Valour got me 4mil xp on EU_1

[//saxon]

alright, ill be the one to say it

i vote change valor

for one simple reason, i have witnessed first hand events so painfully disgusting, i can hardly believe i witnessed them at all, and now my hand trembles as i write.

meh just my opinions, which dont mean shit, but imo some people just shouldnt get valor...they just shouldn't period

im talking of course about POS NO SKILL THROWERS, COWARDLY NO BALLS ARCHERS, GODDAMN PIG FUCKING FATHER RAPING MOTHER STABBING BIRD PUNCHIN KITTEN KICKIN PUPPY HUMPING SCUM OF THE EARTH......ffs, XBOWERS

the people that help their team out the least, take the least risk, and get rewarded for it, BIG TIME.

shame on you crpg...if your gonna give "valor" to these fucks, change what it says at least, have it say "(insert persons name) your overwhelmingly gay performance earned you an extra multi, GJ!"

but dont call it valor ffs, its a spit in the face to those who play this game valorously

as long as its melee i'll lose to a million no balls ultra agi skeying pheguts and be perfectly fine with it each loss.

but dying to range just leaves a bad taste in my mouth, i dont even feel i lost, i honestly feel cheated

and to those range players about to counter bitch at me bitching...you are simply in denial if you think the rewards and skill requirements to get those rewards are the same for melee and range

when melee makes a great play...its a great play

when range makes a great play

it just gay

crpg is gay enough ffs

plumbo out

*drops the mic, walks off stage*

its ok, im not a ranged character and i have no ranged alt characters you can trust me, just let it all out 

[SMEGMAR]

xX y3ah br0 val0ur is EPIC 4 life Val0ur 4ll d4y 3v3ry d4y br0 Xx

ME WITH MY EPIC VALOR NODACHI SKILL MACHINE.
U M4D BR0S?

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[/spoiler]

[Teeth]

Right now: 2.5x average points of both teams.

No, no, no, no, this is all wrong, again. When valour was originally implented it seemed like its function was to reward players on the losing team that did well even though their team sucked with a continuation of their multi. A continuation by the way, not current multi + 1. Now the valour system has for some reason been extended to the winning team, which I find weird and unnecessary in itself, but what really fucking blows is that when the calculation uses both teams for the average, often the losing team actually gets prevented from getting valour because the winning team has a much higher average score. Like losing with against a stacked team isn't bad enough, if it is stacked enough they will be rewarded with an extra multiplier instead of you.

For the love of god, seperate the averages, put the limit higher if valour needs to be more exclusive, but there is no reason to use both teams in the average calculation.

[ecorcheur_brokar]

I think it's nice that valour reward more often high lvl player, because at the beginning, only the time you spend in crpg counts for the speed of your leveling. But when you go to higher level, if you want to continue to go to upper lvl, you need to play well so you can get valour and keep your multiplicator as long as you can. In the end, only the good player (and/or those who really spend too much time in crpg) will get to level higher than 35.

And Saxon let's face it you're a good player, that's normal that you often get valour.

Still what would be fun, is a valour for kill-strike in limited time. It usually means that you took risk by jumping into a bunch of people alone, and that you managed to do massive damage. (or maybe you took a bath of ranged, but then two pleasure are better than one)

[//saxon]

Still what would be fun, is a valour for kill-strike in limited time. It usually means that you took risk by jumping into a bunch of people alone, and that you managed to do massive damage. (or maybe you took a bath of ranged, but then two pleasure are better than one)

yes its a good and understandable way of getting valour, would be good.

[San]

No, no, no, no, this is all wrong, again. When valour was originally implented it seemed like its function was to reward players on the losing team that did well even though their team sucked with a continuation of their multi. A continuation by the way, not current multi + 1. Now the valour system has for some reason been extended to the winning team, which I find weird and unnecessary in itself, but what really fucking blows is that when the calculation uses both teams for the average, often the losing team actually gets prevented from getting valour because the winning team has a much higher average score. Like losing with against a stacked team isn't bad enough, if it is stacked enough they will be rewarded with an extra multiplier instead of you.

For the love of god, seperate the averages, put the limit higher if valour needs to be more exclusive, but there is no reason to use both teams in the average calculation.

You're preaching to the choir here, especially since I was one of the first to complain about those issues. Old valour had its own problems, giving you a very high chance at it as long as you didn't die too early in the round. I abused the heck out of that, since all I had to do was minimize risk.

It took a bit of extra logic to implement, but I'm glad that score & valour continue to be refined at least.

[ecorcheur_brokar]

I didn't want to read all the post but you make a point here teeth. There should be in the calculation for the valour, a bonus for the players on the loosing team, because it's harder to score with shitty team.
Also a bonus for the attacking team in siege would be great, it is almost impossible to get valour when attacking.

[li379041890]

I have no idea about the old valour and the mechanic of it.
I think the valour is epic now but i wanna suggest to make changes on multi somehow since there are some players/Clan are too op and they are easily be placed at the same team.... (Its a tragedy to the other team and 4 round games become less fun.)

so my suggestion is:::::::::::::::::
How about make a rank system?
For example, based a player's lifetime K/D to all the player in database so the system can give a rank level to the player which he can see on by himself only
then during the game, based on a player's performance (K/D or score) to increase or decrease his rank (temporarily) and add all together so that the two teams will be even and balanced based on the everyone's rank

[Teeth]

You're preaching to the choir here, especially since I was one of the first to complain about those issues. Old valour had its own problems, giving you a very high chance at it as long as you didn't die too early in the round. I abused the heck out of that, since all I had to do was minimize risk.

It took a bit of extra logic to implement, but I'm glad that score & valour continue to be refined at least.

So you agree with me that the averages should be done seperately for the two teams? I am not sure if you got my main point as you refer to other things here. If you do agree on that with me, then why aren't the averages split, is it somehow too difficult to implement?

[Riddaren]

If only one or two HX/HA players would constantly focus you...

You know what to do fellow cavalry players.
If you are not HA or HX, bring a great lance. That will teach him.

[WITCHCRAFT]

Next patch: 3x average of whichever team you're on.

Interesting. Seems like kind of a slippery slope in a good way. The more enemies you hit/kill, the less there are left for your team to score points on. Gives an incentive to not delay or hide in the early part of a round.

[Molly]

There is only one single change needed for valour:

Make it loosing team only. Yes, it's that simple.

Everyone knows that it's piss easy to do really good in a good team. It's much harder to do good in a shit team tho. Therefore, Valour only for the loosing team.

[WITCHCRAFT]

There is only one single change needed for valour:

Make it loosing team only. Yes, it's that simple.

Everyone knows that it's piss easy to do really good in a good team. It's much harder to do good in a shit team tho. Therefore, Valour only for the loosing team.

It's entirely possible to win when you are stuck with a garbage team though. This gives a bonus to those who carried all the bad/lazy/new players on their shoulders. They deserve it just as much as the pro who went down fighting 1 vs 8 and killed 6 of them while losing the round.

[//saxon]

Make losing team only.

[San]

So you agree with me that the averages should be done seperately for the two teams? I am not sure if you got my main point as you refer to other things here. If you do agree on that with me, then why aren't the averages split, is it somehow too difficult to implement?

Had to get another person to edit score stuff apart from the creator. Only a few people can change that directly. At first he thought it was too difficult, yeah. If you have access to the beta forums, you can add your own recommendations for score.