92 replies to this topic

[Alisa]

KitiaraLi, on 28 Jul 2021 - 05:10, said:

As in the rest of the world, if you have nothing interesting or relevant to bring to the conversation, just stay out of it.

I don't even bother responding to people that never PvPs. They don't see what everyone else sees and still throws their opinion in.

I know nothing about arena or have over 500 wins. You won't see me giving ideas for arena.

[Tilley10]

Arioche, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:26, said:

Hello everyone!

 

Recently there has been some talk about increasing the PvP Attack Ranges. While we're all for the idea, we need to be careful with how we go about this, so we'd like to hear more of your thoughts before we go forward with anything.

 

As it stands, the current attack range (+/-10) has been causing some issues for those who actively partake in pvp. However, if we increase the range too much, this may negatively impact the game for those who do not pvp. 

 

We're currently still deliberating on how to go about tackling this issue. We acknowledge that some of the problems with pvp is the system itself. We also wish to protect players that do not partake in it.

 

Thank you!

 

~ Fallen Sword Team

 

 

Thank you again for starting this discussion! I, for one, appreciate this a lot. The current PvP ranges are very outdated. There are hardly any targets from 1100-EOC so it needs to expand. Players currently have many solutions to attempt to avoid PvP altogether: PvP Protection, Deflect, wear a solid offline setup, carry next to 0 gold and of course if they are hit, they can bounty the person who hit them. FS was built around being a PvP game - all of those solutions are plenty.

 

 

Corrupted, on 26 Jul 2021 - 13:12, said:

Make normal PvP ranges the same as GvG ranges:

1 - 300 (+/- 25)
301 - 700 (+/- 50)
701+ (+/- 100)

 

 

This would most likely be the easiest to implement and would keep consistency to GvG ranges. At my level of 2,999, I would go from having 3 targets to 16 targets myself. I am fine with this suggestion or the level range that Maehdros suggested.

 

Maehdros, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:46, said:

Perhaps a scaling pvp range based on your level. Glad to see some kind of love go there. An update to ladder potions would be nice as well. I know there's so many Le that need to be created so not going to bother asking for that. Cheers!


1 to 999 , +/- 10
1000 to 1999, +/- 20
2000 to 2999, +/- 30
3000 to 3999, +/- 40
4000 to 4999, +/- 50

 

 

Filletminion, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:31, said:

Even Tiddly winks has Risk, every game needs it to be alive.

This is the most Fraught Discussion in the game.

 

Personally Bring back PvP seasons. you guys did a load of work on the original and by the end of the first season the bugs were addressed then you canned it.

 

It Seems a bit silly that one group of players are the only ones who will ever get that medal or have the chance to.

 

 

EpicPiety, on 26 Jul 2021 - 16:04, said:

I agree with reinstating PvP seasons. It was bound to be extremely successful however because of it's buggy implementation and auto opting everyone in, it caused a problem and it got canned. Bounty board would need to be reworked through PvP seasons because how it was implemented wasn't the way it ought to have been imo.

 

Yes, I would like to see PvP Seasons return - as would many others. This would shake up the current Global Events and add a unique one. I wouldn't mind seeing this once a month or once a quarter.

 

This should be a separate thread but the Bounty Board needs a massive overhaul. That way we can stay on topic on this thread and be on topic in that one. Plus, I would like to see what everyone would suggest for it. As it is now, nobody really has incentive to post and nobody really has incentive to clear.

Edited by Tilley10, 28 July 2021 - 17:31.

[BadPenny]

michael65, on 28 Jul 2021 - 15:26, said:

   the consensus seems to be for hard limits.
juvi likes gvg ranges or mahaedros' (sp?) ranges. these two are popular.

but...
i. ranges under level 1000 probably need adjusting.
ii. ranges still not wide enough for purposes of DQ. does fs need wider DQ ranges?
except those on the ladder, pvpers can level/delevel to find a level rich in targets. any widening should be acceptable to most pvpers.

Sorry, I'm not interested in deleveling just for a DQ, and let me tell you, from about 2500 till I don't know where, there are more times I have 0 active targets (except for an occasional guildmate) than when I do, and many times, I don't even have inactive targets....  

The fact remains that the last time any adjustments were done to ranges were in 2008 or 2009 when +/-10 was instituted for 200+.... and at that time, EoC was at or around 1k....   AND the average players online was in the thousands rather than <400

 

With the app being available for the general public, no matter how limited it may be, new players will want to see that there is equity in all aspects of the game.  Unlike most FS players, these new folks are most likely accustomed to serious cut-throat PvP play... 

 
 

[wil72]

Arioche, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:26, said:

 

" We also wish to protect players that do not partake in it". (Unquote) "it" being PvP.

 

Thank you!

 

~ Fallen Sword Team

"We" being HCS. That, to me, is rather concerning. I woudn't have thought it was up to HCS to protect players from PvP but rather the players themselves. Did you mean to word it in the manner that you did? If so it is a dangerous rhetoric in my opinion as many "non" pvpers will jump all over this statement. And some, nay many, will use it to strengthen their arguement for a total opt out option with regards to PvP. A truly horrendous thought I think you will all agree. This IS a PvP game. KitiaraLi has been good enough to post quotes from HCS hierarchy to confirm this. May I suggest you re-post with amendments to make this crystal clear because as it stands, for me at least, you have kinda.......muddied the waters.

 

As for alterations to PvP bands:

 

SilentS0ul's suggestion that GvG and PvP bands should be identical sounds good to me.

 

Cheers,

wil72

[Emperor Sidd]

Hi Arioche

 

I agree with wil72 points above, the statement about protecting players left a bad taste in my mouth when I first read this post and opted out but wil72 has conveyed my thoughts. The gold and bank are distinct aspects of a players character for a reason. 

 

When the game was at its peak, players always had many players in their range who they could hit or be hit by, this is still true at EOC where you have about 100 people with in 10 levels. You should not include number of players in your evaluation of the attack ranges, instead it should be based on access to gear. If you take into account the distribution of items +/- 100 levels isn't much at EOC, you can even go to 200 and its a fair fight. This is of course ignoring the fact that 95% of the players wear epics; negligible stats to defend if someone wishes to attack you.

 

I also believe players can keep arguing for another week with anecdotal evidence, you should decide on attack ranges and implement them. It should be easier to balance out with realtime feedback.

Edited by SiddXIV, 28 July 2021 - 23:10.

[WandKing]

I feel that this post was born out of the fact that some players would like to do a PvP DQ if the reward is sweet enough, yet have no targets.

A simple change to the PvP DQ could solve that.

Give the player a 2nd choice...reward remains the same

 

Defeat x active players in normal PvP or Defeat  xxx creatures.

 

No other task is needed, it is either defeat players or defeat creatures

 

 Once a click is made they are stuck with the choice.

 

Maybe this would entice pvpers to go kill some creatures for change 

 

 

Another idea swimming in my head is having a lawless level, say every 1000 levels.

After next new content that would make 5 areas.

In those areas your pvp range increases to +/- 500 or even 1000.

you can invite some friends in there to wail on for your DQ or (pvpers would love this)

Hang out in the area waiting for a unsuspecting  leveler passing thru! 

[Arioche]

Hello!

 

Thank you to everyone who has left feedback and suggestions on how to improve the pvp ranges. We have read each and every message and are factoring them into our discussion on the best solution to implement. We understand that finding targets is a problem for some players, so we really want to address this issue sooner rather than later.

That said, we do want to address the comments relating to protecting players that do not partake in pvp. While some of the core mechanics of the game are related to pvp, these mechanics still need to be designed carefully. There are multiple ways one can protect themselves, but we must consider all scenarios before we implement anything.

This change needs to find a nice balance, hence why we began this thread. We want to give you the chance to say your piece, rather than change something so important without it. With that being said, we love some of your ideas so far! 

 

~ Fallen Sword Team

[moneypants]

here i got one. no epics allow if your on the ladder. so sick of players sitting in epics and then use big pots for 30mins hit and then into epics. as a pvp player i dont wanna see the ladder full of epic gear. if your going to gain token no epics are allow!

[moneypants]

Maehdros, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:46, said:

Perhaps a scaling pvp range based on your level. Glad to see some kind of love go there. An update to ladder potions would be nice as well. I know there's so many Le that need to be created so not going to bother asking for that. Cheers!


1 to 999 , +/- 10
1000 to 1999, +/- 20
2000 to 2999, +/- 30
3000 to 3999, +/- 40
4000 to 4999, +/- 50

 

 

LLAP, on 26 Jul 2021 - 13:11, said:

PvP protection, XP protect and Deflect are viable options... This is a PvP game.

 

 

shindrak, on 26 Jul 2021 - 14:25, said:

Yea bring PvP seasons back 

Yes please

 

michael65, on 26 Jul 2021 - 15:26, said:

gvg uses group attacks at two minute intervals not affecting xp nor gold.

for pvp, the ranges are too wide except 1000+ levels. what could be the problem?
whine, whine
complain, complain
from unhappy players

when your level 1000 vs 2000 it be to hard gear changes so much in stats. if they both use every pot in game guess which wins? 

[moneypants]

moneypants, on 29 Jul 2021 - 12:24, said:

here i got one. no epics allow if your on the ladder. so sick of players sitting in epics and then use big pots for 30mins hit and then into epics. as a pvp player i dont wanna see the ladder full of epic gear. if your going to gain token no epics are allow!

[Feldshan]

Also have to throw out the idea of Hidden Coffer being changed to be more like Deep pockets and less like a neon sign saying something like " most likely to have gold here", seeing as I doubt people just place the buff on themselves when they don't have much gold. Would be nice if Cloak would cover that, but then it might be too easy if too many people start using it that way.

 

Another thing would be to either have a buff for the pvp, or non pvp person to get some of the gold back that is lost during the combat, or have the system take that amount and auto bounty a person if it would be enough to match the bounty creation amount the person getting hit would have to pay out. That way it would be possible to potentially get bountied twice, but if the gold gained from the hit was enough it would still be worth it.

 

Not totally the area to really talk about these, but they do factor into the reason non ladder pvp people are pvping besides the daily quest. Also understand the whole point about wanting to loose some of the gold, but I am sure that losses to stamina, other factors could be used to both protect gold and also drain more gold off players in the effort to protect the gold they have. Even a buff where you risk loosing all your gold in an effort to save gold would be an interesting gamble that some people might be willing to take if it was setup right.

[Tilley10]

Arioche, on 29 Jul 2021 - 09:11, said:

Hello!

 

Thank you to everyone who has left feedback and suggestions on how to improve the pvp ranges. We have read each and every message and are factoring them into our discussion on the best solution to implement. We understand that finding targets is a problem for some players, so we really want to address this issue sooner rather than later.

That said, we do want to address the comments relating to protecting players that do not partake in pvp. While some of the core mechanics of the game are related to pvp, these mechanics still need to be designed carefully. There are multiple ways one can protect themselves, but we must consider all scenarios before we implement anything.

This change needs to find a nice balance, hence why we began this thread. We want to give you the chance to say your piece, rather than change something so important without it. With that being said, we love some of your ideas so far! 

 

~ Fallen Sword Team

 

Tilley10, on 28 Jul 2021 - 16:50, said:

Thank you again for starting this discussion! I, for one, appreciate this a lot. The current PvP ranges are very outdated. There are hardly any targets from 1100-EOC so it needs to expand. Players currently have many solutions to attempt to avoid PvP altogether: PvP Protection, Deflect, wear a solid offline setup, carry next to 0 gold and of course if they are hit, they can bounty the person who hit them. FS was built around being a PvP game - all of those solutions are plenty.

 

I stand by that there are already a plethora of ways to prevent a PvP attack in the game. One of the main deterrents is the Bounty Board but it needs a huge overhaul to be appealing once again. Hopefully a new thread gets started on this some time in the near future.

 

The range is something that can be altered after a trial period. Increase the ranges a little bit for a month or so and collect data. From there, increase again, leave as is or even lower the ranges. A good starting point would be Maeh's suggestion - posted below.

 

Maehdros, on 26 Jul 2021 - 12:46, said:

1 to 999 , +/- 10
1000 to 1999, +/- 20
2000 to 2999, +/- 30
3000 to 3999, +/- 40
4000 to 4999, +/- 50

 

Thank you again for working on this! The community appreciates the feedback you are giving and also listening to us.

Edited by Tilley10, 29 July 2021 - 15:09.

[Subject]

PVP Event.! Like Globals…. Give a week advance notice that the “Event” is about to start so all can have time to prepare with pots / Gear / Buffs … So on and so forth. I for one want that medal as I don’t have it due to inactivity during the time that PvP event came out. Not cool that there is a medal that I literally can not obtain. But have to look at other accounts who have it. ( understand that it was my fault due to being inactive ) but still drop the event again cause I want it….. and in that note make more dang medals How hard can this be… honestly

[BadPenny]

Subject, on 29 Jul 2021 - 15:53, said:

PVP Event.! Like Globals…. Give a week advance notice that the “Event” is about to start so all can have time to prepare with pots / Gear / Buffs … So on and so forth. I for one want that medal as I don’t have it due to inactivity during the time that PvP event came out. Not cool that there is a medal that I literally can not obtain. But have to look at other accounts who have it. ( understand that it was my fault due to being inactive ) but still drop the event again cause I want it….. and in that note make more dang medals How hard can this be… honestly

It wasn't just an event sweetie, it was an short-lived all-out change to the whole PvP and bounty system, that failed due to the outcry of non-PvPer's being hit by anybody and everybody.  Although I missed it, as I was also inactive, I heard it was a free for all, anybody could hit anybody else, and bounties were automatic.... 

imho, with a few tweaks (make this opt-in only, like the ladder) leave the bounty system as is (maybe with a few minor tweaks, but auto bounties seems to take the "choice" out of the equation), install at least a minimal range system, ditch the ladder entirely and bring back PvP rating from ALL PvP (oh, and don't take away Dominance Medals like when the ladder was born), and Seasons would work a lot better than our current system. 

 

Not that I know all that much....
 

[Feldshan]

BadPenny, on 29 Jul 2021 - 16:04, said:

It wasn't just an event sweetie, it was an short-lived all-out change to the whole PvP and bounty system, that failed due to the outcry of non-PvPer's being hit by anybody and everybody.  Although I missed it, as I was also inactive, I heard it was a free for all, anybody could hit anybody else, and bounties were automatic.... 

imho, with a few tweaks (make this opt-in only, like the ladder) leave the bounty system as is (maybe with a few minor tweaks, but auto bounties seems to take the "choice" out of the equation), install at least a minimal range system, ditch the ladder entirely and bring back PvP rating from ALL PvP (oh, and don't take away Dominance Medals like when the ladder was born), and Seasons would work a lot better than our current system. 

 

Not that I know all that much....
 

Still it wouldn't hurt to have a free for all limitedly (granted I would grumble about it too, but it would make things interesting and with a warning and maybe a cheap deal on pvp protection for one use, or free pvp protection at the start of the event). Have bounties during it be auto to allow even more mayhem based on how hard you hit people or what you got from them. Write it as an event where the shadow cast a spell that lasts 2 or 3 days and all safeguards are off the realm and darkness has won for those few days only.

 

It would be a way to maybe even test any new pvp settings to see what people think. 

[yotekiller]

  The auto bounty system in seasons was a large part of why people hated it.  First, it took away any choice of the player being hit to bounty or not.  Those that got hit but didn't see a bounty posted felt slighted, as if they got hit with no way of avenging themselves.  Second, all bounty hits were 50 stam - no choice for bounty hunters to hit hard or soft as they so chose.  Targets that wanted more XP taken from their attacker were robbed of that opportunity - 50 stam hits only.  Third, auto bounties were triggered by gold lost, not by XP loss.  What are most non-pvp'ers more concerned with losing?  XP, but in seasons I could hit the same player 25 times with 100 stams but as long as they didn't lose any gold, no bounty was posted.  Hit them 1 time with a decent amount of gold lost and here comes the bounty.  Oh, there was one caveat, if you didn't lose enough gold to trigger a bounty you could pay into a fund to speed up the process.  So, even if you didn't lose gold to the hitter, you lost gold to the system in order to get revenge.  It was a terrible system that upset pvp and non-pvp players alike.  I don't understand why so many people seem so anxious to see it return but I remember how bad it was and I sure don't want to see it return.

  A much better and easier system to implement would be to just add some extra bonuses to the ladder occasionally.  Announce that during one of the ladder resets in a certain date range to come, the bonuses will be added to the ladder.  The ladder is already an existing system that just has to be tweaked for an event instead of creating an entirely new stand alone system.  Those that want to opt in and play can compete against others of like mind.  Those that don't want to participate can carry on about their business without being involved.

[gapukas]

Bring back pvp seasons

[ColtColt]

i'll agree other bountie system, without scripts

[moneypants]

you wanna knw whats killing pvp? theses buffs 

 

so go armour and attack probly wouldnt beat his high defence. been running that high dc for days 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[moneypants]

Thats so broken cant be leech and mins 

 

im quiting the ladder 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by moneypants, 05 August 2021 - 14:21.