51 replies to this topic

[Calista]

On the bb, an unresolved combat costs you the stam used. The attack happened, it wasn't a win. In regular pvp, an unresolved combat costs you the stam used. The attack happened, it wasn't a win. On the ladder, an unresolved combat costs you the stam used. The attack happened, it just wasn't a win. A deflected hit costs you nothing, because the attack did not happen. In a gvg, if the combat is unresolved, it happened and it wasn't a win. This is consistent with how other areas of pvp work in the game. If you change it for gvg, then you need to change it for the board, the ladder, straight pvp, and anywhere else I'm forgetting to mention.

[vastilos]

Nope. You failed to defeat your opponent. Pretty straight forward.

 

Well, in the same sense, your opponent also failed to defeat you.

 

Thus, it is a tie.

[Undjuvion]

the only fundamental FAILURE here is the total lack and ability of people to see, that if noone was victorious and noone was defeated, no matter how many times people say other wise, it is indeed not a decided fight, it is UNRESOLVED which by definition as some have pointed out is a tie or a draw, no more than something that leaves both sides dazed and breatheless waiting for the attacker to retry so they can both have an outcome

[Calista]

Actually, what you seem to be failing to see is that an unresolved conflict is not a win. So call it a tie. That isn't a win. You have to win to get credit for a win.  A loss or a tie do not count. That's pretty self explanatory.

[Undjuvion]

Actually, what you seem to be failing to see is that an unresolved conflict is not a win. So call it a tie. That isn't a win. You have to win to get credit for a win.  A loss or a tie do not count. That's pretty self explanatory.

 

yes and u have to lose to LOSE which is why joe is asking for reform

 

hi nurse btw!

 

 

edit: some of us wouldnt need to clarify its not a loss if others would accept what we already knew, your point is moot as ours, its why reform is asked

Edited by Undjuvion, 07 May 2016 - 02:49.

[Mister Doom]

Actually, what you seem to be failing to see is that an unresolved conflict is not a win. So call it a tie. That isn't a win. You have to win to get credit for a win.  A loss or a tie do not count. That's pretty self explanatory.

 

Highlighted the important parts.

[Undjuvion]

i can see a point in their arguement as i said, the fact this continues and some wont say they see what is also true shows true trolling, at least for some

 

 

edit: i think we have moved forward in this arguement now, what we are asking for is reform, no need to waste more of peoples time, when some dont even gvg if at all or simply even care on the topic

Edited by Undjuvion, 07 May 2016 - 03:13.

[Mister Doom]

BigGrim has already pointed out earlier that winning is the important part.

(in the GvG battle, not this endless forum debate)

If you don't achieve a win then the game classes it as a fail.

 

It really couldn't be more simple. In PvP and GvG the attacker already has an overwhelming advantage, if that attacker then fails to make the best of that advantage and doesn't take down their prey, they shouldn't be able to call, "No fair, do-over." Which is essentially what this thread is asking for.

 

There are two reasons this thread has dragged on as long as it has.

 

#1 Sadly the forums have become a place were people care more about getting 'forum points' by 'winning' forum argument. Often times by any means necessary.

 

#2 Even more sadly some people have taken it upon themselves to aggravate and attempt to undermine BigGrim at any opportunity. Seeing the recent overturning of forums bans that Grim had done in the past as some kind of victory and justification of this 'witch hunt'.

 

The forums aren't a place for free-thinking individuals to put forward ideas, for discussions about game topics and for feedback. No, these days the forums are far more Machiavellian, if you don't have some kind of secret agenda then you're likely wasting your time here.

[Undjuvion]

started reading, then saw sadly the forum etc etc and slowly stopped reading, i was simply right i now see, thx for your opinion tho

[Mister Doom]

And my point is proven...

[Calista]

The original post makes it out like an unresolved conflict is unimportant in other areas of the game. This is untrue. An UR on a bounty can cost me the win, points on the ladder, gold and levels in straight pvp. It's a fact we've dealt with from the start, and it can be annoying for many different types of players. The request to change it really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. Common sense dictates that without a win, no matter what else the outcome is, it doesn't count as a win.  But whatever, address the whole issue and don't make it out like it's only an issue for GvG players. It has always affected several areas of the game, and we've learned to work with it.

 

No one ever wins an argument on these forums. Not sure what you mean by 'forum points' unless you mean the like thing, which doesn't affect anything. Unless I'm missing something.....

 

Not everyone is out to undermine Grim. They just don't agree with him. That's not hard to do, especially with his attitude towards pvp players.  The forums is a place where we can discuss ideas. No one listens or takes it seriously,  but at least those who feel the need to address issues have a place to say something. But even saying stuff in the FS box about Nurses Week had people disagreeing with me and talking crap.  Ya gotta have a thick skin and not take this stuff personally. The whole point of a discussion is to have different sides speak up. It would be incredibly boring if we all agreed on everything.

 

 

Btw, it's Nurses Week. Go thank your nurses today!    

[Mister Doom]

lol no not the like thing...

Hmm, I don't know what else to call it? Ego points maybe?

 

I didn't mean to imply I think 'everyone' is out to undermine Grim, though I know some most certainly are.

