Further Guild Conflict Tweak
#21
fs_tangtop
Posted 22 February 2010 - 19:10
#22
Posted 22 February 2010 - 19:18
So what happens if, before any hits are made by a defending guild, a guild founder in the initiating guild kicks people who may be easy targets, because the initiating guild missed once or twice?
This still doesn't resolve that, hoof...or is anyone that leaves a given guild a legitimate target, and the screen is just showing us people that have already been involved?
Hmmm... Do you think we should add all members at the time of the initiation to the potential target list for the duration of the conflict instead?
Yes, yes, yes!!! I think the only ones that will have a problem with this would be those that kick players to win.
#23
Posted 22 February 2010 - 19:24
So what happens if, before any hits are made by a defending guild, a guild founder in the initiating guild kicks people who may be easy targets, because the initiating guild missed once or twice?
This still doesn't resolve that, hoof...or is anyone that leaves a given guild a legitimate target, and the screen is just showing us people that have already been involved?
Hmmm... Do you think we should add all members at the time of the initiation to the potential target list for the duration of the conflict instead?
Yes, yes, yes!!! I think the only ones that will have a problem with this would be those that kick players to win.
Or those who wanted the easy defend button.. but I do like this update.. and I enjoy the rush of figuring out who is being attacked
#24
Posted 22 February 2010 - 20:14
#25
Posted 22 February 2010 - 20:36
I want to know something,
why is it that Decisions here are made based on only a few pklayers posting in the Forum?!
What, it does not matter to anyone if they dont come here and post as fast as they can?!
Huh, why is that?
With millions of accounts and who knows how many ACTIVE players, changes are always made based on the few players that actually have the time to log in and post here.
This is BULL and I'm tired of it.
Oh, and if you want to know my take on things in the game, well I would tell you but i doubt it would match YOUR opinion so who the F&%$ cares, right?!
(Blah)
People keep saying HCS is only listening to a few... I don't think it so. The folks posting in here, take Gravely, for example... are very knowledgeable. They aren't lvl 1 noobs who don't understand the game. They work often as founders or leaders of guilds (meaning they help explain the game to their mates). (Hope you didn't mind the reference, Gravely)
And further, just because they (HCS) do listen to those few players doesn't make the otherwise great suggestion invalid. As another poster said - anybody can come in here and post. Whether they choose to or not, this proposed update was posted on the front page, so 2,000+ players saw it and had the chance to comment on it, so it wasn't a secret update or anything (although HCS owns this game and can do it however they want).
Having said that, give HCS some credit. Better they listen to a few than none at all, and yes, I DO think HCS cares, even if I don't always agree with every decision they make. They do an overall good job, and I for one, am GLAD to see them taking more player feedback and trying to tweak things.
Thanks, HCS!
#26
Posted 22 February 2010 - 21:00
#27
Posted 22 February 2010 - 21:07
So by your logic, in a war, a sniper should have a big shiny arrow pointing to their location? The locations of troops should be sent to the army they are planning to attack in advance?I liked the previous update better. Now the "easy win" button is back on again for the attacking guilds that use only 1 attacker to do the 50 hits. If it was a guild conflict with actually more than 1 participant.....say for example 6 attackers, then it still isn't easy to buff all the targets. Why do you call the target list a "win button", when it actually makes GvG more difficult?
#28
Posted 22 February 2010 - 21:21
#29
Posted 22 February 2010 - 21:58
However since the target is probably offline at the time, the better analogy is sneaking up behind someone and stabbing them in the back, in which case you probably DON'T know who it is.We are playing FS, not find the sniper. If somebody gives you a punch in the face, then usually you know who did it.
Personally I'm kinda indifferent on knowing who the attackers are. It does take some of the fun out of trying to determine who is attacking. If it was only the attacking (initiating) guild who's attackers where shown then it would do something to level the playing field against the advantages the attacker already has (primarily selecting a time that is most advantageous to them. However since the "attacking" player list applies to both guilds, then it is probably best left out. IMHO, I believe it would be best for this list to contain all the valid targets (i.e. would not include players that are inactive 7+ days) at the time the conflict started. That way any player kicked out (even if they had not been attacked yet) would still be a viable target. This would combat the solo guilds that have just created 3 multis (that they kick out right after starting the conflict) in order to participate in GvG.
Some other options to be considered that might improve GvG would be:
1) Require that the 4 player requirement be active players (i.e. none of them can be deemed inactive for the purposes of GvG
2) If a guild drops below that level (i.e. a guild has 4 valid targets, and then kicks even one of them after starting a conflict) then they automatically lose that conflict.
3) Any player that is kicked or leaves a guild is not allowed to rejoin that guild for 30 days.
#30
fs_lionsmane
Posted 22 February 2010 - 22:00
Also, if a guild kicks a player just to avoid a loss then they should lose the GVG automatically, but if a player voluntarily quits then they are still able to continue.
#31
fs_gravely
Posted 22 February 2010 - 23:12
And Thoran, you're right. There's NO WAY that Hoof, or the entire dev team, could possibly listen to everyone, even if they all chose to voice their opinions on IRC or post in these forums.
That being said, I've played a lot of games and MMO's. I can respect that the Cows are even willing to engage in this level of community involvement. It's not perfect, but it's a damned sight better than most other solutions.
What would you have them do? Have a long standing poll and a thread hundreds of posts long on a given topic?
....Go look at the top of the boards. Tell me what you see in the "Upcoming Developments" section.
That idea didn't work, for whatever reason.
At least this is an effective, fair, and, not least, comparatively rapid fix. Is it the very best it could possibly be? Probably not. But show me where there's been any suggestion that more refinement or tweaking couldn't occur....Hoof has been listening to feedback ever since the servers upchucked a couple weeks ago and pretty much turning on a dime trying to make it all pan out in everybody's best interest. He's offered ideas, that, well, made some people with knowledge cringe - and to his everlasting credit, he's seen those collective cringes and swallowed those ideas whole in favor of people who know what they're talking about.
For my own part, since Hoof has listened to me with regards to this very specific GvG tagging update, you and I are on a level playing field - I am no super guild member with access to any form of communication to any member of HCS outside these forums or the IRC channel when Hoof joins it publicly. I'm just a player in the game making suggestions based on my experiences playing said game, and trying to be as persuasive and forward thinking as humanly possible about it while doing so. You have access to everything I do - and therefor the same ability to influence the game's direction. Rejoice in it, because in most games you'd just be an account number paying a subscription fee.
#32
Posted 23 February 2010 - 03:15
I want to know something,
why is it that Decisions here are made based on only a few pklayers posting in the Forum?!
What, it does not matter to anyone if they dont come here and post as fast as they can?!
Huh, why is that?
With millions of accounts and who knows how many ACTIVE players, changes are always made based on the few players that actually have the time to log in and post here.
This is BULL and I'm tired of it.
Oh, and if you want to know my take on things in the game, well I would tell you but i doubt it would match YOUR opinion so who the F&%$ cares, right?!
(Blah)
But if you dont care about posting your opinion on game-related issues how do you expect the upcoming changes to be considering your feedback as well? Its a small number of people that post in the forum regularly, an even smaller number of people that are actually intelligent enough to post something useful..Luckily that small number of knowledgeable people covers most aspects of the game so feedback, in my opinion, is of high quality despite coming from 0.01% -or less- of active players..
HCS will listen to what they see posted, we are lucky to have response to our feedback and, in the end, its just like sauna parties..the more the merrier
#33
Posted 23 February 2010 - 10:19
#34
Posted 23 February 2010 - 13:02
I want to know something,
why is it that Decisions here are made based on only a few pklayers posting in the Forum?!
What, it does not matter to anyone if they dont come here and post as fast as they can?!
Huh, why is that?
With millions of accounts and who knows how many ACTIVE players, changes are always made based on the few players that actually have the time to log in and post here.
This is BULL and I'm tired of it.
Oh, and if you want to know my take on things in the game, well I would tell you but i doubt it would match YOUR opinion so who the F&%$ cares, right?!
(Blah)
But if you dont care about posting your opinion on game-related issues how do you expect the upcoming changes to be considering your feedback as well? Its a small number of people that post in the forum regularly, an even smaller number of people that are actually intelligent enough to post something useful..Luckily that small number of knowledgeable people covers most aspects of the game so feedback, in my opinion, is of high quality despite coming from 0.01% -or less- of active players..
HCS will listen to what they see posted, we are lucky to have response to our feedback and, in the end, its just like sauna parties..the more the merrier
- First, I never said I 'dont 'care about posting my opinion' nor did anyone say that about other players that don't frequent the Forum as often.
- The 'smaller number of people that are actually intelligent enough...' you mean the ones that can spin a web of BS too long for the Cows to read dont you. i often see long posts that actually has a lot of words but little meaning and are often talking about improving the Top Guilds and at the same time making it harder for the Average Player.
Ever wonder why you don't see more Solo Guilds of high level Experienced Players anymore?
Why, if you do see one, they most likely are not going to play anymore..
THEY CANT, that's why
I have always supported Andrew and his crew, its the small group of players that force the rest of us to lay 'Their game' that is getting to me and nothing more.
-------
"Hi all,
After listening to your feedback on the forum, we have tweaked the 'Targets' list on the Guild Conflict page..."
A change in the game was made that was an addition, not a change. Yet before anyone could use this new feature, it was changed back... "Due to Feedback"
As the title of the Topic and the post on the Front Page of the Game suggests, THIS is what I was talking about.
I always give my two cents here in the Forum and am often agreed with by several players that also post. Though, it's been a very long time since I seen anything come to fruition.
I never suggest anything for anyone else but the 'Middle guy' or 'the average user'. Meaning guilds on their way up or even new Guilds. I dont care if things aren't good enough for the Top Guilds or even Top Players, they should be challenged the most hence they are at the 'TOP'.
All I would like to see is a more even laying field like it was back in the beginning.
Bring Back Fallen Sword Classic
#35
Posted 23 February 2010 - 14:17
What was everyone's thoughts on changing it to a 'snapshot' of the full guild list for potential targets (within level ranges of course), rather than just a list of current partipants who have left?
Important Note: This doesn't mean all target guild members would be classified as participants, but it would mean thar guild members who were in the opposing guild at the start of the conflict would still be targetable until the conflict is over.
#36
Posted 23 February 2010 - 14:24
I like it.Hi all,
What was everyone's thoughts on changing it to a 'snapshot' of the full guild list for potential targets (within level ranges of course), rather than just a list of current partipants who have left?
Important Note: This doesn't mean all target guild members would be classified as participants, but it would mean thar guild members who were in the opposing guild at the start of the conflict would still be targetable until the conflict is over.
What about 4 member guilds starting a conflict with 3 inactives? They are basically skirting the rules and are solo guilds able to GvG.
[Signature removed]
“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM
#37
Posted 23 February 2010 - 15:00
You think all 4 should have to be active?
#38
fs_robotussin
Posted 23 February 2010 - 15:05
#39
Posted 23 February 2010 - 15:09
luisspamer,
You think all 4 should have to be active?
Yes. If they can't be hit, then they should not be counted.
#40
fs_steveram5
Posted 23 February 2010 - 15:20
luisspamer,
You think all 4 should have to be active?
without a doubt
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


