[Suggestion] All Favor Custom Game Option

Please ban this guy.

What's the point of playing then anyway? Favor is the ONLY thing saved between matches and something you can try to get as much as you can of.

I vote no!

Yeah ban me, great idea. Why do I want to accumulate favor? I just want to play a fair game between two sides. Favor in its current form prevents that from happening.

Its not that its a bad idea but I have to side with No on this one. Because otherwise everyone will play either with Favor all or Favor off.

I think this is a good idea but then they would need another thing to replace it for persistant items. So i vote no... as much as i hated the favor reset.

If everyone would avoid it given the choice, then it suggests to me that it wasn't that great of a feature to begin with.

It wasn't imo, but I doubt they'll change it anytime soon.

I think this is a great idea, always nice to give the user options.

Everyone doesnt always select the "Filthy Rich" option even though its there, and even if all the custom games start selecting a "Favor ALl" then it kind of proves that people don't like favor as it is now.

Exactly correct. I'm the OP because this is such an obviously good idea that I can't believe it wasn't done.

theres a general feeling favor in combination with items isnt the best solution

however it is nice to have something carried over from game to game

see this thread for an alternative:

http://forums.demigodthegame.com/357460

it is not very likely we will see this before demigod2 though

I agree with this. If they are coming out with modability, it would make all options moot soon, anyways. So no matter how much you're going to defend or attack whether an option is good or bad, the fact stands is that more options for customization is always good for a game's lasting potential.

I'm on the fence about the all favor items on proposal.  I would probably want to try it just to play with different items more readily.  But beyond testing, I don't think I'd want the feature for 'real' gameplay.

But I do want to suggest that "More options is always better" is not always the case.  The proposed option is a risky one because it's not just any old option - it's an option that defines a server.  Having too many subsets of server types carries the risk of fragmenting the player base.  I've seen this happen in other games (NWN comes to mind) where there were so many subsets of server/realm types, it was sometimes difficult to figure out what matched your play preference best.  And the community 'resolved' that issue by ultimately collecting most servers into just a couple of type descriptors.  Which meant that often times servers weren't accurately represented by their type descriptors, thus rendering the 'feature' of being able to search out a server that matched your playstyle/preference less useful.

However, it was pointed out that mods to such features may become possible as the customization/modding capabilities are introduced.  Would it make more sense to have servers running such a mod, versus having a new server type introduced?

I don't think we're talking about server-client gameplay here. Demigod is peer-to-peer. There are a gazillion custom games/maps for W3, and it doesn't fragment the community.

Or if you want to talk about server-based games, TF2 has custom maps and options, and that game goes on strong. Counterstrike is another example.

I'm still confused what you're trying to say about server-defining, though.

By the time this gets implemented I'll have enough favor to buy whatever I want so I don't care. 

When you go looking for a game, you may set some criteria in your own mind about what you want.  Things like map, # of players, ping, whatever.  These are things that define a server or the rules and limits of the server.  So when you add new options that describe the rules or features of a server, that's what I'm thinking about when I used the term "server-defining".  Some feature or set of options that define what that server is going to have for rules, maps, and other things.

I do believe that there is such a thing as having too many options, and my response was driven by the prior statements by one or two folks that, "More options is always better."  For the reasons previously given, I don't think that should be used as a basis to add this feature.  Perhaps it should be added in for other reasons - and as it stands, it wouldn't kill me either way to have the option.  But I would be wary of just adding in new server side options based on the assumption that "more options are always better" because I don't believe that is a true statement.

Aesir, there are already a large number of options presented to a custom game host, and all of them break the balance of the game imo. I don't play custom games with people who insist on changing them, so that already fragments the community. The difference with the proposed option is that it won't actually change the way the game plays, so it's unlikely to be an issue with fragmentation. I will join a game and play with someone using favor on, or favor all, but if they put starting level at 3 for example I'm going to pass (or gold on high, or grunt strength high, or towers high as people seem to like doing).