Jump to content

yotwehc

Member Since 15 Apr 2013
Offline Last Active Jan 08 2018 23:19

#863305 My suggestion on reviving the Arena

Posted by Maj on 16 April 2014 - 23:42

Any planned improvements should first concentrate on the following goals:
 
1. Increase arena participation --> speed up arena fill rate
- Make combat moves available on the fly
- Add in-game documentation
- Create grouped arena tournaments
(more details below)
 
2. Create a fair prize/reward system
These have been suggested in previous posts: 
- Finalist, semifinalist gets arena tokens to use in arena shop
 
3. Overhaul the existing in-game Arena / Arena Moves interface
- Minimize postbacks/Ajaxify pages
 

Any additional features such as 'increased moves' should be done after the above features have been polished.

 

-----

 

With the goal of increasing arena participation, these are the additional improvements I'd like to see in arena:

 

1. Do away with earning combat moves and make them available to all players by default. I don't see the point why new players should earn them piecemeal as this only slows down their full participation and possibly eliminate their interest in arena. I see some players earn less than 10 arena moves and stop there. Getting them to jump right into the action will increase arena participation, thus quickly filling arena matches.

 

2. Add an easy-to-understand in-game help/FAQ with detailed info on combat moves, arena mechanics, etc. Demystifying arena will somehow eliminate one of the barriers to entry to arena participation.

 

3. Create grouped arena tournaments based on arena wins so new players can have a chance to compete against players with similar arena experience. There will be five tabs, while the 'PvP Moves' tab will be removed:

 

Group I - Arena Wins 1-49, players with 50 or more wins cannot enter

Group II - Arena Wins 1-99, players with 100 or more wins cannot enter

Group III - Arena Wins 1-249, players with 250 or more wins cannot enter

Group IV - Arena Wins 1-499, players with 500 or more wins cannot enter

Group V - Free for All, all players can participate regardless of number of arena wins

 

The groups/arena wins listed may need tweaking, but the idea is there.




#863301 Next Global Event with Frag Stash rewards?

Posted by BigGrim on 16 April 2014 - 23:20

So does scripting ...

 

Not really, logging in is hard when you've been terminated.




#862163 Double composing XP weekend?

Posted by duktayp on 11 April 2014 - 23:37

yes - win button please

 

3118917+_28fdeac8f4f7534b550b3e036c2a347




#861349 Mysterious Item

Posted by Cal on 09 April 2014 - 05:06

It wasn't originally bound.  It was part of the quest to get on of the elemental swords, probably the Elemental Trident of Water, but I'm not sure cause someone screwed up all the quests so you're killing one elemental to get the drop of another elemental.  Anyway, I think long ago it wasn't bound and some guilds got the item and put it in their guild store and tagged it to help some of the members with the quest.  I'm guessing the cows didn't think this help was really legal so the bound the item, old ones and new ones, and now you're stuck with a bound guild tagged item.  It can be self recalled to the guild store, or a guild member could recall it from you.  If in the guild store you could untag it and then maybe compose it, but it may not be composable.  You could throw it away instead of composing it, but its kinda cool to have an illegal item like that, so I wouldn't be able to bring myself to do that.  You just have to deal with the bit of a headache.




#860327 My Suggestions for reviving the Bounty Board (And this is quite radical)

Posted by Belaric on 04 April 2014 - 21:31

Here is another aspect from a Mathematical view point for those considering this great idea - Presently the way the bounty board is programed the minimum gold that is attached /  required as a reward to each bounty is calculated by an easy formula.

 

            Offering gold as a reward, you must offer at least 100 gold per the targets level

 

So Let's use me as an example and let's also assume that I am the Attacker that is being posted.

I am currently Level 812 - Presently using the HCS formula the minimum cost for posting me via gold on the Bounty Board is 81.200 gold.  Regardless as to how much stam is used I must be attacked 10 times and defeated prior to me leaving the Bounty Board. ( I took the liberty to calculate how much XP I need to make a level - via how much I currently have right now this way I have an idea of how much XP I have per Level)

 

19.755.970 <----- Current XP
+3.863.307<------ XP Needed until I gain a Level

-----------------
23.624.277 = 1 level

 

The average 100 stam hit on me [while on the bounty board] will take roughly around 3.100.000 million XP to 3.500.00 at most.

