95 replies to this topic

[Maehdros]

Firstly, yes, this is a pvp idea, no trolling, derailing or flaming please.


Ok, so here we go, its been said widely that non pvp players do not enjoy pvp or like the xp loss factor, so I suggest the following.



Off the board hits:

When defeated in pvp combat the xp loss goes to the attacker( does not work if xp locked)

IF victorious when defending, the defender gains the xp , the attacker loses xp. ( once again does not work if xp locked)

Shame Buff means more xp gained for the defender, more lost for the failed attacking hit


Bounty Board:

Still double xp loss for the target, but the attacker gains % xp compared to their own level


IE: Player A 100 stams Player B on the bounty board


Player A gains 10% of a level, Player B loses 20% of a level


Note: Xp cannot be gained when successfully defending on the bounty board. Xp is meant to be lost on the board. Period.


Yes I am aware that this would prove more effective then leveling BUT, players 100 stamming bounties RISK more and could lose More then they stand to gain.


The board would come back to life.And I would take a guess pvp would not be as hated as it currently is :mrgreen:



Next, I suggest another option for someone hit via pvp.



Revenge hit:

Player A is defeated by Player B, Player A has the option to post a bounty OR hit back risk free of a bounty( but loses their ability to bounty as well)

Too often players say they are afraid to hit back or find it not worth doing.This would change that. Players have the option to hit back for the xp lost, OR post a bounty.



Thoughts?

[Chazz224]

This sounds like a really good compromise... and would help improve the quality of the bounty board... This might be something many of those who strictly level might support as well... Really Nice Mae..

[paingwin]

i love it. +1

[Removed94]

Yes

This would be great. Get a lot of the players that are averse to PvP involved.

10% gained on a 100 stam BB hit does seem a bit high, but this would breathe a much needed new life into PvP.

[jacody]

+100

[Reo]

This right here, Would be amahzing. Just saying.

[Mister Doom]

Gaining xp for attacking in pvp?
Yeah that's been suggested countless times, just list it as one of those things that's never going to happen.

I like the revenge hit idea though, would certainly appeal to some people.

[fortville]

Sounds good to me. I have never had a problem with traditional PvP. What I've always had a problem with is getting farmed in PvP for the recent medal, prestige, moo coins, or what-have-you. Admittedly I like my XP. It helps get me up in levels so I can provide better buffs to my guildmates and more income for the guild. That being said if I could hit back risk free of the board I would.

[Lutrafs]

The only issue I see with the idea, is a player that is at or near EOC deciding they want to lvl via the bounty board instead of actually lvling. 10 percent of a lvl for every 100 stam hit? or even for a full bounty, They would end up way past EOC with only a couple hits. I think if this was put into the game they would have to put a limit on it such as the +1 percent xp upgrade has.

Other then that I dont see any problem with it.

[Maehdros]

The only issue I see with the idea, is a player that is at or near EOC deciding they want to lvl via the bounty board instead of actually lvling.10 percent of a lvl for every 100 stam hit? or even for a full bounty, They would end up way past EOC with only a couple hits. I think if this was put into the game they would have to put a limit on it such as the +1 percent xp upgrade has.
.

A 100 stam clear would be 1 level gained approximately. It;s still to be seen whether hoof changes the level loss limit to 2 levels or leaves it at 5 on the board. I agree with the limit to gaining xp on the board capped at the current EOC.

[Maehdros]

Gaining xp for attacking in pvp?
Yeah that's been suggested countless times, just list it as one of those things that's never going to happen.

It was said pvp protection would never happen either doom It's a suggestion to make pvp more fair for everyone, seeing as currently it ends up in bickering and locked threads.


It was pretty evident how lively the game became when the smasher medal was first introduced. No one can deny that. Now imagine if pvp was actually enjoyable for everyone.

[Mister Doom]

It was said pvp protection would never happen either doom It's a suggestion to make pvp more fair for everyone, seeing as currently it ends up in bickering and locked threads.


It was pretty evident how lively the game became when the smasher medal was first introduced. No one can deny that. Now imagine if pvp was actually enjoyable for everyone.

Problem is, pvp protection was brought in to 'protect' those that wanted nothing to do with pvp. This suggestion is the antithesis of that, this would even further reward the initiator, resulting in more hits, further resulting in a similar effect on the FS public as the 'Smasher medal' originally had, we both know how that ended..

Well everyone is entitled to propose suggestions Maehdros, I wouldn't get your hopes up about it too much though.

[Maehdros]

Problem is, pvp protection was brought in to 'protect' those that wanted nothing to do with pvp. This suggestion is the antithesis of that, this would even further reward the initiator, resulting in more hits, further resulting in a similar effect on the FS public as the 'Smasher medal' originally had, we both know how that ended..

Well everyone is entitled to propose suggestions Maehdros, I wouldn't get your hopes up about it too much though.

More hits, more hit backs, more bounties, more punishment yep, more interest in pvp. It rewards the retaliator too, which is what many have complained about with regards to pvp. *there's no point in hitting back, or posting a bounty* There would be with this suggestion. But hey, we can agree to disagree as per the norm. Cheers

[Mister Doom]

More hits, more hit backs, more bounties, more punishment yep, more interest in pvp. It rewards the one who retaliated too, which is what many have complained about with regards to pvp. *there's no point in hitting back, or posting a bounty* There would be with this suggestion. But hey, we can agree to disagree as per the norm. Cheers

Oh hey, I have no problem with the 'return swing' idea I think that would be a great addition to FS.

[mimdala]

I like the Revenge hit idea. I've sometimes wanted to hit back, but didn't want to get bountied for it.
I just think the probability of the attacker initially losing is pretty low, and the chance of a pvp-clueless player like me winning in retaliation against a seasoned pvper is pretty unlikely. I'm open to the possibility of being wrong, however

[Removed94]

Revenge hit:

Player A is defeated by Player B, Player A has the option to post a bounty OR hit back risk free of a bounty( but loses their ability to bounty as well)

Too often players say they are afraid to hit back or find it not worth doing.This would change that. Players have the option to hit back for the xp lost, OR post a bounty.

Would the time the revenge hit is available to be done be consistent with that of the time available for posting a bounty?

I would think extending it a few more days for a revenge hit would be OK.

[Khanate]

The idea of gaining exp for PvP has been proposed countless times and shot down as many times. It's a terrible idea. Gain your exp through PvE; it is also, like PvP, a vital aspect of the game.

However the revenge hit is not a bad idea. Allow for 1 day for the player to hit back for... say 50% of the exp he lost and at the same time lose his bounty option.

[Maehdros]

The idea of gaining exp for PvP has been proposed countless times and shot down as many times. It's a terrible idea. Gain your exp through PvE; it is also, like PvP, a vital aspect of the game.

Could you explain why its a terrible idea? Xp is lost when defeated by creatures similar to how its lost when defeated in pvp. What would be detrimental about it being gained in pvp?

[Maehdros]

Revenge hit:

Player A is defeated by Player B, Player A has the option to post a bounty OR hit back risk free of a bounty( but loses their ability to bounty as well)

Too often players say they are afraid to hit back or find it not worth doing.This would change that. Players have the option to hit back for the xp lost, OR post a bounty.

Would the time the revenge hit is available to be done be consistent with that of the time available for posting a bounty?

I would think extending it a few more days for a revenge hit would be OK.

It's a 48 hour limit to place a bounty, so I'd suggest the same can apply for a revenge hit?

On that note, hoofs idea was that each off the board hit is bountyable.

IE: Player A hit Player B 5 times, They can be bountied 5 times.



This being said, would 5 revenge hits be fine as well?

[Khanate]

The idea of gaining exp for PvP has been proposed countless times and shot down as many times. It's a terrible idea. Gain your exp through PvE; it is also, like PvP, a vital aspect of the game.

Could you explain why its a terrible idea? Xp is lost when defeated by creatures similar to how its lost when defeated in pvp. What would be detrimental about it being gained in pvp?

Farming of semi-inactives who don't bounty back was already rampant back when prestige was added, this would further compound the problem. I've myself done many such hits (maybe 200 in total) and people have gone as far as to lose on purpose to allow prestige to be gained faster. This will do less to promote PvP than to promote farming of chatters.

Secondly, what you are suggesting is adding a second mechanism to help PvP'ers gain back their levels on top of the existing one (prestige). If PvP'ers don't want to partake in PvE at all then their levels should go down in a manner proportional to their PvP activities.