petition #1

Advanced Master Poster Joined: Nov 05, 2002 Posts: 334

lee

fix the dark arena replacemnets , they are ruining the basic game

guardian

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:06 am

Is this where we "sign" our names? I support the proposed proposition.
AYE!

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 13, 2006 Posts: 1020

I am with you, Aye!

Grimm

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:42 am

Grimm wrote:

I am with you, Aye!

Grimm

i 4th the motion.

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:28 am

Aye. Yes. Affirmative. And any synonym you can think of...

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 11:47 am

Deke supports this initiative

Advanced Master Poster Joined: Sep 30, 2006 Posts: 473

I support this as well

ArchMaster Poster Joined: Sep 05, 2005 Posts: 1316

I'm <gasp> jumping on the bandwagon.

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 1:32 pm

Count me in for a yes vote!

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:56 pm

I know there is another post out there with people analyzing the sizes of replacements, but has anyone asked RSI about the averages?

Assuming the numbers people are talking about are right - I would also support such a modest reform.

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:57 pm

guardian wrote:

lee

we the paying customers , feel that basic arena play suffers too much and is dwindling to an extent because of the low quality of dark arena replacements .

many things can be done to fix the issue and generate more current manager interest in the basic arena's and possibly even help hold onto newer mangers , or even get some older managers to return .

as such we would suggest a simple change , one that generates less unusable warriors , we are not in any way shape or form advocating that every replacement needs to be a great one , but every replacement should be serviceable in some way.

we are also not advocating a drastic immediate change we suggest smaller steps be taken in series over a period of time so each step can have its merits or problems evaluated .

step 1 decrease the amount of larger warriors in some fashion in favor of middle size warriors there are 19 sizes , simply using the skill breakpoints and a bell curve should indicate where the distribution needs to be

sz 3-4 fewest warriors (the current percentages are fine)

size 5-6 more than 2-4 less than 8-14 (the current percentages are fine )

sz 8-14 - this is the median size and roughly 50 percent of warriors
-should land here (and they are not ).

sz 15-16 half the number distributed in sz 5-6 (the current percentages
appear to be way off.

sz-17-20 half the number distributed in sz 5-6 (the current percentages
appear to be way off .

note the recent data offered by both mannequin and us - the wording in this info does not seem accurate as the middle sized and up warriors do fit a bs curve
sz 21 somewhere near the the amount of rollups generated at sz 3 .

we recommend leaving out the above data stated on sizes in the middle

now looking at the number of sizes you may think that from a pure math point of view that this is not correct .

but looking at it from a player perspective :

1. value for our hard earned money .
2. holding our interest in an arena (we will spend more money ).

these changes could go a long way to making at least some arenas more vital and alive .

step 2 if this change shows positive result we would then advocate looking into less unusable warriors being generated perhaps with something as simple as the program just does not allow any rollups with a wit/wl combination lower than 17 .

guardian

We can agree, in general principal, but cannot with a lot of the extraneous details. It is important that whatever we offer is completely accurate. See our notes.

Advanced Master Poster Joined: Nov 05, 2002 Posts: 334

leave it out put it in dont care , the recent data supplied doens nor reflct only dark arena replacemnnts, dead arena warrior replacements since the change ,if you can supply only that data then it will matter .

using warriors that came from team sheets are not relavant

guardian

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 6:49 pm

guardian wrote:

leave it out put it in dont care , the recent data supplied doens nor reflct only dark arena replacemnnts, dead arena warrior replacements since the change ,if you can supply only that data then it will matter .

using warriors that came from team sheets are not relavant

guardian

Either way, sign me up.

Posted: Sun Oct 29, 2006 10:10 pm

What is the suggestion? Make the replacements better or offer 2 replacements for a warrior or something? I am also in favor of this. The fact is RSI makes $1.50 for each of these Dark Arena fights. Guess what? If the replacements are good and people want to run them......they are going to be getting the same $1.50 every turn. If the Dark Arena doesn't pan out after awhile, a team will shut down and there will be 0 $1.50's coming in.

I got lucky in DM-62. I started running a team with 3 runable warriors and two that I would be embaressed to run. I sent them in for one turn and figured if I could round out a roster, I would stay there. Bam, two solid (Not godling) warriors later I am comitted to that arena for a long time. If it would have been 3 turns of Dark Arena with noone worthwhile, It would have been a 3 team squad or a 0 team squad from that point on.

Carnage

Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:24 am

guardian wrote:

leave it out put it in dont care , the recent data supplied doens nor reflct only dark arena replacemnnts, dead arena warrior replacements since the change ,if you can supply only that data then it will matter .

using warriors that came from team sheets are not relavant

guardian

Are you saying that DA replacements are different than replacements for graduated warriors? Both Mannequin and our data was for replacement within arenas. Perhaps we missed the point, then, if it is DA only. We would admit that many (most) of our replacements were from graduation bound warriors.