>>I agree!

Curious if you would address the two points I made regarding this then? Or is it that you don't have a problem with invested time = nothing, and pvp becoming a situation where the only statistical edges can be gained by buying into microtrans events? Not being snarky, legitmately curious.

>> If you want to be competitive and you're not already into the grind,

The people that want to be competitive likely are already putting in work. Capping daily limits on experience would prevent them from doing this entirely. You're turning a year to two years into never. Taking away the possibility, and even the choice.

>>I don't know. I like to watch the numbers grow too, for awhile, but honestly it gets boring after a short while

Everyone likes to see numbers get bigger, they feel like progress. As mentioned in the other thread about how people play DR, themselves, some people play JUST to watch the numbers grow. They play for THOSE gains. Just because it bores you personally does not the paradigm make.

>>Why do you bother?

I bother because as things are, hard, legitimate work pays off, as it should. You would like to take that away from players like myself, who are NOT breaking policy or doing anything wrong.

And while talking on taking away rank advantages in PvP, you completely ignored and avoided to mention the fact that all statistical advantages in PvP will become monetized through microtrans available special materials at that point. Curious as to why you quoted the paragraph, commented on an adjacent fact, but avoided the focus of the point I was making entirely.

>>There is nothing wrong with scripting and/or opting out of being social. What is bad is afk scripting.

100% agree. I was merely pointing out that the perception that people are all 'mindlessly scripting' isn't necessarily going to stop when you finally get rid of all the afk scripters. If people want to fix that problem, they should step up, engage people, and be the change they want to see happen. Make the environment more social through their own actions, rather than just complain it feels like a ghost town. Devote the energy to something positive.

>>Kinda agree with this view,

And I do as well, but I'm also solidly in the camp of 'putting in hard work should reap its rewards.' Stop handing out participation trophies, there is no reason effort shouldn't matter. The current mode of combat is much less 'ranks = I win button' than the last iteration, and I think people also take that for granted. Knowledge of systems, how to work advantages, and ability to think under pressure matter much more than they used to and are absolutely able to overcome some rank gaps. Honestly, there is no real shortage of people to fight against in your range, if you put yourself out there.

>> I've collected some better items than you.

Balancing ranks is just going to make this even MORE of a problem than before.



And, I missed this earlier:

>>Good! Take away that advantage - it does nothing but encourage people to punch down and discourage people from jumping into PvP.

You want a genuine RP environment, but you don't want a dragonslayer, combatant in a multitude of wars, a knight of high esteem (hyperbole for making a point) to have an advantage over a kid slinging ship rats down at Barana's. Real, true RP is both the good and the bad. I'm sorry, but this is a multiplayer game, and not everyone can shout "RP!" and still Mary Sue your way through the world like each and every individual is the best individual at everything ever. If you want that, maybe a single player game is more your style.

>>You want a genuine RP environment, but you don't want a dragonslayer, combatant in a multitude of wars, a knight of high esteem (hyperbole for making a point) to have an advantage over a kid slinging ship rats down at Barana's. <<

He can have plenty of advantages, while still getting merc'd by an arrow to the face the same as the kid. What I don't want, because it is really boring on a ton of levels in a multiplayer game, is for him to have years of nigh insurmountable advantage over everyone who started playing later. If you want to be more OP than everything around you and be secure in that position maybe the single player game is for YOU.



Mazrian

>>Because it's an irrelevant point?

Again, your opinion. The fact that in your model, the only statistical advantage in pvp is easiest and quickest gained with RL cash does not feel irrelevant at all to me.

>>The people who are not playing now but may consider DR in the future are not putting in work.

So disregard those of us here now, paying to play, actively in favor of potentially non existent hypothetical people that are not even in the equation yet? Check.

>>Yes, I absolutely would take that away because:

>>1) it's not hard
>>2) it's not work.

If you train minimally and only train the skills you HAVE to, sure. Some of us aren't lazy, and try to keep as many skills moving at once as possible. Again, you're dictating your opinion from your perspective as fact.

>>If it feels like work, if it feels like sacrafice, then something is massively wrong with the game (it is).

Any game with a competitive aspect has a degree of work to it. You don't just get things handed to you, even on consoles. You try out Overwatch, the grind to get to diamond is real. Same with pretty much every competitive game ever. Yes, I agree something is wrong with the system as it stands, absolutely. Yes, I feel like the time investment necessary should be decreased to a more realistic level. No, I don't think that means people should not be rewarded for putting effort in beyond the minimum.

>>If you train minimally and only train the skills you HAVE to, sure.<<

If you train, period. Once you've written the routine it's just tweaking and waiting. If you use Geniehunter or the stuff from the Dependency repository it's even easier. There's really no such thing as working harder when it comes to long term exp gain.

>>The fact that in your model, the only statistical advantage in pvp is easiest and quickest gained with RL cash does not feel irrelevant at all to me.<<

I mean, in the model we have now the easiest way to gain statistical advantage in PvP is to buy a high level character and skip the grind. I think you even come out ahead just on a cost basis. Cash rules everything.

>>Any game with a competitive aspect has a degree of work to it. You don't just get things handed to you, even on consoles. You try out Overwatch, the grind to get to diamond is real. Same with pretty much every competitive game ever. Yes, I agree something is wrong with the system as it stands, absolutely. Yes, I feel like the time investment necessary should be decreased to a more realistic level. No, I don't think that means people should not be rewarded for putting effort in beyond the minimum.<<

The difference is that with Overwatch, LOL, etc you're engaged and having fun while you grind ranking. The grind is kind of the point. In DR you grind so you can go do something else that you'd prefer to do if you didn't have to grind to get there.



Mazrian

>You want everyone to be on the same level. There are plenty of people in any given range, why do you need EVERYONE to be in your given range?

There definitely aren't plenty of people at a given range - looking over the circle spread alone indicates that the player base is fairly spread out, to say nothing of the actual rank spread. That many players in the 1500+ club talk about how boring PvP gets at their strata, I'm genuinely curious why whenever the topic of rank normalization comes up, they're also the first to argue against changes that would open up more of the player base to them for conflict.

Secondly, that noobwars was a thing is another mark for the notion of HLC conflicts being not particularly interesting or compelling to those who are up there.

And thirdly, this topic of rank normalization doesn't mean 'everyone is equal', it means that the game is balanced more heavily with an eye towards ability/action/choice, than rank domination.

>>game is balanced more heavily with an eye towards ability/action/choice, than rank domination. <<

This is definitely more what I'm in favor of.

Mazrian

>>it means that the game is balanced more heavily with an eye towards ability/action/choice, than rank domination.

As mentioned, THIS, I am 100% for. Taking ranks completely out of the picture and setting everyone essentially at the same rank point (even if, for example, beyond 300 ranks), I am not.

With an eye towards the nudge.

>I'm not sure I understand, here. How could one gain, in 24 hours, more than 24 hours worth of experience? Why implement any cap at that point?

I think there are a few ways to address this, none of which are perfect, but all of which reduce the 'need' to 24/7. You could perhaps also mix and match, or use multiple approaches. My favorite is to allow experience to be earned for ONLY x/24 hrs a day, but multiply XP earnings for those hours by 24/x. So say you can only earn XP for 12 hours per every 24 - the experience earned per hour is doubled, but you can only earn experience for half as many hours. This way, for example players can script for 12 hours a day, and then spend the remaining 12 hours doing whatever they want.

>Absolutely this. It allows there to still be benefits from putting in the time, because regardless of the level of work, it's still hours spent at the keyboard, watching your script, that you will never get back. For years, that time has been worth the reward for spending it, for some of us. Invalidating all that time spent retroactively seems both horrible and unnecessary.

Eh, yeah, it is, but frankly, changes have gone into DR before that invalidated previous choices and required player adjustment. They aren't often met happily, but I think it's important to take a look at what's best for the long term health of the overall game, and recognize that sometimes that means nerfs to your individual character. For what it's worth, I've played my main for about 9 years, at least 5 or which have been 'seriously'. While he isn't at cap, I'd be more than happy to see his ranks matter less.

I don't really view the 'years spent scripting' (woof!) as 'hard work' or an 'accomplishment'. It's an activity I did while doing other things. I'm much prouder and more interested in the community I'm part of, and the events that I've participated in, and my characters story, than the numbers associated with my character. I fully recognize that some people don't feel that way about their characters, and the numbers are everything for them, and I think that's fine. But I also think the rank disparity drives AFK scripting, and renders PvP less interesting and desirable.

Anyway, I put down this drum years ago, so, meh, but that's the elaboration on the idea.

>>I think it's worth acknowledging that not everyone is going to consider running an automated script as "hard work".

Running around 12+ hours a day, due to luxury of work scheduling and type, while not breaking the scripting policy is more work than someone who scripts an hour or two a night is putting in. You can cut it down all you like, but maintaining that long of a clip being attentive to the game environment takes effort.


>>It wouldn't hurt to look at the exp model in the game and do something like having exp drain 4x as fast during the first 4 hours, then 2x the next 4, 1x the next 4, then no more exp for 12 hours. That way, players get more exp each day, but your returns notably diminish if you're grinding non-stop. Does this really addressing AFK scripting? Not directly, but at least the game discourages the situations that would encourage nonstop AFK scripting.

Again, I am not at all against the exp system being adjusted. I 100% believe it needs to be addressed. Just not without allowing someone to invest more time without some reward for doing so. I could see, under your proposed model, maybe slowing down the drain in those last 12 hours to .3 or .5, but not wiping it out all together (just because there are days where I'm actually around and at it for 14 - 16 hours rarely). But, that is based on my personal preferences, and honestly, the loss of anything over 12 hours a day would be worth the sacrifice of reigning those 24 hour a day scripters under control. That being said, they will still just script afk 12 hours a day instead, and it won't necessarily curb the problem of them breaking policy, just ease the rank gap between those that do and those that don't.

>>At the same time, given the way DR experience/skills works, it might be beneficial to change it from "hours" to "bits," where the first X "bits" of experience of bits are worth 4x, etc etc etc, that way if someone is training non-combat survivals/lores those first four hours, they're not at a disadvantage if they move to combat after that.

TBH, even with the loss of a little productivity on my longer days, I'm 100% behind this. And yeah, I was thinking the same thing, bits wise. As in, the first x pulses out of your experience pool into ranks get a 300% bonus to the amount of hard exp gained, then a 100% bonus, etc.

Having it produce nothing, experience wise, beyond that 12 hour gradient would be the only way to prevent 24 hour scripting sessions, and the sacrifice of that little bit of extra time one would realistically have to train beyond 12 hours on a long day is worth starting to treat the problem.

I was thinking hours of skill drain per skill, but sure we're talking about the same outcome here. X number of draining pulses per skill also works.

>>I was thinking hours of skill drain per skill, but sure we're talking about the same outcome here. X number of draining pulses per skill also works.

I like the idea of it being a general pool for bonus bits over per skill just because some players might want to do a lore day, then a survival day, then a combat day, etc.

We also wouldn't have to worry about things like "Should the armor pool get fewer bits than the weapon pool" or "Is the armor pool at an advantage because they have fewer skills to split bits among than magic pool" and so on.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

A post was hidden.

Helje kindly asked that we keep this on topic. I don't want to have to end this one but if we keep up the posturing, rude remarks, or political commentary this one will be done.

-GameMaster Signi

>>IMO that's why it should work exactly like an RPA, bonusing bits on the way out of the pool over a time period of pulses

The only reason I can see a timer not being fully appealing is that it could discourage training skills you can’t train alongside X number of additional skills.

Looking at how many “bits” could be gained during that time and making the bonus X number of those bits would make it so those who don’t train “optimally” being unintentionally penalized/left behind even more so.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>Say, by only training targeted magic in the magic skillset, their bits are consumed from a reasonably sized skillset much slower. So, they could train without ever getting away from the bonus exp rates, still at x2 or even x4 during the entire 24 hours.

I'm extremely skeptical that this is what will happen.

In the end, there are two things you have to consider, which are leading (but not the only) causes of people afk scripting:

1) How to improve skill gain rates so people feel AFK scripting isn't necessary to advance.
2) How to discourage "excessive" gameplay, with the assumption that someone playing past X hours a day is probably not really being attentive to the game.

You can address both of these by having the game front-load the amount of experience players can gain in a given day. GMs can determine the amount of experiences players could/should gain in a given day (this could be based on if someone scripted 24/7, or whatever rate they feel is the "proper" gameplay rate, or most likely a mix of the two), and making it so you learn slower and slower throughout the day. You still get the same amount of experience each day, but you don't have to do as much work/scripting/etc as you previously did. There are two ways to implement this, both having advantages and risks:

1) Have it be time-based. You first 4 hours teach X*4 amount faster, your second 4 teach X*2 amount faster, your third 4 teach X amount faster, your fifth 4 teach X/2 amount faster, etc. The advantage is that there is an explicitly clear amount of diminishing returns the more you play in a given 24-hour (or one day, whatever) period. You're discouraged from "excessive" grinding, while not being "penalized" for your inability to effectively grind anymore. The disadvantages with it being time based is that someone may want to roleplay those first four hours of exp drain, or they may train a crafting skill or non-combat survival, or other things that would diminish their ability to effectively use their first four hours. In addition, some "hardcore" players may feel that they're not able to have as strong of a skill advantage for the amount of time they put into the game.

2) Have it be bit-based. Your first Y bits of experience absorbed teach X*4 amount faster, your second Y bits of experience absorbed teach X*2 amount faster, etc. The advantage here, unlike RPAs (I think), is that players can take advantage of the improved learning rates without having to work the system to maximize the exp gain. Will people who train 12 weapon skills use up their bonus bits for the day faster than someone training 3 magics and a crafting lore? Yes, but everyone still gets the same number of bonus bits in the end. Could this create a theoretical situation where someone afk scripts one skill, at the expense of every other skill, in order to be uber at that one skill? Maybe, but what is the probability of that happening moreso than it already happening?

This idea isn't meant to be a silver bullet. It's meant to address a cultural issue in the game ("Wow this game takes forever"/"It is hard to compete as a newbie"/"I will never catch up") and diminish the incentives that encourage bad and/or policy-breaking behavior as a result ("To compete I need to play nonstop" and/or "AFK scripting is the only solution"), while also still respecting the needs of people who love to grind (They will still be ahead of those who don't grind, just not as ahead if they were actually grinding skills for 12+ hours nonstop in one day).

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>I feel like people would afk just as much with diminishing returns. Once you're set up to do it you might as well do it even if the benefit is less.

I wouldn't be surprised, but one aspect of the harm that would be caused as a result would be notably diminished.

As mentioned adjusting/front-loading exp rates isn't going to be a silver bullet that will solve all AFK scripting, but one step in what should be multiple steps. Along with disincentivizing the benefits of getting away with afk scripting, I'd hope for stronger enforcement along with other measures. This way, the risk/reward of AFK scripting eventually makes it not worth the effort.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

>>In my circumstances, as a Paladin, I would absolutely focus on combat while using my magic bits, so 100% of them went into TM and Debil, over time it would absolutely push them above my secondary weapons, being a much smaller group of skills drawing from the pool, essentially negating the skillset learning rates as a whole. Too many reasons doing it bit based and letting players essentially choose where they go wouldn't work.

There is no such thing as "magic bits" or "weapon bits" in my example. You just have "bits". You can't selectively use your "bits", beyond what you do (or don't) decide to train while they're available.

---

Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.

We are having some discussions, yes.

We're not ready to say anything about the discussions just yet.

We are still reading. (Thank you for keeping it productive and about ideas and not about people!)

Iocanthe
Doing stuff