In Wizard101, going second is a huge disadvantage for one reason.
When you're going first, you do not have to deal with dispels, shields, beguiles, and debuffs played the current round.
When you're going second, you have no time to react the things mentioned above and often suffer as a result.
To combat this unfairness, I think you should have only one team go each round. In other words, team 1 makes their move, and then team 2 goes to the move making screen. Then team 2 makes their move, and team 1 goes to the move making screen basically cutting the rounds in half. This allows each team to make their moves blind to the changing PvP arena.
This system is already in Pirate101 and will make PvP more competitive and more consistent.
Horrible idea! First of all have you think this through? The person goes 2nd can attack twice in a roll! So if the person goes first have a tower on, then the 2nd person can first use like a wand attack then use a major attack, this goes for both players, attack twice in a roll is EVEN worse, this could leads to spam, and storms can just go crazy on attacks. Clearly you didn't think this through!
Horrible idea! First of all have you think this through? The person goes 2nd can attack twice in a roll! So if the person goes first have a tower on, then the 2nd person can first use like a wand attack then use a major attack, this goes for both players, attack twice in a roll is EVEN worse, this could leads to spam, and storms can just go crazy on attacks. Clearly you didn't think this through!
I'm not quite sure you actually read the post. There is no two hits in a row, what he's saying is if 1320wraith goes first, then boom I cast tower shield or whatever. Then Death Commander, who is second, goes into his spell selection. It's not 1320Wraith uses tower death commander uses wild bolt death commander uses wild bolt I'm dead, It's a way to try and get rid of the huge advantage the first person has being able to throw a shield or dispel up on the same turn the second person attacks. Only big problem I can see with this is we might as well just stop using dispels, because there would be next to no tactical use aside from the constant entangle plan. This probably would make it a lot more fair than giving an extra pip for whoever goes second, but I'm not so sure I'd want to have the matches take twice as long with each side selecting spells separately.
I see what you mean about the match going twice as long, but you could probably compensate by cutting a little bit of time off the move making screen, another little of pet cast animations, and another little on casts for the utility spells. not exactly sure how drastic you would need to make the cuts put might even out.
With the dispels, they would become a lot less useful if you were going first, but they would be used to stop a player's intended move for a round instead of being pip killers.
Another thing, sorry about making it a little unclear. I meant for it to be as 1320Wraith described it, and there won't be anyone making two turns in a row just a separation between team 1 and team 2 making their moves instead of the current system of both teams making their moves at once.
Before anyone says anything about PvE, PvE is great the way it is, and I only want this system implemented in PvP.
Only idea i have is in 2 v 2 players on sun and dagger(first players on each side) would move before eye,key(last players on each side) in 4 v 4 players on sun,eye,dagger,key move before star,moon,gem,spiral no extra pip would be given.
1 v 1 and 3 v 3 same as it is now extra pip for going second.
I'm not quite sure you actually read the post. There is no two hits in a row, what he's saying is if 1320wraith goes first, then boom I cast tower shield or whatever. Then Death Commander, who is second, goes into his spell selection. It's not 1320Wraith uses tower death commander uses wild bolt death commander uses wild bolt I'm dead, It's a way to try and get rid of the huge advantage the first person has being able to throw a shield or dispel up on the same turn the second person attacks. Only big problem I can see with this is we might as well just stop using dispels, because there would be next to no tactical use aside from the constant entangle plan. This probably would make it a lot more fair than giving an extra pip for whoever goes second, but I'm not so sure I'd want to have the matches take twice as long with each side selecting spells separately.
I'm sry but i think you sir didnt get what he meant He's saying that team 1 goes first then team 2 goes first so here it is: team 1: tower team 2: blade
next turn
team 2: attack team 1: balde
next turn
team1: attack team2: heal do you see it now? They go 2 times in a row
I'm sry but i think you sir didnt get what he meant He's saying that team 1 goes first then team 2 goes first so here it is: team 1: tower team 2: blade
next turn
team 2: attack team 1: balde
next turn
team1: attack team2: heal do you see it now? They go 2 times in a row
No, what he is trying to say is that the two separate sides are mutually exclusive to the actions of the other. Therefore, first turn would be Tower from the first team. Second team does not use anything. Second turn is the second team, seeing the tower, they are able to use a wand spell to break it. First team does not do anything as it is not their turn. Then it returns to the turn of the first team, and they cast a dispel. Second team does NOT cast in the same turn as the first team, and instead gets a turn to their own. This is a pretty good fix, as it evens out the competition more by reducing the effectiveness of dispels to burn pips, and of shielding at the last moment to spoil a hit. No team is attacking twice in a row, this would merely stop the first team from being the winner every time. EACH TEAM GETS ITS OWN TURN. Not Team 1 goes first, Team 2 goes first. If you still insist that what he means is that the tactical advantage is instead switched entirely to the second team, then their is some pretty easy ways to figure out for sure. 1. Play Pirate101; he specifically stated in the first post that this system is currently utilized in that game. 2. Actually read the rest of the posts instead of just replying to this one; ChickenHawk100 specifically stated that yes, what he means is that there is but a SEPARATION, and NOT going 2 turns in a row.
Horrible idea! First of all have you think this through? The person goes 2nd can attack twice in a roll! So if the person goes first have a tower on, then the 2nd person can first use like a wand attack then use a major attack, this goes for both players, attack twice in a roll is EVEN worse, this could leads to spam, and storms can just go crazy on attacks. Clearly you didn't think this through!
Just out of curiosity her, but what do u mean by "in a roll"? And also, I think that u right in that, though this is great for pirate101, for wizard101 it just is not right.Though you could be a little less critical, and maybe be a little more careful about dumb grammatical errors.
Horrible idea! First of all have you think this through? The person goes 2nd can attack twice in a roll! So if the person goes first have a tower on, then the 2nd person can first use like a wand attack then use a major attack, this goes for both players, attack twice in a roll is EVEN worse, this could leads to spam, and storms can just go crazy on attacks. Clearly you didn't think this through!
First off, as 1320Wraith said, the suggestion is that each side selects its spell after the other side both selected and casts their spells. But furthermore, your complaint about going twice in a row being a problem is for all intensive purposes no different than now. If you are first, you are basically going 2x in row ALL the time (unless you have a cheat or psychic powers). #1 cast wand to break shield, #2 had no idea what #1 would cast so casted blade or something, #1 now cast a second spell before #2 can react. I know I know you are going to argue of course you anticipate that #1 might do that and therefore would cast another shield to foil #1's plan but you could do basically the same thing when you alternate who goes first. So when you are going to be #1 you anticipate #2 will try a wand-attack combo so you put up a second shield to foil it. I know, next you will argue about shatter. I will just say that I would rather alternate who goes first than to always be 2nd in a match. Or better yet make it random who goes first every round so you don't know if you will get back to back attack or not.
This way, even though Team 2 is still going second, they don't have to wait 4 turns for it to happen. A true rotation of who goes next. In the Event of 4x1:
and so on throughout all the examples of one side vs another. We have LONG since strayed from the battle tactics in real life where everybody is sitting in a line, with guns drawn, and one side fires every gun they have, then the other side fires every gun they have, everybody takes 4 minutes to reload, and they repeat this till one side is dead (oversimplification sure, but you get the point).
