Official Suggestion : PvP Improvements (rev. 2)
#501
Posted 12 September 2011 - 16:22
#502
Posted 12 September 2011 - 16:38
#503
Posted 12 September 2011 - 17:16
HCS should really consider removing PvP Prestige gain from each bounty win/clear...
I don't think a good idea, many players that got medal BM crystal clean bounties to get prestige
Neither do I, it may be only 10 gained but for some that is as far into PvP some will go, through the earing it through the BB.
It was sarcastic, as much as it may have not been apparant, with people saying that Bountyhunting isnt PvP.. While, any Player attacking another sounds PvP, to me.
#504
Posted 12 September 2011 - 17:18
in my opinion PvP prestige has to be gain in any action when it comes to PvP,( ladder, bounties and hit gold )
It is, and should stay that way, on the Bounty Board one each win is gained and any other PvP 10 will be gained each hit every 3 days from the same person..
#505
Posted 12 September 2011 - 18:16
There is already a ladder for BHers. The BB should have nothing to do with PvP ladder. Mixing the two always leads to farming. We tried this, it failed miserably - let's move on!
1) It didn't fail miserably, it's still in place
2) Radneto implemented a form of it in the first post, I merely offered an alternative way that it would be more balanced and also make clearing bounties more urgent. Bounties remaining on the BB for long periods of time has been brought up many times as a concern of some. This placates them to a point.
#506
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:18
I'll post some comments/feedback soon
#507
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:19
You can only gain PvP Rating from an online (last activity within 15 mins) player and the normal rules of 1 hour per attack apply.
Ouch that sucks for the higher levels, the chance of them to be online at the same time gets lower the higher you are because there are less people of that level. So PvP will be dead at higher levels.
Oh dear must have missed that one Radneto, getting old aint good
What would you prefer? Maybe activity within the last hour?
#508
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:20
I do love the idea of using gold instead of bounty tickets 8) that i give a big +1 too
It should help make the bounty board more active and also create a new gold sink
#509
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:21
Range is still too much, trust me, for the good of the game +/- 10 levels is what is needed
If someone wants a bigger range they can bounty hunt
Why this small? You don't want PvP? Might be good for the lower levels, but for the higher levels this means less targets and at the top almost none.
How about keeping the range smaller at lower levels (e.g. +/-10 for under level 200) and increasing it to +/-25 for level 200+?
#510
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:22
I assume you'll be adding new rewards as well to boost interest(sad to say FSP drive the game and alot won't risk xp for the current rewards)
We'll definitely be adding new PvP rewards
#511
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:28
]Discouraging the 100 stam for sheer PvP rating should do the trick for people not interested in PvP. By making a 10 stam worth more per stamina this person would only be hit by numerous 10 stam hits. I stick by my idea of having a 10 stam hit more valuable than a 100 stam hit. A flurry of 100 stams hourly is going to have the levelers (and their $$) heading for the door in hordes.
rewarding a ten stam more then 100 would kill the BB, promote trading between friends, and negate the whole risk factor. I know players dont like being 100 stammed, but its the risk of playing this game without protection, or being xp locked. The BB is there for that reason. Post bounties , and smash someone who repeatedly hits. have friends help if necessary.
Is the issue more that a player may be attacked with 100 stamina once every hour for PvP Rating? What if we limited the PvP Rating gain from each player to once every 24 hours, once every ladder reset or something along those lines (outwith the bounty board of course)?
#512
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:33
Maybe attacking other players who have opted in would give more rating? Wouldn't work without a twist like that...
Sounds like a good idea
#513
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:34
Please continue discussion here!
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=104235
[locked]
You are not authorised to read this forum. * scratches head *
That was the link to revision one of this idea - this thread has replaced it
#514
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:35
Note 3: You can only gain PvP Rating from an online (last activity within 15 mins) player and the normal rules of 1 hour per attack apply.
normally i refresh the page every now and then when i sit at work to check if someone in my guild needs any buffs.... i guess this suggestion pretty much means i will stop doing that... or why should i make myself a pvp target?
I see what your saying - maybe we could exclude certain actions (such as buffing) from what is deemed activity - unless anyone has any other ideas?
#515
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:37
How about keeping the range smaller at lower levels (e.g. +/-10 for under level 200) and increasing it to +/-25 for level 200+?
Will there still be an opt in, opt out?
If theres no opt in, then range should remain +/- 10 hoof. anything more then that is bad for the game ( hor's tweak to your proposed idea last week was: if your in the top ten of a band, your able to hit others in the top ten..regardless of level difference)
As for adding new rewards, please wait until some sort of new system is agreed upon or discussed by the community. Nothings going to be perfect.But dont rush the release of new gear.
The issue is with the farming of players. If there is no opt in... we dont want players to be driven away. Tho many have stated ( and been against( the fact that anyone can be hit for pvp. They just shouldnt have to deal with being hit every day. Players would simply farm a few players, be it friends, or someone totally innocent. My suggestion was only gain rating/ pvp score from someone once a reset ( non transferable, nothing for the defender on a loss on an off the board hit)
On the board score gained is drastically reduced, but still awarded to promote clearing of bounties.
Many agreed the suggestion/ Thread i had running was pretty much how it should be. Hors tweak to your suggestion is fair also. But a bit different.
#516
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:39
#517
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:40
Seriously, you guys should sit down at a conference table and think about how players will exploit any changes you propose before you propose them. Players are smart, they always do a min-max analysis on the rules, you should too.
We do
That is also one of the reasons we like to post major ideas/changes on the forum first - so we can gain feedback from the community and discover any issues with the idea before implementing it
#518
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:41
How about keeping the range smaller at lower levels (e.g. +/-10 for under level 200) and increasing it to +/-25 for level 200+?
Will there still be an opt in, opt out?
Would you prefer we kept the opt-in/out?
#519
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:43
How about keeping the range smaller at lower levels (e.g. +/-10 for under level 200) and increasing it to +/-25 for level 200+?
Will there still be an opt in, opt out?
Would you prefer we kept the opt-in/out?
With my proposed system of One off the board hit ( gaining rating) per reset. Any other hit is only gold and xp. Then there wouldnt be a need for an opt in opt out.
Hors idea of only gaining a low score from someone who has no rating ( ie: they havent attacked anyone) Once a reset also works.
#520
Posted 12 September 2011 - 19:44
Let's punish players that play more frequently. Let's punish players for being higher levels than others. Let's encourage farming of rating and multis.
-1
What changes would you like to see instead?
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

This topic is locked