The Tier System: (A prestige system idea, work in progress)

[HownDoog]

Can we please just take a step back and look at what we're doing here? Stop beating the dead horse more, and just look. This is exactly what we shouldn't be doing guys. We're so dead-set in our own ways that we don't like anything that isn't either our own, or something akin to our own! Open up your minds, and give people the chance they deserve! Regardless of how far along the GMs' idea may have come, I think they are in the wrong by saying that they won't compare the two to see whose is better. We, as a playerbase, are in the wrong, though, too. We need to take a step back and stop criticizing. Remember that rule from childhood? Oh yeah, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. There was a reason we were taught that.

Basically, people, give the idea a shot. If it doesn't work, so what? At least Brutal tried. That's better than most (present GM company excluded) can say. Even if the GM team's idea is implemented first, take Brutal's idea into consideration as a backup! Imperfections and all. Let him refine it to his heart's content.

Let's just drop the arguing and enjoy ourselves... That's what we're here for anyways, right?

My name is HownDoog and I support this message.

[Brutalskars]

I am editing the new version. And I will be sending it to the GMs. Along with an additional section on the possible 'application'.

[FlyingSquirrel]

Can we please just take a step back and look at what we're doing here? Stop beating the dead horse more, and just look. This is exactly what we shouldn't be doing guys. We're so dead-set in our own ways that we don't like anything that isn't either our own, or something akin to our own! Open up your minds, and give people the chance they deserve! Regardless of how far along the GMs' idea may have come, I think they are in the wrong by saying that they won't compare the two to see whose is better. We, as a playerbase, are in the wrong, though, too. We need to take a step back and stop criticizing. Remember that rule from childhood? Oh yeah, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. There was a reason we were taught that.

Basically, people, give the idea a shot. If it doesn't work, so what? At least Brutal tried. That's better than most (present GM company excluded) can say. Even if the GM team's idea is implemented first, take Brutal's idea into consideration as a backup! Imperfections and all. Let him refine it to his heart's content.

Let's just drop the arguing and enjoy ourselves... That's what we're here for anyways, right?

My name is HownDoog and I support this message.

[Hawk]

You're free to send us something, but I just don't want anyone getting their hopes up.

And you know, in a few ways, our system and this one is similar anyway.

[Reese]

At first, I read this and was like "lolno." Then Brutal used devil magic on my mind and now I support it.

I am confused, however, on how these tiers actually work. You train for a tier 2, say, then that's it? Do you continue to train and get to tier 3, but are still a tier 2 class, but a stronger version? I get how it happens for Felsworn, you know with the more intense mutations and greater command over their demonic powers, but what about, say, a Savagekin? Cough... cough... This could have already been elaborated upon, and my laziness to look through 8 pages hath not benefited me, but hey, i'm only human.

[Brutalskars]

It is kind of like ranks in skill/prestige/heroic expierence that make them different than one another. From a T1 class you may rank up to T@ then T3 and etc as your base class.
Or
As a base class you may decide to follow the path of one of the advanced classes, like the classes that you may train into at T2, T3 and T4

Right now I have it so you may only switch from your base class to one of the advanced classes once.

You do not have to rank up in Tiers past T1, and Once you get to T2 you do not have to keep going to T3.

Make sense?

[hiddengecko]

Can we please just take a step back and look at what we're doing here? Stop beating the dead horse more, and just look. This is exactly what we shouldn't be doing guys. We're so dead-set in our own ways that we don't like anything that isn't either our own, or something akin to our own! Open up your minds, and give people the chance they deserve! Regardless of how far along the GMs' idea may have come, I think they are in the wrong by saying that they won't compare the two to see whose is better. We, as a playerbase, are in the wrong, though, too. We need to take a step back and stop criticizing. Remember that rule from childhood? Oh yeah, if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. There was a reason we were taught that.

Basically, people, give the idea a shot. If it doesn't work, so what? At least Brutal tried. That's better than most (present GM company excluded) can say. Even if the GM team's idea is implemented first, take Brutal's idea into consideration as a backup! Imperfections and all. Let him refine it to his heart's content.

Let's just drop the arguing and enjoy ourselves... That's what we're here for anyways, right?

My name is HownDoog and I support this message.

[FlyingSquirrel]

A suggestion I have is a player vote, as well. The reason for this is that GMs can't always be around, and so something that the player does (I.E. act disrespectful, OP, or anything that would be bad for any Prestige-holder) can slip through the cracks in a Prestige application. The GMs would create a subforum which only Grunts and above can view.

How it would go is that a player submit an application, like what I posted earlier. The GMs would approve it, then they would copy + paste the application into a new post named (Ex) "Shivala, Dead Shot. Danalthar.". The post would include a poll. The players would vote a Y/N. However, if they voted no, then they have to include a post saying why it's a no. Also, the player wanting the Prestige would not be able to see their own thread, as to avoid raging at the players. If this isn't possible, then the attacked player would SS the PM/whatever and send it to a GM.

If they get past this, then the poll would stay up with their posts, but it would be completely cleared of all previous votes. As the storyline progressed, the Grunts that read it can continue to post a Y/N, based on how well the player's writing, how much they work they do/desire they show by staying on time, and their attitude throughout the posting.

At the end of the posts, the players would vote one more time on whether or not they think the player deserves the title, and then it will go to the GMs for finality.

[Binkleheimer]

A suggestion I have is a player vote, as well. The reason for this is that GMs can't always be around, and so something that the player does (I.E. act disrespectful, OP, or anything that would be bad for any Prestige-holder) can slip through the cracks in a Prestige application. The GMs would create a subforum which only Grunts and above can view.

How it would go is that a player submit an application, like what I posted earlier. The GMs would approve it, then they would copy + paste the application into a new post named (Ex) "Shivala, Dead Shot. Danalthar.". The post would include a poll. The players would vote a Y/N. However, if they voted no, then they have to include a post saying why it's a no. Also, the player wanting the Prestige would not be able to see their own thread, as to avoid raging at the players. If this isn't possible, then the attacked player would SS the PM/whatever and send it to a GM.

If they get past this, then the poll would stay up with their posts, but it would be completely cleared of all previous votes. As the storyline progressed, the Grunts that read it can continue to post a Y/N, based on how well the player's writing, how much they work they do/desire they show by staying on time, and their attitude throughout the posting.

At the end of the posts, the players would vote one more time on whether or not they think the player deserves the title, and then it will go to the GMs for finality.

No.
Then it is all about player popularity.
And we know how that goes.

[Uthaniel]

I disagree with the "Player vote". We should get to decide what happens to our characters, not other people.
As for the system, let's say it lasts for long enough, we'd have a player (or several) With an account full of tier five characters, immortal titans and whatnot, simply due to an inhuman activity level.

The number of characters one could have per tier (and/or the number of characters that could exist per tier in general) should be limited - that's my suggestion.

[FlyingSquirrel]

A suggestion I have is a player vote, as well. The reason for this is that GMs can't always be around, and so something that the player does (I.E. act disrespectful, OP, or anything that would be bad for any Prestige-holder) can slip through the cracks in a Prestige application. The GMs would create a subforum which only Grunts and above can view.

How it would go is that a player submit an application, like what I posted earlier. The GMs would approve it, then they would copy + paste the application into a new post named (Ex) "Shivala, Dead Shot. Danalthar.". The post would include a poll. The players would vote a Y/N. However, if they voted no, then they have to include a post saying why it's a no. Also, the player wanting the Prestige would not be able to see their own thread, as to avoid raging at the players. If this isn't possible, then the attacked player would SS the PM/whatever and send it to a GM.

If they get past this, then the poll would stay up with their posts, but it would be completely cleared of all previous votes. As the storyline progressed, the Grunts that read it can continue to post a Y/N, based on how well the player's writing, how much they work they do/desire they show by staying on time, and their attitude throughout the posting.

At the end of the posts, the players would vote one more time on whether or not they think the player deserves the title, and then it will go to the GMs for finality.

No.
Then it is all about player popularity.
And we know how that goes.

Which is why they have to give a reason, other than "Herpa derpa I leik her.". Also, Uth, as I said in my post, GMs can't see everything. Players watching as well would be helpful.

[Spiralin]

I don't think that the amount of what you can make should be limited, but the power that you decide to use ig via roll bonusses or, derp I'm stronger I win, should be monitored, and stuff to that effect.

[Binkleheimer]

A suggestion I have is a player vote, as well. The reason for this is that GMs can't always be around, and so something that the player does (I.E. act disrespectful, OP, or anything that would be bad for any Prestige-holder) can slip through the cracks in a Prestige application. The GMs would create a subforum which only Grunts and above can view.

How it would go is that a player submit an application, like what I posted earlier. The GMs would approve it, then they would copy + paste the application into a new post named (Ex) "Shivala, Dead Shot. Danalthar.". The post would include a poll. The players would vote a Y/N. However, if they voted no, then they have to include a post saying why it's a no. Also, the player wanting the Prestige would not be able to see their own thread, as to avoid raging at the players. If this isn't possible, then the attacked player would SS the PM/whatever and send it to a GM.

If they get past this, then the poll would stay up with their posts, but it would be completely cleared of all previous votes. As the storyline progressed, the Grunts that read it can continue to post a Y/N, based on how well the player's writing, how much they work they do/desire they show by staying on time, and their attitude throughout the posting.

At the end of the posts, the players would vote one more time on whether or not they think the player deserves the title, and then it will go to the GMs for finality.

No.
Then it is all about player popularity.
And we know how that goes.

Which is why they have to give a reason, other than "Herpa derpa I leik her.". Also, Uth, as I said in my post, GMs can't see everything. Players watching as well would be helpful.

Giving a reason isn't hard.
And you said only the one's disagreeing had to give a reason.
Which means they can say -anything- they want.
Even the smallest reason.

Plus, as Uth pointed out, you're letting someone else control your character's development.
I don't think so.

[Aphetoros]

I disagree with the "Player vote". We should get to decide what happens to our characters, not other people.
As for the system, let's say it lasts for long enough, we'd have a player (or several) With an account full of tier five characters, immortal titans and whatnot, simply due to an inhuman activity level.

The number of characters one could have per tier (and/or the number of characters that could exist per tier in general) should be limited - that's my suggestion.

If I recall correctly, the limits Brutal mentioned to me that he was suggesting were...
*Tier Five: One Tier Five (If you have a t5 you can't have another tier 4)
*1 Tier Four.
*5 Tier Three.
*Unlimited Tier One. (Tier ones are normal characters!)

[Brutalskars]

It is as Apheteros said except not 5 Tier 1's it is 5 Tier 2's