To not get flamed down immediately, this post is simply asking why it exists. Thanks for your help in advance.
December 12 2006 10:35 AM EST
Because Jon was generous and felt that only 100 was not enough.
Why was it ever that low?
I really just want to know. I can think of so many great reasons for it to be larger, and very few for it to be small.
December 12 2006 10:55 AM EST
This topic is retarded.
Why isn't it in the FORS? It certainly is one.
I'm not suggesting anything is why. I just curious for the reasoning behind the 160 BA limit.
It was to stop the "He who clicks fastest with best connection and no life, winneth" gameplay. ;)
Is that really any worse then the "He who sleeps the least and has the loudest alarm clock, winneth" gameplay?
I know this system works. And, if it stays this way, I won't quit or anything.
But I see too many great players left behind because they can't log on constantly. Yes, this applies to me (- the great). I would love to have more BA. I log on as much as I possibly can, with one of the highest MPR forging characters in the game, and still can't break 5th highest in the day.
Besides, having more BA doesn't mean person with best connection wins. That would only be the case if the amount of BA stored and regenerated was huge. If you only doubled the BA limit, there wouldn't be such a big difference.
If nothing else, more BA lets everyone sleep more. The people with slow connections pay anyways. I have a relatively slow connection, but it never takes me long to get through the BA, even on a bad, computer crashing day.
"This topic is retarded.
Why isn't it in the FORS? It certainly is one."
I'm surprised at your response... usually you're nicer than that.
December 12 2006 11:25 AM EST
True, I am. Sorry about that, I'm just tired of topics that have no foreseeable conclusion being brought up solely for the sake of argument/discussion.
It gets old. >_< Forgive my cranky mood this morning, I blame it on being sick.
Having 160BA as max or 1000 would be the same. the only change would be that you would logg on less but longer. I think 160 is ok, since it gives you a 2:40 pause before spending it all again.
"I'm just tired of topics that have no foreseeable conclusion being brought up solely for the sake of argument/discussion."
At least there's something being discussed. Sometimes CB goes two days without a single post worth discussing in General. It's sad when there's more discussion in OT than General.
December 12 2006 12:01 PM EST
I saw that.
I read it, but it didn't make much sense.
Why not a 320 cap or something? Give a much larger break between having to log on. People still get benefits for logging on often, but players who can't wake up constantly still have a chance.
I do understand what you mean BBQ. The only reason I brought it up was A) I hate the BA cap... sorry.. just do. And B) There was nothing else on forum for me to discuss.
So really, what I asking for is the difference between a BA cap of 160 and 320. I can think of a few advantages, but no real disadvantages.
If this makes the topic less personal, don't consider it a suggestion and consider it a hypothetical discussion of why. Better? No? Oh well... I tried :p
December 12 2006 3:18 PM EST
Yeah. It's not even people who can wake up earlier. It includes people who have things to do, like school, jobs, social lives, etc.
December 12 2006 3:28 PM EST
I'm sure the answer is something to the effect of "This is where Jon thinks it's best" but I'd like to see a higher BA cap myself. Back when there was a small rollback and we had ~500 BA, I thought that was great. I'd enjoy waking up in the morning, seeing 500 BA ready to use and not have to come back until some time after my classes without fear of losing BA.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
December 12 2006 3:39 PM EST
Okay pretend we did have a 320 BA cap. (actually back in mid-cb1 the rewards were a lot lower and we have a 300 ba cap with 10 ba per 5 minutes, but I digress) What would stop you from asking for a 500 BA cap? There has to be a line drawn somewhere, and 160 BA was that line in early-cb1, and has stuck since then, with a few exceptions.
Climb the ranks and get a 7/10 BA refresh rate. ;) That's nearly 4 hours before full refresh.
"Is that really any worse then the "He who sleeps the least and has the loudest alarm clock, winneth" gameplay?"
Yes. Because everyone has the same potential, regardless of conections, etc. ;)
As for 160. That's Jon's decision. ;)
December 12 2006 3:50 PM EST
I like 160. It's a pretty number.
Seriously now, the refresh rate, and the cap, are far better than other turn based games I've tried out. Imagine if you could only click once every twenty minutes with a max cap of 28. Infact that wasn't the worse one; that title goes to a bad Omerta rip off that let you click once an hour. There was no collection of clicks either - it was that once an hour or nothing.
And back to 160...maybe if more than 160 players log on at once the game self destructs.....
December 12 2006 4:19 PM EST
how about, (i have suggested this before)
If your a supporter, (or not, supporter not a bid dif)
But each person can elect a time period of 8 hours (why eight? thats the suggested amount of sleep for a person a day) Durring that eight hour period, your BA will continue to grow... capping at... but of course x+(y*6*8)=*your BA*
X would be the number of BA you had before electing the eight hour period.(caps still at 160)
Y would be the number of BA you get every 10 minutes.
So assuming your new... you have the 160..+10(BA per minute)*6*8(the eight hour period one is allowed to store BA)
It is up to all of you as to whether the number would cap at 640..
640 would be the 160 BA you get plus the 8 hours of 10BA per 10 minutes.
Therefor you could not use the 8 hours to add to your max BA to exceed 640...
So if someone bought all their BA the night before, then used the 8 hour period... and bought BA the next day... you could not have 2000 some BA
What you guys think about that?
/me wonders if anyone is gonna get a flamethrower out to flame away.
December 12 2006 4:28 PM EST
Hyrule- I don't think the cap should change whether or not you get 7,8,9,10 BA per minute. That would mean a person who just joins and has a NUB would be able to get tons more BA than a person that has already went through their NUB or even the people at the top would have gotten. If there is a "rest" period, it needs to still be a hard cap and not variable like you suggest.
Newsflash: Anything that helps you helps everyone. The last thing you want is to make it easier for someone else. Instead, the goal should be to make it harder for someone else (thus, both of you), then for you to put in the extra time needed to push the limits. That's the only way to narrow the gap between you and person above you.
December 12 2006 7:47 PM EST
NS, does it matter if the BA cap was heightened and everyone got the same advantage? I don't think it matters much. And Mian, I can see your point, but I think a little height wouldn't be too bad. Maybe like a clean and even 200? I don't like the fact that I waste so much BA when I'm sleeping and in school or outside. Some people have it even worse with school, jobs, a significant other, etc.
December 12 2006 7:56 PM EST
"I like 160. It's a pretty number. "
But 169 is a square of a prime (pretty) number. Did anyone say Galois Field??
Warning! Terrible analogy ahead!
Anyways, if you want to play the game casually, like me, then you can do that. Missing 1/2 my BA a day and not buying any is perfectly fine with me and many others.
If you want to be competitive, set an alarm clock to wake you up every time you reach close to max BA, burn it all, then go back to sleep. I'm sure some people do that.
In the end, it is up to what you want. I think over 2 hours between BA refreshes (and more as you go higher up in MPR) is fine. It's a good balance between casual and competitive.
(*You have been warned*) It's playing World of Warcraft. If you want, you can spend every waking hour of your life playing in order to get the best character, or you can play every once in a while, just for fun. Like a game should be: fun.
If being forced to wake up every 3 hours in order to be the absolute best person at this game is ruining your fun, go play another game, I guess.
...and 3370318 and 2716057 are both expressible as the sum of two cubes....
Amateurs. I don't even use numbers anymore, except for subscripts. :)
The fact that you over anyone else posted following me is quite ironic (it's not ironic, it's just coincidental!)
December 12 2006 8:28 PM EST
What are you two babbling about?
I quoted Futurama in response to the beauty of 169, as 1729 is similarly a beautiful number. "Zoidberg" is a character on the show, and the concept of "irony" was themed throughout the last episode.
December 12 2006 8:37 PM EST
I knew it was something goofy like that ;)
December 12 2006 8:40 PM EST
Again, it's not all about sleep. People have conditions like school and job which they can't set an alarm clock for and escape long enough to spend their BA.
"If you want, you can spend every waking hour of your life playing in order to get the best character, or you can play every once in a while, just for fun. Like a game should be: fun. "
You'd be able to play every once in awhile with a higher BA cap, so I don't see the argument there. And I don't know about you, but battling is fun for me. If I got to battle more in a day, it'd be more fun.
Op: The only way that you can overtake people above you is to play more than they do. If you make it too easy to always play the max BA per day, then everyone will do so. If everyone above you plays the max, you will never gain ground. You need to make it hard so that people at the top won't do it, then pick up the slack yourself. If anything, I'd want it to be reduced, not increased.
I think the fact that to be on top you gotta make some sacrifices is perfectly fine.
You wanna lack sleep to gain an edge on the others? Your choice, and you pay for it too, so I don't see why anybody should complain about that.
I guess my point is, these people that set their alarm clocks work for their extra ba. You sleep on the job, you don't get paid :P
Now, I know other things can get in the way, like school, familly, and your 'other half' (corny :P). Bah, I say those who miss that to play CB pay too, don't they?
That is my insignificant 2 cents, thanks for reading :)
December 12 2006 9:15 PM EST
I don't believe anywhere is it mentioned in this thread that the BA should be heightened in order to allow people to "gain ground". I just want to fight more.
But if you fight more, so will everyone else. That will cause you to lose more.
December 12 2006 9:30 PM EST
Again, I'm sure it will. Again, more battles = more fun. Like you said, the game's about fun. Those who want to be competitive can spend all day if they want.
BA needs a cut off at some place. Jon probably worked it out to a good place in the ZEN of geekdom. Namaste'
<bartjan> That's the nice thing about this game: everyone can set their own goals ;)
I don't really need a higher BA cap anymore. Thanks bartjan.
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=001yVv">160 BA</a>