Jump to content

Photo

HCS : Experience losses still dependant on level difference


  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

#61 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 18:06

I meant simply that if I am 350 and you are 344 or 356 I cannot take exp from you, but I can attack you for gold/prestige/PvP rating.

I do not fully understand VL yet, I reckon there seems to be a problem with its application but I haven't wrapped my head around it's intricacies to fully incorporate it into my suggestion. Apologies for this gap in my suggestion if VL creates one. Otherwise on an AL-only base I think my suggestion holds its own pretty well.

#62 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 18:15

+/- 10 should be the most the range is extended..i dont want to see PvP turn into GvG..+/-25 is ridiculous to bring it into regular PvP

 


#63 Bunnybee

Bunnybee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 367 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 18:20

Expand it + and - 5 at 400 (so ten either way), again at 600 (making it 15 either way).

Then after that increase it by 5 every 100 levels. Since the number of viable targets decrease exponentially when you start to get up around that range.

#64 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 19:34

Expand it + and - 5 at 400 (so ten either way), again at 600 (making it 15 either way).

Then after that increase it by 5 every 100 levels. Since the number of viable targets decrease exponentially when you start to get up around that range.


To have a 60 level range (30+/-) by level 900? That's starting to be a bit excessive..

#65 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 19:57

how about for every 100 levels, you get +1 attack range..so at level 1000 it will be 15+/-..the increase should stop at 15 beyond 1000 though

 


#66 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:02

how about for every 100 levels, you get +1 attack range..so at level 1000 it will be 15+/-..the increase should stop at 15 beyond 1000 though


Pretty good

#67 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:05

how about for every 100 levels, you get +1 attack range..so at level 1000 it will be 15+/-..the increase should stop at 15 beyond 1000 though


Pretty good

Weak.

[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


#68 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:06

how about for every 100 levels, you get +1 attack range..so at level 1000 it will be 15+/-..the increase should stop at 15 beyond 1000 though


Pretty good

Weak.


NO U R

#69 lostviking

lostviking
  • Guests

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:15

So I would have a 4 level range? Sorry but thats rediculous

#70 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:18

So I would have a 4 level range? Sorry but thats rediculous


No, +/- 7.

5 + 2 for 200

#71 lostviking

lostviking
  • Guests

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:20

So I would have a 4 level range? Sorry but thats rediculous


No, +/- 7.

5 + 2 for 200


Ahh ok, I misunderstood

#72 MaximusGR

MaximusGR

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,177 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:49

Expand it + and - 5 at 400 (so ten either way), again at 600 (making it 15 either way).

Then after that increase it by 5 every 100 levels. Since the number of viable targets decrease exponentially when you start to get up around that range.


To have a 60 level range (30+/-) by level 900? That's starting to be a bit excessive..


Its definitely not excessive..there are about 70 people in 60 level range of someone at EOC, very reasonable amount..Stats are similar, so..whats the problem? :) We do have the right to keep being involved PvP as we level up you know..and we need the targets for it

#73 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 20:58

But then again, if its only gold losses then it doesn't really matter. Everyone should keep a tight check on their wallets

#74 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 21:37

how about for every 100 levels, you get +1 attack range..so at level 1000 it will be 15+/-..the increase should stop at 15 beyond 1000 though

Weak.


NO U R

What are you, ten years old? And your an authority? Ha! Grow up...

[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


#75 Maehdros

Maehdros

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,329 posts
  • Canada

Posted 10 April 2010 - 21:49

Expand it + and - 5 at 400 (so ten either way), again at 600 (making it 15 either way).

Then after that increase it by 5 every 100 levels. Since the number of viable targets decrease exponentially when you start to get up around that range.


To have a 60 level range (30+/-) by level 900? That's starting to be a bit excessive..


Its definitely not excessive..there are about 70 people in 60 level range of someone at EOC, very reasonable amount..Stats are similar, so..whats the problem? :) We do have the right to keep being involved PvP as we level up you know..and we need the targets for it




+1 increasing pvp level range for players as they grow higher in levels( especially in the 600 -900 range, only makes sense. A player shouldnt have their ability to pvp limited by their level or desire to level. A broader level range = more targets = possibly more PvP :wink:

#76 fs_gravely

fs_gravely
  • Guests

Posted 11 April 2010 - 12:21

The main issue that would have to be addressed in any expanding range system would be how the upgrade would be handled for players as they reach the expansions.

Example:

System is set up such that at level 400, range increases to +/- 10, and at 700, +/- 15.

At both 400 and 700, there would have to be an intermediate expansion, such that the range was actually +10/-5 until 410, and at 700, +15/-10, again until 715. Otherwise, a level 400 player could be hitting a level 390-399 player, and they wouldn't be able to hit back; a level 700 player could be hitting a level 685-699 player, with the same gap.

EDIT: And even that would leave a loophole, as fresh level 400 players would be able to hit 406-409, and fresh 700 would be able to hit 711-714. So at 406, have a -6/+10, 407 -7/+10, etc.

#77 Bunnybee

Bunnybee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 367 posts

Posted 11 April 2010 - 17:35

That's an excellent point, and upon hearing it- can't believe I hadn't already considered it. :| You can't have people not able to attack back if they want to. Is it possible, do you think, to make it so that a pvp attack by a person normally outside your range opens a window to hit them back once? I really feel like high level players need an expanded range, but it's even more complicated than I had imagined.

#78 fs_sollimaw

fs_sollimaw
  • Guests

Posted 11 April 2010 - 18:26

I disagree with expanding the PvP range. I understand the desire to continue to enjoy a facet of the game at higher levels, but the main problem isnt the attacking range, its the fact that most people never make it to that high of a level. They give up or quit the game by then unless they spend the money to reach it as fast as possible.

The average player level in the game is rising. It will never get to the point that you have as many targets as the lower levels and thats a fact, but you will see more people coming up over time.

30 levels of a PvP range (-/+15) would make it nearly impossible to level out of someones range. Especially at higher levels where leveling takes so many more resources to accomplish.

You could sit at level level 900 and target people for months. Most people who are reaching EOC are levelers. Forcing them to be subject to attack from the same person for that long is cruel and is in no way fair.




On topic: Yes you should be able to take exp from players lower level than you. +1

#79 RebornJedi

RebornJedi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,449 posts

Posted 11 April 2010 - 19:18

On topic: Yes you should be able to take exp from players lower level than you. +1


+2 :lol:

 


#80 fs_gravely

fs_gravely
  • Guests

Posted 11 April 2010 - 19:45

You could sit at level level 900 and target people for months. Most people who are reaching EOC are levelers. Forcing them to be subject to attack from the same person for that long is cruel and is in no way fair.


This is the main argument against expanding the range, Solli, and I completely agree that it is a valid point. The inherent risk in any expansion is the ability to use it to bully someone. However, PvP at such a high level is hideously expensive; both in terms of the amount exp loss you're talking about and the amount of stamina it takes to regain that amount of exp. The only observation I would offer would be that griefing style pvp rarely, if ever, occurs up there, and certainly not for extended periods; regular 10 stam clears, even under the new system taking no more than 20% of a level, mean that anyone who gets bountied repeatedly for off the board harassment (not even considering the possibility that they would lose five) would mean anyone charging EOC would be set back months. No one up there is going to risk that kind of loss; I mean really, how often do we see level 700+ players on the board? Rarely, and when we do, they're often in active PvP guilds.

That being said, some expansion of the range is justified; even at 445, I have long stretches without any worthwhile targets, and that's not just using the attack player screen to do a sweep, either (which only shows players your exact VL). I am nowhere near EOC, and don't ever plan to be. I'm pretty much dead center of available content, actually. Is it really unreasonable of me to want to have access to viable targets? I don't think it is.


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: