Jump to content

Photo

PvP Update Tweaks (PvP Protection)


  • Please log in to reply
286 replies to this topic

Poll: Should we tweak the PvP Protection? (201 member(s) have cast votes)

Should we tweak the PvP Protection?

  1. Voted Its perfect as it is (95 votes [47.26%])

    Percentage of vote: 47.26%

  2. Voted Change it to allow gold loss (106 votes [52.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 52.74%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:44

Do you approve of the new PvP Protection addition to the game? Do you feel it should stay as it is or only protect against XP Loss?

#2 fs_avalbane

fs_avalbane
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:46

I voted to allow gold theft.

Let's be perfectly honest here...

MOST levelers are mainly concerned with their "precious" exp, while MOST PvP'ers, PvP for the gold. Let the levelers have their exp while letting the PvP'ers have their gold. Seems like a fair trade, imo.

#3 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:48

voted to add gold loss as i see it it is important to the game

#4 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:50

By the way hoof thanks for taking the time.. many props to you for reading threw everything to this point.. lol it can be a B**** of a read XD

#5 021962

021962

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 968 posts
  • Badge

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:51

Do you approve of the new PvP Protection addition to the game? Do you feel it should stay as it is or only protect against XP Loss?


The only way to make this fair across the board for the offline player is make EVERY hit Bountyable.

Right now you can 100 stam a player every hour for hours on end. They can only bounty ONCE. How are they going to get their PvP points back or even get a smidgen of satisfaction from that? (Hey that would be a great tactic for levelers getting hit by PVPer's. Your going to lose 5 levels. But they will never make the Dominance medal)

YOUR OPT OUT IS A JOKE.

25 fsp for xp lock has always been a part of the game and a whole lot cheaper. Only thing you lose is XP gain. So don't upgrade that. Put it in Max Stam instead.

#6 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPip
  • 8,357 posts
  • Badge
  • United Kingdom

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:53

We would change the FSP cost if it only protected XP otherwise it wouldn't be worthwhile.

#7 ZidaneT

ZidaneT

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:53

leave it as it is. one of the primary reasons i went idle is because i got tired of being constantly pounced on mid-levelling because someone wanted to get a few k of gold.

sure, i see the argument that pvp is a gold sink, but if the game economy is so fragile that a few percent of players avoiding pvp will completely destabilise the entire game beyond any recovery, then there's bigger problems than gold sinks.

#8 Kedyn

Kedyn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 698 posts
  • Badge
  • United States of America

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:53

Voted for allow gold loss.

Levelers care for their gold, but they care more for their XP. Anyone, and everyone, should be able to be hit for gold whether they have pennys or millions. It is their fault for carrying that amount of gold. If you're really worried about it, don't care it. If you allow the PVP protection to include gold, then all you do is protect one person in a guild and allow them to hold all gold. You'll see people holding 10 million or 100 million just to laugh at the people that can't touch them.

If gold hits are protected, the marketplace is going to rise again in prices, and then people will complain about market prices going too high. Leave the gold to people who like to steal it, and allow the person holding to understand they were holding too much at that point in time.

#9 livingsin

livingsin

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 796 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:54

it shouldnt exist in the first place....you guys said an opt out would NEVER exist numerous times.

with that said...its here just tweak to allow for gold loss...pvp is the largest gold sink in the game...I prefer to hit for gold not rating(usually). so dont take this aspect from some of the pvp'rs who still enjoy it.

#10 fs_avalbane

fs_avalbane
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:54

We would change the FSP cost if it only protected XP otherwise it wouldn't be worthwhile.


This would be fine, imho. As long as I get my gold that I wanna hit them for. Feel free to reduce it if gold gain is re-implemented.

#11 Bunnybee

Bunnybee

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 367 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:55

I voted to allow for gold loss. I am against any sort of opt out whatsoever, but I realize my opinion is pretty far from center, into the pro-pvp side of things. I know you guys are working hard to make everyone happy, or as many people as possible. At least leaving gold loss seems a better happy-ish medium to me than a complete opt out.

#12 jsustin212

jsustin212

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,551 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:56

voted to allow gold loss as it is just one of the major gold sinks in the game

jsus_zpsa8d5d247.png


 


#13 Maehdros

Maehdros

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,329 posts
  • Canada

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:57

goldzzzzz shiny shiny gold.. I think you know my vote ;) I will meet in the middle... gold loss is fine by me

#14 fs_valestra

fs_valestra
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:58

We would change the FSP cost if it only protected XP otherwise it wouldn't be worthwhile.



Works for me. Make the protection MUCH cheaper, and watching my gold is my own concern? I'm good with it.

#15 fs_fradiavolo

fs_fradiavolo
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 21:59

I voted to allow gold theft.

Let's be perfectly honest here...

MOST levelers are mainly concerned with their "precious" exp, while MOST PvP'ers, PvP for the gold. Let the levelers have their exp while letting the PvP'ers have their gold. Seems like a fair trade, imo.



Agree, but make sure a level 780 cannot rob a level 701 or vice versa ..

#16 ZidaneT

ZidaneT

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 22:00

another thought... if you allow gold loss under pvp protection, then what exactly is the point of pvp protection? xp-lock already protects xp...

as far as i can tell, gold protection is the only reason to actually have a pvp opt-out, and it's a good reason at that.

#17 fs_c00k13puss

fs_c00k13puss
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 22:03

If i'm going to pay 200 FSP i better have my gold protected..

#18 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 02 December 2010 - 22:03

I'm not a fan of the opt out. Someone mentioned before anyone protected just becomes a gold bank, circumventing the deposits upgrade albeit an expensive one. At the very least gold hits and durability loss need to remain susceptible to attacks.

I do like seeing who is opting out and for how long, the new scarlet anti-PvP badge.

[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


#19 winemaker

winemaker

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 445 posts
  • Badge

Posted 02 December 2010 - 22:03

whats the point of having 2 exp protections/locks in the game?

#20 fs_ldudearino

fs_ldudearino
  • Guests

Posted 02 December 2010 - 22:04

a quote worth note

if everyone started with a PvP rating of 0, a lot of the problems would go away, instantly :)


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: