73 replies to this topic

[EpicPiety]

Just please add GvG Ladder resets. Nothing changes fundamentally without it. Fresh feel will be great and something to constantly work towards or get involved.

[Spider0007]

Another suggestion open for debate.

Should "Unresolved" battles count as losses?

I think if a conflict between two players is unresolved, neither guild should have a loss. It should just be unresolved and not count towards a hit, similar to the way an unresolved on a bounty kill doesn't count.

Thoughts?

[Morgwyn]

This is mostly great and should have been implemented many years ago. None of the proposed changes would "revitalize" GvG. The changes listed are only Quality of Life. GvG needs an entire revamp to be relevant - it will continue to be irrelevant even with the proposed changes.

 

It is unfortunate that half of the original post was ignored as it is the best part of the original post by Toreth.

 

 

"In addition to the minor quality of life type changes mentioned above, another change mentioned would be the resetting of the GvG rating every three months or so akin to the PvP ladder with the reward being a simple guild achievement displaying “1st Place in a GvG Season” with the reward potentially being an additional relic slot, or base stamina gain so as to incentivize actively pursuing 1st place repeatedly to keep others from achieving the same.

The ability to provide individuals a competitive aspect to partake in while being rewarded for doing well, coupled with multiple opportunities, over time, to climb and attempt to make the most of a “fresh start” at the start of the three months will also help inject that liveliness into an otherwise humdrum aspect. We already have the resetting of rating present in the game, as mentioned, so transitioning that into the GvG area seems like a relatively easy and feasible way to go about helping bolster individuals’ pride in their ability to conduct themselves at the pinnacle of guild activities."

I do not agree this is the most important section. GvG ladder will make it worse. It will only make the farming of the guilds that are currently not interested worse.

 

I really hope this is not the path HCS will walk. GvG will be fun, and interesting if many guilds participate because it has been made interesting.  GvG will continue to be not fun if it is just about a few top guilds farming the ones that are not interested or find it not worth it. You will just achieve the status we have now.

The real success of GvG was that all guilds could do it, and the rewards were just great. It should be about that, about living up the activity, not just lving up the activity of a few hardcore guilds.

[EpicPiety]

I do not agree this is the most important section. GvG ladder will make it worse. It will only make the farming of the guilds that are currently not interested worse.

 

I really hope this is not the path HCS will walk. GvG will be fun, and interesting if many guilds participate because it has been made interesting.  GvG will continue to be not fun if it is just about a few top guilds farming the ones that are not interested or find it not worth it. You will just achieve the status we have now.

The real success of GvG was that all guilds could do it, and the rewards were just great. It should be about that, about living up the activity, not just lving up the activity of a few hardcore guilds.

Whole heartedly and 100% disagree with everything stated here due to many well thought out points in the thread about the necessity of a fresh feeling to GvG. The current system of GvG also incentivizes farming and has for years already. If there is sought after rewards on the GvG ladders guild will compete for it, simple.

[shindrak]

Another suggestion open for debate.

Should "Unresolved" battles count as losses?

I think if a conflict between two players is unresolved, neither guild should have a loss. It should just be unresolved and not count towards a hit, similar to the way an unresolved on a bounty kill doesn't count.

Thoughts?

This makes sense... Unresolved combat shouldn't count as a win or loss.

[yghorbeviahn]

Another suggestion open for debate.
Should "Unresolved" battles count as losses?
I think if a conflict between two players is unresolved, neither guild should have a loss. It should just be unresolved and not count towards a hit, similar to the way an unresolved on a bounty kill doesn't count.
Thoughts?

I like the idea, and it makes sense in theory..No one lost that combat.

But in practice, wouldn't that just make Defense setups WAY worse? Not being able to get hit is the way Defense setups "win" it.

I'd like to have it on a trial basis anyway.

[yghorbeviahn]

.

Double post

Edited by yghorbeviahn, 17 March 2023 - 01:33.

[Tolden]

What about a Capture/Defend event system?

 

GvG bands (like Ladder):

• There are bands like Ladder system, but there arent top3 only the holder. Each guild can hold x amount of bands according to its upgrades (new guild upgrade);
• It doesnt need opt-in. To join the GvG event the guild need to initiate to select a band, setup def/atk teams and initiate a conflict against the holder
• There are an attacking and defending team. They will capture/defend the band (earn medals for this). 
• Guilds have to capture and secure the bands weekly. To capture the band, the guild must start a 100 hit conflict against the holder. Use the actual akk system;
• After a week the GvG ends and the rewards are given to the players
• Rewads may be OP buffs (cant be leeched or spell broke) and items and they must be bound, or may be an op item that has time durability (7d or so)

I would call these bands by "Castles" to be more cool lol

 

These are my 2 cents for this topic. What do you guys think?

