Toreth

New Skills:

 

Relentless - Offense (Lvl 2000)

+0.15% per point of Damage is transferred to Attack (casting level can be adjusted from your Preferences)

 

Aegis Shield - Defense (Lvl 2000)

+0.15% per point of Defense is transferred to Armor (casting level can be adjusted from your Preferences)

 

Avenger - Offense (Lvl 4000)

+0.03% per point boost to Attack when an opponent hits you (Max 5)

 

Stalwart Heart - Defense (Lvl 4500)

+0.03% chance per point boost to Armor when an opponent hits you (Maximum number of boosts: 5)

 

The following skills will also become available on the Player Skill Tree:

 

Allied Frenzy - Defense (Lvl 3500)

Increases the level range that Assist works by +1 level per point

 

Guild Berserker - Offense (Lvl 3500)

Increase the effectiveness of First Strike, Nullify, and Breaker in GVG Only

 

Gambler - Special (Lvl 3500)

+0.1% chance per point that a random stat will be tripled while all other stats are halved at the start of combat

 

Healer - Defense (Lvl 4000)

+0.01% per point chance that players health will fully restore after any given combat round

 

The Daily Quest Reroll is fantastic; while I haven't used it too much aside from my daily freebie to see if I can test my luck, having the option to keep going if I wanted to attempt for a better reward is a huge benefit.

 

 

Now for the buffs...

 

Healer being added to the skill tree has been great; a slightly lower level but more readily accessible version of the composed-only buff is nothing short of a welcomed add.

 

Guild Berserker is a head scratcher of sorts - at level 203, it invalidates the previously composed-only buff of level 70 (level 81 post Zombie Brew Distilled). Is there another composing update planned to get this potion level up to ~350 or so? Just so that it isn't dead in the composing tree here?

 

Allied Frenzy - this is an "oof." Not for this one by itself, but because "Assist," the buff it builds upon is dead in its current state. It goes unused as it's much easier to get optimal stats against creatures by oneself than to rely on a chance to add 50% from an ally. If "Assist" ever gets a change, I could see Allied Frenzy getting use, but, unfortunately, this one was dead on arrival.

 

While I've never (and still am not) an advocate for "% chance to..." buffs, Gambler has been interesting from what I've been able to experiment with. The potential to triple a stat has been funny in some instances, as basti pointed out, but other times it's left me in a hole, stat-wise.

 

Note: Please no more "% chance" buffs. The ones we have in-game currently are detrimental to fun, competitive gameplay as-is. Adding more of these buffs only compounds issues that are already present.

 

 

As for the four brand new buffs that came along, absolutely well done on ALL of them. All four have viable use and some even help the ever-lacking "Armor" setups against the defense-heavy "meta" that we constantly see everyone dressed in for offline use now. A few more tweaks, and armor sets could likely be just as viable as defense sets. We're almost there, but there are a couple of buffs existing currently that could use minor changes to help bring balance back to the wearing of offline sets.

 

What are the plans for future buff balances? Is this the appropriate thread for presenting feedback and potential changes to preexisting buffs as well?

Overall, most well done on the buffs here!

Thanks again!

Hopefully I’ll have time over the weekend to test the effectiveness of some of the new buffs here - appreciate the update overall!

Hi Toreth,

Thank you for pointing out this issue. We have looked into this and can confirm the decimal point was in the wrong place. This has now been fixed. Thanks again for pointing this out and happy hunting.

~Conix

Of course! I appreciate the quick follow-up!

Hi everyone!

We have just updated the game to v3.8.3.

This update adds the following changes:
- Relentless, Guild Berserker, Avenger, Aegis Shield and Allied Frenzy durations have been increased by 30 minutes.
- Healer duration has been increased by 1 hour.
- Fixed an issue with the Gambler skill activation chance.
- New buff icons now display correctly on world map page

Thank you for your feedback on the most recent update. We hope these changes further improve your enjoyment of Fallen Sword.

~The Fallen Sword Team.

As Sidd, said, well done on such a quick update! We all greatly appreciate the increased duration on the buffs - is there any chance Stalwart Heart can receive the same love for the duration bump as well?

While I think the idea behind VR is great and all, might I suggest conferring with "The Three D's" before spending too much more time on this project?

Relentless - Offense (Lvl 2000)
+0.15% per point of Damage is transferred to Attack (casting level can be adjusted from your Preferences)

Aegis Shield - Defense (Lvl 2000)
+0.15% per point of Defense is transferred to Armor (casting level can be adjusted from your Preferences)

Avenger - Offense (Lvl 4000)
+0.03% per point boost to Damage when an opponent hits you (Max 5)

Soul Guard - Defense (Lvl 4500)
+0.1% chance per point that an attack that would otherwise defeat the player instead has their hit points reduced to 1

The following skills will also become available on the Player Skill Tree:

Allied Frenzy - Defense (Lvl 3500)
Increases the level range that Assist works by +1 level per point

Guild Berserker - Offense (Lvl 3500)
Increase the effectiveness of First Strike, Nullify, and Breaker in GVG Only

Gambler - Special (Lvl 3500)
+0.1% chance per point that a random stat will be tripled while all other stats are halved at the start of combat

Healer - Defense (Lvl 4000)
+0.01% per point chance that players health will fully restore after any given combat round

The two transfers in Relentless and Aegis Shield are great; they’ll likely see bountiful use - especially Relentless (likely the best buff of the group).

Others have already touched on Avenger a bit, and I’ll say the multiplier looks fine from 175-203 given BE bonuses. 5.25% to 6.09% increase in A STAT while defending doesn’t seem like too big of an issue. The wording at the end “(Max 5)” is likely throwing players off a little, but I read it as something akin to SSI charges and the buff would work for 5 incoming attacks.

You’ll notice the all caps and bold of “a stat” instead of copying “damage” directly, and it’s because others have already stated it: we don’t need more damage. Damage is usually the last thing we need, if we’re being frank. While switching the increase to attack to help combat the oppressive “let me just slap this defensive set on” era that we’re in, I could see a benefit to armor if it came down to that as well, however, there are better options to helping armor survivability. My initial reaction here is to change the damage boost to an attack boost. Priority stat order for this: Attack > Armor >>>>>>>>> Literally Anything Else

Soul Guard is interesting in help potentially combat being 2% OHKO’d in some combats, but this is injecting another RNG buff into an already RNG heavy aspect of PvP. While it isn’t detrimental to the outcome of a combat the way that GS, HG, Dispel, etc. are, I can only imagine being lucky enough to avoid SOME of those chance buffs to have my opponent survive with 1 HP from Soul Guard, have Healer proc, get Soul Guard to proc again, get healed again, etc. If I was playing FS in the passenger seat of a vehicle on the app and that combat happened, I’d throw my phone out of the window. Again, while Soul Guard isn’t necessarily that big of an issue by itself, it’s another layer of RNG on an already multi-tier RNG fest. Disclaimer: It ain’t real fun.

Allied Frenzy: Ummm - does anyone even use this or assist? I don’t think I’ve seen either of these on anybody. (From the XMas box)

Guild Berserker being added to the tree at 175/203 levels automatically invalidates the composed potion level of 70. Longer duration from potion? Sure, but…why even use the buff? It doesn’t…do anything? It doesn’t actually increase the enhancements above the cap of 100%, and most gear is going to get the noted enhancements to 100%, anyway.

Gambler - RNG fest again. Not much to say here - there’s trade-off for massive bump, which is good, I guess?

Note: Gambler, Guild Berserker, and Allied Frenzy all immediately going on the block list. 0 reason to use them in any content whatsoever.

Healer is good - perfect levels coming in just a bit under composing levels. Well done on this one, too.

Now comes underlying issues with the majority of these being PvP buffs - the PvP community (and aspect) has been in shambles for a long while. Things have become stagnant and it’s because there’s largely an “objective best” set to use, which should never be the case. Sure, you can build for stuff situationally, but for offline or general use, when I have access to buffs that immediately say “nope” to a specific buff you’re running (Looking at you Dispel Curse), then it starts to make things dull. I know I can go to most PvPers in offline sets and say “oh, they’re likely in a form of a defensive set.” While it’s fine and well to use a defensive set for that purpose, it’s because it’s “easy mode” when compared to other options. Def/Dam with barricade and a dispel activation with flinch + fumble is almost the “win button,” and PvPers don’t want a “win button,” we want competition.

While I’m grateful for the listed buffs (save a few which could be replaced with other options, IMO), the tweak from damage -> attack for Avenger and other tweaks to other buffs are needed for things to be healthy again.

I started taking a look at the breakdown of stats that epics have and their viability here in the last few months and had to ask, "why are the epics used in multiple aspects at lower levels, but neglected for anything aside from stamina gain past a certain threshold?" That caused me to investigate into what the reason behind that might be, and the results? Fairly shocking.

 

As seen by the above, the stat point allocation per level exponentially decreases until it eventually levels off to roughly 2 stat points per level of the epic item. But what if it's just the old epics bringing the average down?

 

Given this graph, we see the same general shape, and these are only epics with item numbers of 14000 or greater; that means items added to the game within the last four years or so.

 

Both of these show the decrease in stat point value for epic items, but that still doesn't show why they aren't necessarily used - let's take a deeper look into this as well.

 

Below are a series of graphs that show stat point allocation per level based on rarity of items across a select few levels. These levels were selected to show the variation in stat point allocation for the rarities, however, all levels where an epic is located were conducted.

 

Disclaimer: For items that belong to a set, the set bonus to the item was applied by taking the total number of stat points in the set bonus and distributing them equally across the number of items in the set. Why was this done? The use of Coordinated Buffs is too much for epics to make up for losing.

 

 

As seen by the graphs, at level 100, the epics are valued higher than even items with set bonuses, which greatly increases their viability in those other aspects outside of "stam gain use," however, at level 300, only 200 levels higher, that gap shrinks considerably. And at 1000? Epics have the same value as a Unique Set Item.

 

The later two levels provided then show just how skewed the stat points are away from epic items as Legendary set items have a full stat point extra per level at 3900 than an epic, and at 4500, our highest epic before the recent release of the Snorra Amulet is even slightly less than Unique Set Items.

 

What's the fix? Well, I would suggest making a flat Stat Point Allocation per Level to Epics at 4x the level and distributing them that way. This would immediately increase epic viability in arena, offline use (aside from stam gain), and add another variable to work around even in regular PvP or 1-Hit usage. Multiple +7 items in the same slot where players "don't necessarily care" about the upgrade because of the stam gain being the same now becomes a nearly "must-have" for other uses as well.

 

A simple fix in making them 4x would drastically improve the market demand for the items immediately, and circulation would be at an all time high; increased activity for these items is only good for the game.

any new santork / reindeer sets this year ?

 

Level 4850 Santork that's Atk/Def

Level 5000 Reindeer that's Def/Dam

With the Christmas Box now available to be viewed, I’d like to take a moment to make a few small requests from the cows before it’s much too late.

 

Request 1:

 

In reference to Vitality - again, the idea behind the buff here is wonderful. HP is overlooked a lot, and this changes things a great deal - all around a 5/5 buff.

• Suggestion

  • Christmas Gift From Cows = Free Player Reset

• While I know this will likely get overlooked, when adding a buff like this, it changes the fundamental way things function all around. Vitality being added means some may no longer need Level Up Points in specific areas, so experimentation could help bolster activity across many facets given a player reset for people to toy around with. Plus, has this ever been given out as a gift? And if it has, how long has it been?

 

Request 2:

 

In reference to the Christmas Libation Epic Potion itself - 3/4 of the potion is wonderful. Mesmerize is a bit confusing

• Suggestion

  • Change Mesmerize to Chi Strike, Fortitude, High Guard, or even Riposte to match the addition of Golden Shield; even changing it to something a little more “all-around” focused as opposed to something that’s strictly mob focused in Mesmerize.

 

Request 3:

 

The addition of the buffs here have piqued interest in their overall function in how combat is going to play out, so why not adding them in other areas as well?

• Suggestion

  • Vitality and All For One Added to the Skill Tree at the High End (EoC)

  • Vitality and All For One: Inventable potions at level 250 to inject some activity back into the inventing facet as well.

• New skills in the skill tree are long overdue, and inventing potions have been long outdone by other things; this could be a breath of fresh air for both of those things.

 

All in all, the new potion looks well done, and with the minor tweaks given suggestions, I’d happily scream “take my money HCS!”

i know we don't gain any points when attacking and conserve procs. what has changed now?

 

same thing with Avert Gaze. what was wrong with it before and how is it fixed now?

I'm not HCS, but you now gain rating when Conserve procs.

 

Avert Gaze, even at 100%, was still causing the player to be Hypnotized in combat. That is the case no longer.

- A whole bunch of ill-advised and terribly presented thoughts.

 

There are issues with Epics that have nothing to do with their functionality with/without the breaking of Coordinated Buffs; take a closer look at how things work and are calculated when referring to those buffs before diving too deeply down the rabbit hole here.

 

The Attack/Armor is wanted because it most certainly is viable if you're able to put in the work to make it functional; you point out the use of Att/Def and Suicide, but you aren't looking at the "why are those sets used?" aspect. You also point out the same sets being used for Titan Hunting, but don't mention the "why?" fully, but instead have blanketed the reasoning with "Piercing Strike, Critical Hit, etc.," and while those are PARTIALLY correct, think, specifically, about how those enhancements may play a part and what their potential counter(s) may be.

 

Also, to answer "why aren't they used?" Here's a link as to "why?"

 

https://forums.hunte...showtopic=77441

 

You'll see the gear disparity isn't the best, and while it hasn't been updated since the release of the SE's, Arena Sets, or the most recent LE sets, you'll find, after quick calculations, that the percentage change in the disparity is negligible.

 

If "armor wasn't viable" why are people asking for it? Hmm? I think this comes down to the understanding of the larger picture and the fundamental/foundational understanding of the mechanics and what it takes to make all of those sets work. If a single individual can't get an armor set to work, doesn't mean the rest of the community who can make it work, should be deprived of those items and sets.

The highest Arterial Strike is 300, the Life Blood Cave Potion, yes? Why do we need the next one to be 5/6 times as powerful?

I know this was aimed at EP, however, I’ve taken the liberty to calculate and test the effects of Arterial Strike in its current iterations at level 345 as well as projected levels of 1150 (and higher). For the testing and calculations, the effectiveness of AS with optimal XP gain buffs was compared against the widely accepted 1-Hit method coupled with Overkill with the same optimal XP gain buffs (Conserve Chance activation was also factored into the numbers provided as well), and when broken down to what matters TO THE INDIVIDUAL PLAYER, we have to look at the gross XP Gained Per Stamina.

All Numbers Provided are Simulated over 1000 Creatures Killed with that creature being the Ornack Winged Arachnid (Champion) at level 4946, and for AS, I looked at every combination between 2 Round Combats and 20 Round Combats to see where any benefit would be in trying to maximize a potential “Arterial Strike” hunt.

- For the 1-Hit Method + Overkill
1,949,250 XP Per Stam

- For AS 345 at 2 Rounds of Combat
566,084 XP per Stam

- For AS 345 at 10 Rounds of Combat
214,473 XP per Stam

- For AS 345 at 20 Rounds of Combat
170,522 XP per Stam

Now, let’s take a look at the proposed AS 1150

- AS 1150 at 2 Rounds of Combat
713,749 XP per Stam

- AS 1150 at 10 Rounds of Combat
480,271 XP per Stam

- AS 1150 at 20 Rounds of Combat
451,086 XP per Stam

It’s widely known that it is more stam efficient for your hunt to die to a creature than to 2-Hit due to doubler not taking effect on deaths, so Arterial Strike is already a fairly “dead” buff, and in looking at what’s available and at the proposed, that likely would remain the same.

What would be a sufficient Arterial Strike Buff level to make it break-even with efficiency or “useful?”

- AS 5750 at 2 Rounds of Combat
1,557,550 XP per Stam

Yes, even an Arterial Strike 5000 Potion being introduced wouldn’t change anything as far as stamina to XP gain efficiency for 2-hitting.

- AS 5750 at 10 Rounds of Combat
1,999,112 XP per Stam

At this level, and at 10 Rounds of combat, after factoring in all the variables, you’re still only barely above the level of efficiency provided by the 1-Hit + Overkill method. And what about 20 rounds at a buff level this high?

- AS 5750 at 20 Rounds of Combat
2,054,308 XP per Stam

And the benefit here at 20 Rounds still isn’t large enough to warrant wanting to plan out something as intricate as an “Arterial Strike Hunt.” You receive 95% of the XP per Stam with the 1-Hit + Overkill method at AS 5750.

- AS 11,500 at 2 Rounds of Combat
2,612,301 XP per Stam

- AS 11,500 at 10 Rounds of Combat
3,897,665 XP per Stam

-AS 11,500 at 20 Rounds of Combat
4,058,335 XP per Stam

Now we have the useful number, but it takes a buff level at 11.5k.

kito, I implore you to look more at the larger picture here.

 

The original idea was posted to gain traction on an idea that could use a "refresh;" EP didn't elaborate too much on what he may have thought out as he has a tendency to jump the gun sometimes before fleshing his idea out fully, but I can assure you that nobody will ever "fight" or "push" for a guild to enter into EVERY spot in an arena. That would indeed be too much and potentially cause a monopoly. Take a look at the rest of the thread as there are other ideas aside from what EP's original post laid out; it seems capping at 50% of guild entries (up from the current 25%) is gaining traction with quite with the added caveat that only 50% of that 50% would be able to use guild tagged gear. Either way, you're looking at a max number of entrants from a single guild as 4 in an 8 man tournament or 8 in a 16 man tournament.

 

I also took a gander at your screenshots from BG, Hoof, and Shin from many years ago and while I understand what was said then, we also have to be cognizant of how things change over time. Many years ago, there was more of an abundance of players around who participated in arena. Now, the player-base as a whole may not even match the number of active arena players. Much like how life changes, FS needs changes to promote the activity that's needed for the community to thrive.

 

You also bring up AH bugs, and while I wasn't around for the one, the second you're misinformed on, and I ask you to PM the individual you're speaking of instead of speculating on what occurred if you're interested. I think you'd be surprised at what may have happened contrary to what you've been told.

 

All-in-all, I see you're advocating for keeping things how they are, and that's totally fine - everyone's opinion should be taken into consideration, however, I'll be the one to outright tell you that your opinion on the matter is wrong given the state the game is currently in. The change to 50% could be a breath of life to the arena in helping cycle things through - more people able to enter arenas more quickly = more varying levels of arenas for people to learn setups + combinations of moves, gold cost of arenas staying at a higher rate (gold being sunk more), and overall market value stays relatively the same. There isn't really a downside.

 

And again, before someone brings up "there's a possibility that a guild holds 100% of the tokens from an arena at 50%," sure, there is a "chance" but that is such a statistical anomaly that you're probably better off playing the scratch-off lottery or shooting a hole-in-one on a par 6.

I agree that anyone can cheat the Medal easily already, but I think that would make it way to easy to group the same, let's say, 8 people going for Arena Medals at the same place to help eachother...Although I know that it can be made already just as easy if you know enough people in the game.

 

I'd be in favor of:

Guild Gear - 25% Rule

Own Gear - 50% Rule

 

PS: I don't play Arena, have not much say into it, completelly talking from an outsider standpoint.

 

I think something like this is the fairest you can be while making changes to help the arena, otherwise you run into the potential for a guild to monopolize the arena.

• Guild Members Capped at 50% Entry
• Half of That Can Use Tagged Gear

With 8 and 16 man Tournaments, it still means that 4 or 8 people, respectively, from a single guild can enter any individual tournament.

 

I completely agree with that statement. Plus there are nuances to combat moves as well. The fact that I've mastered almost all areas of the game besides arena says a lot. 

 

Not to come off cross, but if you truly have "mastered almost all areas of the game" then you would have a firm grasp on the realm of the arena as well. I'm not saying you don't know how to complete things semi-effectively, but "mastered" is a strong word. 

 

Another thing that came to mind is If the rule was removed, wouldn't that reduce the value of arena items since more players now have easier access to them? On the loyalty proposal thread people argued that BM500 would reduce the value of BM300 and would make arena less worth it and so it was cancelled. How is this any different? Maybe I'm missing something here, or I'm too slow to understand. 

 

On the value of arena items, let's look at a general breakdown:

 

8 Man Tournament For Prize of 32 Tokens

• Winner: 32 Tokens
• 2nd Place: 16 Tokens
• 3/4 Place: 8 Tokens

That means there are 64 Tokens coming into the game during an 8 Man, 32 Token Tournament currently. A Guild can have 2 people enter, so they can realistically win 48 of the 64 Tokens, or 67%.

 

16 Man Tournament, 32 Tokens

• Winner: 32 Tokens
• 2nd Place: 16 Tokens
• 3/4 Place: 8 Tokens
• 5/6/7/8 Place: 4 Tokens

That means there are 80 Tokens coming into the game during a 16 Man, 32 Token Tournament currently. A guild here can have 4 people enter, so they can hold 80% of the winnings.

 

 

If the arena were to change to something along the lines of "50% of the entries can come from a single guild where half of those can use guild tagged gear," then we can take a look at a separate breakdown.

 

8 Man, 32 Tokens

• Winner: 32
• 2nd: 16
• 3/4: 8

Hmm...strange...the total number of tokens coming in doesn't change from 64, so that would mean market value of all arena items would maintain. So what changes? Well, if a guild can now have 4 entries here instead of 2, then the guild has the potential to hold 100% of the tokens from the tournament.

 

And what of a 16 Man?

 

16 Man, 32 Tokens

• Winner: 32
• 2nd: 16
• 3/4: 8
• 5/6/7/8: 4

So again, the total number of tokens coming into the game doesn't change from 80. The only thing that changes is a guild has the potential to hold 100% of the tokens from the tournament.

 

 

"That sure does sound like a monopoly, though!" Sure; kind of, until you work out that some of those entries are going to be occupied by Clare, Woopy, Shin, Juvi (occasionally), Sohail (occasionally), who all have more than the potential to knock anyone out at any time; not to mention the RNG factor of the pairings of the first round.

 

Take MoM for example: Shin, Winter, PowerLegi, Tilley - we're already at 4 there. What are the chances that 2 of the 4 of these WON'T meet each other in the 1st round if the 25% of total GUILD entries is increased to 50%? Just so you don't have to do the work, it's 7.9% in an 8 man tournament or 0.3% in a 16 man tournament. On top of the percentages being fairly telling that it isn't going to happen that often, you then have to take into account for those individuals losing as well - nobody wins 100% of the time, so again, there is no monopoly occurring.

TL;DR at the bottom

Cows, good work for the most part here.

Armor sets need a lot more help than a Shatter Armor change, and the Balanced Buffs could likely be tweaked a little further to make them a bit more viable, but it’s a start there.

The only change here that baffles me is the Dark Curse change; others have already spoken up on it since the change. I understand the oppressiveness that a 92% reduction to a player’s defense has, but when we take a look at how all of the buffs tie into one another, the 92% becomes much less of an issue after you potentially factor in transfers and “Chance activations” like High Guard and/or Golden Shield.

Without getting into a massive breakdown in numbers, the change to Dark Curse’s 0.2% per point reduction to defense has caused issues already. Coupled with the ever-oppressive attack reduction buffs of Flinch and Fumble, the change to 0.1% per point reduction to defense has made offline defensive setups a coin flip match of “who gets the random hit through first.”

