Forums › English Language Forums › General › Graveyard

Recherche

UVs need rebalancing and so does the RNG associated with them (Revised October 11th)

67 Réponses [Dernière contribution]
lun, 10/07/2013 - 15:02
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

OCTOBER 11th EDIT

Copypasted from a recent post:

"I think one of the biggest, most important things you can do when trying to be productive is being able to admit when you're wrong. So, let's break this down:

What went right
-Most people who commented on it said RNG is frustrating. A linear way to improve would be good.
-CTR is way too pivotal on specific items and too pointless on others. Some items need their base charge times reduced, and CTR as a whole needs to be toned down a bit while still being more powerful than flat damage.
-Flat armor boosts and damage UVs are a little too weak.
-Damage UVs on enemies that resist the damage type need to go.
-Absolutely nothing should be done to ASI.

What was stupid
-Adding penalties. It was intended to make unique variants UNIQUE, but it'd just end up bottlenecking players into certain playstyles, or to keep rerolling until they got both the UV they wanted and the penalty they could deal with.
-Giving a way to linearly improve UVs and forcing UVs to only end up being certain things. One or the other might be fine, forcing certain UVs is kinda lame, and having both at the same time is stupid.
-Being insensitive to players who already have things instead of acknowledging them and thinking of ways they might be compensated.

I'm copy-pasting this into the main post. So, how might the "successful" ideas be put in the game while compensating the people who already have good variants? I'm currently thinking of a way myself, but it's tricky; you need to factor in what constitutes as a "strong" buff so people with Flourishes with Jelly Max don't get a truckload of free gear, what might be worth enough to compensate it with, and how do you know who's had more trouble with variants than others, if at all?"

_________________________________________
Oh, yes, I'm going there. Somebody had to.

Let's start with the UVs themselves. They're not balanced against eachother.

-Enemy-locked damage bonuses affect 1/6 of the enemies.
-ASI bonuses affect your performance against all 6 families of enemies.
-CTR is hit-or-miss depending on the weapon, but it also helps with every enemy. It's either totally useless (Flourish, BTB, Pulsar, etc.) or extremely useful (Brandish, Avenger, Autogun, every bomb that exists, etc.). Very rarely it ends up being "nice to have", not "pivotal" or "worthless".

For guns and swords, you always want ASI unless you already have it, then CTR if it matters and family-damage last. So, how would I fix this, you wonder?

-Enemy-locked damage bonuses are slightly more powerful. Remove bonuses to resistant enemies on weapons with specialized damage (no more Fiend/Undead on that Graviton Vortex).
-ASI stays the same.
-CTR is less effective across the board. Bombs have their base charge times reduced substantially.

Rationale: Damage bonuses are fairly weak unless they're totally capped and is arguably much less useful than ASI/CTR. ASI is relatively fine. CTR is way too important and sets a massive line between people who are lucky/grindy/rich and those who aren't. Bombs are far too reliant on it, so they get tweaked a bit to compensate for it.

Then there's armor UVs. Flat defense or status resistance are your only options.

-Flat defense boosts can make you very tanky against a certain damage type or give you more breathing room for mistakes when you're using a set where you're not supposed to (like using Mercurial Demo for the MSI in a Piercing level- a Pierce UV might let you make one more mistake than normal).

-Status resistances are as important as the status you're resisting. Unless you're stacking the hell out of Freeze resist for immunity, you might as well forego taking Freeze resist. Meanwhile, Fire and Shock resist are very nice to have, since you lose less health and are paralyzed for less time respectively. Status resists are only relevant around 1/5 of the time when you excluding boss stratums and the wintry smog plaguing the Arcade.

So, what would I do here?

-Do nothing in particular to flat defense.
-Make status resists more meaningful for the "lol who cares" statuses by redesigning the statuses themselves. Give Freeze a shield recharge rate debuff if you're dethawed prematurely, for example. Doesn't have to be that, just has to be something (hopefully a creative something).

Additionally, UVs are rarely "unique" because there's an ideal way to build your weapon. Adding some sort of minor drawback associated with the boosts will nerf UVs as a whole and give players a better sense of choice rather than "this is the best way". For instance, having Medium ASI might give you Low CTR Increase, or Very-High Damage might lead to Medium AS Decrease. It's a lot more straightforward for weapons, except the rare few that have no use for charges/CTR boosts (but that's more of a flaw with weapon design than this proposed system, imo). Armor is trickier to do reasonably. Losing a little of your gear's typical defenses in favor of your UV'd defense might work, or getting a minor status weakness if you've got a big resistance to something. The boosts must always outweigh the drawbacks, though. They need to truly be unique without making players feel like they got set back if they get a bad roll. Also, concerning damage-to-enemy boost/drawback combinations... they'd ideally be +Damage to Neutral Family and -Damage to Other Neutral Family, or +Weak and -Weak. I don't need to explain why.

And here's the fun part, the RNG. Randomly crafted UVs. Randomly picked UVs from Punch. Randomly picked strengths. All that needs to get a slap in its stupid face. RNG sucks, it's not fun, and I dare anyone who disagrees with me to find some positive that warrants Luigi getting Maximum ASI for his Rocket Hammer on his second roll and Samus getting Gremlin Low for the hundredth time on her Nova Driver.

Alright, Draycos, if this system sucks so much, what do you think should happen?

All of these, ideally.

A.) Allow items to "overheat" after getting enough heat when they're 5* and max level, letting you pay fire crystals to boost the strength of a UV. Better crystals are worth more. You need more crystals depending on what power the boost is at, and you can only boost the power of one at a time before you need to re-heat the item. This will kill two birds with one stone; making raw heat more important and making RNG less prevalent.

B.) Pay Punch extra to pick a specific boost/drawback combination. (45k/115k/300k for 1/2/3 variant tickets, respectively) Kills off some of the RNG without making it a cakewalk to get exactly what you want.

C.) Rework Punch so that he only rolls "medium" and "high". I don't think I should explain this one at all.

_________________________

Oh, and before I forget, someone's probably gonna say "this will #@$% off a lot of rich/lucky/grindy people, no way man". I don't care. Conquering a borked system doesn't mean that everyone else who isn't as rich/lucky/grindy as you should suffer.

Thoughts? Criticism? Death threats?

lun, 10/07/2013 - 15:52
#1
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
+1

I approve. UV system is currently ass. Status UVs and ASI/CTR UVs are god, everything else is crap. I don't mind some good stats and some bad stats, but the difference is that anything not what you wanted is useless since you can't get more UVs than you rolled for with a ticket. It isn't like a game like Diablo 3 where you can roll extra stats beyond what you wanted and those extra stats can be good or not but they're free so it doesn't really matter, with UVs since you're generally only rolling one thing at a time you either get what you want or not.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 15:54
#2
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Did I mention how frustrating it is to not be able to progress just because of chance? Because it's really frustrating. I dunno if I made it clear enough.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 16:06
#3
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Draycos

"Did I mention how frustrating it is to not be able to progress just because of chance? Because it's really frustrating. I dunno if I made it clear enough."

The issues isn't chance, because other games have chance in their loot mechanics too, the issue is that there's nothing incremental about it. When you roll a UV, you don't get the option to keep your old UV if you don't like the new roll. You could go from 1, to 3, back to 1, then to 2, then 1, then another 1, then finally to 4. And a 4 that is worse than your 1 because it is gremlin on a Divine Avenger.

Just a bad system.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 16:12
#4
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Chance-based progression where you at least aren't set backwards isn't nearly as bad, true, but I still think it's annoying.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 16:40
#5
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Draycos

"Chance-based progression where you at least aren't set backwards isn't nearly as bad, true, but I still think it's annoying."

Well, if you don't like chance, you picked the wrong genre.

Chance isn't the issue. Being set backwards is. Most of that "being set back" feel has been removed from the game, except in the case of UVs.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 16:58
#6
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

I can like a genre as a whole without liking certain aspects of it...

lun, 10/07/2013 - 19:04
#7
Portrait de Usevnsevnsixfivfor
Usevnsevnsixfivfor

Ooh boy! Another UV balance thread with counterbalances that make me want to puke out the old Radiant Sun Shards. I may have mentioned this in another thread, but why should players who pay lots of money for OOO be punished just to have a decent item? Sure, you may hate the RNG goddess, but that doesn't mean players should be punished by your opinions. I might be fine with a Beast weakness Medium on my Nova Driver, but I will not tolerate a CTI Med on my Combuster. It was your choice to put 20kcr into your WRH for a Beast Low, amd it was my choice to put 20kcr on my Combuster to get ASI VH. You also forgot to mention some form to remove a UV from a weapon due to all these drawbacks. Also, CTR is NOT useless on toothpicks.