[Undjuvion]

This is mostly great and should have been implemented many years ago. None of the proposed changes would "revitalize" GvG. The changes listed are only Quality of Life. GvG needs an entire revamp to be relevant - it will continue to be irrelevant even with the proposed changes.

 

It is unfortunate that half of the original post was ignored as it is the best part of the original post by Toreth.

 

 

"In addition to the minor quality of life type changes mentioned above, another change mentioned would be the resetting of the GvG rating every three months or so akin to the PvP ladder with the reward being a simple guild achievement displaying “1st Place in a GvG Season” with the reward potentially being an additional relic slot, or base stamina gain so as to incentivize actively pursuing 1st place repeatedly to keep others from achieving the same.

The ability to provide individuals a competitive aspect to partake in while being rewarded for doing well, coupled with multiple opportunities, over time, to climb and attempt to make the most of a “fresh start” at the start of the three months will also help inject that liveliness into an otherwise humdrum aspect. We already have the resetting of rating present in the game, as mentioned, so transitioning that into the GvG area seems like a relatively easy and feasible way to go about helping bolster individuals’ pride in their ability to conduct themselves at the pinnacle of guild activities."

 

*whispers* this noticed @HCS?

[Toreth]

TL;DR: Send the trials with the caveat of increasing the level ranges as part of the trial. This is a fix to the structural portion of how GvGs are done; rewards come after the structural part is fixed. Current Epics from GvG Rewards: 25% of them are upgraded; other upgrades still pending. Opt-out is terrible - notification system allows for Unbreakable casts to assist in the ONLY negative of gear damage.

 

While I certainly don't envy HCG for having to come in here and sift through the posts, trying to decipher what's legitimate and what's an "I want," I do hope they can see the dichotomy of the players in the community in regards to this aspect. What's a little surprising is the fact the HCG has come out and said "this is a trial," which has been met with disdainful comments of "No. Terrible. That's not going to work. That's no good." when the proposed quality of life changes haven't even been attempted yet. HCG has finally come down after how long to breathe some life in an absolutely dead aspect of the game?

 

Obviously I agree and support what's been proposed being the original, original poster that Arioche linked to, but there's a reason each of those were brought up initially:

 

• Reducing Offline Time for Targets: This is to help prevent farming completely AFK players. Someone is much more likely to show up online if they've been AFK for ~24+ hours when compared to ~6+ days. Traditionally, once someone hits that ~48 hour mark, the chances of them logging back in for any reason drastically decreases.

 

• Expand Level Ranges: This was proposed to go hand-in-hand with the Reduction in Offline Time for Targets as well as provide more overall target opportunities in dead ranges not at the very low or very high end of content where players are crowded. This is one I would strongly urge HCG to do in conjunction with the Reduction in Offline Timer during the trial as doing the former without this limits options for players.

 

• Notification System: Also should be self-explanatory; nobody likes to be hit while they're AFK and not know about it. Imagine you're going to be pelted for 25 hits and there's an option ahead of time to give you notice to, at the bare minimum, buff up with Unbreakable. Now you've saved yourself gold. Without the notification and time for prep? No time for anything - have fun with that bill. And all of this is for the casual - those who want the hard core will only utilize it for much higher potential.

 

Everyone keeps touching on rewards, but they fail to address the core issue of GvG being a "I wanna farm AFK players who are unprotected." These would assist in doing that. Until the core is repaired, at least some, then the reward structure will do nothing but become stagnant rather quickly even if things are introduced.

 

"I want new items and new epics." Sure, but have those who've asked for such things taken note of the Epics that are currently in the process of being upgraded? Only 5/21 (or 5/20 if omitting Cobalt Rune due to low level) have been upgraded so far. That's 25% or less of the way done on those upgrades, but they are coming. BG said it was going to take a little while as it has to be done in phases. The impatience and desire for instant gratification is going to run this into the ground before it even has a chance to take off.

 

Others have tossed out other ideas around as well; some with merit (Structure for the notifications), others without (“Let me just disengage from GvG altogether”). There are also some that would require more substance from HCG, which also isn’t feasible:

 

The seasons idea was brought up in the Original that Arioche linked to that had favorable HCG response:

 

But, if the core function of GvG isn’t patched first, then the GvG ladder system will be just what it is now - “farm AFK players and race to 1st; then, park until the reset.” These ideas up for trial are the initial steps into injecting a competitive nature back into FS. GvG (and PvP, but that’s a separate topic), are meant to be competitive in some regard, but there’s nothing to appease those who want a challenge.