I also agree that it's not hard to disagree with him, I personally disagree with him on a great many subjects and I make those opinions known. Never maliciously though, when it's done maliciously there is a problem.

[Ringhal]

Ideally, the fight should continue until there is a winner (either the attacker or defender) and this should apply to all aspects.

 

What is the reason for an unresolved combat? Is it to give the defender a better chance of "winning"?

[DirtyChick]

The Guild Conflict page clearly is about a fixed number of attacks and says that a "score point is only gained upon a *victory* for an attack initiated by you" (my emphasis). So what counts is the number of *initiated* attacks and how many victories are obtained from these. A draw may not be defeat/loss but it is neither a victory. Which of the guilds initiated the conflict doesn't really change that notion, or does it?

 

If one guild gets 50 victories with 50 attacks and the other gets 49 victories (+1 draw) with 50 attacks, then the guild with 50/50 wins the conflict.

 

As I said, that sounds fair to me, although this may not be easy for the guild that didn't initiate the conflict (because the initiating guild will likely be fully buffed until the conflict is over). But it's often the case that the defender has a disadvantage, also in plain simple PvP, on the bounty board, on the ladder, ... name what ever you want.

 

Actually, I find this to be a realistic aspect of the game (the attacker is often more prepared than a surprised defender). If we really wanted to even this out (which would be unrealistic) we'd have to let no buffs at all count in PvP; not for the bounty board, not for conflicts, not for the ladder, not for "private" (true?) PvP.

 

This post sums up how the game/code/servers 'play out'.

 

It also pin points how that scenario is decided/played out by the 'code'. You draw your sword and make an attack but you stand a chance of not killing your target because he is equipped and can parry your advance until 'the code' decides it is Unresolved, hence no kill/win.

 

An Unresolved finale is actually quite a rare situation in ALL aspects of game play. The only time it matters is in a GvG because you have something to lose when it occurs and when it matters, has significance.

 

Speaking as a character who enjoyed and GvG'd enough to launch a guild into the top 10 GvG ladder I can say that Unresolved 'attacks' were a pain in the backside and caused losses I as a Founder would snarl about, however, I accepted that it meant my troops needed tweaks to their info with regards to offline gear especially so that I may cast buffs to defend them adequately. IF an attacker then failed to kill them on an incoming attack via an Unresolved due to parry then defence was holding up and doing it's 'job'. IF as they returned attacks and got an Unresolved then it meant that they were inadequately equipped and/or buffed to gain a win on that specific attack and any further attacks.

 

The point being, as stated on game rules pages in regard to GvG, you have 'x' amount of attacks at your disposal and it is up to you/your team to ensure that each attack results in a WIN. Anything less, be it a single outright loss of combat OR failing to cut through the parry guy who holds it together via an Unresolved, well you just lost that guild war if they return fire and kill you on EVERY ATTACK made in retalitaion.

 

It still amazes me that people sign up for combat and fail to realise the basics of life and death and then scream for a way out, which is what the OP appears to be hankering after with GvG's!? Yes the 2% is a bane to all of us, if relying on Defence stat to save you in any combat of the game but it is some weird Hoof shennigans that coded it 10 years ago and that's just how the game plays.

[Removed18058]

Id have to agree with grim here you failed to defeat your opponent and hence lost because defending player succesfully defended your assault and witstood your attacks. Only fight when you can win that way you wont lose

[vastilos]

Ideally, the fight should continue until there is a winner (either the attacker or defender) and this should apply to all aspects.

 

What is the reason for an unresolved combat? Is it to give the defender a better chance of "winning"?

 

It's been a while, but I believe that is how the fights in the arena are solved? Last I remember, there were a set number of attacks before both sides incurred a penalty towards their hp, armor, defense, attack and damage until someone was victorious.

I believe that's how the fights in pvp/gvg should be. There should never be an unresolved combat.

[sweetlou]

There should never be an unresolved combat.

Agreed.

 

Awaiting the tyrannical hammer.

 

 

 

[Darkbusta]

It's been a while, but I believe that is how the fights in the arena are solved? Last I remember, there were a set number of attacks before both sides incurred a penalty towards their hp, armor, defense, attack and damage until someone was victorious.

I believe that's how the fights in pvp/gvg should be. There should never be an unresolved combat

 

The "fatigue" aspect of PvP would be perfect if it was implemented into GvG hits, I honestly completely forgot about that, so thanks for bringing it up.

[BigGrim]

It's been a while, but I believe that is how the fights in the arena are solved? Last I remember, there were a set number of attacks before both sides incurred a penalty towards their hp, armor, defense, attack and damage until someone was victorious.

I believe that's how the fights in pvp/gvg should be. There should never be an unresolved combat.

 

I'm not sure if the Fatigue system from the arena could be brought into GvG but I'll certainly ask Hoofmaster about it! Added to the Update list to bring it up.

[Davros81]

I'm not sure if the Fatigue system from the arena could be brought into GvG but I'll certainly ask Hoofmaster about it! Added to the Update list to bring it up.

NO do not bring in the fatigue system leave it as it is, people need to learn how to combat and circumvent the unresolved combat issue, please do not make another aspect of the game even easier!!