298 replies to this topic

[avvakum]

too lazy to count, but intuitively the 'full pvp buffage' should cost more than some crucial pvp potions, no? Unless, you have the buffs for free.

[DALECK]

Now, lets just say that the proposed bounty board changes go into effect exactly as they are now. Lets also say that I decide to join the ladder. I am the only person in my guild in my bracket, and of all of my allied guilds, I don't think that I would be competing against any of their members, so essentially I am on my own. Now, lets also assume that I have to go out of town on a family emergency right before a reset, but since I opted in, I will get rolled into the next ladder. I sit there unbuffed, and an easy target while I am out of town with no computer. Now lets also assume that there are a few people in my bracket from big guilds out for their dominance medals and craving tokens, so they are hitting me pretty much hourly for the better part of 36 hours. Now, I get home, my relative has just died, I am in a bad mood, and I see that I have been getting farmed, I have taken over 80 attacks from 4 different players. I now have 20 bounties in hand on 4 different people, and I want some pay back. I organize my friends, guild mates, and allies, and we take 100 levels from each of them, all at the same time. What is going to happen when they log on to find that they have each lost 100 levels ? Doesn't this seem like it is a little out of balance, a little too much retribution for the attacks that i took.

If so, same is true for this scenario:
Gold prices are high and I decide to play the marketplace. I check the number of players in range to hit me, buff and gear up for potential incoming attacks, because I know I am playing a game with risk of getting hit and robbed and recognize the extra risk of getting hit while holding golds. After a while I'm holding around 100 mil on hand (Target of my dreams )

Like in your scenario, lets say I have to have to go out of town on a family emergency. I can't get rid of all the gold in time, so I'm using my few deposits to bank at least 40 mil. I list the rest of the gold, buy one days worth of protection so I wont lose XP, check my buffs again and hope for the best.

A couple of days later I come back, my gold is down to zero, I've lost 30% of a level and my logs show who has been having fun faming my gold. Luckily, protection has made sure I didnt lose any XP while it was active, and due to deflect and Protect Gold enhancements they've both had to hit a few times extra. I'm able to stack their bounties and take 50 levels from each. For 60 mil gold (45 mil after taxes) that I willingly put up for risk and 30% of a level of XP. If you ask me, this is way more out of balance.


In your scenario the target could have bought protection for 7 FSP to opt out of the ladder and lose the work he's done during the ladder, in mine I could have reset my deposits again and again until I had no gold left on hand and lost all profit.

Also, I find it pretty unlikely that 4 ladder players have hit one unbuffed target 20 times each on the ladder with the current system. With 4 players it would prolly stop being worth it to hit you at around 2 hits each. Same can not be said about gold hits.
Edit: If they indeed did hit you 20 times each without being able to take rating, for no other reason than to make you lose XP while you were not able to defend yourself, I think they deserve losing levels.. dont you?

What makes it abuseable is not the ability to bounty, but the implementation of stackable bounties.

I must admit that I am unfamiliar with the mechanics of rating transfers on and of of the ladder, so I don't know how many hits it is common to receive during a ladder cycle. If my example was outside of the norm, then that was from my own ignorance of the topic details. However, just because it is out of the norm does not make it impossible, just unlikely that someone would get hit so much in a ladder cycle. Ultimately though, I feel that the ladder needs to be separated from the bounty board. It will make it a slightly safer form of pvp sure, but it will still contain risk. A fair compromise for the betterment of fs and the ladder.

In your scenario Kj, you could have bought the upgrade to reset your bank deposits, and then all would have been well, since you could have safely deposited all of your gold.
I feel that if someone wants to leave enough gold out in the open, they should expect to get hit. If I saw someone in my range with that much gold out, I would be hitting for sure. If they were off line, and I could take a few swings at them to try and take it all, you bet I would, even after the proposed change making every attack carry a bounty. If the reward is worth the risk, people will continue to take it.

I don't what to put words in your mouth Kj, but knowing you as I do, after having fought with and against you in the past, I feel comfortable in saying that you, along with most everyone else in fs, feels that pvp should contain an element of risk. The proposed change to make every hit bountiable increases the risk of pvp, there is no doubt about that at all. However, this change is a sword that cuts both ways. Before, if I had hit someone with gold over and over while they were off line, I could only lose 5 levels for it. At the same time those that deleveled me could also only lose 5 levels for their participation. After this change takes effect, I can lose more levels for my original hits, fair enough, but so to can the people who take my levels. They open themselves up to lose just as many levels as they take from me, or anyone else for that matter. That seems like a fair balance. All hits are bountyable, but there is no longer safety in stacking bounties on your foes. It increases the risk for all. I guess that in the proper situation I am glad to take that risk, or pay that price. Will this change the face of pvp, yes. Will it discourage pvp as a whole, I can't say, but I get the feeling that it won't, since now your hitters have to be ready to lose the same amount of levels as they take, and most aren't willing to make that trade off that often.

[Windbattle]

After reading the majority of this thread, I see a lot of arguing and division. What is the final outcome? where is the closure, BG?

At the tail end of the avatar feedback thread, they said that all changes were going through without any adjustments. Based on that, were all the feedback ideas going on the back burner for now?

Also, threads tend to flame when they run on for too long without developers adding feedback / closing a thread. The whole pvp ladder debate stirs up the classic pvper vs leveler hatred that exists in the game.

[BigGrim]

What is the difference between buying potions vs buying buffs for the pvp ladder?

The Player is fending for themselves in Player Vs Player. Otherwise it's kinda Player Vs Guild, no?

In any event, I'm looking for constructive feedback, not arguements between players. I'm reading everything that is posted.

Problem is, it does tend to turn into two camps who both know better than each other. We want to cut through that!

[4gottn4ver]

After reading the majority of this thread, I see a lot of arguing and division. What is the final outcome? where is the closure, BG?

At the tail end of the avatar feedback thread, they said that all changes were going through without any adjustments. Based on that, were all the feedback ideas going on the back burner for now?

Also, threads tend to flame when they run on for too long without developers adding feedback / closing a thread. The whole pvp ladder debate stirs up the classic pvper vs leveler hatred that exists in the game.

it seems what hoof 1st stated when he started this topic is what it is gonna be happening an doesn't matter what was talked about up until a staff person spoke up again which was talk about making changes to the PvP Ladder as well. might be by Friday when talk from a staff again about it and then gets put into action before out for the weekend, oh the joy of that brings.

[hmfic]

What is the difference between buying potions vs buying buffs for the pvp ladder?

The Player is fending for themselves in Player Vs Player. Otherwise it's kinda Player Vs Guild, no?

In any event, I'm looking for constructive feedback, not arguements between players. I'm reading everything that is posted.

Problem is, it does tend to turn into two camps who both know better than each other. We want to cut through that!

buying buffs is fending for yourself is it not? same as buying potions?

[Kontiki]

The proposed change to make every hit bountiable increases the risk of pvp, there is no doubt about that at all.

I disagree. Risk is a chance of something happening, not how much damage it causes. The smasher medal is certainly something that has increased the risk, stackable bounties just increases damage. If someone is sitting there knowingly with 4 mil on hand, you hit and get deflected once, PG once before getting through on the 3rd hit. They lose around 8% of a level and maybe 1.5 mil gold. You can lose 15 levels. The risk isnt really higher than losing 5 before. But the amount of damage you risk is multiplied many times, and in my opinion does not reflect the damaged caused at all.

Another thing to keep in mind is that I am, and maybe you are, in guilds that are willing and able to retaliate when we feel the other side went too far. (i.e. taking 10 levels for two deflected attacks, or 15 for three normal bounty clears). Many PvP participants are not in such guilds and would be strongly discouraged from participating from an experience like that. I believe their disadvantage would grow even larger with this than how it is now, and its pretty bad already.

After the smasher medal arrived, I've noticed a big increase in stompings on my guild members when they've been naughty. This medal alone seem to be a huge free increase in risk of punishment benefitting those who want more punishment for their offenders without doing anything themselves. Like I explained to Shin in an earlier post, there are a number of ways to deal with PvP, a few of them have had a negative effect on PvP already. If these players would actually accept PvP as part of the game and use some of the tools available to them, they would prolly not have such a big issue with PvP and possibly be less of a target as well.

[Mister Doom]

Buying buffs is fending for yourself is it not? Same as buying potions?

Kind of but not really, being limited to buffs you can cast on yourself or potions everyone can buy is fending for yourself.
Being buffed with everything under the sun by higher level friends/allies/guildies... Well, that isn't.

There really isn't any way to differentiate beteen buffs 'bought' and buffs given. Even if there were, there would always be an easy route around it.

[Mister Doom]

The proposed change to make every hit bountiable increases the risk of pvp, there is no doubt about that at all.