Edited by Toreth, 17 March 2023 - 18:52.

[Morgwyn]

Whole heartedly and 100% disagree with everything stated here due to many well thought out points in the thread about the necessity of a fresh feeling to GvG. The current system of GvG also incentivizes farming and has for years already. If there is sought after rewards on the GvG ladders guild will compete for it, simple.

Whole heartedly and 100% disagree with you, sorry. GvG ladder will not make GvG better. It will only be about a handful of top guilds dominating it and will encourage farming more than it does now.

 

I think it would be wise if HCS would state a bit more specific what they want to achieve here.

Do they want to revive GvG in a way where it is more fun for everybody with rewards that are accessible to everybody, or do they want a to make GvG a system for just a few top guilds?

 

A GvG ladder only gives incentive to those that already want to GvG, the way I took this initial post was looking for a way to get more players/guilds interested.

If you make GvG something that you can improve your guild with and/or getting some nice buff packs or items, than that will do a lot more for broad participation than a GvG ladder.

[EpicPiety]

Whole heartedly and 100% disagree with you, sorry. GvG ladder will not make GvG better. It will only be about a handful of top guilds dominating it and will encourage farming more than it does now.

 

I think it would be wise if HCS would state a bit more specific what they want to achieve here.

Do they want to revive GvG in a way where it is more fun for everybody with rewards that are accessible to everybody, or do they want a to make GvG a system for just a few top guilds?

 

A GvG ladder only gives incentive to those that already want to GvG, the way I took this initial post was looking for a way to get more players/guilds interested.

If you make GvG something that you can improve your guild with and/or getting some nice buff packs or items, than that will do a lot more for broad participation than a GvG ladder.

GvG is for everyone and will continue to be for everyone with the changes mentioned. It's up to guilds to choose if they want to participate.

[john0626]

for guilds to compete 10 active members. active means last 3 days. increase level ranges maybe to 250.maybe have reset every 7 to 10 days. make rp packs worth it. medals for gvg. some kind of reward system maybe for top 10 guilds .

 

[paingwin]

Everyone keeps touching on rewards, but they fail to address the core issue of GvG being a "I wanna farm AFK players who are unprotected." These would assist in doing that. Until the core is repaired, at least some, then the reward structure will do nothing but become stagnant rather quickly even if things are introduced.

 

"I want new items and new epics." Sure, but have those who've asked for such things taken note of the Epics that are currently in the process of being upgraded? Only 5/21 (or 5/20 if omitting Cobalt Rune due to low level) have been upgraded so far. That's 25% or less of the way done on those upgrades, but they are coming. BG said it was going to take a little while as it has to be done in phases. The impatience and desire for instant gratification is going to run this into the ground before it even has a chance to take off.

While I agree with the fact your making about GvG just basically being a farming aspect of the game, you have to realize 1 key thing. People are not going to participate in something, that doesn't adequately reward them for their efforts. It's just the way people in general work these days. Gone are the vast majority of people who would sit at their computer for hours and hours on end, swapping buffs and gear every 2 minutes, just to force that 1 fateful "unresolved combat" against someone to win a GvG(Yes tlthomasjr I will bring this up every chance I can LOL). "Bragging rights" don't mean a whole lot to most people anymore, which is sad. So yeah, your going to have to come up with a reward system that isn't too broken, and rewards people just enough to get them engaged. Otherwise, it doesn't matter how much thought you put into a system, it will fall flat. I've tried to say this for years but it has continuously fell on deaf ears, and now we are seeing the very results of it. 

 

Though the epics and stuff made from the rp items are nice, they dont LEAVE once they are here, hence the oversaturation and blah blah blah. Perishable rewards are the simple way to fix this issue, you know, so they have to "keep playing" to get it again. Potions, buffs, guild upgrades, possible player upgrades, and I'm sure others can come up with rewards that don't stick in game. The point is once you reach a certain level of items in the game the portion of the game that provides them will slow drastically. Take the PvP ladder for instance. Once, some of the best PvP based gear came from ladder gained rewards. The ladders were ACTIVE for a bit, then the gear gained from the ladder could shortly be gotten in the AH for a few FSP and the ladder dried up. Except for those going for medals that is.

 

My point is you talk down to those people speaking about rewards as if it's a bad thing, when in all actuality, it's probably the only thing that will get people interested anymore. But, like I said, the trick is to make the rewards juuuuuust good enough to get people going, and make them non-permanent. (Oh, and make them rewards that can't be obtained, or matched for that matter, from any other aspect of the game) I play a mobile game, and there is a reward you get from playing in the arena that you can only get in the arena, that helps in ALL aspects of the game. Arena never dies.......simple concept

Edited by paingwin, 19 March 2023 - 13:48.

[TheCount]

Whole heartedly and 100% disagree with you, sorry. GvG ladder will not make GvG better. It will only be about a handful of top guilds dominating it and will encourage farming more than it does now.

 

I think it would be wise if HCS would state a bit more specific what they want to achieve here.

Do they want to revive GvG in a way where it is more fun for everybody with rewards that are accessible to everybody, or do they want a to make GvG a system for just a few top guilds?

I can't get behind this line of thinking. I don't understand it. If you don't care about the GvG Rating of your guild, then why does it matter if the ladder resets. Increasing "farming" is doing exactly what the change is intended to do. And if there are a handful of guilds that are better at an aspect of the game, should that go unnoticed? No extra reward for the extra effort?
 

No matter what the aspect of the game or the changes they make, they cannot make everything even. There will always be the bigger fish. That doesn't make the rest of the people playing less relevant or unable to participate. Everyone fuels the activity, and those who take it more seriously will put more effort into it and come out on top.

 

I've hit a lot of guilds in GvG. One thing I've noticed is if you give people the chance, they will compete. Your guild was once in the top 5 or 6 GvG guilds, in a more active time. Resetting the Rating gives people that chance.

[Morgwyn]

I can't get behind this line of thinking. I don't understand it. If you don't care about the GvG Rating of your guild, then why does it matter if the ladder resets. Increasing "farming" is doing exactly what the change is intended to do. And if there are a handful of guilds that are better at an aspect of the game, should that go unnoticed? No extra reward for the extra effort?
 

No matter what the aspect of the game or the changes they make, they cannot make everything even. There will always be the bigger fish. That doesn't make the rest of the people playing less relevant or unable to participate. Everyone fuels the activity, and those who take it more seriously will put more effort into it and come out on top.

 

I've hit a lot of guilds in GvG. One thing I've noticed is if you give people the chance, they will compete. Your guild was once in the top 5 or 6 GvG guilds, in a more active time. Resetting the Rating gives people that chance.

That is why I am asking the question what HCS intention is with this update. Bringing GvG to a wider audience, and increase participation that way, or make a lot of changes so that just a few hardcore guilds can have their new toy?

Personally I think that bringing GvG to a wider audience would be the wiser choice as it binds more people to the game.

Increased farming by a few on many will only lead to more annoyance to those that do not like it now, or do not care.

 

I think you are missing my point in general. GvG used to be a great way for guilds to make some extra fsp, and indirectly improve their characters and/or guilds. Even small and more relaxed guilds could benefit of it and maybe more important, they had fun with it.

And even in that scenario you had guilds that were better than others, that really is not the point. There was one guild that dominated quite hard at GvG, I never had a problem with that.  I just feel it should not be about that. We have plenty of stuff in this game that revolves on being the best.

 

My guild used to GvG a lot, but for fun and the opportunity to improve the guild and its members. We never cared about the rating. RA dominated that era I think.

[wigz]

If people remember GvG 10+ years ago it was the back bone of this game. Then it was revamped and the game started to die. If the previously mentioned suggestions are put in place the same thing will happen.  The online participation went from 3+k to less than 300. True, many may be using mobile.

 

NO 1 hour notification....why?  To look up and see "TO ARMS!" is a rush and everyone starts doing their thing to defend.  1 hour will do nothing but prolong the conflict, and will probably not change the outcome.  

 

The thing that most people are not addressing is the simple fact that currently smaller guilds do not have the capability to compete with a larger guild.  They do not have all the maxed out structures so they don't get the extra bells and whistles, and usually don't have access to free level 200+ buffs or pots. So smaller guilds have to settle for being farmed or pay for the buffs/pots needed to compete so they will be loosing more than just a little gear wear and gold to end up loosing anyway. 

 

What would be great is to go back to the beginning.  If guilds are involved in a conflict then they should not be able to use buffs over level 175 and the pots should only be from the potion bazar.  You would be able to see who the real GvG'ers are. The 2% rule might even come back to life.

 

Being rewarded RP is not a good enough incentive for GvG participation. Being given the chance to compete on a more level playing field is  good incentive.

 

There are Pros and Cons on increasing target ranges. There are levels in this game where the gear is not that good so you have to struggle a bit but someone 50, 100 to 200 levels above you may have the better gear and you're gonna get smacked no matter what you do.  

 

Just a few thoughts from a throw back.

 

[yghorbeviahn]

stuff

Actually it's quite the opposite, smaller guilds have a way easier time defending because it's less members, less possible targets.

Any big guilds full of EOCs are easily farmed, a single person can have like 10+ targets to hit.

It's easy to attack back, normally, due to the access to those things you mentioned, but if you're going against a GvG focused guild with a small team with access to the same benefits it's almost impossible without throwing some Epic pots in the mix...Which is fine if the two guilds want to compete at this level for brag rights/personal goals, it's a reasonable thing to do, but to spend so much just to get some RP with a draw, no one does it.

Limiting the use of high level potions in PvP/GvG defeat the purpose of those pots/composing even existing, I guarantee most of the players in the game have enough Epic levelling pots to hunt for years, the whole reason people buy them with real money is to use it on those occasions.

[Leos3000]

If people remember GvG 10+ years ago it was the back bone of this game. Then it was revamped and the game started to die. If the previously mentioned suggestions are put in place the same thing will happen.  The online participation went from 3+k to less than 300. True, many may be using mobile.

 

NO 1 hour notification....why?  To look up and see "TO ARMS!" is a rush and everyone starts doing their thing to defend.  1 hour will do nothing but prolong the conflict, and will probably not change the outcome.  

 

The thing that most people are not addressing is the simple fact that currently smaller guilds do not have the capability to compete with a larger guild.  They do not have all the maxed out structures so they don't get the extra bells and whistles, and usually don't have access to free level 200+ buffs or pots. So smaller guilds have to settle for being farmed or pay for the buffs/pots needed to compete so they will be loosing more than just a little gear wear and gold to end up loosing anyway. 

 

What would be great is to go back to the beginning.  If guilds are involved in a conflict then they should not be able to use buffs over level 175 and the pots should only be from the potion bazar.  You would be able to see who the real GvG'ers are. The 2% rule might even come back to life.

 

Being rewarded RP is not a good enough incentive for GvG participation. Being given the chance to compete on a more level playing field is  good incentive.

 

There are Pros and Cons on increasing target ranges. There are levels in this game where the gear is not that good so you have to struggle a bit but someone 50, 100 to 200 levels above you may have the better gear and you're gonna get smacked no matter what you do.  

 

Just a few thoughts from a throw back.

 

GVG as far as I know has never been revamped at least for game mechanics. Epics were added as rewards (created some renewed interest) and new buffs and overpowered pots have been introduced to change the dynamic as well.

 

The thing that I do like from this post is maxing buffs and making gvg competitive for any level of guild/player.

 

For PVP/GVG the biggest off putting factor can be the amount of high cost pots that may be required to compete with the best. Ultimately it can just be who wants to pop the most Legendary/Global/Donation chests to deter others from even trying to hit them back.

 

Again I will emphasize if the goal with this thread is to test something "new" to gain renewed interest in the aspect with out sweeping changes it is still missing it so far.

 

I am not sure if this would take a lot of coding or not? 

 

I think it would possibly be fun to test a GVG enviornment where only CASTABLE buffs apply to the combats in GVG or Straight cap at lvl 200 for all buffs.

 

Which ever scenario above is easier to code in. 

 

I think this opens up GVG to a much wider audience to be competitive with each other. 

 

It would allow for more variety in sets and hopefully revive other aspects that have probably died in recent years (Elite farming, SE Farming, LE farming, etc) where more items may be sought after to diversify sets. 

Edited by Leos3000, 29 March 2023 - 19:15.

[Morgoth62]

i agree with what yghorbeviahn wtote above.

 

add to this that i don't see how a one hour notification can change significantly the GVG behavior of the single players or of the guilds. my guild is very active in gvg and quite big, with a lot of players active in the 7 days span that permits to be hit during conflicts and quite evenly spread along the levels, from lvl 100 till EOC. even so, not many guilds are hitting back when attacked, so honestly, i think that the notification is only going to give a little additional advantage to the guilds that are already practicing an active defense during conflicts, but is not going to change anything in order to reduce the farming.

if farming is actually so big an issue, it would be better to implement the possibility to opt out as a guild from gvg, but this would deplete even more this aspect of the game.

also, surprise attacks are a fundamental part of war strategy, i think at least from the Roman empire on, so i cannot see the logic in giving to your opponent time to prepare for the struggle...

 

i'm not very happy with the reduction of the offline time for targets as well, unless the extension of the hitting range is actually going to compensate it: the possible targets are already not too many, so it would be annoying to see them furtherly reduced...

 

finally, i agree with those who are asking for an improved reward system that could revitalize the interest of some guilds for GVG: however, probably the best way to do that would be a complete revamping of the system (i read some interesting proposals above), but i understand that the Cows already stated that this isn't going to happen...