Glacernon Proposal

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Glacernon Proposal

      Glacernon Proposal

      Purpose and subject matter of this Glacernon Proposal

      We, players of NosTale ('players' or 'we') have decided to write this proposal in order to balance the game and improve game experience. We consider the current state inconvenient. We provide our opinion and useful information about the issue, its cause and our recommended solution ('Proposal'). In order to ensure long-term success of Proposal, we would like to cooperate with you on regular basis. We strongly believe that the change is necessary and our representatives can effectively reflect the game situation and help you with the development.

      Our cooperation is of the utmost importance to us. In this Proposal covering the issue we wish to provide you with a complete picture of how the game causes troubles and what we would like to change. This Proposal provides comprehensive information regarding the ways in which you could improve the game and attract more players.

      We are aware of costs you have with the development and your benefit has a very high priority to us. We only propose game changes where absolutely necessary, doing so in international cooperation and comprehensive discussion, with the greatest emphasis on reaching agreement with the vast majority of players.

      1. Lord Mukraju
      In the past it was a great way of opening raids. Unfortunately with the development of the game, it became too weak and nowadays it is so easy to kill Lord Mukraju that it is entirely impossible to stop oponents' raid.
      We propose that it should be a part of Glacernon and raids should not be "free" for players. In order to ensure the satisfaction, we would like to make Lord Mukraju stronger and not so easy to kill.
      We believe that making him stronger is not that difficult and costly for you. However it would be one of the best possible changes on Glacernon. Rejected by Germany on 5 February 2019.

      2. Port in Tundra
      This port is violated by many players who hide themselves inside when they need to heal themselves. This way is unfair and causes dissatisfaction with other players. We think it could be replaced with NPC that would move players to Caligor.

      3. Balanced PVP
      The vast majority of weak players reject to take part in PVP on Glacernon because they can not compete with others. This can be solved quite easily. If significantly weaker player is killed by 1.-43. player (legend), he receives reputation and the legend loses his reputation.
      This improvement would make weak players to take part in Glacernon because they would have motivation. On the other side legends would let them to join the raid in order to save their legend reputation.

      4. Raids on Glacernon
      There are many families with really strong players that are able to finish current glacernon raids too quickly. We would like to differ raids for AW level players and players without AW level.
      AW players should get the opportunity to show their skills which would motivate them to improve their equipment.

      5. AFK %
      The game provides a way to reach 100% for glacernon raid entirely without PVP. It is unquestionable that this way is wrong and should not be permitted. In our opinion players should actively take part in glacernon PVP to open glacernon raid.

      6. Requirements for glacernon raid
      We consider current requirements too easy. Players do not have to show themselves on Glacernon and they can join every raid though. We would like to return activity points to join the raid. That would force players to visit the map at least to make the points.
      In our opinion the optimal would be reseting those points weekly.

      7. Buffs
      Players act in unfair behaviour and buff their characters with so many buffs that the PVP is absolutely unbalanced and even players who spent more time improving their equipment and playing the game are weaker, just because they do not use more characters to buff the main one.

      8. Drop in glacernon raid
      Players have no motivation to drop in raids (excluding light raid). We would like to motivate players to use all time of the raid, not just a few minutes in the boss room. That would make it more interesting for them to open the raid.

      9. Version and signatures of players
      This Proposal was published on 31st January 2019. Players who agree with Proposal make a screenshot of their main character displaying message: "I agree with the proposal."
      This Proposal was last updated on 7 February 2019.

      Best wishes,
      iMagines
      CZ (2011-2016): deleted
      UK (2017): retired
      DE Fortuna (2018-2019): active

      How would native speakers say it?

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Tomps ().

    • Tomps wrote:

      We think it could be replaced with NPC that would move players to Caligor.
      Just think what a mess it will be on popular servers like Ancelloan/Fortuna. Certain fractions can't even get to the map, and you ask for NPC that requires a few seconds to click, which is enough for 90- to get killed. Overall: Strongly against it.


      Tomps wrote:

      This improvement would make weak players to take part in Glacernon because they would have motivation. On the other side legends would let them to join the raid in order to save their legend reputation.
      You mean if you kill a legend, you become legend and legend becomes an ordinary person? That's not the point of reputation system.Even if this is implemented - little to nothing will change. Except that legends will fiercely buff themselves and make more and smarter "ambushes".There's also a thingie from Fafnir raid that heals 30% hp and cures debuffs under lv3. Ban it on Glacernon anyway. Overall: Strongly against it.


      Tomps wrote:

      There are many families with really strong players that are able to finish current glacernon raids too quickly. We would like to differ raids for AW level players and players without AW level.
      AW players should get the opportunity to show their skills which would motivate them to improve their equipment.
      So part of the family will do AW raid and people without c25 will do normal raid? Too problematic and useless. Overall: Against it.


      Tomps wrote:

      The game provides a way to reach 100% for glacernon raid entirely without PVP. It is unquestionable that this way is wrong and should not be permitted. In our opinion players should actively take part in glacernon PVP to open glacernon raid.
      Nonsense. If there's no % gain for afk people it will be kind of difficult to open a raid. If you introduce another system, it will affect raid box prices (more raids - cheaper boxes, less raids - expensive boxes). Overall: Strongly against it.

      Tomps wrote:

      7. Buffs
      Players act in unfair behaviour and buff their characters with so many buffs that the PVP is absolutely unbalanced and even players who spent more time improving their equipment and playing the game are weaker, just because they do not use more characters to buff the main one.
      Impossible to do anything with it - players will buff themselves in Citadel if miniland is closed on Glacernon. Does not solve anything really.
      Also think about buffchars for fernon raids, people place their buffchars before caligor at the portal to the temple and send them to miniland. You close miniland and there will be a huge problem and much of negative feedback. Overall: Strongly against it.

      Tomps wrote:

      Players have no motivation to drop in raids (excluding light raid). We would like to motivate players to use all time of the raid, not just a few minutes in the boss room. That would make it more interesting for them to open the raid.
      Like essences for a fernon fairy - good idea. But everything else will not be worth effort. Think about this one: make a requirement to kill x mobs on map to open a boss room. Solo raiders will have a hard time -> box price will skyrocket,shells will become expensive and equipment with shells will also be much more expensive. Everything in the system is very fragile - change one thing and it will bring an unwanted consequence. Overall: Neutral

      Tomps wrote:

      This Proposal was last updated and published on 31st January 2019. Players who agree with Proposal make a screenshot of their main character displaying message: "I agree with the proposal."
      No one in GF will listen even if 10+ people reply and GMs report on it. Ideas are by 90% not well-thought with bad argumentation.


      Tomps wrote:

      6. Requirements for glacernon raid
      We consider current requirements too easy. Players do not have to show themselves on Glacernon and they can join every raid though. We would like to return activity points to join the raid. That would force players to visit the map at least to make the points.
      In our opinion the optimal would be reseting those points weekly.
      We prayed so that system for points would change at some point and it did. Now you want a regression towards inefficient system. I have a few examples what was very wrong with it and can explain on request. Overall: Strongly against it.


      Tomps wrote:

      1. Lord Mukraju
      In the past it was a great way of opening raids. Unfortunately with the development of the game, it became too weak and nowadays it is so easy to kill Lord Mukraju that it is entirely impossible to stop oponents' raid.
      We propose that it should be a part of Glacernon and raids should not be "free" for players. In order to ensure the satisfaction, we would like to make Lord Mukraju stronger and not so easy to kill.
      We believe that making him stronger is not that difficult and costly for you. However it would be one of the best possible changes on Glacernon.
      Good idea, but don't come back crying that some fraction can't open a raid because boss is too hard to kill while enemies on fullbuffs are scouting the whole place looking for victims. Overall: Neutral

      Overall on the whole proposal: ask somebody experienced and strategic to think. Also I saw on german forum that your Stronger Mukraju idea was very negatively discussed, if you introduce rest of the content, I think your reputation ingame might go down a bit.

      The post was edited 6 times, last by Jekyll ().

