Forums-->General game forum-->
<<|<|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23
| Author | [News from the Court] - Discussion thread |
|---|
ou will get exp for losing to that army on your first and second try too
They're talking about skill points not experience. | People hate the AP rule, they say high levels do also. I don't- I'm loving it.
Am I a bad player? | for Kotrin:
I find sad that we don't even know what problems Administration tried to resolve in the first place.
I have a theory and faction points are just part of it. In the old system it was possible to have "unnaturally" high skill and guild points even at low levels. The new system essentially sets a "natural" limit to skill and guild levels (except the Labor Guild) for every combat level. If you've run out of killable monsters at a certain level then you'd have to level up in order to hunt again. I suppose this is also true for mercenary quests. Maybe the developers are trying to make combat levels more attractive.
As for the AP rule, I suspect that the admins are simply trying to give "casual" players a helping hand against the more "hardcore" players. By slowing down heavy grinders who spend up to 15 hours a day fighting, the casual players will be in a slightly better position in PvP encounters. | you will get exp for losing to that army on your first and second try too
Most of clever players want Skill Points and Gold, admins are taking that and instead of them we gain more Exp, very funny :o) | "And it is absolutely NOT TRUE, when you say that these changes affect everyone the same way. Yes, it could affect everyone if this was a new server. But now you are forcing people to earn lot of exp and it is less possible to make your level in hunters guild and racial skill. So I will be level 8-9 very quickly and meet the older players, some of them will have 2-3 higher hunters guild level..it means +3 attack, some of them have 2-3 racial skill of every faction, that means 9% less damage taken from my creatures. Yes, it will be much fun dealing with those guys. Now when everybody has a great faction skill you stop every means of earning it. So I was wrong when I thought two weeks ago I could just stop for a moment, hunt a bit, assist without earning experience and boost my faction skill a bit so I can catch up with the other player and have fair competitions with them."
a totally valid point Omega. I agree. And i worries me. I have since the new rules played like i used to, and with no more easy hunting I will be leve 6 a lot quicker. And I will have to deal with guys much stronger than me while I'm struggling to be level 5 in hunters guld and racial skills | admins are simply trying to give "casual" players a helping hand against the more "hardcore" players. By slowing down heavy grinders who spend up to 15 hours a day fighting, the casual players will be in a slightly better position in PvP encounters.
so why don't we make a casual game for mediocre players only and chase away everyone that happen to have the weird idea to excel in it?! | | [Post deleted by moderator Kotrin // Double post] | | [Post deleted by moderator Kotrin // Triple post :)] | "a totally valid point Omega. I agree. And i worries me. I have since the new rules played like i used to, and with no more easy hunting I will be leve 6 a lot quicker. And I will have to deal with guys much stronger than me while I'm struggling to be level 5 in hunters guld and racial skills"
It was worse before, when people could spend months losing fights to get their faction levels up, and hunt assists to get their hunt levels up. Those people already had an edge on you, but they won't keep it for too long.
Yes, it affects some factions more than others. But the factions that are affected the least are also the factions that were the weakest. I can't say I mind watching Wizards and Elves get knocked down a peg- and I'm a Wizard!
"so why don't we make a casual game for mediocre players only and chase away everyone that happen to have the weird idea to excel in it?!"
When excelling is defined as what...losing over and over to get so "good" that you don't need any skill to beat your opponent? Do you really think that was the intent of the people who made the game?
How about we make the objective getting to a high level as quickly as possible, and define the people who spend months creating the bestest sixth level character ever as the mediocre ones? | for urgone:
You could level up in the previous rules system by doing pvp. I did that every time when I wanted level up. The Elf faction is not so strong, but with a little strategy, one can boost his/her experience by pvp pretty easy. So, why should I be forced to level up with low faction level when I want for my char to be strong enough to be able to fight pvp when I do level up?
So, the old system was pretty OK for every kind of players. The factions are unbalanced at different levels and there should have been done something. | CG:
If it was pretty OK for all kinds of players, why are there over three times as many elves as demons? Under the old rules, when were demons better than elves?
Elves were taking advantage of a strategy that the game designers didn't mean to exist to make themselves stronger than the other factions (except Wizards, who were doing the same trick). The rule changes will bring the factions back into the designers' intended balance. | Oh, yes? How's that? How is it possible for the Elf faction to be stronger than the rest when there are very few factions which can be beaten by Elves in duels?
Elf is a team player and in this way it can fight pvp. As well as DE. The new rules will push them faster to level up, but they will be weaker and weaker with every level up.
Generally, Elf is a good hunter, second after Wizard (according to the top hunters), because of its initiative. But in pvp, many players who registered under this faction are disappointed. And that's because the Elf faction has not so many chances in a tournament of duels. | If it was pretty OK for all kinds of players, why are there over three times as many elves as demons? Under the old rules, when were demons better than elves?
do you know that every faction has advantage on certain other faction?
demons is better against necro is duel, but necro players is twice as many as demon players. your posting is pointless.
Elves were taking advantage of a strategy that the game designers didn't mean to exist to make themselves stronger than the other factions (except Wizards, who were doing the same trick).
do you think that the game designers didn't think about that before launching/releasing the game? what a shallow designers then they used for this game....
The rule changes will bring the factions back into the designers' intended balance.
really? | "do you think that the game designers didn't think about that before launching/releasing the game? what a shallow designers then they used for this game...."
In general, no. Game designers make a game, give rules, and play it themselves. They don't say "Well, what if somebody decides to lose their first 300 fights". Instead, if they find such a loophole, they change the rules to eliminate that loophole. You know, kind of like what they're doing right now.
The designer of soccer tournament rules never thought that scoring on yourself could help you advance in a tournament. When the NBA designed their draft rules, they never imagined teams deliberately losing the last dozen games of the season in order to get a player.
What did they do? They changed the rules, to go back to the original intent of the game. And these were professional organizations.
So, no. I seriously doubt that the designers of the game considered that people would lose deliberately early on. And regardless of whether they knew about it, they obviously didn't like the result. | In general, no. Game designers make a game, give rules, and play it themselves. They don't say "Well, what if somebody decides to lose their first 300 fights". Instead, if they find such a loophole, they change the rules to eliminate that loophole. You know, kind of like what they're doing right now.
yes, they use game tester player to find such loopholes, loophooles that they might have missed when they design the game!
But do_you_really_know that it_does_not_take_a_genious to know that you need high faction skill in this game and "losing intentionally" is one way to reach that.
so now you are saying that those game designers are more stupid than i am? give_me_a_break...
So, no. I seriously doubt that the designers of the game considered that people would lose deliberately early on. And regardless of whether they knew about it, they obviously didn't like the result.
whatever, lets see how you are going to do it in higher level. | Ganz...you have a lot to learn about games devellopement.
all games have problems like that. every time you try to make a new game, you have lots of problems. you must test, correct some problems, test again, find new problems, correct again...
the last game i made i needed something like 300 hours of test to make it perfectly balanced. and it was a game hundreds of times smaller than lords of war and money.
games creators can't think to everything when they do their game.
it's obvious that intentionnal losing to be stronger wasn't what they wanted to do.
look at urgone's message :414.
it'a great message. | games creators can't think to everything when they do their game.
it's obvious that intentionnal losing to be stronger wasn't what they wanted to do
indeed, since i am not a game developer, i know little things about it..
now, lets assume that you are a game designer for this LoMW, when you think about the concept of this game, you know that high fsp is one of the important thing, right? of course you do, thats why "you" create that experience table in the "About The Game" section. now let me ask you...in this case, as a game developer (which is a pro job) don't you anticipate ways to reach those skills criteria?
and does it really take months (or more than 300 hours) juz to realize that one thing, "losing intentionally" can boost your faction skill? i am speechless... | Of course not. However-
-There's nothing inherently wrong with fp increasing when you lose. It just means that people who aren't very good will eventually be able to increase in combat level.
-They probably assumed that most people would be going for the main objective (get to the highest level), not some other purpose. I'm not so certain that the losing battle strategy helps you gain levels- in fact, I'm pretty sure it hurts it.
-Think about everything that went into this fix- how it affected hunts, hunt assists, AP, and other things. Then think of all the other alternatives they could have used to fix this- having PVP be racial level plus combat level, for example. Or eliminating racial level entirely, and throwing it into combat level. Just deciding on how to fix it probably took months. Then they have to code it, and then they have to find other problems that can be caused by it- is it fair to enforce AP for 1/3 strength hunts, for example? And finally, they have to worry about the people who are already playing- are new players going to end up stronger or weaker than them? And should they do something about it?
-And frankly, they had other issues that were more important to worry about first. Like the side non-creature producing buildings, which they had to get rid of. And balancing the factions, which they did with talents. And that's just for this game. The guys that coded this game may have new and better (and possibly paying) things to do right now. They can't spend 24/7 working on this game. They'd starve to death.
This wasn't just some bug that could be recoded. This was a change in the game structure. It's not surprising that it took that long. | | Anyway..It gives those players(call them intentional loozers) even more advantage because now there is no real chance of being as strong as them with hunt assistance and losing giving exp. :-) | and there is no chance for them to continue intentional losing.
they aren't advantaged.
you can't have free FSP by hunt assists, you can't have free FSP by losing.
it's the same for everyone. |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
<<|<|13|14|15|16|17|18|19|20|21|22|23Back to topics list
|
