Death counter

[apophys]

Idea: a counter by each creature showing how many times it has died so far.

Maybe used as a future upgrade requirement.

[Chewett]

why would a creature dying many times be a prerequisite? unlike wins its not something you need to work for, and would more be something easily attainable through no real work.

[Maebius]

[quote name='Chewett' timestamp='1297368879' post='78736']
why would a creature dying many times be a prerequisite? unlike wins its not something you need to work for, and would more be something easily attainable through no real work.
[/quote]

Not sure how tough that would be to code, but the first thing I thought of was a forked upgrade path. Instead of thinknig as Deathcount greater than X, think Less than X. If it didn't die much, or died exactly Y times, etc.
Nothing too fancy, and yes, it is easy to "game" that sort of system, but it's an interesting thought to ponder.
If only as a social value, like I am thinking low-ID, or specific "round number ID" creatures may be perceived as having more value than a similarly aged/tokened creature. It's not "game-mechanically valuable", insofar as it is a "personal/emotional" value to consider.

Or, probably wasted DB space, and a useless stat. The masses would determine which.

[Atrumist]

[quote name='Maebius' timestamp='1297369720' post='78737']
Not sure how tough that would be to code, but the first thing I thought of was a forked upgrade path. Instead of thinknig as Deathcount greater than X, think Less than X. If it didn't die much, or died exactly Y times, etc.
Nothing too fancy, and yes, it is easy to "game" that sort of system, but it's an interesting thought to ponder.
If only as a social value, like I am thinking low-ID, or specific "round number ID" creatures may be perceived as having more value than a similarly aged/tokened creature. It's not "game-mechanically valuable", insofar as it is a "personal/emotional" value to consider.

Or, probably wasted DB space, and a useless stat. The masses would determine which.
[/quote]

Maybe it is not so useless stat. Maybe it can be used to calculate creature price.

An improvised formula ----> creature price parameter = (age + N of wins)/(N of loses) , N=number

All right, sincerely its not believable that this could find real implementation in game. I was just intrigued by the means that the cp parameter of trees would be infinitesimal. Or not?

Edited February 10, 2011 by Atrumist

[Pipstickz]

[quote name='Chewett' timestamp='1297368879' post='78736']
why would a creature dying many times be a prerequisite? unlike wins its not something you need to work for, and would more be something easily attainable through no real work.
[/quote]
Did you say the same thing when you read about win/loss balance? Almost anything in MD can be attained through no actual work, you know why? Because it's not work, it's a game.

[Neno Veliki]

usefull or not it would be fun to see it in creature statistics

[Jubaris]

I agree with Neno
it sounds fun



maybe it should be used only in special variations of creatures, something unique. Like Unique level of a drachorn (random example)

Edited February 11, 2011 by Rhaegar Targaryen

[Kamisha]

If it is going to be implemented I do think it should be left dysfunctional.

For a creature upgrade I think it sort of defeat the reason we have creature upgrades.Creature upgrades I see as more of a reward system. Losing does have its reward but only if you win equal to that for the 100 percent bonus experience that you get. There is then why would I want to kill my creature many times in order to upgrade it. It just seems way to much like a waste.

Then creature value I just think is a bad idea. That means a creature could have value before its traded. Trade value is about the trade not before the trade. There is a reason why trade value is 0 before anything is traded. Also I think we have a pretty good system for trade value. If I am correct which I might be wrong I think it is the lost amount of days after the trade takes place of course cumulative.

I just think doing something wrong shouldn't be a reward of some kind. Its sort of like the thanks for trying prize that everybody gets at the end of the day no matter how badly they failed. I just don't like to operation of any system that does that.

[The Great Pashweetie]

I think that death is important for creatures, like the game idea that losing is just as important as winning, but i dont think that the "death" of a creature should be important... unless using a balancing tecnique for example:
500 deaths/1000 fights=less experience for a creature, like the profile balance? or perhaps it changes game play for that creature, the more fights(The less deaths) the more percentage of extra stats? Just an idea.

[Clock Master]

I dont like the idea for the death counter as upgrade requirement. What about this idea. After the death counter reaches certain number it prevents the creature from being traded or sacrificed. That way if your creature gets a tons of deaths it is stuck with you forever. To protect the MP3 players who need losses to advance to end up with creatures they dont want the death counter can be something that is activated when you reach MP4

[Pipstickz]

Yes, potentially eliminate all of the few ways people have for getting rid of creatures.

Now, before anyone else suggests something silly, think of how your idea compares to getting wins on a creature. If it benefits or detracts from the value (personal value, not trading value or anything) of the creature more than having wins, I suggest you rethink your idea. As with profile balance, it is desirable to win lots, because that gives you stats, but if you win too much, you're going to get into negative honour and get nothing. Model it similarly.

[Kaya]

What about giving you a bonus for sacrificing creatures with a balanced win/loss ratio?

Although I wouldn't use the amount of deaths, but the amount of losses, because dying is something bad, but losing is needed to balance.