My View of GvG Changes
#1
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:01
Too much RP is getting in the game rigth now.
1. Make it that guilds lose 5 RP per defeat if they don't hit back.
Let's say I attack a guild and get 50/50, they are not many of them that hit back.
If this rule is introduced, most of them will hit back as they could be losing RP.
In order not to lose the RP, they must complete the 50 hits.
As soon as the 50 hits are completed, they won't lose any RP from being defeated.
2. Change the RP awarded for conflicts
A 50 hits conflict should get 5 RP.
A 75 hits conflict should get 7.5 RP. (yeah... weird I know :? )
A 100 hits conflict should get 10 RP.
With this, less RP would enter the game and if we want to get same amount of RP per conflicts, we must use more stam.
3. Let's take care of GvG rating
After 5 days without any conflicts initiated on other guilds, 5 GvG rating per day should be removed.
That way, we will know which guilds are really active in GvG and those that aren't.
An incentive for being in top 10 should be given out. Those guild are often targeted and need to defend more often then others, using more stam for defence and counter hits.
I suggest we introduce GvG points (call it like you want) that would be awarded each days to the top 10 GvG guilds (amount depending on their position)... With those points, they should be able to buy usefull potions for GvG (guild bound).
4. Let's bring in higher levels to GvG
With what I heard in other threads, after level 400, there is a decay in available targets for PvP/GvG.
It is unfair that those players, because of their level have more difficulties finding targets to hit.
We need to extend the ±25 levels range.
I'm not sure of the amount it must be extended, but this can be discussed.
5. New items and buffs pack must be introduced
A thread is already up about this so no need to get into details.
* More to come as I think about it *
* Please keep that clean of spam, flaming and bitching. I really want to see feedback on how to make GvG better and spice it up a bit *
#2
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:11
We lose RP because of that ?
Making losses isn't any real way to get a guild to fight back, in-fact it will just make guilds hate it even more.
#3
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:12
But it won't happen often.
It will force better protection when guilds have a player that can't come on.
#4
fs_spiiderxse
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:13
#5
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:18
Otherwise, guilds at the top don't get any.
It's been changed because some people where giving out GvG rating in order to get more RP after...
And if this can kill all the low lvl 4 man guilds around in FS (which I don't think it will), it would be awsome.
#6
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:22
Encouraged to participate(Say get so much of the Rp from getting 50/50 draw) sure, but not punished.
#7
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:23
But it makes it easy for people to trade RP that way.
I know my suggestion ain't perfect and that it needs alot of work.
That's why I posted so we can get feedback and suggestions and work on it.
#8
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:24
+1!!!!!!!!First of all, all of this must be worked around the fact that we need RP less RP in the game.
Too much RP is getting in the game rigth now.
If you do this, you have to make a conflict end as soon as a conflict is lost anyways I think. (if one guild gos 50/50, once the other guild losses one, the conflict should resolve) Sure, they could only hit back once and lose on purpose, so put a minimum of 25 not to lose RP. BIGGEST PROBLEM- what is to happen with negative RP?1. Make it that guilds lose 5 RP per defeat if they don't hit back.
Let's say I attack a guild and get 50/50, they are not many of them that hit back.
If this rule is introduced, most of them will hit back as they could be losing RP.
In order not to lose the RP, they must complete the 50 hits.
As soon as the 50 hits are completed, they won't lose any RP from being defeated.
THis is an obvious, why was it not this way from the start?2. Change the RP awarded for conflicts
A 50 hits conflict should get 5 RP.
A 75 hits conflict should get 7.5 RP. (yeah... weird I know :? )
A 100 hits conflict should get 10 RP.
With this, less RP would enter the game and if we want to get same amount of RP per conflicts, we must use more stam.
Agreed. This would also take care of the guilds on the pvp ladder with less then four members. If anything, they should decay at a faster rate because no one can initiate.3. Let's take care of GvG rating
After 5 days without any conflicts initiated on other guilds, 5 GvG rating per day should be removed.
That way, we will know which guilds are really active in GvG and those that aren't.
An incentive for being in top 10 should be given out. Those guild are often targeted and need to defend more often then others, using more stam for defence and counter hits.
Disagree, the top gvg guilds do not need anything to further their advantage, they should work with the same stuff everyone else has to as far as potions are involved. Perhaps better rp bought pvp buffs instead?I suggest we introduce GvG points (call it like you want) that would be awarded each days to the top 10 GvG guilds (amount depending on their position)... With those points, they should be able to buy usefull potions for GvG (guild bound).
4. Let's bring in higher levels to GvG
With what I heard in other threads, after level 400, there is a decay in available targets for PvP/GvG.
It is unfair that those players, because of their level have more difficulties finding targets to hit.
We need to extend the ±25 levels range.
I'm not sure of the amount it must be extended, but this can be discussed.
Not sure if this one will work, although I agree for the most part. I also think levels under 50 should be narrowed considering the stat % difference between levels 1 and level 25 to say the least.
Definably a better alternative to more rp items5. New items and buffs pack must be introduced
A thread is already up about this so no need to get into details.
PLEASE! This is needed. just because we dont see "free wins" in the FSbox anymore, doesnt mean all is well and have been fixed perfectly!* More to come as I think about it *
* Please keep that clean of spam, flaming and bitching. I really want to see feedback on how to make GvG better and spice it up a bit *
#9
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:27
To be in a guild, means you participate in gvg. There is no opt out except not being in a guild. The draw idea is good though, tie should go to the defenders, but as Roan said, perhaps only halfYou shouldn't be punished for not wanting to participate, simple as.
Encouraged to participate(Say get so much of the Rp from getting 50/50 draw) sure, but not punished.
#10
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:32
Maybe make it so it's a percentage of our VL that give the range.Not sure if this one will work, although I agree for the most part. I also think levels under 50 should be narrowed considering the stat % difference between levels 1 and level 25 to say the least.
Let's say we take it so that at lvl 400, the range is ±25. That means 6.25%
Using this, a lvl 900 would have a ±56 levels. (Is this too much?)
For lower levels it would be too low... But let's say range couldn't go under 10 levels.
#11
fs_gravely
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:36
Most of the rest of that looks good.
I'm not necessarily a fan of reducing how much RP is gained, though. 50 hit conflicts are fine gaining 10 RP, especially with the introduction of TKP. Offering a few new non epic uses for RP would soak up a large portion of RP and re stabilize the market, without making people work harder.
I DO agree with charging guilds RP for not hitting back - so long as there is absolutely no way in hell for guilds to manipulate the system such that kicking members makes it impossible to return hits. There's a question out there right now that perhaps the last update isn't performing as intended. Needs to be clarified before something like that gets implemented.
#12
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:38
Not a fan either but rigth now with no other items or buffs packs to spend RP on, it is need imo.I'm not necessarily a fan of reducing how much RP is gained, though. 50 hit conflicts are fine gaining 10 RP, especially with the introduction of TKP. Offering a few new non epic uses for RP would soak up a large portion of RP and re stabilize the market, without making people work harder.
If they bring in interesting and worthed items (NO EPICS PLEASE) and buffs packs, it will make the market more stable.
And then we could simply say
50 hits conflict = 10 RP
75 hits conflict = 15 RP
100 hits conflict = 20 RP
#13
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:50
A list of buffs and their levels will cost certain RP ...
Someone with permission will compile a pack based on the guild needs and activate it
That might help as well IMO
#14
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:52
I agree, this is great!There was a great idea a while back ( cant find it ) about compiling your own buff pack for the guild
A list of buffs and their levels will cost certain RP ...
Someone with permission will compile a pack based on the guild needs and activate it
There should be an extra fee for composing our own set of buff pack (perhaps gold not RP)
#15
Posted 01 June 2010 - 17:56
We still need to figure out what to do with negative RP(If a guild with 0 RP doesnt fight back, what happens?) Dont get me wrong, I love the idea, but unless there is something to clear up that matter, they wont implement this.I DO agree with charging guilds RP for not hitting back - so long as there is absolutely no way in hell for guilds to manipulate the system such that kicking members makes it impossible to return hits. There's a question out there right now that perhaps the last update isn't performing as intended. Needs to be clarified before something like that gets implemented.
#16
Posted 01 June 2010 - 18:06
So they would stay at 0.
I could see here an option for guilds that really don't wanna get involved in GvG to do so.
At 0 RP, a guild couldn't get initiated against.
So at 0 RP, nobody can GvG against them (until they initiate a conflict and win RP).
That way, it would also take out the easy wins.
They are too many easy wins in GvG.
If the easy guilds are out of GvG, then it makes it harder.
What do you think?
#17
Posted 01 June 2010 - 18:09
Here's another throw on the packs idea.
Have a list of buffs available to be added to a pack, and each buff has an assigned RP value.
A guild can then _Make_ it's own pack to use and have the RP used according to what buffs they select. Then give the option then to increase the length of the pack by paying a further RP cost.
Lets say for example the power leveling pack, 20 RP for 12 hours, you have an option to double it's duration for an additional 75% of the initial cost. So to have the pack run for 24 hours it would cost 35RP.
Building packs you could have the inventor pack. INV I 200 and Empower 200 could have a 5RP value assigned to them, while INV II 200 and EXT 200 could have say 10 RP value assigned to them. So if these buffs were default 12 hours, it could be 24 hours for 50 RP.
Food for thought.
#18
Posted 01 June 2010 - 18:18
Perfect, both problems solved at onceI think no negative RP should be involved.
So they would stay at 0.
I could see here an option for guilds that really don't wanna get involved in GvG to do so.
At 0 RP, a guild couldn't get initiated against.
So at 0 RP, nobody can GvG against them (until they initiate a conflict and win RP).
That way, it would also take out the easy wins.
They are too many easy wins in GvG.
If the easy guilds are out of GvG, then it makes it harder.
What do you think?
#19
Posted 01 June 2010 - 18:20
Only one should be available.
As soon as they use it, they can't do it back.
#20
Posted 01 June 2010 - 18:27
Well thoughtGuilds with RP could be given the option to reset there RP. That way those that want to stay stay and those that don't want, just have to reset there RP to 0.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

