For the "TL;DR" people among you: everyone will essentially have their Armor Points reset to zero. AG3 will likely not migrate any points from AG2 with our current setup and direction.
Unless something drastic happens, or there's enough people who vocalize their unhappiness about this to Dan, this is how AG3 will start out.
After our meeting about Achievements yesterday, I was brought in the loop on how "oints" will work on AG3.
In a nutshell...
AG3 "Armor Points" as a sum total will calculate your "AG Score". We will still refer to them as "oints", but the site will show them as your "score".
AG3 points will be awarded primarily through the winning of game-related Achievements, and each achievement will have different amounts of points attached (easier achievements will give fewer points, for example).
The achievements we award for AG2 legacy features (previous rank, forum post count, etc) will not award AG3 points.
I do NOT believe we will award points for rating games, or if we do, it will be a minimal amount like the 2 points we give you now. If this is the case, we WILL migrate some points.
The examples Larry gave yesterday about Achievements showed some being worth as many as 15 or 30 points EACH.
---
I will re-open this topic when I have more information to answer questions.
This is getting off-topic, so this is the last I'll say on the matter: When Dan contacts someone who submits a game, Dan will talk to them about licensing/contracts/etc., and it's up to the game developer to ask for a fee at that point or to talk about microtransactions, etc.. Then it's up to Dan whether the game is worth the money to be on our site, etc..
Any further questions about this can go directly to Dan.
I realy never understood the ranks, but i thought they had something to do with games you made. I like that idea, but i'd prefer it to be based on ingame scores and achiements.
Possibly you could have a designer score, and a gamer score.
Don't mean to over complicate it (which is, of course, my specialty) but you could have scores for each genra of game under a specifics tab in ranks, show the total normaly, and that way if you log on you can say "OH!(are you having cake?) i have 10 points!" then click specifics and see that 5 are rpg, 1 is designer, 3 are puzzle, and 1 is strategy!
Sorry about my ADHD rant, but I hope that was helpful!!! "PASTA LA VISTA BEBE!!!"
Too late. And anyway, you won't have to work for them again because of the simple fact that there won't BE any AP (as we know it now) in AG3. There will be reputation points and the NEW AP (AG Score) which is kind of the same thing, but not really. So there.
Uh, you only have like 400 points. Imagine how firetail_madness feels ;o)
there won't BE any AP (as we know it now) in AG3. There will be reputation points and the NEW AP (AG Score) which is kind of the same thing, but not really. So there.
holy misinformation, batman!
We most certainly WILL have Armor Points in AG3, it's just that you'll gain them from playing games and winning Achievements instead of for community involvement.
The Achievement System isn't built yet, so (a) there's no way to gain points, and (b) we don't know where we'll show it yet. Ron (Gumption) is redesigning our profile pages.
there should be an option of two player or multiple people playing in tournaments for certain ranks or titles aside from the being surf or queen etc. also there should be games of which people can wager armorpoints and whoever wins gets the opponents player points also i had an idea of people who had a certain title would play someone with a lower rank or title and the winner would gain the higher title in exchange for the lower title and a certain amount of people could be a certain title so there wouldnt be to many of the higher rank i think its a good idea myself but i don't know what you think
there should be games of which people can wager armorpoints and whoever wins gets the opponents player points
I don't think that's a good idea. However, competing to gain AP (no wager or transfer) might be good.
i had an idea of people who had a certain title would play someone with a lower rank or title and the winner would gain the higher title in exchange for the lower title
Once again, I don't like this idea for the same reason as the last one.
a certain amount of people could be a certain title so there wouldnt be to many of the higher rank
If too many people reach the high ranks, then the rank curve can simply be changed to reduce the number of high-ranking people.
there should be games of which people can wager armorpoints and whoever wins gets the opponents player points
I'm with Patrick on this one. This could teach AGs younger members to grow up with a gambling problem. loljksbutnotrly. I think (sorry to go slightly off topic, i'll reign it back) that achievements should be introduced to multiplayer games though in order to achieve points would work (Like what Patrick said:
competing to gain AP (no wager or transfer) might be good
I had an idea of people who had a certain title would play someone with a lower rank or title and the winner would gain the higher title in exchange for the lower title
I don't get this one so much. Do you mean someone who's Kind/Queen could play a serf, and if the king/queen lost, they'd become a serf, simply because of one loss?