 

So Let's round of the 23.624.277 XP to 24.000.000 and lets round up the 100 stam BB hits from 3 mil to 4 mil XP taken per hit.  While we are rounding things up let's also say that your average 10 hits while on the bb to clear using 10 stam given the reward vs xp taken to make things easy we will say 80k gold = 1 attack with 100 stam. <------ I know this may seem confusing for some people. But the majority of Bounties cleared are used with 10 stam hits [ majority ]  and the bare minimum for me is 80k just about. So lets start working on how much it will cost to post my bounty using this formula.

 

Now 80k gold = 1 attack with 100 stam

The average BB 100 stam taking as much as 4 Mill XP it would require 6 hits to take 1 level from me using 100 stam.

80k = 1 attack using 100 stam X 4 mil XP lost / 24 mil XP total per level = 6 hits per level lost and the cost of each level in gold would or should cost:

 

480k for 1 level lost and 480k x per level for a posted player at Level 812. This would be the minimum cost for posting. Or 3 fsp per level at my range.

960 if the poster wanted me to lose 2 levels

1.440 mil gold or 9 fsp to have me lose all 3 levels on the BB.

 

Let's say some level 1900 Attacked someone it would cost this much to post him:

190.200 gold min to post level 1902 = 1 attack with 100 stam


1.141.200 per level lost

2.282.400 for two levels lost

3.423.600 gold for 3 levels lost

Interesting maths - theoretical scare tactics.

 

Here is an alternative way it could work.

 

Stick with the 100 gold/level as a base.

 

But tied to the victim's level, not the attackers - it is the victim who has to pay after all.

 

For 1 level lost the minimum - 100 gold per level. This should be available to a player of any level as it is 100 gold per their level, not their attackers - the poster has to be able to afford to post after all. This will also have the function of making lower level bounties less attractive to higher level players as there will be less profit to them.

 

If you want 2 levels taken, double it to 200 gold per level. Three levels make it 300/level.

 

A level 100 player wanting 3 levels taken for being hit will pay 30K. They can earn that in a hunt.

 

A level 1900 player wanting 3 levels taken will pay 570K. That is 3 FSP. Not bad.

 

If this seems too cheap it can be scaled up - but it means that players should be able to afford bounties after being hit, if they have any savings. It also means that 3 level bounties are attractive in terms of reward to BH's of that level range. More even battles. the smaller rewards at lower levels will reduce plundering for gold from higher levels, only for BH ticks.

 

These conditions exist right now on the BB. people can scale up rewards if they wish, but there is a minimum to be paid. this system would offer more rewards but not break the offerers bank.

 

This conversation about pricing is only worth having if HCS sweep in on a gilded chariot and say they Love love love the idea and are planning to implement it. That is not happening currently.




#860320 My Suggestions for reviving the Bounty Board (And this is quite radical)

Posted by Belaric on 04 April 2014 - 21:09

After reading this I do not feel this idea will work nor do I feel this idea would be good for the community., I feel the O.P. has noble intent - but with that said " The road to hell was paved with good intentions"

 

Hi Chazz. Let me address your points. This is going to take a while.

 

Yes the victim gets to post the attacker. exactly as happens now. Except the victim can get redress, which does not always happen now.


All that said I can see that their are a couple of pros to this idea - and lot's of cons I will share my thoughts and explain them.

O.P.'s  4 point plan.  

Point 1

1) The victim of an attack sets the punishment required. <----- Let's label this as the first CON vs Pro idea.

The reason why this is bad and listed as a CON:

So anyone attacked in game via this idea would post a bounty up using gold - the amount of gold would reflect how much XP the Poster would want removed from the attacker for such an attack or attempted (deflected attack) I would be happy setting aside deflected attacks as bountyable, as no harm is done. I know BG has always said the intent is there but in this system if punishment is more active perhaps it should only be reserved for those who do actual damage.. This idea is not detailed enough to explain if the punishment is set at a low or medium rate of XP loss for the PvPer that is posted is it possible that the person that is on the board could risk more XP loss exceeding the punishment via multiple hitters?

 

I believe it is quite clear - there is ONE punishment set by the injured party. Once that ONE punishment is met, the bounty is done. If a person says they want 3 levels taken, no more and no fewer levels can be taken. Different bounty hunters do not all take 2 each leading to 6+ levels lost. Only 3 levels can be lost. The BH that does the most damage wins the prize. So it is NOT possible for the punishment to be exceeded by multiple hitters. In terms of amounts of gold required to create the bounty and given as a reward - I have an idea about it - but getting lost in that argument is secondary to the soundness of the overall idea.

