Page 1 of What`s wrong with the new code

I hate to say there is something wrong with something one made and not I, but there is a problem with the new code.

I just tested it today and it proved my point.

I only attacked the top 10 dex stamina players, all had no str to speak of. With their resulting challenges back and a couple from others I was able to get 500+xp in a day, yet only won a couple of fights due to the odd challenge made to me.

With a life span of around 30 days, by doing this you could easily make around 15000xp and never win a fight, be in the top ranked players and never win.

The new code has changed it from building your gremlin to take on a fight to building it so all of your matches will last 20 rounds and hope that close to your end, there are others who die 1st and you can then be #1.

True when i started there was some quirks in the code, but it was interesting to make it into the top 10. My 1st gremlin, Bob made rank #7 with a high dex but decent str/stam and was based on my initial choice of max dex, med stam, and min str. SoB, my current gremlin is min str, min stam, max dex and keeping to that is a 1k/1k/1700pt gremlin, and virtually the only one with a str over 100 in the top 50.

He has less challenges by others due to having a higher str and not giving out 20 points for having the high stam vs no ability to hit hard.

If xp were closer to code 2 (I belive) where it was based off of how many rounds, and not a guaranteed 20xp for lasting 20 rrds, I believe we would get back to a more "normal" setting and not these seriously xp only tweeked gremlins. So when I fought say Steamboat Willy and lost 20 rounds in a row, but less than 200stam due to his <100 str, I`d only get 1-2xp not 20.

The Fat Man Strikes Again!!!

I got tired of sitting in the 90`s range and just aging. .fighting 20 battles a day and not going anywhere. So i killed YeomanKing and started over with a lowbie, hoping the codes will go back.. i am only challenging the personell with relative stats to mine.. so i will not be doing the power xping crud... JMHO but that was and is crud and took all the fun out of working on a Fighter vs a Punching bag.

http://www.gremlins.reviewer.co.uk/viewmatch.asp?Index=86273

Confused little Dribbly just noticed a fight he was in that lasted the full 20 rounds, and at the bottom it says.....

(opponents name) is the winner on points after 20 rounds

.....And yet, If you actually look at the points in the fight, I took 956 points, and my opponent took 101 points (despite winning more rounds) !

I`m not complaining about getting thrashed :D as I expect it to happen at least some of the time, it`s just that going by what the game says, I would`ve won on points..... unless it should be saying "winner on rounds" ...?

This item was edited on Monday, 24th January 2005, 04:37

flobble thats what it goes on the number of rounds won.

Due to the exploitation of the previous fight code version, we can`t really do much about the top 10 or so players, other than terminate them which is probably rather unfair as they didn`t break any rules. :)

We are pretty sure the remaining problems will dissappear when they die. Sure there are ways to make fights last longer, without winning them. But this no longer benefits you over your opponent, so whilst they might climb the ladder thanks to getting lots more XP, so will their opponents.

The difference is their opponents will climb it faster since they get an extra 3 points and 2 xp points for winning.

Editor
DVD REVIEWER

"The Green Belt policy is a Labour Policy, and we intend to Build on it"
John Prescott

Yes, but I just had 13 matches for nearly 250xp and only won 2. The others were to test the xp thing again. I got 216xp for 10 matches and lost every single one of them, never landed a hit but all went 20rnds.

The code is still very exploitable, as I can afford these losses since my win/loss ratio is, well was decent. SOI basically this is a free 200+xp and can be done every few days and still keep a positive record and launch through the ranks. I cant` as I`m old and about to dy but I know others have.

The Fat Man Strikes Again!!!

Yes but who does it give you advantage over is the question. The people you beat? Because they get a lot more XP too, so you won`t rise much above them other than on wins.

Editor
DVD REVIEWER

"The Green Belt policy is a Labour Policy, and we intend to Build on it"
John Prescott

feel like I`m hijacking this thread somehow :D appleloggies if I am!

Ok..... so if a fight without a knockout is then based on the number of rounds won despite how many points are beaten out of each other, shouldn`t the game say that rather than being misleading and clearly stating that a combatant won on points?
As far as I can see it has just as much relevance to say they are "winner on points" as to say they are "winner on carrots" as it`s absolutely nothing to do with the decision making of the overall winner.
.....or am I completely misunderstanding something? :D

it`s not me you understand, it`s dribbly threatening to nibble my ankle if I don`t manage to get an answer! :o

Yeah your probably right.

It`s just boxing jargon, where the winner wins on points if there is no knockout. Its just that 99% of the time you get more points for rounds you win.

I`ll fix it at some point. :)

Editor
DVD REVIEWER

"The Green Belt policy is a Labour Policy, and we intend to Build on it"
John Prescott

Fair enough :) I`ve never had any interest in boxing to be honest so have never heard of that, which is why I couldn`t see how that expression was meant to refer to the rounds!
I do agree though, points on rounds seems to be a fairer way of sharing points out :D

I thnk Dribbly would still prefer carrots though, being the nibbly bunny that he is :o

This item was edited on Wednesday, 26th January 2005, 22:52