We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast
Results 151 to 175 of 260
  1. #151
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Oops, that was weird.

    Quote Originally Posted by l4j
    That don't need it . . . You mean like, say, buffing Freeps?

    And how, precisely, does a localized ON buff that only comes into play when a threshold is passed, only affects a local area, and is tuned to improve the odds for the heavily outnumbered side, break things?

    Seriously. Inquisitive minds want to know. How can this possibly be any worse than giving buffs to only one side that are not scaled to numbers, don't change dynamically, and don't take population curves into account?
    Well the first few things that come to mind are

    1) Does the tech exist that could do this - There's nothing like this in the game that I can think of that would lend me to believing its doable.

    2) How much lag would it cause - The moors does checks on boundry lines in PVP already for some reason and it causes lag spikes. How much of a lag spike will happen, will we WL bug etc etc..

    3) 1v1 circles will be impossible.

    4) multi boxing exploits. Park a dual box warg pack off to the side where you plan on engaging the craid and reap the benefit of the ON buff.

    These are simply things I can think of that are game breakers in the theoretical phase. Imagine bad it would get when it goes live where there are dozens/hundreds/thousands of players manipulating this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stepbrother View Post
    There is no simple answer to the numbers game because the desire for easymode of most players is not something the developers can control. Take away zergs and easymode and I promise you half the moors population will simply not come out anymore.
    Bah. As Sapience said already, the numbers in the moors are static. So you take away the zergy nature of it and people will still come out.

  2. #152
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    One.

    Ask me however how many creeps 6 freeps should be able to fight at once and you'll get a different answer. One of the beauties of LOTRO was always in the interlocking way the classes worked together. Skills supported one another. Too much of that, not all, but too much has been eroded in PVP.
    When you write stuff like this, I don't feel like we're even playing the same game... Because this is exactly how things work right now. Coordinated freep groups with good class makeups can indeed fight higher numbers... providing they actually group up and play in a mildly coordinated fashion. Have the players on your server not figured out heal stacking yet?

    Further I find it odd you would be so vocal in your disagreement with using an outnumbered buff style mechanic, not because I disagree with you in how many workarounds and holes such an approach has. Many of your same arguments against the outnumbered buff suggestions in this thread (that it messes up fights where the numbers in play don't match the buff being given to one side especially), are equally valid when used against your own suggestions. You are attempting to balance the game around the specifics of combat on a single server; globally keeping creeps weaker ruins fights on any servers where the numbers are close to equal (or higher on freepside). There are numerous problems with using a scaling outnumbered buff to balance the game, but at least it actually attempts to keep from screwing over several servers in an attempt to please the player(s) on a few servers.

    As for burrow being a stealth... it requires dropping combat. You have a much more reliable escape available to you if you drop combat... that's half the challenge of an escape, but extremely doable.

    And "classes without stealth or a sprint"?

    DPS RK: Calming verse, used in conjunction with armor of the storm can be an extremely effective escape mechanism from smaller fights.

    Hunter: Cry of the hunter, run around a rock to drop combat then DF.

    Minstrel: Call of the Second age is a sprint, which can be leveraged to powerful effect by slowing/CCing targets in combination. Really, the ability to just overheal creep DPS is a pretty powerful escape mechanism in and of itself...

    The only freep classes that don't have an in-combat speed boost are wardens and loremasters. Yes, being able to escape from a fight is completely dependent on WHAT you are fighting, WHERE you are fighting and many other factors... this is true for everyone.

    Adding MORE escape mechanisms to the game is frankly something I disagree with whole-heartedly. There are too many ways to avoid death as it is and I would rather see less of that than more.


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  3. #153
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Bah. As Sapience said already, the numbers in the moors are static. So you take away the zergy nature of it and people will still come out.
    Sapience said it huh? I guess that settles it.

  4. #154
    I've been lurking in the shadows watching some of the discussions about the state of PvMP in the game and am finally ready to throw some pointers out there...

    First, unless Turbine does something fairly clever, every update that increases the level cap will unfairly boost the Freeps. It seems that after just about every level cap increase, Turbine has to boost the Creep stats to try to match what they think the Freeps will have for gear, legendaries, etc... However, we've seen first-hand how the Freeps can have stats that don't match what Turbine thought was the 'average'. Also, as we get higher and higher in level, the difference between low-level Freeps and capped out - with full raid gear Freeps will continue to grow. Not only that, but the difference between a greenie Creep and a high-rank Creep will also continue to grow.

    The problem is; what can be done about it? Turbine needs to continue expanding the PvE aspect of the game and new levels is one of the ways to allow players to make their characters better. If people can't feel like they are getting any reward for their efforts, they lose interest. So again, how does Turbine balance the Moors, and still allow for PvE improvements to the Freeps?

    Audacity was an interesting idea... if everyone actually used it. But as it has been mentioned before, many classes have found that they can do so much damage without the Audacity gear - that it doesn't get used like Turbine intended. Now, Turbine COULD force everyone to use Audacity Gear - and remove the ability to wear PvE gear in the Moors. I'm sure some would suggest that this might 'limit' the Freeps - but perhaps this is something that is necessary. After all, the disparity between fully-geared Freeps and Creeps will only get worse as Turbine continues the PvE storyline.

    Another thing to keep in mind is the ability to swap gear on the fly - and soon, to swap traits... This gives the Freeps HUGE advantages as they can adjust quickly to different scenarios.

    Is it time for Creeps to get gear that is comparable to top-geared Freeps? But how would the gear be given? What 'gate' could Turbine use to keep the Creeps from all being top-geared? At least the Freeps gate is the PvE and the time it takes to get these items... How do you do that with creeps?

    On the flipside, what if Turbine made PvP only gear that Freeps have to use (Like Audacity - but make it so PvE gear can't be used). Then, Turbine could control the stats of the Freeps much easier and make the Creeps scale to match. Of course, this method loses some of its appeal because the Freeps spend so much time getting their shiny new gear in PvE and not being able to use it is kind of a sore-point...

    A third alternative might be to create an entirely new mechanism for calculating PvP... It can be called something like: The Ettenmoors Constant. It can blend the stats on your gear, take into account your level (for freeps), rank, etc and come up with a value that will determine how hard you hit, heal, or avoid the other side. Because this value takes into account your gear, the freeps are happy because they can still use the shiny stuff they spent hours to get - but it can also include diminishing returns to keep the freeps somewhat in-check. Turbine could tweak the numbers so that a level 40 freep could still make his mark - but he will still be slightly less powerful than a level 50 and so on. This constant would reduce the disparity between the higher and lower levels, the higher and lower gear, etc. Also, it could calculate in the rank, so the longer you've been in the Moors, you still get a SLIGHT increase to your ability. This would differ from Audacity because there is no direct way the Freeps can adjust this value. Getting better gear still makes a difference - even if it is less than the difference seen in PvE.

    Once Turbine finds a way to balance the two sides - and keep up with the changes to PvE, then we can adjust the physical portions of the Moors (unbalanced freep/creep ratio, etc) to make the Moors a better place. I really think that the balance between the freep Pve/PvP needs to happen first though - otherwise we will be having this discussion every time Turbine raises the level cap.

  5. #155
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Sezneg View Post
    Stuff.
    I went point for point with you on this stuff only to have the forums log me out.

    So, cliff notes version, I took what you said to be one-sided hyperbole that only a fool or turbine pvp dev would believe. Sorry dude, you can think I'm new if it makes you feel better, but I'm not buying what you're selling, especially when I strongly suspect the audience you're seeking to shovel this to is Turbine, who you believe are watching, and not me at all.

    Could be a good tactic. Lord knows Turbine's shown an inability to get down to the actual truth when it comes to forum feedback.

  6. #156
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    I went point for point with you on this stuff only to have the forums log me out.

    So, cliff notes version, I took what you said to be one-sided hyperbole that only a fool or turbine pvp dev would believe. Sorry dude, you can think I'm new if it makes you feel better, but I'm not buying what you're selling, especially when I strongly suspect the audience you're seeking to shovel this to is Turbine, who you believe are watching, and not me at all.

    Could be a good tactic. Lord knows Turbine's shown an inability to get down to the actual truth when it comes to forum feedback.
    I cordially invite you to come play on another server and witness what you apparently are not seeing on your own.

    Or just watch it on youtube:

    http://www.youtube.com/user/Masterof...?feature=watch

    Because if you are running coordinated freep groups and are not able to successfully fight outnumbered this update? That's not the game's fault man.

    It seems when you are confronted with contradictory information to your own personal experiences, your only response is to attempt to disqualify my posts as lies or exaggerations and try to somehow disqualify my viewpoint as being one sided. Perhaps you could, instead, accept that maybe your personal experience in the moors is not somehow the sum total of what is possible or experienced on other servers by other players.
    Last edited by Sezneg; May 20 2013 at 03:37 PM.


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  7. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Sezneg View Post
    It seems when you are confronted with contradictory information to your own personal experiences, your only response is to attempt to disqualify my posts as lies or exaggerations
    Not exactly. Its not like I don't believe what you're saying, on its face value. But I've been around long enough to know that the surface is never where the real truth is when it comes to PVP.

    What you guys never talk about are all the fights you win. Just the ones you lose, and you all talk about those so loudly that it can seem like that's all you do is lose and that there's a really big problem. You never talk about compositions of raids, gear, skill level, rank, server performance during the fight, how many map-backs took place, where there NPCs involved, and ratios when it comes to numbers. Ya'll always leave that information out. By their nature the freeps that you guys complain about rarely group up, they're usually solo or in kin groups or clique groups. The certainly don't join fraids with the noobs you all faceroll every other second of the day. And yet you make it seem like these veterans fraids are the only thing you fight.

  8. #158
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Not exactly. Its not like I don't believe what you're saying, on its face value. But I've been around long enough to know that the surface is never where the real truth is when it comes to PVP.
    Because THIS is really the kind of post made by someone in good faith who believes what I say on its face value:

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    So, cliff notes version, I took what you said to be one-sided hyperbole that only a fool or turbine pvp dev would believe. Sorry dude, you can think I'm new if it makes you feel better, but I'm not buying what you're selling, especially when I strongly suspect the audience you're seeking to shovel this to is Turbine, who you believe are watching, and not me at all.
    Elendilmir has long been one of the most active pvp environments. Back at the disaster of Moria launch, we were the only large server to consistently have 1.5 renown per point of infamy while most of the other servers (and every other high pop server) was seeing 2-2.5. We have perhaps the most organized creepside, utilizing factionwide voice communication and full cooperation between our various tribes.

    We have many highly active PvP focused kinships (ANV, Apoc, Apex, Vanguard, to name a few). And our prime-time action always features organized kinship groups utilizing voice chat and cross coordinating as numbers dictate.

    So yes, most of what we fight is in fact PVP vets.

    If you'd like to see what that is like from either a creep or freep perspective, I invite you to come over and see it.

    You can also view our shoutcast, which is how we notify offline folks what's going on. Lost count of how many times "outnumbered buff on creeps" appears post U10.... http://www.theblackappendage.com/shoutbox?page=0%2C0


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  9. #159
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eriador
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by Stepbrother View Post
    The only problem with this is having a warg stroll in and two/three-shot someone in the middle of a freep raid with his massive scaled ON buff, or converselely a burg or a sprinting champ or charging reaver for that matter. I for one don't want to be griefed in this way.

    There is no simple answer to the numbers game because the desire for easymode of most players is not something the developers can control. Take away zergs and easymode and I promise you half the moors population will simply not come out anymore.
    Where did I say there was a "massive" ON buff? The proposition has always been to cap the buff somewhere rational. Though would you rather be "griefed" by getting overrun by an entire raid instead? Seriously, are you really worried about a Warg or Burg sneaking into the middle of an entire opposing raid and taking someone out before the rest fof the raid turns them into jello?

    This is not intended, nor ever suggested, to be a way to turn lone characters into Raid Assaulting monsters. After all, that's what RK's and Minis are for.

    (While said mostly in jest, I have seen an RK run through the midst of a raid, healing themselves, and run off more or less unscathed. No, they were not an average RK. They are skilled and had top end gear, but the fact was they still pulled it off)

    And no, there is no simple answer to the numbers imbalance game.

    What do you propose that is better?
    Hobbits . . .
    Now them's good eatin'!

  10. #160
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eriador
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Oops, that was weird.

    Well the first few things that come to mind are

    1) Does the tech exist that could do this - There's nothing like this in the game that I can think of that would lend me to believing its doable.
    You will note that I proposed two versions of this. The first leverages the existing mechanics from the current outnumbered buff. That code is in place and should be fairly easy to modify. The Localized version is considerably more complex, but a fair chunk of the code is probably in place already. There is already code that identifies targets within various range from mobs and characters. The code to do the scaled buff can probably also be leveraged from existing code.

    From a concept standpoint, it's a piece of cake. Remember, just because you don't see a mechanic in effect in the game doesn't mean it's not there, and certainly doesn't mean it can't be done.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    2) How much lag would it cause - The moors does checks on boundry lines in PVP already for some reason and it causes lag spikes. How much of a lag spike will happen, will we WL bug etc etc..
    You may remember that I did point out this solution is more intense from both the development and server resource side, yes? The answer is "I don't know." But if it's properly done, the answer should be "minimal."

    Note, neither of your first objections are to the mechanic. Just to the implementation.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    3) 1v1 circles will be impossible.
    No they won't.

    If the circles are relatively even, no buff comes into play. If the circles aren't relatively even, some people who aren't participating are asked to move off, or the combatants move further away so they are outside the circle of the buff effect. "We're not going to do any 1v1's until the ON buff clears" works wonders.

    It will have no affect on "remote" 1v1's.

    This argument is a special case and easily adapted to by the players.

    If you're referring to the "region wide" implementation, then people end up not having 1v1 circles when it's in effect. Remember this entire concept is there to compensate for a dynamic numbers imbalance.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    4) multi boxing exploits. Park a dual box warg pack (or BURG pack) off to the side where you plan on engaging the craid and reap the benefit of the ON buff.
    Insertion above mine (seriously, CS, keep the arguments even, ok?) Two idle stealth characters run by someone trying to game the system are not going to change the numbers much if at all. Plus, once they're spotted they get engaged and either run away or die, thus altering the outcome. Or the opposing raid simply moves off and this carefully planned and executed "gaming" fails.

    I don't think I mentioned it in the most recent posting, but leveraging the auto-AFK and auto-back functions can also effectively help curtail this technique. If I'm trying to keep a collection of multi-boxed characters active AND participate in a raid on the opposing side at the same time . . . Well, I think you see the difficulty.

    Seriously. This is really stretching it, though remember that either side could try it - and probably fail.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    These are simply things I can think of that are game breakers in the theoretical phase. Imagine bad it would get when it goes live where there are dozens/hundreds/thousands of players manipulating this.
    Game breakers? Hardly. Your first two objections are development side based on the community's lack of detailed knowledge of the code base. Your third one is situation specific for a use case that's A: Not common on most servers (if forum comments on the subject are a guide) and B: Easily rectified simply by the people engaging in a 1v1 either moving off, or refusing to engage if their opponent is running the buff - depending on whether it's the regional or local implementation.

    The last objection is based on a fairly weak premise, that someone is going to spend TP on multiple F2P accounts so they can buy Wargs and then leave them parked somewhere in stealth to affect a fight. Or, since I, at least, try and include both sides, it would mean paying for multiple accounts to get Burgs on the grid. This solution already addresses the Idle Freaver altering the ON buff issue, and also solves this case.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Bah. As Sapience said already, the numbers in the moors are static. So you take away the zergy nature of it and people will still come out.
    And what is your suggestion other than "buff freeps" - because they seriously don't need even more than they have now - and buffing one side "to deal with numbers" is even more unbalancing than you seem to think the dynamic ON buff is.

    And where exactly did Sapience say they were static? I recall some cases where he said the numbers we can gather from other sources are wrong, but he's never said what they were. And, again going by people's posted experience on the forums, relative numbers were the biggest player complaint during RoR.

    I'm going to step out of this now. I know you won't see why this is a better solution than "buff the freeps."

    Cheers
    Hobbits . . .
    Now them's good eatin'!

  11. #161
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by l4j View Post
    Where did I say there was a "massive" ON buff?
    Well, if it's a scaling localized buff, wouldn't my scenario cause an inherently OP buff (1 vs. a raid)?

    The proposition has always been to cap the buff somewhere rational. Though would you rather be "griefed" by getting overrun by an entire raid instead? Seriously, are you really worried about a Warg or Burg sneaking into the middle of an entire opposing raid and taking someone out before the rest fof the raid turns them into jello?
    Considering my entire playstyle these days, due to a loathing disgust for zerglodytes, has become trying to burn down whatever looks weakest in the middle of the ever present zergs before they can get help or I get squished, yeah, I would be afraid of getting griefed like that if someone playing like me was superbuffed.

    What do you propose that is better?
    There is no solution at all. Like I said, if the game was perfectly balanced, all the easymoders would quit or find some other way to make things easy. I'm not being a smart@ss when I say that, I believe it heart and soul. After 6 years, I've seen enough of the average pvper to know I'm right.

  12. #162
    [QUOTE=ColorSpecs;6796889

    Hyperbole. You can make turbine believe that nonsense, but don't try it on me.
    [/QUOTE]

    Not Hyperbole at all. Rather simple and easy to observe facts. Facts that were acknowledged by Turbine pre-ROR when they said "It's clear that Creeps are out gunned and out healed".

    Your assertions that; Creeps out number Freeps and Freeps can't deal with greater numbers are just completely wrong.

    So it is, in fact, you that are spouting hyperbole. True perhaps of a pre ROI Moors but not true for at least the last 12 months.
    "the woods would be very silent if no birds sang except those that sang best" - Henry VanDyke

  13. #163
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eriador
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by Stepbrother View Post
    Well, if it's a scaling localized buff, wouldn't my scenario cause an inherently OP buff (1 vs. a raid)?
    You quoted the following paragraph, so you know the buff is capped. So, no, your scenario would not cause an inherently overpowered outnumbered buff..

    Quote Originally Posted by Stepbrother View Post
    Considering my entire playstyle these days, due to a loathing disgust for zerglodytes, has become trying to burn down whatever looks weakest in the middle of the ever present zergs before they can get help or I get squished, yeah, I would be afraid of getting griefed like that if someone playing like me was superbuffed.
    Huh . . . are you purposely ignoring the part where I've said, several times, that this buff is capped? You're building your counterargument against something I have specifically said is not the way it would work (as proposed).

    This, by the way, is called a "Straw Man" argument. It's a case where someone purposely, or otherwise, misinterprets the opposing position, and then makes their argument against their version of that position. You're doing that here, by implying that in a 1 vs Raid situation, the 1 will somehow be buffed to insane levels. They won't. I'm not sure how I can be any clearer on that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stepbrother View Post
    There is no solution at all. Like I said, if the game was perfectly balanced, all the easymoders would quit or find some other way to make things easy. I'm not being a smart@ss when I say that, I believe it heart and soul. After 6 years, I've seen enough of the average pvper to know I'm right.
    And herein lies the problem. I will impart a piece of wisdom that a favorite manager imparted upon me many years ago: "If you see a problem, don't shoot down other people's solutions unless you have a solution of your own."

    I will add - Don't mis-represent a solution, then attack your own mis-representation. It's not helpful.

    And, honestly, do we actually care if the easymoders bail? Seriously. People, especially Freep side, often seem to forget that the opposing force here is played by other people. They get to have fun too. Otherwise, they will walk away and then were has the easymode fun gone?
    Hobbits . . .
    Now them's good eatin'!

  14. #164
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Sezneg View Post
    Because THIS is really the kind of post made by someone in good faith who believes what I say on its face value:
    You sound like sapience... The only feedback you're going to listen to is that given in a way you find acceptable, and anything else you're going to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la la".

    You tell me I don't have enough meta-server experience, or experience in general... You keep trying to turn the debate off of the points I'm making toward my legitimacy to make them. That tells me you believe I'm right, that you can't counter them but agreeing with them means giving up some of the OP nature of that spider of yours which you refuse to do, quality of the game be damned.

    PS, telling me I don't know enough about multiple servers and in the same breath saying your server is the meta-server reality is counter-intuitive.

    Get on topic Sticks, or concede.

    L4J, I'm sorry I can't do a two-front war so I gotta pick and I'm going to keep with Stickeez. I agree with you that 2 of my points about your buff were about the implementation, when I'm more worried about when the solution is live, so that's contradictory. But the other two points stand. I just don't see Turbine not completely failing at this if they tried it. Which of course means that there's about a 99% chance they're gonna try it so that should be encouraging to you.
    Last edited by ColorSpecs; May 21 2013 at 01:25 PM.

  15. #165
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    You sound like sapience... The only feedback you're going to listen to is that given in a way you find acceptable, and anything else you're going to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la la".
    Calling me a liar with ulterior motives is not feedback. It's inflammatory, off topic, and likely to get this thread closed if it's continued. (Also: Insulting Sapience for doing his job in a thread that's being watched by both him and developers... *shakes head*)

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    You tell me I don't have enough meta-server experience, or experience in general... You keep trying to turn the debate off of the points I'm making toward my legitimacy to make them. That tells me you believe I'm right, that you can't counter them but agreeing with them means giving up some of the OP nature of that spider of yours which you refuse to do, quality of the game be damned.

    PS, telling me I don't know enough about multiple servers and in the same breath saying your server is the meta-server reality is counter-intuitive.
    I have never claimed my server is the penultimate experience of pvmp in this game. I have merely claimed that my server exists, as do others which do not mirror your own experiences. Changes to the game MUST take all servers into account, you can't build a moors overhaul just to satisfy you. I'm sorry that RoR has been rough on your server, and that you personally are fighting outnumbered quite a bit even post U10. Truly, I am. But your solutions would trash any server that is not exactly like your own in its dynamics. And that is an extremely short-sighted (and perhaps selfish) solution.

    So you can go on trying to make this about me, implying that I have ulterior motives (nice attempt at turning this into a spider dicussion... THEN claiming that I am not on topic.). I will simply go on talking about game balance.


    This is ultimately the difficult thing about getting Pvmp "right", there is a wide breadth of experience and contradictory feedback. You have to take into account both what is possible, and what is probable. That's a difficult enough task without posters coming here with an axe to grind. Personally, I think you have to lean slightly more towards "what is possible" when it comes to balance, and put a little of the onus on the player base to figure things out when things don't initially go their way.... however this is a primary pve game, so leaving balance a little on the side of "what's probable" is certainly acceptable in small doses.


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  16. #166
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    199
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    You sound like sapience... The only feedback you're going to listen to is that given in a way you find acceptable, and anything else you're going to put your fingers in your ears and go "la la la la".

    You tell me I don't have enough meta-server experience, or experience in general... You keep trying to turn the debate off of the points I'm making toward my legitimacy to make them.
    Yes, I would have to agree with Colorspecs, we have already been warned not to question the legitimacy of players' right to express their forum opinion, haven't we...I could say something more specific about some people thinking they're above such advice but I will refrain...So, whilst it's important to get across what play is like on one server, and may not be in general or specifically the same on E or anywhere else, it adds nothing to the debate to criticize his account of his experience as described. We are, though, going round in circles stating the obvious that altering one thing could impact players differently on different servers. Of course it will. This is why what needs to be done - of which there are good ideas here - needs to take account of this as broadly as possible, again, obviously in as dynamic a way as possible to incorporate the main ebb-flow currents of numbers playing on each side on any given server at any one time/one week/one month. We already know from Sapience that overall pvmp numbers remain more or less stable over significant amounts of time so armed with real numbers, I hope Turbine will come along again here and give us some specific thoughts about the ideas generated here so we can drop or help refine what has been suggested so far.
    [CENTER][URL="http://s1322.photobucket.com/user/Jingoism5/media/80624df1-2db7-463e-8896-cfa115eef487_zps9921a0cc.jpg.html"][IMG]http://i1322.photobucket.com/albums/u578/Jingoism5/80624df1-2db7-463e-8896-cfa115eef487_zps9921a0cc.jpg[/IMG][/URL]
    [/CENTER]
    [CENTER]
    [/CENTER]

  17. #167
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Eriador
    Posts
    763
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    <snip>

    L4J, I'm sorry I can't do a two-front war so I gotta pick and I'm going to keep with Stickeez. I agree with you that 2 of my points about your buff were about the implementation, when I'm more worried about when the solution is live, so that's contradictory. But the other two points stand. I just don't see Turbine not completely failing at this if they tried it. Which of course means that there's about a 99% chance they're gonna try it so that should be encouraging to you.
    Don't think of it as a war, CS, think of it as a spirited debate. I actually have a background in both game design (worked for a well known Pencil and Paper company back in the day - and on an early MMO) and software development (current role).

    They may not get it right if they do try and implement it, but part of the beauty of the intended design is that it's very easy to tune. You're not altering multiple character classes. Just a set of threshold values.

    But I'll let you and Stick continue. As I said, I'm going to step away from it here and let it go. I've made the suggestion as clearly as I can, for better or worse. It's not perfect, but it's the best I (and others) have been able to come up with that addresses the numbers issue fairly for both sides.
    Hobbits . . .
    Now them's good eatin'!

  18. #168
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Sezneg View Post
    Calling me a liar with ulterior motives is not feedback.
    I never called you a liar. Ironically, I said you were given toward exaggeration.

    It's inflammatory, off topic, and likely to get this thread closed if it's continued.
    C'mon now, you've been trying to get this thread locked for a while. Sapience warned you to discuss the content, not the poster at least once.

    (Also: Insulting Sapience for doing his job in a thread that's being watched by both him and developers... *shakes head*)
    I never insulted him. If you think that perception that he gives me and apparently at least one other is insulting then take it up with him.

    I have never claimed my server is the penultimate experience of pvmp in this game. I have merely claimed that my server exists, as do others which do not mirror your own experiences. Changes to the game MUST take all servers into account, you can't build a moors overhaul just to satisfy you. I'm sorry that RoR has been rough on your server, and that you personally are fighting outnumbered quite a bit even post U10. Truly, I am. But your solutions would trash any server that is not exactly like your own in its dynamics. And that is an extremely short-sighted (and perhaps selfish) solution.
    This is nothing but an excuse. You could copy and paste 99.9% of that as a response to either side requesting any change. Not gonna fly.

    Quote Originally Posted by colorspecs
    So you can go on trying to make this about me, implying that I have ulterior motives (nice attempt at turning this into a spider dicussion... THEN claiming that I am not on topic.). I will simply go on talking about game balance.
    See what I did there?

    This is ultimately the difficult thing about getting Pvmp "right", there is a wide breadth of experience and contradictory feedback. You have to take into account both what is possible, and what is probable. That's a difficult enough task without posters coming here with an axe to grind. Personally, I think you have to lean slightly more towards "what is possible" when it comes to balance, and put a little of the onus on the player base to figure things out when things don't initially go their way.... however this is a primary pve game, so leaving balance a little on the side of "what's probable" is certainly acceptable in small doses.
    Yay we're back on topic after all!! I knew you could do it

    I agree with what you are saying here. For me, who hasn't even freeped in two years now, balance is achieved when the game is fun. I can judge the overall perception of that by not only my desire to log in as compared to other times in my gaming history but also my friends, allies, and enemies too.

    I'm pretty impartial when it comes to balance; since I have played both sides evenly and what I've found is the moors are best when the freeps are stronger. And by best I mean, the moors are more interesting. The rivalries are more heated, the fights are more diverse, the more veterans come out on both sides. And I don't see any of that happening now. Hell, my old server go look at it's forums; Brandywine. I was lurking there, there wasn't one post of substance I could find that was actually talking about a battle in the game. Some grats threads, an awesome Fizze video, Dude, the last post in the BW pvp forums 2 days ago. TWO DAYS (caps for emphasis) I don't recall the last time... I don't think that's ever happened before.

    And you want to tell me that the things Turbine are doing now are lending itself to retaining its players....

    You're as vet as they come, so for you to say something so otherwise at best blind, then basically I'm doing you a favor by giving you the benefit of the doubt and believe you have an alterior motive.

  19. #169
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    I never called you a liar.
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    So, cliff notes version, I took what you said to be one-sided hyperbole that only a fool or turbine pvp dev would believe. Sorry dude, you can think I'm new if it makes you feel better, but I'm not buying what you're selling, especially when I strongly suspect the audience you're seeking to shovel this to is Turbine, who you believe are watching, and not me at all.
    Please keep telling me how I'M the one trying to disqualify posts based on who's posting them.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Yay we're back on topic after all!! I knew you could do it
    So... you're trying to be as insulting as you can, correct? Tell me again how I am the one trying to get this thread locked...

    It may shock you, but keeping a respectful tone is kind of a good way to keep lines of communication open.

    I have never once in this entire thread questioned a post you have written as being "less than truthful". I have been jumping through hoops trying to understand where you are coming from, what your experiences are like and trying to give your side of the conversation a fair shake. In return you have been insulting, have written my posts off as less than truthful, and have tried to needle, insult and derail whenever possible.

    I'm trying to have a good faith conversation here. It would be nice if you would as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    I agree with what you are saying here. For me, who hasn't even freeped in two years now, balance is achieved when the game is fun. I can judge the overall perception of that by not only my desire to log in as compared to other times in my gaming history but also my friends, allies, and enemies too.

    I'm pretty impartial when it comes to balance; since I have played both sides evenly and what I've found is the moors are best when the freeps are stronger. And by best I mean, the moors are more interesting. The rivalries are more heated, the fights are more diverse, the more veterans come out on both sides. And I don't see any of that happening now.
    Doesn't this undercut your entire theory of having stronger freeps makes the game more interesting and balanced? I hate to be the one to bring this up... but freeps are stronger *right now*. Does this, even a bit, cause you to question your prior assertion? If the key to a happy moors were simply making one side (the freeps), stronger than their opposition, you should be seeing a very happy moors right now if your own logic held.

    Are you, perhaps trying to argue that freeps are *not* the clearly stronger side right now? This would be an interesting argument, that would clearly put you in the minority of public opinion.

    Perhaps you should use this moment to ponder WHY merely having a more powerful freep faction hasn't had the effect you yourself have expected to ponder why that could be?

    I'll allow a fellow Elendilmirian posit my theory:

    Quote Originally Posted by ksjock View Post
    My 2 cents:

    I will eventually log off for many reasons but it usually boils down to this; We are running again and again into fights, we are wiping over and over and we are getting no kills in return.

    The deaths don't worry me, however, the total lack of kills does.

    In its most basic state this games PvP is about advancing your character and having fun. Having an opposition that is too strong takes away both of these things; So why would you not log off?

    Instead of all the finger pointing and blaming others for your lack of "fun" or opposition to fight. Perhaps it might be prudent to look at our own actions and think; "what am I encouraging my opposition to do".

    Of all the changes I've seen to PvMP in my time, I think, it's the ability of some classes and when combined, some big groups/Raids to simply not die that has left the worst taste in my mouth.

    Give people more in combat rezes, give them maps to get back to a fight quicker but seriously do something about the ever growing list of "oh &&&&" skills that mean "I or my fellow will not die right now" because the best fights, IMO, are the ones where points are flowing for both sides and both sides are encouraged to come back and contribute their skills and their deaths again and again.
    Here's a little saying I have for the numbers dynamic in the moors: "Success breeds numbers, failure bleeds numbers".

    Being put up against the wall, with no chance of success is a surefire way to lose numbers. people are much more apt to realize they meant to log out 20 minutes ago for any number of stated reasons. People who would have otherwise been on as more players logged in are instead gone, and the outnumbered side remains outnumbered and camped.

    That can happen to either side, and that's why it's important to keep survivability in check.



    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    And you want to tell me that the things Turbine are doing now are lending itself to retaining its players....
    There's no point debating a verrified fact; See Sapience's earlier post in this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    You're as vet as they come, so for you to say something so otherwise at best blind, then basically I'm doing you a favor by giving you the benefit of the doubt and believe you have an alterior motive.
    Here again, if I somewhow disagree or provide contrary information to what you have posted... I'm blind? I have an ulterior motive? How is that a reasoned discussion? If you are not going to attempt to take anything I write at face value, there is no longer any point to keep writing it.


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  20. #170
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    891
    Quote Originally Posted by Sezneg View Post
    Please keep telling me how I'M the one trying to disqualify posts based on who's posting them.
    I'm making no judgements or attempting to hold any discussion about your qualifications for participating in this topic.

    So... you're trying to be as insulting as you can, correct?
    No, not at all. I'm just not buying what you're shoveling. You've basically backed me into a corner where I'm forced to believe either 1) You're blind 2) you're stupid or 3) you have an alterior motive.

    I'm choosing 3 out of respect.

    You have to admit, you have never forged a reputation as the most unbiased poster on this forums. Just look at your sig.

    It may shock you, but keeping a respectful tone is kind of a good way to keep lines of communication open.
    Having communication is the good way to keep lines of communication open.

    I'm trying to have a good faith conversation here. It would be nice if you would as well.
    I am, and have been the whole time. I can't help it if you find offensive the fact that I don't believe what you are saying sometimes.

    Doesn't this undercut your entire theory of having stronger freeps makes the game more interesting and balanced? I hate to be the one to bring this up... but freeps are stronger *right now*. Does this, even a bit, cause you to question your prior assertion? If the key to a happy moors were simply making one side (the freeps), stronger than their opposition, you should be seeing a very happy moors right now if your own logic held.
    Nope. Your own theory is based on the fact that you tell me you believe freeps are stronger. We both know that's not the case. Creeps have the numbers, they have the mobility, and with the exception of fights against the smallest percentage of freeps, freeps that are currently practically being begged to quit the game by Turbine, you guys do just fine.

    What you mean to say is "freeps hit harder and heal better" even these are debatable right now, but dps and healing are not the only things that win a battle.

    There's no point debating a verrified fact; See Sapience's earlier post in this thread.
    See, this is blatantly disingenuous. Maybe you think you're smarter than me and that allows you to try and slip it past me. Good luck with that. Sapience said numbers are static and that's all. That doesn't illustrate at all veterans leaving and being replaced by noobs.

    If you are not going to attempt to take anything I write at face value, there is no longer any point to keep writing it.
    I'm sorry you expect me to take what you say at face value on this topic. But I'm not going to.

  21. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by Beast_of_War View Post
    A new map where rank and gear do not matter. Everyone enters with standardized stats, and can gain commendations + renown/infamy.
    This will never work.

    In fact, the population would die so quickly, it would be quite hilarious.

    For example: The new "Raids" and I'm using that term loosely, is the most recent example that without incentive, content will not be run.
    "I think we've seen historically that...the serious gamers are much more stable, and they're going to be around for a long time..." Sid Meier

  22. #172
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,803
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    No, not at all. I'm just not buying what you're shoveling. You've basically backed me into a corner where I'm forced to believe either 1) You're blind 2) you're stupid or 3) you have an alterior motive.
    Because THOSE are the only possibilities. It couldn't be that someone other than you has different experiences based on their server environment. No, it MUST be one of THESE three options.

    Seriously? How is anyone supposed to have a conversation with you when not agreeing with you means we are blind, stupid or lying. Get. Over. Yourself. Understand that the game is large, that different servers are different. Your experience is not everyone's experience.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    I am, and have been the whole time. I can't help it if you find offensive the fact that I don't believe what you are saying sometimes.
    I take offense when you accuse me of lying/exaggerating and flat out say that if I honestly believe everything I am posting that I am stupid or blind. That's not feedback. That's not discussion. That's inflammatory and has no place in this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Nope. Your own theory is based on the fact that you tell me you believe freeps are stronger. We both know that's not the case. Creeps have the numbers, they have the mobility, and with the exception of fights against the smallest percentage of freeps, freeps that are currently practically being begged to quit the game by Turbine, you guys do just fine.
    Let's try to separate two things from this paragraph.

    You say creeps have the numbers.

    Clearly they do on your server. On mine, the creeps have the outnumbered buff as often as not in prime time post U10. So clearly, THIS thrust of yours does not apply to all servers. It applies to your server (and perhaps others).

    Now before you accuse me of making this up, lying or being "stupid" I offer some extemporaneous proof of what I say: http://www.theblackappendage.com/shoutbox That's our factionwide shoutcast, we use it to communicate with those not currently logged in to let them know how the moors is. Feel free to browse back as far back as you'd like. Notice that post U10, the outnumbered buff and grams camps are called out quite frequently. Now... are you going to accuse me of making this up and fabricating the entire shoutcast list? Or will you see that maybe, JUST MAYBE, not every server has the same meta-game and population balance as your own?

    As for the rest; you are claiming that freeps are weaker... being practically asked to quit. How do we detangle that from the population situation that clearly exists on your server? How much stronger do YOU want to be to make up for a local population problem? How do you expect this will effect other servers where the numbers do not match what you see on your own server?

    I would strongly disagree with you that freeps are currently weaker. You are using population numbers in your argument in a way that I am not so I will ask you this plainly: Given equal numbers, do you think that currently freeps are weaker than creeps?

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    What you mean to say is "freeps hit harder and heal better" even these are debatable right now, but dps and healing are not the only things that win a battle.
    Unlike relative population numbers; THESE things are absolutely the same on all servers (allowing for gear, battlefield promotions, etc). That's why these are the things that get discussed in threads like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    See, this is blatantly disingenuous. Maybe you think you're smarter than me and that allows you to try and slip it past me. Good luck with that. Sapience said numbers are static and that's all. That doesn't illustrate at all veterans leaving and being replaced by noobs.
    I'm not going to rehash this. Populations are not falling. Churn is a natural phenomenon in MMOs.

    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    I'm sorry you expect me to take what you say at face value on this topic. But I'm not going to.
    If all of your future posts are going to consist of you calling me a liar and my posts untrustworthy, I invite you to remain on topic by simply ignoring my posts in the future.


    Even my Signature is trolling!

  23. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by ColorSpecs View Post
    Hyperbole. You can make turbine believe that nonsense, but don't try it on me.
    However, even with the vast overpopulation of Creeps and relatively strong and at times too powerful skillset of U9, Freeps were still able to handle larger numbers, unless of course your idea of larger numbers exceeds 3-4.





    This isn't a matter of posturing but rather an attempt to provide some background as to the capabilities of Freeps, even during a "dark" time for Freepside.

    For me, U9 was a blast. It separated the PvPers into two groups. While I still consider SoA 12-14 to be an epic time during LoTRO's rollercoaster PvP history, U9 was engaging, challenging, and forced myself and fellow players to push our class skillsets and really understand its limitations.
    "I think we've seen historically that...the serious gamers are much more stable, and they're going to be around for a long time..." Sid Meier

  24. #174
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    GW2.
    Posts
    178
    Gear switching freepside.
    Allows them the benefits of multiple legacies (skill specific or generic; e.g. Mischievous Glee heal, warden bleed ticks), armor specific characteristics (poison or bleed removal), and character stats (e.g.:+vit at the beginning of the fight; switch to +mastery stats towards the end, effectively negating health loss due to damage; for example: switching from 18k HP gear to 10k HP gear after losing 8k HP makes it as if no health was lost).
    This allows for:
    An even greater disparity among freeps. Those who do not are at a severe disadvantage. Also increases the level of grind before reaching full potency; requiring up to 5 sets of gear.
    A greater imbalance between creeps & freeps. They are not balanced against freeps with gear-switching in mind.

    Creepside, this would be akin to changing traits in combat, albeit with a greater range of applicable effects.

    Solution: disable gear-switching in combat. Armor-switching itself is nonsensical enough, both from perspectives of gameplay and feasibility. Weapon-switching, while unfair from a gameplay viewpoint, is reasonable in terms of "real life." Compromise: add a small (1-2 second) switch induction.

  25. #175
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    GW2.
    Posts
    178
    Quote Originally Posted by Beast_of_War
    A new map where rank and gear do not matter. Everyone enters with standardized stats, and can gain commendations + renown/infamy.
    Quote Originally Posted by Prorsum View Post
    This will never work.

    In fact, the population would die so quickly, it would be quite hilarious.

    For example: The new "Raids" and I'm using that term loosely, is the most recent example that without incentive, content will not be run.
    Did you read the entire post?
    A "new" map that is identical to the current one - and is effectively a separate place. The old map remains, with all its current rank, gear, infamy and renown.
    This map would server two purposes:
    1) allow noobs a place to build up rank, gear, infamy/renown before moving to the current Moors.
    2) allow veterans to fight in a place with established equality.
    As it currently stands, a creep may expect around 50-100 hours of gameplay before being remotely competitive. That is quite intimidating for new players. An additional zone where they can gain experience and strength would help ease them in.
    Last edited by Beast_of_War; May 22 2013 at 02:35 AM.

 

 
Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload