347 replies to this topic

[BadPenny]

Bugger it, change it back to the way it originally was. I don't know what that was like but meh.

 

Cheers.

 

wil72

 

 

The original ladder was pretty simple... all PvP attacks, on and off the board, exchanged PvP points, the victor gaining, the loser losing, obviously.  The amount of stam used had no bearing on the points exchanged, so a 10 stam hit got the same as a 100 stam.  It was more difficult to get a dominance medal then, but there weren't a lot of stagnant bands to worry about either.  It was a lot more challenging, and a lot more fun.   Personally, I think this system worked just fine, and I think it was a dumb move to change it. It would thrill me to no end to see it return to being this way, with or without rewards...

 

~ Just my 2 Pennys

Edited by BadPenny, 09 September 2014 - 01:07.

[justinian9]

Much are talked about Ladder latelly, maybe if we just put all the ideas on the same topic and talk about it, HCS can read and choose the better option to the problem.

Opt 1:
- No bounties.
- Without attacks on guildmates.
- No limit of players from the same guild.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Opt 2:
- No bounties.
- Without attacks on guildmates.
- Max of 2~3 players from the same guild on each reset (random choose from server).
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Opt 3:
- No bounties.
- With attack on guildmates.
- No limit of players from the same guild.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Opt 4:
- Bounties allowed.
- Without attacks on guildmates.
- No limit of players from the same guild.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Opt 5:
- Bounties allowed.
- With attacks on guildmates.
- No limit of players from the same guild.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Opt 6:
- Open Ladder, without the 'Opt-In' system.
- Bounties allowed.
- Without attacks on guildmates.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

Just quote the idea you like the most, or propose another one and I'll try to add to this post with your name on it, we need to find a sollution to the problem.

Opt 7:
- No bounties.
- With attacks on guildmates.
- Max of 2~3 players from the same guild on each reset (random choose from server).
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

 

I dd not see this combo in an option

[yghorbeviahn]

Opt 7:
- No bounties.
- With attacks on guildmates.
- Max of 2~3 players from the same guild on each reset (random choose from server).
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

 

I dd not see this combo in an option

I`ll add to the first post, missed it.

-

And I know a lot are arguing against to 'no opt-in' system, but lets talk about more opitions, or about the others I proposed, that one was just my choice (and for now, yodamus and Penny too), but this thread is to find a solution, not to defend the Opt-6.

[Lellarell]

Opt 3:
- No bounties.
- With attack on guildmates.
- No limit of players from the same guild.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.
 

Plus, you have to attack ALL players, at least once, to receive prizes and progress towards medal.

Also, all Ladder Attacks should be 100 stam.

[Lellarell]

Yeah, FOR ME all player should always be part of the Ladder, if you don't want to participate into PvP Ladder, buy PvP Protection and you'll be off the Ladder until your protection ends, just like much other games where you buy a 'shield' to prevent attacks on you, a LOT of games have that, maybe the PvP Protection prices can change, maybe also the needed hours for Dominance Medal, don't know...

 

I want to choose if I will play the Ladder or NOT. I won't pay to be out as I didn't ask to be in. 

Edited by Lellarell, 09 September 2014 - 06:01.

[suderlon]

Opt 6:
- Open Ladder, without the 'Opt-In' system.
- Bounties allowed.
- Without attacks on guildmates.
- No Attack = No Tokens and no Dominance Medal ticks.

 

just take pvp to the old system, increasing pvp activity then you have to increase the range of participants / targets => open ladder !

 

any kind of restriction (player limitation for joining, ....) is a restriction towards pvp

[Dulcharn]

Option 7 :

- Bounties allowed.

- No attacks on guildmates allowed.

- Limit of 2-3 players per guild with brand new cooldown system to rotate guildmates opting in.

- No Attacks = no tokens and no dominance ticks.

 

Option 8 :

- Brand new Capture the Flag Ladder, whereby participants sit in small relic realms where the token rewards are collected.

- see option 7.

[BadPenny]

Option 7 :

- Bounties allowed.

- No attacks on guildmates allowed.

- Limit of 2-3 players per guild with brand new cooldown system to rotate guildmates opting in.

- No Attacks = no tokens and no dominance ticks.

 

_{Option 8 :}

_{- Brand new Capture the Flag Ladder, whereby participants sit in small relic realms where the token rewards are collected.}

_{- see option 7.}

Penny like

[RebornJedi]

Why not keep the ladder with some of the discussed tweaks.. Add in the global PvP.. And the realm style PvP.. More PvP mini games can't be a bad thing.

[suderlon]

just revert pvp back to the old system we had years ago where there was no opt-in option

 

everything was fine then until HCS started listening to the levelers and co and introduced the ladder, from this point on every pvp update was worse than the previous one and if this keeps up pvp will end up with no xp loss (like the arena)

 

every time this past years I saw a pvp update I wondered why HCS does not admit that they want to get rid of pvp

it makes no sense to me that HCS keeps saying that fallen sword is a pvp game but are doing exactly the opposite with their pvp updates

[yghorbeviahn]

Keep the actual Ladder with minor tweaks like said on this thread, and add the old Ladder back, with a new name, new kind of tokens, new medal, and with no difference between 10 and 100 stam, so none leveller can argue about losing too much XP

[Raku]

I can understand why you want everyone to be apart of the ladder. It would definitely make more targets available. 

 

Yet once again why should someone be forced to participate in a portion of the game they may not want to take part in?

Some players do not have the luxury to log in often enough to justify playing the ladder as it is.

 

Want to stop eight players from one guild hitting the only other person on the ladder, then force them to attack every player on the ladder before they can hit that one person again.

Oh but they will only 10 stam their guild mates... as others have said make there be no difference between 10-100 stam hits.

 

I'm sorry to those of you who think this is a pvp game it's not. Fallen Sword is an rpg and as such pvp is just one aspect of the game. 

Should everyone be forced to participate in pvp then should not everyone be forced to participate in every other aspect of this game?

[tasker]

Stop talking about changing PVP. IT won't happen, will never happen. They changed it once cause people wanted it to change, and when it changed people still don't like it. Nothing is PERFECT people!!

[wil72]

Stop talking about changing PVP. IT won't happen, will never happen. They changed it once cause people wanted it to change, and when it changed people still don't like it. Nothing is PERFECT people!!

 

Really?

 

Having spoken with Hoofmaster, we're seriously reconsidering the PvP Ladder system. We're looking to review it, possibly removing it and replacing it with the original PvP system. We think that might help. I personally think the ladder watered PvP down.

 

Don't make "definite" comments mate they tend to come back and bite you.

 

Cheers.

 

wil72

Edited by wil72, 09 September 2014 - 22:50.

[yodamus]

I can understand why you want everyone to be apart of the ladder. It would definitely make more targets available. 

 

Yet once again why should someone be forced to participate in a portion of the game they may not want to take part in?

Some players do not have the luxury to log in often enough to justify playing the ladder as it is.

 

Want to stop eight players from one guild hitting the only other person on the ladder, then force them to attack every player on the ladder before they can hit that one person again.

Oh but they will only 10 stam their guild mates... as others have said make there be no difference between 10-100 stam hits.

 

I'm sorry to those of you who think this is a pvp game it's not. Fallen Sword is an rpg and as such pvp is just one aspect of the game. 

Should everyone be forced to participate in pvp then should not everyone be forced to participate in every other aspect of this game?

could not have said it better..pvp is just one aspect of the game..sick and tired of those calling it a pvp game..it is a rpg that has pvp in it..

[wil72]

could not have said it better..pvp is just one aspect of the game..sick and tired of those calling it a pvp game..it is a rpg that has pvp in it..

 

Wouldn't that mean it is a PvP game? Has other aspects to it, yes. But still a PvP game, no?

 

And the HCS rhetoric is along the lines of......."This is a PvP game", so yes it is.

 

Cheers.

 

wil72

Edited by wil72, 09 September 2014 - 23:25.

[justinian9]

I dont think levelers need another gold sink just to stay off the ladder.

[yotwehc]

Wouldn't that mean it is a PvP game? Has other aspects to it, yes. But still a PvP game, no?

And the HCS rhetoric is along the lines of......."This is a PvP game", so yes it is.

Cheers.

wil72

I could of sworn FS was an mmorpg...
Someone needs to fix Wikipedia:
Player(s) versus player(s), or PvP, is a type of multiplayer interactive conflict within a game between two or more live participants.[1] This is in contrast to games where players compete against computer controlled opponents, which is correspondingly referred to as player versus environment (PvE). The terms are most often used in games where both activities exist,[2] particularly MMORPGs, MUDs, and other role-playing video games.

[BadPenny]

I dont think levelers need another gold sink just to stay off the ladder.

 

Don't be a target, and you needn't worry about much else than a 10 stam prestige hit, which takes less than 1 critter's XP from you... So... mmmm... what's the big deal?  I've never really understood that myself...

[yghorbeviahn]

This thread is not about open Ladder against closed Ladder...It's about to think on a way to fix the Ladder before new rewards get implemented.

Open Ladder is just the option some players preffer, if don't like it, please, give us your suggestion, we are not on a war here.