Forums-->Ideas and suggestions-->
1|2|3
| Author | CG points for defending against thief ambush |
|---|
If the CG points obtained from defending against thief is small (say 1/4 or 1/8 of what you get from a standard duel in Commander Guild Duel), then there is no incentive to waste your arts trying your luck to catch a thief in min AP. The chance of scoring a win in a standard duel in CG I'd say it's higher than 1/4 (resp. 1/8) and costs 1/4 (resp. 1/8) cheaper! So if you want CG points, it is faster and cheaper and more likely to get them in Commander Guild battles.
Of course there will be thief hunters, just as there are now. But by using only *small* CG points, the *accidental* thief victim can be rewarded in case of successful defense, while not being an incentive for *set-up* "victims" to do it.
Or you could make such that the amount of CG points the victim receives is dependent on the disparity of AP between thief and victim. Say CG points obtained = 1/(difference of APs).
So if they are both in min AP, then victim receives 1 CG point.
If the victim is full AP=50 (for example), and thief is in min AP = 10, then the CG points would be 1/40!!! Who would waste their arts for 1/40 combat guilds ? | combat guilds ? *commander* guild points
You could make that dependency also on sum of enchants, in pretty much the same way: decreasing sharply with the difference.
Surely the system can compute that before the battle, since it is able to do it when you try enter a Commander Guild battle | | 39 thx for ignoring my arguments completely. If there is no benefit like u say in thief hunting then why so many ppl are already doing so? | This is a pointless argument. They would never do this anyways because you only have to be level 6 to join the thieves guild where as you have to be level 9 to join the commanders guild. Unless, of course, you are recomending also that the commanders guild joining level be reduced to level 6, which would screw with the gameplay, or that thief guild joining level be increased to 9, which would also screw with the game play.. Or perhaps you just thought it would be nice to just not include level 6-9 people defending ambushes, so that they could storm the forum with how unfair it is that everyone else gets points for defending ambushes but they dont..
But if you want my oppinion excluding that, i am completely neutral on it. This suggestion has strong points that indicate both that it should and should not occur.. From my understanding, these are the strongest points-
1. Thieves are already having enough trouble- caravans get harder each time and unless they are seriously well off economically they need to use minimal arts, which means that thief-hunters can pick them off easily enough; there is no need to encourage the thief-hunter
2. While thieves recieve exp, fsp, gold, and TG points for wins, the ambushed player can at most recieve exp and fsp for wins. For this reason, ambushed players deserve to recieve equally valued rewards for winning in ambushes.
However, if anything pushes it over the edge just a bit, its the fact of the extent of money thieves have to pay for that TG point and 50 gold per win. Today, thieves have to pay over 1m to even have an oppertunity at TG points.. why, then, should ambushed players recieve CG points for free? 1 TG point and 50 gold per battle is about equal to the value of the gold the thief had to spend, so thieving really is a fair sport already.. The only way this suggestion would be fair is if you had to buy invites to the commanders guild to recieve the CG points at the end of a battle.
Haha.. why would you think it fair to have to pay 1mil to join a "thieves guild" but get into an "anti-thieves guild" for free? nobody would even want to join the thieves guild if this happened..
But really though.. im neutral on the topic :) i think both arguments are reasonable | #44However, if anything pushes it over the edge just a bit, its the fact of the extent of money thieves have to pay for that TG point and 50 gold per win. Today, thieves have to pay over 1m to even have an oppertunity at TG points.. why, then, should ambushed players recieve CG points for free? 1 TG point and 50 gold per battle is about equal to the value of the gold the thief had to spend, so thieving really is a fair sport already.. The only way this suggestion would be fair is if you had to buy invites to the commanders guild to recieve the CG points at the end of a battle.
'Thieving is a fair sport'...hahaha good one, that's a hilarious statement!
Fair point, we pay a lot of money to get a TGI. But to say this makes thieving 'fair' and CG therefore unfair is totally irrational.
As for the pre-amble in your first paragraph, you've gone off on a tangent there haven't you. Ah well, I suppose this is a 'fantasy' empire where we have to use our imagination eh?
Thieving...fair. Protecting yourself...unfair....LOL :D | +1 Good plan Merlin!
The Thieves should have no reason to complain about this. Thief hunters will get you regardless, why worry about increased motivation? They have their motivation already with excellent FSP and xp from a win. Not to mention, if the CG points that would be granted cut down the FSP, there wouldn't really be an increase in motivation. | | ^^ CG have to wear full arts while TG not to and for CL 9-12 lords can't wear tactician art even after reach CG level 2. Sure can sell or wait but that's limited option. Now TG only face equal combat level and can decrease difficulty while CG has to struggle with 'dynamic' balancing. Maybe im not thieving a lot but know sure it's never ever easy for high TG levels. | Fascinating what kind of arguments can someone find in attempt to avoid fair AP and balanced duels in CG while wants more points for thief hunting which by far the easiest way to beat a player.
Its sort of funny seeing 3-4 guys who together have less TGI points than marked_one alone argue him about the thieving mechanism. When you cant see the logic why thief hunting is an advantage while thieving in full arts is NOT sustainable in the long run, there is no need give anymore arguments.
Lets give thief hunters some hunter guild points too. They are hunting after all..
CG has to struggle with 'dynamic' balancing What dynamic balancing??? You mean the one sole tournament? Because there is no possibility to fight different levels in CG. | @48
Stay on topic please, as this has nothing to do with minimum AP.
You're saying that because I only have TG 5, I am not entitled to an opinion on theiving? Isn't that a bit dictatorial and ignorant?
I've played pretty much every ambush in full arts. I spent too long playing in min arts and losing just to bring the difficulty down, by the time that worked I levelled up and the difficulty was reset anyway.
And if thieving in full arts is 'not sustainable in the long run, then why would thief hunting be any more sustainable? You go on about 'balanced games' yet you skirt the obvious issue that if both thief and victim are wearing full arts, the thief still has an advantage in deployment.
Again, the bottom line is that if you want to be a thief, you need to accept that people have the right to defend themselves and, as in life, the community has the right to hunt down thieves. My suggestion is that they be rewarded as much as the thief is, in game terms. | | ^^ A bit mislead with the 'dynamic balancing' from other suggestion, although it come from a tournamennt too. Thief not actively hunt, they wait for ambush well wait that's not about that. I think it's a CG points suggestion but if maybe want to discuss with someone with higher TG points then perhaps Fastkill right, it's kind of pointless. Almost no one here support thief hunting while it seems keep coming back to focus on that. | Yeah, CG has no dynamic balancing. It is fairly straight forward. Also, as far as I can tell AP requirements for the Commander's Guild are pretty even and fair. It would be difficult to be "outmatched" in arts based on the minimum requirements... unless you went in with 3/4 Shop set. If you have most of a set, why go into a PvP battle where it is likely that everyone else will be decked out?
I see so many players arguing over "fairness" in different kinds of PvP battles and how many different combination of talents, arts and tactics are unjust.
For example, a Necromancer peer was arguing that Dueling me when I use a Holy Talent build is "unfair" because he thinks there is no way a Necro can stand up to a Holy Elf. What is unfair about doing what is best for my character? If he thinks he will lose he has the option to not join that battle.
Same goes for this topic. Ambush at your own risk. If you really want to do well, use a full set of arts. Is it unfair that it costs so much to do so? The people that can afford to protect themselves do so and succeed.
Eh, a sleepless rant again... my apologies. The point is that it is not unfair when all the possibilities in the game are open to everyone.
And don't get me started on the diamonds stuff. In real life I am somewhat homeless (I have good friends :\ ), no job, no money. I don't donate for that reason, yet somehow I am financially stable in this game while being able to sustain a full set of shop arts. If you're going to mention my salary, I put that towards building up my Enchanter's Guild. Yes I see that as a bit of a nice perk, but no one *needs* the Enchanter's Guild on their own character. Hopefully that is enough to invalidate that potential argument.
Ah tangents, tangents. All-in-all, I believe CG points to Thief Hunters is a good idea when balanced by cutting down the FSP they receive. That way there is no "extra" perk to Thief Hunting... not that I would necessarily mind it. I would just rather come to a sort of compromise on the issue. | | ^^ Maybe it's better if said defend against thief ambush rather thief hunters although it's almost (exact) same and difficult too distinguish from its mechanism. Or can give CG points penalty like in LG if a lords keep fight thieves in different/same routes. So less ppl would think this about add more difficulty to earning TG points at high levels. | @ naviron and ipslne, and jeverag:
Do you think if say, 0.5 CG points were awarded for beating an ambush, this would be enough to encourage people to defend themselves when travelling, but not quite enough to encourage a mass frenzy of thief-hunting?
I'm not sure about lowering the FSP, unless the same applies to the thief. Not forgetting that if it is a full arts ambush, the FSP will be very nice even if you lose> | Eh, I'm not too concerned about having to lower FSP or even needing to encourage people to have to defend themselves. I really think the CG bonus is a great idea, just for those who are willing to spend the gold to protect themselves.
I was just trying to find a way to appease both sides of the debate.
Those who want to Thieve in min arts should be prepared for a loss or two when they come across a well-suited player.
What about the Thieves who ambush in full arts anyway? They have to deal with those who recruit a single unit and wear no arts. 0 xp rewarded and it still uses durability. The likelihood of that happening would seem to be the same as that of the minimally-arted Thief who ambushes a fully-arted Thief hunter.
The relation to the topic may not be too clear; but what I'm trying to negate are the arguments stating that CG points being awarded to the successful defense of an ambush are unfair.
Oh the trials and tribulations of the Thief and the Thieved ;p | For me the problem with this idea is that the commanders guild was to fill a void. Full art PvP combat made you spend a lot of money for a huge XP gain compared to the FSP gain and no HG, TG, etc.
Basically, someone who focused on PvP would be at a significant disadvantage compared to someone who focused on min art thieving and hunting. CG now means you get something. Some people will start doing PvP to get CG points. If they can get it through theif hunting, which will most likely be easier fights, then the CG will not increase the amount of PvP.
It's nothing to do with "the poor thief met a thief hunter and got owned", it's anout the CG doing what it was designed to do. This ideas subverts that purpose. | And if thieving in full arts is 'not sustainable in the long run, then why would thief hunting be any more sustainable?
For Gods sake, because you can afford 1500 gold for beating a player and getting 2 fsp and 10000 exp for that. But you cannot afford to do the same with caravans that become impossible even in full arts. Or are you ready to spend 1500 gold for 0.3 fsp in a caravan?
I am on topic, but this is not going anywhere. If you cant see the financial advantage of a thief hunter who can only meet a player, most probably a medium arted player with no chance to win, there is nothing to discuss.
Thief hunting is the EASIEST way to beat a player. I know what I am talking about, I have been doing that with faction level 0 demon with 80%-90% success.
Now why would something new and as valuable as CG points be awarded for the easiest kind of battle you can do? | It's nothing to do with "the poor thief met a thief hunter and got owned", it's anout the CG doing what it was designed to do. This ideas subverts that purpose.
You make a good point; however --
someone who focused on PvP would be at a significant disadvantage compared to someone who focused on min art thieving and hunting. CG now means you get something.
As of yet it is unclear what CG has to offer to your character. Permanent primary upgrades are likely; but so far only arts have been confirmed as rewards.
I still think getting .5 points to the CG guild when defending against an ambush is useful. It is still considered PvP.
How about the reward being based on the ratio of the Attacker's AP and the Defender's AP? The closer they are to being equal, the more points the defending party gets on a victory. Also, if both parties are in full arts the general outcome on both sides should be larger.
For example, two min-arted people would give the defender .5 CG points for a victory, whereas two fully-arted people would give the defender .75-1.0 CG points. If it is, say, a min-arted attacker vs. a fully-arted defender, they receive .1-.25 CG points. This could be balanced by allowing the attacker to receive proportionally more TG points in the same manner; if they win of course.
These numbers are just for comparison and aren't necessarily practical. | Now why would something new and as valuable as CG points be awarded for the easiest kind of battle you can do?
Basing the CG reward on AP ratio between combatants would take care of that concern. Even better if one could earn more than 1 TG point in the same manner. (For example, a win grants them the point + the equivalent of what the defender would have gotten in CG points, but for TG)
So, using the example above... two min-arted people battle, the Thief wins and gets the usual 1 point, *plus* .5 bonus Thief points for defeating a player as opposed to a caravan. | @Omega: nothing to discuss? cool, see you on another thread.
@barbarian-fishy, the main reason I suggested this is because, at CL 13 at least, the commanders' guild seems to be as popular as a fart in a crowded lift. CG points for ambushes would speed things up, and the argument that this would make things impossible for thieves is a knee-jerk reaction and bears little significance.
Ips made a brilliant point, that thieves are just as likely to encounter a player with 1 creature in their army as they are one with full arts. Moreover, every player that travels the map increases the chance of a thief encountering a caravan, always a greater chance than encountering a player. | | -1 |
1|2|3Back to topics list
|
