|
Post by sean2457 on May 11, 2013 19:16:43 GMT -5
I don't understand something...on "intelligence" you say "be careful forming alliances because you will be paranoid" - sooo what's so bad about that? It was the initial negative I thought of for the trait if a person puts too many eggs in the basket. Used properly, alliances could be a strong force against superior players. It could be very possible that two people form an alliance but maybe one member succumbs to his own thoughts and betrays the other? The negative here encourages potential player combat and would give the writer nice material to work with as well.
|
|
h24dog
College Starter
Posts: 708
|
Post by h24dog on May 11, 2013 19:20:09 GMT -5
This seems like a game that we really need to sort out before we start it.I liked the test run,but I still think we need to iron out some things before we actually start the game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2013 19:27:01 GMT -5
Im still not sure about the difference between attacking and simply traveling as well.
When we say attack (any distance/direction), that means you are attacking ALONG the path and the spot that you end up in. So if you're moving 3 spots, you are attacking anyone in all 3 spots. If two people cross paths that are attacking they will both fight. If someone is just traveling and the other is attacking and they cross spots, then they do not fight.
If paths cross, and 2 people are attacking, then it's a fight. If paths cross, but one of the people is not attacking, then there is no fight. You have to land on the exact square someone is in to attack them unless you both are attacking and cross paths.
Does that help clarify it?
|
|
|
Post by 101mitch on May 11, 2013 19:33:05 GMT -5
So no to the water/tree thing I suggested? What about my suggestion of 1 person being the beast? I agree with one person being beast.
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on May 11, 2013 20:19:00 GMT -5
So that was your plan...good thing I didn't form an alliance with you... LOL, did Ace happen to go for an alliance with you too? I get the feeling that Ace was trying to alliance with everybody and then betray them whenever he saw fit, lol. I'd rather not say what my strategy was... but if it came to a 1 vs 1 situation, I had it in the bag even if the other guy was better than me.
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on May 11, 2013 20:19:48 GMT -5
I vote computerized beasts, no kidnapping, and love Sean's idea. so who's gonna control the beasts? The game managers or players that were too late?
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on May 11, 2013 20:24:12 GMT -5
Are we all agreed on the concept of the Traits? Like you are free to have high statistics in a few areas but you will be penalized for stacking your character in a few areas? I'm worried that in the current version of the game, people would win based on having a high physical grade as opposed to actually making sound decisions. You could have three Traits maxed out to 99 but you would be very prone to the aforementioned weaknesses of stacking them (High physical = more food and water exhausted per day, High Intelligence = harder chance to form alliances, High Speed = more likely to become a victim of traps, etc.). The idea should be that your stats give an idea of what you want to do rather than just brute forcing your way through the game because you have an awesome character. As for the weather, it just seems too realistic to ignore and leave out of the game. A snow storm would be there to punish those who aren't properly outfitted for it and to keep people on their toes. Hey, instead of getting greedy trying to head to the Cornucopia, maybe it's time to settle in so you don't die from the below freezing temperatures? The Random Events should be there to challenge players in another form than simply having the game become who is the best killer. The map and the events themselves could actually be more of a threat than the other contestants. How does intelligence affect alliance making abilities?
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on May 11, 2013 20:41:29 GMT -5
All in one post (deleting the others) Suggestions: Mountains Swamp Tundra Hills Desert Ok, and what would be the point of going to some of these locations? Like the desert for example. could be a good idea if we have no clue what the map looks like
|
|
|
Post by sean2457 on May 11, 2013 21:12:43 GMT -5
How does intelligence affect alliance making abilities? Because I said so. Seriously though, it was the first potential negative aspect that popped in my head on how having a ridiculously high intelligence could negatively affect your Hunger Games experience. More intelligence...more possible thoughts on a scenario...better chance to get a case of the paranoia. The idea is that you are taking more risk by putting more eggs into a few baskets instead of balancing out your statistics. You should win the game because of good decision making, not because you play the most gifted character.
|
|
|
Post by awesomeace on May 11, 2013 21:14:52 GMT -5
How can my character be paranoid if I'm not that paranoid?
A negative for intelligence is you can't be super athletic, when was the last time you seen an athlete with a science degree?
|
|