Example I post Joe on the bounty board and I want Joe to lose 1 level - but 50 people take Joe's bounty is Joe capped at losing 1 level not matter what or can the 50 people tear Joe to shreds and take all 3 or 5 levels?  If Joe's bounty is capped than you are proposing using the Bounty Board very much like Titan Rewards and secures by whom secures the most out of what the bounty is capped at. If Joe's bounty is set to lose 1 level and can be exceeded than this whole plan from the start is biased and completely unfair to the PvPer.

 

Joe loses one level. Whoever did the biggest % of that 1 level's worth of damage win the fee. If they do over 50% of the damage - they get a tick towards their BH medal in addition to the fee. It does have some similarities with the Titan securing method in that a set amount of XP is set to be lost (1 level's worth) and BH's hit until that amount is gone, rather like a titan's HP. Once the XP required is taken - the bounty ends. I do not believe the system demonstrates bias in this. A person who posts the bounty gets what they pay for. If only we had 50 BH's competing over a bounty!

O.P.'s  4 point plan.  

Point 2

2) The bounty hunter (BH) cannot in any circumstance be bountied. Don’t freak out before reading on – I think this can turn into a good thing. <----- This element contains 1 PRO - and a few CONS

The reason why this is bad and listed as a CON:

So by eliminating counter bounties ( taken them away and preventing anyone from ever using them) ALL Players are free to do as they want - They can and will 100 stam everyone that goes to the bounty board as their would no longer be a " Cause and Affect in A DO WHAT YOU WANT SYSTEM. Yep. 100 stamming will be the most efficient way of completing bounties. Nothing wrong with that if the punishment is set and fixed. It is no more a Do What you want system than now - now players get to 100 stam their enemies, 10 stam pillow hit their pals. Under this new system - you can still do that - off the board, but once on the board you are there to be punished for a transgression. If you cannot own up to the fact that hitting someone else is a punishable offence then why do we have the BB at all? Players would and will run around rampant in this " DO WHAT YOU WANT SYSTEM"  Why? Under this system if you hit someone you get punished. Every time potentially.  Say what you want - do what you want - anything goes cause their would be no penalties for Bounty Hunters. If you say bad things to other players the solution is a ticket, not PvP. PvP play is not a form of morality policing. If a BH takes your bounty and trash talks you at the same time - report the guy. <---- This is to increase PvP Participation? LOL Really ? Who is or would be crazy enough to PvP with such measures? People who want to bounty hunt and not be driven from the board by counter bounties - that's who, and a few have already said they'd go for it if bountying the BH was no longer allowed. Even with 200% chance of always taken the gold per attack - we can create a new buff that drops the defending players stats to zero so there is no chance an attacker can lose - we can remove deflect from the game - and even then this would not encourage PvP activity - Your Bounty Hunters would have no targets in this world There are precious few now, in case you hadn't noticed - and those that venture the BB would know any trip their is a 100% chance of losing all 3 levels so unless it's a crazy and insane amount of gold even with 200% Master Thief with a guaranteed win for the Attack - most will not get involved in this. You know, I've heard it said many many times that PvP players do not care about their levels, and that they are easily gained back, stam and XP regenerate - and yet here you are being worried about losing 3. Currently you frequently discuss the 'risk' of losing 5 every time on the board. You are making me question how realistic that 'risk' of losing 5 is in this concern over of losing 3 you are demonstrating. I assume you PvP for the love of it - the thrill - losing levels is a side effect of that - I'm offering a system where you will get more play, and you are concerned about losing levels. You'll only be losing levels if you are dancing on the BB - I thought that was what you liked and wanted more of. You can get those levels back - and in doing so earn gold!! What am i missing here? This would be the end of the game as we know it. I like you dude, but this is hyperbole. I could flip this on its head and say currently PvP is dead because there is no point people using the BB as the people policing the board are the people who get posted to the board most often - no-one else bothers as they have, over the years, been pushed out. The inmates run the asylum on the board, and that is no good for anyone but the inmates, and now even they are running out of things to do. If no-one is doing gold hits now - then PvP is dead anyway - what are you defending? I have offered ways to increase gold haul. PvP players lament the lack of activity - your own success in controlling the BB has caused it to wither. If you want to play - if you want to indulge in competition - you have to let other people back in. Or you can stay in your fishbowl and see nobody but your mates and wonder why no-one wants to play in your bowl with you. It is because they get torn apart in 3 seconds flat and you go back to being bored. This system allows new blood to enter, and not be out-competed and demoralised by people who have years of experience under their belts. You say you want more folk to play, but are resistant to an idea that has people saying that they will play who have not participated either before, or in years. As I said early on the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

The reason why this listed as a PRO:

Those who hate the back lash or repercussion of PvP would have nothing to fear in this " Do what you want system" It is not do what you want - it is retribution upon the guilty. Anyone on the board is there for a hit. No shrinking violets get on the board. Once there punishment is fixed. Nobody gets off easy - the injured party sees justice done. The victim of the hit is no longer punished twice - the community gains more faith in the BB as a punishment system - WHICH WAS ITS ORIGINAL purpose. More people post, more people BH, more people play PvP. Win Win Win. - there for - anyone found on the BB can be smashed with little to no reason they are smashed because they hit someone first Chazz and many will participate in this event - but the best part is without having to fear that the player that is posted can do anything about it. Currently the player posted being able to counter bounty has led to a dead board. Is that what you want? Is that the preferred state of play for you? The counter bounty has been used as a weapon to drive BH's off the board. Or so it seems to me now.  So a Player level 1980 can smash anyone - make fun of them while doing so - berate the players guild - and nobody can do anything about it. You submit tickets to support - it is what the rest of us do. You seem inordinately concerned about people bad mouthing you - why is that? I have often said that a surprise attack stealing gold and XP is likely to irritate the victim, and in the heat of the moment they may dash off an unfortunate message to the attacker. I think a 30 min cooldown on communications between attacker and victim after the attack would minimise this. Why is the attacker surprised by a PO'd message after they have stolen gold and caused XP loss? Why are you so ready to take offence? is it because in taking offence you give yourselves licence to hit people more?  As I said above PvP is not the morality police. Bad language and insults are not acceptable and should be reported.  Yup I see this working out well ..... *Sarcasm* =/ Another controversial PRO to this it would completely put an end to any and all guild wars - outside of normal PvP - nothing can be done - so any guild war would or have to be settled by waiting a few yrs to see if anyone goes to the bounty board. Guild wars as they stand are popularity contests - who has the most allies to delevel the other guild on the BB. The BB was not designed as a weapon in Guild wars, it has been appropriated for that purpose. It is not essential that the Bb etain that purpose to my mind, but it still can be in this system. As I said to vastilos - this system actually allows guild wars to be more direct by allowing guild mates to take each others bounties. In a guild war both sides will be hitting each other, both sides can set take and clear their own bounties. The war will end when one side gives up on hits. The other side will have one last round of bounties to finish out and we have a winner. Direct, clean, no reliance on networks of allies.

O.P.'s  4 point plan.  

Point 3

3) Guildmates can clear each other’s bounties. <----- This element contains 1 PRO - and 1 CON

The reason why this is bad and listed as a CON:

It is said from the O.P. that bounties posted will have a 7 day time duration prior to their expiration. I have agreed it can be cut to 48 hours potentially. So not only in the " Do what you want system will someone that's posted be forced to stay active and online for 7 days trying to defend their bounties if they attempt to do so but in addition to defending all the incoming attacks from outside players the posted individual will have to defend against his own guild mates most likely resulting in less buff support while they are posted.  Only if the guildmates choose to take the bounty - I have no problem with an unwritten code within a guild that you do not take your guildmate's bounty - it has no effect on the wider game - as current unwritten codes of behaviour do on the BB. Chazz - I'm looking for clarity and consistency here, and I think the system I imagined has much more of that than exists now where folk are can fall foul of unwritten rules and BB etiquette. Everyone deserves to know where they stand. I believe doing guildmates bounties is a bonus in a guild war as I said above. You can be cleared by a guildmate, you can clear a bounty your guild mate puts up. Fair for all. <--- So more or less turning brother against brother here in short. Nothing of the sort - bother can help brother by taking a bounty posted by a guild mate. If you want to hit your guildie (a suggestion asked for at times by PvP players if i recall correctly) you can do so and potentially finish the bounty faster and or earn the bounty reward -which may lessen the sting of the initial bounty if you split it with your brother.

The reason why this listed as a PRO:

If the players in the community don't stomp someone and secure the bounty prize first - maybe their is a slim chance a nice mate or friend can save the posted player a level if they are lucky.

O.P.'s  4 point plan.  

Point 4

4) Two new Top 250's for PvP are created: An Outlaw Top 250 is created to track those players who have lost the most levels on the bounty board, and a Lawless Top 250 to track those who evaded the posse of Bounty Hunters and survived on the board for a set period of time, initial suggestion being one week. Additionally Outlaw and Lawless medals could be created in addition to the top 250s. <----- I see no CONS or nothing worth mentioning - However their are some PROS I will comment on.


The reason why these are listed as PROS:

The new Outlaw Top 250 will be extremely competitive in the sense that due to anyone taking part in PvP aspect can expect to automatically lose all their levels once going to the bounty board I say again - it has been frequently asserted in PvP's defence over the years that you constantly run the risk of losing 5 - it becomes apparent that you have enjoyed the reality of not losing 5 that often given how concerned you are over losing 3. There is a reason I dropped the max levels to be lost to 3. If you have been playing all these years and claiming more risk than has been apparently getting through to you, then I find it hard to be sympathetic - it means you have effectively cried wolf about these 5's all this time if you are so concerned about 3's. This is what your responses are telling me. - so this ladder can help ease the pain by assuring those players names are on a billboard and that they can also earn a shiny medal for their troubles and willingness to help keep such an aspect alive. NO - you get the medals for playing the way you want when you want and taking your licks for it. You are PvP badasses and you can take it. That is what this top 250 says. That is what you are doing now, supposedly, but are you? For years PvP players have mocked levellers for clinging to their levels. here is your chance to show how different you are, and you are not embracing the chance. I am very disappointed to be honest. You are not supposed to care about levels, you are supposed to regain them easily enough (VL and a champ anyone? a tactic available at any level - not just EOC!) and here you are fretting over actually losing levels. Why? If you lose levels you hunt and gain gold etc. to effect repairs and pay for running costs, just like those who do not PvP.

The new Lawless Ladder will most likely consist of the EOC players who would there be buffed up to evade the XP loss most times - but this will serve as a list of names for players to review and avoid as they would clearly show them selves to be tough to 100 stam and clear. If the duration is shortened to 48 hours the lawless ladder will consist of those PvP players with the skills and the buddies to keep them buffed and intact. Across any level. EOC players have less gear variations to protect them and are vulnerable to EOC hunters. The limit on bounties was introduced after a legend went was it days or weeks without his bounty being captured? This ladder would also show who to go after for more glory! The challenge of it - I thought that was what PvP players craved!? Who better to take down on the BB than someone at the top of the lawless ladder who has escaped many a time before? Or who has a crystal Lawless medal - you will KNOW that player is a tough nut to crack! How will that not be an achievement that causes pride and satisfaction? I think you search for negatives Chazz.

In closing I feel that the O.P. here had the best of intentions here in topic - I'm sorry to say I don't support it and feel this would do more harm than good in the long run. I see view this as PvP Brutality - not a positive incentive for all - I beg to differ I think this system is more inclusive than the current one. I think gold hauls can be increased via thievery and MT, I'm open to the idea of PvP protection being removed if this system is seen to work. I really think everyone in the community can benefit from this. If or by removing the Counter Bounty features from the Bounty Board I do feel many would run around in game rampant - people would disrespect - 100 stam each other - Especially knowing that their are no consequences for such actions. Disrespect - report. Hit - BB. The way it is supposed to be. The politics of the wild west were done away with for a simple reason - they don't work - if society did away with the police - or countries disbanded their armies - the world may seem like a better place for a moment - and that is refereed to the " Quiet before the Storm" be cause when all hell breaks lose it's comforting knowing we have police and armies to defend us. <---- This is not to say that all Pvpers are such neither You are certainly making it sound like PvP players are our police - and self-appointed ones at that. Not a good thing I feel. The BB as I imagine it will actually better police lawlessness within the game that it is currently. I see that you are worried that you can no longer PvP a mouthy player to make them shut up and show some respect. I can see and understand that impulse - but that is not PvP's purpose as far as I can tell in the game. Yes reports are slow, but that is the official mechanic within the game. If we have a wild outbreak of disrespect and swearing left and right then HCS can take steps. I will even say you told me so, but I think holding back an idea because you will not feel as able to hit someone who mouths off is bizarre. - I am speaking about the ability to defend your selves - have friends here in game or mates stick up and help you. We need these Counter Measures - Hoof was right by creating them - they help keep things fun, interesting,  and above all else fair within the community. I believe counter measures have been used over the years to reduce opposition on the Bb and it ability to function effectively. I am not surprised you like them if you are sovery concerned over losing the levels you ahve for years insisted meant nothing to you on a BB with actual teeth.

