Game Update v1.6521
#81
fs_funnytrees
Posted 05 February 2010 - 00:48
that could be the base prices, and then it costs more for whatever (guild level, members or rating)
but put a cap so it doesn't go over a certain amount.
#82
fs_kagerou804
Posted 05 February 2010 - 01:17
Commenting-I have a few suggestions, please comment
2. To encourage retaliation, a draw should reward the defending guild either half or all of the RP, since the initiating guild has the advantage of picking their target and planning ahead.
4. There should be no requirement to retaliate or lose RP, that doesn't make sense.
For the moment i think the 50k is a good fix, it will at least reduce the need to lower G Rating. This I believe was the foremost complaint.
At least on most of your points
2- I think we really should be encouraging retaliation. I (as well as others) have come up with some interesting ideas. I don't think we should be offering split RP for both guilds in the case of draws. I came up with this idea of Standoff Points (SP) to be gained during draws. Each guild will receive 5 SP if the conflict comes to a draw, and SP can be used to buy buffs. RP buffs would essentially become SP buffs. This will encourage a bit more retaliation without adding to abuse. I think it could also serve other purposes as well.
4- The reality is this- if HCS comes up with something that encourages retaliation, then we wouldn't need requirements... and I honestly don't think we need them now.
And I agree with funnytrees- while 50k isn't overly cheap, it could go up a little, but I like caps too.
***Before I was saying draw points, but I took a moment to think and realized that "draw points" were used in Final Fantasy VIII. Therefore, I changed it to SP- Standoff Points (besides, 'standoff' seems to be the word of choice for HCS, since they use it on the home page***
#83
Posted 05 February 2010 - 01:40
Maybe I was harsh in my original comment, but I am still frustrated.
You ask for "comments" and "input" but you never truly come out with your opinion on what really needs to be fixed.
There is a large segment of the gaming community that had no issues with the way GvG was being run. There were complaints about the number of FSBox ads, but as far as "trading" GvG points, there was a very large group that believed it wasn't hurting anything in the game.
You obviously can't appeal to that segment of the community or listen to their feedback if you philosophical don't agree with GvG being that way.
We need more feedback from YOU on what you want to accomplish before we can really help solve the problems in the game for you. We need more information.
You still haven't answered the logic behind the update yesterday. What was your thinking behind making higher level guilds pay more for conflicts? What was your logic and what was the goal of that change?
I'm honestly confused what you are hoping to accomplish. I will be glad to offer more constructive suggestions (and I have on many, many boards here) if I think they are in line with the goals you see for the game.
How about just answering the following questions:
1. Is it the intent to make GvG only a confrontation and aggessive mechanism of the game? Do you want strict winner/losers, highly competitive participants?
2. Is it the intent to make GvG rating matter other than bragging rights?
3. Is it the intent to allow guilds that don't want to participate in GvG a game mechanism to either make them less attractive targets or avoid GvG altogether?
4. Is there desire to increase or decrease the number of GvG conflicts?
5. Do you want more or less small, GvG specific guilds?
6. Do you consider GvG a gold sink and an important part of the GvG game mechanism?
7. Are you currently happy with the current stamina output vs. profit potential of the RP for Epic component system?
These are just a few examples that cause all us players to just argue back-and-forth about our opinions, but that's not feedback. And because the sampling of players that participate on the forum is so small, it's not even an accurate reflection of the true opinion in the FS community.
Your position on these points will ultimately decide the direction of the game. Not ours.
You say you listen to our feedback, but that's really not true. You have an opinion on what you want GvG to be way before you start "listening" to us. It would help if you explain what you want to accomplish first in a lot more detail than "We're thinking of changing GvG, what do you think?"
Logic... Sadly, nothing will come of it but thank you for stating something, which should be present in their change meetings. If they have them... Probably somewhere next to the QA department... wait. Nevermind.
#84
Posted 05 February 2010 - 05:04
1. I still like the concept of 4 active players in the guild to be able to gvg. (Active as in been on in the last 7 days. Which means its consistant because if they have not been on in the last 7 days. You can not attack that player. - Makes Sence.)
2. I like the Idea of the 2nd party to finish the conflict even if result in a tie. How about this.
-You lose RP if the other guild does not complete there 50 hits. Example. I attacked guild A with 50 hits. Guild B doesn't return the 50 hits so Guild B loses 5RP.
-This should be do able. I almost think Flawless. Am I wrong?
I believe this will get players to work harder for there gains.
#85
fs_drrahman
Posted 05 February 2010 - 05:49
#86
fs_regnier7
Posted 05 February 2010 - 05:57
This is essentially what I had in mind for "draw points".
Don't change RP, the way it is now is pretty much fine.
Remove the buffs all together from RP
Introduce a new point system called SP ----Standoff Points
In a force draw, each guild wins 5 SP, which can be used for buffs.
This will get more people involved with GVG. Maybe add some more guild buffs in the SP system.
HCS added new buffs not too long ago, I think this system would benefit from the route they were taking.
And as far as using less stam for defending- maybe issuing draw points and at the same time reducing the stam cost is a bit excessive.
I like this idea....
#87
fs_stickisgod
Posted 05 February 2010 - 06:01
This guy is smartPlease consider making GvG's costs increase as a guild has more active conflicts.
#88
fs_regnier7
Posted 05 February 2010 - 06:07
hmm... could slow down the flow of Epics coming into the game....
This is essentially what I had in mind for "draw points".
kagerou804 wrote:
Don't change RP, the way it is now is pretty much fine.
Remove the buffs all together from RP
Introduce a new point system called SP ----Standoff Points
In a force draw, each guild wins 5 SP, which can be used for buffs.
This will get more people involved with GVG. Maybe add some more guild buffs in the SP system.
HCS added new buffs not too long ago, I think this system would benefit from the route they were taking.
And as far as using less stam for defending- maybe issuing draw points and at the same time reducing the stam cost is a bit excessive. [/quote]
This idea is just win. Punishing those who don't want to fight back because they get nothing for doing so is just plain silly. But this could be an idea to look into and tweak a bit, me thinks.
#89
fs_coyotik
Posted 05 February 2010 - 07:28
And 99% of the problems will instantly and magically go away.
#90
fs_kagerou804
Posted 06 February 2010 - 14:46
This is essentially what I had in mind for "standoff points".
Don't change RP, the way it is now is pretty much fine.
Remove the buffs all together from RP
Introduce a new point system called SP ----Standoff Points
In a force draw, each guild wins 5 SP, which can be used for buffs.
This will get more people involved with GVG. Maybe add some more guild buffs in the SP system.
HCS added new buffs not too long ago, I think this system would benefit from the route they were taking.
And as far as using less stam for defending- maybe issuing draw points and at the same time reducing the stam cost is a bit excessive.
This idea is just win. Punishing those who don't want to fight back because they get nothing for doing so is just plain silly. But this could be an idea to look into and tweak a bit, me thinks.
Thanks reg!
Yeah I agree, it won't solve anything to punish people for fighting back, and unfortunately splitting RP rewards will just create more abuse. If a guild wants to get RP, they'll have to find a way to make it happen. Want fancy buffs? Fight back.
Ahh, and I have changed most of my posts so it shows the term SP- Standoff Points, rather than DP- Draw Points.
Still any thoughts?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
