Forums › English Language Forums › General › Suggestions

Search

Allow for different-starred turn-in missions.

9 replies [Last post]
Fri, 04/20/2012 - 09:34
Dirt's picture
Dirt

Let's face it, I'm a wasteful spender. I've given missions several 5* weapons just to get that big Prestige increase. Now that Three rings has actually given us some incentive to throw money at our e-peens maybe we should get the option to choose how much of a fistful we want to throw!

The suggestion is simple: allow us to decide what star rank item we want to turn in. An example would be for tomorrow: I have to turn in a Blighted Bone, a 4-star material. It would be super keen if I could instead opt-in to turning in a Reaper Rib instead for the higher Prestige payout. If we don't feel like giving up our precious Blighted Bone or Reaper Rib, we could opt-in to a lower-ranked item for their lower payout.

The same system, of course, could be implemented to the supply delivery mission and arms appropriation mission.

Fri, 04/20/2012 - 10:00
#1
Kentard's picture
Kentard
Hmm...

I'm quite sure the arms appropriation suggestion was mentioned somewhere before; but I'm waay too lazy to dig it up. No pun intended.

My main objection to this is that it'll make Prestige a little too easy to get.

That being said, my suggestion is that this can be done; but you incur a 50% prestige penalty on that respective reward for not handing in the 'right' weapon, though. This way you avoid people 'powerlevelling' their prestige too easily.

Here's an example. Suppose you have to turn in a Sudaruska for 300 prestige.
While the easy way out would simply be to turn in a Kamarin or Khorovod, you would not get 150 or 180 prestige respectively, but you'll get 75 or 90.
This discourages players from taking the 'easy way out' for such missions.

As for materials, nah, leave it as it is. The AH is way too convenient anyway; that and it'd be tough to calculate the reduced payouts if 2 or 3 materials are involved.

Fri, 04/20/2012 - 10:34
#2
Dirt's picture
Dirt
Seeing as there is no benefit

Seeing as there is no benefit to Prestige aside from a neat symbol next to your name I do not see the issue with "power-leveling" Prestige.

Of course, putting a cap on it would work the same. T1 can turn in 1 and 2* items, T2 can turn in 2, 3, and 4* items, and T3 can turn in 3, 4, and 5* items. I don't think a decreased payout is necessary as, again, Prestige has no value.

Fri, 04/20/2012 - 11:49
#3
Juances's picture
Juances
~

No worries, I bookmark all my random ideas. Just in case someone brings some 'copyrighted' idea again and demands money :p

http://forums.spiralknights.com/es/node/45882

Fri, 04/20/2012 - 19:17
#4
Iron-Blast's picture
Iron-Blast
Response..

"Seeing as there is no benefit to Prestige aside from a neat symbol next to your name I do not see the issue with "power-leveling" Prestige."

Well for starters OOO has stated that this was the first of the rewards so there could be a bigger reason to power level for prestige, but for now I see your point.

"Of course, putting a cap on it would work the same. T1 can turn in 1 and 2* items, T2 can turn in 2, 3, and 4* items, and T3 can turn in 3, 4, and 5* items. I don't think a decreased payout is necessary as, again, Prestige has no value."

I like this idea. But I still think the payout should be decreased if not as much.Maybe 25-35% (I dont say one solid number such as 25 because it could start giving us funny prestige amounts such as 150 prestige mission giving 85.5 prestige or something and it just wouldnt work.)

Fri, 04/20/2012 - 23:38
#5
Kentard's picture
Kentard
@OP:

I don't think a decreased payout is necessary as, again, Prestige has no value.
True, but I'm not keen to see virtually everyone running around with over 20,000 Prestige.

Given that we have a tangible ranking system already in place, there is a reason why they want you to hand in a specific item - basically to force players to spend in order to gain said rank (just for bragging rights mostly, but it still accounts for something) or to have the fortitude of owning that item already.

There is a pretty big opportunity cost in such missions already. I'm just saying that this should be taken into account.

Sat, 04/21/2012 - 01:45
#6
Asukalan's picture
Asukalan
Ok, game wants you to spent

So, what you suggest is to make wealthy people who dont have anything to do with CE to be able to spend even more to get even more prestige while the poor players who cant afford to spent anything will get no prestige?

I think it should work other way. If game asks you for 4* stuff you may choose to give 1,2 or 3 instead for reduced amount of prestige, but not higher 5.

"I don't think a decreased payout is necessary as, again, Prestige has no value." Oh yeaaaah, right, so why are you suggesting a way to get more? Sorry but you stink with selfishenss from very long distance. Obviously if you suggest a way to get more prestige it HAS a value for you.

Sat, 04/21/2012 - 02:15
#7
Hexzyle's picture
Hexzyle
@Asukalan

Dirt: "I do not see the issue with "power-leveling" Prestige."
Asu: "Oh yeaaaah, right, so why are you suggesting a way to get more? Sorry but you stink with selfishenss from very long distance

He's not. Read his goddamn whole comment and piece together the relevant sections you brainless fool.
He doesn't care about prestige, so therefore he's not bothered if people get more of it.

Sat, 04/21/2012 - 02:42
#8
Mk-Vl's picture
Mk-Vl
Mhmmmm

ribs

Sat, 04/21/2012 - 05:13
#9
Kentard's picture
Kentard
@Asu:

I think it should work other way. If game asks you for 4* stuff you may choose to give 1,2 or 3 instead for reduced amount of prestige, but not higher 5.
Well you could get around that with my suggestion of reduced payouts if you don't give the EXACT item, but he's pretty adamant against it.

Obviously if you suggest a way to get more prestige it HAS a value for you.
As much as I don't like your tone, you have a point there.
Again this would make it a little too easy for just everybody to get prestige; your point on the disparity between rich and poor players seems a tad exaggerated, but I believe that's the idea.

Sorry but you stink with selfishenss from very long distance.
For the love of god, relax.
You had pretty pertinent arguments; no need for ad hominem now.
Given that it's getting increasingly prolific in your posts it can be quite irritating.

Powered by Drupal, an open source content management system