Jump to content

Photo

Developer Chat Notes (23/Mar/2012)


  • Please log in to reply
465 replies to this topic

#361 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 20:51

hypothetical scenario is the right word when you are talking about them loosing nothing of value but having the ability to rip levels in return

ever heard the saying the punishment should fit the crime?


I was actually referring to it as hypothetical simply because pvp without xp isn't a part of HCS' proposal. (unless I'm mistaken and I overlooked something?)


lol no it is not (except for there initial terrible idea of no XP loss on the ladder) this bit was started by cramble (i believe, couple pages back now) saying XP loss has no place in PVP. really it is off topic (as you said not part of the cows proposal) and we need to get back on topic

#362 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 20:51

lol no it is not (except for there initial terrible idea of no XP loss on the ladder) this bit was started by cramble (i believe, couple pages back now) saying XP loss has no place in PVP. really it is off topic and we need to get back on topic


Agreed :lol:

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#363 fs_littledog9

fs_littledog9
  • Guests

Posted 24 March 2012 - 20:53

im sure if they post something and then get magically 100stammed, im sure HCS would be happy to give fair warning


I'm afraid not, I mean I could attempt it. However I can already foresee the response.

"pvp is part of the game, as you have no evidence of intimidation or harassment I'm afraid there is nothing we can do"



had the exact thing happen to me about a year and a half ago. was in a debate on the forums with a higher level unnamed player. he sent me a nasty pm and within an hour 3 of his guildmates were 100 stamming me.

wasn't too upset about it, it's just xp. but it was a bit of a b***h move on his part.

#364 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 20:57

lol no it is not (except for there initial terrible idea of no XP loss on the ladder) this bit was started by cramble (i believe, couple pages back now) saying XP loss has no place in PVP. really it is off topic and we need to get back on topic


Agreed :lol:



back on topic. my view. the biggest flaws with where this stands now

IRC. not everyone can get into it to speak there mind so it is not a proper or fair way forward. the cows with all there resources surely can come up with something much better that everyone can easily get into

GVG 2 players must hit.. i have said a couple times on this that while the big guilds will have only minor effects from this it will essentially screw the little guys

and 1 bounty for 1 hit. well this has been explain more times than i care to count so i need not explain it again

stam limits on the ladder. another terrible idea. if you OPT in then you KNOW that you are going to get hit. period. it is a battle of the strongest. that is why it is tied to the dominance medal. if you do not want to be hit then do not opt in

#365 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 20:59

IRC. not everyone can get into it to speak there mind so it is not a proper or fair way forward. the cows with all there resources surely can come up with something much better that everyone can easily get into


Perhaps if they added a page actually 'inside' FS that allowed for access this would solve some of players 'access' issues?

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#366 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:03

IRC. not everyone can get into it to speak there mind so it is not a proper or fair way forward. the cows with all there resources surely can come up with something much better that everyone can easily get into


Perhaps if they added a page actually 'inside' FS that allowed for access this would solve some of players 'access' issues?


a chat that is inside of FS rather than using a out side source would be ideal. anyone that can log into the game would then be able to go into it. on top of that the cows could customize it to work better for what it is being used for and it could link right to the forum so that the whole thing could be posted in a forum post with minimum effort for the people that work or something when it goes on. speaking as someone that can not use IRC and missed the chat as i was at work anyway i would love to be able to read it considering how many people are saying that the main post of this thread is wrong and how hoof posted it is not how it is. is it how hoof says or not. i dont know. all i can go on is the main post which is against how the people from the chat say it is meant to be

#367 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:05

a chat that is inside of FS rather than using a out side source would be ideal. anyone that can log into the game would then be able to go into it. on top of that the cows could customize it to work better for what it is being used for and it could link right to the forum so that the whole thing could be posted in a forum post with minimum effort for the people that work or something when it goes on. speaking as someone that can not use IRC and missed the chat as i was at work anyway i would love to be able to read it considering how many people are saying that the main post of this thread is wrong and how hoof posted it is not how it is. is it how hoof says or not. i dont know. all i can go on is the main post which is against how the people from the chat say it is meant to be


Honestly I missed the actual dev-chat. However I arrived at the very end. The post on page one is the final revision of what was discussed as far as I'm aware. HCS actually posted a few paste-bin's of their final revisions before posting them onto these forums, so yes, the info you see on page 1 is correct. :)

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#368 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:10

Honestly I missed the actual dev-chat. However I arrived at the very end. The post on page one is the final revision of what was discussed as far as I'm aware. HCS actually posted a few paste-bin's of their final revisions before posting them onto these forums, so yes, the info you see on page 1 is correct. :)



PvP Ladder Changes


[*]Limit to amount of stamina used to attack enemies to 500 stamina per reset.

this is the part everyone says is wrong. it has been posted at least 20 times in this forum that it is not 500 stam per ladder it is 500 stam per player per ladder which is not what the post says and i am STILL waiting for hoof to address this and say which it is

this however tho is one more reason that IRC is a failure in this regards as we dont even have a reference of what was and was not said other than hear say :x

#369 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:14

additional ladder hits ( past the 500 stam limit per player) will they be bountyable?


Yes as they won't be PvP Ladder attacks.


It is 500 stamina per target per reset.

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#370 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:19

additional ladder hits ( past the 500 stam limit per player) will they be bountyable?


Yes as they won't be PvP Ladder attacks.


It is 500 stamina per target per reset.


at no point in time did hoof say that tho. he only says hits after the 500 stam cap are no longer ladder hits. his original post says clearly 500 stam per reset. when Hoof says other wise i will be convinced.

and no i am not saying that any of the many people saying this are wrong or lying or anything else. i simply can not see it my self so i can only go off the original post that says what it is i am going off of. people i know and trust have said the same to me and i gave them the same answer. and honestly with how some of the other stuff they came up with read i wont put anything past them right now

#371 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:21

at no point in time did hoof say that tho. he only says hits after the 500 stam cap are no longer ladder hits. his original post says clearly 500 stam per reset. when Hoof says other wise i will be convinced.


Ok :)
It's actually fairly obvious though if you think about it, 500 stamina for ALL your attacks over two days? lol

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#372 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:22

at no point in time did hoof say that tho. he only says hits after the 500 stam cap are no longer ladder hits. his original post says clearly 500 stam per reset. when Hoof says other wise i will be convinced.


Ok :)
It's actually fairly obvious though if you think about it, 500 stamina for ALL your attacks over two days? lol



would it honestly be that big of a surprise to you?

not me sad to say

#373 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:25

would it honestly be that big of a surprise to you?

not me sad to say


From an idea solely thought up by HCs, well, it's debatable.
On an idea thrashed around and partly created by the FS players via a direct contact environment? Those ideas are usually pretty sound.

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#374 cramble27

cramble27

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 122 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:27

at no point in time did hoof say that tho. he only says hits after the 500 stam cap are no longer ladder hits. his original post says clearly 500 stam per reset. when Hoof says other wise i will be convinced.


Ok :)
It's actually fairly obvious though if you think about it, 500 stamina for ALL your attacks over two days? lol


Don't laugh, at the beginning of the discussion, the Cows wanted to limit ladder hits to only 1 attack per person in your band. :shock: It was quickly pointed out that for some people, they could only attack 2 or 3 people, so that would be silly. :roll:

The Cows wanted to limit farming, which is why they finally decided upon limiting the amount of stam a person can attack another single person to. Hoofs post is a bit ambiguous, but what he meant was I can attack player A with a total of 500 stam, I can attack Player B with a total of 500 stam, etc. during each ladder reset. With the change of 25 stam minimum to attack, that means I can only attack a single player at most 20 stimes, hence limiting farming.

#375 Mister Doom

Mister Doom

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 6,518 posts
  • United Kingdom

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:29

Heh once per person per reset? O.o

Oh, were they thinking of ditching the opt in/out and having it apply to everyone?
That idea didn't go down so well last time..

EnhancedShardoom1-1.gif


#376 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:30

at no point in time did hoof say that tho. he only says hits after the 500 stam cap are no longer ladder hits. his original post says clearly 500 stam per reset. when Hoof says other wise i will be convinced.


Ok :)
It's actually fairly obvious though if you think about it, 500 stamina for ALL your attacks over two days? lol


Don't laugh, at the beginning of the discussion, the Cows wanted to limit ladder hits to only 1 attack per person in your band. :shock: It was quickly pointed out that for some people, they could only attack 2 or 3 people, so that would be silly. :roll:

The Cows wanted to limit farming, which is why they finally decided upon limiting the amount of stam a person can attack another single person to. Hoofs post is a bit ambiguous, but what he meant was I can attack player A with a total of 500 stam, I can attack Player B with a total of 500 stam, etc. during each ladder reset. With the change of 25 stam minimum to attack, that means I can only attack a single player at most 20 stimes, hence limiting farming.



as i stated. it is nothing against any player but i want to see that from Hoof as it is not how his first post reads to me and to others.

on the topic of farming i still say how can you be farmed when you OPT in to the ladder and know in doing so you are entering a part of the game that not only requires but is built around multiple hits

#377 shdowdrgn

shdowdrgn

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 633 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:31

Heh once per person per reset? O.o

Oh, were they thinking of ditching the opt in/out and having it apply to everyone?
That idea didn't go down so well last time..



no i think that was still with the opt in......

#378 firewall31

firewall31

    New Member

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:37

I keep reading nobody wants this change to the bounty system .and telling the cows to rethink this .yet its the same 10-15 people saying it over and over. thats not everybody .thats just a small group of people who enjoy pvp .and i know a bunch of people do enjoy pvp .but also many people dont . and they are forced to play a part of the game they dont want to .and you say buy pvp protection .not everyone can afford that .you say buy better gear to defend yourself .why should they have to if they dont want any part of pvp .

#379 fs_littledog9

fs_littledog9
  • Guests

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:46

I keep reading nobody wants this change to the bounty system .and telling the cows to rethink this .yet its the same 10-15 people saying it over and over. thats not everybody .thats just a small group of people who enjoy pvp .and i know a bunch of people do enjoy pvp .but also many people dont . and they are forced to play a part of the game they dont want to .and you say buy pvp protection .not everyone can afford that .you say buy better gear to defend yourself .why should they have to if they dont want any part of pvp .


we do want it changed. there's no reason for there to be the same penalty for one player that 10 stams you when offline as a player that 100 stams you 5 times while offline. some of the pvpers are acting like the sky will fall and they'll lose 100 levels in a week if they get bountied for every hit, which is clearly not the case.

though it is rather ironic to see some of the pvpers gripe about losing xp, thought that argument was monopolized by the levelers in the game :P

#380 firewall31

firewall31

    New Member

  • New Members
  • Pip
  • 18 posts

Posted 24 March 2012 - 21:59

I keep reading nobody wants this change to the bounty system .and telling the cows to rethink this .yet its the same 10-15 people saying it over and over. thats not everybody .thats just a small group of people who enjoy pvp .and i know a bunch of people do enjoy pvp .but also many people dont . and they are forced to play a part of the game they dont want to .and you say buy pvp protection .not everyone can afford that .you say buy better gear to defend yourself .why should they have to if they dont want any part of pvp .


we do want it changed. there's no reason for there to be the same penalty for one player that 10 stams you when offline as a player that 100 stams you 5 times while offline. some of the pvpers are acting like the sky will fall and they'll lose 100 levels in a week if they get bountied for every hit, which is clearly not the case.

though it is rather ironic to see some of the pvpers gripe about losing xp, thought that argument was monopolized by the levelers in the game :P




exactly some things are just pure common sense. somebody said why should i lose 25 levels for hitting someone with 100 stam shots 5 times . well then dont hit somebody 5 times with 100 stam shots


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: