Choosing who fights

[PvK]

Isn't there an inherent unfairness in the ability to choose which warrior you will send to a match, after being shown who the specific opponent is?

You can even hire a new fighter and use them.

Seems like, to be entirely fair, you should see the expected enemy, and be able to see the potential alternates, with some chance the opposing manager will switch and use one of the alternates, instead. And if you hire someone new, they shouldn't be allowed to fight in the same period they were hired.

Or am I missing something? Was it just considered that giving the player this element of control was more important than fairness?

PvK

[StormcloudCreations]

Yes, you hit on it: I wanted to give the player a chance to "match-up" and give them some control over what happens. Part of being a manager.

[PvK]

I see - thanks. So it's currently kind of like free agents challenging your team. It might be interesting to add other ways to generate match-ups, such as challenges to specific fighters, and/or opposing trainers who can also choose from their team, where this might work differently and choices would involve different trade-offs. For instance, you could refuse a personal challenge, but lose a little prestige, and the opportunity for better attendance at the fight. It could start to get kind of complex, though (refusing a challenge while down with spotted fever shouldn't be a disgrace, etc. ).

PvK

[StormcloudCreations]

(I see - thanks. So it's currently kind of like free agents challenging your team.)

Well, the match-ups are randomly selected from the 9 other warriors in the league, not just a totally randomly generated guy from out of the blue. Of course, it will make sure you don't fight the same guy twice in a row, to be fair.

"Challenges" might be interesting! Maybe there could be a stat or money penalty if a warrior issues a formal challenge to you before a match (Maybe call it an "Honor Match" or something like that..hmm).

[FloridaFringe]

"Challenges" might be interesting! Maybe there could be a stat or money penalty if a warrior issues a formal challenge to you before a match (Maybe call it an "Honor Match" or something like that..hmm).

Excellent idea. One suggestion would be to have the challenge directed at your best fighter. If anyone else is sent in instead than there could be some sort of penalty. Otherwise a reward of such could be offered of something along the lines of reduced high-end advertising rates. This would offer good incentive to accept the challenge even if your best fighter might not be good enough to win but still might have a chance.

Sometimes it seems best to send in a scrub because the opponent is way too good. This would change the perspective around a bit in those cases where your top fighter would really pull it off if he fights at his best. Instead of sending in the scrub you might take a shot and hope for the best. As long as the risk vs reward ratio was balanced properly of course.

[StormcloudCreations]

Hmm...interesting. Originally, I was going to have a Challenge Match be displayed as coming up, and then you can decide who to stick in there (presumably your best warrior), but there would be a stat penalty if you lose, so it might make sense not to use your best warrior at times (you don't want your best warrior to get his stats dinged, as that could mess up your season).

But you may get a stat or money bonus if you win, which in turn may urge you to use your better warrior. Decisions, decisions...

[Psitticine]

Is there any kind of stat dealing with team prestige? Possibly, if you deny or try to bypass a direct challenge, your prestige could take a nasty hit. If you accept, however, the buzz about the grudge match acts as a nifty boost to your advertising for the match.