Fair???>

"Help is on the way"..? That's what you said three years ago...

... and just for the record. Another weekend wasted. 48 hours straight on Tegan in PvP and not a single win. That's not balanced. I can run POS solo, but I can't win a single battle in 48hrs? How is that balanced?

The same overpowered, buffed up idiots round after round after round. Then one goes and another one comes in. Then he goes, and another one comes in.

48 hours, No win. That's almost worth YouTubing and showing the world how stupid Drakensang PvP is, and how the dev's really do not give a shit. No, I was right. Goodbye Drakensang. You do not deserve getting a cent. Love the PvE, but sick and tired of the ******** attitude of the developers when it comes to PvP.

 

@Nyshen:

A point system of some sort for matching, that takes a lot of factors into play, seems like a better system than the ELO they use now. I guess they would need to decide on specific points for the different categories. Also, I think if there's one person waiting who totally blows the curve away (my GM comes to mind - you probably know who he is - he waits for an hour and still doesn't get a match sometimes) - then I guess they would have to put that person in a match even if there's no one online that can really challenge that person. I guess, maybe, for every minute you wait your point score is reduced by 0.5 points, or whatever is appropriate - until it finally puts that player into a match. Even though it may not be a fair match, the uber-players need to be able to play a match sometimes, too.

Overall, I think it's a good idea. I don't know if this dev team is capable of developing it properly, though. I don't know if they're overworked, undepaid or just plain... well, something I probably shouldn't say, to be polite... but I've lost any confidence I had in their abilities some time ago. It would be nice if they could do something like a point-matching system, and make it work.

 

War is seldom fair. Better to prepare and adapt. No matter what, you will have to pay some dues to get to the top.

 

Actually imho, instead of points deduction, it should be points bonus in terms of +% for the lower rank opponents, so to have more incentive for them to continue in the face of definite defeat

 

I don't think anyone saw this comment by Perrush so I'll say it again, grouped players fight other grouped players

 

Dar!!!! Baby!!!! *Runs up and gives Darwarren a big hug and kiss* (Sorry folks, but I love this guy. In a he's the man who helped me get into my current guild and helped in other ways sort of way thing.........Better get back on topic somewhat before I get into trouble.) *Mouthing the words without saying them out loud and placing my hand up to my ear like it's a phone* Call me.

BOT. War may not be fair but this is still a game darling. Things should be balanced to a certain degree. It's about fun and one can't be having all that much fun when some cheese brain won't even let you get past a spawn point or back into a city, or you're paired up against a level 9 whose more akin to a level 40. That's just going to far as far as a "game" goes. I mean we don't allow people to play Monopoly with their own loaded dice do we dear?

 

Yes, sometimes you can have crappy flag bearers or marshals on the team or meet an ardent cent that hits 5k with a fireball. Level of fame should be part of match making but I do not believe level of equip and gems should be. That would be kind of stupid as you might as well look at the stats of the equip. War is, indeed, seldom fair. Some people have their records to blame. PVPing at low level with 1000 wins and 100 losses just means you'll have to lose some in high level to even that out. Teaming is my main issue here, otherwise things go well until sometimes when match making goes loose and suddenly you have a full team of marshal vs a full team of players under akoto. Those games are the ones that need to be fixed. Otherwise, not all match making is bad. All people think about is "themselves". They want the win and do not want to lose. Obviously, matching a legionnaire to a marshal is really kinda stupid still.

 

Well I disagree about the equipment. More often than not this is what causes the mismatches. I've fought against higher ranks and won and lost but the matches were still fairly even, (And enjoyable), and yet I've also had battles against lower ranks, hit them numerous times with them getting nary a scratch and yet they hit me twice and I'm dead. (There's no fun in that.) Now whether they worked for that equipment or paid for it I don't know. And I'm not trying to make it so they can't have that equipment regardless of how they earned it, just trying to make it so when they sign up for an arena match they can duel each other and not the newer player, or the player who's still trying to work at getting that better equipment themselves.

As far as groups are concerned they really should have a separate arena area just for groups. You sign up you take your chances against whomever also signed up. I don't like the idea of eliminating groups from play. I think it adds a good element to it all. Group A from one guild wants to battle group B from another sort of thing. That's war. That's competition.

But what they should do for all team battles is change the way people respawn. Either make it so they respawn in random locations or every time they respawn they have that blue protective shield around them for a few seconds. Put an end to that field marshal hanging out at the respawn spot killing people as soon as they reappear.

 

Well, that is their choice for not PVPing until they have super good equip. It is one of the benefits of doing that: people underestimate them. Why should I get penalized only because I have better stats? Completely outrageous. Would you like to measure my skill in playing as well?
Did I ever say delete all groups from play? I merely pointed out grouping is a main issue especially when people like to make a team of 5 to fight solo queue people.

 

You wouldn't be "penalized" for having better stats. You just won't be paired up with someone who is of a lower level than you. You don't pair up level 9s with level 45s. Why? Because it's an unfair, unbalanced match. So how is making sure that some level 9 with level 40 equipment isn't paired against some other level 9 with level 10 equipment any different? The equipment you have, as much as anything, probably even more so, is what makes your character as strong as it is. Meaning these two level 9s really aren't both level 9....are they?

Trust me you learn very quickly not to underestimate anyone in the arena because even if they're the same level as you they may not actually be the same level as you at all. Which really is the point. Pvp being unbalanced in this way where low levels are really fighting against what is the equivalent of high levels.

That's why a point system, or a whatever they choose to use system, has to take into account equipment when pairing in the arena. To create a more balanced pairing. Either that or make it so people can only wear and use equipment that matches their level. Which I'm pretty sure will piss more people off than what I'm suggesting.

 

Hi Nyshen,

The majority has asked...no, not asked, begged for fairness over 2 years.
DSO simply doesn't care, its their job to please and protect the mid/heavy P2P class.
Thats why you still see, a low lvl farming in events and Atlantis with lvl 45.

And to show you how much DSO protects the P2P class.
No more darbmoor+grimmagstone to farm for low lvl items, why???
Because the P2P class all ready have what they need.

Why did DSO implemented the "new beginning"???
To prevent a F2P of gaining items+gems every day to build a strong toon.
To force the F2P to lvl up to 8, if he wants to obtain the daily bonus+daily quests.

And to make matters worst, today low lvl players can't even farm or do quests in Swerdfield, because its full of lvl 15 to 45 players farming for low lvl items.
I was forced to delete my Balor account because of this, the lvl 45 class were killing everybody in their path.

Everybody can complain about how unfair this game has become, but most of us won't quit no matter what and DSO takes that factor to its advantage.

How many more years do you thing it will take for DSO to accept our complains and change their policy???

They will change it when there're only 1000 players left, by then its already too late and the game will close its doors and the mid/heavy class will have lost millions of dollars/euros in this game, only because they are unable to sympathize with our cause.

I'm not here to start a battle between F2P vs P2P.
Only because the P2P has the resources to improve their toons 100x times faster then the F2P, doesn't mean that they are to blame.
Its DSO fault for creating the conditions for a "Perfect storm".

 

Hello Bearer-of-Death, (That's a mouthful. You prefer to be called Bearer or Death? Cause I'm not using your full name every time )

I agree. P2P isn't to blame at all. I guess if I had the resources and nothing better to do with the money I'd do it too. But I would hope if I were in that situation I would still be able to see the other side of the coin. For a game like this to survive it's best if they can come up with a way to please everyone. (I'm not naive enough to believe they can, but they can balance things out a bit.) That's why instead of just complaining about it I try to offer ideas, taking both sides into account, so both sides of the coin can be relatively happy . I don't want to limit the P2P players from being able to stack their character, just make it so there's some balance so everyone can have some fun.

Really what else can one do but point it out and offer ideas? They may do nothing about it, but at least you tried.

 

Hi Nyshen,

I simply copy your name from your avatar and copy/past.
You may call me whatever you like, as long i know its directed towards me!!!

Many members(myself included), over the years we gave so many ideas to improve this game in all directions. Just go and take a look at the "creative corner" section.

I entered my 3th year and so far, there hasn't been one improvement towards the F2P class.

As for complaining, well....DSO CM accuse me of spreading lies, witch hunt and "persona non grata" only because i confront them and tell the truth.

Thats why i stopped communicating with them, now i only speak to members about the game and nothing more.

 

Yup. DSO sets the rules for everyone; no special exemptions. Personal expectations (and fantasies) do not apply.
It must be hard to find an endless supply of players "just like me," to get those perfect match-ups everyone wants. But then, we knew battle was dangerous, when we signed up for it.
Perhaps some people need a PvE version of PvP, so their competitors can't adapt, and will be programmed to lose on demand. That way we never need to improve past old limitations. Lol.

 

Please, get rid of the twinks... pvp is never gonna be perfect but at least give us a chance of winning.

 

Yo guys. You're still going with this? PvP is broken. It's hard to make a working elo, but DSO's elo is just... crap. You have the rank and lvl mismatches (ex: lvl 40 legionnaire VS lvl 45 Marshall), and then you have the f2p VS p2w mismatches (these are really bad at lower lvls). With greed, BP paved the way for uber shoppers, full of gems and glyphs and essences and buffs. Average p2p and f2p have no way of winning against these shoppers. Now, don't get me wrong. It's ok to pay for a game and support it if you enjoy it, but shopping should not make you godlike. The most powerful weapon a player can have in DSO... is the credit card.

So, if you guys want my advice, just do what I did: leave DSO. Or at least take a break, this environment does not seem fun. What are games for if not for fun.

I'm a PvP oriented guy, not so much towards PvE. And there are plenty of other games, complete free2play or buy2play, with NO pay2win whatsoever. My main game right now, that satisfies my PvP crave is completely f2p, and if you want, you can buy skins and other cosmetic stuff with real money, but nothing considered p2w. Btw, the elo in the game I'm playing is not perfect, but it's not in any way as bad as DSO

That's it for now. I'm out.

 

Battle? Dangerous? Dear, it's a game....there's no danger at all. Maybe we've gone over the edge in role play land and actually think we're doing battle against the big bad Dagon.

Adapt? Let's see I have a limited amount of time to realize the guy I'm playing in the arena isn't hurt one iota by anything I can throw at him so the only strategy left is run, hope I don't get hit by anything, and what? Wait till I die of exhaustion as opposed to him killing me in one or two shots? There's no adaptation here. Adaptation, as it applies here, implies that if I loose round one I still may have a chance in round two if I can adapt and overcome what he's done and is doing. Which is impossible in the above scenario because he's so OP. It's just rinse and repeat.

Why is it the opposing view point in these little discussions are always under the impression that what is being asked for by those who want to balance the system are only asking to win? Or to make it easy? We're not. We're asking for a balanced competition so playing is fun. (Hint....key word here being fun)

Little story. The other day my little level 11 recruit got paired against a level 6 ranger candidate. Of course I don't underestimate him. For all I know he's stacked to the gills. So I move here and there, wait for the right moment, hit him with a fireball. Of course my cursor isn't right above him so I don't know how much damage he took. I keep moving, he keeps firing at me and missing, I get another shot in.....he's dead. Two shot kill. So the next round, since I'm curious, I go two to two. I want to see how much damage he can do to me. 4 hits in and he hasn't done much of anything. So I end it quickly. And to me that wasn't fun. He had no business being paired up against me. I found no satisfaction in it at all. And for all I know he thinks I'm stacked up and is so pissed off at how unbalanced the pairing system is maybe he quits the game. Which is bad for everyone. Games need players or they die.

On the other hand I've had many losses that were fun as heck. Because they were challenging, I had to adapt. I may have lost but I learned something from it and will be better next time. You don't learn anything from a one sided match. And if you get to many of them the only thing you learn is stop playing pvp because it's unbalanced.

General questions for anyone who cares to answer:

So what is it with the guys who like to keep their characters low level and stack their characters up sky high? Why is a little balance so scary to them? Does beating up on a new player or someone who can't or won't pay up the gills to do the same stacking to their character that much of an ego boost to you? Are you really satisfied with the un-challenging matches in the arena? Are you unwilling to adapt if they were to balance things out? Would it piss off the money players so much if they can't have their one sided victories that they'd quit?

Just curious.

 

Here are more numbers. No wonder the competition gets tough. Some players must be online constantly!

Agathon: 169.747 players listed in Total Honor Points, 8/19/2014.

(Rank, Honor Points, # players.)
Seasoned Knight of the Order, 1.000.000 H.P., 601 players.
Ardent Knight of the Order, 1.450.000 H.P., 496 players.
Flag Bearer , 2.250.000 H.P., 365 players.
Marshal, 3.600.000 H.P., 204 players.
Field Marshal, 6.750.000 H.P., 33 players.
Grand Marshal, 15.000.000 H.P., 2 players.
Grand Master, 32.500.000 H.P., 0 players.
High Grand Master, 75.000.000 H.P., 0 players.

 

I used to see the same kind of thing in online war strategy games like tribal wars. What you have there are multiple people playing one account. (At least in some cases.) While one is asleep the other is playing. While one is at school or work another is playing. But hey, trying to manage over a hundred villages while planning an all out attack on another tribe where you have to launch 50 attacks, all within 1 second of each other, while at the same time trying to defend those 100+ villages, as well as helping other tribemates with their defenses, from hundreds of attacks that are incoming, shifting thousands of troops between villages, at ALL times during the day,.....let's just say having an extra hand or two is very helpful in allowing you some sleep and having any kind of life outside the game.

But in those kinds of games one can understand needing extra hands. In a game like this one I don't really see the point of multiples unless you're really that impatient to get to the next rank.

 

It's not even about balance that much. I've given up on the developers getting the balance right. It's about fairness. What's the difference? Well, I consider it unfair and pointless to come up against the same player in duels ad nauseum. If I lose five times against the same player, him killing me a hundred times more won't add to his kill count and just gives him more fame points. Problem is, I need fame points, too, but I am not going to get much going up against this buffhead over and over again. That's unfair - and would be fairly easy to eradicate. 5 kills in a 24 hour period, and then no more. The nice side effect would be getting rid of guild players who do the 'you-win-once'-'I-win-once' routine for days until they reach the high fame ranks. Again something that is not fair to single players. How about we start with that? Then we can work out ELO and all the other non-working rubbish later...

ah, forgot, the devs won't read this anyway...