Glacernon Proposal

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

    • 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.
      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
      I've got to say, i still don't really understand what you are suggesting on this one....

      So if a low level dies to a high level, they earn rep and the high level loses rep?? Or, did they both earn rep...

      If the high level person loses rep, why would this suggestion even exist... I mean what, the high level is supposed to run away or be punished? I assume if the low level somehow manages to kill the high level they'd still get rep as well.

      If they both get rep, isn't it just extremely abusable? Ppl be killing their alts just so their alt scrub can buy a ton of rep items, maintaining low rep for easy farm...

      On a side note, back when we had the point system i absolutely hated when the points reset right as your raid opened. Man that was the worst. Also, saying everyone could get enough points in a single day and then didn't need to bother for the rest of the month.... It costs points for every raid you join, how many points is enough for a month exactly considering technically you can have way more raids in a single day than the average player can farm points for in that same timeframe(when the server is actually active....) This would essentially be a restriction on players who aren't 90+ or don't have high +SPs/shells. As all their points would simply be from dying, and that certainly won't allow them to join a majority of raids in an active server. Not that this is currently a problem, but if the population base decided they wanted to FC a ton it can quickly become one.

      I remember waaaay back when i first started playing(was a total noob) i talked to madam blue mage and she said FC was a level 30+ recommended area, so as soon as I hit level 30 i headed over to check it out. It happened to be an inactive FC time so i did quite a bit of pve mobbing and at that level really enjoyed the loot you get in FC(sad how the only ppl who can actually farm in FC for enjoyable loot are the same ppl who get constantly 1 shot preventing them from farming in FC). Once it became active again it became clear it really wasn't a 30+ recommended area, even if the pve suggests otherwise.

      If you really want to make a balance suggestion(although it still wont REALLY help as some ppl love gifting their low level alts OP SPs) you can level restrict PvP with overlapping restrictions based on PvE zones. First area something like 30-50, northern 45-65, bitoren 60+ or 60-80 if the really high levels dont mind only doing pvp up by caligor entrance. Then sure it sorta creates more safe zones (though anyone running through any portal with a unicorn mount, or just having a unicorn mount in general don't really need 1 anyway) but it also allows for lower levels to take part in PvP. Not that i would actually support that either since it'd only be good in a lively server where there are plenty of new players being introduced so low level players are capable of having decent activity in FC, which certainly isn't the case with well any server really.
    • Pinkamena wrote:

      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.

      I was also one of those players who got all of my FC points from mobbing and running through tundra practically praying that someone was there to kill me. Back then I had little to no care whatsoever for my score (It always reset each month so there's no reason to worry about it) and getting a death was a cause for celebration if I needed points - it beat mobbing 100%.

      Pinkamena wrote:


      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.

      'Why should players endure the mockery of having 100 deaths for the sake of 1 box' - This is where our view differs. Is it really such an embarrassment? Sure, it's not ideal, but I would take an FC box and a chance at R7 over an extra death-count in a meaningless stat which resets monthly any day.

      Pinkamena wrote:

      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 do understand your point of it being unfair. It does give a huge advantage, which some players tend to let 'go to their head' a bit (I've lost count of the number of overconfident and arrogant NosMallers I have met over my time playing). But should that be enough reason to stop all competition in-game completely? Whilst the current system does enable everyone to enter the raid (without having to resort to mobbing/PvPing), it also means that people can complete raids without having contributed anything towards FC at all. Players come, raid, and leave. Is that really all FC is about?

      Pinkamena wrote:

      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.
      Should it be implemented to the UK server right now? No. It wouldn't help in any way and with the server as dead as it is now the alt users would have a huge advantage over the rest. The main focus for UK should be a merge.

      But just because it wouldn't suit us right now, it doesn't mean it won't be a useful change in active servers, which may (hopefully) include the UK in future.
    • Dear Ruff,

      let me answer your question:

      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.

      The word SIGNIFICANTLY is a way important in this one.. Defined: significantly = less than 500.000 rep.

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

      How would native speakers say it?
    • Tomps wrote:

      Dear Ruff,

      let me answer your question:

      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.

      The word SIGNIFICANTLY is a way important in this one.. Defined: significantly = less than 500.000 rep.

      Sincerely,
      Tomps
      Ok.... So here is the thing. I do not know what 1.-43 is supposed to mean AT ALL.

      Seriously what are you saying. Does the person being killed earn 43 rep and the person doing the killing lose 43 rep??? Not 43k, just 43.

      The only affects players below 500,000 rep is fine. I don't care about what is considered significantly weaker what i care about are the rewards/punishments.

