Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes!

4 (33.3%)

Well, its better than gambling...

2 (16.7%)

No, I like factions how they are.

2 (16.7%)

No, I like gambling how it is.

1 (8.3%)

No, buffing other players is overpowered.

0 (0%)

No. For all these or other reasons. (please comment)

3 (25%)

Total Members Voted: 12

[Rosmy Sundr]

Gambling is useless. It was almost always useless, even in the original games (except for save-scumming, and even then it was piddly). Even if gambling with other players were implemented, with unrestricted pvp the outcome would almost always be dependent on combat skills, not gambling skill. Scrap it.

But don't just scrap it, replaces it, with "Leadership"

"Leadership is the ability to successfully lead a group. The skill of making the abilities of a group more than just the sum of its parts."
Base: 10% + 1.5% x (Cha + Int)

Uses:
* For Any Player - Leadership skill added to skilldex. Treat cooldown like gathering (greater than 20 minutes = "Strain might kill you..."), cooldown for using the skill is 1300 - 4 x Leadership skill, in seconds. Status: "Encouraged" for 20 minutes, does not stack. Armor Class +5, critical chance +10% (limit 95%), and +10% to all skill rolls of targeted player (or npc followers), player (or merc/slave) must be in (and remain in) your party, and for players, you must be tagged leader. Cannot encourage self.

Justification: Encourage team play early for players, The extra AC and weapons skill could make all the difference for lowbies PvE and give more experienced players the edge in PvP and events.

* For Faction Leaders
Faction Membership limit = 5 + (Leadership / 5) (so maximum number of members in a faction, including leader, would be 65, unless perks allow for a leadership greater than 300% (or a perk the purely raises faction membership limit)

Leadership of >= 100% allows for the purchase of a second faction base (for double the base price)
Leadership of >= 200% allows for the purchase of a third faction base (for 5x the base price)
Leadership of >= 300% allows for the purchase of a fourth faction base (for 10x the base price)

Justification: Most factions currently fall into 2 categories, large factions which take up multiple faction names to have multiple bases, and "private factions" run by 2-3 players (or 1 player with multiple computers/alts). The large factions are impossible to compete with as far as town control goes, and the private ones eat up all the available faction names. Requiring a skill in order to operate a faction (beyond mere speech skill for TC) means a player must be seriously committed from character inception to run a faction, for more than just a group tent with a workbench. This also puts an upper limit to the size of a faction, meaning that factions that load up on taxis and merc guard-keepers as alts do so at the cost of unique members. However if a large faction wants to expand their area of influence (or just their storage space), they have the ability to do so without taking up another faction name. Its up to the factions which members are taken to which base, so "probationary member" bases and other such partitioning can still be utilized while maintaining faction membership.

[Boon Lived]

Hmmm, this just doesn't sound right.
I can't put my finger on it, its just...
Ah, i got it!
Couldn't we just use alts to get 3 bases, and then from that get 9 bases?
We can have bases everywhere! WHEEEEEEEEEEE!

P.S Couldn't this just be Speech?

[Who Killed Bambi]

i see like gamblin (or luck) work in fonline.
when i visit monte carlo in reno with 1 luck - fail all time.
when i come with 10 luck char - he even dont want to play his game.

maybe its not luck or gambling. hard to know mechanics.

[Wipe]

Half of this suggestion is already deprecated. It was said many times, that factions system is going to change in near future; problem with one faction = one base will be no more.

But let's forget about it for a minute, shall we? Your proposition makes 'leader alts' even more important than it's now. I see no point in restricting members limit, and mechanic you propose doesn't have much sense too. It looks like "i want bigger faction - i need an alt with high skill for that. i want a bigger faction but don't like to sacrifice points for skill - im fu--- im in trouble". If gangs can't have XX members, they will buy another base. 'Alt Gangs' are already a case, with upper limit there will be even more of them. But hey, what if faction will get new leader? Kick random members cos new leader don't have enough skill points? oO And don't forget that gangs are greedy... i'll be suprised if anybody will pay 150 or 300k for a cave, if (s)he can just create other char and have it much cheaper. Maybe later, when caps will be everywhere and every bum will ride in highwayman... but even then, there is no point for getting cave for half of bunker price. It just doesn't make sense.

Your suggestion which partialy aims against alts... introduce other alts - only tagged skills will be different. Not much changes in 'faction names problem' too. It may looks good on paper, but it just moves current problems somewhere else - it doesn't give a solution to anything.

[LagMaster]

i smell imba and alts

[Triskaidekaphobe]

I'm still holding out for gambling to be implemented at a latter date.
Gambling would actually go very well with this idea:

http://fodev.net/forum/index.php?topic=17297.0

If one skill has to be knocked out I would much prefer it to be speech.

[Wipe]

If one skill has to be knocked out I would much prefer it to be speech.

Good luck rewriting many quests.

[Triskaidekaphobe]

If it comes to such a thing I won't be the one needing any luck.
Fortunately I'm not the one calling the shots. I'm just the one making the half-baked, misinformed suggestions.
So no luck will be needed at all.

Even so, If speech was relaced by leadership couldn't it be made that all the quests requiring some form of speech would be replaced with leadership requirements?

Hope I'm not derailing this thread 

[Mars Sultan]

I don't like this suggestion, it's much too articulate and gives the appearance that some effort was put forth to make it readable. Since suggestions in this forum are almost universally shot down anyway, you could have saved a lot of time by making your suggestion consist of 2 run-on sentences made up of poor, shattered English. Make sure that the first sentence states a gameplay/mechanics issue in an obviously biased way while the other one attempts to enact a shortsighted solution while you pat yourself on the back because you managed to work up the courage to communicate with other people on the internet.