
*Poke*
Posted 25 March 2010 - 21:18

No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins
Posted 26 March 2010 - 00:35
Posted 26 March 2010 - 03:38
I will chat to him today about it
Posted 26 March 2010 - 13:23
Last day of said week bump.Sure - we'll take a look at this next week
Posted 26 March 2010 - 20:01
No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins
Posted 27 March 2010 - 08:11
Posted 27 March 2010 - 13:13
Posted 27 March 2010 - 13:40
Posted 27 March 2010 - 14:32
Posted 27 March 2010 - 14:51
Posted 29 March 2010 - 01:24
Posted 29 March 2010 - 03:24
it should take more of a guild/ally effort to take someone down 5 levels..500 stamina to drop a level at 20% per hit? tis brutal lol 1000 stamina(10%) to drop someone a level sounds better. your attacked every 2 minutes, it can be planned for up to 2 days and tossed up when you are offline and in 20 minutes, you lose 5 levels. it would take over 2 days of hourly hits to take 5 levels with 100 stam from the target you attacked in the first place to risk losing 5 levels. plus the more players it takes to drop you 5 levels, the more bounties that can be posted
![]()
1% level loss for 10 stam and 10% for a 100 stam attack across the whole board for PvP would bring more activity to pvp..i have alot of faith that it would.
RJ, a question. Has anyone ever told you that trying to discuss something with you is akin to talking to a wall? Because I haven't seen you do anything other than repeat yourself, and the basic tenets of your position, in every numerous post of yours regarding PvP that I have ever seen.
It's nothing against you personally - I just feel that trying to debate with you would be a waste of time, because there is no convincing you.
Posted 29 March 2010 - 06:35
Posted 29 March 2010 - 06:39
The main argument that I've seen for making 10-stam hits unbountiable is that it would pretty much be one-man gvg. So what? If you gained no gold, took no xp, and gained no prestige, the only thing that you would take would be pvp rating and durability off of the defender's items. Yes, there would be no risk, but there would also be no gain. It would be purely for fun, and it would give people the opportunity to really shake up the pvp ladder.
No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:00
The main argument that I've seen for making 10-stam hits unbountiable is that it would pretty much be one-man gvg. So what? If you gained no gold, took no xp, and gained no prestige, the only thing that you would take would be pvp rating and durability off of the defender's items. Yes, there would be no risk, but there would also be no gain. It would be purely for fun, and it would give people the opportunity to really shake up the pvp ladder.
For the above argument to hold any substance it would require for sumone to actually care about the PvP ladder, and so far I have not met one single PvPer who gave a flying cow about PVP rating. We all know how the medal is obtained, and that is the way it will stay, nomatter what U do, and do not do to make PvP childproof.
Making small taps (aka 10 stams) to be risk free, for both hitter and target, is similar to making rum without alcohol in it: We can all drink it, and no one gets drunk.
PvP is about risk. It's about the unknown factor in hitting another player, not knowing how they react, or retaliate. It's about the risk of missing. About the risk of getting hit back. About risking getting on the board, and getting smacked.
Making 10 stams safe for everyone would not make PvP fun for anyone, but non-PvPers, and it sure as Sunday following Saturday would result i PvPers just going 100 stam on everything, and then what? We get 1000 stam hits for the real issues?
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:08
It's been a while since this thread had any real discussion so I had to go back and read some of it.
The main argument that I've seen for making 10-stam hits unbountiable is that it would pretty much be one-man gvg. So what? If you gained no gold, took no xp, and gained no prestige, the only thing that you would take would be pvp rating and durability off of the defender's items. Yes, there would be no risk, but there would also be no gain. It would be purely for fun, and it would give people the opportunity to really shake up the pvp ladder.
For the above argument to hold any substance it would require for sumone to actually care about the PvP ladder, and so far I have not met one single PvPer who gave a flying cow about PVP rating. We all know how the medal is obtained, and that is the way it will stay, nomatter what U do, and do not do to make PvP childproof.
Making small taps (aka 10 stams) to be risk free, for both hitter and target, is similar to making rum without alcohol in it: We can all drink it, and no one gets drunk.
PvP is about risk. It's about the unknown factor in hitting another player, not knowing how they react, or retaliate. It's about the risk of missing. About the risk of getting hit back. About risking getting on the board, and getting smacked.
Making 10 stams safe for everyone would not make PvP fun for anyone, but non-PvPers, and it sure as Sunday following Saturday would result i PvPers just going 100 stam on everything, and then what? We get 1000 stam hits for the real issues?
I'm sold. Haven't seen any argument against it. Double on the BB as alwaysStangValle says: Let me state that I was the one who did the hit that started this thread. Yes, it was a 100 stam. It takes somewhere around 15 million xp to gain a level at 703 so 3.8 million xp from a single 100 stamina hit took about 25% of a level. On the BB with the way things currently are the 100 stamina hit would have taken about 50% of a level. My suggestion has always been 1% of a level per 10 stam off the BB and 2% per 10 stam on the BB. This should be for everyone reguardless of level. Many low level players are untouchable right now since it would take an entire large guild to delevel a low level player. As it stands right now 1 player can take 3-4 levels off a high level player alone. Yes, it would only take 3 players to delevel a person 5 levels on the BB with my numbers, thats a whole lot better than one player being able to take 3-4 levels isn't it? Stang
Perfectly acceptable to me. Make it even for all people. Why muck around and make it complicated.
10 Stam = 1% of a level
100 Stam = 10% of a level
Simple and efficient. Fair to all players.
[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
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:21
i promote the 10 stamina without bounty only off the bounty board..those hunting are still at risk like how it is now..plus thats where alot of 'PvPer's pvp nowadays. if its outside the board then its for gold and/or xp so they are using 100 stamina anyways so the 10 stamina doesn't effect the current 'PvPer's play style, which we can label as being a pirate, basicallyMaking 10 stams safe for everyone would not make PvP fun for anyone, but non-PvPers, and it sure as Sunday following Saturday would result i PvPers just going 100 stam on everything
so whats wrong then? LOL if you don't care about it, why not open it up for grabs to those who could/would be interested in it without playing the 'honor system' with the target if they are going to attack back or throwup a bounty and put the conflict, our conflict, in someoneelse's hands...lol someoneelses lol...thats not why i attacked you. i want to pvp those in my 5+/- range for pvp rating to see how good and dedicated i am in keeping my pvp rating. if the 10 stam came without a bounty option, we would all be attacked daily if our pvp rating was high enough. thats what i want to see..challenges lol that gives those who want to fight for pvp rating alone..no xp, no gold, just rating..a way to attack or defenad against those around their level. we will still have those thieves, bullies, bounty hunters, and wacky cats as PvP stands now..just another 'system'For the above argument to hold any substance it would require for sumone to actually care about the PvP ladder, and so far I have not met one single PvPer who gave a flying cow about PVP rating.
and that will remain..the 10 stamina without bounty is only opening up another part into PvP and putting some action and activity into everyday pvp - like GvG didPvP is about risk. It's about the unknown factor in hitting another player, not knowing how they react, or retaliate. It's about the risk of missing. About the risk of getting hit back. About risking getting on the board, and getting smacked
how is it obtained?We all know how the medal is obtained, and that is the way it will stay, nomatter what U do, and do not do to make PvP childproof.
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:32
This is for another thread but come on...how is it obtained?We all know how the medal is obtained, and that is the way it will stay, nomatter what U do, and do not do to make PvP childproof.
[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
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:37
To come full circle on this argument, players that are worried about xp would be more inclined to play the PvP aspect of the game IF xp loss weren't so terribly skewed against higher level players. As it is now, players under say 400 don't lose anything in relation to players above that and it gets much worse the higher you go.
Perfectly acceptable to me. Make it even for all people. Why muck around and make it complicated.
10 Stam = 1% of a level
100 Stam = 10% of a level
Simple and efficient. Fair to all players.
I'm sold. Haven't seen any argument against it. Double on the BB as always
Also as sort of a compromise I would like to see the "protection" of lower level players extended from level 7 to 35 or 50, then let the 10 stam = 1% xp loss ensue. Nothing can turn a player off when starting the game then to constantly being bashed by players that only hang out at low levels on purpose to attack for gold. After that game is on so to speak.
i have a conflict going on now that has me on the powerless side..i don't wish to bounty. just to take xp like they are :twisted: why should i be open to losing experience/levels without the ability to do the same thing back, personally *shrugs* doesn't make senseOh and I forgot, xp loss needs to be from players above and below the +/- 5 level attack range. It is completely one sided.
Posted 29 March 2010 - 07:58
Be it, 1% to 2% for 10 stam hits and 10% to 20% for 100 stam or anywhere between and double on BB of course would be fine. Wherever the number falls I am fine with it as long as it effects all players consistently, even if they do continue to protect some beginning players. A single player being able to delevel another high level on the BB is just wrong and needs to be tweaked badly. And I agree with you that needing 10+ players to delevel another lower level is also wrong. Make it equal for all players!**with xp loss being 2%/20% per 10/100 stam on the bounty board, it can be very easy to be 'helped out' with the deleveling process..which is going on ALOT nowadays. i think it should take more then 3 players to drop someone five levels..6 players would be a better fit..
![]()
*cough* 1% per 10 stamina attack across the whole board *cough*
[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
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users