Jump to content

Photo

Official Suggestion : PvP Improvements (rev. 9)


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

#41 Maehdros

Maehdros

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,329 posts
  • Canada

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:10

Vegas idea about negative rating not resetting makes sense. or simply..Dont reset ratings when the ladder resets. First ladder everyone has 0 rating..and it keeps going from there. simple right? Those with negative rating will only be hit for gold.. or prestige.. and still only lose .25 - 2.5% for a pvp hit.


Players should pvp because they like...gold.. yes..its shiny... its hard on your teeth... and can give you ulcers but its sooo good!


its fun pvping , clearing bounties..slapping someone hunting..slapping em for prestige..or becuse they messed with sumone they should not have messed with. Thats why people should pvp. Thats why if items were bound i think it would be better. GREED killed the ladder...and made it a mini game.

#42 DragonLord

DragonLord

    Veteran

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

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:11


Leave the opt-out and the PvP protection in place and most levellers


Why would you need pvp protection if you have opt-out


'cos the opt-out is for the ladder ?

and PvP protection is for the off-ladder "love-taps" ??

#43 donalde

donalde

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 179 posts
  • Finland

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:12

I don't understand why you're ignoring all the posts regarding keeping the opt-out and PvP protection. I also fail to see why you believe that PvP is so much more popular than the game players are telling you it is. Yes, 75% reduction in XP lost is better than nothing, but read the other threads - folk are still not happy with even that loss.

Yes, PvP has a place in the game - NO-ONE is saying different - but by being FORCED to participate (as the above two proposals will achieve) then a lot of players are going to be unhappy - and thus, this proposal will keep getting a lot of DISLIKE or STRONGLY DISLIKE votes and we'll end up at Revision #999 ;).

Leave the opt-out and the PvP protection in place and most levellers (I suspect) won't give two figs about the other changes, 'cos it affects a part of the game they have no interest in. Thus, you can make PvP better for those that like it, without tinkling off everyone else...


+1 on this.

#44 vegasmark

vegasmark

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 232 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:12

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)


Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.


+1 .... this is much better than no choice

#45 daco

daco

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Badge

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:12

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)


Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.



M8 issue is not only gold ... think about it if i get 5 x100 stam hits that is 50% of my cirten lvl ... which is about 1000stam ... and you people put opt-in in game to not force people to pvp ... what is wrong with it now >?

#46 LLAP

LLAP

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,319 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:13

PvP protection is only thing that helps keeping hunted gold safe.


Check your upgrades... there's a thing called deposits.


yes. so I hunt like 10M gold every time I hunt... anything over 1M gold hand puts me as target (tested before PvP protection was introduced). So, you can do the math. deposit from 1M is 250k. Thus I can deposit 2.5M. To where I should put remaining 7.5M?


50FSP each additional gold deposit upgrade. Having 4 of them allows you to deposit a little over 70% of the amount your depositing. 1-2-3-4. 3million ish left over.


Get a friend to put somthing up for an hour auction and keep adding the amount you are going to bid on it, after its over they will get 10million ish. they will sen dit to you and bing bang boom! SORTED!


#47 Necra

Necra

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 718 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:13

No bound items! That is just pointless. We are trying to make more people get involved. If the things are bound they will play until they get one then never do it again. It is just pointless. You guys are still not listening. Do not remove the opt in/out. Most everyone is saying this. Still strongly disagree and as every new Rev. is basically the same, I will keep disagreeing. PvP needs to be ignored for awhile anyway. Fix GvG!


missed this post. this pretty much says it all, lol

keeping them bound will get ppl involved - the only way to get it is earn it - not buy it.

#48 sohail94

sohail94

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 722 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:13

the ladder should remain a seperate mini-game, there is no other aspect in the game in which you are forced to be part of; you can level when you like, hunt SE's when you like, find chests when you like but for some odd reason you can be pvp'd at any time which doesn't make sense at all - keep the pvp'rs seperate from the levellers and everyone is happy.

#49 fs_dok1234

fs_dok1234
  • Guests

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:14

removal of the opt in/out is not the smartest choice

#50 daco

daco

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 11 posts
  • Badge

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:14

I don't understand why you're ignoring all the posts regarding keeping the opt-out and PvP protection. I also fail to see why you believe that PvP is so much more popular than the game players are telling you it is. Yes, 75% reduction in XP lost is better than nothing, but read the other threads - folk are still not happy with even that loss.

Yes, PvP has a place in the game - NO-ONE is saying different - but by being FORCED to participate (as the above two proposals will achieve) then a lot of players are going to be unhappy - and thus, this proposal will keep getting a lot of DISLIKE or STRONGLY DISLIKE votes and we'll end up at Revision #999 ;).

Leave the opt-out and the PvP protection in place and most levellers (I suspect) won't give two figs about the other changes, 'cos it affects a part of the game they have no interest in. Thus, you can make PvP better for those that like it, without tinkling off everyone else...


+1 on this.


I don't understand why you're ignoring all the posts regarding keeping the opt-out and PvP protection. x2
We do not get answers ...

#51 jklundt

jklundt

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 101 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:14

It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.


So would this mean cheaper XP lock but higher price on the PvP protection?

#52 Necra

Necra

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 718 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:15

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)


Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.

The MT percentages have been readjusted already.

#53 Josh1404

Josh1404

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,618 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:15

A lot of players PvP to make a profit. Making the new item sets bound will drive people away from PvP. Only a small majority will PvP for the sake of it without making any profit from these sets.


Personally I think this would be good because then PvP will be more of a game than just a dot-making activity


Personally i would still PvP regardless of whether these items become bound or not. But i know most people's incentive for PvPing is to make a proffit. This will drive them away, that is not good for the game.

#54 donalde

donalde

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 179 posts
  • Finland

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:15

TO THE ANTI-PVPERS: please focus on the fact that your XP loss is getting reduced by 75%!!!! What more could a whiner ask for? ,oP Try Strongly Agree or Agree to save your precious XP (o0


yeah, but still hunted gold in in target. without guildie banking you, you are instant PvP target. Players who hunt like 30k stamina at time get around 12M gold, so well beyond any protection. If uou remove PvP protection, everyone just dumps their gold as soon as possible, thus inflating market place.

But you can offload on the marketplace when you are hunting and bid on ah specials


So, I soon have BP full of bound potions and MP is on 300k. Nice logic :)

#55 donalde

donalde

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 179 posts
  • Finland

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:16

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)


Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.


All gold and XP is protected? Or part?

#56 Grimwald

Grimwald

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 270 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:17

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)

Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.


Most smart players won't keep much gold on hand. Normally I don't have more then 50k. You can safeguard your gold in the bank, but you can't safeguard your xp without paying a lot of FSP's for it.

#57 fortville

fortville

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 295 posts
  • United States of America

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:18

I like it, I will say tho... has there been thought to keeping pvp protection BUT only allowing it to protect xp? Still allow it to be cheap, but no longer protect gold. Make xp lock even cheaper ( obviously as well)


Seems most wont like this update if protection is gone. Due to liking their xp. I'm just trying to meet in the middle...without getting my head ripped off O.o


It seems the issue is more with gold than xp from what I understand.

What about keeping PvP Protection, but still allowing players to attack? Ie. the same as the current revision but xp/gold is protected if you have PvP Protection active.

Personally I could give a hoot about the gold as I usually have less than 100k on me at any given time. I don't want my XP messed with. I also don't want to have to pay to protect my XP every time I level up just so someone else can hit me to gain PvP tokens. As I stated in the previous thread: "I have no issues with "standard" or "original" PvP. What I have an issue with is being forced to be a part of a ladder for rewards(PvP Ladder Tokens). The rewards only benefit PvPers at the expense of people that are not vying for those rewards. Keep these attacks for those who are competing for the tokens. I think this suggestion has been posted before... A choice(selection/button) for the kind of attack you are throwing. If it's for tokens then you can only attack those who have opted to compete for them." So as long as I am forced to be a part of the game that will hurt my XP and that I have no interest in my vote will remain NO.

#58 Hoofmaster

Hoofmaster

    Company Director

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

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:18

There seems to be a clear distinction between players who are interested in levelling and those who are interested in PvP.

Maybe it is better to keep the opt-in/out. My main concern however is the limitation of targets that it causes.

How about this for a different idea: When you attack a player, you can choose whether it is for PvP Rating or Gold/XP. This way there would be no need for an opt-in/out as hits for PvP Rating would not take Gold/XP.

We could then also leave in PvP Protection.

#59 Mekrushu

Mekrushu

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 183 posts

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:19

I don't understand why you're ignoring all the posts regarding keeping the opt-out and PvP protection. I also fail to see why you believe that PvP is so much more popular than the game players are telling you it is. Yes, 75% reduction in XP lost is better than nothing, but read the other threads - folk are still not happy with even that loss.

Yes, PvP has a place in the game - NO-ONE is saying different - but by being FORCED to participate (as the above two proposals will achieve) then a lot of players are going to be unhappy - and thus, this proposal will keep getting a lot of DISLIKE or STRONGLY DISLIKE votes and we'll end up at Revision #999 ;).

Leave the opt-out and the PvP protection in place and most levellers (I suspect) won't give two figs about the other changes, 'cos it affects a part of the game they have no interest in. Thus, you can make PvP better for those that like it, without tinkling off everyone else...


+1 on this.


+1 from me too!

Lets think about the repercussions of removing pvp protection, shall we?

1) The market place becomes unstable and the cost of fsp skyrockets
2) Us potion makers selling for gold, will STOP selling for gold! You will now pay fsp only, and those prices will also skyrocket, because the MP has.
3) Lower level players can no longer afford the inflated fsp and potion costs and quit the game...

*looks for the win button*...EVERYONE LOSES! :shock:

But hey, if you are willing to pay me 2x -3x as much for my potions, I am happy to take your fsp! :D

FSsig.jpg

 

Tact is for those that lack the intelligence to be sarcastic!


#60 donalde

donalde

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 179 posts
  • Finland

Posted 16 October 2011 - 20:19

50FSP each additional gold deposit upgrade. Having 4 of them allows you to deposit a little over 70% of the amount your depositing. 1-2-3-4. 3million ish left over.


Get a friend to put somthing up for an hour auction and keep adding the amount you are going to bid on it, after its over they will get 10million ish. they will sen dit to you and bing bang boom! SORTED!


One is possible PvP target when he holds over 1M gold in hand, seen multiple times before there was PvP protection

So, you wanna see MP going up to 300k+? :)


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: