Throw down the Gauntlet - Pistols at Dawn *Pending*

[yeti_c]

I wonder what the Modulators think of this?

C.

[The1exile]

I wonder what the Modulators think of this?

C.

If they're not gaping in awe of this wonderful suggestion, out with the silk glove and get slappin'!

[dominationnation]

I like the idea but I dont thimk that lack will be to eager to add it. It is like private games except with 18th century messages

[yeti_c]

I like the idea but I dont thimk that lack will be to eager to add it. It is like private games except with 18th century messages

Exactly!!!!!!!!

C.

[lackattack]

Screw the freestyle snobs - chalengee should pick all options!

Really, this sounds like a neat feature, but since it can be simulated with pms, it is a low priority. I'm classifying it as Pending.

[Anarchist]

To the Death!

[yeti_c]

Screw the freestyle snobs - chalengee should pick all options!

Really, this sounds like a neat feature, but since it can be simulated with pms, it is a low priority. I'm classifying it as Pending.

Woohoo...

My first suggestion gets in!!

C.

[firth4eva]

bump

[Arbotross]

we also should have a seperate win/loss [%] row for challenges that way people know who they are messing with when they challenge someone

[yeti_c]

we also should have a seperate win/loss [%] row for challenges that way people know who they are messing with when they challenge someone

Awesome necrobump - but it's a great thread so I'll let you off!!!!

C.

[Ditocoaf]

woah... awesome bump. I've never seen this thread before.

About the challenger/challengee options thing. I would propose letting the challenger choose options to set or leave them up for grabs. If you want them to actually accept, then give them the choice! But if you, for instance, cannot stand Freestyle, then you should have the choice to give a conditional challenge. If the challengee doesn't like some of the settings, they just reject it.

[4V4T4R]

awesome idea. some thoughts:
-The challenger should have the option of calling off the duel after the conditions are decided by the challenged. (this is also more realistic.. as one way to avoid a duel without refusing to duel is to choose ridiculous conditions, attempting to get the challenger to back out. i.e. shotguns at three paces, etc.)
-There should be a statistics system similar to feedback, that tracks how many duels a player declines. This would also limit the number of random challenges, as the challenged just might accept and create a ridiculous game that you would then be forced to drop (or play through).

[Ray Rider]

we also should have a seperate win/loss [%] row for challenges that way people know who they are messing with when they challenge someone

Good idea, but it would be annoying for higher lvl players who get challenged by low lvls (either they accept and risk losing a ton of points, or they decline and their challenge win % goes down).

[Thezzaruz]

or they decline and their challenge win % goes down).

Declining a challenge = a loss???

[Ray Rider]

or they decline and their challenge win % goes down).

Declining a challenge = a loss???

Oh, I guess I was just assuming that declining a challenge would count against a person's %. If it wouldn't--then great; no problomo.

[MoreTeaVicar]

The idea of a 'Challenge' game reminds me of Chess club league ladder at school (over 40 years ago). Then the aim was to progress up the ladder. The rule then was you could only challenge a player who was under 4 places above you. A player could refuse, but could not refuse 3 challenges in a row.

Although the idea of 'throwing down the gaunlet' is a nice 18th C. notion, lets not lose realism here. People want to climb the rankings, and as such will only want to challenge players above them.
How about restricting the ability to challenge so that you can't challenge someone more than say 2 ranks (or xx points) above you.
It may be possible to introduce the rule that a player can't refuse more than say 9 challenges in a row. (there also has to be some acceptance that not everyone is available to play for some lengths of time, holidays, illness, working away etc so there should be some allowance to accept a challenge but to delay the game to a future time)

For pure grudge matches, you would be able to issue challenges an unlimited number of ranks below you and a challenge from above can't be refused.

This will partially protect the upper ranks (I am NOT one of their number, so no bias here) from being inundated with challenges from newbies etc.

[Ditocoaf]

...It may be possible to introduce the rule that a player can't refuse more than say 9 challenges in a row...For pure grudge matches, you would be able to issue challenges an unlimited number of ranks below you and a challenge from above can't be refused.

If this is instated, I'm sure it will be purely optional. Nobody should ever be forced to play a game in any way.

[nevik11]

Maybe have it so you can only challenge people of your rank or above

[hildspe10]

I don't know how the administrators might choose to do this, but I really love this general idea!

[Timminz]

Maybe have it so you can only challenge people of your rank or above

Why? The way I understand it, if you challenge someone, they can decide whether or not to accept, and the map/settings.

[t-o-m]

quench

[Soloman]

really intersting concept...

[yeti_c]

My first ever *decent* suggestion gets another uncovering!!

Yay for Benjikat - and gauntlets.

C.

[Inhuman14]

Concise description:

• Basically, this would be a one v. one option for creating games. The idea is that you would challenge someone that is within a close range of you (50-100 rank points sounds about right) to a "duel" type battle.

Specifics:

• A challenged player would get a message in their inbox saying that so and so has challenged them to a match on XXX map.
• At this point, the challenge-ee has two options. They can Deny or Accept the challenge. I believe there should be a mild penalty for denying a challenge, but I doubt the community would accept that, so I'll say that there is none.
• There will be an "Do/Do Not accept or send ANY challenges" toggle in the Game settings that also prevents point loss for denying challenges by default. This should help with players who only play 2 v 2 or something like that. This will also help players who want total control over who they fight. Thanks for pointing this out, denominator and Redfelt.
  
• If the challenge-ee accepts the challenge, they choose all of the style details of the match (freestyle/standard, Flat/Escalating/None, Fog of War, etc.). This is traditional in duel type situations, and is only fair - The challenged must have some advantages.
• Here's the catch. If you win, you gain X2 points, but if you lose, you lose X2.5 points to the challenged. This seems to me like it would be maximum incentive to challenge and accept challenges. These modifiers are up for alteration if they seem too much or too little.
• I think that only one or two challenges will be able to be sent out at a time. Else I believe this feature would be abused.
• There should be an Accept No/All challenges button on the Game Settings. Maybe even a point range feature. - This one thanks to SuicidalSnowman.

Possible problems - Farming is possible, but with the relatively narrow point range, it would be tough to do at any sort of high level.
I believe with the 1-2 challenge limit it also prevents challenging everyone in sight in a wanton manner.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• This will help up-and-coming players advance more quickly in rank and increase mobility across the board.
• This will also allow higher ranked players to challenge someone they hate/think they're better than for higher-than-normal stakes.

Please give me feedback on this idea, whether you like it or not - I want to know more about the community so that I can contribute more fully in the future.

[pimphawks70]

this is a very good idea... not sure how well it will be accepted though!