Remove the whole UV-Forge mess, put the bombs back to normal, put Punch back to normal, redo the useless status baloney, and lock this thread. Please. I can make the same post from that recent Winfinity thread and move it here.

And about that Super Smash Bors. joke, Luigi could accidentally dash into the lava of Norfair and Samus could pelt the gremlin with her Nova.

This idea should be written on the most crumpled and ragged piece of paper, soaked into lighter fluid, burned in a creamery, recycled in a trash can, eaten by a lizard, and have the lizard cut in half from the paper cuts of sorrow and grief of the terrible counterbalances in the suggestion, cooked in the same creamery where the paper was burned in, eaten by a wild bear which is stuffed and placed in front of OOO offices, sold off to a paper factory because OOO didn't like the idea of scaring away customers, and have the bear turned into paper which is very crumpled and ragged, and have the suggestion written on that paper, have the paper soaked in lighter fluid, burned in a creamery...this suggestion is that awful that this cycle is simply too kind for it. This suggestion deserves a big, fat...

-1

Destroy this thread. Please.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 19:10
#8
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
Shhh young child.

Isn't it past your bedtime?

lun, 10/07/2013 - 19:21
#9
Portrait de Bitsbee
Bitsbee

My bedtime is at 10.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 19:24
#10
Portrait de Usevnsevnsixfivfor
Usevnsevnsixfivfor
they will kill us they will kill you

Bedtime? Ooh! Maybe you have a bedtime story to read to me!

Khamsin reads the suggestion to me out loud.

U77654 explodes and crashes a second Skylark.

The world ends!

And that's why I don't ever go to bed.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 19:27
#11
Portrait de Bitsbee
Bitsbee
Sometimes...

I stay up until 10:05.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 20:08
#12
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

...You are neither constructive nor funny.

"Why should players pay lots of money for OO be punished just to have a decent item?" Don't be short-sighted, did you not read the part where I said "the boosts must always outweigh the drawbacks"?

"That doesn't mean players should be punished by your opinions." So, you think people should have to shell out tons of money/time or win the e-lottery in order to make good use of some weapons? Have you ever used a bomb compared to a sword and noted how useful one was at base compared to the other?

"I will not tolerate a CTI Med on my Combuster." Read carefully. I'm heavily implying that every +2 means just -1. For CTI Medium, you'd need to roll Damage or ASI... and it'd be Very High anyways. Also mind that I want charge times tweaked and CTR to have less of a pivotal role in whether something is actually useful or not.

"You also forgot to mention some form to remove a UV from a weapon due to (some of these) drawbacks". I thought that was a given, and I don't know why you're trying so hard to invalidate everything else with something as weak as that.

"It was your choice to put 20kcr into your WRH for Beast Low, and it was my choice to put 20kcr on my Combuster to get ASI VH." Bull. You didn't "choose" that, just like I didn't "choose" to get Fire/Shock Medium on my BKC.

You really can't say that with the other revamps, CTI Medium on a Brandish is more weighty than a ASI VH. You're freeing up two equipment slots and losing one potential slot. CTR is less powerful after this theorized update. The entire point of the boost/drawback system is to make unique variants a lot more diverse instead of "the one true ideal setup". Nothing's stopping you from repicking, anyway.

"Pointless passive-aggressive insult paragraph about how you think the suggestion is totally awful"

"max size -1"

"Oh, and before I forget, someone's probably gonna say "this will #@$% off a lot of rich/lucky/grindy people, no way man". I don't care. Conquering a borked system doesn't mean that everyone else who isn't as rich/lucky/grindy as you should suffer."

lun, 10/07/2013 - 20:05
#13
Portrait de Bitsbee
Bitsbee

My head hurts...I'm going to sleep.

lun, 10/07/2013 - 23:27
#14
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy
Some threads I've had on this subject

Turning pay-to-win buffs back into Unique Variants

I don't stand quite by everything I put there, but I do like the general idea of UVs having drawbacks and UVs allowing things to go past max.

How about reducing base charge time for bombs?

The numbers should really be closer to how damage, MSI and ASI bonuses work. That is, each step of bonus should only provide a 4% improvement for a total of 24% at max, not somewhere close to 100% like it is now.

Right now, Nitro charges at something like 1 chargebar/s at max and 0.5 chargebar/s at no bonus. Let's make the numbers something like:

1310, 1250, 1190, 1136, 1087, 1042, 1000

Measured in milliseonds to charge up a full bar.

What's important is that CTR doesn't have a larger impact on your DPS than damage bonus does. That's just stupid.

Freeze rebalance

mar, 10/08/2013 - 01:01
#15
Portrait de Hexzyle
Hexzyle

Oh look, it's this thread again.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 05:28
#16
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

@Zeddy

I think CTR is more powerful than damage and fairly even with ASI, concerning items that can take advantage of it. Damage boosts shave off one or two hits, but ASI and CTR let you attack faster, surpassing the benefits of damage because it's easier to dodge/knock stuff back/inflict a status more. While you can't necessarily attack all the time to take advantage of the speed, I still think ASI/CTR are better, if only slightly.

Links are informative and constructive as always.

@Hexzyle

Apples and oranges.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 05:37
#17
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
+1 Zeddy

I agree with you. CTR being broken as hell is probably part of the problem.

Would be nice if CTR felt like a boost, rather than a requirement to using certain things.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 06:18
#18
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Hey, I said it too. :P

mar, 10/08/2013 - 06:40
#19
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy
@Draycos

Damage boost represents more than a mere "x less hits to kill things", although it does indeed represent that as well.

Namely interruption. Many things can be interrupted with some amount of damage, but not at slightly lower amounts. I'll often prefer damage boost over ASI for this reason. ASI may let me dodge between hits faster, but damage will let me keep my enemies from attacking at all provided I can time correctly.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 06:49
#20
Portrait de Shamanalah
Shamanalah
my 2 cents

And here's the fun part, the RNG. Randomly crafted UVs. Randomly picked UVs from Punch. Randomly picked strengths. All that needs to get a slap in its stupid face. RNG sucks, it's not fun

RNG sucks

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I can only picture a sad kid in front of his pc going "RNG sucks!" loudly >.<

That is RNG, welcome to the world of math hell. And no Punch and UV are fine that way... they should be bonus that are randomly given to people who like to spend cr on their items... Whether you are lucky or not is another story...

mar, 10/08/2013 - 07:18
#21
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

I knew I was forgetting something.

Speaking of damage, how feasible are the changes I theorized for how damage boosts might be picked? The main purpose I had in mind was to minimize "trash" UVs and also prevent people from getting +Gremlin -Construct on a Shadow weapon, because that'd be kinda crazy since you can carry multiple weapons. However, this causes problems for triple UV bombs.

For instance, an elemental damage bomb could look like this-

+Construct
-Undead

+Jelly
-Fiend

+CTR
... and there's no ASI to reduce, so how would this work? Slightly diminishing one of the other boosts, like making Construct VH/Undead Decrease Medium a Construct Medium/Undead Decrease Medium?

Oh, look. Here we have another person throwing insults around without having anything to convince me I'm wrong. I figured you would post here.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 08:23
#22
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy

You could decrease ASI for CTR bombs. If you've tried planting bombs while stunned, you know that attack speed can make a pretty big difference in life-and-death situations. If CTR is made to give less of an impact overall, ASI for bombs might only need some slight tweaking for it to work.

It's also possible bombs get reworked to have primary attacks in the future anyway. At least, if guns are getting an update to "make them more viable as a primary weapon", then there damn well better be a similar one for bombs.

As far as I'm concerned, guns are the only weapon type that's viable to bring exclusively everywhere. Even pure sword-wielders will face hard counters in both PvE and PvP.

mar, 10/08/2013 - 08:52
#23
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Zeddy

"As far as I'm concerned, guns are the only weapon type that's viable to bring exclusively everywhere."

Maybe. That has nothing to do with being the discussion of primary weapons though.

jeu, 10/10/2013 - 10:40
#24
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Yeah, I guess you're right. Generally it's not safe to bomb when you're stunned in the first place, since you can kite as well and you can't shield while charging, but I can definitely see it being much more impacting as ASD.

Guns do have one single PvE counter- Greavers. With no easy way to control your distance, and with the narrow range of guns, they're not easy to deal with using guns alone.

Khamsin, what do you mean?

jeu, 10/10/2013 - 10:44
#25
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@draycos

"Khamsin, what do you mean?"

I mean that whether or not bringing a secondary is desirable has nothing to do with the qualities of being a primary. A primary type is a weapon type that is viable as a main source of damage in the majority of encounters. Not filling every niche use doesn't diminish its use as a primary.

By viable I don't mean whether you can use it by the way, but whether it has DPS "comparable" to the highest DPS weapons used in those encounters. You can beat almost everything with a proto sword but most wouldn't call it a viable alternative to a brandish.

jeu, 10/10/2013 - 19:58
#26
Portrait de Usevnsevnsixfivfor
Usevnsevnsixfivfor

"I thought that was a given"

I thought that OOO needing to fix the DA bug after lots of threads mentioning it was a given too. Apparently not. (inb4 "OOO is terrible and you should try to have logic" I can compare your statement to OOO's btw.)

"the boosts must always outweigh the drawbacks."

So a Beast VH AP would get an ASD Med with that logic. (inb4 "Specific weapons will have ASI or CTR not reduced because of weak damage bonuses." That would take a bit of time for OOO to accomplish, and some bugs would also happen.)

"OO"

*OOO

"Bull. You didn't 'choose' that, just like I didn't 'choose'"

Well you chose to add a Unique Variant (if you didn't craft, but that is a whole new planet) then you also would know that UVs are randomly generated and can get pretty weird sometimes and you would have to deal with changing your Undead low GF to a Fiend low GF and those two UVs alwa repeating. So yes, you did "choose".

"You are neither constructive nor funny."

Since when were replies to suggestion threads meant to be constructive? Also, the definition of "funny" is when someone gets hurt. You check the link yourself, and before you shout "Urban Dictionary is false" then let me say to you that it has the definition of words when used on the Internet. The most common definition of "funny" is when someone gets hurt. You look very hurt, because you whole "passive-aggresive" statement is really passive-aggresive! I love the Internet's rules.

And no, I am not a rich player who spends thousands of dollars in this game for LD and UVs. I have yet to consider buying a pack of CE or an E-Pass or OCH with money, and never had. Almost all of my CE and cr is automatically traded for TF2 keys, which happens to be MY choice I chose to choose that I still choose today. The reason why I go against this thread is because all the other players that disapprove of this idea but are farming EFSC instead of reading this AWFUL suggestion that crashed a second Skylark. They are grateful that I am doing this for them so that they can have peace in the volcano-vault and spending their loots on accessories and UVs. And also, just because I only rolled an item once, that doesn't mean that I don't know how UVs work. As I already said, "Destroy this thread. Please."

jeu, 10/10/2013 - 22:24
#27
Portrait de Feyi-Feyi
Feyi-Feyi

First rule of SK: Don't touch UVs or face the angry mob.

Yes I will be part of that angry mob.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 00:38
#28
Portrait de Dust-Dragon
Dust-Dragon
Beep.

I don't really see the argument behind this change. You mention about CTR and whatnot being more useful for certain weapons. What does that have to do with UVs? That's the fundamental behind the weapon itself. Brandishes have OP charge attacks, so you'll want CTR. Etc, etc.

That makes the needs of UVs vary from weapon to weapon, it doesn't make CTR any better than the others (yet, I suppose it does tend to be useful on more weapons than the others). The benefit/drawback system suffers from a serious problem: You want one aspect to improve, but you might be paying to make it even worse. Say, an Autogun. You want CTR VH, but you get ASI VH, giving you CTI Med, making your Autogun even less practical. Then you need to pay again to try and get rid of it.

This system does not make anything "more unique", it just slaps cons onto paying for pros.

I can't be bothered going through the whole thing, but this point took my eye:
Bombs have their base charge times reduced substantially.
What the hell for? If I want to use a bomb, I should not be expected to pay out large amounts of money to make it viable to use. Assuming ASI is possible on a bomb, you can potentially get CTI Med, making the bomb even worse.
The thing to change is how CTR modifies the charge time; not just reduce the base time (aka: fix the upgrade, not break the bomb).

Also note currently ASI has no effect on bombs, and they have no normal attacks. So, CTR is VERY important on bombs. More important than on a Brandish or DA. Making their charge attacks slower makes bombs generally worse, and has no improvement whatsoever to.. well, anything. I mean, come on, how many bombers do you see in PvE?

Oh, look. Here we have another person throwing insults around without having anything to convince me I'm wrong. I figured you would post here.
You're complaining about mathematics. Randomisation is generally hated because it can either be very nice, or down right evil. You can't make it any different. The only thing you can change is how good "very nice" is, and how bad "down right evil" is. You're suggesting to make evil not quite as bad, and nice a bit mean. That's just closing the gap.

I understand how that can be good, but it makes UVs less exciting. Especially "Med or High" being the only thing you can get.

On that note, you seem to be halving the value of the pro, to be the value of the con. What are planning for +1, +3, and +5? Kinda low, kinda med, and kinda high?

Anyhow, if you don't see where I'm going with this, I'm happy with trying to re-balance bonuses amongst weapons, but you're not. You're just introducing problems to trying to upgrade.

Sooo, -1.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 01:39
#29
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy

"What the hell for? If I want to use a bomb, I should not be expected to pay out large amounts of money to make it viable to use. "

That's Draycos' reason for wanting bombs without CTR to charge faster as well. I'm not sure why you're against it.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 04:03
#30
Portrait de Hexzyle
Hexzyle

Like Feyi-Feyi said. Don't touch the angry-face bomb's UVs.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 06:23
#31
Portrait de Usevnsevnsixfivfor
Usevnsevnsixfivfor
they will kill us they will kill you

Cool I got four people on my side in a row! Also, don't touch our UVs. They are very fragile.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 06:44
#32
Portrait de Midnight-Dj
Midnight-Dj
I am with U77654

Oh, and before I forget, someone's probably gonna say "this will #@$% off a lot of rich/lucky/grindy people, no way man". I don't care. Conquering a borked system doesn't mean that everyone else who isn't as rich/lucky/grindy as you should suffer.

So, let me guess, this is like the Crimson hammer stunt OOO pulled off to all those that paid for the expansion for real money, my friend (in real life ) was pissed off when I told him about the update. He paid his hard earned 5 bucks for the expandsion and now every F2P player can get it for FREE. This suggestion is just like that, veterans spend their hard earned crowns to roll for good UV, after many set backs, they finally got CTR high or ASI high, and these suggestion come true, the noobs will roam the land with good med or high UV which they got from punch with just one roll. What do you think those hardcore veterans will think? THEY will be more angry than vanaduke, cursed vanaduke, ice queen and JK combined. And probably quit...

So -1, I am a buffalo, just following the herd and I don't justify anything that has occured.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 07:30
#33
Portrait de Bitsbee
Bitsbee

5$ isn't really that much & hard to earn.

Unless you live in a strict household, then that would be reasonable.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 07:56
#34
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
.

Lemme just say this, myself and probably plenty of others would probably be willing to drop 50-100$ if it meant we could have a fully decked triple max set ready for PvP. It's up to 000 to decide if burning the current existing 500-1000$+ whales is worth it to scoop up money from moderate sized fish.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 08:32
#35
Portrait de Toeni-Sevan
Toeni-Sevan
UV's are a luxury good.

In the case of luxury goods it's hard to place a value on what you're getting. I realize that there's a wage gap between players that leads to a small proportion of the players having superior weaponry, but in the end it's difficult to bash a system that was meant to distribute luxury goods. Adding a filter or removing the chances of low isn't a proper solution; there isn't an identifiable problem to reason with. Punch was placed there as an incentive to sink crowns in the game, a suggestion that lowers the magnitude of his effects on the level of wealth the game holds as a whole would have consequences we couldn't account for.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 14:24
#36
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Excellent, now we're getting somewhere.

@Usevnsevnsixfivfor

I'm fairly certain the DA bug is because it used to have a much wider spread. It was probably in place to keep you from breaking blocks in ways you weren't supposed to (you used to be able to hit the ghost block in the final normal fight of FSC, even with that in place). Now that it's been given a tighter spread, it's pretty pointless. Or, at least, I'd like to say it was originally intentional, but then there's every other projectile that disappears early, too.

