The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Terron
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby Terron » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:06 pm

i was just considering a "search" as a listen and spot check.

fact is fade should just be a cloak of invisibility and immediately end if you get attacked or attack someone or get searched out, because invisible or not a lizard could smell you and elves would hear you. (monsters shouldnt detect you)

the feariefire thing would work if feariefire lasted as long as a torch, or a longer duration for higher int possibly(not really used on the class because of point issues). either way it ends up some coding issues.


lastly, after reading these forums almost everyone complains there isnt enough pk(fighting) in general, i don't see how deaths gimping stats temporarily is going to help that, its only benefiting those who play copious amounts of time and train extra alts.
when the game is larger in the future people wont run across the map in 25 seconds like they do now. and when theres more adequate bossing options later, players wont be able to hit every spawn, they will be choosing A or B or even C. eliminating potential fights in the process. gimp death stats just ensures its a 1 and done more than a cat fight to the death 9 times. it may even the odds so to speak atm, but thats a definite drop in the fun meter later on.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box"

this game is like sim ant
zerg the red ants with more black ants

User avatar
Folder
Posts: 1076
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:04 am
Location: Texas

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby Folder » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:32 pm

I think the problem with ghosting is that there's no real downside to dying. It's sometimes actually better to die because you can run back together. I feel people would actively try harder to stay alive if death meant more than it does now.

For me it's not about evening any odds, it's about improving gameplay quality. But I started this to hear opinions so let's have em!
<Silhouette>

User avatar
NiteHawk
Site Admin
Posts: 3121
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:33 am

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby NiteHawk » Mon Feb 06, 2017 4:39 pm

Terron wrote:i was just considering a "search" as a listen and spot check.

fact is fade should just be a cloak of invisibility and immediately end if you get attacked or attack someone or get searched out, because invisible or not a lizard could smell you and elves would hear you. (monsters shouldnt detect you)

the feariefire thing would work if feariefire lasted as long as a torch, or a longer duration for higher int possibly(not really used on the class because of point issues). either way it ends up some coding issues.


lastly, after reading these forums almost everyone complains there isnt enough pk(fighting) in general, i don't see how deaths gimping stats temporarily is going to help that, its only benefiting those who play copious amounts of time and train extra alts.
when the game is larger in the future people wont run across the map in 25 seconds like they do now. and when theres more adequate bossing options later, players wont be able to hit every spawn, they will be choosing A or B or even C. eliminating potential fights in the process. gimp death stats just ensures its a 1 and done more than a cat fight to the death 9 times. it may even the odds so to speak atm, but thats a definite drop in the fun meter later on.


I don't mind adjusting values to be less effecting etc in the future if it's needed though, but we are looking at the current time. Everything can be adjusted.

User avatar
daedroth
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:53 am

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby daedroth » Tue Feb 07, 2017 4:58 am

Is the problem with fade basically if you make it so that when you attack you become visible, it also affects if you are attacked? As in monsters infravision/search will find a faded person - and this is not wanted?
If that is the case would it be possible give fade a + to the chance of avoiding being found (make the + so high it would be impossible to find the people faded - so that the people faded would never be found) but the spell will still break when they attack?
Another option: just take the name literally, it is named "fade", not invisibility, and make it searchable (which has already been proposed). Not so keen on that one though.

The changing people thing (as oppossed to ghosting): Is it possible to lock the account for 10 seconds or some such? Have the alt that logged off not in the game but "ghosted".
Going by what NH has said in the other thread about logging, that may not be possible.
Disclaimer: Any ideas I come up with may not even meet my approval. I am just posting an idea based on the topic I have just read.
I love sheep.

User avatar
Vindal
Posts: 69
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2016 11:50 am

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby Vindal » Tue Feb 07, 2017 7:25 am

I also don't like the fade mechanic at all, but its hard to say what can be done to improve it. Making yourself appear when attacking/attacked makes the spell borderline worthless, maybe yeah you can be faded but with a -agi or something?

Personally, ghosting or alt switching doesn't bother me, but I wouldn't be opposed to a stat loss on death either to make it more bothersome. M If there was going to be any changes alt changing etc. it should be to stop character transfers between an account. A single person should be able to go back and forth between all 10 25ers if they got em. They leveled it, they earned it. They can bring them to battle. But account sharing, transferring 25ers to lowbies, and moving characters between people before an event/key/oad is a ruiner for me. An hour lockout after transferring isn't long enough, should be a week or more.

CGI
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 3:07 pm

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby CGI » Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:30 am

Maybe give Necros the anti-face spell?

ABC casts solidify at XYZ, making them reappear. XXs timer before you can be faded again.

User avatar
daedroth
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:53 am

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby daedroth » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:07 am

Vindal wrote:But account sharing, transferring 25ers to lowbies, and moving characters between people before an event/key/oad is a ruiner for me. An hour lockout after transferring isn't long enough, should be a week or more.


It does seem a little short, but I think a week is too long. A day maybe? That way you wouldn't be able to prepare for impromptu moshes/events. However there could be a counter in place for that when a character has been transferred THEN it cannot be transferred again for a week.
Could even be brutal and put a limit on how many times a character can be transferred (total limit or time based).

I am not so bothered about account sharing, as long as people do not complain if their "friend" steals all their gear or whatever. You should know/guess at the risks involved peeps.
Disclaimer: Any ideas I come up with may not even meet my approval. I am just posting an idea based on the topic I have just read.
I love sheep.

User avatar
Honzo
Posts: 136
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 3:14 pm

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby Honzo » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:24 am

Vindal wrote:I also don't like the fade mechanic at all, but its hard to say what can be done to improve it. Making yourself appear when attacking/attacked makes the spell borderline worthless, maybe yeah you can be faded but with a -agi or something?

Personally, ghosting or alt switching doesn't bother me, but I wouldn't be opposed to a stat loss on death either to make it more bothersome. M If there was going to be any changes alt changing etc. it should be to stop character transfers between an account. A single person should be able to go back and forth between all 10 25ers if they got em. They leveled it, they earned it. They can bring them to battle. But account sharing, transferring 25ers to lowbies, and moving characters between people before an event/key/oad is a ruiner for me. An hour lockout after transferring isn't long enough, should be a week or more.



Not sure about a -agi but break on attack does seem like a good idea to me, personally. As far as the account sharing issue goes, I think it's a problem myself but I can see where it is "part of the game." Trading characters seems to be part of the commerce as well as "leveling jobs." I think a day is too short too. I suggested 7 days in the past and it -did not- go over well with like..anyone really. lol. Unsure what to do about it, but I think that being able to loan people chars etc. to do things kind of stinks. That being said, I can't even begin to judge how many events we would have really had if people hadn't. There was a couple of yall(I could probably name you off, it's so few) that went on crazy leveling sprees and already have tons of 25's though! Not sure what their opinion would be on this. :)

CGI wrote:Maybe give Necros the anti-face spell?

ABC casts solidify at XYZ, making them reappear. XXs timer before you can be faded again.


Interesting idea but idk about a new spell..maybe tacked on to Wither and nerf the dmg bonus some?

User avatar
JadeFalcon
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2016 8:29 am

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby JadeFalcon » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:25 am

When a 25er dies, he should be given a 15m "aura of defeat", basically a spell giving -2 on every stat.

That will make death "count", decreasing "returns to battle", without being overly onerous.
Don't take life too seriously. You will never get out of it alive.

Proud member, Halfling Appreciation Club

HAC Tip of the Week:
Roast Halfling leg with rosemary, garlic and white wine. Ideal for that family dinner!

User avatar
Folder
Posts: 1076
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 9:04 am
Location: Texas

Re: The current "meta" for endgame PvP

Postby Folder » Tue Feb 07, 2017 9:40 am

Making anti-fade spells is overcomplicating imo. What's the purpose of fade? To me it's to move around undetected and gain a surprise attack, it's not to fight forever while invisible. It doesn't make sense lore-wise or gameplay-wise, to me at least. I think the initial surprise attack still makes the spell worthwhile, but maybe that's just me. Staying faded with a stat loss sounds sucky to me, especially since it can't be cancelled.

About account sharing - hrmm. A week seems quite long. Is this really a problem you think? I don't even remember the last time I transferred an alt, I think it's probably been 3-4 weeks. I know of one guildie who transferred an alt to a friend recently, but that's 1 alt over the course of weeks. Maybe it's more prevalent elsewhere. Anyways a week seems unnecessarily long if you'd like to be able to help a friend or complete a leveling job or whatever.

Still think a stat loss on death is good, just don't make it so extreme that the first death means you can't possibly go back.

Logging multiple alts - shrug. It's a thing but not game breaking, at least not atm. You're generally at a disadvantage if you are logging in on your own in group fights, it's already risky enough imo.
<Silhouette>


Return to “Archive Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 274 guests