Jump to content

Photo

Official Suggestion : PvP Improvements (rev. 2)


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

Poll: Do you like this idea? (182 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you like this idea?

  1. Voted Yes (70 votes [38.46%])

    Percentage of vote: 38.46%

  2. Voted No (112 votes [61.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 61.54%

Vote

#161 Kontiki

Kontiki

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 471 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 01:12

If you have zero rating there is a SIGNIFICANT reduction(50%) in the rating that can be gained from you .. also You can only be hit once every ladder for rating if you have 0 rating
i.e. you aren't pvping people

er... this comment is referring to the changes I made not the OP

Replying to the bold part, if rating can be gained from you once every week if you do not participate in PvP (score 0), maybe the rating gain should be much lower for attacking these players? I picture a small group hurrying to farm them before others get a chance to hit them right after every ladder reset... Or did I miss something?


Clarifying,
I can gain rating from player XYZ only 1 time per reset.
Player ABC can also gain rating 1 time from player XYZ
As well as player 123, and all other players

But if player XYZ never pvps the rating I would gain from them would be half of what I can gain from a person that did pvp.

10 stam hit = 5 rating + (5 rating * 0/ My rating)
There is a significant advantage to hitting another person that is PvPing instead of some one not.


Additionally idle 48 hour or more can not be hit for rating.

I can agree with this.

So, a couple more questions for ya :P
- I could only gain rating once from every player in my range, or does it only count for people not participating in PvP? I mean, could I hit other active PvPers for rating every hour? Just thinking, a lot of players participate in PvP by making the occasional gold hit or clearing a bounty now and then. I'm not so sure they would appreciate being a highly wanted target for every hour of a week.

- How will the suggestion deal with XP lock? Personally I would like to see the XP lock removed if you initiate an attack.

#162 dowuones

dowuones

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 01:19

As first thought ive to say it seems a bit too complicated

Also as already many pointed out, farmimg players who have no idea of whats happening, are not interested in PvPing, or dont like it, its a serious problem.

In the past, with rating loss, players who dont PvP were hitted once every reset, they lost rating and were no interesting target anymore (and this already created problems, troubles, forum fight, discussions, complains and everything that i can say is not good to see in a game)

Without rating loss this seems to be even worse. Even if a single player will farm them only once per reset, if there are only 5 players going fro the ladder, you will be hit 5 times, if there are 10 players, you will lose 1 level per reset, if there are 30 players you will probably quit the game.

About activity: if you can be hit only when online, whats the best choice for a player not interested in PvP? Max you stam and log in only once a week or every other week? The first thing this game need is more activity, not the contrary.

I understand PvP ladder is not currently working in the best possible way, but i feel this change would bring more troubles than benefit to the game.

#163 RED

RED

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 327 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 01:34

i havent had time to read everything here and will eventually,,,one point here, without an out clause this game will die quick as most of the donations come from levlers so this needs to be thought over very well,,,,,


with the new buffs it is impossible to defend when offline so we`re going the right direction here from what i see

anything done looks like farming is gonna be rampant also, so 10 lvls should remain,,,

#164 Maehdros

Maehdros

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,329 posts
  • Canada

Posted 10 September 2011 - 01:47

- How will the suggestion deal with XP lock? Personally I would like to see the XP lock removed if you initiate an attack.



I suggested to Hor that similar to pvp protection, xp lock is gone when you attack someone, but could return next reset ( until you hit someone again)

#165 shindrak

shindrak

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,940 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:05

I voted "NO". Sure this would get pvp and the bounty board jumping, for a little while at least. But is it going to be good for the game as a whole? I dont think so. Is it going to get more players interested in pvp? maybe for a short period. Will it help bring more players into the game and help retain the ones we have? I doubt it. What I see happening is the "pvpers" will be hitting everyone in their range as hard as they can, and as often as they can. The easy targets are going to get pummeled hardest, and they're likely the ones that have little interest in pvp. The well established, well geared players with lots of fsp and exp to throw around are going to dominate. Kind of like they do now in some bands. But at least it will make them all have to put in an effort for their rewards. This update as it laid out right now would do nothing much more than harm to the community.

+1 ... pvpers wants it like they want so they enjoy over other ppl have no chance to try this aspect

#166 Wiivja

Wiivja

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,175 posts
  • Badge

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:07

If you remove XP loss from pvp attacks the levelers would be happy I think. Else removing the opt out of pvp ladder will make alot of people angry and they might quit the game. I have spoken with several who would rather quit than being attacked all the time losing xp

#167 Woulfe

Woulfe

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:07

My biggest worry is that with over 1,000 people online only 80 have found this issue worthy of a vote, and even fewer commented. And we wonder why FS is slowly dying. I don't have any solutions but I sincerely hope that we can work together and get it right.

#168 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

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

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:22

My biggest worry is that with over 1,000 people online only 80 have found this issue worthy of a vote, and even fewer commented. And we wonder why FS is slowly dying. I don't have any solutions but I sincerely hope that we can work together and get it right.


If someone have no interest in PvP, it is unlikely that they would look at a PvP suggestion thread. I do agree however that if we make changes, they have to be well thought-out to ensure it works for both players interested in PvP and players interested in just levelling.

We posted up the initial suggestion as a potential idea that might work - we are open to other ideas however :).

Note that we plan to discuss this fully before making any changes in the game.

#169 livingsin

livingsin

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 796 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:26

hoof-I applaud the willingness to work a mutual agreement out...however as you see...we have people who think PvP is the devil commenting in a thread about how to make PvP better....Don't think they're ideas are to improve PvP but more destroy it. (no offense to any levelers).


You have a good idea here. just needs slight tweaks.

#170 Maehdros

Maehdros

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,329 posts
  • Canada

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:29

We posted up the initial suggestion as a potential idea that might work - we are open to other ideas however :).

Note that we plan to discuss this fully before making any changes in the game.



*cough* Hor's tweaks to your ( hcs) idea of a ladder/ pvp leaderboard , *cough* ;)

#171 DragonLord

DragonLord

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,081 posts
  • Australia

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:34

hoof-I applaud the willingness to work a mutual agreement out...however as you see...we have people who think PvP is the devil commenting in a thread about how to make PvP better....Don't think they're ideas are to improve PvP but more destroy it. (no offense to any levelers).


You have a good idea here. just needs slight tweaks.


I don't want to destroy PvP. I just wish that PvP was "as it says on the tin" - Player vs Player - 2 people wanting to put their wits and skills against each other - rather than the (normal) "let's mug someone 'cos he's got a lot of money on him" or "he's tinkled me off, so I'm gonna 100 stam him every hour on the hour".

However, this suggestion, WILL drive a lot of people away from the game - and those that AREN'T driven away, will log in a lot less frequently so as not to constantly be eligible for the "can be attacked if online or logged out within 15 mins" aspect. Stay Offline whilst recharging = safe from pvp - which is BAD for the game.

We need an active community in the game - one that can co-exist together - and this proposal, unfortunately, isn't it.

Remove xp loss from PvP and just make it gold hits, and I think you'd find that most levellers wouldn't even care about it anymore ...

#172 livingsin

livingsin

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 796 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:51

but without xp loss the BB dies cuz theres no reason to ever post a bounty again....99% of gold targets don't care about gold loss...its xp loss..(at least in my experiences). So by using your method of "fixing" PvP you break the BB.

I agree we need more activity. the 15 min rule ruins that completely. BUT there are options to protect from being farmed for PvP.

a. buy protection

b. buy xp lock

c. don't hold gold

d. stomp the 1st couple of people who try and farm you...bet not many others try.

e. have a pvp friend take a small amount of rating from you so your a less viable target...

#173 KitiaraLi

KitiaraLi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Denmark

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:52

However, this suggestion, WILL drive a lot of people away from the game - and those that AREN'T driven away, will log in a lot less frequently so as not to constantly be eligible for the "can be attacked if online or logged out within 15 mins" aspect. Stay Offline whilst recharging = safe from pvp - which is BAD for the game.

To quote a moo moo "If players really do not want to be PvP'd then they can use the opt out via their upgrades."
I will however agree, that I see a problem in this, as the opt out is rather expensive, and not everyone is a credit card player, and will also agree that we do not need any less active players.

Remove xp loss from PvP and just make it gold hits, and I think you'd find that most levellers wouldn't even care about it anymore ...

When you get hit, you should care!
As I see it, most levelers already don't care, and ignore it when they get hit, simply because they know their only option is to post a bounty, since their leveling friends don't care either (as in - noone to dish out the needed 100 stams to relieve the attacker of 5 lvls).
Removing xp loss from pvp = removing xp gain from critters.

No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins


#174 KitiaraLi

KitiaraLi

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,240 posts
  • Denmark

Posted 10 September 2011 - 02:57

longwinded suggestion alteration here viewtopic.php?p=1176460#p1176460


+1

This, would be a huge step in the right direction, and take care of most of the loopholes in the OP!

No one can deny that we changed this game and influenced it in such a way that NO ONE could compete with us.. so much so that they changed the rules. ~Abhorrence, chosen founder of Cerulean Sins


#175 Woulfe

Woulfe

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 204 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 03:27

When you get hit, you should care!
As I see it, most levelers already don't care, and ignore it when they get hit, simply because they know their only option is to post a bounty, since their leveling friends don't care either (as in - noone to dish out the needed 100 stams to relieve the attacker of 5 lvls).
Removing xp loss from pvp = removing xp gain from critters.


I dont think that it is because levelers dont care. It is because we all know that they will get their bounty hunter buddy to clear their bounty with 10 stam hits. Then they collect the bounty and split the profits. In the end we pay them to rob us of XP and Gold.

Dont get me wrong, I am not against PvP. it is needed as a gold sink and to increase interest in the game.

#176 Noeni

Noeni

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Badge

Posted 10 September 2011 - 03:36

does this mean that one can single out a target and repeatedly 100 stam him/her for their rating for the time he's stays log in? , most likely that target won't bounty or retaliate for fear that the attacker will take revenge for placing him on the BB.just trying to understand this new pvp system .maybe there should be a regulation on the points/ rating gain from attacking another player that repeated attacks not rewarded.

bannerfans_6199711.png


#177 abhorrence

abhorrence

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,191 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 03:45

So, a couple more questions for ya :P
- I could only gain rating once from every player in my range, or does it only count for people not participating in PvP?

You can only hit some one with 0 rating 1 time personally and gain rating. If they attack after that and gain rating then they become a viable target to be hit again hourly until the reset.

I mean, could I hit other active PvPers for rating every hour?

Any person with greater then 0 rating can be hit by you hourly until the reset.


Just thinking, a lot of players participate in PvP by making the occasional gold hit or clearing a bounty now and then. I'm not so sure they would appreciate being a highly wanted target for every hour of a week.

Here is an example KJ.

Hor hits 15 people with 100 stam and gains 1000 rating. Hor sees you KJ after you did 1 gold hit and 100 stammed someone with 0 rating to take gold.


KJ's rating after 1 gold hit
100 stam hit = 50 pvp + 50 * (targets pvp rating divided by attackers pvp rating)

Based on the formula above your 1 gold hit gave you 50 PvP rating (assuming the target had a 0 rating)

Now you have 50 rating. Hor has a choice. She can hit someone actively PvPing with a rating 500+ or hit you.

Active PvPers rating = 500
Your rating = 50
results:
100 stam = 50 rating + 50*500/100 for 75 rating Active PvPer
100 stam = 50 rating + 50*50/1000 for 53 rating KJ's gold hit

The system has a built in protection for low rated or 0 rate players. Each hit that a active pvper does makes a hit on a inactive pvper less and less valuable.


- How will the suggestion deal with XP lock? Personally I would like to see the XP lock removed if you initiate an attack.

Any player that has a rating above 0 loses exp lock until the reset and attacking someone automatically knocks off PvP protection.



#178 krypt118

krypt118

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 03:46

I like the idea but i am concerned with not being able to attack players that are offline. Some of us work long long long hours and dont have a ton of time to sit and wait for players to get online. If this as been addressed already im sorry i didnt read the whole thread. No I dont care if players are online or not when im attacking, im concerned with my time table not theirs.

#179 Noeni

Noeni

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 566 posts
  • Badge

Posted 10 September 2011 - 04:01

why not attack them when you have the chance to be online why wait till they are offline and can't defend themselves that's like stabbing in the back.I think many will play the game less if they get attack online and offline

bannerfans_6199711.png


#180 krypt118

krypt118

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 334 posts

Posted 10 September 2011 - 04:10

why not attack them when you have the chance to be online why wait till they are offline and can't defend themselves that's like stabbing in the back.



Thats my point why do I have to wait for them to come online. I shouldnt have sit around all day for Joe Shmo to get online so i can attack him. Its not about stabbing someone in the back or being scared like I said i dont really care if a player is online or offline or even fully buffed I however do not like waiting on other players so i can play the game.


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: