Jump to content

Photo

Game Update v1.8


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

#81 rowbeth

rowbeth

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,108 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 08:53

Methinks there are going to be a lot of people not happy with xp loss throughout the band...


Just means us levelers need to wear an offline set. Then you can hope people wont hit you. + just dont hold much gold... most wont go at you if u dont hold much gold


There are no offline sets good enough to stop PVP hits, and so what is the point? Even the most defensive equipment sets available to me can easily be overcome by a single, relatively cheap, potion. And at higher levels gold stops being any incentive for PVP hits. If gold loss were still the main driver for PVP then I could live with it as I then control my risk. But all the hits I have had over the last 200 levels have been motivated by PVP-rating and prestige, for which I have no way of controlling the risk.

Definitely a lot of unhappy people about this change!

#82 Anemie

Anemie

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 08:58

I simply cannot understand this drive to inflict experience loss on everyone. I chat to a huge number of people who are simply depressed by PVP hits and are rapidly losing their interest in this game. Most of them do not inhabit the forum and so have not fed their views into these discussions. Those that do (like me) have learnt that anti-PVP views are too easily overlooked. I got extremely close to leaving this game under the last PVP system - and only stayed because the small number of people within the narrow band for experience loss actually stopped when I asked them nicely. With these wider bands I think it very unlikely that personal requests will work well enough to keep my playing FS.

Please: lose the experience loss from PVP or provide a realistic and sustainable opt out

XP loss is needed for 1 mayor reason(there are other reasons but this one is most important in my opinion).
PvP-ers can now hit levelers and other PvP-ers and take XP which means riskier hits,higher chance to lose levels and rating.
Before this it was all about safe hitting of those who most likely won't bounty you-and this isn't PvP(at least not how I see PvP)....

#83 iut044

iut044

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 396 posts
  • Badge

Posted 02 April 2011 - 09:09

Hi all,


PvP Rating is now no longer transferred unless the target player has been active within the last 48 hours.

So you are encouraging players to be less active .

There are no offline sets good enough to stop PVP hits, and so what is the point? Even the most defensive equipment sets available to me can easily be overcome by a single, relatively cheap, potion. And at higher levels gold stops being any incentive for PVP hits. If gold loss were still the main driver for PVP then I could live with it as I then control my risk. But all the hits I have had over the last 200 levels have been motivated by PVP-rating and prestige, for which I have no way of controlling the risk.

Definitely a lot of unhappy people about this change!


Agreed the best solution is to make the ladder optin or opt out .

XP loss is needed for 1 mayor reason(there are other reasons but this one is most important in my opinion).
PvP-ers can now hit levelers and other PvP-ers and take XP which means riskier hits,higher chance to lose levels and rating.
Before this it was all about safe hitting of those who most likely won't bounty you-and this isn't PvP(at least not how I see PvP)....


Is it fair that levelers are 100 stammed 3 or 4 times a week ?

#84 Anemie

Anemie

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 09:19

Is it fair that levelers are 100 stammed 3 or 4 times a week ?

Well,it depends,you have probably heard all the arguments against and for the option to hit anyone who is active...
I wouldn't be so against the option to opt-out at cheaper price-Opt out would mean that you can't lose or gain rating(you would still be able to lose gold and XP)-and if you attack someone(through BB or PvP)-you would be back on the ladder until you buy opt-out again(after the next reset)....
(This is just what I think,others may be against it)...

#85 LLAP

LLAP

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 09:37


Is it fair that levelers are 100 stammed 3 or 4 times a week ?

Well,it depends,you have probably heard all the arguments against and for the option to hit anyone who is active...
I wouldn't be so against the option to opt-out at cheaper price-Opt out would mean that you can't lose or gain rating(you would still be able to lose gold and XP)-and if you attack someone(through BB or PvP)-you would be back on the ladder until you buy opt-out again(after the next reset)....
(This is just what I think,others may be against it)...


the opt-out of not loosing rating but still XP/Gold... Seems wrong to me..
When someone at 1000 gets hit for 10stam usually looses 13rating (atleast thats what I usually get..)
That player loosing there XP/gold and not the rating might still make then a target for someone else whilst if they lost that 13 they would be less of a target, therefor less attacks as rating transfer will be even low..
Again, just what I think, other may be againt it too, lol.


#86 fs_nthnclls

fs_nthnclls
  • Guests

Posted 02 April 2011 - 11:23

woo-hoo!

#87 Tastria

Tastria

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 513 posts
  • United States of America

Posted 02 April 2011 - 12:24

As a non pvper I am really ambivilant towards those changes. I sort of liked it when I got hit, and all I lost was gold, or rating, but not xp. Yes, Yes, Yes! I know that this is a pvp game for better or for worse, but to cater almost exclusively to those who appreciate this aspect is not a gambit that attracts newer players. I have lost count of the number of times I've made the ladder just by getting hit. (made #10, how's that for irony!) Instead of just bash, bash, bash, how about just a tad of battle tactics instead of how many potions you can swig, or how many structures your guild has maxed. At any rate, your working on the game, it's not static, and that is GOOD!

#88 Anemie

Anemie

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 12:31

PvP Rating is now no longer transferred unless the target player has been active within the last 48 hours.

This is not true,at least not for me,,I just gained rating from player that is offline for more than 48 hours...

#89 RJEM

RJEM

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 02 April 2011 - 12:56

Ok, collating information from posts above into one place for HCS to look at (I think one of them will be checking in later today based on what they said last night):

- The XP loss reduction needs to be removed from the bounty board to allow suitable punishment!
- The 'offline for 48 hours' implementation needs to be checked again to make sure it's working.

As primarily a leveller I don't really expect a major increase in incoming hits as a result of the band expansion provided I don't offend the wrong people or fail to keep basic precautions active.

Hopefully we can see the Bounty Board restored so that the new risk from taking XP is matched by a continued risk of losing something because of that!

#90 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

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

Posted 02 April 2011 - 12:56

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=102148


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: