What would happen to the value of epics if this were too happen? Curious... I think this would kill titan hunting (at least for the low levels)
Should the PvP Smasher Medal Be changed Back?
Started by Maehdros, Jul 22 2012 19:50
167 replies to this topic
#122
Posted 18 September 2012 - 18:54
What would happen to the value of epics if this were too happen? Curious... I think this would kill titan hunting (at least for the low levels)
How does this have anything to do with titans?
#123
Posted 18 September 2012 - 19:16
If the value of epics go to nothing, you think titan hunting will continue?
#124
Posted 18 September 2012 - 19:21
What would happen to the value of epics if this were too happen? Curious... I think this would kill titan hunting (at least for the low levels)
How does this have anything to do with titans?
Watch how long it takes for the "Colossus of Gurgriss" titan to be taken out... I think the rest of the titans would follow the same fate since the value of the drop is basically not worth it.
#125
Posted 18 September 2012 - 19:23
What would happen to the value of epics if this were too happen? Curious... I think this would kill titan hunting (at least for the low levels)
How does this have anything to do with titans?
Watch how long it takes for the "Colossus of Gurgriss" titan to be taken out... I think the rest of the titans would follow the same fate since the value of the drop is basically not worth it.
What does that have to do with the pvp smasher medal? O_o
#126
Posted 18 September 2012 - 20:00
What does that have to do with the pvp smasher medal? O_o
I guess I misunderstood... I thought it was about reintroducing the way smashing hammer was a free for all. in that case, no one will want to wear epics since they will be the easiest targets (like me). If that is the case, the epics would be of no value since the additional stam gain would be lost by the tremendous amount of xp lost...
#127
Posted 18 September 2012 - 20:23
What does that have to do with the pvp smasher medal? O_o
I guess I misunderstood... I thought it was about reintroducing the way smashing hammer was a free for all. in that case, no one will want to wear epics since they will be the easiest targets (like me). If that is the case, the epics would be of no value since the additional stam gain would be lost by the tremendous amount of xp lost...
Players are already easy targets for gvg when wearing epics. Xp is easily gained these days, and someone can deter hits via the bounty board or buy protection amongst other things. ( if they can afford epics they can surely afford protection if desired. Add in Epics have always been tremendously over valued. Not sure how you think they would plummet in value? It;s not like everyone will start smashin one another.
#128
Posted 18 September 2012 - 20:59
What does that have to do with the pvp smasher medal? O_o
I guess I misunderstood... I thought it was about reintroducing the way smashing hammer was a free for all. in that case, no one will want to wear epics since they will be the easiest targets (like me). If that is the case, the epics would be of no value since the additional stam gain would be lost by the tremendous amount of xp lost...
Players are already easy targets for gvg when wearing epics. Xp is easily gained these days, and someone can deter hits via the bounty board or buy protection amongst other things. ( if they can afford epics they can surely afford protection if desired. Add in Epics have always been tremendously over valued. Not sure how you think they would plummet in value? It;s not like everyone will start smashin one another.
As I said, I believe I misunderstood. I thought this forum was about making things the way they were when the Smashing Hammer medal was introduced. IF you recall, everyone did start smashing one another. If that were to happen, who would want low level epic items?
#129
Posted 18 September 2012 - 21:03
As I said, I believe I misunderstood. I thought this forum was about making things the way they were when the Smashing Hammer medal was introduced. IF you recall, everyone did start smashing one another. If that were to happen, who would want low level epic items?
The medal had just been released, plenty of players had been trying to be the first to get it, etc. As with anything new, theres a frenzy. Plenty of players will use epics if they want more stam. With pvp in this game, its all about stats. Unless a player plans on staying buffed up 24/7 while gaining stam, it doesnt matter what gear they have on, players Can be hit.
Epics make a players a weaker target, via gvg, pvp, the bounty board. It's all about whether or not the extra stam gain is worth it. With high or low level epics , the level doesnt matter, their stats arent meant to benefit a player really. It's all about the stam/xp gain.
#130
Posted 19 September 2012 - 00:36
It is hard to believe that even after 9 pages of conversation, not one comment from HCS
#131
MummRa
-
- New Members
-
- 545 posts
Veteran
- United States of America
Posted 19 September 2012 - 01:07
It is hard to believe that even after 9 pages of conversation, not one comment from HCS
Usually implies they already have a decision and are just waiting for it to get out of hand or volitale.
