 New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in Sim/RP-Discussion. |
| User | Post |
| Phoenixocracy Posts: 2221/2746 |
Originally posted by Cairoi Says the man who doesn't simbattle xD |
| Cairoi Posts: 3745/3807 |
As long as I am in charge of simbattling, the belts stay dead.
Tag teams can happen, though. I've got no qualms with that. |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 4217/4541 |
Yeah, I'd really rather not turn this all into a competition again. Tournaments are more than competitive enough for me. 
The belts idea just opens up a new can of worms that cause quite a few problems in the past. Besides, I'd take best simbattler any day I didn't have to prove it, xD. |
| Xeios Posts: 2919/2954 |
Belts are stupid. There's no real way of judging a 'best battler,' situation. So, I'd suggest keeping 'belt' style thing to tournaments. Win a tournament, here's a belt. |
| Phoenixocracy Posts: 2196/2746 |
...I say we bring the belts back.
At least one overall 'Best Simbattler' belt. I think that it would be fun. On topic, the tag-team/free-for-all sounds cool. I'm game. |
| Squire Vince Posts: 1426/1586 |
That's what i was thinking, i'd like to see this happen sometime soon. |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 4215/4541 |
We actually used to do tag-team matches, back in the day. Ryan and I held the Tag Team belt until everyone got bored of the belt system and it disappeared.
The way I'd see it is that each new post happens in the same time frame. If a mass attack towards everyone happens, then each player has to wait until his or her turn to defend against it and counter it. So like, if player two attacks player one, then player one has to wait until his turn to defend. So basically... Player one goes and attacks... Player two goes and attacks... Player three goes and attacks player one... Player four goes, takes care of any attacks going his way Player one goes again and defends as if the attack just happened. |
| Squire Vince Posts: 1425/1586 |
I was wondering what anyone thought of the idea of a three to four person battle. The battle would be turn based as they are now. First player 1, then player 2, player 3, and player 4. Now this may cause some confusion during the battle which is why hasty replies would be desirable. Also posts would have to be (in battle time) kept short as they are usually.
Now what if player 3 wants to attack player 1? In this case the same rules would follow suit, it would be like any other battle. I'm still pondering about this idea. So I would like your help fellow battlers. What if player 2 doesn't post in time? In this case player 3 is allowed to kill him/her off. Or if they so will it the character could stop existing in the fight. If this battle came into fruitation posting would have to be constant, once the post time limit has been reached that person is out of the battle. But i still would like input on what to do if out of turn attacking were to happen as well as what should happen if player one was attacked by players 3 and 4. Help |
