Difference between revisions of "Rules talk:Miscellany"
(Transformation rule) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I understand the need for the rule and respect it completely. Quoting Dev - "If that rule wasn't in place, it'd allow someone to power-game by using transformations to take on people way out of their PL range. It's in place to prevent that." However I would like to see some clairity in the rule. It was stated to me that the deduction needs only take place if the opponent C is incapeable of a transformation themselves. Hence if they can and just don't choose to transform and beat the everloving snot outta the first offender, that's their perogitive. Either way my major question is the clarity of "if an Opponent is capable of a transformation, does the deduction still apply, Tranformation used or not?" Or "If both C's actually transform, does that level the playing field and hence negate the deduction that way?" Please get back with me if I managed to confuse anyone. | I understand the need for the rule and respect it completely. Quoting Dev - "If that rule wasn't in place, it'd allow someone to power-game by using transformations to take on people way out of their PL range. It's in place to prevent that." However I would like to see some clairity in the rule. It was stated to me that the deduction needs only take place if the opponent C is incapeable of a transformation themselves. Hence if they can and just don't choose to transform and beat the everloving snot outta the first offender, that's their perogitive. Either way my major question is the clarity of "if an Opponent is capable of a transformation, does the deduction still apply, Tranformation used or not?" Or "If both C's actually transform, does that level the playing field and hence negate the deduction that way?" Please get back with me if I managed to confuse anyone. | ||
| + | |||
| + | :If both participants use an identical transformation, it is effectively negated, as gain will be (in the case of a pair of 3x transformations) tripled (due to the increased PL of your opponent), and reduced by a third (due to your own transformation), returning it to the original specifications. An opponent simply possessing a transformation doesn't negate this, nor is it negated if they use it. It'll just give you a higher base gain to divide. If, for an example, your opponent had a 2x multiplier, and you had a 3x multiplier, and both were used, your gains would be effectively doubled (due to their increased PL), but then reduced by a third (due to your 3x multiplier). If that doesn't clear that up sufficiently, let me know. [[User:Alothin|Hroefn]] 02:30, 25 September 2006 (CDT) | ||
Revision as of 00:30, 25 September 2006
I still dislike the PL multiplier gain adjustment rule, heh. Tiryst 01:50, 21 September 2006 (CDT)
Transformation rule
I understand the need for the rule and respect it completely. Quoting Dev - "If that rule wasn't in place, it'd allow someone to power-game by using transformations to take on people way out of their PL range. It's in place to prevent that." However I would like to see some clairity in the rule. It was stated to me that the deduction needs only take place if the opponent C is incapeable of a transformation themselves. Hence if they can and just don't choose to transform and beat the everloving snot outta the first offender, that's their perogitive. Either way my major question is the clarity of "if an Opponent is capable of a transformation, does the deduction still apply, Tranformation used or not?" Or "If both C's actually transform, does that level the playing field and hence negate the deduction that way?" Please get back with me if I managed to confuse anyone.
- If both participants use an identical transformation, it is effectively negated, as gain will be (in the case of a pair of 3x transformations) tripled (due to the increased PL of your opponent), and reduced by a third (due to your own transformation), returning it to the original specifications. An opponent simply possessing a transformation doesn't negate this, nor is it negated if they use it. It'll just give you a higher base gain to divide. If, for an example, your opponent had a 2x multiplier, and you had a 3x multiplier, and both were used, your gains would be effectively doubled (due to their increased PL), but then reduced by a third (due to your 3x multiplier). If that doesn't clear that up sufficiently, let me know. Hroefn 02:30, 25 September 2006 (CDT)