 

If the BB does not represent risk, and does not accurately reflect the amount of PvP going on in game - what is the point of its existence? If PvP players would rather be lords of an empty castle, why should they care if the castle starts falling down - does an empty and derelict BB actually suit your purpose? You make me wonder about that, Chazz.

 

Is the current system a Do As You Want system - but only for those in the know?

 

- Chazz




#860204 My Suggestions for reviving the Bounty Board (And this is quite radical)

Posted by Belaric on 04 April 2014 - 16:05

first off...i want to say that its awesome that everyone is putting in ideas to liven up the BB!!  nice to see us all working together to make this a great game!  I found the ideas to be thoughtful and sparked good points.  Still i am one who feels that you shud be able to bounty the hunter.  For the simple risk of taking a bounty.  brings to mind killing fish in a bucket.  cant make it totally risk free.  also, for many who Bh, most will not take a bounty on a simple clear if someone else is on it.  So for player A to decide to try and quit, that bounty is passed up on since it looks as if it is being cleared..unless you see it sit for awhile then you ask...so yes A shud be bountied for quitting..hence..bounting the hunter.

 

im adding this...it is for another forum..but i dont think smasher shud count on the BB...that is my 2cents.

There is no killing fish in a bucket going up against someone who knows what they are doing on the BB. I agree with Maehdros now that a week was far too long as it is hard to be buffed and online enough for a week to survive punishment.

 

Again as I said to Maehdros - universal risk has led to this inactivity on the BB. Sometimes you have to take a chance on something new.

 

I see no reason why a quitter should be bountied. By making them quit the target has won the battle.

 

In this system if you see a bounty in progress and you know you cannot win the bounty - you can still hit and gain ticks towards the Smasher medal. So even if you won't win the bounty you as the BH do derive some benefit. Also remember the fee is not paid until the bounty is completed, so the incentive is always there to finish the bounty if you want to get paid. So all someone has to do is watch and see if the XP total to bounty completion is still dropping - much like watching a titans TKP drop to see if it is still being hunted. If the activity stops - other BH's know someone has given up/stopped (for whatever reason) and they can hit if they want to. If it is felt that too many people are stopping once they think they are past 51% of the damage required (which would not be clear - calculators required!!) - raise it to 70% to make sure you get the BH medal tick - that will motivate people not to stop.




#860189 My Suggestions for reviving the Bounty Board (And this is quite radical)

Posted by Belaric on 04 April 2014 - 15:35

Interesting idea,  Sadly finding *loot* on other players these days is a rare occasion, even with an increased pvp range.So the increase in thievery rates would have to be massive.

 

 

As for your suggestions, I don't agree with a week of sitting on the board for a bounty to expire. Not everyone plays 24/7, that's a HELL of alot of stamina sunk buffing to try and save 3 levels, and most hunters without experience will wait for targets to go offline, then clear/smash. 2 days as it is currently ( until changed) seems fine. If a player is hit off the board, they have 48 hours to post a bounty, same should apply to a bounty once posted. If you can defend for 2 days, you get out of jail. if not, you get slapped around gently or *not so gently*

 

This ties in with your second proposal which I strongly disagree with. No counter bounties of the hunter.

 

Bounty hunting IS pvp. it's a faster version of it ( 2 mins compared to 1 hour) between attacks. In my opinion I see this as a risk free smash away fun for those who don't want to get bitten back in pvp.  (imo) If  someone PvP's they risk a bounty. Plain and simple. Bounty hunting should never ever be risk free. It's PVP. If someone has the nerve  to smash for the fun of it or wants to earn a reward for smashing me, I sure as heck want the ability to seek revenge. ( I assume anyone in the same situation  would as well)

 

The *forced* clearing/smashing of a bounty, set by a *wronged* player shouldn't coincide with a *risk free bounty*. If someone wants to smash, they should risk the same to themselves.Also, this tangles up pvp prestige, as one way of obtaining it can lose you levels/bounty, while laddering ( in the new update) or simply clearing bounties, is a counter bounty free way of gaining prestige.

 

 

Tho I rarely read the forums or play as much as I used to,I am all for encouraging pvp via events,  ladders, new leaderboards ( as you suggest) and so on. Even nerfing the level loss limit on bounties. But as for removing counter bounties, sorry mate, I'd never agree to it.

 

 

just my two~

 

 

Cheers!

Thanks for the 2c.

 

I can see your point on a week. It could be shortened to 48 hours. I think increased activity would make it tougher to survive that time. Or perhaps somewhere in between.

 

BH is PvP I agree. But it seems to me that bountying the BH which originally may have expanded the PvP market by creating more targets in a PvP free for all, has now gotten to the stage where it has constricted the PvP market - people do not wish to play that way anymore, being counterbountied has become a disincentive to play, so they don't participate, the BB slumps into inactivity. The price of being able to counterbounty has become less initial activity of any kind it seems to me.

 

The question then becomes - do you want a system where you can bounty anyone for any hit and nobody wants to play, or do you have a system where Bounty hunters do not get bountied and more people take the chance to play? Your risk as the original attacker remains the same. Under the current system you have the option of immediately extending that risk to anyone who tries to punish you for the initial unprovoked attack - I believe you have the right to that initial attack, but I think the privilege of counter bountying has led to the board dying. Is that what you want? Is an inactive BB to your taste?

 

In summary - your preferred style of play has been hugely successful - you have placed risk everywhere. The strongest and best PvP players survive, even if the activity is not that profitable anymore. I think you have become victims of your own success and excellence - the general population of the game does not want to mess with you. So you are kings of an empty kingdom that is running out of gold. Some of you donate to survive. The risk you love is too high for the general community - they have walked away from the BB. This way does reduce risk, but increases activity - your kingdom has people within it once again. Which do you prefer? The current system leaves your play style marginalised and disliked. I'd be hoping this change would make PvP unmysterious and acceptable to a much wider community. In my wilder dreams it would make the whole game more attractive. But yes - it would not be your grandfather's PvP - I've made no bones about that anywhere.




#860048 Hiding Inactives From Top Rated List?

Posted by duktayp on 04 April 2014 - 03:48

the lame analogy i keep using is

 

when i watch the sports channel, i want to hear about *current* standings/events/stars

 

not watch stories about dead people that excelled years ago 

 

 

--- edit: many years from now, i can see the the top-rated lists full of nothing but inactives

 

archive these players and put them on their own 'legends' list




#859986 players and pvp

Posted by Belaric on 04 April 2014 - 00:03

To be honest (from my experience) there are better ways to profit in game. I've dabbled in the titan hunting a bit and for stamina spent (1000 for ten 10 stamina bounty clear vs 1000 stamina spent on titan kills) it is more profitable. As for the arena, I couldn't tell you anything about it. I am terrible lol.

The price of the tickets is something that's dependent on the person buying the tickets and what they're using them for (to place a bounty or taking a bounty?) because at higher levels the cost for doing a bounty isn't very cost effective at all (but if you're doing it for the BH medal, then the tickets shouldn't matter) while at lower levels the cost to take each bounty and the reward can sometimes be even or even profitable. I don't think players have given up gold hits (I still do some here and there) even though the reward isn't worth the risk anymore (100 stamina hit for 10%-15% of gold on hand for the possible loss of 5 levels).

I bolded a bit of interest.

 

I think everyone in game recognises that new player retention is key.

 

If new players are being PvP'd still because it is at low levels that PvP retains some profit margin, could that be affecting new player retention? I know I almost quit 5+ years ago at level 30 due to some repeated hits. In today's game markets how many hits would it take to make someone decide this game is not for them and go elsewhere where there was less hassle?? Because ironically it is at the lowest levels that the gold from hunts still really makes a difference to new players in terms of repairing gear, buying pots and buffs for the next hunt. Yes new new players have it way easier than we did etc. etc. but I don't care - we want new folk in the door - give them some lollipops to encourage them to stay, no big deal to me.

 

I think Chazz's PvP tutorial is a good start, and something done to make sure new players are prepared for and not freaked out by any PvP they run into. We want to nurture our noobs, not stomp on them. Preparing them for the realities of PvP combat seems a good way to try to boost retention and keep our entire community pulling together.

 

I would think a PvP element added to the opening epic quest when it gets expanded would be a good place to start - I think the epic quest as it stands runs to around level 30? It would encourage new players (as new players predominantly do this quest now) to learn how to trade hits. Something to help players know this activity is normal, and how to deal with it. the epic quest is the ideal venue as so far there have been many bonuses of stam etc along the way, so any new PvP hits in the quest could be easily recovered from by the noobs, but the mechanics would become known to them. Hell - have advice in the quest on hiding gold etc. to minimise hits. Integrate a bit of tutorial there!!

 

It concerns me that as it stands the only profitable levels for PvP in terms of gold hits may be the area of the game where we most want folk to flourish, and people may be getting discouraged from sticking with the game as a result. I am not blaming anyone here - I'm simply making a deduction from available evidence - which is vastilos' opinion, nothing set in stone.

 

FWIW I'd like item durability damage nerfed in GvG at low levels for precisely the same reason - minimise negative initial reactions from new players, who might not be able to keep up with repair costs if GvG farmed at low level. Yeah its babying them - I really don't care - I'd rather they got into it and stuck around. I think we'd all like that.




#859318 Zombie Yeoman Global Event

Posted by cyrus7 on 02 April 2014 - 03:01

I was thinking that perhaps making the bigger Global Booster, bound of course, as a prize for the top 100 might be a fair compromise.

If the Top 100 was to receive higher level Global Boosters as a prize, I would think that would only ensure that [mostly] the same players achieve Top 100 the next time, as they can spend less time to use their stamina, and therefore are more inclined to do so, rather than spend hours using their stamina as those with only access to the tiny boosters do.




#859057 Zombie Yeoman Global Event

Posted by bloody18 on 01 April 2014 - 02:08

Thanks HCS :) Dont listen to the Kimmy Gibblers of FS !  Do the 5K to qualify individually ..and by golly good things might happen ! Woot ! Thanks HCS!  o-FULL-HOUSE-KIMMY-GIBLER-facebook.jpgYES.png




#858998 Zombie Yeoman Global Event

Posted by wil72 on 31 March 2014 - 20:50

Consistency, in this, an Event? Yes, consistency is relevant in certain areas of the game but an Event? I think the cows have played a very shrewd wee game with us, well done cows. I'd go as far as to say this is not a bug, mistake or error on HCS part, please don't prove me wrong, but a cunning twist. We shall never know if this is going to happen in the future. Players may just think twice about watching the tiers and hedging their bets and going for what they think the " community " will achieve. Instead now we have a situation where there is a gamble, go for Ruby qualification, waste, I mean, use our stam even though the " community " is unlikely to get Ruby tier. But will that be the case in the future? With this twist now added maybe Ruby will be more achieveable.

 

Well played cows.

 

Cheers.

 

wil72




#858914 Development Roadmap (Updated 7th Mar 2014)

Posted by RebornJedi on 31 March 2014 - 16:03

The game is only 6 yrs old going on 7 Reborn lol and I've been here for almost all 7 " almost " and I can tell you I've seen 2k players as a steady mainline here for my first 3 yrs on 

the game is 7 years old going on 8, but i get your point..

 

from digging through past forum posts, looks like 1400ish was average in the summer of 2011 with around 1750 during a LE in that autumn... the next year, it looks like half that.. was it because of a crackdown on multis, or lack of overall development, or did newer better games come out, or did the lack of a mobile interface push away the average gamer, or did any other handful of reasons happen not just one aspect being changed/neglected that dropped the online player amount.

 

we could assume and speculate all we want, but realistically we have no real proof or numbers in front of us.

 

.. what we need to think about now is the future, not the past..

 

we have to come together as a community and keep pushing for the game we continuous play (for whatever reason).. eventually the cows will start pushing as much as us




#858913 Zombie Yeoman Global Event

Posted by rowbeth on 31 March 2014 - 15:48

Wow - all this griping about other people's presumed motives seems like a great way to kill off any sense of community to me.

 

Thanks for the event HCS - I certainly enjoyed the zombie stomp.






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