Jump to content

Photo

Not Sure The Devs Intended This...


  • Please log in to reply
84 replies to this topic

Poll: Poll (46 member(s) have cast votes)

Keep XP Loss For A Bounty Hunter IF They Lose On The BB?

  1. Yes (38 votes [82.61%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 82.61%

  2. No (8 votes [17.39%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 17.39%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#21 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 05:56

Luis... could you define what you consider is "automatic punishment"? 

 

You throw that out a lot. I simply don't get the gist.

I do refer to automatic punishment often. I think players in Fallensword must learn the very process by which they take care of themselves. Guilds have a larger purpose than free buffs and gear! Basically players who are incapable of punishing another player on their own, with their guildmates and/or allies, are always seeking to have the game punish players for them. They will not risk play that might lose them valuable xp. They are scared! They want punishment beyond what a standard BB posting, even though it takes twice the xp(attack stam being equal) per attack, would do. They usually want it for free or at minimal cost.

 

Way back when there used to be Merc players who would stomp for those incapable for a price. The cost was too high. Guilds grew with enough non-selfish PvPing players who cared little about losing their xp compared to protecting another player in their guild. It takes skill and coordination to drop players 5 levels. Guild Wars used to occur frequently. The BB was pages full of bounties. There were 1000s of players online at times. The game thrived and was much healthier. Now the same incapable players only want EASY play, bigger buff levels, stam gear to refill their banks, and of course auto-punishment of players who attack them so they don't have to risk anything and have their game interrupted by a bully!


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#22 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 14:21

Removing counter bounties would eliminate players ability to respond to being dropped on the bb. Do you really want to give us bounties we can drop and then not allow you a chance to respond? Yet another way to further limit pvp activity. The most fun I've had in this game was guild wars. I've even met some of my best friends in the game by stomping each other. But sadly, the changes in the game have killed most of that activity.

 

Calista, you and I are diametrically opposed on this issue, and that is okay.

 

Do I really want to give you bounties you can drop and not give you a chance to respond? Yes. Because you have responded so well when you have been bountied that now you get left alone. I have long held that CB is the mechanism that has killed the BB. You cannot have it both ways, to want to hit people to leave you alone (including bounty hunters, I imagine) and still want a regular supply of PvP opponents. The two things do not easily coexist, in my opinion. 

 

I argue that Counter Bounty limits PvP activity now, CB drives out Bounty Hunters, punishes them for doing their job, disincentivises them from coming back if they keep getting dropped for doing their job, so why bounty hunt? In the hope you'll be allowed a soft clear here and there without being CB'd? How is that inviting?

 

However, keep CB if you want, it no longer bothers me. Nor does the inactivity on the BB. 

 

Guild wars can happen without CB - you can keep hitting members of the other guild come what may. CB makes it faster, more aggressive, and about who has the most allies to take on the CB's, and who are then prepared to be CB'd themselves. An orgy of PvP - but one side eventually gets crushed, and how many times will they come back if they know they will be out CB'd? Not many. The winners win, the losers will only lick their wounds and come back so many times, sooner or later they stop participating when they realise they cannot prevail against a bigger network of CB hungry friends and allies. So success breeds inactivity in your most fun activity. Can't have guild wars if the other side won't bother fighting anymore.

 

I may be wrong, but I genuinely think that use of CB has killed off the PvP game, not 'game changes'. PvP players using a PvP mechanism have so dominated the BB (and guild wars) that everyone else has been taught, have learned not to play there. Inactivity rules the day. 

 

Remove CB from the board and I think you would see more players give it a try. Again, I might be wrong. But with no CB and auto bounties during the seasons the board became more consistently active than it was since the GXP era.

 

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to say this. To be honest I no longer feel that I have skin in that game, it used to bother me more. I think I'm just losing interest overall in FS, so this seems less important to me now. But it is nice to get it off my chest perhaps one last time. It is a PvP problem for PvP players, and as far as I can see, it is a self-created one, and will continue to be so as long as CB is held to be sacred and inviolate. So keep it if you wish, and keep wondering why so few people come back to play on the BB after being punished via counter bounty.


Good-bye and hello, as always.


#23 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 10 September 2015 - 23:50

Do I really want to give you bounties you can drop and not give you a chance to respond? Yes. Because you have responded so well when you have been bountied that now you get left alone. I have long held that CB is the mechanism that has killed the BB. You cannot have it both ways, to want to hit people to leave you alone (including bounty hunters, I imagine) and still want a regular supply of PvP opponents. The two things do not easily coexist, in my opinion. 

 

I argue that Counter Bounty limits PvP activity now, CB drives out Bounty Hunters, punishes them for doing their job, disincentivises them from coming back if they keep getting dropped for doing their job, so why bounty hunt? In the hope you'll be allowed a soft clear here and there without being CB'd? How is that inviting?

 

However, keep CB if you want, it no longer bothers me. Nor does the inactivity on the BB. 

 

Guild wars can happen without CB - you can keep hitting members of the other guild come what may. CB makes it faster, more aggressive, and about who has the most allies to take on the CB's, and who are then prepared to be CB'd themselves. An orgy of PvP - but one side eventually gets crushed, and how many times will they come back if they know they will be out CB'd? Not many. The winners win, the losers will only lick their wounds and come back so many times, sooner or later they stop participating when they realise they cannot prevail against a bigger network of CB hungry friends and allies. So success breeds inactivity in your most fun activity. Can't have guild wars if the other side won't bother fighting anymore.

 

I may be wrong, but I genuinely think that use of CB has killed off the PvP game, not 'game changes'. PvP players using a PvP mechanism have so dominated the BB (and guild wars) that everyone else has been taught, have learned not to play there. Inactivity rules the day. 

 

Remove CB from the board and I think you would see more players give it a try. Again, I might be wrong. But with no CB and auto bounties during the seasons the board became more consistently active than it was since the GXP era.

 

Thanks for giving me the opportunity to say this. To be honest I no longer feel that I have skin in that game, it used to bother me more. I think I'm just losing interest overall in FS, so this seems less important to me now. But it is nice to get it off my chest perhaps one last time. It is a PvP problem for PvP players, and as far as I can see, it is a self-created one, and will continue to be so as long as CB is held to be sacred and inviolate. So keep it if you wish, and keep wondering why so few people come back to play on the BB after being punished via counter bounty.

Belaric, you make an articulate argument, made more of logic than emotion. It's refreshing. I commend you for it.

 

Whether counter bounties are disallowed or not, punishment will still occur. An example of that is that we currently have "Wanted Bounties" as a useful component of the Helper. If CBs were eliminated, players who were on a "list" and ended up on the BB would then be stomped with certainty. If they sowehow ceased ending up on the BB then their guildmates/allies could be punished for their behavior from that same list. Like life, anyone that has something of value to them can be punished for behavior that offends.

 

So take away CBs, it also doesn't bother me! I will be able to stomp with impunity every player who ends up on the BB that isn't an ally/friend without ever being bountied. In fact, I will easily take the shortcut to the Stomper Diamond achievement  I seek. All the naysayers can go ahead and continue calling me a "bully" or any other disparaging term they want. I don't care. I actually relish in the obtuse titles. But you think taking CBs away would prompt more PvP activity? It's the old chicken/egg maxim. Why would anyone PvP at all? The way it currently exists, the vast majority of bountys are soft, friendly clears. Players currently PvP now precisely because they have become accustomed to being bountied, even for 2x xp loss, and are willing to pay that price.

 

Adversely, I would argue that taking away CBs will only dry up the BB because almost everyone who ended up there would be stomped, to the delight of every non-PvPing leveler in the game(the names who like your post tell it all). There's the automatic punishment by proxy of BHers without risk! It would be the death of PvP without some other unknown drastic change.

 

No, and this is only from my experience as a PvPing player of many, many years with much accreditation, PvP is hurting because it has unsustainable costs. Look at the newest rewards to the Ladder as an example of costs vs reward. Nothing changes. In another example, in order to take a bounty and help someone who is incapable of perpetrating punishing themselves, not only must a player use their own stam, but they must also buy tickets to take the bounty, which for the last few years generally costs 1 dot. The reward IF you are the first one to win 10 attacks is normally paltry. It doesn't even pay for the cost of the bounty! Why PvP in general has been treated unjustly and with disdain by most of the devs is merely speculation on my part, but I believe it has to do with the large amount of PvP complaints they've received over the years through support tickets. They are tired of it and wrongly believe if they do away with PvP or water it down enough that those complaints will be more reasonable in number or disappear. Risk in antagonism is the motor that runs the Fallen Sword vehicle.

 

Let me finish by adding that I also don't feel much attachment to the game any longer. My ambivalence towards the game and HCS has only grown. While I admire Hoof's apparent recent attempt to right the lack of noticeable coding development the last few years, I feel the only substantive improvements will come from the devs learning how to fairly bridge the schism that has been created between the different emphasis in the game.


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#24 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 11 September 2015 - 02:08

Hi Luis, thanks for the reply.

 

I do not use the helper, and have not for some time, so I am not familiar with the "Wanted bounties" feature.

 

I do not regard certain stomping on the BB as a problem - people get on the BB for hitting other players, they have been the aggressor. Similarly, if they have trangressed against you in such a fashion that they are on your "Wanted Bounties" list, well I'd guess you'd be stomping them now anyway! If CB goes away they would get stomped anyway - but could not counter bounty you in return, they would have to put you on their "wanted bounty" list - and stomp you when you appear on it - seems fair enough to me.

 

Deciding to attack guildmates and allies for the sins of one of their compatriots - that is your call. I do not personally agree with it, but I understand why you would do so. Which would open you up to multiple bounties of course. But such is the risk you take in hitting. I would always go with a diplomatic approach first, but appreciate that it does not always work. But hey, you never know, you could negotiate the guilty party into getting him or herself placed on the BB rather than cause their guildmates and allies the grief of being attacked on their behalf. That all comes down to how people decide to play the game.

 

Would taking away CB increase PvP activity? I think so. I certainly don't think the argument that it adds to PVP activity holds much water - given the levels of activity present! if CB did work well at promoting PvP activity, it would follow that there would be more of it. In the short term I think it gets more activity, in the long term I think it has depressed activity. And 8 years in, we are well into long term consequences, I think.

 

Would it dry up the BB further as you claim, due to everyone being stomped, which is not certain - I'm guessing soft clears for friends would still be performed. If everyone got stomped you might see more bounties posted - as you I'm sure are aware, many players simply do not bother posting bounties as they think it is throwing good gold/FSP after bad. If BH'ers can do their job without being bountied, then perhaps more people would 1) bounty hunt 2) post bounties, which would increase, not decrease BB activity.There could then be competition between folk trying to stomp everyone in sight, and friends/allies seeking to soft clear, and bounty hunters doing either or both! I think that is a possible outcome, but as always, reserve the right to be wrong!

 

I appreciate your points about costs, and the lack of profitability for BH'ers on the BB. Part of this is the low rewards posted as a minimum, HCS could increase the amount of gold required to post - but that might depress people's interest in even posting bounties further. It is also a consequence of the first past the post get to 10 victories system, where one player gets the reward and anyone else who did 9 or less hits gets nothing. That alone makes it difficult to make any gold out of BHing. Making it cheaper to take bounties, or to obtain bounty tickets would be a good idea. And I hate to mention it, but in the Seasons there was no get to 10 and win the pot, but get paid per hit. A system like that would also defray costs. Get paid a proportion of the total reward by the hit. Have a total number of hits per bounty - again like the seasons - that means that the folk who hit fastest and most often will make the most cash off available bounties, especially if each hit costs only 1 ticket.  That increases the possibility that BHing could be profitable.

 

So yes I agree tickets should cost less, and the first to 10 wins system makes bounty hunting difficult to profit from, or even break even. Changing bounties to a fixed number and having gold added to the player posted pot (perhaps from a fund taken from the gold sunk in game via gold hits) and then paying BH's by the hit from this increased pot might help BHing become 1) fun, 2) profitable. Or as Egami would say - worthwhile! Profit is not the B all and End all, but feeling that you are getting something worthwhile for your time and expenditure of resources is. I'd like it if BHing had that sense of being worrthwhile for those who participated in it.

 

I do not know that PvP has been treated unjustly or with disdain by the devs. I really think it depends what tint of spectacles you are wearing when looking at the issue. Everyone can get historical and point out grievances and changes that happened that they disliked, or felt harmed their game. I have made the point repeatedly recently that all I want is consistency from Hoof and HCS, and for them to be the adults in the room when we, the players/children are fighting. I still feel consistency is lacking, but they are only human and are trying their best. The recent attention being paid to PvP is a case in point. It may not be all you want when you want it, but Hoof is earnestly tackling issues within the game, and has acted on many of your suggestions directly Luis, which is pretty cool!

 

Risk in antagonism is the motor that runs the Fallen Sword vehicle. I just cannot agree Luis. It may add spice for you, and for many others, but risk in antagonism did not draw me to this game, nor did it keep me here. And I think many others like me enjoy the game as an exercise in building their character, exploring the world, making friends and having the opportunity to indulge in many different activities, of which PvP is one. I have accepted PvP's existence in the game, and played my game aware of the risk of gold hits, and of PvP defended relics etc. I personally have chosen to minimise risk of gold hits, and avoid PvP in general, initially because my whole focus was on catching EOC, now out of habit and inclination. PvP has never interested me. I am not alone, I think, in that attitude. I have done it, I have been on the ladder for the tokens i needed to make some dragon draped sabatons for my guild, I have delevelled a player - then swore never to do it again, as that player quit the game after that delevel party, and it grieved me to even have been a part of making another player decide to quit. 

 

I have said elsewhere that if PvP had been made central to character advancement from the start of the game - i.e. PvP earned skill points or was required to advance in levels, then we would have a very different game, and your risk in antagonism quote would be more correct, but the central mechanic of the game, like it or not, is gaining character levels in order to unlock skills and level up points, and new areas of the game to explore. So, for me, that says that risk is not the engine that drives the game, but creation and accumulation of skills and abilities through gaining levels is.

 

Adding PvP levels to the game, and to characters, that unlocks new skills and abilities in the game may be a way to make Pvp more central to the game, and increase overall participation - the question is - what new abilities would be so desired that everyone would join up to gain PvP levels? What new aspect to the game could be created that would be compelling enough? I have no idea what that would be. HCS are having a hard time coming up with new skills as it is. And could the skill tree be radically reworked and half of the skills allocated to PvP levels only? I think this game is too far in for that to be done, but it could be done in a Fallen Sword 2.

 

How to fairly bridge the schism is the difficult part. I suppose that is what the devs hope we can help them with. They tried (in however flawed a fashion - depending on your perspective) to create a more inclusive PvP experience with the seasons.  I don't know if it would have worked, but I feel it was not given a fair shot. Which element of the community put in all the tickets to support there? I think you could argue Pvp and non-Pvper alike did so, and for different reasons. Which is probably why HCS acted in such haste. Now the ladder is back and rewards are being rolled out and it is being given time to succeed or fail, much more than was given to the seasons, which is a good thing - as it needs to be given a proper chance to succeed.

 

Next time a major initiative is planned to help unify the game experience I hope HCS will have learned their lesson from the seasons and give plenty of advance warning about what they plan, take plenty of feedback, but ultimately make a decision and stick with it for the long term good of the game. I think we all are stuck in the mud and dislike change, and i think that instinctive dislike of change cost us something in the seasons that could have been worked on and improved. Maybe the next time!

 

Sorry for the humungously long post. 


Edited by Belaric, 11 September 2015 - 02:18.

Good-bye and hello, as always.


#25 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 11 September 2015 - 16:17

How to fairly bridge the schism is the difficult part. I suppose that is what the devs hope we can help them with. They tried (in however flawed a fashion - depending on your perspective) to create a more inclusive PvP experience with the seasons.  I don't know if it would have worked, but I feel it was not given a fair shot. Which element of the community put in all the tickets to support there? I think you could argue Pvp and non-Pvper alike did so, and for different reasons. Which is probably why HCS acted in such haste. Now the ladder is back and rewards are being rolled out and it is being given time to succeed or fail, much more than was given to the seasons, which is a good thing - as it needs to be given a proper chance to succeed.

Bridging the schism is something I tried very recently to address here but was summarily dismissed by BigGrim. I basically thought allowing players to 'buy' any reward HCS offers through a general token system would allow players the opportunity to gain said reward through whatever game aspect they enjoyed and excelled in. When consumers have options, they win and therefore so would the game! It's about inclusion not divisiveness.

 

Seasons had some great aspects, and sadly more not so great. I think the devs tried to bite off more then they could chew. The costs and automated processes were the parts I disliked. I will continue to argue against the game assisting players by omitting what I consider essential elements of the game.

 

And lastly, with the exception of the long lasting cloak potion, the other pots aren't going to entice anyone to play the ladder! As long as Prestige is still easily traded through collusion by players with bio ads offering bounty-free hits even the Prestige pots will not entice anyone either.


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#26 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 12 September 2015 - 16:25

Hi Luis,

 

I can see your point, and why BG didn't go for it. If tokens that can be used for any purpose can be gained from one aspect of the game, then the need to try different aspects is reduced - as you can buy arena items with tokens earned on the ladder and vice versa, it may in fact encourage specialisation, where the specialists dominate their field and do not need to go anywhere else to access all resources in game via a universal token system. If the idea is to encourage players to play multiple aspects of the game, this does not work. Would it work at increasing overall game activity? I am not sure. I like the idea of needing to pool resources from different areas of the game, and not all players will be able to do that alone... but that is why we have guilds, where different specialists can work together and create things for the guild as a whole. 

 

The devs spent a long time developing the seasons. They thought they had chewed on it plenty, but really did not do their pre-release testing very well - the 10X XP loss period at the beginning was a destroyer for the seasons. Reverting it to standard XP loss was too little too late, and made the change to no XP loss a little more inevitable to my mind (that change then annoyed a different group of players - more negative votes in the poll). How they could let the 10X XP loss code through into the open game is just horrible. That alone probably cost the seasons many positive votes in the much maligned poll.

 

As you and I have very different views on what drives the game it is no surprise you did not like the automation of bounties, and I thought it was a great idea, that just needed so tweaking to work very effectively. As for costs - I was under the impression that BHing costs were lower (in terms of tickets needed) on the seasons  BB. And rewards more readily accessible. What you referred to above as the difficulty in making a profit in bounty hunting was at least partially addressed in the seasons, and could have been tweaked further to make bounty hunting a viable career option again, I believe.

 

If you are taking about overall costs to participate in seasons in terms of stam and resources - yes it was a huge drain, but again, everyone was trying it out for the first time and throwing everything into it, had the seasons continued the tactics and stam expenditure would have changed, and some would have needed to be addressed - for instance the possible tendency of folk to wait until the last day of the season, and then make a big charge and do lots of hits to make it up to Crystal/titan tier would have had to be addressed - it would have saved on stam/resources, but would have made the other 13 days of the season a waste of time. Suggestions were already made to ameliorate that. Ultimately there is no doubt that the seasons were going to be challenging and require a fair bit of investment to succeed in. The rewards were extremely generous I think in recognition of that fact. I was prepared to play the seasons and suck at it even for the wood or silver rewards!! (Which indicates that they were probably a tad overpowered, to be honest!!)

 

As for the ladder potions - looking at them I might have some interest in Chi Strike, none in Anchored, not a lot in Prestige (I do not use it in any shape or form), but I suppose if I was offered said potion cheap I would not say no, if I had fallen way back from EOC. Entrench - not really and I can get the same composing. Barricade has its uses for me, but I haven't even used the 175 buff in forever. Severe Condition - again, one I don't use, and that is outstripped at high levels by composing versions.

 

But what do you do? Either the composing pots gets made useless, or the ladder pots are passed over in favour of the composed version. Having a strong ladder potion that is not quite as good as the composed is a fair compromise at present, but juggling potion strengths can only go on so long. New skills are difficult to come up with, and new luck skills in PvP would not be welcomed, so it is hard to create new demand via pots, but pots were requested. Potions on the level of the seasonal rewards? The two formats are not alike enough to justify that, or the token cost would have to be HUGE for the top end pots. And if they were introduced at huge prices, I'm betting the prices would be complained about and requests for them to be reduced instantly asked for, as indeed happened with the ladder pots that were introduced!

 

New ladder gear is the way to go. I had suggested crystal with less than 50 durability in the past, so 50 seems pretty good to me with UB floating around. Mistakes are always made with stat allocations, but diamonds in the rough are found eventually by the players. And they can still introduce some legendary sets that could either be created for their stats/usefulness, or to simply be converted into frgas, in times of no LE events. Legendary frags are a high demand area in composing - creating legendary frags via ladder tokens might find a market. Depends how easy it is to make the ladder legendary sets though. 

 

Prestige trading - I don't do it, I get hit by prestige farmers, I just let it roll. Now that prestige is usable in chunks we will see if farming goes up. But as prestige potions are also available, will farming be reduced? Certainly if the prestige pot was unbound I could see prestige farmers doing a calculation on stam expenditure in farming prestige vs just buying a pot, and buying the potion if the numbers worked out in their favour - boom , not a lot of farming anymore! (Which would then have a knock on effect as there would be less BB activity as some prestige farmers DO get bountied now! So be careful what you wish for in terms of unbinding ladder items, and preventing prestige farming! Yes some farmers trade hits for nothing, but other prestige farmers do still run the risk of bounties -but give them easy access to prestige potions and even that aspect of potential BB activity could dry up. As always in FS, unintended consequences can rule the day!!)


Edited by Belaric, 12 September 2015 - 16:27.

Good-bye and hello, as always.


#27 Egami

Egami

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,863 posts

Posted 15 September 2015 - 23:55

At this point, I just want to thank both Luis and Belaric for posts 21-26. My apologies, but it's late. 

 

However, from what I've read and skimmed so far, they are chock full of helpful info from two veterans who have seen a lot in this game and have played it differently. Despite this slight difference of perspective, they are both capable of making constructive comments that I think would be educational to the entire FS Community no matter what type of FS aspect they "concentrate" on. 

 

For me, the crux in all of this is exactly how entangled all these concepts have become based on the difference of playing styles and how particular things have evolved, for good or bad, during the approximately eight years that all three of us have been here.

 

I fully plan on coming back here and reading through all those posts and would highly recommend any FS player to do so. For the moment, I would simply like to thank them both for spending their time on what I think (game play aside) is a really positive, constructive conversation.

 

Kudos to both and prosperous smacking to all (o0 



#28 mary4ever

mary4ever

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 511 posts

Posted 16 September 2015 - 11:47

The XP loss was a remnant from the PvP Seasons update, but I think it makes sense and should stay.

We can also look at reducing the bounty ticket costs and potentially rewarding a successful bounty better - maybe addition PvP Prestige? Open to ideas on this :)

yes please to reducing the bounty ticket costs <---- I liked the bounty ticket cost from the season (1 ticket per 1 bounty hit)

 

do you remember the " Bounty Champion Pot ", maybe this could be reintroduced to increase PvP activity on the BB?

or some kind of better reward as you said for a successful bounty

 

I like the XP loss for the BH BUT think a reduction of XP loss for lower lvl players would be good

 

EXAMPLE:

if targets VL is higher than the BH's VL then XP loss reduction for the BH when he loses a combat

if targets VL is lower than the BH's VL then XP loss stayes the same

 

this should encourage lower lvl players to take higher lvl players bounties despite the XP loss ;)


3 players on iggy (1 troll & 2 players whose posts never make any sense)


#29 Egami

Egami

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,863 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 00:38

Ok, at the risk of being a bit repetitive with regard to my #27 post, I can now say that I have read through and taken notes on posts 21-26. 

 

This thread is now officially my personal second favorite in the history of the FS Forum. So again... kudos out to both Belaric and Luis (sweetlou) on taking their personal time to comment. This is a prime example of what I'd like to see in posts. 

 

Neither are flaming, both are expressing their personal game-play opinions. Both are being extremely constructive and having an intelligent conversation. Both are thinking and both have made me think. 

 

As it stands, I'm not too sure how to proceed. I had my own "idea"... but it's difficult. This post, for me, brings up a lot issues. I "guess" that I might try to forge ahead and respond here, but I'm not too sure how efficient that would be. 

 

I would really hope that people will read their conversation... but even I myself have been unable to "like" a single post of theirs. Is that bad? No. Is there a solution? I wonder.

 

Bounty Hunting.

Guild Wars.

Punishment.

Counter bounties.

Prestige.

Seasons.

PvP Ladder.

PvP Arena.

 

For me the above are all separate topics and absolutely all of them are present in this topic. 

 

Again, I'm not too sure how I'll deal with my response (5 pages of abbreviated quotes), but again, I'd like to send a sincere thank you out to both Belaric and Luis. 

 

Prosperous smacking everybody (o0



#30 Calista

Calista

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 871 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 01:23

I haven't read all the detailed posts in this topic yet. I will post later with more if necessary. But I have noticed that the bounty board is now having a lot of bounties simply expire because people don't want to try. I cleared bounties for like 6 hours the other night just because it was driving me nuts to see them expire like that. Is that what the cows had in mind with this change?


 


#31 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 03:04

I haven't read all the detailed posts in this topic yet. I will post later with more if necessary. But I have noticed that the bounty board is now having a lot of bounties simply expire because people don't want to try. I cleared bounties for like 6 hours the other night just because it was driving me nuts to see them expire like that. Is that what the cows had in mind with this change?

I don't mind seeing bounties expire! I think it adds a great game component to the BB. If players want, nay expect, bounties to be cleared for them for minimum rewards they are suffering from delusions.


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#32 Calista

Calista

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 871 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 03:28

I guess where I have an issue with it is that people always complain that it isn't worth it to post bounties because of 'friendly' clears. And at least with a friendly clear the person loses some xp. If this was suppose to liven the board up, it isn't going to work like that. Now they are paying to watch the bounty sit there and nothing happen.


 


#33 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 04:12

I guess where I have an issue with it is that people always complain that it isn't worth it to post bounties because of 'friendly' clears. And at least with a friendly clear the person loses some xp. If this was suppose to liven the board up, it isn't going to work like that. Now they are paying to watch the bounty sit there and nothing happen.

 

I agree and actually voted in the minority against having xp loss on the BB. I think BHing has been unsustainable for a long time. That means you end up paying to BH. That has been fine for many of us forever. Now I think losing xp pushes players over the edge to not clear bounties, especially higher level ones. The lower your level, the less inclined you are now to take that bounty.

 

Still, as we know, staying buffed enough to put up a fight on the BB in decent gear for 48 hrs is tough. Players capable of defending themselves deserve that the bounty expires. Players posting the bounty need to learn to add better rewards, bottom line.


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#34 Calista

Calista

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 871 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 04:21

I completely agree. It takes effort to stay on the board for 48 hours and anyone who does the work should have the benefit of it expiring. But they pay for those buffs and put in the effort to fight off a clearer.  Right now, they aren't even staying buffed and they are expiring. Offline, unbuffed, easy pickings and they are just being left to expire because the bounty hunters can't be bothered.


 


#35 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 18:07

On the BB and people not wanting to try to clear them - the implication being because of the threat of XP loss in the event of a failed bounty Hunting attack.

 

But players are staying unbuffed and as easy pickings and still not being picked off, so is XP loss the problem, if the targets are sitting there waiting to be hit, offline and vulnerable? Or is there a different motivation for why those targets were being left alone?

 

Why would XP loss on a failed attack be a deterrent to attack an easy target? Because of the 2% rule? Because any loss of XP is deemed too much of a risk? I find that hard to believe.

 

The other thing to consider is the flip side of this argument. Say we go back to no XP loss for the bounty hunter. Is that not encouraging risk free bounty hunting? Should players far lower level than their opponents get to have a long sequence of free shots at a high level opponent? (minus gear repair costs - which will be less for the low ranked player than for the higher ranked player he or she is attacking - assuming both players are wearing level appropriate gear, of course!)

 

Does that not lead to simply hitting at someone and waiting/hoping for a combination of luck buffs and 2% hit chances to come in? Is that the style of PvP you wish to promote, as it seems to me that it is that style of PvP that is promoted by no XP loss for bounty hunters on the board.

 

I know many PvP players have railed against the influx of luck buffs, and their effect on PvP, but it seems to me that allowing low level players repeated risk free (no XP loss) hits at higher level players on the BB is encouraging the use of precisely those luck buffs to eventually get a hit through.

 

If that is your preference, okay. It does seem to embrace the luck based approach to PvP though. And I am not trying to insulate higher level players from attack on the BB, just looking at some of the consequences of no-XP loss bounty hunting. 

 

 

******

 

 

The 'friendly clears' thing. This has been stated many many times by many many players over many years, on many different PvP threads. To recap - people do not see the point in posting a bounty after being robbed because then they pay a bounty to the gold thief's friends who then soft clear the gold thief. They feel they get robbed twice so stop posting.

 

Unless all these people are part of a vast conspiracy to conceal their real reason not to post bounties I am inclined to believe this often repeated claim in the forums, which has been made off and on for as long as I can recall reading PvP posts.

 

Calista: "At least on a friendly clear the person loses some XP."

 

True. But not even the much quoted 2X XP loss is guaranteed, thanks to Conserve. Each hit does 2X XP loss, IF conserve does not kick in. If it does, no loss at all. We now know that friendly clears actually costs less than 2x XP over the course of a 10 hit clear. Given that composing conserve potion is maxed out at 300 at level 17, and distil 10% pots are easy to get, it is relatively simple for a whopping 16.5% of friendly hits (Conserve 300 cave distilled to 330) to cause no XP loss. So effectively 1/6 of that 2x XP loss is cancelled out, which means that a friendly clear with that readily available equipment does only 1 and 2/3 XP loss/hit over 10 hits.

 

This represents even less reason to post a bounty. And bigger conserves are available to reduce the damage further, to over 25% reduction in XP loss, which would equate to under 1.5X XP loss over a 10 hit friendly clear.

 

I don't know if Hoof kept the XP loss for the BH as part of a stimulate the BB plan, it seems more like he thought it was fair for the bounty hunter to risk losing XP as well as the target, so kept it.

 

I'm not sure it has deflated activity further, as there could be other reasons why unbuffed and offline players are not being hit.

 

And, bottom line, the BB activity has been minimal before and after seasons, and has been for a long time. Days go by with none, one or two bounties. Dulcharn recently kept it going almost single handedly.

 

To make bounty hunting more profitable, as I said above, asking people who have been hit to post higher bounties is not likely to work if the perception remains that they are paying for soft clears. Raising the cost of posting bounties will only depress the urge to post more.

 

We recently had a system where the game posted bounties, and players could add to the pot to increase the XP lost on the board. The game added reward money. Now, a lot of people did not like that system, but there is no reason why an aspect of that could not be ported into the current BB - i.e. the game adding gold to every bounty posted.

 

 

So: a player posts a bounty at current prices, the game then adds the minimum gold required for that bounty to the pot, each and every time, but only after the bounty is posted. No auto bounties here, a player still has to choose to bounty. The gold added to the game comes from the gold sunk by gold hits. If gold sunk by gold hits is insufficient to add to a particular bounty (has all been spent adding to other bounties), then no gold is added - this keeps gold hits as a sink, and does not cause BHing to bring new gold into the game. In that event, the player posting has the option themselves to add to their bounty pot.

 

Note that I am not advocating adding gold for increased XP loss. Only adding gold to give more incentive to Bounty hunt. XP loss, conserve modified or not, would remain the same. If it was felt later that folk wanted to be able to add gold for XP loss in .1of a % increments to a max agreed (like in the seasons) then that could be explored, if everyone is willing, and we have seen an uptick in board activity. 

 

Add to that system a reduction in costs of tickets and BHing may become more worthwhile. However, the problem of friendly clears remains. I believe it is a legitimate reason people to not post. Fixed XP loss for the gold thief on the board might work - but that is the automatic punishment I know Luis loathes. However it would be an incentive to post - a bounty that will not and cannot be soft cleared.

 

Or, we look at why there are not many pro Bounty Hunters out there. I have said above i think it is because of Counter Bounty. Mercs got smashed out of the game, and I think, over time, Bounty hunters have been similarly dissuaded from playing. This, to my mind, is a result of PvP players using existing PvP mechanics to their advantage and within all game rules, but has unfortunately led to a dearth of willing participants in the PvP game. As ever, I could well be wrong.

 

Without independent bounty hunters, soft clears remain the norm (because who will regularly take bounties and do more than 10 stams if they are at risk for CB? A 100 stam clear will be assumed to be a merc and/or something personal and will be CB'd - my assumption, and I am happy to be corrected by the knowledgeable), and as long as soft clears remain the norm, players who get hit for gold will have a reason not to bother posting, thus adding to BB inactivity.

 

Another 2 c. I'm off to clean a house.


Good-bye and hello, as always.


#36 Calista

Calista

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 871 posts

Posted 17 September 2015 - 19:19

I appreciate everyone who has replied in this topic. It can be a heated subject for many. The walls of text are a bit overwhelming for me, though. That's why I had stopped posting in this topic and was letting Luis do his thing. I'll reply as best I can.

 

I can't speak for the reasons why bounties are expiring. I know there is a relic war going on and that's part of it. But bounties were not typically being left to expire before this change. Bounty hunters typically take no part in whatever the drama is that leads to people being on the board. Our job is to clear the bounties, not get involved. (Guild wars and bounty hunting are 2 separate things, from my POV) And prior to this change, the bounties were cleared unless someone put in the effort to fight off clearers.

 

From my POV, the bounty hunters aren't going to waste their money, bounty tickets, buffs, and now xp to clear someone much higher level then them. There is no incentive to even try,  which is why I believe so many bounties are being left to expire. I've been specifically told by players they aren't going to pay HCS to advertise who's hitting them for 2 days, which is essentially all they're doing at this point.  That kills the number of bounties on the board, specifically because there is no reason to try.

 

Bounty hunters already face the risk of a counter bounty. Yes, I know you would like to see counter bounties gone. But those of us who play the board know the risks and accept them. Why more punishment for those of us willing to help those who post the bounties?

 

Conserve does not kick in 100% of the time. The bounty hunters who are clearing bounties use it to save their stam, which bounty hunting sucks up. Another downfall for the hunters.

 

I think that is all I need to say at this point. I wanted to make sure HCS is aware that is what is happening now. And to ask if that was their intention.


 


#37 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 18 September 2015 - 04:35

Calista: "At least on a friendly clear the person loses some XP."

 

True. But not even the much quoted 2X XP loss is guaranteed, thanks to Conserve. Each hit does 2X XP loss, IF conserve does not kick in. If it does, no loss at all. We now know that friendly clears actually costs less than 2x XP over the course of a 10 hit clear. Given that composing conserve potion is maxed out at 300 at level 17, and distil 10% pots are easy to get, it is relatively simple for a whopping 16.5% of friendly hits (Conserve 300 cave distilled to 330) to cause no XP loss. So effectively 1/6 of that 2x XP loss is cancelled out, which means that a friendly clear with that readily available equipment does only 1 and 2/3 XP loss/hit over 10 hits.

Doing nothing invites players to hit without retaliation. I think it's the wrong message to send! I know most guilds can't or won't protect their members. This is the real issue. Most guilds have become weak, I don't care how much xp they can gain if they're inept at protecting their members.

 

Your choices are simple; hit back, probably earn a little respect, do nothing and have zero punishment, have guildmates/allies/friends drop the offender 5 levels, or simply post for someone else to do the job(which has just become riskier). Which response is the easiest, cheapest, safest path? The attacked player and his guild deserve everything they get.

 

Leave all the unbuffed,stam gain geared players on the BB. I'll pick them up. I've been chasing Bleltch's phenomenal BHer title for years. I'm going to do it using the least amount of stam possible. It's how everyone plays the game, right?


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#38 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 18 September 2015 - 05:10

I appreciate everyone who has replied in this topic. It can be a heated subject for many. The walls of text are a bit overwhelming for me, though. That's why I had stopped posting in this topic and was letting Luis do his thing. I'll reply as best I can.

 

I can't speak for the reasons why bounties are expiring. I know there is a relic war going on and that's part of it. But bounties were not typically being left to expire before this change. Bounty hunters typically take no part in whatever the drama is that leads to people being on the board. Our job is to clear the bounties, not get involved. (Guild wars and bounty hunting are 2 separate things, from my POV) And prior to this change, the bounties were cleared unless someone put in the effort to fight off clearers.

 

From my POV, the bounty hunters aren't going to waste their money, bounty tickets, buffs, and now xp to clear someone much higher level then them. There is no incentive to even try,  which is why I believe so many bounties are being left to expire. I've been specifically told by players they aren't going to pay HCS to advertise who's hitting them for 2 days, which is essentially all they're doing at this point.  That kills the number of bounties on the board, specifically because there is no reason to try.

 

Bounty hunters already face the risk of a counter bounty. Yes, I know you would like to see counter bounties gone. But those of us who play the board know the risks and accept them. Why more punishment for those of us willing to help those who post the bounties?

 

Conserve does not kick in 100% of the time. The bounty hunters who are clearing bounties use it to save their stam, which bounty hunting sucks up. Another downfall for the hunters.

 

I think that is all I need to say at this point. I wanted to make sure HCS is aware that is what is happening now. And to ask if that was their intention.

 

Hi Calista - sorry for my walls of text, but when a subject is complex, a one liner does not always cut it.

 

I agree that guild wars and bounty hunting are separate, and should be, but on the board, who can tell the difference, if you are not involved?

 

So do you believe that bounty hunters should be able to clear people much higher level than them?

 

Why?

 

It seems to me that bounty hunters should be going after folk near their own level and below. Too high a level above? Leave it to bounty hunters at a level that can compete effectively with their target, no? 

 

And how were these lower level players clearing bounties in the past when XP loss was not active? Was it through repeated attacks and waiting for a nice combination of buffs to activate? That approach would lead to XP loss now when the needed combinations do not align.

 

Why should players who need that level of assistance in terms of luck buffs activating even be trying to take on those bounties? Should a level 30 be able to execute a bounty on a level 2500? (as a stupidly extreme example) Is that what you want in PvP? 

 

Is it the case now that higher level players unbuffed and offline cannot be defeated?

 

In stam gain epics that is certainly not the case.

 

In offline defensive gear (armor or defence based) and unbuffed a buffed player many levels lower can penetrate their defences without utilising luck buffs to get there.

 

It seems you are arguing for folk who are realistically out of the range to really be able to hit someone with any regularity, to still be given a chance to clear bounties that should be beyond their capability. Why should that be encouraged?

 

Calista: " I've been specifically told by players they aren't going to pay HCS to advertise who's hitting them for 2 days, which is essentially all they're doing at this point."

 

Please explain this - I freely admit I do not understand the point you are making. How does HCS advertise who is trying to clear bounties/hit them for 2 days? Is this a FSH function I don't see as I don't use it?

 

 

 

 

 

Yes I believe that no counter bounties would improve the health of the BB, and the PvP ecosystem as a whole, but that is only my opinion.

 

 

 

I no longer want them gone, (I did in the past and argued for it in a topic of my creation) I was at pains to point that out earlier. I think keeping them kills the BB, and keeps PvP marginalised, but if that is what PvP players want, I'm not going to argue against it anymore. I will keep stating why I think it is a mistake, but I think that until PvP players agree themselves that it no longer serves a useful purpose, and no longer expands their game, that any attempt to remove it is futile. As a result, and as I said up thread earlier, I think you are welcome to keep CB, and keep the desert of PvP it has created.

 

You ask: Why more punishment for those of us willing to help those who post bounties?

 

Well, by your own admission there are targets you can hit quite safely when offline and unbuffed. Why is XP loss on a failed hit a problem there? The only problem is on claiming a bounty on a player who is realistically out of range and defending him or herself: BUT - who commands a higher and therefore possibly profitable bounty.

 

The problem therefore is why are there not bounty hunters at that level willing to take that bounty?

 

Why should the bounty board be reliant on players of lower level collecting bounties on high level players?

 

Where is the possibility of profit? If the only profit is in taking on players way above your level - that needs to be addressed.

 

 

 

Conserve saving stam for the BH I have no problem with. No it does not kick in 100% of the time, but enough to render the 2X XP loss argument a bit exaggerated for as long as it saves XP as well as stam. 

 

Conserve saving XP loss on the target being hit makes no sense. Save the BH stam - sure. Save the target's XP loss? Why? It makes zero logical sense (outside of the logic employed by the program as coded), but has been enjoyed as a loophole for years. Which most of us only found out about when players complained that the loophole had been closed. And successfully campaigned to have reopened. But this means that knowledge has leaked out into he wider community, and fewer people again feel like posting bounties, as the punishment is even less than the 2x XP loss advertised.

 

 

 

To be clear.

 

 

I am in favour of making bounty hunting profitable.

 

I support lowering the cost of BH tickets.

 

I think the game should augment bounty pots posted by players with gold drawn from the gold sunk by gold hits, as long as gold sunk from gold hits is available. (Guild wars could eat up this pot of gold and maybe should be considered separately? A Vendetta Board, rather than a Bounty Board?))

 

 

I think random prizes for bounty hunting like the bounty pot should be reintroduced as an incentive. But it will need to be truly random. To anyone doing 1 hit at any time. To prevent any attempt at forming cartels to suck up the bounty pot. Invent a new god: Glosvir the Hunter who randomly blesses any who score a hit on a difficult prey.

 

 

I do believe that as long as counter bounties are allowed independent bounty hunters will not truly exist in this game, they will always have to play by the rules of the groups who can counter bounty them out of the field. This is my belief, not a stated fact.

 

I do not believe that XP loss on the BB for failed attacks is the reason bounties are going uncollected.

 

If the BB relies on bounty hunters hundreds of levels lower than their opponents clearing bounties then it is in even worse shape than I thought.

 

Ultimately - when recently was the BB genuinely active?

 

The Seasons.

 

(under very different rules - but they helped magnify PvP activity, unlike CB (which was not active in the seasons!), which does not add PvP activity - because if CB really does add to PVP activity - why is there not more activity on the BB? Answer - because CB silences PvP, and does not promote it, but still some proponents of the PvP game cling to it.)

 

If Counter bounty meant 3-4 pages of BB activity a day, I would not be here arguing against its efficacy. It is that simple.

 

Before that, the last time the BB was truly active was during the GXP mining craze. Other than that the BB, as currently constituted, has been minimally active. For years.

 

HCS - you have some mountains to climb with PvP. It will never be for everyone in the game. For some, it is everything in the game.


Good-bye and hello, as always.


#39 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,955 posts

Posted 18 September 2015 - 05:35

So do you believe that bounty hunters should be able to clear people much higher level than them?

 

Why?

 

It seems to me that bounty hunters should be going after folk near their own level and below. Too high a level above? Leave it to bounty hunters at a level that can compete effectively with their target, no? 

 

And how were these lower level players clearing bounties in the past when XP loss was not active? Was it through repeated attacks and waiting for a nice combination of buffs to activate? That approach would lead to XP loss now when the needed combinations do not align.

 

Why should players who need that level of assistance in terms of luck buffs activating even be trying to take on those bounties? Should a level 30 be able to execute a bounty on a level 2500? (as a stupidly extreme example) Is that what you want in PvP? 

Your text walls are outta hand lol

 

Believe it or not there are some tough, knowledgeable BHers at all levels and many are at  levels sub-1000 since, like me, they have long ago been disenchanted with the boredom of the leveling game. These players truly could care less about losing xp on the BB. By why punish the BHer? Is there a good reason? What have they done?

 

I will concede I think players trying to punish with 100 stams and lose should be held liable for those losses through xp loss. And please, counter bounties need to remain an essential part of PvP!

 

I don't think anyone believes players "should be able" to clear people much higher than them whatsoever. They try clearing players for the challenge. It's fun playing the game. After the risk of being bountied why should they be punished further? I look to be in the minority on the issue but I think the additional punishment is ill-founded on players who are cleaning up the punishing assignment players who post are unwilling or unable to do. I think the cost to post a player needs to increase!


[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#40 Belaric

Belaric

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 858 posts

Posted 18 September 2015 - 05:38

Doing nothing invites players to hit without retaliation. I think it's the wrong message to send! I know most guilds can't or won't protect their members. This is the real issue. Most guilds have become weak, I don't care how much xp they can gain if they're inept at protecting their members.

 

Your choices are simple; hit back, probably earn a little respect, do nothing and have zero punishment, have guildmates/allies/friends drop the offender 5 levels, or simply post for someone else to do the job(which has just become riskier). Which response is the easiest, cheapest, safest path? The attacked player and his guild deserve everything they get.

 

Leave all the unbuffed,stam gain geared players on the BB. I'll pick them up. I've been chasing Bleltch's phenomenal BHer title for years. I'm going to do it using the least amount of stam possible. It's how everyone plays the game, right?

 

I've done nothing for years, Luis, and it has not hurt me, or my guild.

 

My guild does not protect its members. They should protect themselves. My guild is no nanny state.

 

We expect them to stand or fall on their own two feet and be responsible for their own actions, including stealing gold, and being sworn at afterwards, and being bountied and dropped 5. This has happened often to some of my guys and gals, and they have never complained to me about it.

 

The guild is there to provide an environment where the player has access to resources that allow him or her to grow and experiment, but we will not go to bat for a player's bad decisions, nor will we fight out a player's wars for him or her. All options within the game are available, but we make it clear that to PvP is to PvP and it is that player's choice to attack other players, and not the Guild's choice. The Guild will not protect a player from the consequences of his choice to attack other players.

 

If one of our players is being repeatedly attacked for no good reason he or she can discern? Well then that is a cause for a ticket to support. If there is no good reason for a repeated attack  on a player who has not attacked anyone else, then support seems a reasonable way to go.

 

I have had a few players in guild have vendettas with other players, or feuds, and I have had no idea until it came up randomly.

 

They dealt with it themselves and needed no back up.

 

Guilds should not need to defend their members.

 

Guilds should teach their members to make choices and live by the consequences. This is another way in which our views on how to play the game differ Luis. I'm not sure which is better, but I know which I'm more comfortable with. 


Good-bye and hello, as always.



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: