Most land stolen in a single tick stat

[Alcibiades]

We have a lot of land based statistics:

Most land bought
Most land stolen overall
Most land lost in a single tick
Most land held.

i thought it might be nice to add in Most land stolen in a single tick.

Just another kind of neat, fun land style stat. I don't think it's abuseable, i don't think there is anything wrong with it. if there is someone please enlighten me

Cheers.

 

[AndyM]

I like this suggestion, and makes sense to have the counterpart to the land lost stat, makes things more symmetrical

Last round Thombi got the award for losing the most land but I got nothing (apart from the land of course ) for doing the stealing!

 

[Azzer]

Most stolen in a single tick, or most stolen in a single combat (incase of 2 outgoing mobs hitting seperate targets on the same tick)? Just wondering on the specifics!

 

[lavadog]

I think if you want some symmetry like AndyM said, it should be most stolen in a single tick, since land lost is calced that way. Although imo, most in a single combat is more "stat worthy" because it probably takes some more effort and skill.

 

[StormyWaters]

I'd like to see most land in single combat, because you really can't lose land in multiple combats in one tick.

 

[Alcibiades]

Most stolen in a single tick, or most stolen in a single combat (incase of 2 outgoing mobs hitting seperate targets on the same tick)? Just wondering on the specifics!

In a single combat was my original intention since it would be the most accurate. otherwise you could muddle the stat by stealing from say 5 targets instead of just 1. Sorry for being unclear!

Lavadog raises a good point tho... it's more 'symmetrical' to have it done by the whole tick, but it's more statworthy to have it done by single combat. What does everyone else think?

 

[Weeble]

It could be abusable if it was purely "Most land stolen from one target in one tick" as you could then see who nicked what land from whom... I don't actually know if that information would be useful to anyone though :-/

 

[Tombi]

It could be abusable if it was purely "Most land stolen from one target in one tick" as you could then see who nicked what land from whom... I don't actually know if that information would be useful to anyone though :-/

Well a person who nicked the most land in a tick is probably gunna be in a pretty high profile ally anyway so does it really matter?
and AndyM its Tombi ;P

 

[Alcibiades]

It could be abusable if it was purely "Most land stolen from one target in one tick" as you could then see who nicked what land from whom... I don't actually know if that information would be useful to anyone though :-/

Hmm, the only time i see that being a danger is in the event of a resistance/war where someone gets pwned and then an ally really starts to die. And you get the 'sharks in the water' stuff happening faster because people know where the land is cheap. That would increase piggying to some extent. But that sort of thing *already* happens with the 'most land lost in a tick' so i don't see how it could be a serious objection now....

And if people are really up in arms about it, simply slap an X number of ticks time delay on it?

 

[StormyWaters]

Why not just have two stats, one for both?

 

[pinpower]

I'd say just have the one stat but make it from a single target/combat. So its the most land stolen in 1 tick from 1 target basically.

*thumbs up*

 

[Scorpio]

Yep, not necessary but it would be a fun stat, nonetheless

 

[Garrett]

weeble biggest drop in a tick is already public, maybe i glossed over your point? so why not have biggest gain in a tick.

Now since personal loss can only be from a single combat, then probably the gain should be single combat and the wording changed on the stat for the one in existence and the one being proposed to 'single combat'.

 

[Weeble]

Because if you were watching the single gain and single loss you could easily work out who attacked whom...
Again, no idea if that sort of info would be of actual use to anyone (besides immediately pointing out who has a lot of fresh new land and thus a possible target). *shrugs*

I'm not against the idea, just wondering aloud if that kind of data -^ would be detrimental to anyone!

 

[Garrett]

ah. like the scripts in irc use to scrape the dumpdata before. well it'd be detrimental to that one person i guess. may impact front end, but if it's like resistance... half the game is going to know about it anyway.

i think it'd probably only result in maybe a couple picked on individuals, as so many people cba to attack half the time. But i think someone also said maybe delay the update. so maybe that would be the acceptable solution?