in a different thread:
"I can't beat so and so unless I adapt a new strat to do so."
Let me change a few words here:
"I can't beat so and so unless I get a constant changed."
If 210, then why not more? Why not make the 7/10 run for 8 hours? That's a good night's sleep, a work shift, etc.
So, to quote mrwuss one last time:
"Knock it off. Seriously."
Stop trying to change the game to your advantage. At least that is the administrative message I took from the Dexterity Balance thread.
August 12 2005 3:47 PM EDT
Since when did I ever claim this would help me more then it would help you. I currently don't miss BA much at all, and I am always the MVP for the day at least once each day but usually multiple times. And I can still keep up this pace so you better pray for such a change. Seriously SutekhT, this helps you more then it helps me so don't you EVER claim this to be a "make my strat better" post again!
High inflation is only a concern for those who want to trade USD for CB2$, which is of no concern to me. Now who's whining? Anyhow, this would have such a minor effect that you wouldn't even notice in the first place. You can't even say that there would be a substantial increase in fighting, just slightly bigger gaps between the fighting.
I figured out long ago what was the issue with inflation, and it's more the new user bonus. Not really the bonus though but rather the psychology it develops. The faster people get money the less it is worth. The new player will say to themselves that "hey, I could make that in a week so it's not much" even though that week is by now the equivalent of 3 weeks work without the bonus. So why don't you take your issues with inflation to someplace more appropriate.
Sutekht has a point, why 210? As for Gaza he thinks the less cap there is the better so let's just start asking why 160? Hell, why not make the cap 10 so only the "hardcore" of the hardcore players can get ahead. Really, your arguments take away just as many reasons for having a 160 cap as it does for having a 210 cap so why don't you just stop sticking your own foot in your mouth.
Zog, by the same token at what point is the game truly competitive. I think your actually afraid because there would be MORE competition this way. Yes, the game would mean you have more people able to compete with you for once (old an new players alike). So I guess your just begging for people with a little less time then you to stay at a disadvantage. You might even thank me if this were to happen because you just may not notice how unnatural it is to sleep and live like you do.
I thought that 210 would be just enough to make everyone feel more comfortable is all. As far as I can tell nobody was consulted on what would be a good number before and I thought it was about time we think about it. If you have a problem with the number chosen then say so, but don't throw these misplaced half-baked stupid arguments at it. It's just a suggested tweak and that's it, even still a 7 BA refresh person would have to check in just under 5 times a day as opposed to just over 6 times. I don't see a huge gap there, do you?
From what I can remember, there used to not be a BA cap at all.
But then, the game became "Who can click the fastest while finding non comatose people to kill".
Which was generally agreed to be a bad thing.
As to why the specific number was chosen. I don't know. If there are to any adjustments, I hope it hurts the higher folk more than the lower. They really need to be slowed.
August 12 2005 3:54 PM EDT
"But then, the game became "Who can click the fastest while finding non comatose people to kill"."
HA! I RULED that game! Me and the NSFY Clik-Bot 2k3 were unstoppable!
August 12 2005 3:56 PM EDT
From January through March 2005 I fought 24x7. A change to the BA cap would most definitely have been a disadvantage for me at that point, as folks who slept would be losing fewer BA per day in relation to me. When you turn on the gas and fight 24 hours a day, you actually want the BA cap to be smaller.
Another point, the higher you make the BA cap, the more effective you make the NUB. I am not weighing in on either side concerning the NUB, but the more you allow complete BA usage (which a higher cap does, in effect), the more BA new users will get to burn during their NUB period. In essence, changing the cap now would allow a full-on newbie to reach the top and beyond, because a known constant will have changed. There's is a delicate balance to consider here. It isn't insurmountable (Jonathan could find a way to make it work), but there's more than meets the eye.
Not sure how this idea currently helps me more than you, seeing as how my BA has been at 160 for the past five days. Care to clarify?
And by the way, I will say precisely whatever I want whenever I want (within the guidelines of the PG policy and grammar), and there is exactly nothing you can do about it. *smile*
August 12 2005 4:08 PM EDT
I was just saying that I have a higher BA consumption then you SutekhT (Chet was so much easier, now I copy and paste your name) which means that I lose out by having the cap raised. I'm currently where you were back when you were trying to get ahead and burning BA while people slept, and I frankly don't care. Let them have their sleep and BA too, I'll still complete my goals without a cap, or USD, or cash from other games, or without a NUB. As for who can click the fastest I'm sure it was but I just want to know what makes 160 so special.
August 12 2005 4:29 PM EDT
You can just call me "Sutekh", "Sute", or "Sut".
160 isn't special. Neither would 210 be.
I highly doubt my word has an significance, but IMO this is a great idea. I hav school for 6 hours so the extra almost 3 hours im losing about another 160 BA. If the cap was raised itd give normal ppl who have a life or cant get on a computer all the time whichever you are to have a bit of an even field. As far as the NUB part goes i dont agree with that because there using the same amount of BA just they can wait longer before they use it. That doesnt change anything really other than maybe they'll be impatient. I fully agree with Vestax on the point of this wouldnt mess with inflation too much i mean its not technically more cash unless you are able to only get on once every 5 hours to blow ur BA i mean u just dont lose that BA that u normally would its a little bit of an extra oomf not much though. Thats my opinion there on that and again its a great idea ive always wondered about raising the cap.
August 12 2005 5:37 PM EDT
I'm sorry, I thought maybe this game should reward people with the best character strategy.
I'd prefer to be left out of a "who can have less of a life" contest.
Maybe that's what CB is, but I don't think it should be. I think that if you can come up with a new and original character strategy (that does well) you shouldn't have to be chained to your computer to succeed.
Yes i agree with that also if you happen just mayb to have a life maybe u should live it. Your life and well being and body is more important than a game and should always come first.
August 12 2005 6:07 PM EDT
Some people are fortunate enough to use daddies amex to gain an edge.
Some people are fortunate enough to be smart and devise efficient strategies.
Some people are fortunate enough that using 80%-100% of their daily BA has a negligable impact on their daily lives.
Some people are fortunate enough to be social and make nice profits trading/lending
Some people are fortunate enough to have the patience to camp.
All are possible advantages.
Use one if you can't use the other, and if you just have 1 or 2 out of 5, it might be that you won't be the best.
Just got to live with that(not being the top), we are not all top athletes, professors, ministers and doctors :)
Phaete you are a very wise man i have known you almost my whole time on cb2. My only thing is some people may not have any of those things without help but thats not the meaing for this. It's also a problem you might have a great strat but no means to get cash except for playing the game. That means no USD and they may not camp or trade and lend or have time. Now a normal human beings wants to be the best at something prolly 8 outta 10 cases. That means the people who do all 5 will rule over people who can maybe do 2 and that makes the person possibly feel insignificant. I may be wrong here but i just believe the more BA cap could help some people get an advantage. Even NUB users even though i think its an uneeded add on to the game but don't get me started there, OR possibly jon could make it so people with an NUB get the regular cap somehow just an idea.
August 12 2005 6:47 PM EDT
If we are really serious about "time has nothing to do with it", then let's make this simple: 1008 BA per day for the 7/10s, 1152 for the 8/10s, 1296 for 9/10s, and 1440 for the 10/10s -- it's basic math --, use it whenever you wish. No regen until a new 24-hour batch the next day, right after cache flush or after midnight server time.
Do people really want that? Seriously, I'm asking. What would the effects be on clans, camping, etc? NUB would be more powerful than ever, as a newbie would likely be able to use almost 100% of their BA during their period of lucrative rewards.
If this does not sound desirable, then it would mean people want _some_ sort of reward for being able to come around more. If THAT is the case, then 160 is not really any different than 210 or 100. It's arbitrary. Jonathan decided. What is the point in arguing with an arbitrary number? That's like having a beef with pi. I CANNOT believe pi is greater than three but didn't have the gut to make it to 4. FOR SHAME!!!!!
