| Author | [Update] Adventurers' Guild |
|---|
Once more, this guild show the explicit purpose of admins to encourage players to try different factions (so that players can have more fun, the market will be more active, and the admins can have more data to degisn new tasks and improve the AI), as I mentioned a long time ago.
The purpose is good, however, I don't like the design of this guild for its unfair. I prefer some other format of rewards. e.g. artifacts, money, or other economic ones that can make up for the cost of campaigns. |
| Yeah reward is to low on most of guilds. |
| [Post deleted by moderator Arcanide // Off topic )] |
[Post deleted by moderator MrBattleControl // ]
Player banned by moderator MrBattleControl until 2016-06-02 18:11:56 // 4.5. Foul language with regard to an administrator, moderator can be punished by banning for 1 month up to blocking (Multiple relapses) |
| [Post deleted by moderator Arcanide // Off topic )] |
| [Post deleted by moderator Arcanide // Off topic ). This is about Adventurers' Guild.] |
ha ha ha ...very funny 4 comments for me.. so much angry and frustration lolol.. get some iron rod and bit on it man. it may help you control your frustration.
for you : most of the active player here know i am not a female (all online game you can see male hiding inside female char. some guys blindly think they all female(because they are not maturated enough), it is not my problem)
anyway i am apologize for my last comment... what i mean that admin want to go with majority..that is the only way they can exist. example chose mage are very less ,they give some arts which give a mage god power in PvP in high level (which disturb might guys, some are start develop mage faction but rest ...they simply say good by) |
Only suitable for multi-faction players. Impossible for single faction players
surprisingly i actually agree with you this time, however as so many people have already pointed out the rewards from this guild is marginal and not worth the effort which is fine by me...
so i feel it is still acceptable although not a very well thought out reward system... |
the problem is that you have to do the same quest at least 2 times (medium and hero) to get max points
You only get an extra 20% more guild points for the 2nd playthrough though, and that is assuming you actually perform as well as in normal. I see little use in doing it on hero, unless you just want to do it again for the fsp ratio. |
for Slust:
I agree, on this basis it becomes more financially viable do get AG level 1 wth only 1 run through of each campaign and ameliorates some of the negative impacts of the cost to reward basis. |
however as so many people have already pointed out the rewards from this guild is marginal and not worth the effort which is fine by me...
so i feel it is still acceptable
Not a good reason to call it acceptable. Its not just a matter of gold required but also dedication and willingness to play that boring repetitive series of battles over and over again which i'm sure is not such a big hindrance to some russians and a fraction of english players. There are examples infront of us already. You can choose to call it acceptable still but that is either too lenient or indecisive.
I agree, on this basis it becomes more financially viable do get AG level 1 wth only 1 run through of each campaign and ameliorates some of the negative impacts of the cost to reward basis.
Again, its not just the cost that is the major factor. Pretty sure there will be a lot more campaigns now that they have made it into a guild so everyone can accumulate points for more levels in that guild. The real complaint is being forced to play PvE again to keep up (it hasn't been very long since watcher's guild was introduced). |
| MG and WG are enough for PvE . It really gets boring now with the likes of Adventure guild. |
WG
MG
HG
TG
More than enough for PVE.
Not to count Defense for MC |
Again, its not just the cost that is the major factor. Pretty sure there will be a lot more campaigns now that they have made it into a guild so everyone can accumulate points for more levels in that guild. The real complaint is being forced to play PvE again to keep up (it hasn't been very long since watcher's guild was introduced).
I disagree with the notion that you are forced down this route to keep up. If it is as unpopular as you forsee, then there will be few people with AG1 for the +1 stat. The number that get AG2 will be a minority I believe, even when we have several campaigns. That is unless they make them more financially rewarding or less repetative (in which case some of the negative impacts with regard to their enjoyment are reduced).
IF you think of it this way, if you compare someone with AG2 and so +2 stats to your AG1. This is equivalent to the current comparison of me to anyone in a military clan with bonuses active. PErsonally I have not particularly felt this stat gap, so would therefore infer that people will not feel the stat gap really with the AG should they choose to simply not participate.
Only time will tell of course, within this I am sure the page that gathers info on all players will end up with a sort tool for Adveturers guild and we will be able to easily tell how much of an impact these stats will have. At the moment a browse through top 20 players will show you, currently not a lot. |
typoif you compare someone with AG2 and so +2 stats to your AG1.
Should AG0 |
I disagree with the notion that you are forced down this route to keep up. If it is as unpopular as you forsee, then there will be few people with AG1 for the +1 stat. The number that get AG2 will be a minority I believe, even when we have several campaigns. That is unless they make them more financially rewarding or less repetative (in which case some of the negative impacts with regard to their enjoyment are reduced).
IF you think of it this way, if you compare someone with AG2 and so +2 stats to your AG1. This is equivalent to the current comparison of me to anyone in a military clan with bonuses active. PErsonally I have not particularly felt this stat gap, so would therefore infer that people will not feel the stat gap really with the AG should they choose to simply not participate.
Well nobody can stop you from disagreeing or undermining the advantages of a mere stat or two but my intention wasn't to oppose AG, I was more or less upset about the collective effect of AG, WG and those armaments which were all introduced in the past year. Being deficient in some of these can easily affect your relative strengths. Thanks for reminding me about clan bonuses too haha. Perhaps you thought the same thing about clan bonuses and said that they were not unfair simply because it gives very little but these things add up.
Lets wait and see how many more guilds are needed until people will finally say its too much and that their benefits aren't all too minimal to be not concerned. |
and those armaments which were all introduced in the past year
personally i feel armaments can be real game changers n for too much pve, well idk bout that since i have always been a pve player preferring to build my char n disliking to fight against other players so i don't really discourage more pve content. |
for virtual_vitrea:
I did not mean to undermine the advantages of stats (in fact I recently realised just how much of an impact they make), however the perception is when they "force you" into pursuing areas of playing which you may not want to in order to stay competitive.
This is a subjective thing, with the stats becoming more important the more you can compete at tournies etc, Since I have pursued a build with not enough focus on one faction, nor have time in one chunk to do pvp (they last sooo much longer), the stat disadvantages are not so noticeable for me. I am therefore biased my own opinion though do recognise the fact that it is another area where if you do not put some effort into it you have an unbalanced character. That being said, I think this is fair enough, balance is exactly about that, a little bit of everything.
I do however thing it is a bit too repetitive to be anoything other than a grind for FSP and AG points at the moment and lso too expensive directly, and then extra so if you factor in multi faction castles.
Simply allowing you to play hero from the beginning would help reduce the grind, as then you do not have to repeat any battles to get top levels if you do not want to.
I think a situation of asking for help could be nice to still meet the PvE notion, but increase its interactivity. ie for some battles you could ask for help to beat them in a similar way to hunts (this would require an AP check, so perhaps could do it like with tavern battles where you can see them before you accept). This would then still be PvE, but have an increased social and tactical element that would decrease repetitiveness. |
| Sorry I really should check my messages before posting, so many typos and grammar muddles from rephrasing myself!I do however thinK it is a bit too repetitive to be anything other than a grind for FSP and AG points at the moment and is too expensive directly |
I did not mean to undermine the advantages of stats (in fact I recently realised just how much of an impact they make), however the perception is when they "force you" into pursuing areas of playing which you may not want to in order to stay competitive.
actually, If a player do campaign, it mean he get a lots exp from there while other play other guild.
so not really suffer status as may even gain more points from other guilds. |
