Kits should have some sort of drawback. Therefore I propose a ecodollar penalty to using kits. It would be based off how effective a kit is. For example buffer would cost the most, then spy, then miq, then hunter, ect. If you don't have the money in your bal the command fails. This would make not using kits equally viable to using kits in terms of cost effectiveness. You lose out on the number of kills you can get in return for not having to pay. I would like to see the costs be somewhat below the profit margin of using kits, so that using kits is still an effective way to make money, not using kits being equally effective. You should be able to make roughly 20k/hr from sg instead of whatever crazy amount it is now. People would still buy kits but eff 7 mining, melon farming, farming, all become an equal to sg kits in terms of money production. Thoughts?
This is possible to code if not easy. I've seen it on a youtube series that used essentials.
If implemented, I see this suggestion as a kit nerf that doesn't actually change the gameplay.
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Thread Tools
Thread Tools
Page 1 of 3
-
SuburbSomeone Shrubby TycoonBuilder ⛰️ Ex-Tycoon ⚜️⚜️⚜️ Premium Upgrade
- Joined:
- Apr 9, 2013
- Messages:
- 3,301
- Trophy Points:
- 78,090
- Gender:
- Male
- EcoDollars:
- $0
- Ratings:
- +6,465
Great idea. I'd love to see this implemented personally, as it would add some good strategy to not only using kits, but deciding whether to play SG or use another method in order to make 15-20k an hour.
-
UnitedStates2 BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️ Gameplay Architect Premium Upgrade
-
I really like this idea, but I don't really know how effective it could be.
The amount per kill, can't be changed easily. But a charge per command could be done-
Potato x 2 -
Informative x 1 - List
-
-
iTzXtremeGaming ResidentResident ⛰️ Ex-EcoLegend ⚜️⚜️⚜️⚜️ Prestige ⭐ III ⭐
So we're getting charged irl money to get a kit we need to pay in-game money for?
Nty -1-
Agree x 3 - List
-
-
I am not too sure about this idea, as the point of kits is that yes, there is a cool down time of 30 minutes if you just buy the kits, the with kits+ the cool down is 10 minutes then kits++ its no cool down.
Users who buy kits pay very good money for their kits already and an in game fee isn't really going to be fair to the users who have spent over $500 on their kits as when they bought them they expected them to be free to use whenever they want with no cool down time.
I just don't really think it's fair to users who have paid a lot for their kits to then be charged in game too :p so -1-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
EccHamster BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
I dont work full time and go to school to buy kits that i dont get to use fully. sorry -1.
-
Like x 1 - List
-
-
EccHamster BuilderBuilder ⛰️ Ex-President ⚒️⚒️
Although if they did something like skywars where there are kits and if you pay for like vip you get them but have to earn in game money to get them i would be ok. But when i bought the kit there was no fee in game which is why i purchased
-
-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
-1
My three arguments are that people already paid either IRL money or ECD to purchase the kits, and then they need to pay more of their own money just to use them, that's just absurd. Second argument is the money value you get from SG isn't too high and comparing it with other methods of making ECD you can make a good amount as long as you are having around 7/10 games won (Depends on size of the game too). If it was just a 2 player game then you wouldn't make as much profits as you'll need to spawn in your kits. Finally, should there be a bug involving kits then someone needs to go through spawning these kits, paying unnecessary amounts of ECD just to test this bug.-
Winner x 1 - List
-
-
I don't want costs that will cause a loss of profit for small player games. With two players in a kit game you get roughly $1100 for a win, kills counted. If you use less kits then you make more profit. And its not like winning a two person game without kits is difficult. (Are you implying you can't?) So that argument basically assumes your kits are a crutch for not being able to use no kits.-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
-
EDIT: And if this was added I'd like a refund of my kits pls-
Agree x 1 - List
-
-
-
Like x 1 - List
-
-
xX3PICREBELXx JiggaBuilder ⛰️ Ex-EcoMaster ⚜️⚜️⚜️⚜️ Premium Upgrade
-
xX3PICREBELXx JiggaBuilder ⛰️ Ex-EcoMaster ⚜️⚜️⚜️⚜️ Premium Upgrade
My second reason is that constantly people are pushing for kits to be changed, most are deluded but in the past I’ve seen a few okay suggestions which do look like they would do a good job in balancing kits without removing the fact that kits are meant to give you an advantage of another player. Many of these have already been implemented(eg. Enchanting) and in my opinion we should strive to look at more examples of balancing the game instead of punishing people who have contributed into letting this server grow/survive by purchasing SG Kits. It’s not like this suggestion makes the experience more pleasurable for people without kits; it’s simply making life harder for those who have contributed to the server in the past which in my opinion is just wrong.
Finally, we’ve already had numerous nerfs to SG and with summer now ended people still trying to claim they make anything over $15,000 are just lying(I know I’m not the best SG’er but even still those numbers just aren’t legit) and even if they are making that much they can only possibly make it for a maximum of 2 hours a day, the player count just isn’t high enough to sustain that kind of player count to support that kind of income(I logged on today to 21 players online). I can make so much more money Mining while watching something on Netflix which requires so much less effort than playing Survival Games so if people want this suggestion to go through because they think SG makes too much you probably want to look towards other ways of making money and you’ll quickly see how Mining makes a ridiculous amount of money compared to every other money method(Even though in my opinion this is justified)
So there you have it, my reason for -1’ing this suggestion.-
Agree x 4 - List
-
Page 1 of 3
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.