So, in my opinion, you either want time to have nothing to do with it (and should be in support of a "lump sum" idea like I mention above), or you believe time does matter, so 160 is just as good a cap as any.
ok sut the thing is NOT EVERYONE HAS TIME TO SIT AROUND WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING BUT CB!!!!!!!! Now that i said this the fact is if there was more of a BA cap u would waste less on times away. As for rewarding those who come around more thats ludicrous because you shouldn't be rewarded for playing more but for being intelligent on how you play. Jon did want us to waste our lifes on cb and nothing else but to have fun with it. Oh and as far as your statement for pay its 3.14 then other numbers and that would be rounded down in math =).
August 12 2005 6:59 PM EDT
Come on SutekhTDestroyer, you are going way too extreme man.
I mean all have asked is having 4 or 5 hour of sleep with out nightmare of loss BA.
After all we are only human, not bots.
Banludar me 200% support you =).
August 12 2005 7:03 PM EDT
Some quickly whipped up figures to get an idea of the relative effect this has.
(please correct me if they are horribly wrong)
Take an average of 300 CB2$ per bought BA.
because you can't fight all your BA, you loose 200 BA per day.
Buying this extra every day will cost you 300*200=60k CB2$
For one month this will be 30*60k=1.8m CB2$
So it will cost you USD 15.00 to make up for this using your/daddies amex.
It takes more then 2-3 hours per month to close this gap of the missing 200 BA per day
So you get perhaps then an equivalent of 5 USD/hour (less then half of minimum wages in social caring countries)
One or two camped rare items will also nullify this discrepancy in BA losage for a month
It's all about choices, making sacrifices, evaluate which is more important.
And in my opinion, this max BA matter is a moot point
Thanks for the compliment Dan :)
1000 ba per day is a great idea. Lets throw in a kicker though. Players can only spend it between 2 AM and 5 AM their individual local times. Then, if you're really serious about playing CB2, you need to get up and play then. And you have to be wearing a baseball cap and chewing gum, or no dice.
How many players seriously believe they are going to get to the top of this food chain? It's end game already. So just enjoy playing a developing your losing character. <grin>
August 12 2005 7:06 PM EDT
I managed to mostly understand Dan's point since he basically just repeated what he said before ("don't make me work for my PR").
But I'm still confused about this: "Oh and as far as your statement for pay its 3.14 then other numbers and that would be rounded down in math =)."
Is he just pointing out that 3.1 rounds down to 3? I think we were pretty clear on that point. But that's just me.
yeah jon i wasn't saying dont make me work i was saying give people who have actual lifes a little chance. I mean each one gets u about wat a little over an hour extra wait for full BA and yeah i know i was just pointing out to sute because he personally to me sounded like a total ignoramous!!!
Oh and Barron everyone has a chance at #1. I mean Mikel is the best example of that he shot up like nothing. Be a little optimistic dont think oh no ill never be #1 at anything ill just play for no reason. I mean have fun becoming the best you can but look at it at the point of view that its always worth trying. "It's better to try to succeed and fail then to never have tried at all."
August 12 2005 7:29 PM EDT
Actually, as usually happens with me, I am suddenly excited about this "lump sum" idea.
Bad points: a compromise in community perhaps, as there is no need to return many times a day. BUT, for clan and wacky time reasons, people probably would stretch it out.
Plus, the BA able to be purchased makes more direct sense...it is half-again as much BA from the lump sum that people can buy for those times when they have burned all theirs for the day but need to do some testing and whatnot. (or to buy to gain MPR).
Other gains: Being able to whack out a lot of forging to finish a weapon at a given time of day. Having a huge allocation to do statistical testing (as some of us are wont to do). Jamming out a quick clan vendetta to make a point within a 24-hour period (and paying the price for the rest of the day when out of BA). Anyone else think this could be fun?
I have seen other sites that are day-based. Like the site where you explore a town and only have so many "cycles" to use before you have to wait until tomorrow. This idea isn't new.
Jonathan, I am sure the lump sum idea has been brought up before, and I am sure you probably aren't interested. Might I assume and impose and ask why? I was thinking it could be a "supporter only" option, so the vets who don't even have chat turned on could come in, burn BA, and get on with life (or anyone who bucked up with the supporter cash). For people who like to hang out, they still would: chat, forums, camping...there is plenty to do.
I really don't think I am taking anything to an extreme. Yes, I came off negative at first on this post, so I can understand why you might think I was knee-jerking. But I wasn't. The lump sum idea does away with all "why the cap?" questions. People understand why the number of battles isn't infinite, but they don't understand the cap. So get rid of it.
ok sute by lump sum do u mean once a day u get BA to burn and thats all u get a day??? If so thatll mess up clans but unless u even it out per day. That is a pretty good idea though but a little complicated to do on cb but possible. The whole supporter idea is great if u pay to support you should have a bit of a choice on ur preference of playing. Maybe supporters can like change the cap themselves like anywhere from 100-500 cap so if u cant get on much u can have a fair chance like if u hav a day where you can only get on twice a day could evenly catch up making it a more fair playing ground. Also NO IM NOT SAYING MAKE IT EASIER TO PLAY just to get the point across. I want a challenge but on a fair playing ground which does sound wierd but it makes sense if u think about it.
August 12 2005 7:37 PM EDT
are you suggesting a cap-by-another-name of N with regen every 24h, or are you suggesting that every day you get an additional N no matter what?
August 12 2005 7:38 PM EDT
Dan my friend, please pay more attention to the spellcheck. Punctuate. Use paragraphs.
Oh i thought i did and spellcheck i try but i dont look over my typing when i am done. Sorry jon i type a lot of shorthand. But paragraphs i do use just i like to make it one big one cause its simpler but im starting to puncuate lol. I usta never do it.
Oh but not to sound like a smart alik here but a paragraph is one or more paragraphs following a certain idea. So technically i am using paragraphs =)
August 12 2005 7:52 PM EDT
Congratulations; you're an idiot.
Ok jon how am i an idiot can u tell me why.
August 12 2005 7:59 PM EDT
No, but I'll give you a hint.
"Oh and Barron everyone has a chance at #1."
I'll never be number one. Unless I buy the number one character, but then that's not really me getting there. Is it.
August 12 2005 8:22 PM EDT
Above someone quoted me, I am now famous, but they looked to far into it. Let me clear something up.
I am an admin on CB, along with others, but I never stated nor tried to represent that what I said was in the words of the real owner of CB, that being Jon.
I hand out justice to those who need it, and I am blunt when it is required.
August 12 2005 9:20 PM EDT
Jonathan, yes, still a cap of whatever your 24-hour gain would be. No accumulation above that. I was over-generalizing. There is still a cap, it is just at a point that is so large so as to be much more "dang, I am out of BA and still have 23 hours to go" instead of, "crap, I was only gone 3 hours and I am staring at a 160".
quoting mrwuss (the hidden message)
....I.....famous......admin on CB.....I........real owner of CB, that....justice....is required.
But seriously folks, I love the idea of raising the max BA bar to an eight hour rest period. It appeals to the "I have a life" crowd, which resembles "almost" everyone here. This game has the most intelligent chat and forum dialogue I have ever come across.
August 12 2005 9:26 PM EDT
Every positive you gave for the lump sum idea was great Sut, especially the clan warfare *grin*. But I imagine doing it this way would kill the commmunity as a multitude of people would only log in once per day and chat might end up being vacant along with the random contests and off topic posts in the forums that we all love so much. I can also see this making the game less "addicting" by only having to check in once a day. I find myself losing interest very quickly in these types of games.
August 12 2005 9:28 PM EDT
mrwuss, I quoted you. Not sure who thought you were "the word of Jonathan", but I assure you -- I would never, ever, ever make such a mistaken interpretation.
Oh, and your bluntness and justice are greatly appreciated.
August 12 2005 9:31 PM EDT
An excellent point and a huge concern, Tezmac. How did I know you might have something constructive to offer? :o
August 12 2005 9:37 PM EDT
To follow up on Phaete's brilliant post, removing the BA cap would also eliminate one of the ways for someone to reach the top. Avoid managed climb to the pinnacle on CB1 just by playing 24x7 and never missing a BA. Removing the cap would make this means of success on CB2 an impossibility, which would also mean having a non-networth dependent team (good strat/bad strat notwithstanding) an impossibility as well as you would never be able to catch up "pr-wise". Upon preview, thanks for the compliment Sut. :O)
ok, here's a thought to solve the BA cap. The original post requested an extra 50 BA. Leave the cap at 160 BA and add the extra 50 BA to available for purchase.
Say a player with 7 BA refresh and 503 available BA to purchase daily. If he continuously using up his BA daily and never reaches 160 cap, his BA purchase remains at 503. However if he doesn't play say for 5 hrs, his BA will reach 160 cap and his available BA purchase increases to 553.
August 12 2005 10:35 PM EDT
Wow, what did I start here. First I had to defend the possibility of an additional 50 BA cap and now I see you guys gung-ho about almost removing the cap completely.
Sorry if I seemed aggravated (that goes double for Sute). Maybe not all of the arguments were misplaced but enough of them were. However, now I'm feeling better and ready to add what pros and cons I can add to this idea.
As it stands a new player couldn't even get 3 hours of sleep, which I firmly believe to be the bare minimum a person should get, without losing BA. Therefore, I thought the arbitrarily chosen 160 was a bit off of reasonable and more like insanity. There is no reason why even a 9 BA refresh person should have to go to their computer first after a nap rather then put on some cloths or go to the bathroom.
My original thought was to push the cap so max BA was closer to 8 hours of sleep. Yet, as Phaete and Taz have pointed out, this would remove one means by which people get ahead in this game. A method which I find to be a more honorable way of getting to the top rather then something like using loads of USD. This fact made me rethink this idea and instead I choose to suggest that we move the cap to somewhere between insane and committed. (committed as in putting forth rigorous effort, not as in placed in an asylum, that would just make no sense out of what I said.)
As a note, the average full sleep cycle is an hour and a half. This means that 3 hours gets you two cycles and 4 and a half gets you 3. Anything in between is close to worthless as your REM cycle would be incomplete. This is just in case you would like to know why the current rate for 9 and 8 BA refresh is ill chosen with the 160 BA cap. So, I suggest you at least give the people 20 more BA on the cap if anything.
As for Sute's new position on making the cap equivalent to a full days worth of BA I would say that it has merit. I have only one other objection I could think of for going to this extreme, which is that with a fixed number cap the people with lower BA refresh rates are privileged with a less stressful BA consumption. Adjusting caps to fit the person refresh rate takes this privilege away from them. I just figured it was nice that people had another reason to work for that higher MPR, but it's really not a big point.
August 12 2005 10:43 PM EDT
In that case CoolWater, why don't we just make all the lost BA buyable and don't even bother with the complication of what you just said (trust me there is a lot of complications). Then just throw another cap an that and your all set. However, I'm still in favor of just lifting the cap a little. 50 more is preferred but I will think 20 more to be a massive improvement.
August 12 2005 10:58 PM EDT
Vestax, well thought out and well-stated.
Yes, I have gone off the other end and embraced the "time doesn't matter" stance.
Consider the NUB. Jonathan is making it clear that he wants to give new people a chance to move forward. He doesn't even make them use all the BA someone at the top would have used by that time (as I suggested several weeks back), he increases rewards. So on the overall timeline, time means less.
So continue with that. Make time meaningless. There will still be people who miss entire days, entire weekends, or just don't have a chance to click 1000+ times. I am basically agreeing with you and saying, "it can't make that much of a difference: just make it a daily refresh/cap."
Vestax, BA cap should always be there. whether it be normal BA cap or buyable BA cap. By doing what I suggested, it's like penalizing players for being away too long. 50 BA at ~$300 comes to around 150k.
If a player went away for 8 hrs sleep, he still lost 3 hrs of BA regen instead of the current one which would have been 4hrs 12 min.
August 12 2005 11:30 PM EDT
Not to be a spoil sport or anything I am enjoying this thread but Cool your math was a little off there 50 BA at 300 each is only 15k . :p
sorry, you're right raijin. just woke up.
If my suggestion can cause complication, so is your original suggestion. So why having this whole discussion?
My suggestion is merely similar to yours except that you have to pay for the extra 50 BA.
August 13 2005 12:23 AM EDT
Well, your idea seemed like you were in a favor of letting a person have additional BA every time they broke the 160 cap, which would be complicated to deal with. I guess that's not what your saying but you still haven't worked out what happens when a person uses their buyable BA first and then goes to sleep. Will they be able to go as far as 553 BA again or do they only get 50. And if they use that 50 or more then what happens the next time they exceed the cap. You haven't specified much or made yourself clear at all.
If you are indeed granting a higher cap where they pay for the extra BA then you are in quite a tough spot I would say. The idea of a compromise is to get all sides to agree, and frankly I don't see where you are in the middle. There are three major sides to this argument. Those for a higher cap, those for no change, and those for almost no cap. I don't see how you compromise with the later group at all.
You also need to show that there is a problem with having just a regular cap increase first, as mine is the simpler solution out your's and mine and simpler is better being all things equal. You also need to show how the status quo is better with more buyable BA for the people with more of a life. This means you have to adopt most of my points and yet most likely reject them in order to still reject my point-of-view. Good luck.
Yes you get extra 50 buyable BA even if you max out your buyable BA.
For the group requesting a higher cap, obviously you have extra 50 BA but you have to pay for it. For those requesting no change, you still get the normal cap of 160 BA, you've the choice not to buy the extra buyable BA. For the 3rd group, there's no compromise at all because with almost no cap throw away the fun in the game (you spent more BA you win the game, you spent less, you loss). People will just login once every 2-3 days knowing that there's almost no cap to the BA.
August 13 2005 12:47 AM EDT
Hmm, I seem to remember a long time ago that I mentioned that users should be able to purchase extra BA via paypal and that purchased BA would go to all users. This way if you want to catch the top players you can purchase BA, burn it and get the regen BA while others who may not have logged in yet do not because the purchase put them over their cap. They are still getting a large amount of BA, they just have to login fairly often to take advantage of regen BA and possibly purchased BA.
Vestax, I would like to say one thing about your paragraph in relation to my reply.
I am a part-time player so a higher cap or longer refresh rate would hugely advantage me from what I am at now making your point irrelevant.
My main point is that if you have an involved life then you shouldn't be a top competitor in a game as you are just going to be playing it in your spare leisure time, you should be getting on with your busy life.
We reward effort here, not simply going away for long periods of time and coming back to have the same amount of BA as everyone else.
Finally, as far as I see the 160 cap and the refresh rates have been happily accepted and accustomed to for a long time, why bother changing it now for a few who want to do less work for their place?
Vestax, for your 2nd paragraph of your last post, try applying it to your suggestion of 20 extra BA. I don't see how it compromises the latter groups either.
For people with more of a life, they can go away from CB for 5 hrs (instead of the current 3hrs 48 min and this is taking 7 BA refresh as an example) and not losing any BA regen. Because once the normal regen of 160 cap is reached, the extra 50 BA will regen into buyable BA. Being away for more than 5 hrs you start losing BA regen.
This thread is closed to new posts.
However, you are welcome to reference it
from a new thread; link this with the html
<a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001Sxo">BA Cap</a>