Outnumbered Buff-a plea to make it useful

#1 - Sept. 11, 2013, 6:54 a.m.

As it stands, the outnumbered buff may as well be called, the ‘You have zero chance of winning, so please leave the server now’, buff.
It gives 20% magic find—33% experience—10% world experience—and no armor damage on death.

All very well and good, but you have to have a chance of actually winning something to make use of the buff in the first place, and as the buff only comes into effect roughly when the enemy is outnumbering you three to one, the buff is practically redundant, as you will be dead pretty quick in any pitched battle (roamers aside).

Personally, I would much rather have an Outnumbered buff that would actually even the score in fight, or would actually be useful—what you guys and gals say?

DevonCarver

#8 - Sept. 11, 2013, 12:24 p.m.

insanemaniac.2456:
why we wont see a useful outnumbered buff:

scenario — player enters map where his server has outnumbered. server loses outnumbered. other players harass him to leave so server can be stronger.

Correct. The idea behind the buff is to incentivize you to show up even if you are outnumbered by pulling out some of the disincentive for losing a lot, but if we put anything too good on it, it will cause serious problems between players. We don’t want it to be something that people fight over, harass each other over, or generally cause a worse play experience because someone takes away the buff because it is our goal for the maps to be full and for no one to have the buff.

DevonCarver

#20 - Sept. 11, 2013, 5:54 p.m.

timidobserver.7925:
People already harass each other over enough stuff. Whether it be builds, what profession they are running, what food they are running, and so on. I’d suggest removing the idea of controlling that from consideration when making these decisions.

This argument boils down to “Well it’s happening already. So let’s just do whatever.” I agree that people harass other people and part of what we try and do is mitigate that. So, we wouldn’t make a change that would exacerbate that, unless it had a major pay off. This doesn’t fit that criteria.