How to make relics less over powered - ideas needed
#1
fs_tangtop
Posted 10 February 2011 - 02:28
Most people agree that relics are too powerful and need to be tweaked.
This thread is to allow the community to throw out ideas for change and analyze those ideas for possible pitfalls, etc. Please feel free to add ideas or constructively criticize ideas that others post here. Hopefully we will end up with a bunch of ideas that hoof etc can use to implement change.
Personally I think it is too easy to get 20% bonus. I think a 5-6% bonus should be typical (e.g. two relics), and the max 20% should be almost impossible to attain or at least sustain.
My idea:
1. Empowering should be just one step, a relic is either empowered or it is not, no need to have 10 steps for it. That is just unnecessary button clicking and page refreshing and I hate that.
2. Empowering a relic should take stats from their standard 1% to a max of 3%. Enhancements would get +10 (e.g. dodge), stamina gain and XP gain should double.
3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
4. The max number of relics a guild can hold should be increased to 8. This could either be for the current max level of the structure, or another level of the structure could be added. This would allow 7 relics to be held fully empowered to get the maximum 20%, or a full set of 8 un-empowered could still get 8% theoretically.
5. Randomize the relics a little more at high levels. e.g. Make it so that only 4 of the 5 stats have bonuses, add in some higher xp gain ones for variety. Vary the empowerment's some more too. Throw in some minuses also (e.g. +1% Att, +1% Def, +1% Dam, -1% Arm, +1% HP, -5 Breaker).
What I imagine would happen if this was implemented would be that things would stay about where they are right now. A greedy guild might go and try and hold 3-4 relics, but would probably suffer as a result. Smaller guilds and lower level guilds will not be hurt as much as they are by not having 20% bonus (instead they will not have 6%, but could likely hold one relic to get at least 1% like they do currently).
#2
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 03:17
#3
fs_tangtop
Posted 10 February 2011 - 03:22
The problem with this is that guilds only need to hold 1 relic to achieve this, very easy to defend and maintain, and does not function as the gold sink it was intended to be. Plus I think that 10% easy stats is still too easy to get. It should be harder to get that 10%.The max amount that they should effect your stats needs to be changed...i find it astonishing that they have been this over powered for this long. I feel like no one should be able to get more than plus 10% per stat. i dont even see how its justified that plus 30% is ok, not everyone wants to be in a huge guild and all its doing is reinfrorcing the people who spend big buck on the game and screwing over the new players and putting them at even more of a disadvantage (if the overpowered low level gear wasnt enough) so heres your solution : LOWER THE MAX % INCREASE TO 10%
#4
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 03:34
#5
fs_tangtop
Posted 10 February 2011 - 03:49
The max currently is 20% btw.ok but it doesnt matter how hard it is because by hard you mean it will cost more, and im sure you know that people are willing to spend whatever it takes to have any advantage over anyone else... i dont want to be in a huge guild and i shouldnt be at a disadvantage because of it, when im on the pvp ladder and see someone stats who are 40 levels lower than me and thing "wow those are some awesome stats" and then realize its only because they have plus 30% added to there stats it really pisses me off. And i cant blame people for taking advantage of it, i blame the cows for letting it get that bad. i just feel like people are buying there stats with fsp. I actually intended to come and create a thread about the relics and i saw your post. Your right, something does need to change but i dont feel the the price needs to change, but how much it can effect your stats.
#6
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 03:56
The max currently is 20% btw.ok but it doesnt matter how hard it is because by hard you mean it will cost more, and im sure you know that people are willing to spend whatever it takes to have any advantage over anyone else... i dont want to be in a huge guild and i shouldnt be at a disadvantage because of it, when im on the pvp ladder and see someone stats who are 40 levels lower than me and thing "wow those are some awesome stats" and then realize its only because they have plus 30% added to there stats it really pisses me off. And i cant blame people for taking advantage of it, i blame the cows for letting it get that bad. i just feel like people are buying there stats with fsp. I actually intended to come and create a thread about the relics and i saw your post. Your right, something does need to change but i dont feel the the price needs to change, but how much it can effect your stats.
yes sorry about that, got a little carried away without thinking about it, as you can tell i dont spend to much time worrying about if my relic is empowered....since i dont have a stat increasing one because they are all taken up by the enormous guilds
#7
Posted 10 February 2011 - 04:07
I fought for the reduction of empowerment from an absurd 60% bonus. We got 20%. Ok, overpowered? Slightly. The cost to empower should afford guilds that bonus however.3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
I wholeheartedly agree that the costs to empower should equate to the number of players that benefit, the same as mercenaries and some structures. It makes absolutely no sense that a 3 player guild should have to pay the same as a 128 player guild. I think this idea alone would be a small, smart, and positive step to better relics.
[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
#8
fs_chibibucky
Posted 10 February 2011 - 04:20
1. Empowering should be just one step, a relic is either empowered or it is not, no need to have 10 steps for it. That is just unnecessary button clicking and page refreshing and I hate that.
2. Empowering a relic should take stats from their standard 1% to a max of 3%. Enhancements would get +10 (e.g. dodge), stamina gain and XP gain should double.
3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
to add to these 3 ideas. no "up front" cost to the empowering. instead a very high hourly cost. if a guild hold a relic for 60 days they pay more for the bonus than if they empower it fully and lose in after an hour.
#9
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 04:25
to add to these 3 ideas. no "up front" cost to the empowering. instead a very high hourly cost. if a guild hold a relic for 60 days they pay more for the bonus than if they empower it fully and lose in after an hour.
i like that idea, and make having the full 10% something horribly high, like higher than the total of all of a guilds structures....that way if they reaaaallly want the stats they can pay for it, and of course have that price also based off how many people are in the guild. but im guessing guilds would just start making pacts to trade relics every couple days so that they never reach that high of a cost...
#10
Posted 10 February 2011 - 04:38
I live in hope that one day this will be addressed.I wholeheartedly agree that the costs to empower should equate to the number of players that benefit, the same as mercenaries and some structures. It makes absolutely no sense that a 3 player guild should have to pay the same as a 128 player guild. I think this idea alone would be a small, smart, and positive step to better relics.
#11
fs_sollimaw
Posted 10 February 2011 - 05:02
Personally I think it is too easy to get 20% bonus. I think a 5-6% bonus should be typical (e.g. two relics), and the max 20% should be almost impossible to attain or at least sustain.
20% bonus should be nearly impossible to obtain,or be horridly overpriced, but 10% from 1 relic is fair. Everyone who says that the game is too easy needs to leave their guilds and fully empowered relics and try hunting without.
My idea:
1. Empowering should be just one step, a relic is either empowered or it is not, no need to have 10 steps for it. That is just unnecessary button clicking and page refreshing and I hate that.
The multiple steps sinks more gold than a single step would because you can fail on any of those steps.
2. Empowering a relic should take stats from their standard 1% to a max of 3%. Enhancements would get +10 (e.g. dodge), stamina gain and XP gain should double.
See above.
3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
I disagree. The costs should be the same across the board for every guild regardless of size. The game should encourage guilds to become large because it sinks more FSP into upgrades.
4. The max number of relics a guild can hold should be increased to 8. This could either be for the current max level of the structure, or another level of the structure could be added. This would allow 7 relics to be held fully empowered to get the maximum 20%, or a full set of 8 un-empowered could still get 8% theoretically.
Guilds can hold enough relics. There need to be more relics worth taking at lower levels and less at higher levels. There are far too many relics above level 700 and not enough players that high.
5. Randomize the relics a little more at high levels. e.g. Make it so that only 4 of the 5 stats have bonuses, add in some higher xp gain ones for variety. Vary the empowerment's some more too. Throw in some minuses also (e.g. +1% Att, +1% Def, +1% Dam, -1% Arm, +1% HP, -5 Breaker).
Agreed. I would take it further and reduce many of the high level relics down to only 1 or 2 stats to keep them in line with the lower level relics.
What I imagine would happen if this was implemented would be that things would stay about where they are right now. A greedy guild might go and try and hold 3-4 relics, but would probably suffer as a result. Smaller guilds and lower level guilds will not be hurt as much as they are by not having 20% bonus (instead they will not have 6%, but could likely hold one relic to get at least 1% like they do currently).
I have a very different outlook of what would happen. I see lots of complaining by all but those in the highest level guilds. This doesnt benefit a growing guild. It only hampers their growth even more than the current system.
