We have the great pleasure of announcing you some changes which should delight the players seeking fair play. Those changes are already operational :
- In case of default win, the player who withdraw from the battle lose all the progress made in his missions during the match.
- In case of too frequent default wins (for now : 3 times during the last 15 minutes), the player cannot play temporarily and receive a message from Kate (for now : a 5 minutes ban). This limit does not apply in ELO to let the top players keep withdrawing from matches to avoid leveling up their characters.
- The mission concerning KO's with one character are now valid if there is KO and the specified character won its round, which does not need to be the last round anymore. (so you can validate KO's with Ghumbo even if you make him win the first round, which will avoid playing in a predictable way).
- Missions will not be activated in the Events' rooms anymore (we do not mind if you make arrangements in guilds' rooms, but we are against the Events created only in this purpose).
- An optimization has been done which should reduce the lag in case of large population.
The point of missions are to complete as you play, not to actually go out and finish missions. It only limited a player on strategy if they were attempting to do the mission. If they weren't doing the mission, the card becomes a good bluff.
Yes, this does add flexibility to the K.O. missions, but the fact is you can throw the card with minimal pillz (or even zero) and, if you get it through you can still finish the K.O. mission, if you don't then you can still play the game regularly. If you were to say throw out a card that required a K.O. first round with 0 pillz and your opponent threw out a DR, and dealt 2 damage. If you were to have a card like Caelus in your hand and your opponent were to not have a DR, or card that could defeat Caelus, you could fury Caelus and end up getting the K.O. mission that way. That adds way too much leniency in my opinion.
If anything, I say they should make a new mission instead of changing the K.O. mission. Also, to people who have already completed the mission don't receive any benefits or such, yet they probably spent more time and effort to have finished them already.
- In case of too frequent default wins (for now : 3 times during the last 15 minutes), the player cannot play temporarily and receive a message from Kate (for now : a 5 minutes ban)
I have serious issues with this rule. I frequently make pfulls in LW, and sometimes that means having to lose a match in order to prevent my cards from leveling up.
The problem is, if my opponent times out, it results in an automatic win for me, causing my cards to level up. So I surrender whenever my opponent's time bar hits red, to prevent me from winning by my opponent's timeout. As there are many jerks in LW, this means frequent surrenders, and 5 min bans for me. So in effect, this rule is punishing honest pfullers who are just trying not to lv up their cards, instead of the time-outers.
"In case of too frequent default wins (for now : 3 times during the last 15 minutes), the player cannot play temporarily and receive a message from Kate (for now : a 5 minutes ban)"
I don´t like that rule at all. I am just playing survivor and it sometimes happens that you are COMPLETELY lost after round 1.So I resign to save my and my opponent´s time. What´s wrong about it? Nothing, no opponent has a reason to complain, it is the same like in Elo. It is boring to continue hopeless games. And guess what? I just had a bad streak and as a consequence I got a temporarily ban...
Default wins do not annoy me. Only the SLOW PLAYERS do! Unfortunately you do nothing about stallers, they are the tournament´s player nightmare number 1. It is by far the most annoying feature of Urban Rivals that you can totally destroy someone´s tournament performance in playing slowly. The stallers deserve to be banned! But instead their victims are punished (blacklisted) if they react with some rude words...
@Dregn, see here: http://www.urban-rivals.com/community/forum/?mode=viewsubject&forum_page=&id_subject=1655864&subject_page=0
Yes, forfeiting is wrong. I do agree, though, that playing (deliberately) slowly always on the last seconds, or timing out is worse. (Oh, and since someonw was so nice to mention "Germans, anyone" and allegeing 'we' do it, let me take this opportunity to polemically ask "Brasilians and Frenchmen, anyone?".)
Also, yeah, ELO and Survivor are a bit different to other rooms: There, the primary objective can reasonably be put down as winning while BP and missions are secondary. That's not true for other rooms.
I further agree that there should be some effective measure against stallers. That's hard to do though - suggest somethin that works by AI and I bet the admins will be happy to look into it. I disagree that you are a victim if you quit just because you screwed up round one. I firmly stand by what I said from the start: quitting for not game-external reasons (doorbell, important phone call, fire...) is unsporty and deserves punishment. Even a lot more than is currently in this game. Mind you: stalling is worse, no argument there. But just because X is worse than Y, it does not mean Y should not be punished at all.
@Bemmoth: I will borrow what you said:
The point of missions are to complete as you play, not to actually go out and finish missions.
Firstly, many people play this game simply to complete mission; they "actually go out and finish missions", so it's nobody's place to define what "the point of missions" is. But anyway, using your example, if the guy is offhandedly throwing the card away (so to speak), by only pilling 1 or not at all, he obviously doesn't care about the mission that much. He's doing what you said, simply completing as he played. If he really went out to finish missions, this would affect him most significantly.
Now what's interesting is, for someone who thinks missions should be fluid amongst other game modes, you are quite adamant about making missions attention-demanding and specific. One wouldn't argue this point so adamantly if he didn't particularly play missions to be completed (again, just quoting what you said).
So the moral of the story is this: when arguing, please don't use self-contradicting logic. If your next response contains more faulty logic, I'm not going to waste any more time with you. If you don't even know what you're talking about, I shouldn't spend more time figuring things out for you.