Quote:
Originally Posted by Twochain
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Coth racing is removed, because it is WAY more gameable than foot racing.
Foot racing is not perfect, but it's better than NO CSR, (Although that would be fun for a bit). It's vastly better than rotations, and it's the most inclusive option available. And obviously it's possible to set up a script to run forward when a 900+ rolls. What the argument here is, the possibility of running forward via script isn't why your losing the races. I don't believe stunningly is scripting, however I concede to the point about how easy it is to do so.
HOWEVER, THE POINT IVE MADE A THOUSAND TIMES is that the REAL advantage a script has, is if it's a race on spawn. The programs ability to never be distracted is the real advantage.
SO:
ALL RACES NEED TO BE A ROLL OFF
EACH ROLL OFF IS DONE BY A TRUSTED MEMBER/GM. THIS PERSON SHOWS UP. DECIDES WHICH NUMBER SET WILL BE THE WINNER TONIGHT, TYPES IT IN /SAY, AND IMMEDIATELY STARTS TO ROLL.
For instance, person asks if all racers are ready. They say yes. He says "Okay, 5xx Starting rolls"
/random 1000
/random 1000
If the person immediately starts rolling, you are risking losing the race trying to modify your script to roll on X. I.E You skip it completely.
There, there's the solution. Please, implement this and go practice.
|
coth racing has a few things in it's favor, imo:
1) to the extent that the coth can also be scripted, the cothee still has to not fumble it once they land and get FTE (granted, this is less relevant now that kael FTE's come with a 5 minute lockout).
2) to the extent coth racing is also suspect, the distribution of winners was spread out more evenly, which suggests a more fair system. If we can't have faith in either coth races or footraces, we might as well choose the one that had the largest variety in individuals who could win it.
3) the barrier to coth racing is much much lower than footracing (which probably goes a long way towards explaining why the distribution of winners is more spread out). to the extent what the devs (and Vanq., at least so they claim) want is a competitive environment, lower barriers of entry to the competition themselves will promote rather than hinder that goal.