Jump to content

Photo

Okay, can we really look at XP loss from PvP?


  • Please log in to reply
706 replies to this topic

#581 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 03:49

It's hard to argue that even 10% makes it prohibitive. Much harder to claim 15% is.


No it's not. 10% is prohibitive, so is 15%.
To say other wise is shortsighted.

A flat percentage makes sense because even 20% (too high imo) of a 500 stam level means that it takes only 100 stam to regain back. Which is a ratio of 1:1.


I agree a flat % makes sense... to you.

However as a person that doesn't pvp I would expect your opinions to vary from my opinions, since I pvp on a daily basis.

#582 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 08 April 2010 - 03:50

Thankyou Reg, I do make sense occasionally you know ;)

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#583 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 03:54


It's hard to argue that even 10% makes it prohibitive. Much harder to claim 15% is.


No it's not. 10% is prohibitive, so is 15%.
To say other wise is shortsighted.


Plenty of delevels happen in the 200's where the exp loss on the board is roughly 10% or less, to say it is prohibitive when evidences show it isn't might mean that... you may be the short sighted one?


A flat percentage makes sense because even 20% (too high imo) of a 500 stam level means that it takes only 100 stam to regain back. Which is a ratio of 1:1.


I agree a flat % makes sense... to you.

However as a person that doesn't pvp I would expect your opinions to vary from my opinions, since I pvp on a daily basis.


Doesn't make you right. Might make you biased though? :roll:

#584 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 03:55

5 levels being the maximum lvl of punishment. People seem to be losing sight of this. Seeing as it cannot go any higher this is the worst punishment the BB can give. By this reckoning it shouldn't then be easy to achieve. Three people shouldn't be able to deliver the BB's ultimate punishment.



hmm.... This does make sense.


Why not? 3 people putting out maximum effort and maximum stam should be able to punish the attack of a single individual. You think it's more fair to require more and more of someones allies to expend more and more stam to punish someone within the rules of the game? You think 2500 stam with out a single miss isn't enough? You need to require your allies and guildmates to spend 5000 stam (without a single miss).. more? To punish the attack(s) of someone.

#585 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:00

Dropping someone even just one level is a punishement. Dropping 2-3-4 or even five is a gradient of increasingly punitive action. Of course 3 people shouldn't be able to deliver the BB's ultimate punishment. Speaking of this in terms of stamina kind of goes against the code of honour that this sytem was put in place to support. It is actually a decent system of punishment however the means of delivering this is far too easy.

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#586 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:02

especially when the initial attack(s) didn't cost the target 5 or even 1 level

 


#587 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:02


It's hard to argue that even 10% makes it prohibitive. Much harder to claim 15% is.


No it's not. 10% is prohibitive, so is 15%.
To say other wise is shortsighted.


Plenty of delevels happen in the 200's where the exp loss on the board is roughly 10% or less, to say it is prohibitive when evidences show it isn't might mean that... you may be the short sighted one?


I was referring to high level players not low level players.


A flat percentage makes sense because even 20% (too high imo) of a 500 stam level means that it takes only 100 stam to regain back. Which is a ratio of 1:1.


I agree a flat % makes sense... to you.

However as a person that doesn't pvp I would expect your opinions to vary from my opinions, since I pvp on a daily basis.


Doesn't make you right. Might make you biased though? :roll:



Every post you have made is to reduce the exp loss for yourself and increase exp loss for low level players that are engaged in pvp every single day, and you accuse me of being biased? The suggestions I have made would not benefit me, infact they would open me up to more attacks from lower level players taking more and more exp from me. So if by biased you mean put myself in harms way suggesting what I think it right, then yes I most certainly am biased.

#588 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:07

Of course 3 people shouldn't be able to deliver the BB's ultimate punishment.


I disagree.

#589 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:08

Of course 3 people shouldn't be able to deliver the BB's ultimate punishment.


I disagree.


Of course you do. I don't expect you to agree with me. The point I make is still valid though. The true purpose of the BB has been lost, this is now the perfect time for HCS to redress this.

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#590 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:17

So according to you, how many more people should it take to delevel 5 times a level 50 versus a level 700 knowing that the level 50's 5 levels cost him 2000 stamina and the level 700 12500 stamina? This is to understand your full opinion.

#591 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:19

So according to you, how many more people should it take to delevel 5 times a level 50 versus a level 700 knowing that the level 50's 5 levels cost him 2000 stamina and the level 700 12500 stamina? This is to understand your full opinion.


Stam to gain back levels has absolutely nothing to do with the bounty board. The parameters for the bounty board are 5 levels.

#592 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:20

So according to you, how many more people should it take to delevel 5 times a level 50 versus a level 700 knowing that the level 50's 5 levels cost him 2000 stamina and the level 700 12500 stamina? This is to understand your full opinion.


Stam to gain back levels has absolutely nothing to do with the bounty board. The parameters for the bounty board are 5 levels.


I asked you a proper PvP metric: how many people.

And stamina always matter. If levels are lost, then stamina has to be spent to gain them back. Stamina is spent for another's stamina to be lost, if you are not willing to talk about such balance then you are avoiding the issue.

#593 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:22

The point I make is still valid though. The true purpose of the BB has been lost, this is now the perfect time for HCS to redress this.


My point is valid also.

#594 evilbry

evilbry

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,172 posts
  • New Zealand

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:26

The fixed rate is the _best option_ for one simple reason.

It's easiest to implement, which means a significant lack of drama afterwards with bugs and exploits. For the most part it is fair across the board, and who wouldn't want something to be right first time it is implemented?

If people want all sorts of fancy formula's implemented, that's all fine. Just keep in mind the days and weeks of fixes and patches to try and fix it, as has happened in the past with XP loss changes or we only need to look at the GvG changes over the past 6 months.

I know what I would want, Something that works decently and allows the cows to move on and work on fixing other things.

#595 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:36

The fixed rate is the _best option_ for one simple reason.

It's easiest to implement, which means a significant lack of drama afterwards with bugs and exploits. For the most part it is fair across the board, and who wouldn't want something to be right first time it is implemented?

If people want all sorts of fancy formula's implemented, that's all fine. Just keep in mind the days and weeks of fixes and patches to try and fix it, as has happened in the past with XP loss changes or we only need to look at the GvG changes over the past 6 months.

I know what I would want, Something that works decently and allows the cows to move on and work on fixing other things.


Exp loss has been changed no less then 4 times in the past. This isn't by far the first time. The fact is that there use to be a sliding scale that lower levels could take more exp from a higher level then someone the same level as a higher level so there is already a basis for more "complicated" systems.

#596 evilbry

evilbry

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,172 posts
  • New Zealand

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:38

The fixed rate is the _best option_ for one simple reason.

It's easiest to implement, which means a significant lack of drama afterwards with bugs and exploits. For the most part it is fair across the board, and who wouldn't want something to be right first time it is implemented?

If people want all sorts of fancy formula's implemented, that's all fine. Just keep in mind the days and weeks of fixes and patches to try and fix it, as has happened in the past with XP loss changes or we only need to look at the GvG changes over the past 6 months.

I know what I would want, Something that works decently and allows the cows to move on and work on fixing other things.


Exp loss has been changed no less then 4 times in the past. This isn't by far the first time. The fact is that there use to be a sliding scale that lower levels could take more exp from a higher level then someone the same level as a higher level so there is already a basis for more "complicated" systems.

So then, I ask you. How much time do you want tied up with this? How long do you realistically expect it to take until a "happy medium" is met?

I understand it is an important change, but the way it is starting to head now is opening a huge can of worms and workload for the coders.

#597 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:40

a fixed % across all levels will need tweaks and fixes no matter what..especially if they have a thread for discussion on it..the majority of those upset will get their allies and friends to complain there and get it changed..look at all the quest updates, have the 'majority' complain on the forum and you can get it changed like the epic stats or the amount of SEs that spawn.

i like hoofs thoughts on capping the max % of xp loss when it hits that level..so we keep the learning/protective curve for the low levels and then cap the xp loss at 200-300 when it hits 5-10% for 100 stam off the board.

you leave the low levels alone, which is where the activity of PvP is the highest..its high for a reason...then you help out the higher levels by giving the ability to think about casual pvp.

the xp loss changes in the past have been a decrease of 30-40% total(im leaning more towards 40% reduction)..or its been decreased drastically that even i was blown away lol...a fixed % is required instead of % reductions but it's ALOT more complicated then just putting its across the board.

the way and possibilities xp loss can occur need to be looked into as well to stop abuse..

 


#598 Removed22342

Removed22342

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:41

So according to you, how many more people should it take to delevel 5 times a level 50 versus a level 700 knowing that the level 50's 5 levels cost him 2000 stamina and the level 700 12500 stamina? This is to understand your full opinion.


Stam to gain back levels has absolutely nothing to do with the bounty board. The parameters for the bounty board are 5 levels.


I asked you a proper PvP metric: how many people.

And stamina always matter. If levels are lost, then stamina has to be spent to gain them back. Stamina is spent for another's stamina to be lost, if you are not willing to talk about such balance then you are avoiding the issue.


It would be hard to balance it completely I guess, higher level character usually means more resources to defend oneself (be it magics, level up points, gear etc) which potentially makes it hard to find enough players to be could stand a chance to hit on that bounty. I'd say it's more about the chance for the one reacting against an offender than how much it cost him to gain a level ... this is about the board. regarding attacks off the board it might apply.

#599 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:43

I understand it is an important change, but the way it is starting to head now is opening a huge can of worms and workload for the coders.


PvP adds a huge amount of playability to any game..its important to get it right before they leave it alone again..just like GvG. i was surprised by how long they left it 'rot' until they came out with the much better current system

the ability to take experience from another player is a touchy and important topic. it needs to be discussed, argued upon, and broken down..

 


#600 Removed22342

Removed22342

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 656 posts

Posted 08 April 2010 - 04:44

the way and possibilities xp loss can occur need to be looked into as well to stop abuse..


Like posting bounties and casting deflect on them?


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: