Quote:
So, additional criteria such as trades, participation in invasions, fort/castle captures, differentiation between home forts and enemy fort captures, upgrade status of these structures, gold accumulation*, XP accumulation*, clan prowess, death/kill ratio, community rating (via polling community) and all of this weighted by the character level. All of this would all factor in a more comprehensive system.
|
Ok, but these criteria should not be susceptible to abuse, and should not encourage cheap and unintended playing style. RP rating has been tried and tested for long. And it is not at all game breaking and encourages fighting.
Quote:
Lastly, there can be no singular top player in one genre in this game. Classes are either offence or support and are of different levels.
So, top players would have to be broken by class and the so called "dream team" of the best of each class would be posted. The best of this 6 would then be team leader in effect becoming the player of the week.
|
Yes, this would be in compliance to my "champions race" suggestion
Quote:
The only one I am worried about is the kill/death ratio. Once this gets only minor significance, we should be fine. I would hate to see players hiding away from war to preserve a tally they might have accumulated by running around killing half dead grinders all day. I would hate to see grinders hiding inner realm for fear their tally gets hurt by vultures picking at them over and over.
|
There is more to worry about. Remember "Rosettes quest"?
http://www.regnumonline.com.ar/forum...ad.php?t=61139
And who appreciates players, that "enhance" forts by "gold donations" Anyone? It´s nice for invasions, but really bad for normal battles.
With this reward it will be impossible to prevent them from upgrading a fort.
Ok, in case of a significant weekly reward on RPs (my suggestion), there have to be adjustments to prevent RP jobbery (see soccer event). But fort swapping is much more game breaking. Jobbery will not effect the normal WZ activity.
Osram