Curse

Winterclaw · Aug 26, 2008, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Currently the titles work like this: you do something and it gives you something until you max it out.

However why must all titles work like this? Why not have something that works a little more dynamically where the ratio can go up or down and the rank of the title can go up or down with it.

For example there could be a second drunkard title. The new one would work based on how many drinks per hour you have and it would be total times you have drunk divided by how many hours the character has been around. So if your character is 50 hours old and you have him guzzle down 250 drinks, he'd have a 5:1 ratio and whatever title that is. If he doesn't have another drink for the next 200 hours, it'll go down to 1:1.

jiggles · Aug 26, 2008, 10:29 PM // 22:29

or we could just leave it the same?

Proff · Aug 26, 2008, 10:33 PM // 22:33

I'm sorry but........

/FACEPALM

I mean it's not a title because you're not working for anything, and there's no benefit from it. Might as well just get drunkard r1/2 and display that. If you have any better examples as to what it can be used for then fine but this is just....

Xsiriss · Aug 26, 2008, 10:38 PM // 22:38

A new idea that might change the game!?NEVER troll troll etc...

Anyway it's a good idea about making titles that work differently, but maybe not for drunkard/sweetooth/party titles. Maybe in the esteemed GW2 we'l see something like that, kill/death title ratio would be interesting.

Senrath · Aug 26, 2008, 10:39 PM // 22:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winterclaw

Currently the titles work like this: you do something and it gives you something until you max it out.

However why must all titles work like this? Why not have something that works a little more dynamically where the ratio can go up or down and the rank of the title can go up or down with it.

For example there could be a second drunkard title. The new one would work based on how many drinks per hour you have and it would be total times you have drunk divided by how many hours the character has been around. So if your character is 50 hours old and you have him guzzle down 250 drinks, he'd have a 5:1 ratio and whatever title that is. If he doesn't have another drink for the next 200 hours, it'll go down to 1:1.

Eh, I'll pass. Once I get a title, I'd like to keep it without additional effort, thanks.

Shayne Hawke · Aug 26, 2008, 10:41 PM // 22:41

Titles that would require constant attention like that would be bad.

**Marty Silverblade** · Aug 26, 2008, 10:52 PM // 22:52

As previously mentioned, that example that requires constant attention is bad. I'd rather something that doesn't decline over time, for example, if the survivor title was changed to player deaths:monster kills (monsters would have to be at least the players level). Of course farming would kill this idea but it's just an example

.

Parson Brown · Aug 27, 2008, 12:12 AM // 00:12

I like the idea of having titles operate a bit differently, but this would make the title quite literally a lifetime of work (as far as the character is concerned). I mean, no matter what you decide to do with the character next, you still need to babysit that drunkard title!

fireflyry · Aug 27, 2008, 12:17 AM // 00:17

Sounds like those annoying japanese "vrtual-pet" games that were all the rage ten years ago.

Having to grind is bad enough, having to log in frequently to maintain titles is even worse.

/unsigned

Arkantos · Aug 27, 2008, 02:17 AM // 02:17

So a title that requires an indefinite amount of gold, and once you run out of gold, gg?

No thanks.

tmakinen · Aug 27, 2008, 05:29 AM // 05:29

I'm amazed at the amount of negative feedback on this thread ... wait, I'm not, this is Quru after all.

People have complained to high heaven about the silly grind that is maxing titles. Winterclaw has a really decent idea - if titles cannot be maxed then the OCD crowd must find something else to fret about. If titles ceased to be an achievement and instead just reflected your style of play (without providing any in-game advantage) then people should be happy, right?

To the OP, good idea, unlikely to fly though because a certain portion of the player base actually likes to grind their e-peen.

Div · Aug 27, 2008, 09:03 AM // 09:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

People have complained to high heaven about the silly grind that is maxing titles.

And it's not grind to have to constantly do something day after day just to maintain a certain rank in a title track? It's even more grind than now, where you do it once and get it over with. Like how I quit knowing that my r6 koabd is amazing and Avarre can never match my greatness because he's bad and my titles won't ever depreciate.

MirkoTeran · Aug 27, 2008, 09:12 AM // 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senrath

Eh, I'll pass. Once I get a title, I'd like to keep it without additional effort, thanks.

This. 12 chars.

zwei2stein · Aug 27, 2008, 09:21 AM // 09:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

I'm amazed at the amount of negative feedback on this thread ... wait, I'm not, this is Quru after all.

People have complained to high heaven about the silly grind that is maxing titles. Winterclaw has a really decent idea - if titles cannot be maxed then the OCD crowd must find something else to fret about. If titles ceased to be an achievement and instead just reflected your style of play (without providing any in-game advantage) then people should be happy, right?

To the OP, good idea, unlikely to fly though because a certain portion of the player base actually likes to grind their e-peen.

Players generally hate when their "achievement" decays.

There are decaying things already:

* Top scores in Challenge missions where OCD people can race with other OCD people as infinitum.
* Alliance factions where groups of OCD people race others, ad infinitum too.

tmakinen · Aug 27, 2008, 09:32 AM // 09:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by holymasamune

And it's not grind to have to constantly do something day after day just to maintain a certain rank in a title track?

Ah, but now you're getting it completely wrong. The current title system is there to gain higher ranks up to max, promising e-peen and in-game advantages at the expense of grind. The alternative would be to have titles that merely reflect your playing preferences, are not supposed to be maxable in the current sense, and thus you get respective ranks when you do what you find fun in the game instead of having to do something boring to gain ranks.

Let's take an example, an alternative gladiator title could be like the following:

1-29 RA/TA matches played within a month: Lazy Gladiator(1)
30-99 RA/TA matches played within a month: Gladiator(2)
100-299 RA/TA matches played within a month: Keen Gladiator(3)
300-999 RA/TA matches played within a month: Fierce Gladiator(4)
1000-2999 RA/TA matches played within a month: Rampaging Gladiator(5)
3000+ RA/TA matches played within a month: I Live In TA(6)

If there isn't maxing, there's no pressure to max.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Players generally hate when their "achievement" decays.

And that's why it would be great to break out of the "achievement" mentality in connection with titles

zwei2stein · Aug 27, 2008, 09:55 AM // 09:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

If there isn't maxing, there's no pressure to max.

And noone really bothers either.

What about making this some kind of positive modifier, such as: DPS Title: Total damage caused / time spent in combat with rank for each 5 points of DPS.

Kills per hour, ... etc ...

Basically, good old "combat statistics" suggested every other month. They would go down only if you are participating in combat and sucking.

Div · Aug 27, 2008, 12:06 PM // 12:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

If there isn't maxing, there's no pressure to max.

Yeah there is. No one will be able to max champion (or perhaps even glad) before the game completely dies out. However, you still see people trying to farm those titles.

Quote:

Let's take an example, an alternative gladiator title could be like the following:

1-29 RA/TA matches played within a month: Lazy Gladiator(1)
30-99 RA/TA matches played within a month: Gladiator(2)
100-299 RA/TA matches played within a month: Keen Gladiator(3)
300-999 RA/TA matches played within a month: Fierce Gladiator(4)
1000-2999 RA/TA matches played within a month: Rampaging Gladiator(5)
3000+ RA/TA matches played within a month: I Live In TA(6)

And by your example, r6 would be the "max" title for gladiator, and exactly the same as how it is now, except now the title depreciates.

Luminarus · Aug 27, 2008, 12:44 PM // 12:44

I think a ratio title like this would work better in HA, that is change rank to a ratio of wins to losses.

If you lose in HA you lose 1 point. If you win you get 1 point, or whatnot. Atleast then idiots who suck cant make fame by winning 1 in 3 matches, and grinding out r3.

A title that drops back if you dont play however, imo is retarded.

Hyper.nl · Aug 27, 2008, 12:47 PM // 12:47

/notsigned

It does not makes much sense to be rewarded for these things imo.

Akaraxle · Aug 27, 2008, 01:08 PM // 13:08

How about we just stop this title galore?