It would make the site seem less of a grind fest for requests, plus it would work with the weapon mastery and companion system quite easily.

Great Idea! but it does bring up some concerns with me.

1.) Whats stopping me from fighting a D-rank several times to consistently give him S-rank exp to become a higher rank?

2.) Whats stopping people in general from throwing away battles?

You'd the system where something like that wouldn't be to the benefit of the user for an S rank to fight a D rank for EXP, i.e reduced experience for that fight, which means that the returns are outweighed by the effort, as in too much work for the equivalent amount of experience or even less so. As for a D rank winning a fight that'd be an obvious breach of abusing the system and wouldn't be scored.

Additionally, staff monitored fights could be an option so that throwing matches wouldn't be viable and would void the reward in that case. The experience would IMO be capped at the lowest ranked person in the fight instead of what Jeremiah to also stop the "power leveling." Not even providing a reward to specific differences in powers something else that could be done, if a person is more than 2 ranks above the other for instance.

We could definitely work on this over time. In fact, it's something that I've discussed with Jyu on a couple of occasions. However, there are a few problems that could arise from such a thing (some of which addressed by Hikaru).

Some of these issues are potentially things that we could overcome. For example, Hikaru brought up the potential of people who would hunt weaker opponents, just for the easy XP. We could cap that- For example, an A rank mage might not be able to get XP from beating a D rank, but a D rank would get extra if he won. However, in that case, why would the A rank bother? What if the A rank threw the battle?

The problem with this system would how easy it is to abuse, and how hard it is to regulate. For example, what if we made it a system where there were battle mods who reviewed to see if it appeared to be a fair (or even a good) battle? Well, who is to say for sure that this would not get biased? There could be favoritism, or even worse, there could be discrimination.

So this is definitely something that I think should be implemented. That being said, it's not something that will be easily rolled out. We will likely try to bring something like this in the future, but it'll be slow coming out. It'll also take a lot of experimentation. We'll likely end up with a system completely different than what we start with.

All that said- I do agree, this is something that I'd love to see rolled out! I hope some more members will contribute with their ideas, or at the very least their opinions!

Sounds like a fun idea, I was thinking that perhaps when it comes to fighting so that S ranks aren't fighting say D rank's and just throwing fights put limits on what each ranks can fight. Maximum 1 rank above there's and minimum 1 Rank below.

Example below as to what the minimum and maximum rank is one can fight.

D > C
C > B and D
B > C and A
S > B and X

You get the point.

Also have a set amount of exp to be awarded per rank, as being handed exp equal to quest's isn't really that worth it when ya win, especially if you end up needing to put a lot of effort into beating your opponent.

If you win you get exp depending on what rank you fought.
D Rank: 5,000 Exp
C Rank: 10,000 Exp
B Rank: 15,000 Exp
A Rank: 20,000 EXP
S Rank: 25,000 Exp
X Rank: 30,000 Exp
Z Rank: 40,000 Exp

Meaning if your C rank and you beat someone of the same rank you earn 10,000 exp. But if your C rank and beat a B rank you get 15,000 exp where if you beat a D rank you only get 5,000 exp.

However if you lose you earn half the exp. A C rank beaten by a D rank earn's 2,500 exp. A C rank beaten by a B rank earn's 7,500 exp. A C rank beaten by a C rank earns 4,000 exp.

D Rank: 2,500
C Rank: 4,000
B Rank: 7,500
A Rank: 10,000
S Rank: 12,500
X Rank: 15,000
Z Rank: 20,000

If it's a draw add the tally of what each would win and divide by half. C Rank VS B Rank 25,000 exp would mean each would get 12,500 each. Where if its B VS B 30,000 exp each would get 15,000 exp each.

Also having mods monitor the fights to see if anyone is throwing a fight would be a good idea. If a fight is thrown then no one should get any exp.

Another thing to include to prevent throws is to have jewel rewards and losses aka betting so those that lose will have specific amounts of money taken and those that win will have similar, the rewards would also change depending on the rank difference.

The methodology of supervising a fight could be done by having it requested as being reviewed in the review section with information involving the two or more people in the fight including either ranks, the amount betting for each of them and any other information that is deemed needed for the reviewer without having to examine through their profiles for instance items and companions.

Not a fan of the money idea, that'd be more of an IC thing than a reward, but the EXP is a good idea. Perhaps have an area of the site where users can submit their fights to be reviewed and graded prior to rewarding EXP, so mods aren't getting asked every day by a new person to have their fight checked, and it can have a Review section just like everything else.

For example:

Topic Name:
Combatants:
Winner(s):
Loser(s):
Link to Topic:

But how would rewards happen if two people fought one and won? Would they both get Exp equal to the rank of the fighter or just halved like one of them had lost?

The greatest issue that comes with this (not just the system, but also some of the measures proposed to regulate it) are of which Finn pointed out. The genuine concerns of favoritism, bias, and suspect and doubt regarding users. Think back to the Princess War a couple of years back, and how easily and blatantly that was exploited.

What is to stop Individual A and B from speaking outside of the forums and pre-generating a number of posts that appear to display a huge long fight sequence to which they start popping out in rapid succession or multiple times with very little deviation. On one hand, Moderator C or Individual D might look at that, think that they are trying to cheat the system by spamming posts, which may lead to A or B arguing that they're just trying to fine-tune their fights. It's open to a number of different interpretations.

As to the betting idea, myself personally, I am against it. Similar to the notion of fight trading, this as much seems like a way to get around the penalties associated with transferring money, and also opens the door to risks of fixing fights in order to pay out huge dividends to people.

With Odin's idea as to the fights for review, it again brings the question of bias, who will be grading it, can they tell it is a genuine fight or not, do they know how to grade fights, are they just going to give the credit regardless, do they even care? A lot of factors which can throw objectivity and proper dissection of fights out the window.

To the notion that capping experience is going to deter people away from spam fighting, I would argue that even capping the experience that one can get from a fight isn't going to deter anyone away. It's been made no secret that there are those who have expressed great opposition to the grind-like nature of the site and regardless of my personal opinion on it, much of the site is designed with that in mind.

That said, combat has also become a rather large aspect to it as well, with it being a mandate in some cases (guilds, evolutions of pets, etc), so it'd be wrong of me to simply dismiss the idea. However, I think at the moment and until a fully fleshed out idea is crafted - as Finn and Hikaru have both pointed out, the chances for exploiting this system is significant - consideration should be kept, but I would lean against simply a compendium of ideas that were proposed in this thread.

The money was just a suggestion to prevent rigging as money leaves a trail that can be cross checked by having a look at the bank transfer logs on top of that 'cheaters' would have to take into consideration the banking regulations which would make it very noticeable if things were happening that shouldn't be.

Besides who said the rewards would have to be huge, if it was a predetermined amount of money that was required for those types of fights then there wouldn't necessarily be an issue with fight fixing for money, for instance a D rank fighting another D rank they both put in 25k, one wins gets 60k with the extra 10k as a bonus, there done. Note: Banking transfers have a fee typically around the 20% mark depending on the town meaning you'd lose any reward boost and require ic posts to do the transaction, with the exception of Black Dahlia organization so it's super obvious in that case.

Forcing a fight to be orange or red for it to be is another way to detract those that want to rig the system making fighting a riskier venture in the first place to get an extra reward or something on the side, because no-one wants to lose an arm for a chunk of jewels and some experience. Additionally enforcing caps on fighting a certain person is another option i.e once a month to prevent people 'throwing matches.' Events and Tourneys would be a separate thing entirely

As for Biases towards players that's always, always going to happen and if you want the site to not just be a grind fest in regards to requesting for money to burn it on spells to grind to use them for more grinding in requests than that's something that everyone would have to be willing to risk.

To prevent the repetition abuse you can have the fight/s moderated by two staffs in a separate group prior, during and after the fight is done or if something happens that needs to be challenged. Additionally the inclusion of a mandated fighting tally of all your character's past and present fights including the participants as well as other important information is another way to ensure the prevention of rigging.

This thread has been answered and conversation has ended. It will now be moved.