I would like to see the no xp/gold/bounty hits for 10 stam come in, it would liven up the game and give something to do
Twist on the PvP system...
#81
fs_dapredator
Posted 14 October 2008 - 11:30
I would like to see the no xp/gold/bounty hits for 10 stam come in, it would liven up the game and give something to do
#82
Posted 14 October 2008 - 14:57
Great ideas in here, under the current system, the top pvp players are practically immune to attacks unless the attacker feels like losing 5 levels, which i don't think many people want for knocking someone down off a pedestal that they are probably going to buy their way back on to, we have a pvp medal that is supposed to reward the top pvp player, if they never attack or get attacked, then it isn't really pvp.
I would like to see the no xp/gold/bounty hits for 10 stam come in, it would liven up the game and give something to do
The mysterious thing for me is that why pvp rating is not a part of GvG conflicts? Fighting in the range of +/-25 lvl is more pvp than taking it from any level player on the BB. Activation of pvp rating in GvG conflicts is not probably hardest thing to implement and it can change both systems giving Motivation to the GvG conflicts and bringing more Life and Action to the PvP Ladder. GvG conflicts will not be a waste of stamina anymore and more players will be back into action on the PvP ladder... earning "days" with everyday efforts towards a PvP medal could be realistic for larger group of players. It also can make GvG more focused on the players with high pvp, so who will attack inactive and retired members if the players with high pvp are the main targets in conflicts... Overall guild PvP will be closer to pvp of its members, which is a logical thing too... Guild upgrades - +1 Max Conflict Participants and +1 Max Conflicts might become valueable. So, if it's not hard to implement then probably it's "bad thing" for some reasons.. What are those reasons?
From my point of view, it can make happy hundreds of players and give them very strong positive emotions. Imagine a player who spent tons of stamina in many GvG conflicts over 24 hours and defended its pvp on returned attack, then earned 1 day towards a medal on the next day... It can become a very memorable day of somebody's life... Ok, she can lose that 1st place on the next day but will come again later to earn more... Only success makes interesting playing this game and widening number of successful players in the PvP rating is probably a good thing. Currently the PvP rating is a measure of guild teamwork and probably better pvper within a guild is not allowed to earn his medal or willingly help to a guildmate with higher chances to get it.. Look in the Accomplishments section, Badpenny has just won 7 bounty attacks on her by a crystal bounty hunter who is almost 100 levels higher... if PvP rating was any close to pvp between the players she would earn her PvP medal long time ago... From what I see at that moment, "no pvp" in GvG conflicts benefits a small group of players over a larger group of players and also breaks both PvP and GvG systems. Probably, there are some side effects that I missed, but at the moment I am not quite sure how is that not the right thing for the game overall..
#83
Posted 14 October 2008 - 23:46
There is also alot of other logic that doesn't make sense to me in this game... this is the main idea I created this suggestion...
I was really hoping this would get added in when I still had an interest in playing this game... now I only really login to chat with people I met from the game and buff people cuz I don't have a use for stamina...
I think that if HCS actually did implement this it may make the game interesting again...
-----
Now Playing: Atreyu - Falling Down...
#84
Posted 16 October 2008 - 05:40
I think that if HCS actually did implement this it may make the game interesting again...
I would like see just more action on PvP ladder whatever will be implemented, and also more players that will earn their "days" towards their PvP medals with efforts. The measure of pvp in the game is how the top of PvP ladder changing, once it is like in Raising Stars and Badpenny has the PvP medal - problems solved. The PvP system has everything to become a happy place for hundreds of very active players... there is motivation, but it's lacking feasibility...
#85
Posted 21 October 2008 - 10:08
Ok, if all changes to the existing pvp system look unfair to the players that spent some resources and efforts to achieve something, then probably you can add something new to it... like setting location traps for the players on an enemy list... once your 'enemy' has been trapped, you get a message and both players have 10 minutes for attacking each other for pvp only... xp, gold and bounty shouldn't be part of it... Something like that... There can be various traps and recepts to design them ...
#86
Posted 21 October 2008 - 22:46
I think that would make the system abusable... and this suggestion is mostly to remove any possibility of the system getting abused, and to even out the playing field...bump!
![]()
Ok, if all changes to the existing pvp system look unfair to the players that spent some resources and efforts to achieve something, then probably you can add something new to it... like setting location traps for the players on an enemy list... once your 'enemy' has been trapped, you get a message and both players have 10 minutes for attacking each other for pvp only... xp, gold and bounty shouldn't be part of it... Something like that... There can be various traps and recepts to design them ...
----------------
Now playing: Atreyu - Shameful
via FoxyTunes
#87
Posted 22 October 2008 - 00:37
about the pvp rating with bounties. it should stay the same it is now. if you are hitting people with more stam to get more pvp then thats a risk you are taking.
the pvp ladder will come to life with this sort of idea. *thumbs up*
also with pvp, it gives people an idea on the stats and numbers of this game. not enough people actually relies how stats work. this will give them a chance.
#88
Posted 22 October 2008 - 02:07
Great ideas in here, under the current system, the top pvp players are practically immune to attacks unless the attacker feels like losing 5 levels, which i don't think many people want for knocking someone down off a pedestal that they are probably going to buy their way back on to, we have a pvp medal that is supposed to reward the top pvp player, if they never attack or get attacked, then it isn't really pvp.
I would like to see the no xp/gold/bounty hits for 10 stam come in, it would liven up the game and give something to do
i would agree with you on here, just think the top 10 woundt dare even attack anyone in their pvp range as they will probably get bountied and drop straight down the pvp ladder.
#89
Posted 30 October 2008 - 02:01
Great ideas in here, under the current system, the top pvp players are practically immune to attacks unless the attacker feels like losing 5 levels, which i don't think many people want for knocking someone down off a pedestal that they are probably going to buy their way back on to, we have a pvp medal that is supposed to reward the top pvp player, if they never attack or get attacked, then it isn't really pvp.
I would like to see the no xp/gold/bounty hits for 10 stam come in, it would liven up the game and give something to do
i would agree with you on here, just think the top 10 woundt dare even attack anyone in their pvp range as they will probably get bountied and drop straight down the pvp ladder.
You do realize this suggestion removes that 'lack of dare' in PvP...
#90
fs_aznvasion
Posted 03 November 2008 - 01:18
#91
fs_rulen
Posted 09 November 2008 - 06:09
#92
Posted 09 November 2008 - 14:49
So get this, i wake up one mornin and look myself in the mirror, it is the walrus that i see.
#93
Posted 09 November 2008 - 17:58
That's kinda the hope, to make people who may have wanted to PvP not get discouraged from doing so, yet at the same time make it so that people who are anti-PvP aspect wouldn't mind if someone attacked them, as they wouldn't lose their PvE gains, and they don't care about PvP gains...wow! if this were implimented into the game it would definetly change my pvp-ing ways. i think this is a great idea/suggestion
I'm glad you like the ideaI like it overall. Only thing that I would add would be to change up the attack player part of actions menu to seek by pvp rather than just giving us 5 players at the level. Its a good idea DA. Hope it changes then I can get my pvp by means other than by bounties.
But I think the attack players list should be random of players +/- 5 from your VL, not 5 players who happen to be your level, and not 5 players based on their gold or PvP... just straight up random each and every single time...
Glad you like the idea...something needs to be done about pvp and this seems like a good idea
Cheers all and keep the responses coming!
#94
Posted 11 November 2008 - 20:28
I once talked to someone about the idea of a "revenge hit"...
A 'Revenge hit' is an attack that is allowed to be made on a lower level who hit you, which will also take exp loss, however, there are a few conditions on the hit...
* If you make the 'revenge hit', you do so at the price of not being able to bounty the person who hit you. In the condition that you already bountied them, you lose the ability to make a 'revenge hit'...
* If you make the 'revenge hit', then the person who hit you cannot bounty you for it, as they hit you first...
* You can only make 1 'revenge hit' per hit that you received, any extra hits made after the revenge hit per attack received, will count as normal attacks, and the other person may bounty them...
* If you are a lower level then the target that hit you, the 'revenge hit' still holds, but they lose no exp when you make the 'revenge hit', because you lost no exp when they made the hit...
#95
Posted 12 November 2008 - 04:56
* You can only make 1 'revenge hit' per hit that you received, any extra hits made after the revenge hit per attack received, will count as normal attacks, and the other person may bounty them...
if you give up the option to bounty them, you should be allowed to hit him as many times as you want in a certain time period. maybe 2 days like the time you have to put up the bounty. you are giving up a chance to take 5 levels with a bunch of people using 100 stamina for 9 hits each. for the revenge hit you take on all the responsibility/stamina for doing the damage/'revenge'.
thats you waiting an hour each for an attack. 48 attacks possible if you are setting alarms to wake up from sleeping ;P taking x2 experience maybe even x3. ive been in deleveling parties where its been lets say, 4-5 people doing 100 stam, 9 hits. thats 36-45 100 stam hits to take 5 levels at x2 experience loss. thats ALOT of stamina for one person. so x3 would equal out because you arent getting 48 hits in two days. thats too big of a task to do. plus 4800 stam max is alot to spend to get your revenge.
it would be nice to see how much experience you could take with lets say 35 100 stam hits at x3 exp loss. thats saying you are sleeping 6 hours a day and you start hitting the attacker one hour after he/she attacked you.
there also shouldnt be a limit to how many levels you can take because its personal
and they cant bounty you back ;P this is revenge. yet they can do the same exact thing to you. this will promote more knowledge in proper defense and giving those buff shops some more gold. if you can defend yourself well then the attacks wont be as bad. plus if the person isnt as active then it will be even less.
i want to be able to stand up for myself : ))))
#96
Posted 12 November 2008 - 05:02
To be fair, if someone robs you for 2million, you should get 2million back... that is fair...
Now when applying this to a PvP system, there will be alot of people who will think this is chaos...
But if the person hits you once for a loss, you should be able to hit them once per loss... not 10 times, not 20 times...
If someone hits you 5 times when you are offline, you should be able to hit them 5 times when you are offline...
So this system will allow you to make 5 protected hits on them for 5 protected hits they made on you (as you protect their hits when you make your hits)... so if you are offline, and they hit you 5 times, you can hit them 5 times, and they cannot place you on the Bounty Board for that, or get any protected hits from those 5, as it negates out... (if you don't understand where I am going with this, I'll explain with an example tomorrow, but I should prolly go to sleep now as it is late)...
#97
Posted 12 November 2008 - 05:18
im looking for personal revenge on those who have robbed me and took my experience away. if you dont understand where im going with this then i cant explain it any better ;P
plus they should definitely add it to where if you use 10 stam hits you just take pvp rating, no experience or gold, and theres no bounty. *thumbs up* thats so perfect to bring some life back into pvp and make the pvp ladder REAL. and sooo so simple to add : )))))))) and it would make my idea for the revenge hit to work alot better and make it more fair because pvpers wont be punished, just the thieves
#98
Posted 12 November 2008 - 14:18
and with your 'revenge' hit idea, i only get to him twice AND he knows its coming. i didnt know he was going to attack me. i didnt have time to prepare except for having a defense set on. which can easily be taken down nowadays with all the buffs and nice attack stats you can achieve at this level. if i only get the same number of hits to do onto him, it should ATLEAST be x3 exp loss for the fact im giving up a chance to bounty him. but personally i think its lame and i should be able to hit him for 2 days as many times as i can. he knows its coming. he can defend. i was just minding my own business.
so i sit here 500k gold and 1 level down the drain because someone who doesnt give a flying F about their levels decided to take some gold and experience.
heres the message from them after me asking if it was worth it for five levels gone: "For that to happen someone would need to first take 5 levels but since I dont really give a hoot about my levels it really achieves nothing in worrying me.....lol. I just spent 3 months at 230-255 doing 400 bounties, the only reason I came up to 255 was to rob people selling buffs at 250 in my new Cacus set....ROFL. If you feel you want to try taking 5, go for your life, but it wont stop me or slow me down. All it will do is make me watch you more closely.....lol"
so now im threatened about being watched if i go thru with a deleveling party :shock: why not give me a personal chance to take his levels. i would love to tear thru his armor and take some experience. yet im above him in level so now i can DO NOTHING! bs!!!!!!!!!!
you see alot more people like this who just dont give a dam about their levels. i try to stay on the nonpvp side because im trying to build up my guild, yet now i cant even standup for myself *shakes head*
all i ask is for someway for me to get revenge. i dont have the resources for mercs nor do i want to spend 3-5 fsps per level lost from the dude and i just found out i dont even have some past mates to help out and risk some levels. this is UNFAIR and only helps out the PvPer who is robbing me of gold and levels.
#99
Posted 13 November 2008 - 05:54
ive lost ALL faith. pvp is dead and can only be used by thieves with no remorse.
*tips hat* i give up *shakes head*
#100
Posted 13 November 2008 - 13:08
You can't advertise deleveling bonuses on the SB, that is considered harassment towards the other player... and there are people who don't have guilds backing them... if the BB was changed to only have posted 'theives' and there was no bounty for a bounty hit, then there would be no limiter on having people ACTUALLY bounty hunt...just put up the bounty on my attacker. also put a shoutbox message for 5 fsp per level taken. i got nothing *sigh* one dude took it and completed it. it was for min gold too.....no justice. none at all.
ive lost ALL faith. pvp is dead and can only be used by thieves with no remorse.
*tips hat* i give up *shakes head*
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