    • Tomps wrote:

      1. Lord Mukraju
      In the past it was a great way of opening raids. Unfortunately with the development of the game, it became too weak and nowadays it is so easy to kill Lord Mukraju that it is entirely impossible to stop oponents' raid.
      We propose that it should be a part of Glacernon and raids should not be "free" for players. In order to ensure the satisfaction, we would like to make Lord Mukraju stronger and not so easy to kill.
      We believe that making him stronger is not that difficult and costly for you. However it would be one of the best possible changes on Glacernon.
      Well , i cant say this might not be a good ideea, it is a not bad ideea , but the thing is if u have an enough strong team devil/angel side to deff the other side , and deny the raid , it is pretty easy i kinda remb back in days when Harmony and a few angels used to deny Devils (outcast,purgatory,and few others families, that were quite strong)and we could not get the raid a few times, but on the other part atleast the UK server needs the players to push , and to get the 100% first , to get the mukraju XD , so ye not against/not agree.

      Tomps wrote:

      3. Balanced PVP
      The vast majority of weak players reject to take part in PVP on Glacernon because they can not compete with others. This can be solved quite easily. If significantly weaker player is killed by 1.-43. player (legend), he receives reputation and the legend loses his reputation.
      Well , it is true that there might be weaker/stronger players , bigger/minim. diff. between the players,BUT the ideea of an 1-43 player to lose rep just cuz the other player that been killed is lower as eqiup is kinda bad imo, not like i would do that if this would increast the UK population(even this aint the issue), but as i remb when i used to kill low lv people ,i used not get any good rep from them , i mean the reputation was lower than an 90+ or with higher rep, people that are low lv and lower rep can lose about idk 500 rep? if u are under 140k rep u lose 10 rep per death.So neither agree/disagree

      Tomps wrote:

      4. Raids on Glacernon
      There are many families with really strong players that are able to finish current glacernon raids too quickly. We would like to differ raids for AW level players and players without AW level.
      AW players should get the opportunity to show their skills which would motivate them to improve their equipment.
      Imo, i wouldnt request for a better form of water raid tbh, it is allready stupid that the dragon is still bugged after all these years, idk about others , i think the raid shall be able to be soloed by an 93 with decent eqs/sps (atleast the dark,fire raids) the light and water , about an nice pve 92/93 set with +13/14 sps. or w/e , so ye im disagree this.

      Tomps wrote:

      5. AFK %
      The game provides a way to reach 100% for glacernon raid entirely without PVP. It is unquestionable that this way is wrong and should not be permitted. In our opinion players should actively take part in glacernon PVP to open glacernon raid.
      Nope , we all know that people wont fight 24/7 in fc for the % pushing, so we shall leave the alts pushing still on, because atleast for UK this might be the only thing that can get an fc raid at the moment , and i bet that all others server doing it tho. Against it.

      Tomps wrote:

      6. Requirements for glacernon raid
      We consider current requirements too easy. Players do not have to show themselves on Glacernon and they can join every raid though. We would like to return activity points to join the raid. That would force players to visit the map at least to make the points.
      In our opinion the optimal would be reseting those points weekly.
      The point thing , was kinda eh , hard for other and look at this , if we return this thing , how the low lvs that u wanna to help in fc(act4) u wanted to help will get the points , because they do have no way to get them , so this will help just the big guys with guns to make raids.Against it.

      Tomps wrote:

      7. Buffs
      Players act in unfair behaviour and buff their characters with so many buffs that the PVP is absolutely unbalanced and even players who spent more time improving their equipment and playing the game are weaker, just because they do not use more characters to buff the main one.
      This part isnt bad at all , it is true people are useing buffs, i use buff to sometimes when i need them , but i do say if they wont use them , i wont use them tho,so ye i'm neutral to this, Thanks.
      Oh and btw from what server are u part of , im just wondering what server came with this ideeas.
      It's me the "greedy" UK fighter

      Hi.I'm UrCandy<3 or Stefan , nice to meet you !

      "People will pay for their behavior at the right time" ^^
      Haters gonna hate =)
    • NarutoDreams wrote:

      Oh and btw from what server are u part of , im just wondering what server came with this ideeas.
      Most likely one of the two german servers: Ancelloan or Fortuna.


