Well well well, more spring exp. pips - Page 2

Well well well, more spring exp. pips

Discuss the source code and development of Spring Engine in general from a technical point of view. Patches go here too.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
FizWizz
Posts: 1998
Joined: 17 Aug 2005, 11:42

Post by FizWizz »

128 hours, and I would say I am only average.
User avatar
Min3mat
Posts: 3455
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 20:19

Post by Min3mat »

pleh quoting is hard
Last edited by Min3mat on 04 May 2006, 00:41, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Min3mat
Posts: 3455
Joined: 17 Nov 2004, 20:19

Post by Min3mat »

Caydr wrote:If it were a perfect world and I was the unholy overlord of all things gaming, I'd just use the forum emoticons as the rank images ^^

:cry: = less than 5 hours
:( = 5-10 hours
:| = 11-25 hours
:wink: = 26-50 hours
8) = 51-100 hours
:evil: = 101-500 hours
:twisted: = 501-1000 hours
:mrgreen: = 1000+ hours

Eh? Eh? Am I right or what?
nah


:shock:= less than 5 hours
:o= 5-10 hours
:| = 11-25 hours
:wink: = 26-50 hours
8) = 51-100 hours
:evil: = 101-665 hours
:twisted: = 666-1000 hours
:cry: = 1000+ hours

because a: noone should look sad playing spring!
and b. emos > yuo
and c: 666 is a sweet no tbh ^.^
User avatar
FizWizz
Posts: 1998
Joined: 17 Aug 2005, 11:42

Post by FizWizz »

Min3mat wrote:
Caydr wrote:If it were a perfect world and I was the unholy overlord of all things gaming, I'd just use the forum emoticons as the rank images ^^

:cry: = less than 5 hours
:( = 5-10 hours
:| = 11-25 hours
:wink: = 26-50 hours
8) = 51-100 hours

:evil: = 101-500 hours
:twisted: = 501-1000 hours
:mrgreen: = 1000+ hours

Eh? Eh? Am I right or what?
nah


:shock:= less than 5 hours
:o= 5-10 hours
:| = 11-25 hours
:wink: = 26-50 hours
8) = 51-100 hours
:evil: = 101-665 hours
:twisted: = 666-1000 hours
:cry: = 1000+ hours

because a: noone should look sad playing spring!
and b. emos > yuo
and c: 666 is a sweet no tbh ^.^
you need to start taking your meds, Min3Mat.
and b: emos < all
and c: 666 = whoopty-f---ing-do, the number that comes between 665 and 667. Actually, 666 does have some signifance to me, I had a computer with a 666MHz CPU.
jouninkomiko
Posts: 436
Joined: 26 Aug 2004, 08:11

Post by jouninkomiko »

A MAJOR problem with WoW was that pvp rank was dependant on how MUCH time you played, rather than solely the skill involved. I'd love to see this changed to reflect real skill rather than real lack of a life.

... On a side note, I have played spring for the sum total of 4 hours, since its conception. And I was a dev before the first public release. Soon, I'll start loggin some gametime :)
nfekti0n
Posts: 46
Joined: 08 Feb 2006, 16:15

Post by nfekti0n »

A MAJOR problem with WoW was that pvp rank was dependant on how MUCH time you played, rather than solely the skill involved. I'd love to see this changed to reflect real skill rather than real lack of a life.
Guild Wars is the game for that. :-)
Egarwaen
Posts: 1207
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 21:19

Post by Egarwaen »

jouninkomiko wrote:A MAJOR problem with WoW was that pvp rank was dependant on how MUCH time you played, rather than solely the skill involved. I'd love to see this changed to reflect real skill rather than real lack of a life.
There was a thread about that in Game Lobby not too long ago. The consensus was that this would be bad for the "global" ladder, but very good for any "voluntary" ladders that started.
User avatar
Targ Collective
Posts: 202
Joined: 12 Nov 2005, 14:16

Post by Targ Collective »

Perhaps a system based on wins vs losses combined with abitrary 'experience' would be best. Wood = 3:1 losses to wins, Stone = 2:1 losses to wins, Iron = 1:1 losses to wins, Bronze = 1:2 losses to wins, Silver = 1:3 losses to wins, Gold = 1:4 losses to wins.

I know, you're doing well to get 1:2. I just can't be bothered to think in terms of 1:1.6, etc. You get the idea.
Tobi
Spring Developer
Posts: 4598
Joined: 01 Jun 2005, 11:36

Post by Tobi »

wouldn't that turn it into a true competition, which many people oppose too (including me)?
User avatar
Targ Collective
Posts: 202
Joined: 12 Nov 2005, 14:16

Post by Targ Collective »

...Yes. I'm sorry, I didn't realise you opposed the idea.

EDIT: Saying that, it is worth considering so long as people don't take their competitive urges too far. Anti-newbieism benefits no-one. I guess that's why you're against it, right?
User avatar
jcnossen
Former Engine Dev
Posts: 2440
Joined: 05 Jun 2005, 19:13

Post by jcnossen »

We've had this discussion before in the general forum, just search.
IIRC, it was concluded that all the competitions should remain optional, which implies that you only define the ranks with playing time or some other thing not based on skill.
jouninkomiko
Posts: 436
Joined: 26 Aug 2004, 08:11

Post by jouninkomiko »

I think there needs to be an element of competition to obtain a rank. I mean, that's what it's all about. Maybe you should be able to get experience for beating people of a certain rank. Like... if you beat a "nobody" it shouldn't contribute to your experience which can eventually take you up to another level. The best player should be the Supreme Commander, nuff said.
User avatar
LOrDo
Posts: 1154
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 00:21

Post by LOrDo »

jouninkomiko wrote:I think there needs to be an element of competition to obtain a rank. I mean, that's what it's all about. Maybe you should be able to get experience for beating people of a certain rank. Like... if you beat a "nobody" it shouldn't contribute to your experience which can eventually take you up to another level. The best player should be the Supreme Commander, nuff said.
So no experiance would increase just by playing? You have to beat someone to get experiance? I liek the idea, sorta. But like many people have said, spring really isn't ready for competition yet.
Post Reply

Return to “Engine”