Jump to content

Photo

PvP Ladder Thoughts... (Take 2)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
396 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you like these ideas as a whole? (115 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you like these ideas as a whole?

  1. Voted Yes (76 votes [60.32%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.32%

  2. Voted No (50 votes [39.68%])

    Percentage of vote: 39.68%

Vote

#81 Tilley10

Tilley10

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 247 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:15

Hi all,

To summise what is being discussed in the other thread - here is what we are currenly look at doing - note this isn't set in stone however - please continue to discuss it on this thread.

Suggested Changes to PvP Ladder

1) Make the ending time random to prevent last minute attempts to boost the PvP rating.

2) Change the bounty board back so that all PvP hits confer a rating adjustment rather than just the final completer of the bounty.

3) Apply a reduction in PvP rating transfer to bounties, dependant on how much higher the attacking player is above the bounty target.

4) Remove stamina limitations from bounties.

All these points are still up for discussion however - please discuss here :)

~ The Fallen Sword Team


1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Yes
4 = Yes

I like that only the winner of the bounty gets the rating.

Could change it even more so that if you don't complete the bounty you lose rating and it goes to the person who completed the bounty first. Just a thought

#82 EJames2100

EJames2100

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,387 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:17



Simply put Hoof.
I don't like that you are slowing a Higher lvls Rating gain off a lower lvl down and not doing the reverse.
It should not be one way.


So if any hit on the board would confer 20 to 25% of what would normally transfer off the board, then factor in any sublevel penalty, would that be something you'd like to see, EJ?

Just make the number small, even 5-10%. Dominance should reflect quantity more then quality of targets.


Unfortunately it's too late for me to figure anything out right now.
But as long as the lower lvls are fairly penalised against higher lvls as they will be against lower lvls.

I mean a 900 guy could work his ass off against lower lvl targets, gaining pvp in slowly as ever.
Gets unluckily placed cause of a lower lvl holding a Rating grudge and within a few hits to a lower lvl, their entire Rating is gone.
If that makes sense.

It would mean the lowest Lvls have the best protection on the Board, normal gain rate, a higher lvl takes bounty and loss is very minimal.

Just doesn't seem fair for it to go one way.

#83 paingwin

paingwin

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:18

Hi all,

To summise what is being discussed in the other thread - here is what we are currenly look at doing - note this isn't set in stone however - please continue to discuss it on this thread.

Suggested Changes to PvP Ladder

1) Make the ending time random to prevent last minute attempts to boost the PvP rating.

2) Change the bounty board back so that all PvP hits confer a rating adjustment rather than just the final completer of the bounty.

3) Apply a reduction in PvP rating transfer to bounties, dependant on how much higher the attacking player is above the bounty target.

4) Remove stamina limitations from bounties.

All these points are still up for discussion however - please discuss here :)

~ The Fallen Sword Team


1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Yes
4 = Yes

I like that only the winner of the bounty gets the rating.

Could change it even more so that if you don't complete the bounty you lose rating and it goes to the person who completed the bounty first. Just a thought


why would you give a hunters rating to another hunter when they had no pvp contact? that makes no sense at all

#84 Bleltch

Bleltch

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,784 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:18

[quote name="leos3000"]

Because a level 950 can take and win any bounty, but a level 20 cant?[/quote]
sure but it costs me 180 bounty tickets to hit a level 20, where it cost them 1 ticket to hit me....you want to add a penalty for being a higher level, then make every bounty only cost 1 ticket.[/quote]
You make it sound like you want to buy points? That's one of the things wrong we're trying to fix.

#85 boeffie

boeffie

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 977 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:19

Normal rating transfer when the lower level is the agressor is fine to me, especially if rating is being gained and lost on a per combat basis. The only thing that really needed addressing from a rating perspective was high level farming, and POSSIBLY a cap on how much total rating could be lost on any given bounty.