The change to Dark Curse has nearly killed other buffs as well. Because of the Dark Curse nerf, Nightmare Visage and Barricade are almost unnecessary in any scenario you want to raise your defense; on top of that, I almost don’t even need to think about using Dispel Curse either. Three buffs have been all but neutered because of this one change.


The best way to go about fixing Dark Curse is to revert the nerf; doing so fixes the issue with Nightmare Visage and Barricade being fairly negligible. It also still allows PvE aspects to go unchanged in their function after the game has created such a large dependency on the Damage stat over all others.

To top off that suggestion, however, I’d also like to bring up a change to Dispel Curse, which would help with the oppressiveness of the 0.2% per point reduction in PvP.

Changing Dispel Curse to “0.1% reduction to the effectiveness of your opponent’s Dark Curse buff” likely changes everything for the better. It helps Epic potions retain value, it alleviates everyone’s issues with Dispel Curse, and it brings a better balance overall.



TL;DR
1. Most Stuff Good

2. Dark Curse Nerf Bad
2a. Kills Need for Other Buffs
2a.1. Barricade
2a.2. Nightmare Visage

2b. Rely On 2% Hit

2c. Change Dispel Curse Differently to Counter
2c.1. 0.1% per Point Reduction to Effectiveness to Opponent’s Dark Curse Buff
2c.1a. Leaves PvE Content Alone
2c.1b. Helps PvP Consistency
2c.1c. Keeps Value of Epic Potions High
2c.1d. Allows Skill-Based Play OR Donation Based Play Depending on Potions

In regards to expanding the PvP ranges, Corrupted’s or Maehdros’s suggestions are more than sufficient; the dead ranges in the games sometimes yield only 1 or 2 active players, which means those PvP daily quests are going to leave someone open to quite a few bounties, OR, they’re in the same guild and it isn’t even able to be completed. The difference in gear quality isn’t that big where either of the two mentioned wouldn’t be feasible.

Individuals also have many ways to keep from being hit on a regular basis as others have pointed out; PvP Protection, Protect XP, and Deflect are the main options, but on top of that, not holding gold, not playing into being a victim of being hit, and wearing potential offline gear for protection against PvP are even more options.

PvP, generally, almost needs a major rework as well; the balance between how stats work in conjunction with and against each other has had the PvP scene in disarray for a while. The players talk about how overpowered Defense is, and it’s because of the use of Flinch, Fumble, and Dispel Curse, mainly, however, a closer look would lead people into “why not just use armor?”

Well, for one, the gear options are lacking, which, with the most recent post from Corrupted will hopefully help alleviate some of those issues going forward. Secondly, the mechanics behind how armor works against damage as opposed to how attack works against defense is different. Lastly, we take a look at the buffs mentioned before as well, and while those affect defense, we look at potential armor equivalents in Shatter Armor, Smite, and Terrorize. Hardened, the counter to Shatter Armor, has an activation rate that is ridiculously low and for that to be viable, you would need it at level 1500, or thereabouts. On top of the buffs, there are also Enhancements that greatly affect the way armor function; you thought having your armor reduced by 75% at the start of battle from Shatter Armor was bad enough? Enter Piercing Strike with its 20% activation rate PER COMBAT ROUND. There goes another 50% of your armor. What’s the counter for this? If you’re attacking, use Demoralize, sure, but for defending? You haven’t got an option.

Some suggestions to help with this:
- Demoralize Should Work for Attacking and Defending Both
- Dull Edge Should No Longer be PvE Only
- Increase the Activation Rate of Hardened (or Add it to the Composing Pool in Pre-Existing Levels)
o The Other Option Would be to Have Shatter Armor “Deteriorate” Your Opponent’s Armor by % per Point the way that Dark Curse Does to Defense Instead of Having it Just say “Nope” to 75% of your armor

As others have stated, having individual threads for the individual PvP aspects would be beneficial as well; Bounty Hunting Mechanics are different than GvG mechanics; GvG is different than the PvP ladder; etc.

Thank you, Arioche, for keeping the discussion here going; let’s hope things continue moving forward.