Page 1 of 4

Partial Descension?

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:08 pm
by Sol
Given the ever increasing times to descend someone, with an assumed minimum being 12 hours, should there exist a possibility to partially descend a person? I.e when the defenders LF+LFR reaches 50% (or something) of its maximum the attacker, that is locked into the battle, can choose to cripple the opponent using their remaining stores of LF and LFR OR continue on with a full descension.
It would effectively turn the defender into a demi-god, so it's sort of like descension, but only half as a good. The actual effects from the partial descension could be really anything, as long as it's not as powerful as a full descension. It will be classed (somewhat) as a descension though, so the 2 weeks it takes the user to recover before another descension will still be in effect.

After attempting to descend someone for hours on end, it gives people a chance to not waste all of that time if they think they won't make it until the user logs in again. Plus might help with the smaller vs large.
Ideas, thoughts?

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:38 pm
by doc holliday
Idk. Not really my cup of tea

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:40 pm
by Sol
doc holliday wrote:Idk. Not really my cup of tea

:roll: Then why did you reply? TAF thing?

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 9:53 pm
by Z E R O
Seems unnecessary...

I'd suggest leaving descension alone.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:38 pm
by Field Marshall
I really like it to be honest. It's not a complete defunctioning of the main account. Though it will stop people calling themselves "undescendable" and will give a little bit of power back to ascended.

Somebody who has put the effort in over 12 hours deserves something other than a little 5 min farm by the descender and they are back to the start again!

Gets my vote 100% I think you will only get hostility from the rest of the community though!

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 2:49 am
by jedi~tank
SO this will increase the amount of times a person has to log on?

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 4:38 am
by ƒëmmë
and this helps the ppl new to or unexperienced on Ascended how?
The 12hrs was introduced to help ppl, and as a bit of a compensation for not having a ppt on there.

please leave this alone :)

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:30 am
by Field Marshall
fem fatale wrote:and this helps the ppl new to or unexperienced on Ascended how?
The 12hrs was introduced to help ppl, and as a bit of a compensation for not having a ppt on there.

please leave this alone :)


6 hours is the minimum descension Fem...so by 12 hours if they were brand new and not within the cooling in period, they would already be descended.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:34 am
by jedi~tank
If you do this, then the duration for being descended should be cut to 3 days...72 hours.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:47 am
by Field Marshall
Jedi~Tank wrote:If you do this, then the duration for being descended should be cut to 3 days...72 hours.


I don't think he's talking a full descension as we know it at the moment. Something along the lines of - in 12 hours, it's fight time, both players locked in...temporary suspension. Not entirelly sure...but something!

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:55 am
by doc holliday
Sol wrote:
doc holliday wrote:Idk. Not really my cup of tea

:roll: Then why did you reply? TAF thing?


Uhhh. Weren't you asking our thoughts? My thoughts. Not really my cup of tea= I don't really like the idea

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 5:56 am
by jedi~tank
Bad idea.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 6:57 am
by Clockwork
I think this is an interesting idea, but I would suggest that if implemented it has no direct effect on 'main' and just effects the 'ascended' server.

My suggestion would be that you reduce the effectiveness of some of the ascended 'personal' and or 'physical' levels in relation to the percentage of total life force reserves remaining. Keep it capped at something sensible, like a max reduction of 35% or so (and maybe only trigger the reduction after a set percentage of life force reserves have been depleted), call it fatigue on the part of the ascended entity as a result of the battle.

If the reduction in level effectiveness is applied to 'physical' levels, then it might become worth the 99 turns to put a dent in a large defence or assassin power. If applied to the defence 'personal' levels it would mean smaller accounts would have an easier time or more potential to descend larger accounts or feel usefull in alliance v alliance fights.

Refilling life force reserves back to full would remove any negative effect applied.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Fri Aug 03, 2012 3:35 pm
by Sol
doc holliday wrote:
Sol wrote:
doc holliday wrote:Idk. Not really my cup of tea

:roll: Then why did you reply? TAF thing?


Uhhh. Weren't you asking our thoughts? My thoughts. Not really my cup of tea= I don't really like the idea

I thought not my cup of tea = I don't have knowledge in the area so I can't really provide direction on the statement.

Anyway.
I think some of you are substituting the devastation of a full descension, when the actual effects are up for debate. I was considering something like temporarily removes all bonus covert increases to the main account, or even perhaps a choice to remove the bonuses from, def,atk or cov+anti, or remove a tech level from the MS. Or even something like blocks the use of ppt until the next market reset.

Clockwork has the right idea.

When someone is descended though, half or full, they are still inert for the 2 weeks.

Re: Partial Descension?

Posted: Sat Aug 04, 2012 5:57 am
by BarelyAllen
Sol wrote:
doc holliday wrote:
Sol wrote:
doc holliday wrote:Idk. Not really my cup of tea

:roll: Then why did you reply? TAF thing?


Uhhh. Weren't you asking our thoughts? My thoughts. Not really my cup of tea= I don't really like the idea

I thought not my cup of tea = I don't have knowledge in the area so I can't really provide direction on the statement.

/quote]

It's more like saying "I don't like it as much as I like tea", and for the sake of saying it, we assume the speaker likes tea.

This idea sounds like it could be good if a good partial descension minimum time is established.