Official Suggestion: The Sanctuary
#21
fs_punkass
Posted 27 March 2008 - 15:24
We should be coming up with ideas that encourage more pvp, not less. The top pvp rated players already think they are untouchable, as no one wants to attack and get 5 levels taken from them, which is guaranteed based on the bios of these players. As if being atop the pvp ratings should be a permanent place for them.
Top pvp rated players should be more of a target than anyone else in the game, not less. And all I see if a sanctuary was implemented is a crowded place full of the top pvp rated players, players who don't know how to protect their gold, and paranoid players. All three of these groups don't need to be protected.
#22
fs_elricdrake
Posted 27 March 2008 - 15:28
This is not a good idea.
We should be coming up with ideas that encourage more pvp, not less. The top pvp rated players already think they are untouchable, as no one wants to attack and get 5 levels taken from them, which is guaranteed based on the bios of these players. As if being atop the pvp ratings should be a permanent place for them.
Top pvp rated players should be more of a target than anyone else in the game, not less. And all I see if a sanctuary was implemented is a crowded place full of the top pvp rated players, players who don't know how to protect their gold, and paranoid players. All three of these groups don't need to be protected.
Well said punkass.
are you kidding me? lol. if PvP isn't dead yet, this will be the nail in the coffin.
I totally agree.
NO!
#23
fs_krypkill
Posted 28 March 2008 - 22:38
Make the game too safe and you erase the fun.
#24
fs_sleepsalot
Posted 29 March 2008 - 07:21
#25
fs_rufus83
Posted 29 March 2008 - 09:17
are you kidding me? lol. if PvP isn't dead yet, this will be the nail in the coffin.
I don't pvp, and many people doesnt. Maybe the reason why the pvp is not a part of the game so interesting for many players is the possible loss of tons of gold and xp. Maybe the solution is not the sanctuary, but to review pvp.... Maybe doing smaller the losses would get more people involved, and so the pvp would become more interesting, and no one woud need a sanctuary, which instead is the death for pvp
#26
fs_peyrhon
Posted 31 March 2008 - 20:19
Looking at it from HCS perspective, I can't see this being a good idea for them. My thought is that if I could go to a sanctuary for a bit of gold, why would I bother upgrading my BP slots (FSP!!!) to store my defense (or armor) set?
Also, hiding in a sanctuary is a brainless way out in my opinion...doesn't require the planning of building a defense/armor set around the people who may attack you...which in turn makes them try to figure out how to beat you.
Peyrhon hits Sanctuary for 99, 999 damage (Piercing Argument, Critical Logic)
Peyrhon is victorious!
#27
Posted 31 March 2008 - 20:37
#28
fs_vampirarmy
Posted 31 March 2008 - 21:03
#29
fs_dapredator
Posted 01 April 2008 - 10:47
#30
fs_mrwright
Posted 04 April 2008 - 05:27
The PvP system in this game is pure crap anyways, why not nerf it further?
It might even cut down on the whining...
#31
fs_silverwand
Posted 06 April 2008 - 13:33
PvPing seems to occur more in the lower levels. I think until you reach level 5 or 10 you should be safe from attack. This will help stop new players getting upset and quitting.
If this idea was introduced I would like it to be quite expensive and also a drain on stamina i.e. the sanctuary spots are few and far between. The gold cost could be based on your level though. It shouldn't cost the same for a low level player.
And a time limit, say 1 week or something.
#32
Posted 07 April 2008 - 11:41
The Sanctuary
3) If you are going on holiday, your character will be truly safe from de-leveling.
I think this system should only be used for point number 3 when you know you will be innactive for a week, 2 weeks or even 3 for me this year.
You will only be allowed to enter the sanctuary after a cooldown period of not logging for 24 hrs.
To reactivate (Keave the sanctuary) you will have to log on then 24 hours after this period you will be placed back on world map.
#33
fs_karoj
Posted 10 April 2008 - 20:11
I'd have to agree with some of the perspectives shared here. Minimum stay 1 week. All actions frozen while you're there.
I'll probably get stabbed for saying this, but since we are talking about making buildings for things---> why don't you have to warp/walk somewhere for Crafting and Hellforging? blacksmithing has to come with you because of the way the item durability is set up, but why not have physical locations for some of the other actions? If there was a crafting and hellforging loctaion somewhere on each world map, it might stimulate PvP as it would lead to a bit of congestion in the area....
#34
fs_tyrnok
Posted 12 April 2008 - 16:30
As a player that dislikes PVP, and doesn't like to lose the experience that I just spent 2 hours and 1300 Stamina fightin for.. it's a great idea.
and with bounties being allowed on a member that's in there preventing abuse of it, it's even sweeter
#35
fs_kelrithian
Posted 16 April 2008 - 17:47
Personally, I really dislike this idea, for all of the previously mentioned reasons. Further discouragement of PvP is the last thing this game needs, in my opinion, lest everyone get extremely bored.
And a question comes to mind. Would a player potentially be able to hide in this sanctuary indefinitely? Or would they be booted once they're out of gold? It certainly wouldn't be good for anybody, if someone went inactive in such a place, forever. Especially if they have a decent amount of PvP points, then said points are lost to the rest of the gaming community...forever.
Definitely a big no from me. But if this is implemented, I think there should be -very- high costs associated with it, and players shouldn't be able to go inactive.
And I just had an idea. This could actually work as some sort of guild structure, but only if there were still high stamina and gold costs involved with using it. What if...players could hide within their guild sanctuary, which from an RP standpoint, could be considered their guild "Castle" or "Fort", or what have you. The costs would of course still be very high to use, which would prevent players from just camping out there. But there needs to be -some- way of exposing these players. So what if, you could draw them out of their sanctuary, by winning a GvG against the guild in question? Again from an RP standpoint, this could be considered as "storming the castle", and if you win the conflict, all players within the other guilds sanctuary, would be exposed. I haven't really thought out the details, this is just off the top of my head, but I don't like the idea of some spot on some map, where anyone can hide, with no possibility of getting to them.
Regardless, I don't like the idea of -any- form of sanctuary. However if it turns out that it is going to be done, I'd like to see something a little more exciting and involved than just "a safe spot on the map".
#36
fs_leannesara
Posted 24 April 2008 - 07:31
I agree with the idea of a sanctuary, perhaps one sanctuary per 50 levels of maps, so you have to travel to it and definately it should not be located near a portal, make some effort involved.
I agree with bounties still be able to be performed.
I also think, like a few others, that once inside you get NO exp, gold gain and no Stamina gain.
You should not be able to access other things in game; basically The Innkeeper says, do you want to stay, cost is x times your level per hour, IF You say "Yes" you are instantly LOGGED OUT.
When you LOG BACK IN, The Innkeeper says, I hope you enjoyed your stay, You are no longer protected in the Sanctuary.
That and the bounties should prevent abuse.
I think it's a greater abuse to PVP someone you know is not going to log in anytime soon so they can't put a Bounty on you.
#37
fs_fastjack
Posted 28 April 2008 - 12:49
#38
Posted 28 April 2008 - 18:55
Please do not add this...
PvP is already a dead art
If this comes in then all I'd have to do is list 500 FSP in the MP for 100k gold... go to this area... come back 1 hour later... and buy out everyone under me... do this over and over again... never having to worry about bank depos or PvP... Bank Depos and Lock EXP are the 2 'opt out' options for PvP... as it is I hate that there are ANY options to opt out... WHY do you want to add in more options :?
#39
fs_angiefc
Posted 28 April 2008 - 19:12
1st) The gold cost is removed from bank, not from hand
2nd) if you have attacked a player within the last 48 hours you can not use it
3rd) if there is a bounty on you the players can still attack you via the bounty.
and 4th) you gain stamina at half the rate you normally would (if you usually gain 60 an hour you only gain 30) this would help prevent people from going into 'sanctuary' mode for just over night.
Other ideas (dang I always get a lot of them)
You must remain out of sanctuary for at least 4 hours before you can kill monsters.
To enter "Sanctuary" you must give up 1 bank deposit, ontop of the cost it would take
Make entering the Sanctuary cost 1fsp, and when you leave it you start at the default "portal back to Kruul" map.
Make it based on your level. It's 50 gold per hour per level you are, so a level 23 player staying in for 3 days would pay 27600 gold out of bank. Gold payment starts upfrount, and you don't get any gold back. Minimum charge for using Sanctuary is 16 hours.
A player can not send gold hand to hand for 12 hours after leaving santuary, this would help prevent some one making, or having a friend make, a level 1 char and really avoid the sancturary cost.
(As for pvp in general, and this is off topic)
I've often thought that under level 10 pvp should be turned off, or at least remove the xp lost if you're that level or below.
#40
Posted 28 April 2008 - 20:39
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