#134
GoHalos
-
- New Members
-
- 574 posts
Veteran
- United States of America
Posted 10 October 2012 - 15:32
Yes. And I don't even pvp.
#135
Posted 10 October 2012 - 20:44
Sure! sounds good... why was it changed in the first place? :?
Visit my shop! Mongo's Emporium for emotes, pets, vanity and more!
#137
Posted 11 October 2012 - 02:07
I haven't followed the various threads on PvP too closely -- I don't actively PvP, so it doesn't have that much of a bearing on me -- but participating and following (to a degree) this one has given me what I think might be a fair idea to solve both this dilemma, and also reinvigorate the Bounty Board.
I propose that the maximum levels that can be lost on a bounty be altered, and tied to the amount of stamina used on the initial hit. For example, if Player A hits player B for only 10 stamina, and Player B bounties, only 1 level can be take through the bounty; if it is a 100 stamina hit, though, TEN levels can be taken. (To prevent gaming of this proposed system, I would also make it so that an attack has to be in multiples of 10 stamina, so that people aren't attacking with 19 stamina, or 99 stamina, or something like that, as a work-around.)
I think that doing this would prevent more active PvP-ers from losing 5 levels on basic 10-stam love taps, while also increasing the potential penalty for 100-stamina hits. And under a system like this, where there's more of a penalty for the 100-stamina hit, I think the Smasher system, as it was previously, might be fair to all parties.
On a tangentially related point, I would also like to propose a workaround to one of the bigger issues with the previous Smasher system: people who were dumb and didn't understand it, and would blindly 100-stam people every hour, or every day, without realizing that they were not building towards the Smasher total. I would rather not get into a discussion of what the waiting period should be, at present, since frankly, that will just devolve into a "PvP-ers want a shorter one, Levelers want a longer one" thing that gets us nowhere.
HOWEVER, I would like to propose that, if you're about to 100-stam someone within the waiting period, and thus the hit would not count towards your Smasher total, that the game give you a warning. What I have in mind is similar to GvG, when you're trying to hit someone after you've already done the requisite number of hits: when you hit Attack, the game tells you that you're in a conflict with this Guild, did the number of hits, and this attack won't count towards it at all, and then asks you if you're sure you want to hit. It wouldn't be asking much (I think) for HCS to give a similar warning if a 100-stam hit wouldn't count towards a Smasher total, and to thusly prevent ignorant players from ruining things for the rest of us.
I propose that the maximum levels that can be lost on a bounty be altered, and tied to the amount of stamina used on the initial hit. For example, if Player A hits player B for only 10 stamina, and Player B bounties, only 1 level can be take through the bounty; if it is a 100 stamina hit, though, TEN levels can be taken. (To prevent gaming of this proposed system, I would also make it so that an attack has to be in multiples of 10 stamina, so that people aren't attacking with 19 stamina, or 99 stamina, or something like that, as a work-around.)
I think that doing this would prevent more active PvP-ers from losing 5 levels on basic 10-stam love taps, while also increasing the potential penalty for 100-stamina hits. And under a system like this, where there's more of a penalty for the 100-stamina hit, I think the Smasher system, as it was previously, might be fair to all parties.
On a tangentially related point, I would also like to propose a workaround to one of the bigger issues with the previous Smasher system: people who were dumb and didn't understand it, and would blindly 100-stam people every hour, or every day, without realizing that they were not building towards the Smasher total. I would rather not get into a discussion of what the waiting period should be, at present, since frankly, that will just devolve into a "PvP-ers want a shorter one, Levelers want a longer one" thing that gets us nowhere.
HOWEVER, I would like to propose that, if you're about to 100-stam someone within the waiting period, and thus the hit would not count towards your Smasher total, that the game give you a warning. What I have in mind is similar to GvG, when you're trying to hit someone after you've already done the requisite number of hits: when you hit Attack, the game tells you that you're in a conflict with this Guild, did the number of hits, and this attack won't count towards it at all, and then asks you if you're sure you want to hit. It wouldn't be asking much (I think) for HCS to give a similar warning if a 100-stam hit wouldn't count towards a Smasher total, and to thusly prevent ignorant players from ruining things for the rest of us.
#138
Posted 11 October 2012 - 03:00
if it is based on stam use for attacking then there is a little issue still. what about the ' failed ' attacks made on target along with deflected attacks still get posted on BB alot of times.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users