• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Revamp PvP

DeletedUser26965

Proposal
Revamp PvP

Current System
PvP only exists in the Neighborhood Realm

Details
1. Do away with neighborhood PvP and implement an option to battle/plunder any city on your world (or even cross world would be cool). and or,

2. Implement a PvP system to where players can agree to battle each other at any time in a real time format.

Abuse Prevention
n/a

Visual Aids
n/a

Conclusion
Thank you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Algona

Well-Known Member
I vote no on both Proposals.

1) Incessant slaughter of weaker players by those who. like me, Do Not Have A Life.

2) Limited use, massive cost, disconnects.
 

DeletedUser26965

I vote no on both Proposals.

1) Incessant slaughter of weaker players by those who. like me, Do Not Have A Life.

2) Limited use, massive cost, disconnects.
1. They can set limits. It's the general idea that matters, how the minor details are dealt with are not much concern to me. Neighborhood only pvp is a drag really, imo and can be bettered and broadened.

2. I'm not sure what you mean by limited use. Have you played PvP on other games? You can just have a simple little window that says enter a battle or something like "challenge a player" and the two of you fight each other in real time instead of fighting an AI. Sounds much more interesting and fun to me. Costs of what? Troops? Disconnects? I'm not sure how these things should determine on bettering PvP.
 

Algona

Well-Known Member
1. They can set limits. It's the general idea that matters, how the minor details are dealt with are not much concern to me. Neighborhood only pvp is a drag really, imo and can be bettered and broadened.
Sounds like things you should address in your Proposal?

2. I'm not sure what you mean by limited use. Have you played PvP on other games? You can just have a simple little window that says enter a battle or something like "challenge a player" and the two of you fight each other in real time instead of fighting an AI. Sounds much more interesting and fun to me. Costs of what? Troops? Disconnects? I'm not sure how these things should determine on bettering PvP.
Limited use. How many folk fight now? How many do you think have the interest in this Proposal? How do you get reasonably fair matchups?

Cost. To INNO to develope a new interactive combat system.

Disconnects. What happens when INNO crashes? My ISP drops? My computer freezes? I ragequit?

You've got grand ideas, but I think you need to ask yourself how does INNO get to where you want from the current game and what's in it for them?
 

DeletedUser26965

Sounds like things you should address in your Proposal?
No, I'm not going to try to foresee every aspect of a proposal, I'm not an employee of Inno.

Limited use. How many folk fight now? How many do you think have the interest in this Proposal?
How could I possibly know this? If you build it they will come?o_O People like to PvP, what we have now is PvIA.

I can't quite fathom how you like my proposals but then vote no on them. I mean if you like the current Pv"P" system the way it is and don't want change then okay but what do you care what's in it for inno, I don't lol, just like I don't care what's in it for the shareholders of McDonald's that I want better and more beef in my burger :)
 

DeletedUser14197

You're right, that was lame of me. At first I misunderstood your proposal. I didn't have time to read others comments. I don't think people would want to be attacked by everyone outside their hood. That would end up being very discouraging. But, even if I understand your proposal to be that 2 people could agree to fight each other and than actually fight each other, not sure inno could pull that off. Actually though now that I think about it, it would defintely be a more interesting fight and would certainly be more challenging. Not too sure about the plunder thing though.I guess if I lost a battle I would make sure I was there to collect my goods. Probably the winner wouldn't be as likely to get any plunder. I actually wouldn't participate in it, I suppose. Though if Inno could pull it off, it would be the most challenging fight of the game in that you would be fighting another player, not a computer. It actually is an interesting idea. Not too sure it would work in this game. I might change my vote. I wonder how many people would actually participate in it. A lot of the people who participate in attacking could fight most their hood on auto. Not sure they really want a challenge of fighting another player.
 

DeletedUser26965

Thank you honey55 for your response. I think once people understand what I'm going for here they'll realize PvP can be more interesting. If you step back out of the game and examine it for a moment from a purely PvP aspect you'll realize just how very restricted and limited it is now, that is you can only fight players that a randomizer chooses for you and now that will consist of people only from your era, you can be stuck with those same players for months on end while there's thousands of other players out there just wanting to PvP that you can't PvP with, and you can only fight a computer not the actual player. If people like to PvP, and they do, then it would follow they would like to have a more interesting PvP experience than what we have now.

All the other aspects of how such a system would be developed can not be completely fleshed out in a proposal. It's the basic and general idea that matters. Remeber, I proposed two new aspects to PvP.

1) Instead of being stuck only to Pv"P"(AI)/attack neighbors cities broaden that to include all players cities. This maintains the current format so one can still plunder. It seems to me all Inno would have to do here is include the "Attack" "Plunder" buttons when you visit someones city just like they have now for your neighbors only now it would be everyone you visit. They can structure it any way that makes sense for the health of the game by perhaps limiting how many fights you can attempt, who you can fight and so on but I'm not too interested in getting hung up on minor details.

2) Also make another option with that to where you can PvP anyone in real time so you are actually fighting a player not an AI. Call it a Battle Arena if you like, you enter the Arena and fight other players 1v1 each player controlling their own units. With that you could also do something like click on someones avatar and challenge them, if they accept you again fight each other 1v1, each player controlling their own units. They can add rewards to this if they like but I don't really care at this point as it's not even a reality, again not too worried about the details.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser27889

I think you need to change your proposal to what you're actually proposing. Right now your first post sounds as if you are proposing no holds barred attack and plunder at random instead of an interactive, real time version of PVP.

While I like the idea if I'm understanding you correctly that the battles would only take place if consented to by both parties, it would be a huge undertaking. They are already having large scale problems with GVG lag and it becoming unplayable for some people. One would have to imagine the lag on this would be incredibly worse. I would also have to imagine this is an idea they would have had by now and if they didn't/couldn't implement it there's most likely a reason we're all still fighting AI for every battle.
 

DeletedUser2355

I vote yes. Some people just get on here and vote no to everything. The game needs something to spice it up. This might do the trick so again Yes , Yes , Yes
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser26965

I think you need to change your proposal to what you're actually proposing. Right now your first post sounds as if you are proposing no holds barred attack and plunder at random instead of an interactive, real time version of PVP.
I'm not sure how more simple I can state "implement an option to battle/plunder any city on your world" instead of just having "PvP only exists in the Neighborhood Realm", I mean is that difficult to understand? And isn't this what discussion is for anyway so people can elaborate on their proposals or would you rather I write a ten page proposal?
 

DeletedUser2355

Sounds like things you should address in your Proposal?



Limited use. How many folk fight now? How many do you think have the interest in this Proposal? How do you get reasonably fair matchups?

Cost. To INNO to develope a new interactive combat system.

Disconnects. What happens when INNO crashes? My ISP drops? My computer freezes? I ragequit?

You've got grand ideas, but I think you need to ask yourself how does INNO get to where you want from the current game and what's in it for them?
Who cares, yes yes yes. Some people want a detailed business plan and why don't you write the code too...lol
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser26965

While I like the idea if I'm understanding you correctly that the battles would only take place if consented to by both parties, it would be a huge undertaking. They are already having large scale problems with GVG lag and it becoming unplayable for some people. One would have to imagine the lag on this would be incredibly worse. I would also have to imagine this is an idea they would have had by now and if they didn't/couldn't implement it there's most likely a reason we're all still fighting AI for every battle.
Okay, if WoW can have 80 man PvP battles with massive heavy graphics all in real time with players around the world then Inno can certainly have 1v1 16 man turn based battles with very little graphics. Lag and things You Can Do About It
 

DeletedUser27889

I'm not sure how more simple I can state "implement an option to battle/plunder any city on your world" instead of just having "PvP only exists in the Neighborhood Realm", I mean is that difficult to understand?
Yes, you cannot say A when you mean B an expect everybody to understand. As evident by, nobody understood.

To players of this game PvP is fought with an AI and consented to by only one person involved. Your idea is completely different.

And isn't this what discussion is for anyway so people can elaborate on their proposals or would you rather I write a ten page proposal?
Would you rather people have to read 10 pages of dialogue to understand what you're talking about? Then prepare to have to repeat yourself a dozen times because you wouldn't spell it out properly in the proposal.
 

DeletedUser2355

Lots of games are moving to cross server battles. Even Inno seems to be moving in that direction with the addition of GE which is cross server.
 

DeletedUser26965

Okay people, I don't see anything in the rules as to how to structure proposals other than the format of them. Anyone having trouble comprehending should realize not every foreseeable or unforeseeable aspect of a proposal can possibly be accounted for and written into it. That would be absurd. A proposal is defined as "a plan or suggestion, especially a formal or written one, put forward for consideration or discussion by others." It does not have to be a complete and thorough already fully developed program written for Inno to implement into their system. Again that would be absurd. If you have a problem with comprehending an aspect of the proposal might I suggest simply asking which aspect you would like elaboration on, again, a person putting forth a proposal can not account for every possible foreseeable or unforeseeable aspect of it and can't read everyone's mind on what they might think then write that into the proposal beforehand, again absurd to think otherwise. Perhaps writing your own proposals would give you an idea of how it works.
 

DeletedUser8152

2. Implement a PvP system to where players can battle each other at any time in a real time format.
Real-time combat would be a lot of fun, but it involves many complicated problems and I think it is really beyond the scope of the current FoE game.