Clan pvp - a rethink

[Leone]

Not surprisingly, this has come as a direct result of the personalised weapons idea. As it happens, I do like the idea to a certain extent but it really does need to be thought through, otherwise I'm buying an amulet of invisibility and a helmet of 100% magic resistance.

You get my point.

I foresee only 2k plus players buying items for $50. I'm LVL 800 something. Why would I buy a 900 bow when I get one free (or for a lot less than 50$) relatively soon?

The impact on clan pvp? So a lvl 6k with their brand new 6k weapon wipes me out immediately. That I don't mind so much. The problem is that they may drop my 750 armour that is difficult to replace.

So, my suggestion: DON'T change the pvp rules about clans. You join a Clan, you accept the consequences. DO change the pvp drop rules. The % drop should be reduced dramatically - perhaps even to 0% - as the gap between levels increases.

[Ryaca]

+1

[madmaniacal1]

So, my suggestion: DON'T change the pvp rules about clans. You join a Clan, you accept the consequences. DO change the pvp drop rules. The % drop should be reduced dramatically - perhaps even to 0% - as the gap between levels increases.

I would have to disagree, because of 1 point. If the equation were just based on lvl "difference", the higher player would have less chance to drop as well.
My proposal: Y×(K÷V)=X,
Y is current (30%) drop rate.
V is victor's level.
K is killed player's level.
X represents the new drop rate.
This will decrease drop rates if a high lvl kills a lower lvl, but will increase drop rate if a lower lvl kills a higher lvl.
Imo, this would balance pvp a bit.

Yes. If the level difference is high enough, X could potentially reach 100% with my equation, but would require teamwork.

[Khmer]

So, my suggestion: DON'T change the pvp rules about clans. You join a Clan, you accept the consequences. DO change the pvp drop rules. The % drop should be reduced dramatically - perhaps even to 0% - as the gap between levels increases.

I would have to disagree, because of 1 point. If the equation were just based on lvl "difference", the higher player would have less chance to drop as well.
My proposal: Y×(K÷V)=X,
Y is current (30%) drop rate.
V is victor's level.
K is killed player's level.
X represents the new drop rate.
This will decrease drop rates if a high lvl kills a lower lvl, but will increase drop rate if a lower lvl kills a higher lvl.
Imo, this would balance pvp a bit.

Yes. If the level difference is high enough, X could potentially reach 100% with my equation, but would require teamwork.

Bobby Fisher, the most brilliant ever in chess, in his late years, designed Bobby Fisher chess aka 960 chess, he recognized issues with the beautiful game. Your equation needs his touch, It is too confusing for 95%

[blitzcraig]

so a level 300 killed by a level 1000 has just a 9% chance to drop, while a level 1000 killed by a 300 (via teamwork as you suggested) has 100% chance to drop - I like the concept (though I'd personally suggest never going higher than the 30%, so it'd only work to decrease the chance when way outmatched)

I'd actually recommended a similar idea with xp gain from PvP in the early stages of FT PvP, but it never got much attention

[Ryaca]

I like the idea that blitz originally had long ago regarding pvp and dropping equip

[madmaniacal1]

So, my suggestion: DON'T change the pvp rules about clans. You join a Clan, you accept the consequences. DO change the pvp drop rules. The % drop should be reduced dramatically - perhaps even to 0% - as the gap between levels increases.

I would have to disagree, because of 1 point. If the equation were just based on lvl "difference", the higher player would have less chance to drop as well.
My proposal: Y×(K÷V)=X,
Y is current (30%) drop rate.
V is victor's level.
K is killed player's level.
X represents the new drop rate.
This will decrease drop rates if a high lvl kills a lower lvl, but will increase drop rate if a lower lvl kills a higher lvl.
Imo, this would balance pvp a bit.

Yes. If the level difference is high enough, X could potentially reach 100% with my equation, but would require teamwork.

Bobby Fisher, the most brilliant ever in chess, in his late years, designed Bobby Fisher chess aka 960 chess, he recognized issues with the beautiful game. Your equation needs his touch, It is too confusing for 95%

My apologies regarding any confusion. I wrote the equation primarily for Compbatant, as he would be the one to implement it (if he chooses to).

I noticed a suggestion of a cap for the drop rate. Cannot fault that logic, as even i have been mobbed by lower level players before. Idk about leaving 30% as the max, or this change wouldn't help much. Perhaps 50% as max would be more suitable, and outlaw status could even lock the % at max if it were made variable.

[Leone]

Great points made. I was thinking of pvp drops from higher against lower players. I didn't consider the other way around. That's why we're ace on here. We pick up on each other's threads.

[madmaniacal1]

I'd actually recommended a similar idea with xp gain from PvP in the early stages of FT PvP, but it never got much attention

While an increase in exp from pvp sounds AWESOME, I think the abuse potential is why it never happened.

Picture this:
Player resets stats (but doesn't use points) and unequip gear, then starts fishing (to prevent Hp regen). Player then brings alt and kills the other account. Massive exp gain through mechanics abuse.

Just my 2 cents.

[blitzcraig]

Yes, that is exactly right - my suggestion had accounted for that by reducing the "high level loser" players xp by much more than it increased the "low level winner"... fake numbers here, but say a level 10 kills a level 1000 - the 1000 may lose 50,000,000 xp (1/10th of a level) while the level 10 gains just 5000 xp (1/10th of a level) --- again, those are obviously made up numbers, but that was the basis of the idea.... and to clarify, it would not work the same the other way around... it'd be capped - so if a 1000 kills a 10, the 10 may lose 5000 (1/10th of a level) but the 1000 may gain that 5000, or even less, which is nearly effectively zero gain