853 replies to this topic

[centurion]

Just for the record. I have nothing against PvP or WK or anyone else.

Also I have not hit a relic since this topic was raised. Nor have I submitted a ticket.

I do think their would be a lot less tickets if Every off the board hit could be bountied.

Maybe the reason HCS steps in is because of the exploitation of an obvious bug in the coding. Where by you can hit any offline player multiple times and only get bountied once.

Maybe if they fixed the bug. All of this would become a non-issue.

A player loses at the most 10% of a level from a 100 stam hit off the board.. so at the most..2.4 levels.. ( minus xp gain) if someone is hit 24 hours of a day.


Now..said player logs on and posts a bounty.. which..every 2 minutes.. that bounty can lose 20% of a level( if 100 stammed)..to a max of 5 levels... you don't think thats fair? You would rather an attacker be able to be bountied for each hit..and therefore possibly lose 5 levels for each attack? so thats 120 levels..if someone hit you a day straight...while you only lose 2.4 levels.. lmao...

I've pointed out already that chance of you actually losing 5 is pretty low Lordofruin just did an experiement in pvp rating where he got bounted 11 times and lost 2.3 lvl. that tells me he lost close to the minimum xp while being on the bountyboard. Short of delevelling party and paying for delevel, taking 5 is no longer that easy. and every member of the delevelling party can be bountied as well.

there was few easy solutions: 1) get rid of empowerment. 2) reduce empowering cost but add maintaining cost (which I would like to see as best compromise) 3) ban bullying tactics.(which cows have taken as a path)

[Maehdros]

I know the chances of losing 5... I've occassionally hit people lol.



and yes...empowerment...i'd love to see it gone...but the main thing...is what is deemed OK..by HCS..as a reason to hit someone. apparently even "radio silence" when hitting someone...isnt even allowed now Oo

[Mister Doom]

I'm surprised your still on the forum after what you said to hor..so i shall avoid conversation with you cheers doomy.

Makes sense, I mean, completely ignore the fact that she was the first to be rude, even after I remarked on it and asked her to stop. Then, mis-used the posts I had made, called me ignorant etc.. Sure I was rude but why continue to be polite to a player that obviously is incapable of reciprocating the niceties? Anyways, this is off-topic.

This thread was meant to be regarding the confusion present in the delivery of statements from different HCS members, not a personal or guild fued.

[sweetlou]

Just for the record. I have nothing against PvP or WK or anyone else.

Also I have not hit a relic since this topic was raised. Nor have I submitted a ticket.

I do think their would be a lot less tickets if Every off the board hit could be bountied.

Maybe the reason HCS steps in is because of the exploitation of an obvious bug in the coding. Where by you can hit any offline player multiple times and only get bountied once.

Maybe if they fixed the bug. All of this would become a non-issue.

A player loses at the most 10% of a level from a 100 stam hit off the board.. so at the most..2.4 levels.. ( minus xp gain) if someone is hit 24 hours of a day.


Now..said player logs on and posts a bounty.. which..every 2 minutes.. that bounty can lose 20% of a level( if 100 stammed)..to a max of 5 levels... you don't think thats fair? You would rather an attacker be able to be bountied for each hit..and therefore possibly lose 5 levels for each attack? so thats 120 levels..if someone hit you a day straight...while you only lose 2.4 levels.. lmao...

I've pointed out already that chance of you actually losing 5 is pretty low Lordofruin just did an experiement in pvp rating where he got bounted 11 times and lost 2.3 lvl. that tells me he lost close to the minimum xp while being on the bountyboard. Short of delevelling party and paying for delevel, taking 5 is no longer that easy. and every member of the delevelling party can be bountied as well.

there was few easy solutions: 1) get rid of empowerment. 2) reduce empowering cost but add maintaining cost (which I would like to see as best compromise) 3) ban bullying tactics.(which cows have taken as a path)

You are so wrong. Just because a player wasn't dropped 5 every time he attacked means nothing. What were the attacks, 100 stam? Also who did the player hit, newbies in small guilds? There is a likelihood those are two of the reasons he was only regular bountied. It takes experienced, PvP players who will react appropriately. Your friend's little experiment proves nothing.

[sweetlou]

I'm surprised your still on the forum after what you said to hor..so i shall avoid conversation with you cheers doomy.

Makes sense, I mean, completely ignore the fact that she was the first to be rude, even after I remarked on it and asked her to stop. Then, mis-used the posts I had made, called me ignorant etc.. Sure I was rude but why continue to be polite to a player that obviously is incapable of reciprocating the niceties? Anyways, this is off-topic.

This thread was meant to be regarding the confusion present in the delivery of statements from different HCS members, not a personal or guild fued.

Go away misogynistic troll! I don't care how thoughtful you think you are. Your comments are offensive and you need to be banned permanently.

[Mister Doom]

15:09 30/Nov/2010 To ****: I understand what you're saying, I still don't see a strict set of rules to be the way forward though. Given the fact HCS already deems prolonged pvp as harrassment, if they were to make it impossible, ie; remove the ability than this infringes on the gameplay of the consenting players who actually enjoy it. If HCS were to give an example of unacceptable gameplay and trust players to 'do the right thing' then there would be no need for the rules and restrictions. I assume a lot of players are right now asking for a ruling because they then believe that no amount of pvp would then be against the rules, this isn't going to be the case though, I'm sure you can see this. They would obviously have to take into consideration the fact they have viewed continuous pvp as harrassment before. Rules = restrictions

This is taken from a message I just sent in response to some calm debate...

It is my opinion that, if solid rules were to ever be incorporated, not only would they eventually be bent out of shape by clever minded people. They would also come at a game-hampering cost. Would it not be better for them to introduce a set of flexible guidelines, so as not to intrude on the gameplay of consenting players but that still protects those that have/are being harassed?

[sweetlou]

15:09 30/Nov/2010 To ****: I understand what you're saying, I still don't see a strict set of rules to be the way forward though. Given the fact HCS already deems prolonged pvp as harrassment, if they were to make it impossible, ie; remove the ability than this infringes on the gameplay of the consenting players who actually enjoy it. If HCS were to give an example of unacceptable gameplay and trust players to 'do the right thing' then there would be no need for the rules and restrictions. I assume a lot of players are right now asking for a ruling because they then believe that no amount of pvp would then be against the rules, this isn't going to be the case though, I'm sure you can see this. They would obviously have to take into consideration the fact they have viewed continuous pvp as harrassment before. Rules = restrictions

This is taken from a message I just sent in response to some calm debate...

It is my opinion that, if solid rules were to ever be incorporated, not only would they eventually be bent out of shape by clever minded people. They would also come at a game-hampering cost. Would it not be better for them to introduce a set of flexible guidelines, so as not to intrude on the gameplay of consenting players but that still protects those that have/are being harassed?

You say this because you despise PvP. What is new?

[Mister Doom]

Going by prior conversations and posts you have made, to you, only PvP can be construed as harassment.

Therefore, attempting to address whether or not a player who engages in relic captures - for the purposes of harassing a given guild - is pointless.

Obviously, as I have stated multiple times. A guild can only take a relic from another guild mulitple times if they do the same back.. Or have we had some kind of revelation while I've been snowed in that somehow dictates who is the owner of said relic?

[Mister Doom]

Going by prior conversations and posts you have made, to you, only PvP can be construed as harassment.

Therefore, attempting to address whether or not a player who engages in relic captures - for the purposes of harassing a given guild - is pointless.

Also, for clarification. That is the only form of harassment in this given situation, and only if done at 'harassing levels'.

There are other things in FS that have been classified as harassment. The constent sending of 1 gold, bio's etc.. Trying to imply that my prejudice against pvp is clouding my vision. (as some people have tried to imply) makes no sense. I'm advocating a system which allows pvp oriented players to play the game they like without the burden of strict prohibiting rules, as long as guidelines that are there to protect all players are followed. Perhaps I'm not making my point clear enough here? :?

[Mister Doom]

c,mon doom, stop playing stupid

you know there is a difference in constantly taking a relic that one guild empowered and attempts to defend, then taking a relic that the guild does not attempt to empower and defend, and in fact, only takes it to annoy the first guild

Look I'm not saying I agree with what they are doing, infact, the other day I replied to a message telling an OotWC member, "Thanks, but I am not choosing sides in this."

The point is Phyr, that once a guild captures a relic, it's theirs for an hour, no more, no less. They don't own it. So when another guild comes along and takes it, it is then 'theirs' for an hour, no more, no less. It matters not if they choose to defend or empower it.

As I said earlier in the thread, the main problem with the relic system is the poorly constructed atk/def mechanism. They gave relics a vast amount of value but a ridiculous system of attainment.