#12
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 05:14
#13
Posted 10 February 2011 - 05:29
Would you disagree because you have more than 100 active(less than 7 days) players in your guild? Sure... Must be fun and expensive hiring mercenaries for you guys.I disagree. The costs should be the same across the board for every guild regardless of size. The game should encourage guilds to become large because it sinks more FSP into upgrades.3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
but would probably suffer as a result. Smaller guilds and lower level guilds will not be hurt as much as they are by not having 20% bonus (instead they will not have 6%, but could likely hold one relic to get at least 1% like they do currently).
[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
#14
Posted 10 February 2011 - 05:34
Cheaper than upgrading the guild storeWould you disagree because you have more than 100 active(less than 7 days) players in your guild? Sure... Must be fun and expensive hiring mercenaries for you guys.I disagree. The costs should be the same across the board for every guild regardless of size. The game should encourage guilds to become large because it sinks more FSP into upgrades.3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
but would probably suffer as a result. Smaller guilds and lower level guilds will not be hurt as much as they are by not having 20% bonus (instead they will not have 6%, but could likely hold one relic to get at least 1% like they do currently).
#15
fs_sollimaw
Posted 10 February 2011 - 07:56
Would you disagree because you have more than 100 active(less than 7 days) players in your guild? Sure... Must be fun and expensive hiring mercenaries for you guys.I disagree. The costs should be the same across the board for every guild regardless of size. The game should encourage guilds to become large because it sinks more FSP into upgrades.3. Empowering a relic should cost based on the number of players in the guild online in the last 7 days (i.e. ignore retired players as they do not get a bonus from the relic). A 50 man guild should pay roughly what it does currently to fully empower a relic. A 25 man guild should pay half that.
Dont need mercenaries when you have enough people to join your group.
The point is that the game needs to encourage guilds to become large to spend more on upgrades.
#16
Posted 10 February 2011 - 08:41
Since you avoided answering my first question I'll ask another. Why does the game need larger guilds? I believe guilds have always been too large, way too large. If your logic is that it encourages players to spend more, then by all means let's see some value added back into certain upgrades like gold gain.Would you disagree because you have more than 100 active(less than 7 days) players in your guild? Sure... Must be fun and expensive hiring mercenaries for you guys.
Dont need mercenaries when you have enough people to join your group.
The point is that the game needs to encourage guilds to become large to spend more on upgrades.
On the contrary the devs have been devaluing upgrades like deposits per day and refill bank deposits with gold being protected in the new PvP Protection upgrade which only a very few use. Only one out of 128 needs to act as a guild's de facto bank, by depositing or exchanging gold to safe FSP for others. So now there's much less incentive for all players in those guilds to use those two upgrades when you have a protected banker in your guild.
I've always thought costs should be based on the amount of players that benefit, just like many structures and mercenaries work. But of course, you're in a huge guild so of course you want to keep costs low. It's self-serving. I want the costs to be fair and appropriate to players in large and small guilds. It's much more difficult to naturally fund the costs to empower the smaller the guild.
Notice Tangtop suggested that the cost be based on the number of players active shorter then 7 days? That's because players inactive longer are not benefiting and are ineligible from GvGs. The players active less then 7 days are still benefiting, and so is their whole guild. I agree with him.
[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
#17
fs_coyotik
Posted 10 February 2011 - 09:03
If the empower cost is dropped reasonably (I agree with your suggestion re active member count), this could lead to breaking the naturally formed relic pacts for high level guilds.
And I very much like the idea of hourly upkeep for holding an empowered relic. Maybe even most of the fixed cost would be gone. That would be another step towards breaking the relic pacts.
#18
fs_coyotik
Posted 10 February 2011 - 09:10
The point is that the game needs to encourage guilds to become large to spend more on upgrades.
Actually not. If a fixed total number of players is split into more smaller guilds, the total spent on guild upgrades is likely to be higher than if they're in few big guilds. The only thing where big guild generates more upgrades is having the 8 "free" guild member slots for every 124 players, that's 160 FSP per guild. 3 extra structures are 225 FSP, so if there were 2x62 members instead, they'd only need to have 3 structures more than the default limit to make it more profitable for HCS.
#19
Posted 10 February 2011 - 10:23
#20
fs_sexyman08
Posted 10 February 2011 - 13:01
The point is that the game needs to encourage guilds to become large to spend more on upgrades.
i know someone already addressed this but im just going to reinforce it, its not like smaller guilds dont buy all the upgrades, i consider myself to be in a small guild we have 30 members and yet we are well on our way to getting all the structures that benefit us and im sure we will have them eventually....so you all get what im saying.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

