Disrupt: Spend 350 coins to immediately end the turn, regardless if people send their actions or not. You will also not receive the 250 coins blessing, however.

Oracle: Spend 300 coins to immediately kill another person, only if you can guess which action they’d be doing.

Yin and Yang: Choose a person to attack. The amount of coins you spend will be tripled damage, however if it fails to kill them, they will receive all of the damage in the form of healing.

Husa’s dumb: Spend 500 coins to immediately kill Husa, regardless of anything.

(Yes I realize all of these actions are incredibly unbalanced)



I’m in

Ashton wrote:

Disrupt: Spend 350 coins to immediately end the turn, regardless if people send their actions or not. You will also not receive the 250 coins blessing, however.

Spend 500 coins to extend the round by a week. Don't worry, I'll enforce the deadline more strictly.

Ashton wrote:

Oracle: Spend 300 coins to immediately kill another person, only if you can guess which action they’d be doing.

If you guess what they picked, killing them is easy anyways, so Oracle doesn't add anything new to the table, except for removing the tie to more coins = advantage, less coins = disadvantage. Something new it offers is, giving a comeback potential at a pretty cheap price. To tie coins into it, I'd change the "guess which option" to guess "how much" they spend, and if you spend the same amount or in the same coin range, they die, it readds the tie to coins of both mattering and adds more risk (as you can waste a lot of coins this way), but I'm overall not convinced.

Ashton wrote:

Yin and Yang: Choose a person to attack. The amount of coins you spend will be tripled damage, however if it fails to kill them, they will receive all of the damage in the form of healing.

Actually interesting, I'll have to think about a "double edged sword" mechanic like this more.

Ashton wrote:

Husa’s dumb: Spend 500 coins to immediately kill Husa, regardless of anything.

No.

Ashton wrote:

(Yes I realize all of these actions are incredibly unbalanced)

I’m in

Interesting read though.

Swap or haunt or take over (idk): All your coins and actions are swapped with your target for the turn. The action is free, but you still need to choose an action your target will carry out, so technically not entirely free.

It's entirely defensive move if you think you have a high chance of being hit and not the other person. Also when 1 v 1, this is asking for mind games. If both swap, the action gets negated because that person swaps with you and then you swap again with them.

I really like this idea, though the cost of the action you give to your target should be smaller than the target's total coin count to prevent player from just forcing a suicide by ordering them to do an action that cost more than their coin count. If the cost is no more than half the user's coin count it should be fairly balanced I feel.

Bounty system: if you kill a player who killed a player in the previous round, you would get some bonus coins (possibly around 250~500)

Or you could spend an amount of coins for a bounty that would give another player double the amount of coins you spend.

samX500 wrote:

I really like this idea, though the cost of the action you give to your target should be smaller than the target's total coin count to prevent player from just forcing a suicide by ordering them to do an action that cost more than their coin count. If the cost is no more than half the user's coin count it should be fairly balanced I feel.

You are swapping coins with your target too, so how much you choose to spend affects your coins not target's

Frenzy rounds while a normal round is going on? A round with crazy rules or challenges?

Might be good to keep normal games and frenzy matches separate for people who are more competitive and not into stupid crazy rules.

+ I'm not really liking these suggestions, but I don't mind if there's a separate thread for a round with crazy rules.

"suggest" - if your suggestion is actually good attack x4 coins spent. Receive damage half of coins spent otherwise.

Current Signups:
AHHH
vinnicci
Husa
samX500
Ashton

If I may have a criticism about the current move availible. Right now there is a rock paper scisor going on with the move, with Steal beating Defend, Defend beating Attack and Attack beating Steal. My criticism is that I feel like Defend is far too weak compared to the other move, it is a part of the rock paper scisor game but the unlike Attack and Steal, if you don't get attacked, your move is useless. Not only that, defend actually defend yourself less than using Attack or Steal. Attack will entirely save you from being stolen, Stolen won't care about your defense at all, but defend can only defend against a fraction of the attack and so to be usefull, you need to spend a lot of money, unlike steal and attack which will protect you from the entire attack just being being cast.

Here's my suggestion as to how I would fix this problem.
I would change defend for a move called shield bash. This move will work exactly like attack, first you need to set a target and set a price. If you succesfully defend an attack from your target, you will block the entirety of the attack and damage the attacked for half the coin he spent. If you get attacked by someone who wasn't your target, you will only block twice the amount of coin you spent worth of coin, basically the old defend but 2 times weaker to compensate with my ability. If you shield bash somone who is healing you will block the healing and damage him for the amount of coins you spent. If you shield bash someone that is stealing form you, you won't do anything and will get stolen.

I feel as though this would be a good idea and not too strong. First the amount you can actually defend for is 4 times smaller than before, which makes it extremly weak, espcially since defend as always been a move which does too little to be worth spending a lot of coins in and that if it fails, you simply wasted your coin. It's also not as strong as attack, since you can't decide how much you will defend from your attacker and if you attack a healing person, you only damage them for your amount of coin instead of twice the amount for steal.

Also with the introduction of this mve, the move heal would have to be buffed because the move is now much harder to pull of. I personally don't believe that the move belongs in the game and I wouldn't complain if it were to be removed entirely but if you want to simply buff it, I think making it go to 750 might be a good amount. It might seem high since you would gain 1000 coin from a succeful healing turn but the move is very unlikely to be succesfull, espcecially if there are few people.

Tell me your thought on my proposal, I am aware that what I am sugesting would change the game drastically but I really feel like it's for the better, I believe that defend is way to weak and this, to me, seems like an excellent idea to make it useful without destroying it's nature too much.

First, I don't consider defend weak at all, if you look at the last rounds, if people had made use of defend, even if at low coins, they would have prevented most of their deaths with barely taking any damage. You don't need to kill in battle royales until the very end, you only need to survive. Yes, I made the decision to make aggressive play more rewarding, but that doesn't change the defensive nature of battle royales.

The thing about defense is, that it's meant to protect against multiple people, too, this is something attack and steal don't do, attack can defend against multiple people stealing from you, though, but steal completely leaves you vulnerable. When you select your target with a defensive option, it becomes way too unreliable to be any useful, no matter the multiplier.

Steal "counters" everything except Attack, but it's not a simple RPS decision, either, cause you take a major risk to die really easily whenever you try to steal. Considering stealing is such a massive risk, and defend is such a low risk, the return for both is fair. Even if you take someone down with stealing, you can easily die the same turn, making it not turn out well for the person that did steal, either. That is something that also influences the balance of the decisions.

I do not dislike shieldbash though, I like the concept of it. Have to think about it more.

I think heal does belong into the game (and a form of healing is a mainstay in any battle royale, resource management more specifically and preparing/amassing resources), but I'm not sure if heal is too strong or too weak right now, the way people played at the beginning, heal outperformed defend, but the way people played last round, defend would have outperformed heal. They're different, yet similar. I'll have to observe it more. It really depends on for how much people attack on average, there is a breakpoint where heal loses to defend when being attacked and ideally heal loses to defend when attacked but is better than defend when not attacked, but not too fatal, as it's not as strong as steal and thus doesn't deserve the same level of risk.

Edit: Also want to say that I do not consider this a game of RPS. It's a Battle Royale with RPS features. If anything, it's a game of resources (and trying to avoid attention via your actions, as to not become a target and die).

Bumping this up. I don't think 5 signups are enough. I'll see if we can get a few more.

BUMP

bumpbumpbumpbump

Main reason I'm not joining is that it's hard to strategize when you can be killed round 1. Meaning it's random dumb luck if you are not killed.

I do have to agree, this game revolve around luck a little too much. Anyone can just spend a huge amount of coin and kill you instantly without letting you any chance of doing anything. However it's the point of the game so I don't really mind too much.

abraker wrote:

Main reason I'm not joining is that it's hard to strategize when you can be killed round 1. Meaning it's random dumb luck if you are not killed.

Hide is being added to the game, so that's not the case anymore.

Small Edit: Even now, it's been quite consistent who lived and died, some people are just playing politics better than the others, maybe intentionally, maybe unintentionally. Best thing to do to survive is to stay under the radar, after all.

2nd Edit in response to Sam:

Yes people can do that, but they won't win that way, as they'll be so low on coins that they'll either die immediately themselves or in the next round. If people do that, they're probably not trying to win at all.

Hide is not in first post game description

^ also edit player signups into it would also be nice, and the history of players that have won uwu and stuff !

Will do that tomorrow, tired right now. All 3 of those things.

Damn abraker be salty he died lmao

Tbh a lot of it is luck I’d say, just play eh

new rules looks ok but ashton will still die first round.

Want to point out, that I gave Defend a minor buff against Steal. It's in the original post as well.

/in

BUMP, although I think FG is currently not active enough for a proper round. I'll keep signups open for a little longer and then decide if I go ahead with the current 6 signups or cancel it and try again at some later date.