Jump to content

Photo

Official Suggestion: Relic System Changes


  • Please log in to reply
235 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you feel these changes are for the better? (57 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you feel these changes are for the better?

  1. Voted Yes (145 votes [72.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 72.50%

  2. Voted No (30 votes [15.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 15.00%

  3. Either way - I'm not to bothered. (25 votes [12.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 12.50%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#161 fs_klyd

fs_klyd
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 19:56

you need to seperate the relics into lvls, smaller guilds battle for smaller relics, top guilds battle for top relics.....

#162 fs_weredevil

fs_weredevil
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 20:42

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

#163 fs_geoff

fs_geoff
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 20:46

why not make it that once you have a relic, you can join a defence group (doesnt need a leader to join, but a leader is extremely helpful - he would give 5X the bonuses anyone else would), and make it that after 2-3 attacks, you have to join again.
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 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

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

fs_azrail
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:08

so as it is now this is an alternative for guild wars/raids right? (hoof plz answer that one 'cause depending on the answer we (maybe only i <_<) will think it as GvG and make suggestions to make it better if it is a completely new system it actually needs more refinement starting from scratch...)

#166 fs_borisdrago

fs_borisdrago
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 21:17

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.

#167 fs_silverrook

fs_silverrook
  • Guests

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

fs_shylesson
  • Guests

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 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

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

fs_arkyrocks
  • Guests

Posted 13 March 2007 - 22:16

there should be a lower limit to the relics that guilds can hold becasue the darkstalkers have already taken alot and we the lower guilds wont win against thier might other than that its good


i would also like a relic map

#171 mdgmMX

mdgmMX

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 29 posts

Posted 13 March 2007 - 23:42

i dont agree with the teletransportation thing
but it wolud be nice to have some kind of portals around the world
dont you ting ?

#172 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:19

I think we should maybe implement some of the changes first and see how it works out --- initially 1, 2 and 4 ->

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 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

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

fs_davidjames
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:22

#2 is silly. why do all members of a group need to be in the same spot? kind of defeats the whole purpose of a group attack. how about trying just 1 and 4 first.

#175 fs_davidjames

fs_davidjames
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:23

no i don't think captures are too easy. our guild failed at quite a number of capture attempts today.

#176 fs_arkyrocks

fs_arkyrocks
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:25

i think u are just saying this because a bunch of ur guild including u is on the blue casim rite now ready to atk

just saying i really have no clue but watever i just try to be funny


i meant that toward hoofmaster

#177 fs_davidjames

fs_davidjames
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:28

those members are all offline and were defending it when they went offline but it has since been taken from us.

#178 fs_borisdrago

fs_borisdrago
  • Guests

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

fs_sigiloso
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:37

yes! i think only 1 and 4 ideas should be apply!

#180 fs_borisdrago

fs_borisdrago
  • Guests

Posted 14 March 2007 - 00:38

1/3 and 4 should aply but not 2 as i have posted b4 but no one read


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: