Jump to content

Belaric

Member Since 07 Feb 2013
Offline Last Active Jun 20 2023 03:01

#891780 PvP XP system: ways to make it rewarding.

Posted by Belaric on 29 September 2014 - 09:50

This is an idea to be used in conjunction with Doom's Blood idea/whatever HCS decide to implement.

 

I think, for the new PvPXP system to work and be engaging, it has to reward players who play well.

 

I do not think a new token system and new fixed prizes is the entire answer.

 

They can be part of the reward system, but not all of it.

 

Ranks and ladders and being #1 are huge draws. I think the PvP XP system should use that to make PvP XP accumulation a game within the game, with specialised tactics specific to that pursuit.

 

GAINING PvPXP more efficiently that the other guy should be part of the draw. Everyone wants to be #1!!

 

The ability to gain extra PvPXP should be skill based.

 

I propose a tree of PvPXP skills, based either upon PvpXP level, or to be bought by players using PvPXP points. (Sacrifice PvP XP to use these skills when on the BB)

 

I think these skills, which are basically buffs, but only applicable to PvP, should only be activated by players in/on the bounty board.

 

The existence of these skills would be an incentive to get on, and perform well, on the bounty board.

 

For instance:

 

Iron Stance : after X successful defences on the BB you gain a bonus % to PvP XP per subsequent successful defence on the BB. (Reward for dancing hard)

 

Diamond Eye : Gain % bonus to PvP XP earned when defeating enemy with Iron Stance active on BB. (Reward for beating a solid opponent)

 

Power Shift : Use X amount of available PvP XP (Or have this as high level PvP  ability) to gain a % boost one stat of your choice for Y minutes when on the BB. Increase % boost or Y duration by sacrificing larger amounts of PvP XP/ having higher level pvP XP. BB specific.

 

Crystal Eye : On BB you can ignore cloak buff and see your opponent's real stats.

 

Power Master : At high level of PvP XP a player can reallocate a % of their level up points permanently.

 

And so on. Create PVP specific skills that make the PvPXP game more complex and interesting for PvP players. And which act as goals for Pvp players to achieve and then use/unlock.

 

 

 

I think those kinds of abilities (those are just for instances) tied to PvP progress would act as an incentive to try the PvP game, and make it more based on skill than luck, which I believe has been a complaint made by PvP players about some newer buffs. At high levels the PvP skills could have a global benefit, which would be an incentive to all other players to join in to gain such in game advantages.

 

 

 

Worth thinking about?

 

 

I have not discussed problems with collusion and rating.PvPXP trading this time out because

 

a) we should focus on the positive

 

2) HCS must know they need to deal with that




#891773 Gold Hits and a gold hit BB in the new PvPXP system. An idea.

Posted by Belaric on 29 September 2014 - 09:05

Hi everybody.

 

I'm thinking with the new PvPXP system that is coming down the line, that some problems/ideas have popped up about gold hits. This is an idea of mine to deal with the gold hit realm.

 

First – there are many ways to hide/use gold usefully in the game and minimise hits, so new players should be able to learn how to minimise the damage done to them by gold hits pretty fast. These have been listed many times.

 

BG has said just hit back when you get hit for gold. Fair enough. But I think that does not cover all eventualities, so I have this proposal.

 

Second – if XP cannot be taken to grief other players, the next best thing is gold, so we may see an upswing in gold hits. I am not saying XP is/was taken to grief other players primarily. I am just noting from what BG has said that the HCS position seems to be that XP loss via PvP hits has led to a loss of player volume. HCS would like to see less players lost via XP hits, so they are seriously considering a new system of PvP that removes XP loss. That is my inference and my perspective only.

 

So third –  in my view we’ll need a gold hit BB, separate from the PvP XP BB.

 

Because the PvPXP game will be separate, and have separate and distinct benefits from simple gold hitting. I have ideas about that - but that is for a different thread.

 

I think in future when you access the attack player menu you should have the option of Gold hit or PvPXP hit. This allows players who don't care about PvPXP rating, but who want to try to make money pvping, to have that freedom. But with that freedom comes possible retribution. For gold hits that comes on a gold hit BB.

 

How to handle the gold hit BB?

 

I think, similarly to Yodamus’ idea for the PvPXP BB, that it should be automated.

 

I think automating the BB is  ESSENTIAL to making it work for everyone, and to make make it fair.

 

Currently many players over many years have asked why they should lose gold twice due to a gold hit, once due to the hit itself, second due to having to pay for a bounty to be posted. The current BB is not that active (dead is a word used many times by many players) – reluctance to pay twice may be part of the reason for that inactivity.

 

My idea would be that a player is posted to the gold hit BB only after she has hit enough times to SINK X amount of gold. The reward is then posted by the game for this now notorious gold thief. The reward is a % of the amount of gold she has sunk. (say 75%) This means the gold hit BB pays for itself, and gold hits are preserved as a gold sink. Yes, less of a gold sink than now – but I think composing (for instance) more than replaces the gold sink function of gold hits. The only way to know is to try it and see how the gold-FSP market responds.

 

How much gold needs to be sunk should be based on the gold thief’s level. I think it could be worked out something like this: the gold thief’s level x gold dropped by monster of same level x Y (a random number of monsters of that level killed) = the amount needed to be sunk – as a for instance. The cows could work out a ratio. This could provide an increasing value of gold required to be sunk by gold thieves of increasingly high level, which seems fair to me.

 

Thieves could work out how much to hit and then stop to avoid being posted which would make their thieving self-regulated. If there is no time limit on crossing the threshold they either stop hitting, or accept an occasional bounty. Again – how frequently this happens in practice could be adjusted if people are being posted too frequently. Some variance could be put into the threshold of when a player is posted to make such calculations difficult to judge. The main point is that is should still be possible for a skilled gold thief to profit by thieving, but it shouldn't be an easy road to travel.

 

What would the gold thief lose on the gold hit BB?

 

Why good old XP!  I say this only if the attack ranges for current PvP are kept for gold hits in the future system. As levelling out of a gold hitters range would remain a prime strategy, beyond getting rid of all ones gold, to avoid further hits. Therefore the gold hitter losing XP on the BB would help her victims escape her attack range. And there would need to be multiple victims most likely for the gold sink threshold to be hit. If the gold thefts never sink enough gold to trigger a bounty the inference is that the gold thief is not doing enough to break another players game.

 

Further, to avoid simple repetitive hits for harassment purposes being covered by the excuse of “It was a gold hit – I’m not doing anything wrong!” I would propose that gold hits cannot be undertaken on a player who has on hand say 10% of what they could earn in gold from mobs of their level x their current max stam. So if people do keep their gold levels low – they cannot be hit for any malicious purpose. A gold hit has to be a hit to gain gold, not pester someone. Again – the threshold qualification could be varied, I'm just saying 10% as a starting point, for argument's sake. And yes – this would mean that those guys with 250K stam banks could probably carry quite a lot of gold before being hit – their reward for sinking so many resources into getting such an absurdly large stam bank.

 

There you have it – my idea for a gold hit bounty board – automated, and activity regulated by the gold hitters themselves.

 

No counter bounties, before anyone asks. The game has generated the initial bounty. In fact the gold thief has generated her own bounty by stealing and sinking gold. The only person losing XP should be the gold thief. She done the crime, she does the time. (and then gets to earn gold regaining her lost levels! Bonus!)

 

Yes, this does mean 2 Bounty Boards. One for gold, one for PvP XP. 2 types of BH medal, BH lists etc. etc. (I think all current BH qualifications would count towards BOTH new tallies) Is that workable for HCS? Their call. I think to make things simpler in terms of what is allowed as a PvP hit vs a gold hit this might have a chance of working.

 

Thank you for reading. This went long, as usual.

 

 




#889597 Game Down?

Posted by Belaric on 14 September 2014 - 09:12

Meh - I got none of the panting faux passion and all of the inactivity. Not even a silk shirt fail.




#888535 Update v2.50

Posted by Belaric on 05 September 2014 - 22:19

If only we had a good mobile interface. The thought that folk might be finding, trying and instantly giving this game up because the phone/tablet interface is suboptimal is highly frustrating. Just throwing away customers. Aaargh.

 

EDIT : P.S. A Friday afternoon update? Good to stick with the classics Zorg!! LOLOLOLOL!!!




#884606 Open letter to the Cows

Posted by Belaric on 10 August 2014 - 15:53

To be frank (insert joke here), Belaric, aren't EOCer's a bit disillusioned with the lather, rinse, repeat as it is?  I sure know I would be.  An FS II could be a wonderful idea; doesn't mean FS has to khack.

 

DP

 

Speaking personally - No. I like levelling, always have, like my stats going up, like having a huge cushion of skill points to spend as I please, like seeing my XP and my guild XP going up. Sitting at one level with over 1000+ levels of shiny unexplored content above me seems madness, to be honest, but that style of play does seem to float other player's boats - the great thing about FS is it accommodates all styles. And if anyone is disillusioned by lather rinse repeat it would be of a different order to the level of disillusionment that would strike if say the game were suddenly reset, and all the work done to get to EOC was washed away. Getting to EOC is an achievement and it does confer advantages - you can always get the newest highest level gear/titans/SE/legendary/spine mobs, your stamina is freed to do anything in the game in addition to levelling when new content comes out, you are a boss GXP generator for your guild. You have the highest level buffs... which at the moment is true for anyone within 575 levels of EOC, but hey ho - the principle was there.

 

I wonder if your (DP's) perspective is that the game would be better if the game were reset and the advantages the EOC segment of the community enjoy were erased. That is the sense I get, I could be wrong, and you can correct my misapprehension. In my case if such an action were taken my motivation to start again with no advantage conferred from my previous hard work would be very limited, for I would feel aggrieved that what I had worked for had been taken unfairly from me by such a reset. (Not that I see any inclination on HCS's part to entertain such an idea - thankfully). This is separate from the idea of ascending characters, which again - I do not think would work very well in this game system, or at least no reasonable interesting alternative to the status quo of open ended content has yet to be suggested. I'm cool with open content.

 

IF a FS2 started up and we all started from scratch there, fair enough. I think that would be a good idea, especially if on a fully mobile platform. With all the ideas for content and features already in existence in FS, the mobile version would have loads of content fast, and 'updates' that are just imports of existing ideas from the original game. HCS could look like rockstars to players of a mobile FS2. Just sayin'. But do they have the resources for such an endeavour?? I think the original game probably would wither as a result, but it could be argued it might get more traffic from peopled drawn in by the mobile version. We have not seen an Eldevin bump. Or have we??? LOL!

 

I think Undjuvion earlier referenced the fact that levelling is now a bit like headbanging as there is much less incentive to do so.

 

All HCS has to do to incentivise the high level crowd is introduce some level 2000 buffs, and promise the next set at 2400. Voila! Instant motivation to level from 1600 to 2000, and from 2000 up. We have shown we can go huge gaps between buff releases, lets take advantage but still produce a realistic goal. Even go 2000 for one set and 2500 for the next. Any form of carrot will do. The buff names and presumably ideas for their mechanics have been around for a long time - you can look them up in the AH under the grants buff tab. All HCS has to do is introduce some of them at 2000, and promise more at 2500. Keep some buffs spare for potion only and for composing only (as incentives for those areas of the game), but new buffs for high level players will motivate many, I think. Coding buffs must be a PITA by now, which I assume is why it has not been done. Interesting and non-game breaking buff ideas are still being made on the buff thread - give them a try!

 

So: in open letter to the cows style.

 

1) Introduce new high level buffs ASAP - it would invigorate the entire game. You know this. This is not a roadmap issue - this is a core game function issue and so can supersede roadmap priorities in my opinion.

 

2) Really think about removing the Players Online Graphs, or the registered vs playing info on your home page - you are just advertising your lack of numbers, which surely can't be smart - unless you think the bait and switch effect of not having the numbers there and letting players join and start playing only to find small communities online is worse. Your call, your company, your business strategy. And maybe it is a statutory requirement to have registered and active numbers up there somewhere, I don't know. 




#883291 Chompers Attack!

Posted by Belaric on 01 August 2014 - 22:26

I saw HC's posted Chomper event on facebook ... look this chomper in the middle!

11llx5g.jpg

 

Where it is? lol wondering if they missed adding it to the event

 

13976.gif

13977.gif

 

and this set in wiki images :o  :huh:

Ring rune - result if it is indeed an attack/armour based set as advertised in the high level sets thread...




#883290 Open letter to the Cows

Posted by Belaric on 01 August 2014 - 22:23

P.S. I'm all for a streamlined modern FS 2 to be created and made fully mobile if the original FS cannot be adapted. An FS2 that works on mobile, and everyone gets to start on the same playing field at level 1 would be cool. It would probably lead to the demise of the original FS, but the new game might be worth it if all the desired gameplay improvements are included.

 

Do HCS have any interest in such a project?


  • Xed likes this


#883072 Chompers Attack!

Posted by Belaric on 31 July 2014 - 14:29

Thanks BG - I thought the new sets would be crystal!

 

Wish you had gone helm rune at 1650 though... LOL! Sorry - can't help myself!!




#882911 Open letter to the Cows

Posted by Belaric on 30 July 2014 - 17:02

LOL! "In a deeper sense?" Should we wade into such philosophical waters?

 

There are fun new things every so often - *SPOILER ALERT IF YOU ARE UNDER level 1500* Crestoun and the cycle that led us to the Terror titan was awesome, and tricky if you were in the first wave, at least! The revisited Xindy and Morbidstein that led to the new SE's and the Eater of Time. Every so often special content arrives that is a lot of fun and is challenging. Most of the time the new levels are fairly rote but you look for diamonds in the rough - a useful champ or elite set etc. There is always something new, something evolving, even with standard content.

 

In other online games I think ascended characters work because so many character builds exist in those games' fundamental structure. Ascending characters, or getting them to epic levels or whatever opens up new ways of playing and putting together future builds. Variation in build strategy is much more diverse and interesting. And in the game I am specifically thinking of and with which you are familiar - people can play the same content over and over - but with radically different characters. Even then, they can play through their characters' levels, without playing the same world areas, there are enough different world areas to level up in entirely new places 2 or 3 times.

 

Fallen Sword does not have that fundamental structure to allow radically different builds of the same character. There are no character classes to play with. So ascending is less interesting. And the existing linear content is less interesting to run through a second time too - at least in other games you can roam around an open world and have choices as to where you earn your lower levels. Suitably ascended characters don't even have to bother with low levels at all and can start at a mid level as a bonus! I have a hard time seeing how FS can match that kind of flexibility and game play in an ascended format.

 

Erm, have we strayed off topic a tad???




#882899 Increase The PvP Attack Range

Posted by Belaric on 30 July 2014 - 16:06

Your suggestion nearly kills the gold thieving/BB part of this game.. I hope we never see a full opt out option for PvP..

Let's try to steer this thread back in the direction of attack ranges in open world PvP please.. PvP can't have one thread so let's keep it simple and feel free to start anew thread with your ideas

Expanding attack ranges.

 

If there are fewer online, I can see why expanding attack ranges is tempting as it becomes harder to find people to hit.

 

An unfortunate side effect of dwindling online numbers.

 

The main negative I see is it becomes much harder to escape an attackers range. In the past it has been very hard to escape a 10 level range against a persistent attacker. Escaping incrementally larger ranges may prove to be even more difficult.

 

If the cows want to give this a try - cool. I don't think it would be broadly popular, but that is my personal opinion. The old in game poll could be used to gauge its community wide reception prior to implementation. See what the whole community thinks of expanded PvP ranges before implementing anything. Forum polls are too limited. Or - the cows could unilaterally go for it and see what happens. The choice is theirs.

 

If they do give it a go, I think the sliding scale of increasing ranges seems reasonable. Of course 25 at EOC means there would be no escape as content comes out in 25 level chunks.... LOL!! How many folk can go 26 levels beyond EOC very often? (I'm saying this as a point of amusement, not an actual objection to the sliding scale idea.)




#882892 Open letter to the Cows

Posted by Belaric on 30 July 2014 - 15:34

Going back to Yotekiller's original post for a moment...

 

I agree that having the numbers of players posted is a disincentive - 900K registered 700 playing is not a good advert.

 

The players online graphs when you click on a game from the HCS homepage don't seem a good idea. The Eldevin one has a max range of 150, which makes it a minutely multiplayer online game, FS has a max of what 600 or so - moderately multiplayer - these features allow potential new customers to look at the online numbers for both of these games, see low activity and say no thanks.

 

Unless these counters are a statutory requirement I would think about getting rid of them - you are simply advertising the lack of players online.

 

Maybe keep the online counters in game once signed up - but even then it is used as a slow drip drip drip of morale depression for long time players as they see the numbers slowly drop. Ignorance may be bliss.

 

Now I'm guessing that once upon a time Gothador had more online numbers than FS did, but still HCS dedicated resources to FS, so I have to see the wisdom of HCS, for the future of their company, putting resources into Eldevin. They still need an AH and a Guild system instituted over there, apparently, and those are core functions of an MMO. More dedicated support to FS would be much appreciated, but I suppose that needs to be balanced by an assessment of how much income FS now generates. HCS has the numbers, we don't. Indeed if we have the online numbers removed we will become, as players, more ignorant of how the game is going and will have to judge by 'feel' what the online numbers are. LOL! Maybe we want to keep the counters after all!

 

The stamina arguments - if this thread just becomes "Give us more stuff." Then it fails, in my opinion.

 

However. Changes to the stamina system might be good. I liked the sliding scale suggested. Something equitable for all, that allowed everyone to play more often would be good. The designers did not expect stam banks of 100K, or even 40K! (And as Mzz stated above - it was a player's choice to grow such gigantic banks - a bit rich to then complain about them never filling.... but human nature being what it is....) I once suggested unlimited stam to 300 to get folk started! LOL! Having more stam will mean more people gaining levels faster, and if people choose to get to EOC and sit, that is their choice. IF having more stam (or an altered XP gain) allowed people to advance through the lower levels faster and get more deeply entwined in the game I don't think it would be a bad thing - we want to keep and grow our numbers, just because we walked uphill both ways to school doesn't mean everyone else has to! As long as new content is generated regularly, I'm cool, it does not necessarily have to be faster just because there is more stam gain. We will have the option of using our stam in other areas of the game.

 

Blah blah, I've gone on again. Sorry DP.




#880406 A note from the FSH Developer

Posted by Belaric on 22 July 2014 - 15:24

Yuuzhan,

 

My thanks to you and all the other FSH developers, it was a great tool to enhance gameplay - when I first switched it on it was like that moment in The Wizard of Oz when the screen goes into technicolor!

 

Edit snip.

 

Real life always wins - good luck with your new job, enjoy your time with your family.

 

Anyway - all the best to you, see you around in game.




#880243 New gear for high levels?

Posted by Belaric on 21 July 2014 - 19:46

I agree with leos on the 1650 set - it is a direct replacement for griffs and only 100 levels up from griffs at 1550 - so would be a waste of a set there. It would be better placed up at 2120 if that is the only slot you have due to realm event design. Griffs has been used all the way to that level, to be broken by synlust at 2125. So switch the 1650 set as designed to the 2120 slot and you are cool.

 

1880 Boots rune? We have twins boots rune, I know totally different stats, but still. Also it will not fit with Tapios or Pontius' sets, both of which are armor/boots sets with arm/dam stats. Might be nice for another high level armor statted set to fit around those sets..., so switch to ring rune maybe? That way it does not mess with the two above mentioned sets, or the santorks helm/gloves war set at 1500. Or make it a Shield/rune combo, which preserves mix and matches with titanic tagoz, which already does not play with pontius' and tapios' sets.

 

2120 set? Well gloves shield is a replication of nolhoggrs at 1650. (Though with 70% damage 30% attack I'm not sure you'll get TOO many complaints LMAO!! It would be a direct upgrade) BUT.... If you switch the 1650 set to 2120  as advised you will not want to create another 1650 gloves shield set, as Nolhoggrs would be greatly devalued. Unless you keep this set at 2120 and change the 1650 set.

 

My option if you were sticking with att/dam as stats would be to go helm/rune at 1650. It is not a combo that has been used since helhearts in a badass set(off hand), and yes it breaks twins (150 levels up at 1800), but it fits with griffs/ponamu/nolhoggr as a prime hunt set up. Plus random boots of course. Helm rune at either 1650 or 2120 would probably work as a sexy damage heavy set.

 

Weapon shield? At 1650 this breaks ponamu which is a 1600 set, and nolhoggrs which is already a 1650 set so again too close in levels to existing highly useful sets. At 2120, It breaks both ponamu and nolhoggrs, but might be worth it at that level with 70% damage!! LMAO!

 

Thanks for asking. For an attack/dam damage heavy set I think a helm/rune would work at 1650, put the ring/armor set to 2120 and you'd be golden. Too many armor statted higher level sets have boots in them (Sadaions upward), so I'd try to avoid boots for the armor stat set at 1880.

 

I have done this from memory and not while being super anal about available sets. If I have missed something or one of my suggestions breaks something great I trust the forum community will inform me of my error! LOL!




#878870 If we implemented 3 FSH features, which would you pick?

Posted by Belaric on 14 July 2014 - 03:29

1) Guild Inventory - sortable by level, quick wear from inventory. A huge time saver. 

2) Quick buff is way useful as a time saver also.

3) I like the auto linking of scout tower info when you click on the titan kill log. A lot.

4) I like the auto calculation of stats vs monsters in terms of will you hit? Hits to kill etc., even though it has been inaccurate for a while it still gave me a ballpark idea and saved me some scratch paper!!

 

Yes we can live without it. But it is inconvenient. How much inconvenience do we want to have to play through? Will lost functionality lose players? I don't know - and it is a calculation HCS need to make.

 

The guild report system and scrolling down looking for items in people's backpacks is a humungous PITA. Every time I go back and play SS2 the need to search manually for gear kills me. Doing it here with much more guild gear to organise - well, I'm trying to live with it now...




#878626 Missing composing buffs

Posted by Belaric on 12 July 2014 - 13:54

Got to say that for HCS introduction of higher level/ more skills in composing must be a massive headache for them - given the many laws of unintended consequences that abound. I mean look at Davros81 - at level 27 he will have Co-A co-D completed at 250. He never needs to use the earned 175 skills again. Blazing cave potion becomes irrelevant to him, and anyone in his guild who he can make potions for.

 

Folk who have powered into the 30's 40's and 50's will instantaneously, if the cows ever introduce new/more buffs, max out those newly introduced buffs and make more skills and cave/invented/arena potions defunct, not just for themselves, but potentially for their guilds, as one composer can supply many other players - have a couple in one guild and you are in great shape. That, while great for us as players, may not be as awesome a prospect for HCS.

 

Composing specific buffs as a solution? Well we have had no new buffs as a reward for gaining levels in 550 levels, so I would not hold my breath on composing specific buffs being created anytime soon.

 

Yes gold gets burned, and some people burn stam hunting frags. But how does this activity stack up in game vs cave diving and the farming and shopping activity that goes into inventing for instance? Or the stam burned on buffing guildies which stops when potions replace mere 175 buffs? HCS may be having a hard time balancing the benefits of an expanded composing system.

 

If composing becomes the dominant form of acquiring buffs in the game (which it might if skills keep getting added to it), something which was created to get rid of excess old items will reduce huge swathes of the game to irrelevance. That may ultimately do more harm than good. That consideration may be another reason why HCS is slow to act here.






Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: