181 replies to this topic

[clock96]

clock96, your system is xp loss but above post says opposite
 
I am am honest then I see very low chance for your idea get accepted by hoofmaster, zorg and biggrim but I hope I am mistaken
 
I know you explained to mary but I saw last pvp updates and yours is not in the direction HCS have been doing their pvp updates
again I hope I am mistaken and maybe we can see pvp getting more

this post is an old post, BG made another one after it and he is the one who suggested the new update I made, he wanted to add it to the ordinary "Normal or ladder attack" that means HCS don't have a problem with XP loss

[yotwehc]

this post is an old post, BG made another one after it and he is the one who suggested the new update I made, he wanted to add it to the ordinary "Normal or ladder attack" that means HCS don't have a problem with XP loss

With the xp loss, then as a leveler, I remove my support for your idea. Good luck.

[clock96]

With the xp loss, then as a leveler, I remove my support for your idea. Good luck.

You already get attacked anyway, the PvPer will just get more from the attack, levellers already get a lot of privileges and cool things, let the PvPers have something, I knew that PvPers were neglected all of the past years but after I knew the huge change that happened to PvP about 5 years ago, I didn't even believe it, PvPers lost a lot, how would you feel if HCS for example told you that creatures will give you less than half what they used to give ? Then make a couple of more things that make levelling up harder ? You won't like it and quit the game, same happened to PvPers, this will help PvPers once in this game after we lost a lot I am sad I wasn't here during the old PvP sounded like a lot of fun

[justinian9]

Even if the Cows went back to original system someone would complain... just do your best Clock96 to change what you can 

[yotwehc]

You already get attacked anyway, the PvPer will just get more from the attack, levellers already get a lot of privileges and cool things, let the PvPers have something, I knew that PvPers were neglected all of the past years but after I knew the huge change that happened to PvP about 5 years ago, I didn't even believe it, PvPers lost a lot, how would you feel if HCS for example told you that creatures will give you less than half what they used to give ? Then make a couple of more things that make levelling up harder ? You won't like it and quit the game, same happened to PvPers, this will help PvPers once in this game after we lost a lot I am sad I wasn't here during the old PvP sounded like a lot of fun

Then this is like all the other pvp v level thread. Many moons back, there was this awesome idea of a simple smasher medal where you get just a simple medal for smashing x number of people. All hits were counted towards the medal. I quit the game after getting whacked several times within minutes. Your idea will result in the same. If you want to drive out levelers, go forth with your idea

[Pardoux]

I can't believe how much this idea has changed since its inception. The original idea had merit, it could have drawn in new players to participate in PvP (which was, I'm guessing, the ultimate aim) but now it's been diverted / subverted (take your pick) to just being a "let's revert PvP back to the "glory" days" thread ...

 

I admit, the cows are caught between a rock and a hard place on the subject of PvP - some love it, some hate it - and they have to try and please at least the majority of players.

 

Personally (gee, who would have thought), I think that there are more levellers than there are PvP'rs - and that PvP just isn't as popular as it once was.

 

OK, that may be because some PvP'rs have left the game, and it may be because PvP has been changed, but if it was still as popular and as an important a part of the game as they say it is, then wouldn't it still be popular and not in need of constant threads by the PvP community to change it again ?

 

If it reverted back to the "old days", then I think there would be a bigger exodus of players than there is now - and, before folk throw the "prove it" statements, I'll counter with "you prove me wrong" - neither statement can be proven, both are speculation.

[clock96]

Then this is like all the other pvp v level thread. Many moons back, there was this awesome idea of a simple smasher medal where you get just a simple medal for smashing x number of people. All hits were counted towards the medal. I quit the game after getting whacked several times within minutes. Your idea will result in the same. If you want to drive out levelers, go forth with your idea

Well, PvPers were driven away from the game, it wasn't fair

I can't believe how much this idea has changed since its inception. The original idea had merit, it could have drawn in new players to participate in PvP (which was, I'm guessing, the ultimate aim) but now it's been diverted / subverted (take your pick) to just being a "let's revert PvP back to the "glory" days" thread ...

I admit, the cows are caught between a rock and a hard place on the subject of PvP - some love it, some hate it - and they have to try and please at least the majority of players.

Personally (gee, who would have thought), I think that there are more levellers than there are PvP'rs - and that PvP just isn't as popular as it once was.

OK, that may be because some PvP'rs have left the game, and it may be because PvP has been changed, but if it was still as popular and as an important a part of the game as they say it is, then wouldn't it still be popular and not in need of constant threads by the PvP community to change it again ?

If it reverted back to the "old days", then I think there would be a bigger exodus of players than there is now - and, before folk throw the "prove it" statements, I'll counter with "you prove me wrong" - neither statement can be proven, both are speculation.

Maybe someone should start a thread to bring old PvP back, someone who was active in PvP in that time, btw you can say which one you like more, the original idea or the updated one, the updated one was suggested and supported by BG (as far as I understand) I liked that BG suggested adding it to the "normal or ladder attack" which means HCS aactualy don't have a problem with loosing levelling XP, and for levellers, think for once about PvPers, please ?

Edited by clock96, 21 September 2014 - 21:58.

[yotwehc]

Well, PvPers were driven away from the game, it wasn't fairMaybe someone should start a thread to bring old PvP back, someone who was active in PvP in that time, btw you can say which one you like more, the original idea or the updated one, the updated one was suggested and supported by BG (as far as I understand) I liked that BG suggested adding it to the "normal or ladder attack" which means HCS aactualy don't have a problem with loosing levelling XP, and for levellers, think for once about PvPers, please ?

Think for once about pvprs? Lol. When levelers leave statements in their profile to not hit them, they get hit more. You have heard statements claiming nothing has been done for pvprs for 5+ years. The smasher medal doesn't count because it was "softened" after initial implementation (still a pro pvp change). Many of the new buffs introduced were not pro pvp either (really?). Removing gold protection from xp protection? The view from some are so biased. Honorable pvp I respect. Guild vs player pvp? Unwritten rules? Bullying? The majority of pvprs I know and like but there are rotten apples amongst their peers and there is almost nothing that can be done. When a ticket is issued and people are warned to behave, even more anger. Sorry but you started off well then your idea got dragged down.

[kitobas]

I can't believe how much this idea has changed since its inception. The original idea had merit, it could have drawn in new players to participate in PvP (which was, I'm guessing, the ultimate aim) but now it's been diverted / subverted (take your pick) to just being a "let's revert PvP back to the "glory" days" thread ...

 

I admit, the cows are caught between a rock and a hard place on the subject of PvP - some love it, some hate it - and they have to try and please at least the majority of players.

 

Personally (gee, who would have thought), I think that there are more levellers than there are PvP'rs - and that PvP just isn't as popular as it once was.

 

OK, that may be because some PvP'rs have left the game, and it may be because PvP has been changed, but if it was still as popular and as an important a part of the game as they say it is, then wouldn't it still be popular and not in need of constant threads by the PvP community to change it again ?

 

If it reverted back to the "old days", then I think there would be a bigger exodus of players than there is now - and, before folk throw the "prove it" statements, I'll counter with "you prove me wrong" - neither statement can be proven, both are speculation.

 

 

1.  Yes, I read your post fully - and the assumption (maybe speculation was a better word) I'm referring to is "I do not have any objection if the levelers want this kinda "safe" pvp system BUT like I mentioned before: hoofmaster needs to assure the pvpers that the NEW SYSTEM will NOT replace the current pvp system in the future !!!"   <-- YOUR quote.

 

2. Most updates have been tweaking PvP yes - but I disagree with your ladder one. Folk are on the ladder (broken as it is) and meant to be hitting each other for rewards. Being able to bounty hits on there has no place..

IMO a player should be able to bounty ladder hits IF he/she hits the same player too at least once per ladder reset because if you bounty a ladder hit then the other player can bounty too !!!

normal, ladder and bounty attacks should be bounty able !!! any form of PvP attack that takes XP should be bounty able (for example: the arena and gvg do not take any XP so they should not be bounty able)

 

3. What I was meaning with "try the safe version" was ... *tries to explain it more clearly* ... if folk get a "buzz" from hitting other players, working out gear / buff combinations etc, then the next logical progression would be to move from the "safe" environment to the "less safe" environment. Would everyone who tried it do that ? - probably not - but would some ? - I'd bet money on it. And, thus, that's MORE players participating in "real" PvP - so a win for your camp.

GvG has NO RISK too and even a wider attack range:

Level Ranges are as follows:

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

so GvG gives you an even wider playing field (after lvl 701 your attack range is +/- 100 which is much more than the normal pvp or new system attack range) and if the levelers have not moved from the "safe" environment to the "less safe" environment yet then in my opinion the chances are even smaller for them to make the transition to "real" PvP after the "new system"

 

clock96 first idea with no xp loss was very similar to gvg, if levelers not playing pvp after gvg (gvg giving you more targets and you can hit targets again after 2 minutes) then lowest chance they start after clock96 first idea with no xp loss

 

If it reverted back to the "old days", then I think there would be more players playing, I remember the online players years ago was very higher than now (years ago between 1500 - 1700, now we have 350 - 550)

 

pvp updates made to protecting levelers I think is one of biggest reason why online player are now very low or can you explain why years ago when original pvp was active we had 1500 - 1700 online players and now we have 350 - 550 online players?

[clock96]

Think for once about pvprs? Lol. When levelers leave statements in their profile to not hit them, they get hit more. You have heard statements claiming nothing has been done for pvprs for 5+ years. The smasher medal doesn't count because it was "softened" after initial implementation (still a pro pvp change). Many of the new buffs introduced were not pro pvp either (really?). Removing gold protection from xp protection? The view from some are so biased. Honorable pvp I respect. Guild vs player pvp? Unwritten rules? Bullying? The majority of pvprs I know and like but there are rotten apples amongst their peers and there is almost nothing that can be done. When a ticket is issued and people are warned to behave, even more anger. Sorry but you started off well then your idea got dragged down.

As far as I know you can hit who you want every hour so when you do so you get called a bully ? However, I am afraid this is getting out of topic so HCS, if you are looking to implement any of the idea or the update then make a public vote, which one players like more then implement it, I am sure this will get more PvP activity, PvPers are starting to get extinct

[Pardoux]

clock96 first idea with no xp loss was very similar to gvg, if levelers not playing pvp after gvg (gvg giving you more targets and you can hit targets again after 2 minutes) then lowest chance they start after clock96 first idea with no xp loss

 

If it reverted back to the "old days", then I think there would be more players playing, I remember the online players years ago was very higher than now (years ago between 1500 - 1700, now we have 350 - 550)

 

pvp updates made to protecting levelers I think is one of biggest reason why online player are now very low or can you explain why years ago when original pvp was active we had 1500 - 1700 online players and now we have 350 - 550 online players?

 

Your "PvP changes = drop in player numbers" statement is non-sensical, sorry.

 

1. The game is OLD - started in 2006. Back in the day, player numbers were much higher because it was something "new" - now, not so much.

 

2. Players move on, numbers drop - new players come in but aren't being captivated enough to stick around - that's something for the cows to continue to try to address.

 

3. MANY MANY changes may have resulted in player numbers dropping. Player numbers decline when a lot of players get terminated. Player numbers decline when an exploit that lots were taking advantage of gets closed and they can no longer make a killing etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

 

In essence, there are a plethora of reasons why the game isn't as popular as it once was. To say that decline is purely down to PvP nerfing is biased in the extreme.

Edited by Pardoux, 21 September 2014 - 22:24.

[kitobas]

Think for once about pvprs? Lol. When levelers leave statements in their profile to not hit them, they get hit more. You have heard statements claiming nothing has been done for pvprs for 5+ years. The smasher medal doesn't count because it was "softened" after initial implementation (still a pro pvp change). Many of the new buffs introduced were not pro pvp either (really?). Removing gold protection from xp protection? The view from some are so biased. Honorable pvp I respect. Guild vs player pvp? Unwritten rules? Bullying? The majority of pvprs I know and like but there are rotten apples amongst their peers and there is almost nothing that can be done. When a ticket is issued and people are warned to behave, even more anger. Sorry but you started off well then your idea got dragged down.

bro, fallen sword is a game, in game I can hit you and you can hit me if we are in attack range

I playing many online games but I not remember game you can not attack other players

 

ps: I play chess too and you can attack other player too in chess

[kitobas]

Your "PvP changes = drop in player numbers" statement is non-sensical, sorry.

 

1. The game is OLD - started in 2006. Back in the day, player numbers were much higher because it was something "new" - now, not so much.

 

2. Players move on, numbers drop - new players come in but aren't being captivated enough to stick around - that's something for the cows to continue to try to address.

 

3. MANY MANY changes may have resulted in player numbers dropping. Player numbers decline when a lot of players get terminated. Player numbers decline when an exploit that lots were taking advantage of gets closed and they can no longer make a killing etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

 

In essence, there are a plethora of reasons why the game isn't as popular as it once was. To say that decline is purely down to PvP nerfing is biased in the extreme.

I not say that player decline is purely down to PvP ,

 

I said:

pvp updates made to protecting levelers I think is one of biggest reason why online player are now very low or can you explain why years ago when original pvp was active we had 1500 - 1700 online players and now we have 350 - 550 online players?

 

I said one of biggest reason, that mean there are other reasons but that is one of them

[Pardoux]

I not say that player decline is purely down to PvP ,

 

I said:

pvp updates made to protecting levelers I think is one of biggest reason why online player are now very low or can you explain why years ago when original pvp was active we had 1500 - 1700 online players and now we have 350 - 550 online players?

 

I said one of biggest reason, that mean there are other reasons but that is one of them

 

OK, I still disagree tho - there are many reasons, of which that is one (from your side of the fences viewpoint LOL). Only the cows can know (or speculate) about which have a bigger impact on the game.

 

Now, there have been PvP changes to the game that increased PvP activity - and these were very quickly nerfed back down again. To me that says the cows realised that the first change would have a negative impact upon the games population.

 

The bottom line is, we can all argue back and forth - and PvP is a topic that always results in a LOT of back and forth discussion/argument - but only the cows can make changes and, hopefully, they'll continue to try to (at least) make changes that benefit the game population/longevity rather than ones that cause a decline.

[kitobas]

OK, I still disagree tho - there are many reasons, of which that is one (from your side of the fences viewpoint LOL). Only the cows can know (or speculate) about which have a bigger impact on the game.

 

Now, there have been PvP changes to the game that increased PvP activity - and these were very quickly nerfed back down again. To me that says the cows realised that the first change would have a negative impact upon the games population.

 

The bottom line is, we can all argue back and forth - and PvP is a topic that always results in a LOT of back and forth discussion/argument - but only the cows can make changes and, hopefully, they'll continue to try to (at least) make changes that benefit the game population/longevity rather than ones that cause a decline.

 

many good stuff mary said but important:

 

these updates regarding PvP are clearly reducing the RISK factor and surely but slowly heading towards NO XP LOSS and in my opinion this is the problem why pvp activity is this low, not only pvp activity but even the number of players have been decreasing during the years (yes, I know there are other factors but I believe this is one too because many of my friends left for this reason)!!!

this game used to be so much fun and I ♥ fallen sword !!!

[clock96]

Guys plz stop qouting old posts cuz it has wrong info which messes up everyone's mind

[Pardoux]

I say chalk - you say cheese.

 

All we're doing is going round in circles here.

 

PvP'rs are trying to claim that the nerfing has been the major contributing factor to game decline. Others call phooey.

 

A never-ending conundrum ...

Edited by Pardoux, 21 September 2014 - 22:54.

[kitobas]

I say chalk - you say cheese.

 

All we're doing is going round in circles here.

 

PvP'rs are trying to claim that the nerfing has been the major contributing factor to game decline. Others call phooey.

 

A never-ending conundrum ...

maybe you can understand after this example what I mean:

 

if you try solving a equation (pvp) with same way (pvp update benefitting levelers) again and again (5+ years) and you have no solution (pvp activity low / players online low) then why not try another way (pvp update benefitting pvpers)?

 

my english is not good but think is understandable

[BadPenny]

All this bickering is taking away from the merits of this idea.  We should be discussing that, not what is causing the decline in the player base.  Everybody knows it is a plethora of things.... we don't need to debate it at all.

 

That said, I'm thinking a lot of you misunderstand.  Maybe I do, too, but the way I see this is that Clock is trying to add value to PvP to make it more desirable to the average player.  I don't see this as a bad thing.  Like he said, you're going to be attacked anyway... why not get something if you successfully defend.  PvP XP could very well be the answer.  Surprisingly, that concept is similar to the original way PvP was ranked in FS.... So what's the big deal?  I don't understand all this heat and discontent from both sides...

[clock96]

All this bickering is taking away from the merits of this idea.  We should be discussing that, not what is causing the decline in the player base.  Everybody knows it is a plethora of things.... we don't need to debate it at all.
 
That said, I'm thinking a lot of you misunderstand.  Maybe I do, too, but the way I see this is that Clock is trying to add value to PvP to make it more desirable to the average player.  I don't see this as a bad thing.  Like he said, you're going to be attacked anyway... why not get something if you successfully defend.  PvP XP could very well be the answer.  Surprisingly, that concept is similar to the original way PvP was ranked in FS.... So what's the big deal?  I don't understand all this heat and discontent from both sides...

Finally, someone is reading my mind