Forums-->General game forum-->
1|2
| Author | fsp/exp ratio logic |
|---|
You get better(=higher) fsp/exp ratio by losing than by winning. That means, that the one who loses often is stronger eventually. Do you see a logic in that? I thought that the one who wins is the better warrior.
This way, when you win a lot now, you are sentenced to be losing later, to opponents who are not as skillful as you, because their faction level will be higher.
That doesn't mean that I propose that the winner should get better exp/fsp ratio. I think the exp/fsp ratio should be the same for both winner and loser.
Does anybody has a different opinion on this? Any other points? | | Illogical. | | if i dont miss something and follow your logic then isn't making exp/fsp same is more bad? | if you make it the other way around, the stronger will get stronger and the weaker will get weaker...
you rather have that >.> ? | It's basically for balancing purposes, so the losers don't keep on losing and the winners don't keep on winning. Besides why does everyone hate to level up? Leveling up is supposed to be a good thing in practically every game.
The only big excuse I keep seeing people give is that for that particular level you are weaker compared to the fsp farmers. But if you are really such a better player, then how does a few fsp matter? It takes a huge amount of fsp to gain 1 faction level and each faction level only gives minor advantages. Only in special cases would the difference be significant.
Also in the end it doesn't matter. The advantage fsp farmers get is reversed when they win. And those who don't spend all their time farming fsp, have leveled up above the slow leveling fsp farmers. | | 1 lvlup to max lvl and it wont bother u at all :D | Higher FSP/Exp for a loss makes perfect sense.
This kind of reward system narrows the gap between players rather than widening it.
If someone is behind other players in FSP and is therefore loosing games, it will allow him/her to slowly catch up in FSP.
Consider that even great players would have almost no chance of winning if they recently switched factions and have 0 or 1 FSP while a mediocre opponent has 7 FSP.
Meanwhile, a good player with 6 FSP will have no problem beating a mediocre one with 7 FSP. So, the current system does not put good players at such a disadvantage that they can't win when they deserve it. | Balancing, yes! Good idea, except: those who lose *in purpose* will be automatically made stronger as well.
Some players have been losing fights in purpose by the thousands, getting rewarded by the system for it with better fsp ratio.
Goal? Blasting the (minor) tournaments. That's how it explains (some) wizards winning them, not the fighting skills. And you'll see the results very soon... | look at the char ethereality he has been doing hunts for years and delibrately losing so that he can get high fsp with a low level
Clever but stupid | #3 elf_89 - Why would it be worse?
#4 Sven91 - I was careful to write that EQUAL ratio for both winner and loser makes sense to me.
Pantheon, Flour - I agree that the disadvantage is not that big, but that's not a supporting argument.
It's basically for balancing purposes, so the losers don't keep on losing and the winners don't keep on winning.
Probably yes. And I don't agree with giving advantage to someone who loses often. Is it fair to the winning player?
This kind of reward system narrows the gap between players rather than widening it.
And I think it shouldn't be narrowed nor widened. I think the loser doesn't deserve the advantage.
a good player with 6 FSP will have no problem beating a mediocre one with 7 FSP
Yes, but still the same. I see no reason, why a loser deserves this advantage. Maybe we can give him more troops since he doesn't know how to fight, huh? ;-) | to me i felt like their will be no winner or looser.because if u loose u will also get rewards same as a winner.people will start doing battle with minimum ap,because their is nothing to loose.so other guild/market/economical system may face serious trouble.yeah i agree with u that,their r some guys who spend a lot of time by loosing and increasing skill points,but their number is quite few.while they are spending a lot of time in that effort we r having the fun.better players are always better.and as pantheon says
"in the end it doesn't matter. The advantage fsp farmers get is reversed when they win. And those who don't spend all their time farming fsp, have leveled up above the slow leveling fsp farmers." | The funniest part is that tournaments usually have very poor xp/fsp ratios.
Many farmers don't join them for this reason.
Several thousand xp in a single fight, the worst nightmare of a farmer! | Probably yes. And I don't agree with giving advantage to someone who loses often. Is it fair to the winning player?
You see a high fsp/xp ratio has an advantage even when the total fsp and xp is low. For example you see 0.1 fsp and 100 xp as better than 1 fsp and 2000 xp. You see the 2x fsp/xp ratio as an advantage while I see it has a huge disadvantage because you are getting 10x less fsp and 20x less xp.
Current system is a win-win.
The winning player gets to advance faster to play higher level players. The losing player doesn't get rewarded for losing because he gets very little fsp and xp. But at the same time the higher fsp/xp ratio helps him to win future combats and thus helps him catch up to the winning player.
This is like in real life where students who pass classes gets to advance to teh next level. While those who fail, get to repeat the grade again. You see the bad students as being rewarded because that class would become easier for them. I see it as a punishment because they couldn't level up and are stuck with the class they can't pass. Sure that class would be easier become easier to them on the 2nd, 3rd, 4th... try, but is this really an advantage you want? | for Pantheon:
You assume lvl 15 (or last level whichever that is) is the promised land to which everyone is rushing. Also assume there is some "achievement" in reaching the END of the game, where hunts become impossible, same as mercenary quests, thieving becomes sloooooowww, partners for battles: rare, etc... all the "best" things in the world of course...
Oh yeah!, you'll have units tier 13. To look at them day and night and take pictures together...
Oh yeah! second, you'll be able to look at all >4 levels bellow and call them 'noobs', and in the pit of arrogance reproach them they don't know 'Who is who'...
Your analogy with real life class failing is just downright wrong. Absolutely nothing in common. There is lots of fun to be found in each level of the game. I personally think there is more fun at lower levels than higher! And some play the game for enjoyment and the fun they find. This is not a marathon to rush to reach the END line!
I would shed off some pounds of experience any day, and I would go back to level 9 in a wink of an eye (if only possible!) | look at the char ethereality he has been doing hunts for years and delibrately losing so that he can get high fsp with a low level
This bug had been fixed over a year ago. | Your analogy with real life class failing is just downright wrong. Absolutely nothing in common. There is lots of fun to be found in each level of the game. I personally think there is more fun at lower levels than higher! And some play the game for enjoyment and the fun they find. This is not a marathon to rush to reach the END line!
I would shed off some pounds of experience any day, and I would go back to level 9 in a wink of an eye (if only possible!)
I would still think my analogy is good. How many people don't want to go back? :)
I never said that the goal is to reach end? Just like in real life, no one is really racing towards the end. :)
I'm actually all for "it's the journey that matters". But should one purposely severely delay their journey? Some would attempt to do so whether in this game or in life, but with the update on xp, so you can't lose to gain 0 xp, this delaying becomes more difficult.
Just like there's respect for our elders, the elders still respect the young and don't call them 'noobs'. Maybe say the young are a bit inexperienced, but by no means call them names. :)
I'm not saying the current xp gained, fsp gained, and ratios are perfect for each won or lost combat, but there aren't any severe defects like how some players are suggesting. | | Illogical. | | Irrational .. :) Yeahh .. I agree with JRF .. Now .. when we loose in hunts for instance, we also get some Exps .. we just need to loose and loose to raise our level .. :) this doesnot make sense .. :) | Excepting when you are imposed an upper limit, the ratio xp/fsp is the same according to a formula given by Arctic (or Empire - don't remember exactly) in Official Announcements some time ago. Once you reach the upper limit for fsp or xp per battle, the counter stops and therefore it only seems unbalanced. The loser usually doesn't reach the maximum xp or fsp, so, the formula is applied. The winner usually reaches the maximum fsp and therefore for the range of xp from the maximum fsp and maximum xp for the battle type, he/she doesn't get a linear gain in fsp. After all, if you sum up, the loser might have a linear dependence of xp and fsp which a winner may not have it, but the loser will increase his/her fl (faction level) much slower than a winner (by at least 4 times) which makes the loser waste more money on artefacts (which in our days is quite a luxury).
On the other hand, those who changed their factions at higher levels have a big disadvantage from the others because of the fl (don't forget that the faction level plays an important role in a battle independently on the faction). So, losing becomes for those players quite a normal thing, but the linearity xp/fsp helps them growing a little bit faster, so, they can enjoy the game again.
About fsp farmers, that is no longer valid since a while and Arctic and co. took care of them during the time. | #13
As naviron explained, it's not a race to lvl 15. So you are still stuck with "2 players of the same combat level, winner and loser, have different amount of faction points. The loser has more, which is convenient for him." With 120 points more, he can have in some cases higher faction lvl. Or he can make faction lvl 1 at each other faction and reduce the damage of the winner by 3%. Don't tell me that it's costy, because I don't care, this is not about money, but about combat skills.
Your class example is misleading, because in the class students don't compete together. If one has more points than another, it's not like he won. The main purpose is to lvl up to higher grade, not to defeat another student. But here, the main purpose is to defeat another player. In a Survival tournament, Minor tournament, GB, hunting record etc and nobody really cares in which class he is. And it is ironical, that if you get to lvl 15 mostly by losing (which may take time, but it IS possible, that's the point), you can have the same fsp in main faction as another lvl 15, but also lvl 4 or 5 in all other factions!
Again, I know it takes money, I know it takes time, but it is possible. What kind of logic is that? |
This topic is long since last update and considered obsolete for further discussions.
1|2Back to topics list
|