I disagree. Risk is a chance of something happening, not how much damage it causes. The smasher medal is certainly something that has increased the risk, stackable bounties just increases damage. If someone is sitting there knowingly with 4 mil on hand, you hit and get deflected once, PG once before getting through on the 3rd hit. They lose around 8% of a level and maybe 1.5 mil gold. You can lose 15 levels. The risk isnt really higher than losing 5 before. But the amount of damage you risk is multiplied many times, and in my opinion does not reflect the damaged caused at all.

Another thing to keep in mind is that I am, and maybe you are, in guilds that are willing and able to retaliate when we feel the other side went too far. (i.e. taking 10 levels for two deflected attacks, or 15 for three normal bounty clears). Many PvP participants are not in such guilds and would be strongly discouraged from participating from an experience like that. I believe their disadvantage would grow even larger with this than how it is now, and its pretty bad already.

After the smasher medal arrived, I've noticed a big increase in stompings on my guild members when they've been naughty. This medal alone seem to be a huge free increase in risk of punishment benefitting those who want more punishment for their offenders without doing anything themselves. Like I explained to Shin in an earlier post, there are a number of ways to deal with PvP, a few of them have had a negative effect on PvP already. If these players would actually accept PvP as part of the game and use some of the tools available to them, they would prolly not have such a big issue with PvP and possibly be less of a target as well.

KJ I'm not really sure why you're trying to rationalise that the damage caused by the instigator of a pvp attack should be in any way equal to the damage received if placed on the BB?

The initiator has all the advantages, gets a 'reward' from the victim in the form of stolen gold and depending on the player, joy from inflicting the damage. Not to mention the fact that the person hit in the first place might possibly have had zero interest in pvp, getting hit damages their gear, demoralises them and basically puts them in a bad mood.

Like for like xp losses for attacker / victim is just silly. :S

[Kontiki]

With all powerful lvling pots and xp events losing 20+ lvl in 1 day isnt a big problem

If someone cant afford losing levels from stackable bounties cuz he/she cant recover lvls then he should slow down on hitting players to reduce the risk

Exactly. The proposed changes discourages PvP further.

that's a bad direction for discussion, we might end up talking about 'no XP loss' encourages PvP.

I think there's a huge difference. XP loss is among the factors that makes PvP work, it triggers action and reaction, and makes exciting things happen. Therefore, no XP loss would mean its no longer PvP in my opinion. Its pillow fighting for profit, no good reason to bounty, no good reason to defend, no good reason to retaliate. I suspect it would look much like the GvG ladder does right now, with a few lovers of challenge at the top and the rest just joining in for the gains...

[Kontiki]

KJ I'm not really sure why you're trying to rationalise that the damage caused by the instigator of a pvp attack should be in any way equal to the damage received if placed on the BB?

The initiator has all the advantages, gets a 'reward' from the victim in the form of stolen gold and depending on the player, joy from inflicting the damage. Not to mention the fact that the person hit in the first place might possibly have had zero interest in pvp, getting hit damages their gear, demoralises them and basically puts them in a bad mood.

Like for like xp losses for attacker / victim is just silly. :S

In no way am I suggesting that damage caused should be equal to damage received. I'm trying to point out we are already able to lose 60 times the damage we cause from a single attack (if the attack goes through and no protection is active on the target). In most cases, additional attacks are possible because the target doesnt do anything to prevent it. If only the minimum damage caused per attack was increased it would be more acceptable to me, much due to the fact that the ones mainly asking for this change were players not willing to do anything themselves, and not players that would actually retaliate and take 5 levels per attack. Though I do feel that the smasher medal has given them a lot already.

[4gottn4ver]

Buying buffs is fending for yourself is it not? Same as buying potions?

Kind of but not really, being limited to buffs you can cast on yourself or potions everyone can buy is fending for yourself.
Being buffed with everything under the sun by higher level friends/allies/guildies... Well, that isn't.

There really isn't any way to differentiate beteen buffs 'bought' and buffs given. Even if there were, there would always be an easy route around it.

about the only potions that can really be used by only the buyer is the bound ones the other potions can be bought or invented by another player and given to the ladder player. the same goes for the buffs. say player A mostly has hunting/ lvl'ing buffs but is trying out the pvp ladder. and player B has pvp style buffs, so player A is only able to cast ' hunting/ lvl'ing ' buffs on themself for playing the ladder. while player B is in the same lvl range as player A with pvp style buffs and same buff lvl as the player A. how can HCS differ from player A an player B buffs being the same max lvl buffs can be cast are the same lvl range which ones they can use or not?

an with limiting the buffs on ladder players can cast them self what is the limit of such a change to like that be just limited to ladder players. what about BH'ing, gvg's, hunting/ lvl'ing?

how much uses does ' hunting/ lvl'ing ' buffs have in other aspects of the FS game? how many other uses does ' pvp ' type buffs have in the FS game??

but going back to the base of this what the heck, why not just change the BB back to long ago style, until the BB target is cleared it remains posted no max xp/ lvl lost amount? I heard about it before an since each attack is gonna be postable/ stackable what would be any different. for most part the reasons for attacks made are mostly gold based. that alone has been old news an reasons how to prevent that from a player being a target is no secret or can cost alot to the player/ non-pvp'er. but many of those that don't do it complain they were attacked and fail to think of why it might of happened. having little to no gold in open while on/ offline is a tiny way to make a player less of a target. well atleast nothing your not willing to risk losing in open.

[abhorrence]

The initiator has all the advantages, gets a 'reward' from the victim in the form of stolen gold and depending on the player, joy from inflicting the damage.

When you play a game, lets say chess. The person that loses a pawn, isn't a victim. They are a participant in the game. Getting hit in PvP doesn't make you a victim, it means you were playing Fallen Sword and you got attacked.

Not to mention the fact that the person hit in the first place might possibly have had zero interest in pvp, getting hit damages their gear, demoralises them and basically puts them in a bad mood.

Having zero interest in PvP doesn't exclude you from PvP. You can certainly pay for that privilege though.

Getting hit in GvG does just as much damage and probably more considering the recycle time on hitting is so low. Would losing in GvG demoralize them even more then direct PvP? Put them in a bad mood?

It's incumbent on the games creators to educate their player base about the extent of their game. Also, these caretakers of the game should do all that they can to minimize rifts that can develop between players. I think it's safe to say that HCS could do a substantially better job in this aspect.

Posts like yours should be addressed by HCS in an open forum.
Instead of allowing these stereotypical posts that perpetuate the image that anyone attacked is irrevocably harmed, there should be a greater effort to assure players that attacks are normal and should be expected. Instead when you come to the forums you see the continual bickering between groups of players. You see complete and utter outrage at most any pvp interaction.

There is a teachable moment in here for HCS and it continually gets lost in the reluctance to step in and take control of the game you created.

[Bunnybee]

+1 Abhorrence, that was well said.

[Kontiki]

Agree 100% with Hors post

[4gottn4ver]

so what is the point of any further convo on this topic?? from the main front news page on FS which I think most have seen now.

Update Pending
17:31 12 Jul 2012
Later this evening, we'll be updating the game with the Bounty Board changes, which include making it possible to buy Bounty Tickets with gold


seems to be a shut case/ topic now. changes are going to be made an this topic can be hashed out to death an it means nothing. 20+ pages now on this topics an how many replies from staff in it an not counting the starting the post that started it since last Friday.......... 3 from hoof( not counting the starter post )........ 10( some of which was member control edits ). it started out on pvp/ BB changes to come an that got left way behind an went to pvp ladder changes so whats next to be talked about for changes while topic is open?

[Zord]

Erm, I must admit that I missed the very last pages of the discussion, but I should mention that limiting the PvP ladder to your own buff would have a terrible effect on lower levels (unless decent pots would come out).

I use several setups which consists of gear as well as the appropriate buff set, and in case only potions could be used (since the lvl130 absorb and others does not change too much at my level), the ladder would be the "fun" game of who dodges/first strikes/2% misses more (as the majority of the buffs would not be available at the desired level I guess). In other words, removing the possibility of using buffs (here I intentionally neglected own buffs) at our levels would mean that ladder is even more about luck and even less skill would be involved. I doubt it would be desirable...

And as for bounty on the ladder, I am clearly against it. Not that I want to play soft - no I expect to be 100 stammed all the time when I join - rather that I expect to suffer the XP loss due to fighting for the ladder and not caused by some sort of dirty play. If people team up, you can also team up if you want, or not, since people who are not hitting others have less targets to hit, so this issue I think is not that big. If there is no bounty placed on the ladder, there is no real chance to play dirty thus you dont need the extra protection just some skill and dedication (and the permission to use buffs;) ).

[BraveKath]

Agree with Hor's last post!

Feeling a little disappointed that HCS has made so few comments here, as it sends a message of a lack of interest and consideration for the players still in the game.

[evilbry]

Dear Hor,

+1 your post.

<3 Bry