      NarutoDreams wrote:

      This part isnt bad at all , it is true people are useing buffs, i use buff to sometimes when i need them , but i do say if they wont use them , i wont use them tho,so ye i'm neutral to this, Thanks.
      Yeah, neutral. Try to imagine how buffs will be banned on fc? block ship for multiaccounts? Close miniland? make everyone a separate entity that receives only self-buffs? You can't be neutral on that one because it's impossible to change anything


      NarutoDreams wrote:

      it is allready stupid that the dragon is still bugged after all these years
      Morning, darling. For how long have you been sleeping? It was fixed, I personally tested it's not bugged and also has a low chance of trigger which is super good.
    • They don't seem to be bad suggestions in theory, but I can't see them working if actually applied (For UK anyway, I can't speak much of US or other servers)

      Tomps wrote:

      1. Lord Mukraju

      In the past it was a great way of opening raids. Unfortunately with the development of the game, it became too weak and nowadays it is so easy to kill Lord Mukraju that it is entirely impossible to stop oponents' raid.
      We propose that it should be a part of Glacernon and raids should not be "free" for players. In order to ensure the satisfaction, we would like to make Lord Mukraju stronger and not so easy to kill.
      We believe that making him stronger is not that difficult and costly for you. However it would be one of the best possible changes on Glacernon.
      I'm rather indifferent about this. I can imagine that it would help to bring back more PvP and competition between sides in FC, which would be positive. But it could also bring back the old problem of many families switching sides just to be on the 'winning' side and leaving FC heavily imbalanced again. Though I admit, that would be a possible problem in an active FC anyway; it'd be impossible to avoid all problems.

      Tomps wrote:

      2. Port in Tundra
      This port is violated by many players who hide themselves inside when they need to heal themselves. This way is unfair and causes dissatisfaction with other players. We think it could be replaced with NPC that would move players to Caligor.
      Again, I'm rather neutral about. I agree with the problem existing, but removing UL completely I think would be too far. Before UL was introduced Tundra was a very open PvP space with the centre of the map having no-where to run to hide (unless a raid was open at the time). If you went there, you had no real choice but to accept PvP (discounting small technicalities like logging out etc.) , despite not knowing who/what your opponent would be.

      The addition of UL brings positive points and negative points:
      Positive being that even if one faction outnumber the other, the minority do stand more of a chance in being able to remain to PvP, as UL offers the chance for them to regroup, to buff, and to rest. In a completely open tundra with no UL, the best chance an outnumbered faction would have is to PvP around their own base/citadel.
      Negative being that it makes PvP disjointed and not 'real' PvP. Players leave UL, use one or two skills, then run back - The FC equivalent of running in and out of Arena safe. It also gives Scouts a huge advantage, enabling them to leave with hide, attack and run back without ever being visible to the opponent. Not what I'd consider PvP.

      Tomps wrote:

      3. Balanced PVP

      The vast majority of weak players reject to take part in PVP on Glacernon because they can not compete with others. This can be solved quite easily. If significantly weaker player is killed by 1.-43. player (legend), he receives reputation and the legend loses his reputation.
      This improvement would make weak players to take part in Glacernon because they would have motivation. On the other side legends would let them to join the raid in order to save their legend reputation.
      Somewhat against this one. I agree that there needs to be more incentive for weaker players to take part in FC, but I'm not sure that this is the way.

      Tomps wrote:

      4. Raids on Glacernon

      There are many families with really strong players that are able to finish current glacernon raids too quickly. We would like to differ raids for AW level players and players without AW level.
      AW players should get the opportunity to show their skills which would motivate them to improve their equipment.
      Against. It's making the assumption that families are either all members with AW/Champion Level or no members with AW/Champion Level. What of families with just a single member with Champion Level, would they still get the 'easy' raid? Or what of families who are accepting of lower levels/Non-AW players? Would the lower levels need to struggle/skip the raids just because they're in a strong family?
      It's already difficult (in UK at least) to get stronger players to consider lower levels as worth adding to families/raids, with many preferring to add only their own alts and the most able players they can. More needs to be done to get higher and lower levels working together, not divide them further.

      Tomps wrote:

      5. AFK %

      The game provides a way to reach 100% for glacernon raid entirely without PVP. It is unquestionable that this way is wrong and should not be permitted. In our opinion players should actively take part in glacernon PVP to open glacernon raid.
      If I was a part of an active server, I would completely agree with this. Unfortunately, UK isn't even close to an active server and AFK is the only way that FC% moves at all. It might work for your server and many others, but it wouldn't work for us.

      Tomps wrote:

      6. Requirements for glacernon raid

      We consider current requirements too easy. Players do not have to show themselves on Glacernon and they can join every raid though. We would like to return activity points to join the raid. That would force players to visit the map at least to make the points.
      In our opinion the optimal would be reseting those points weekly.
      I really want to agree with this and it might work for other servers, but I think it's 'too little, too late' for us.

      If I remember right, points were obtained not only from winning PvP, but dying to a player in FC too. They were also obtained from killing FC mobs. The problem this would bring in UK is (as usual) alt abuse. As always, any action/change taken to try to make/reward players working together in an MMORPG (I still can't believe that we're having to force teamwork in a multiplayer game) is always taken advantage of by players who use it to gain an advantage through 15+ alts.
      In active servers, FC might be active enough or have enough non-alt users to mean that all, both high and low levels, can get points, whether it be through mobbing, killing in PvP or dying to opponents. But in UK it won't happen. Alt-abusers will kill their many alts for points - they'll be able to enter the raid. Anyone of high level but without alts will need to take the slower (but possible) method of mobbing. Anyone too low level to do that fast enough to make it worth it will have no choice but to skip.

      Tomps wrote:

      7. Buffs

      Players act in unfair behaviour and buff their characters with so many buffs that the PVP is absolutely unbalanced and even players who spent more time improving their equipment and playing the game are weaker, just because they do not use more characters to buff the main one.
      Same problem as above. Alt abuse as always. I'd more than happily support a limit to the number of alts allowed but we all know that it won't happen. So problems like this will always exist.

      Tomps wrote:

      8. Drop in glacernon raid

      Players have no motivation to drop in raids (excluding light raid). We would like to motivate players to use all time of the raid, not just a few minutes in the boss room. That would make it more interesting for them to open the raid.
      I'd hesitantly agree, I think it'd depend a lot on what the drop is. It might make no difference at all, it might be too good that it's abused (Alts...)
    • i don't have much to say but just wanna point out that making the whole thread in bold defeats the propose of using bold (for me at least). i also found this funny:

      Tomps wrote:

      9. Version and signatures of players
      This Proposal was last updated and published on 31st January 2019. Players who agree with Proposal make a screenshot of their main character displaying message: "I agree with the proposal."
    • Gandalof wrote:

      i don't have much to say but just wanna point out that making the whole thread in bold defeats the propose of using bold (for me at least). i also found this funny:

      Tomps wrote:

      9. Version and signatures of players
      This Proposal was last updated and published on 31st January 2019. Players who agree with Proposal make a screenshot of their main character displaying message: "I agree with the proposal."

      Dear Gandalof,

      Thanks for the feedback. Bold has been reduced for highlighting only.
      This proposal came from ideas players of the Czech (the least active ever) server have put together for many years of playing.

      Sincerely,
      Tomps
      CZ (2011-2016): deleted
      UK (2017): retired
      DE Fortuna (2018-2019): active

      How would native speakers say it?

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Tomps ().

    • Ok,first thing first,Dear DeepStriker and Chaosbringer.I ask you to motivate why do you agree with this purposal.If you liked the post just for the "meme" or something then ignore this sentence.
      Now,on topic.

      Tomps wrote:

      1. Lord Mukraju
      In the past it was a great way of opening raids. Unfortunately with the development of the game, it became too weak and nowadays it is so easy to kill Lord Mukraju that it is entirely impossible to stop oponents' raid.
      We propose that it should be a part of Glacernon and raids should not be "free" for players. In order to ensure the satisfaction, we would like to make Lord Mukraju stronger and not so easy to kill.
      We believe that making him stronger is not that difficult and costly for you. However it would be one of the best possible changes on Glacernon.
      Why ? What changes will this produce ? and why is this one of the best possibile changes ? I fail to see how.
      I mean the strongest players will still deal with Mukraju in a matter of seconds because they want to do the raid,therefore willingly or not they allow the rest of the players strong or weak to join the raid freely,so again what benefits will this change cause ?
      For UK/US this change is a big middle finger,we barely and hear me when i say BARELY have any fc raids,and if one faction does get it and Mukraju is too strong to be killed and raid is denied that its just a big middle finger to the faction that wasted alot of time,and i mean alot,because there are days when % dossen't move on both sides.............
      Position : Disagree.

      Tomps wrote:

      2. Port in Tundra
      This port is violated by many players who hide themselves inside when they need to heal themselves. This way is unfair and causes dissatisfaction with other players. We think it could be replaced with NPC that would move players to Caligor.
      Ok,first you mean the portal in the middle of Bitorean Tundra that is UL ? by port i thought you meant the starting location that is unreacheable by the opposing faction,lmao.
      We didn't had UL back then,yet the pvp still existed,i thin the UL portal makes the pvp funnier tho.
      Position : Neutral to Disagree.

      Tomps wrote:

      3. Balanced PVP
      The vast majority of weak players reject to take part in PVP on Glacernon because they can not compete with others. This can be solved quite easily. If significantly weaker player is killed by 1.-43. player (legend), he receives reputation and the legend loses his reputation.
      This improvement would make weak players to take part in Glacernon because they would have motivation. On the other side legends would let them to join the raid in order to save their legend reputation.
      Dear,High lv players,specifically the 99 with big champ lv,dosen't give a flying duck about rep,this won't solve anything,they will still keep killing anyone of sight and the FC will still be unenjoyable,also this seems like something that The high lv players wouldn't agree with.
      Position : Neutral to Disagree.

      Tomps wrote:

      4. Raids on Glacernon
      There are many families with really strong players that are able to finish current glacernon raids too quickly. We would like to differ raids for AW level players and players without AW level.
      AW players should get the opportunity to show their skills which would motivate them to improve their equipment.
      And excuseme,what about families that have all type of player ranges that want to join the FC raids ? How the raids will be for them then ?
      AW players have act 6 as their main content,i see no point on changing the dificulty of 4 raids that are made for 80-90 players anyway.I fail to see how this helps the average player anyway.
      Position : Disagree.

      Tomps wrote:

      5. AFK %
      The game provides a way to reach 100% for glacernon raid entirely without PVP. It is unquestionable that this way is wrong and should not be permitted. In our opinion players should actively take part in glacernon PVP to open glacernon raid.
      Umm yh,how about the servers that lack pvp players,like idk.................. US AND UK servers ?????
      Seriously again to point 1,we lack the population to pvp and in our current mod,the fc raids are extremly rare,if this passes by goodbye FC raids,we will be lucky to have 1 per month............
      Position : Neutral to Disagree.

      Tomps wrote:

      6. Requirements for glacernon raid
      We consider current requirements too easy. Players do not have to show themselves on Glacernon and they can join every raid though. We would like to return activity points to join the raid. That would force players to visit the map at least to make the points.
      In our opinion the optimal would be reseting those points weekly.
      HELL NO,NOOOOOOOOOOOO
      NO

      This is the most bias thing that favores the top players i ever heard,honestly,the fact that you use rep to enter the fc raid IS THE BEST CHANGE MADE because it finally welcomed lower levels to join the FC raids,i have nothing against needing activity points to get raidbox.But hell no im not going back to farm penguin in fc 24/7 daily just to have enough points to join the goddam raid,and then have the risk to die out cuz i don't have enough points.also weekly resets,wtf.
      Position : Strongly Against.

      Tomps wrote:

      7. Buffs
      Players act in unfair behaviour and buff their characters with so many buffs that the PVP is absolutely unbalanced and even players who spent more time improving their equipment and playing the game are weaker, just because they do not use more characters to buff the main one.
      This may the only good change that was listed in the purposal,yes its true,100 bufs is so damm annoying and then there is a luci that just takes them all.
      I would also suggest to change Luci 3rd spell too,that is way too pay2win and huge disadvantage against warrior players.
      Position : Neutral to Agree.

      Tomps wrote:

      8. Drop in glacernon raid
      Players have no motivation to drop in raids (excluding light raid). We would like to motivate players to use all time of the raid, not just a few minutes in the boss room. That would make it more interesting for them to open the raid.
      Ehh,not rly interested in this one,people do these raids for the boss only,until like min 30 people are still arriving in the raid so i don't see them bothering too much to acttualy start mobbing in the raid.Not really a bad ideea but not necesary either.
      Position : Neutral.

      Ok,time for conclusions :
      This proposal does not serve the interests of the majority,but the few,and these few are the top elite players.The point that bothered me by far is the point 6 with reintroduction of FC points,which i say a BIG HELL NO.
      Also people stop agreeing to anyone who comes with suggestion,and think before.I recommand to either rethink most of the points in the purpose or just delete it alltogheter.
      The UK and US servers don't need this,now more then ever.If you guys would take into account the situation of all other servers first,then maybe the purpose would had been better.
      This being said i stand by Jekyll and i strongly oppose this ideea.


      ~All the things she said ~
      ~All the things she said~
      ~Running through my head~
      ~Running through my head~

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Pinkamena ().

    • Pinkamena wrote:

      This purposal does not serve the interests of the majority,but the few,and these few are the top elite players.

      Dear Pinkamena,

      The reputation point about giving reputation to low rep/lv players just for dying serves particularly everyone's interests except the elite's ones.

      Sincerely,
      Tomps
      CZ (2011-2016): deleted
      UK (2017): retired
      DE Fortuna (2018-2019): active

      How would native speakers say it?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Tomps ().

    • Tomps wrote:

      Pinkamena wrote:

      This purposal does not serve the interests of the majority,but the few,and these few are the top elite players.
      The reputation point about giving reputation to low rep/lv players just for dying serves particularly everyone's interests except the elite's ones.
      It dosen't matter when point 1,2,4 and 6 are bassicaly all made for the big guys.
      Also,there will always these ones that will kill on sight not giving a duck about reputation,so the average players will still suffer greatly,mark my words,these ones are not few.
      ~All the things she said ~
      ~All the things she said~
      ~Running through my head~
      ~Running through my head~
    • Pinkamena wrote:


      Ok,time for conclusions :

      This purposal does not serve the interests of the majority,but the few,and these few are the top elite players.The point that bothered me by far is the point 6 with reintroduction of FC points,which i say a BIG HELL NO.
      Also people stop agreeing to anyone who comes with suggestion,and think before.I recommand to either rethink most of the points in the purpose or just delete it alltogheter.
      The UK and US servers don't need this,now more then ever.If you guys would take into account the situation of all other servers first,then maybe the purpose would had been better.
      This being said i stand by Jekyll and i strongly oppose this ideea.

      To be fair, I do think you're being a little overdramatic! I wouldn't say that people are agreeing with 'anyone who comes with suggestion', rather that they just agree with that situation in particular.

      I accept that the reintroduction of FC points likely wouldn't work too well for UK, purely because the 'elite' often have ridiculous numbers of alts to kill, whilst the more general players tend to stick to 1 - 3 characters and the activity level of UK FC is so low, that there would be no other option for non-alt-killers to get points other than to mob. But I wouldn't say that, in an active server, it would favour the elite - You'd get points from killing and dying, so it's win-win. Take part in FC and (whether you actually win the PvPs or not) you benefit from FC through raids. As the system is at the moment, a player need not step foot in FC outside of raid time. They could go, do the raid, then leave and not go back. I think the reputation change was a huge mistake, but to go back to how it was (for UK at least) would be 'too little, too late'.
    • Dear readers,

      The purpose of my proposal is opening of the discussion on this topic with something, something that can be used as the ground for both houses of the argument. Those who agree and those who disagree.

      It surely is not the final version - regarding the point 9 - it is going to be updated with your ideas supported by significant amount of players.

      Best wishes,
      Tomps
      CZ (2011-2016): deleted
      UK (2017): retired
      DE Fortuna (2018-2019): active

      How would native speakers say it?

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Tomps ().

    • Kaile wrote:

      Pinkamena wrote:

      Ok,time for conclusions :

      This purposal does not serve the interests of the majority,but the few,and these few are the top elite players.The point that bothered me by far is the point 6 with reintroduction of FC points,which i say a BIG HELL NO.
      Also people stop agreeing to anyone who comes with suggestion,and think before.I recommand to either rethink most of the points in the purpose or just delete it alltogheter.
      The UK and US servers don't need this,now more then ever.If you guys would take into account the situation of all other servers first,then maybe the purpose would had been better.
      This being said i stand by Jekyll and i strongly oppose this ideea.
      To be fair, I do think you're being a little overdramatic! I wouldn't say that people are agreeing with 'anyone who comes with suggestion', rather that they just agree with that situation in particular.
      I accept that the reintroduction of FC points likely wouldn't work too well for UK, purely because the 'elite' often have ridiculous numbers of alts to kill, whilst the more general players tend to stick to 1 - 3 characters and the activity level of UK FC is so low, that there would be no other option for non-alt-killers to get points other than to mob. But I wouldn't say that, in an active server, it would favour the elite - You'd get points from killing and dying, so it's win-win. Take part in FC and (whether you actually win the PvPs or not) you benefit from FC through raids. As the system is at the moment, a player need not step foot in FC outside of raid time. They could go, do the raid, then leave and not go back. I think the reputation change was a huge mistake, but to go back to how it was (for UK at least) would be 'too little, too late'.
      Im sorry if im being "overdramatic" but im cutting the problem from the root before it grows.
      Maybe its a bit exaggerated to ask for reasons as why they agree with the solution,for that i apologize,nobody is forced to explained their choices at all.

      But i have 0 tolerance with point 6,Z E R O,i caught the time when the fc points was a thing,it was awfull for me,with absolutely no benefits.
      The elites were just doing their thing,getting points easily by kos anyone and monopolizing areas of mobbing,others would just find an isolate spot where they will bring their alts to hit so they can get points,the average would be forced to mob non-stop and get killed by the elite in order to make the bare minimum just to enter the goddam raid,and then you will need to save up at the very least 20k more points aside from that 10k points so you may get the chance to succesfully complete the raid,you had the chance to waste all the 20k points and not get anything,which was frustrating and Hell.
      And why should players endure the mockery of having 100 deaths from campers just for the sake of getting 1 box ? thats humiliation and not a comfort reason to apply this awfull system back.
      Competition is maybe good but not in nostale,where 90% is pay2win and only true competition is beetwen nosmallers or resselers while the rest of the playerbase falls back in line,the reputation system was finally a good thing as it doosent discriminate the players,and offers everyone an equal chance to participate in the FC raids.
      I tend to like the latter suggestions tho,the 7 and 8 ones i have no problem with,the first 4 are quite meh and earn a dislike in my book,the 5th is understandable but should be handled in a different way,the 6th one should be deleted from the list and not be considered at all.If unfortunately this porpose will get far.We don't need this now imo,not our servers and not now,atleast wait until the last merged take place,then maybe we can start considering it.
      ~All the things she said ~
      ~All the things she said~
      ~Running through my head~
      ~Running through my head~

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Pinkamena ().

    • Dear Pinkamena,

      Although I wanted to step aside from this argument and stay neutral, I have to state my own experience from "the time of FC points".

      Originally I come from the Czech server where I spent 5 years (2011-2016) playing as non-elite (even under average) player. As stated by Czech players on our board, every single player can in one day make as many points as needed for the whole month. That was used as the argument against the use of returning to this way of entering the raid to improve overall activity in Glacernon. As quoted (and of course translated): "Doesn't improve the activity since they can make their points in just one day and the rest of the month just ignore Glacernon as common"

      Sincerely,
      Tomps
      CZ (2011-2016): deleted
      UK (2017): retired
      DE Fortuna (2018-2019): active

      How would native speakers say it?
    • Tomps is actually really civil about it, and takes everything under consideration to improve the initial idea and takes zero offense (and he shouldn't really take any just everyone seems to be offended in here lately).

      So basically let's all keep it as civil as him and give polite suggestions and respectfully disagree with some of the stuff he is suggesting. (If you are disagreeing that is.)