TOC - expending the function

[Sol]

Until they have full reserves, the -50 on personal constitution, and -50 on personal defence would apply. Whether they refill or not, if reserves are at full, it resets to their normal personal def levels.
BTW thanks for the work on this.

So it's just a one off -50 i.e regardless of how much LF/LFR they have, if it's not full, the attacks will be calculated if it was -50 to cons and the PD's? And no problem

My Idea is this. Simple. Effective. Encourages logging in to ascended. It will deal with people with a 2 bil TOC fighting people with 1000 PC and 1000 Repel during wars. People should not be "untouchable" because it would take 47 hits * 3 hours, that is rediculous, and I believe this solves that problem.

This would of course only apply if the attacker had a lower MNEC. Obviously. We don't need to take levels away from weaker accounts, 9 hours is sufficient for their descensions, etc.

1. Second Personal Assault attack while defender not at full reserves takes off 25 levels on PC and Repel.
2. Third Personal Assault attack while defender not at full reserves takes off another 25 levels on PC and Repel. Repeating as each subsequent hit before they have refilled LF and Reserves.
3. This will not make the TOC stronger of the attacker, but merely gives a person a chance to descend accounts that are near undescendable by actives such as me but who do not have 5 bil ToC's.
4. In war this is very useful and will encourage ascended play.
5. I think this is very effective and simple way of fixing the undescendables. Let's at least make them log in once a day while at war. Ya know?

2. Is where it will hit a problem, there are quite a few variables to account for, whether tag teams are in effect, the spacing between attacks and when they account etc, overall it would be better to have it in proportion to how much lfr they actually have left instead of basing it on how many attacks .

[Dexter Morgan™]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

It already auto stops others from hitting when engaged, and lists the id engaged. Basically, I wan't to make it possible to descend by myself without hitting every 3 hours for 482 hours. I don't wan't to tag team, as this is MY descension I would be doing. So if I have hit the same ID, before they have refilled LFR, they on second hit by me, would start dropping a set number of defence levels, whether it be 5,10,25 per subsequent attack.

Say I hit someone with 900/900
Then I hit them w/o their account at full reserves, they are then given 880/880.
Then I hit again, they are now at 860/860.
Repeat til they are descended or refil to max.

Also a suggestion to get people to play more and to take out so long a punishment, with this update may I suggest a 7-10 day descension rather than 14 days? That would put them in battle again without people taking 14 day war vacations while descended. This keeps action in main up as well.

[jedi~tank]

Yeah I know suggestion sucks and even if it didnt who would read this long piece of crap anyway right. My bad

I read it, and like your ideas.

[Sol]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

[Dexter Morgan™]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

3X3 = 9 last time i checked. (minimum # hits)
As far as the coding goes, your on your own with that, but look forward to seeing what you decide to do.

[Sol]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

3X3 = 9 last time i checked. (minimum # hits)
As far as the coding goes, your on your own with that, but look forward to seeing what you decide to do.

Ah yes keep forgetting max lf damage changed xD, that being said it's still a 9 hour absolute min shift to take someone down, and the reason we are talking about changing this is to be able to have a chance at taking down some undescendables so we would already be looking at well over 3 attacks....

[Dexter Morgan™]

[spoiler]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

3X3 = 9 last time i checked. (minimum # hits)
As far as the coding goes, your on your own with that, but look forward to seeing what you decide to do.

Ah yes keep forgetting max lf damage changed xD, that being said it's still a 9 hour absolute min shift to take someone down, and the reason we are talking about changing this is to be able to have a chance at taking down some undescendables so we would already be looking at well over 3 attacks....

[/spoiler]

Yez but it would encourage faster logins between the "undescendables".

[Sol]

[spoiler]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

3X3 = 9 last time i checked. (minimum # hits)
As far as the coding goes, your on your own with that, but look forward to seeing what you decide to do.

Ah yes keep forgetting max lf damage changed xD, that being said it's still a 9 hour absolute min shift to take someone down, and the reason we are talking about changing this is to be able to have a chance at taking down some undescendables so we would already be looking at well over 3 attacks....

[/spoiler]

Yez but it would encourage faster logins between the "undescendables".

I don't think so. If it won't be useful for descenders then the defenders wouldn't really need to worry.

[Dexter Morgan™]

[spoiler]

They would not drop levels if the ID attacking is different than previous.
Solves that.

So you're expecting one person to descend another? Too an extent I would expect them to, but the min is 12 hours, if I coded this then the original attacker would only get in 4 odd hits before they log off for the night (assuming they can do the 4 hits during a 12 hour day). Not really worth my time .

But if you wan't to do a proportion to TOC vs Def on subsequent hits, that gets tricky I would imagine. And already exists, only on a regulated level. A level which has proven not fruitful for players.

Tricky...not really...I think I actually made a TOC increase in proportion to the defenders LFR, just a matter of inverting and applying it to personals instead of toc..

3X3 = 9 last time i checked. (minimum # hits)
As far as the coding goes, your on your own with that, but look forward to seeing what you decide to do.

Ah yes keep forgetting max lf damage changed xD, that being said it's still a 9 hour absolute min shift to take someone down, and the reason we are talking about changing this is to be able to have a chance at taking down some undescendables so we would already be looking at well over 3 attacks....

[/spoiler]

Yez but it would encourage faster logins between the "undescendables".

I don't think so. If it won't be useful for descenders then the defenders wouldn't really need to worry.

If you use the lower system, it WILL benifit the attacker, and punish the defender. (or lack there of.)
Proportions should be fair and well thought out, but I believe simply lowering those two stats per successful hits by same ID, it will be very effective. But I am just offering opinions, and maybe I am missing something into the programming already set up. Thanks Sol, Keep it UP