      If it is a mere 43 rep per death, weaker players won't really see this as encouragement. It is barely more rep than killing a prota in bitoren....

      However i have a problem with anyone losing rep for killing these players, even if it is only 43 rep. What is to stop a horde of such players going to FC and what can become a pretty decent punishment on other players for killing them? Especially alongside your needing points to do FC raids suggestion, but honestly even without that noob alts can be used as weapons with this to attack a players rep(rather than actually fighting them). Keep in mind that having high reputation alone is a competition nowadays where players with the most actually receive rewards, are these players to be kept out of all FC combat simply because of noob floods?

      Of course, if you don't lose rep from killing noobs but noobs still get rep from dying that isn't too big of a deal. Until the reward for dying becomes worth farming.... If you are better off farming deaths for rep than bitoren mobs(at below 500,000 rep) what is to stop people abusing this and killing their own alts gaining rep on their alts AND their main, and then spending the alt rep to keep it below 500,000 so they can keep easy farming?

      Should fire/dark res become worthless because you can just spam kill your alt for quick rep and spend 90,000 rep per glove/boot? This is assuming dying to the higher ups is worth decent rep of course. Again I've no idea what that 1.-43 is supposed to mean but if you get a measely 43 rep per death then this won't matter at all as it would not be worth farming (of course it wouldn't encourage low levels to participate either)
    • Ruff wrote:

      Ok.... So here is the thing. I do not know what 1.-43 is supposed to mean AT ALL.
      I assume, by 1-43, he means the reputation rank, not a reputation gain. The ranks range from 1st place to 43rd.

      The suggestion being, if a player within the reputation ranks (Legend/Hero Reputation) kills a player with significantly less reputation than themselves (500k rep difference suggested), then they lose reputation and the low level that was killed gains reputation.

      Personally, I agree that low levels need more incentive to join in with FC, but I don't think this is the way to go about it.
    • Quote Ruff

      Ruff wrote:

      Tomps wrote:

      Dear Ruff,

      let me answer your question:

      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.

      The word SIGNIFICANTLY is a way important in this one.. Defined: significantly = less than 500.000 rep.

      Sincerely,
      Tomps
      Ok.... So here is the thing. I do not know what 1.-43 is supposed to mean AT ALL.
      Seriously what are you saying. Does the person being killed earn 43 rep and the person doing the killing lose 43 rep??? Not 43k, just 43.

      The only affects players below 500,000 rep is fine. I don't care about what is considered significantly weaker what i care about are the rewards/punishments.

      If it is a mere 43 rep per death, weaker players won't really see this as encouragement. It is barely more rep than killing a prota in bitoren....

      However i have a problem with anyone losing rep for killing these players, even if it is only 43 rep. What is to stop a horde of such players going to FC and what can become a pretty decent punishment on other players for killing them? Especially alongside your needing points to do FC raids suggestion, but honestly even without that noob alts can be used as weapons with this to attack a players rep(rather than actually fighting them). Keep in mind that having high reputation alone is a competition nowadays where players with the most actually receive rewards, are these players to be kept out of all FC combat simply because of noob floods?

      Of course, if you don't lose rep from killing noobs but noobs still get rep from dying that isn't too big of a deal. Until the reward for dying becomes worth farming.... If you are better off farming deaths for rep than bitoren mobs(at below 500,000 rep) what is to stop people abusing this and killing their own alts gaining rep on their alts AND their main, and then spending the alt rep to keep it below 500,000 so they can keep easy farming?

      Should fire/dark res become worthless because you can just spam kill your alt for quick rep and spend 90,000 rep per glove/boot? This is assuming dying to the higher ups is worth decent rep of course. Again I've no idea what that 1.-43 is supposed to mean but if you get a measely 43 rep per death then this won't matter at all as it would not be worth farming (of course it wouldn't encourage low levels to participate either)

      Dear Ruff,

      The top 43 players according to reputation are considered Legend as mentioned by Kaile.

      Quote Kaile


      Kaile wrote:

      Ruff wrote:

      Ok.... So here is the thing. I do not know what 1.-43 is supposed to mean AT ALL.
      I assume, by 1-43, he means the reputation rank, not a reputation gain. The ranks range from 1st place to 43rd.
      The suggestion being, if a player within the reputation ranks (Legend/Hero Reputation) kills a player with significantly less reputation than themselves (500k rep difference suggested), then they lose reputation and the low level that was killed gains reputation.

      Personally, I agree that low levels need more incentive to join in with FC, but I don't think this is the way to go about it.


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

      How would native speakers say it?
    • Ruff wrote:

      Ok so basically, only those players aren't allowed into FC. Got it, still very much against imposing such a restriction.
      Whilst I don't particularly agree with the idea either, it could hardly be described as not allowing those players into FC. The majority (not all) gained that reputation from alt-killing. Losing a small amount of reputation from a kill is not going to keep them out of FC when they can replace it ten-fold daily.
    • Quote Kaile

      Kaile wrote:

      Ruff wrote:

      Ok so basically, only those players aren't allowed into FC. Got it, still very much against imposing such a restriction.
      Whilst I don't particularly agree with the idea either, it could hardly be described as not allowing those players into FC. The majority (not all) gained that reputation from alt-killing. Losing a small amount of reputation from a kill is not going to keep them out of FC when they can replace it ten-fold daily.

      Dear Kaile,

      I'd say you managed to point out the most crucial reason why it was proposed by our Czech players - The majority (not all) gained that reputation from alt-killing.

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

      How would native speakers say it?
    • The direction this porpose is going is similar to the old fashioned fc points system.
      I agree that there are people who preffered the older version and had nothing against getting killed and farming 24/7.But there are people that didn't liked this ideea and most likely are the reason we got the current rep system,i preffer the latter.
      Back then FC was preety much the endgame scenario,while act 5 wasn't fully developed so it was somewhat normal to be that grindy,but nowdays we have act5.2 and act 6 that are already grindy as hell,why add another pain with a new FC point system that won't solve the "killing your alt to gain points" problem that even Tomps admited will exist if such porpose is to implemented.
      Having points resseting every week and requiring to grind an entire day in FC or maybe 2 in order to get enough points to join the FC raids before the week is over is extremly unappeling to me.
      You guys prefer competition as a way to encourage people to stay FC,i prefer social equality that the current system brings because its better overall for everyone.
      If the initiators of this porpose want to revitalize FC,there could be other ways that both the players and the team can come with,but without changing the current rep system.
      Organize different games in FC,organize alt wars in FC so the average players starts to be more interested idk.
      But regardless i keep my opposition against this porpose in the end.
      ~All the things she said ~
      ~All the things she said~
      ~Running through my head~
      ~Running through my head~
    • If it only affects the players with the top 43 highest rep, regardless of how they achieved it, it will keep them out of FC.

      I assume this suggestion was to keep them from killing their alts to gain rep?(even though this doesn't stop them from killing their alts for rep to make it up to the top 43)

      However, if whomever is 1st in reputation is significantly higher than EVERYONE ELSE then no matter who they kill they are losing rep right? This continues until they've lost so much rep that other players aren't significantly behind them. In other words, it pushes them out of FC. This continues down the entire ranking.

      If the 43rd highest rep is significantly higher than the 44th, it pushes them out of FC. Again, not to mention this just gives everyone who isn't in the top 43 weapons against the top's rep via alt noobs.

      You can't make back 10x as much as you lose daily if everything you kill to make rep is making you lose rep instead(not even talking about alts here)

      So essentially, it is a restriction in whom can participate in FC(especially alongside bringing back the point system, forcing the top 43 to engage if they want to do FC raids even though they are potentially losing rep with every kill)
    • well if you want to stop alt rep-farming all you gotta do is make fc kills not give rep. >inb4 "that will kill pvp in fc" people pvp in arena with no rewards so..

      can also make it give no rep after certain rank, like once you get red elite for example, no rep gains from fc kills.
    • Pinkamena wrote:

      The direction this porpose is going is similar to the old fashioned fc points system.
      I agree that there are people who preffered the older version and had nothing against getting killed and farming 24/7.But there are people that didn't liked this ideea and most likely are the reason we got the current rep system,i preffer the latter.
      Back then FC was preety much the endgame scenario,while act 5 wasn't fully developed so it was somewhat normal to be that grindy,but nowdays we have act5.2 and act 6 that are already grindy as hell,why add another pain with a new FC point system that won't solve the "killing your alt to gain points" problem that even Tomps admited will exist if such porpose is to implemented.
      Having points resseting every week and requiring to grind an entire day in FC or maybe 2 in order to get enough points to join the FC raids before the week is over is extremly unappeling to me.
      You guys prefer competition as a way to encourage people to stay FC,i prefer social equality that the current system brings because its better overall for everyone.
      If the initiators of this porpose want to revitalize FC,there could be other ways that both the players and the team can come with,but without changing the current rep system.
      Organize different games in FC,organize alt wars in FC so the average players starts to be more interested idk.
      But regardless i keep my opposition against this porpose in the end.
      There'll always be disagreements over how good or bad different systems were. It can still be useful to discuss it. :D

      It won't solve the
      alt-killing problem. In both systems players will still abuse alts. In the old system it would be for points. In the new system it would be for reputation. The only way to stop it would be to introduce an account limit or to make killing your alts and selling rep an offence. Neither of which are likely to happen any time soon - if at all.

      The idea behind the point system is it would give players more reason to go to FC, making it an active act again. Whilst the equality of the current system is all well and good, how does it encourage players to get involved at FC? It doesn't. Leaving FC as the first part of the server to die completely.

      If I remember correctly, events have been hosted in FC before (rarely, I know!) , but I don't think they made much difference at all. Alt wars would make no difference at all to regular PvP. As you said before, NosMallers have a huge advantage over other players. There's countless players with stronger alts than many general player's mains.

      Ruff wrote:

      If it only affects the players with the top 43 highest rep, regardless of how they achieved it, it will keep them out of FC.

      I assume this suggestion was to keep them from killing their alts to gain rep?(even though this doesn't stop them from killing their alts for rep to make it up to the top 43)

      However, if whomever is 1st in reputation is significantly higher than EVERYONE ELSE then no matter who they kill they are losing rep right? This continues until they've lost so much rep that other players aren't significantly behind them. In other words, it pushes them out of FC. This continues down the entire ranking.

      If the 43rd highest rep is significantly higher than the 44th, it pushes them out of FC. Again, not to mention this just gives everyone who isn't in the top 43 weapons against the top's rep via alt noobs.

      You can't make back 10x as much as you lose daily if everything you kill to make rep is making you lose rep instead(not even talking about alts here)

      So essentially, it is a restriction in whom can participate in FC(especially alongside bringing back the point system, forcing the top 43 to engage if they want to do FC raids even though they are potentially losing rep with every kill)
      You realise that a top 3 ranked reputation player loses about 20k of reputation per death in raid time? (I haven't actually heard the exact amount for a long time, so that might not be completely correct. It could be more or could be less. I know it's a lot) If that hasn't stopped them from coming to FC, I can't see losing a small amount of reputation for killing a low level from stopping them either.

      Indeed though, that is an issue. Because many of the top ranked players are alt killers, they have a LOT more rep than regular players. So 500k reputation difference isn't a significant difference at all and would mean that the player would likely lose rep with every kill that they get. This wouldn't apply to all but the most 'extreme' alt killers. The 500k rep difference certainly wouldn't be enough.

      Whether they would gain back this rep would depend how much the loss would be, how many low levels they kill and how many alts they have.

      Ultimately, we need FC active again and need lower levels encouraged to go. But I agree this isn't the way to go about it. There's too many problems around it.

      Gandalof wrote:

      well if you want to stop alt rep-farming all you gotta do is make fc kills not give rep. >inb4 "that will kill pvp in fc" people pvp in arena with no rewards so..

      can also make it give no rep after certain rank, like once you get red elite for example, no rep gains from fc kills.
      Arena's more convenient to get to, there is safe zone, you can choose and speak to your opponent and (most importantly in UK) you can use FPs!

      That would leave the ranks stuck as they are and removal of it would pretty much be a removal of a large part of the reputation update. The only way would be with more rules and limits, which won't happen :(
    • Pinkamena wrote:

      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
      There is nothing you can do with it. I'm 100% serious you can talk and cry about it being unfair but game mechanics are forcing you to make accounts for buffs. What about c45 bow that takes buffs away so often? delete it?
    • Jekyll wrote:

      Pinkamena wrote:

      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
      There is nothing you can do with it. I'm 100% serious you can talk and cry about it being unfair but game mechanics are forcing you to make accounts for buffs. What about c45 bow that takes buffs away so often? delete it?
      Sad but true.
      Buy luci from nosmall.
      Buy pack of tckets from nosmall.
      Get S on the spell.
      Vuoala ! You can know kill any sp that is buff dependent,gg izi.
      Why no add a bow that has a 15% to kill the target ?
      It will be very balanced.
      ~All the things she said ~
      ~All the things she said~
      ~Running through my head~
      ~Running through my head~
    • Jekyll wrote:

      too late. It will be a huge disadvatage to people who are not legends and people with 200mil rep will keep their position pretty much forever (there are three or four on Ancelloan server)
      it's not too late. it's never too late.

      just make new server or reset all rep Kappa

      Pinkamena wrote:

      Sad but true.
      Buy luci from nosmall.
      Buy pack of tckets from nosmall.
      Get S on the spell.
      Vuoala ! You can know kill any sp that is buff dependent,gg izi.
      Why no add a bow that has a 15% to kill the target ?
      It will be very balanced.
      careful what you wish for, you might just get it


      Jekyll wrote:

      *suddenly 98% of the players become archers*
      >implying that isnt the case already