Official Suggestion: Relic System Changes
#161
fs_klyd
Posted 13 March 2007 - 19:56
#162
fs_weredevil
Posted 13 March 2007 - 20:42
but overall i like the suggested changes a lot.
Thx,
WereDevil
#163
fs_geoff
Posted 13 March 2007 - 20:46
but to make this work properly, there would have to be a restriction to attacks...
mayb u can only attack once per 2 hours or something?
mayb make it so that for X stam per hour (or mayb gold per day, kinda like hiring a merc.), your stats are added to the defence of the shrine.
this way, you use a bit of stam/gold, but you dont have to stand there all day doing nothing.
#164
Posted 13 March 2007 - 20:55
I like the proposed changes. #2 would be a bit rough. how about limit the number of attacks a guild can make on them perday (buy more attacks for fsp up to a limit) and have defending "groups" so you wouldn't have to depend on the teleportation idea that would balance against attacking "groups".
but overall i like the suggested changes a lot.
Thx,
WereDevil
Hmmm - limiting the attacks to 'x' per day might be a good idea
#165
fs_azrail
Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:08
#166
fs_borisdrago
Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:17
1. Cooldown period. Sould not be more then an hour. That is enough to get some defenders in place if you want the relic bad enough.
2. Max of 6 relics is fine maybee reduce it to 5 so one guild does not have a huge advantage over rest.
3. Defence bonus shoud be applied based on ammont of relics a guild holds.
1relic +50% to defending group stats
2 relics +15% to defending group stats
3 relics + no bonus
4. Quote:
Players in a group attempting capture must also all be on the same square as the relic (group members not at the location will not get the 20% bonus applied to the group).
This doesnt really make sence group bonus should be applied in the event of the attack just like any other groups
5. there is should be a teleportation option to the relic by a guild that owns it and ability to teleport out to the world area of choice just as normal portal. (same costs 25 sta +gold) And a guild member should not be able to defend a relic that is in the zone he normally would not have access to.
This means that once you done leveling you can use your last 25 stamina to teleport to one of your relics to defend it while you are not online. When you back online for 25 stamina and some gold teleport back to your desired area.
But if you in some dungeon you faced with a choice to defend your relic or to continue leveling.
Because there typically more people offline then on it will allow easier defence if a guild wants to controll the relic. Also it will make defending multiple relics harder.
And yes guilds with 8 people or less will not be able to effectively defend the relic but i dont see why they should. (and thouse that say only the big guilds get what they want, well we worked for it and nothing stopping you from doing the same )
Over thelast month 5 of the top 10 guilds were replaced with better guilds who spent the time/ money / effort to get there so they deserve the benefits (look at ewoks and dreadblade and otheres like them) You cannot expect to be a 5 person guild and get same benefits as a 100 person guild.
6. a relic list with current ownership is also a great idea
7. One last thing please dont make more then 30-50 relics in the game as that will ruin the game (there are too many bonuses as it is )
this in my opinion should make it work just fine without making new ways to do it and also allow a smaller guild of 20 member or more to controll at least one relic if they choose to.
Of course bigger guilds will always have inherit advantage but that always will be the case.
And really small guilds (15 members or less ) will have a tough time of controlling a relic but all that means is they will have to get new recruits.
#167
fs_silverrook
Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:25
I like the proposed changes. #2 would be a bit rough. how about limit the number of attacks a guild can make on them perday (buy more attacks for fsp up to a limit) and have defending "groups" so you wouldn't have to depend on the teleportation idea that would balance against attacking "groups".
but overall i like the suggested changes a lot.
Thx,
WereDevil
Hmmm - limiting the attacks to 'x' per day might be a good idea
still doesnt solve the hoarding issue of top 5 guilds cuz once they have the relics they will keep them because no one will be able to take them from them
i understand your not going to re write the code for it but i think my original idea about random items maybe not relics but other items can be worked into a new update or something as its something that got a good response and lots have agreed its good
#168
fs_shylesson
Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:48
So here are my thoughts on this even though i am sure not many will read them b4 complaining again and will not like them just cause they dont like anything.
1. Cooldown period. Sould not be more then an hour. That is enough to get some defenders in place if you want the relic bad enough.
2. Max of 6 relics is fine maybee reduce it to 5 so one guild does not have a huge advantage over rest.
3. Defence bonus shoud be applied based on ammont of relics a guild holds.
1relic +50% to defending group stats
2 relics +15% to defending group stats
3 relics + no bonus
4. Quote:
Players in a group attempting capture must also all be on the same square as the relic (group members not at the location will not get the 20% bonus applied to the group).
This doesnt really make sence group bonus should be applied in the event of the attack just like any other groups
5. there is should be a teleportation option to the relic by a guild that owns it and ability to teleport out to the world area of choice just as normal portal. (same costs 25 sta +gold) And a guild member should not be able to defend a relic that is in the zone he normally would not have access to.
This means that once you done leveling you can use your last 25 stamina to teleport to one of your relics to defend it while you are not online. When you back online for 25 stamina and some gold teleport back to your desired area.
But if you in some dungeon you faced with a choice to defend your relic or to continue leveling.
Because there typically more people offline then on it will allow easier defence if a guild wants to controll the relic. Also it will make defending multiple relics harder.
And yes guilds with 8 people or less will not be able to effectively defend the relic but i dont see why they should. (and thouse that say only the big guilds get what they want, well we worked for it and nothing stopping you from doing the same )
Over thelast month 5 of the top 10 guilds were replaced with better guilds who spent the time/ money / effort to get there so they deserve the benefits (look at ewoks and dreadblade and otheres like them) You cannot expect to be a 5 person guild and get same benefits as a 100 person guild.
6. a relic list with current ownership is also a great idea
7. One last thing please dont make more then 30-50 relics in the game as that will ruin the game (there are too many bonuses as it is )
this in my opinion should make it work just fine without making new ways to do it and also allow a smaller guild of 20 member or more to controll at least one relic if they choose to.
Of course bigger guilds will always have inherit advantage but that always will be the case.
And really small guilds (15 members or less ) will have a tough time of controlling a relic but all that means is they will have to get new recruits.
I agree. I think the ratio of possible relics to hold vs relics available should lie heavily on the relics available side. There should be way more relics to take than there are available to any one guild to have. This forces the problem of which relic do I fight for and defend and allows for more guilds to have a chance to get a relic. While I will fight a guild for a relic no problem, I do understand and empathize with a guild who just cannot compete at any level with a high lvl guild. This relic system should not be a top 250 or top 100 advancement for that matter (as it seems to be).
#169
Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:59
i agree with most of the changes, for #3, it should be like 100 stamina round trip, and i also agree with the idea of a guild level to hold the relics (a lv50 guild cant hold a lv 10-20 relic) and i also think that the max relics per guild should be lowered to 2 or 3, instead of the 10 it is now.
We already lowered the max to 6 - once we add more relics in this will be less of an issue
#170
fs_arkyrocks
Posted 13 March 2007 - 22:16
i would also like a relic map
#171
Posted 13 March 2007 - 23:42
but it wolud be nice to have some kind of portals around the world
dont you ting ?
#172
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:19
1) Add a cooldown of 'x' hours to the relic, so once it is captured its safe for 'x' hours from capture. (Max of 3 hours - better relics will have lower cooldowns - ie. 1 hour).
2) Players in a group attempting capture must also all be on the same square as the relic (group members not at the location will not get the 20% bonus applied to the group).
4) Add a relic list, showing the current ownerships and cooldown times
remaining.
Would this seem fair.
#173
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:21
i liek them all except number 2
Snowman, don't you think the captures are too easy in the current system ... shouldn't some effort have to be put into the capture?
#174
fs_davidjames
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:22
#175
fs_davidjames
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:23
#176
fs_arkyrocks
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:25
just saying i really have no clue but watever i just try to be funny
i meant that toward hoofmaster
#177
fs_davidjames
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:28
#178
fs_borisdrago
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:36
i liek them all except number 2
Snowman, don't you think the captures are too easy in the current system ... shouldn't some effort have to be put into the capture?
captures are easy but if you implement your number 3 so you can teleport in and out they become much harder as a guild can put all of their ppl not online and leveling to the defence so a guild with 30 members could have up to 25 members defending their one relic at a time
#179
fs_sigiloso
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:37
#180
fs_borisdrago
Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:38
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