Yeah, I wasn't suggesting there would be a bonus if the player was lower, only a reduction if the player was higher.


Ok i misread that. I would agree with that change


Well I wouldn't, chances of high levels loosing anything against low levels is pretty small, reducing the rating transfer is NOT a penalty, it's just less WIN.

I can see you wanting to not upset high level pvp-ers, but really, how fair is it they have a full BB to choose targets from, with no risk at all, if they wanted to, even when hitting highly rated lower level players, while that same highly rated lower level has far less targets, and runs a high risk of loosing if he does try to take on a high level? That risk should be expressed in rating.

#86 fs_littlejom

fs_littlejom
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:20

Yes it makes sense, until you introduce rewards for being higher on the PvP ladder. Making it easier for lower level players to gain PvP makes sense unless those lower level players are on the PvP "leaderboard" - in which case higher level players are being penalized.

And I know it is not part of the discussion, but it costs me >1 fsp in bounty tokens to attempt a bounty on a level 350 player... if you're going to give an advantage to lower-level players in ratings transfer, then cap bounty tokens at like 50 or something so higher level players don't pay more and get less.


You can have garbage items on and buff yourself anytime as a lvl 900 compared to a lvl 300 with his own items having to find buffs, if you get the exact same ratings how is that fair at all?

#87 psycho3103

psycho3103

    New Member

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:24

All this is worse then when i have explosive diarreah.....Too many changes

#88 Tilley10

Tilley10

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 247 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:24

Hi all,

To summise what is being discussed in the other thread - here is what we are currenly look at doing - note this isn't set in stone however - please continue to discuss it on this thread.

Suggested Changes to PvP Ladder

1) Make the ending time random to prevent last minute attempts to boost the PvP rating.

2) Change the bounty board back so that all PvP hits confer a rating adjustment rather than just the final completer of the bounty.

3) Apply a reduction in PvP rating transfer to bounties, dependant on how much higher the attacking player is above the bounty target.

4) Remove stamina limitations from bounties.

All these points are still up for discussion however - please discuss here :)

~ The Fallen Sword Team


1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Yes
4 = Yes

I like that only the winner of the bounty gets the rating.

Could change it even more so that if you don't complete the bounty you lose rating and it goes to the person who completed the bounty first. Just a thought


why would you give a hunters rating to another hunter when they had no pvp contact? that makes no sense at all


Adds risk to everyone taking a bounty and a reward for those who win.

#89 paingwin

paingwin

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:25

how about you just get rid of rating trading altogether and just go with a set number for each successful pvp attack, based on level and the other players accumulated pvp points? the point trading is flawed from the start so make it a permanent number. everyone starts a 0, then as you hit people in pvp you gain x amount of pvp points, and that is based off of defender level, amount of points etc.

#90 paingwin

paingwin

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,075 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:27

[quote name="Tilley10"][quote name="paingwin"][quote name="Tilley10"]



~ The Fallen Sword Team[/quote]

1 = Yes
2 = No
3 = Yes
4 = Yes

I like that only the winner of the bounty gets the rating.

Could change it even more so that if you don't complete the bounty you lose rating and it goes to the person who completed the bounty first. Just a thought[/quote]

why would you give a hunters rating to another hunter when they had no pvp contact? that makes no sense at all[/quote]

Adds risk to everyone taking a bounty and a reward for those who win.[/quote]

the reward for winning the bounty is from the person bountied. not other hunters.

#91 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:28


Yeah, I wasn't suggesting there would be a bonus if the player was lower, only a reduction if the player was higher.


Just to be clear, the reduction should only be in effect for major differences in level right? Something like... 25% of the player's level for above level 100.


Not as effective, because gear radically alters at a far more rapid pace than that. Heck, look at the difference between level 500 and level 550 defense gear. Balaurs is a gigantic step up from anything previously available.

100 level bands are probably the best compromise available.

And Khan, agree that reduction of total rating gain needs to be introduced. Like, maybe...20% of a normal hit, REGARDLESS. That way a 10-0 bounty clear is like 2 full hits off the board?


100 level bands? Yes 25% of the player's level is 100 level at 400. And 200 levels at level 800. But any reduction should go both ways.

And about 20% of a normal hit. We're gonna need decimals or to alter rating by multiplying base rating and rating traded from normal hits by 10 (as I've mentioned numerous times).

#92 Removed8950

Removed8950

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 183 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:29

I say yes to all current proposed changes. No one will ever be completely satisfied and just based on the events within the last 24 hours it looks like a more than fair compromise thus far. Especially the random ending time of the pvp ladder. Not sure who the high speed genius was behind that obvious solution but they deserve a round on the house.

Removing the ability to Bounty a PvP Ladder attack is something I've been thinking about. If enough people want it, I don't see why not. It might be a relatively easy tweak, unlike the rest of the suggestions.


#93 fs_gravely

fs_gravely
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:29

Unfortunately it's too late for me to figure anything out right now.
But as long as the lower lvls are fairly penalised against higher lvls as they will be against lower lvls.

I mean a 900 guy could work his ass off against lower lvl targets, gaining pvp in slowly as ever.
Gets unluckily placed cause of a lower lvl holding a Rating grudge and within a few hits to a lower lvl, their entire Rating is gone.
If that makes sense.

It would mean the lowest Lvls have the best protection on the Board, normal gain rate, a higher lvl takes bounty and loss is very minimal.

Just doesn't seem fair for it to go one way.


EJ, if a level 100 attacks you on the board, you would gain full rating from them when they lose.

The trick here is that it would be determined by the agressor, not just the level relationship.

#94 fs_gravely

fs_gravely
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:31

100 level bands? Yes 25% of the player's level is 100 level at 400. And 200 levels at level 800. But any reduction should go both ways.

And about 20% of a normal hit. We're gonna need decimals or to alter rating by multiplying base rating and rating traded from normal hits by 10 (as I've mentioned numerous times).



That works for the first hundred levels (and thus band) but not for the portions thereafter. a 900 can farm a 600 easy, and they'd be in the 50% band clear to level 1050, not in the 75% band where they belong.

As for the decimals/increased amount of rating, why not just round down? Most rating transfers are for 9, 10, 20, 42 points - 2, 2, 4, 8.

#95 fs_psylonpon

fs_psylonpon
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:32

So an example from my personal experience:

As a lvl 32 player, I took on a 10 kill bounty on a lvl 426 player and he had PvP rating of ~970 and I had a rating of ~1100. Since he switched gear two times during the bounty, I lost 6 combats losing 20 PvP rating each time and by the end of the bounty, his PvP rating was 1030 and my rating was 1060 for a net loss of about 40 PvP rating.

I got back to 1200 PvP rating later in the day and a lvl 300 took a bounty on me with a PvP rating of 960 and beat me 10 straight times and gained 140 PvP rating with his superior gear, level up points and guild bonuses.

Is this a fair system that rewards the merits of each situation? A higher level player, especially when the level difference is over 100 levels, will ALWAYS have the advantage whether it is defending or attacking. If a low level can beat a much higher level player, he should be rewarded. Using the excuse that the low level player beat a suicide suit should make no difference. It isn't the low level player's fault that the higher level player CHOSE to wear a highly vulnerable setup.

#96 fs_gravely

fs_gravely
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:34

Is this a fair system that rewards the merits of each situation? A higher level player, especially when the level difference is over 100 levels, will ALWAYS have the advantage whether it is defending or attacking. If a low level can beat a much higher level player, he should be rewarded. Using the excuse that the low level player beat a suicide suit should make no difference. It isn't the low level player's fault that the higher level player CHOSE to wear a highly vulnerable setup.


Your potential for gain shouldn't be astronomically higher than another player, though.

If you choose to wear a weak setup that even a level 20 could 10-0, no one will be able to grab your rating, because your (lack of) levels will protect you.

Sublevel penalties are fair. Bonuses aren't.

#97 psycho3103

psycho3103

    New Member

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 42 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:36

So an example from my personal experience:

As a lvl 32 player, I took on a 10 kill bounty on a lvl 426 player and he had PvP rating of ~970 and I had a rating of ~1100. Since he switched gear two times during the bounty, I lost 6 combats losing 20 PvP rating each time and by the end of the bounty, his PvP rating was 1030 and my rating was 1060 for a net loss of about 40 PvP rating.

I got back to 1200 PvP rating later in the day and a lvl 300 took a bounty on me with a PvP rating of 960 and beat me 10 straight times and gained 140 PvP rating with his superior gear, level up points and guild bonuses.

Is this a fair system that rewards the merits of each situation? A higher level player, especially when the level difference is over 100 levels, will ALWAYS have the advantage whether it is defending or attacking. If a low level can beat a much higher level player, he should be rewarded. Using the excuse that the low level player beat a suicide suit should make no difference. It isn't the low level player's fault that the higher level player CHOSE to wear a highly vulnerable setup.


PFFT :)

Posted Image

#98 fs_boscosuma

fs_boscosuma
  • Guests

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:38

So an example from my personal experience:

As a lvl 32 player, I took on a 10 kill bounty on a lvl 426 player and he had PvP rating of ~970 and I had a rating of ~1100. Since he switched gear two times during the bounty, I lost 6 combats losing 20 PvP rating each time and by the end of the bounty, his PvP rating was 1030 and my rating was 1060 for a net loss of about 40 PvP rating.

I got back to 1200 PvP rating later in the day and a lvl 300 took a bounty on me with a PvP rating of 960 and beat me 10 straight times and gained 140 PvP rating with his superior gear, level up points and guild bonuses.

Is this a fair system that rewards the merits of each situation? A higher level player, especially when the level difference is over 100 levels, will ALWAYS have the advantage whether it is defending or attacking. If a low level can beat a much higher level player, he should be rewarded. Using the excuse that the low level player beat a suicide suit should make no difference. It isn't the low level player's fault that the higher level player CHOSE to wear a highly vulnerable setup.



There should be some reward, but the reward should be less on level and more on PvP rating. You were able to beat a player much higher than you, which is an admirable thing, but level should have very little do with PvP rating. PvP rating should be on its own.

It is not the lower level's fault or higher levels fault for the gear they wear, the money they spend on the game, or the setup's they use when hunting, clearing bounties or what ever. If level has to be a factor, it should be the smallest factor over the entire mathematical equation for PvP.

#99 BlackSun

BlackSun

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 134 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:40

I really hope you dont undo these changes, particularly pvp points transfer limited to bounty winner and limiting stamina. These were both very positive changes.

#100 Khanate

Khanate

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,829 posts

Posted 12 August 2010 - 22:40

100 level bands? Yes 25% of the player's level is 100 level at 400. And 200 levels at level 800. But any reduction should go both ways.

And about 20% of a normal hit. We're gonna need decimals or to alter rating by multiplying base rating and rating traded from normal hits by 10 (as I've mentioned numerous times).



That works for the first hundred levels (and thus band) but not for the portions thereafter. a 900 can farm a 600 easy, and they'd be in the 50% band clear to level 1050, not in the 75% band where they belong.

As for the decimals/increased amount of rating, why not just round down? Most rating transfers are for 9, 10, 20, 42 points - 2, 2, 4, 8.


1) This is PvP, it's a bit more dynamic than the arena. It's rock paper scissor, sure the level 900's defense set is better than the 600's defense set, but if the 600 goes for the right set he can win. And 600 is above the 25% threshold so would be under a penalty.

2) So on the board rating transfers of 1 to 4 are 0? Makes sense.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: