N*B alternative using realms (in General)


Talion August 14 2007 8:47 AM EDT

I just had an idea and after pondering it a bit, I think it could actually work.

(1) When an existing character reaches Gondor, it can then access 4 new sub-realms. It is placed in the realm most appropriate to its current MPR.

(2) When a new character is created, it always starts off in the 'lower' sub-realm of Gondor.

(3) If a character manages to keep the top MPR of a sub-realm for more than one week, it accesses the next sub-realm until it reaches the 'top' sub-realm of Gondor.

(4) Fight bonuses are calculated based on a proportions between the attacker, the defender, and the top character in the current sub-realm. In other words, if you reach the second spot, you can only have a positive fight bonus if you fight and defeat or draw against the top character in your sub-realm.

(5) Fighting characters in lower sub-realms yields negative rewards.

(6) Rules 4 and 5 get applied to other realms (Shire, Rivendell, Lorien)

(7) Only money can be transfered between realms and sub-realms. No items (except through auctions and the store). It would still be possible to loan items between realms and sub-realms.


So basically, no more NCB and NUB. The weakest characters in a realm or sub-realm get the biggest bonuses and the mightiest gets no bonus until he accesses the next realm.

Since the bonus would be *proportional* the the MPR difference between the top character, it would always be possible to catch it, although in the final weeks, or months, it would take a lot of dedication. Which is the way it should be.

Also, the addition of sub-realms would mean that interim goals have to be attained before making a run for the top spot. That would make the race a lot more interesting.

What do you think?

QBJohnnywas August 14 2007 8:49 AM EDT

So, the absolute top character gets .....nothing?

QBJohnnywas August 14 2007 8:53 AM EDT

Sorry that came off a little harsh. I like the ideas, having more goals is always cool. But from what you describe there is no advantage to taking the top spot. So you'd be better off fighting to stay number 2....

Talion August 14 2007 9:06 AM EDT

Well, since the goal is taking the top spot, once you have it, the challenge is keeping it. If the second spot character can't beat you or at least get a draw against you, you maintain the top spot.

During a car race, when you get the lead, there is no one left to pass except cars that don't even have a hope of winning the race. So the goal becomes staying in front of the second place car even if it has that 'wind drag sling shot' advantage.

So you are saying that no one would shoot for the top spot because they would get no more bonuses? I don't understand your logic. Then again, I can be pretty dense sometimes.

QBRanger August 14 2007 9:10 AM EDT

"So, the absolute top character gets .....nothing?"

Now I am very confused.

Is that not what you want? The top character to get nothing while those below get bonuses to try to catch the top character?

Talion August 14 2007 9:18 AM EDT

Also, with my suggestion, if you are holding the second spot, the only way to get a bonus is by beating the top spot character.

So if your goal is to get the biggest possible bonus, you would have to make certain you retain the last spot in your realm or sub-realm.

I don't think anyone would really shoot for that.

QBJohnnywas August 14 2007 9:22 AM EDT

Not what I want Ranger; personally I want everyone to have a fair shot; but there's no point going for the top if it's only about holding position. No positive rewards up there would mean a top position would have a pretty hard job of holding out.

Talion August 14 2007 9:46 AM EDT

Why would it be so hard to hold? I don't understand that part of your reasoning.

If the second spot character can't beat you, it can't gain any ground. So if you reach the top spot, it becomes a mater of having a good strategy.

If the second spot character has a better strategy, you are doomed. If your strategy is better, he will never catch you.

You might argue that the second spot character will have a strategy out in place to beat the top spot character. But if every other contender thinks that way, you will not be able to beat the second spot character when you reach 3rd spot because you will have the same exact strategy and he will already be stronger than you. Therefore, you will never overtake the second spot character.

It makes total sense to me. No?

QBJohnnywas August 14 2007 9:57 AM EDT

That makes sense, but if the more you're at the top the worse your rewards would be - is what you're suggesting? Or am I missing something?

Talion August 14 2007 10:01 AM EDT

Actually, I am only referring to the rewards bonus. Not the rewards themselves.

So now I see why you thought it made no sense.

QBJohnnywas August 14 2007 10:22 AM EDT

Aha, yes I misread your original post. No that makes sense now. And yes, I do like the idea of more 'goals'. We should have more of those anyway! And get rewarded for it. ;)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] August 14 2007 10:29 AM EDT

"So basically, no more NCB and NUB. The weakest characters in a realm or sub-realm get the biggest bonuses and the mightiest gets no bonus until he accesses the next realm.

Since the bonus would be *proportional* the the MPR difference between the top character, it would always be possible to catch it, although in the final weeks, or months, it would take a lot of dedication. Which is the way it should be.

Also, the addition of sub-realms would mean that interim goals have to be attained before making a run for the top spot. That would make the race a lot more interesting."

A lot like OB and I are recently discussion in the Clan thread. :D

Wouldn't need sub relams to work, but they can always be added for extra goals, and everyone (As JW says) likes the feeling of acclompishment. ;)

Ages ago I suggested something about spltting players into Realms, but I can't remember what it was I was suggesting! LoL! ;) I think i've seen ideas for using the Relams to do more crop up every now and again. ;)

Talion August 14 2007 10:37 AM EDT

"Wouldn't need sub relams to work, but they can always be added for extra goals,"

Yes, exactly. The sub-realms idea has 3 goals:

(1) Attainable objectives other than the absolute top spot.

(2) Make it hard to access the higher realms without some dedication on a players part.

(3) Prevent new characters from starting with, for example, 350 AC armor and/or a +200 pair of DB.
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=002Bk6">N*B alternative using realms</a>