"VH Beast, ASD Med AP"
"Remove bonuses to resistant enemies on weapons with specialized damage (no more Fiend/Undead on that Graviton Vortex)."
Also remember that other post where I said damage boosts should give you a penalty towards the other family of equal resistance (IE, getting construct VH on an avenger means getting Undead Medium. Make sense?)

"OO"
ffff

"You chose to get a UV, therefore you chose your UV"
Well, of course I choose to get one, but I can't ever decide what I get or how many times it takes to get it- hence, this thread.

"funny is people getting hurt, also you're mad"
First, I don't entirely agree. Second, yeah, I was mad, mainly because I was trying to take this somewhat seriously. Better mood today, though. I make some bad posts at 2 AM. Zero patience, zero common sense. Ironically, it's when I'm most willing to write.

"last paragraph"
I don't care too much what you've done with UVs; this isn't a "i'm better than you wahahaha" argument, this is a "UVs and RNG system sucks vs. no it doesn't, screw you" argument.

_____________________________________

@Dust-Dragon

See Zeddy's paraphrasing.

With the CTR revamps this should come with, to prevent people from getting mad when their broken things get fixed twice in succession, ASI VH should be more powerful than CTI Medium. Especially on an Autogun.

It's arguably more unique than the current system where there's a clear, perfect way to build your items... but then again, that'll just happen anyways, since it'll end up according to player preference rather than what's the best for anyone.

Yeah, I'm closing the gap, but I think you're right when you say it shouldn't be such a rough middleground.

I don't think there's any other simple way to do it. Besides, well, scrapping the whole penalty system entirely... but i'll get to that in a later part of this post.

I think I'm introducing more fixes than problems with this idea (though it still needs rethinking). Linear progression rather than luck-based progression is huge... in my personal opinion.

______________________________

@Feyi, Hexzyle

I do not agree to these terms and conditions.

@U77654 I'd guess most of the people who post in this board have a lot of accumulated playtime. Myself included.

@Midnight-Dj I'm guessing you felt the same way about shadow keys? If not, why not?

_______________________________

@27 It's difficult to, but I am. It's a source of progression that's blocked by time or money that could be a massive amount or a tiny amount. Every time you get a crappy roll, you're either wasting 300CE or an hour or so of grinding. Nothing stopped you from getting better stats but a chance.

________________________________

I think one of the biggest, most important things you can do when trying to be productive is being able to admit when you're wrong. So, let's break this down:

What went right
-Most people who commented on it said RNG is frustrating. A linear way to improve would be good.
-CTR is way too pivotal on specific items and too pointless on others. Some items need their base charge times reduced, and CTR as a whole needs to be toned down a bit while still being better than flat damage.
-Flat armor boosts and damage UVs are a little too weak.
-Damage UVs on enemies that resist the damage type need to go.
-Absolutely nothing should be done to ASI.

What was stupid
-Adding penalties. It was intended to make unique variants UNIQUE, but it'd just end up bottlenecking players into certain playstyles, or to keep rerolling until they got both the UV they wanted and the penalty they could deal with.
-Giving a way to linearly improve UVs and forcing UVs to only end up being certain things. One or the other might be fine, forcing certain UVs is kinda lame, and having both at the same time is stupid.
-Being insensitive to players who already have things instead of acknowledging them and thinking of ways they might be compensated.

I'm copy-pasting this into the main post. So, how might the "successful" ideas be put in the game while compensating the people who already have good variants? I'm currently thinking of a way myself, but it's tricky; you need to factor in what constitutes as a "strong" buff so people with Flourishes with Jelly Max don't get a truckload of free gear, what might be worth enough to compensate it with, and how do you know who's had more trouble with variants than others, if at all?

I'm thinking of something like taking an items' number of variants' ticket cost, then multiplying it by some value according to how much power each one has, then giving out tickets [or crowns if you want the CE market to implode] accordingly, essentially giving everyone a "refund". Then, everyone could have their guaranteed, "fair" progression, the old people would still have their powerful gear, get compensated for their powerful gear being a little more common... everyone wins. Ideally.

ven, 10/11/2013 - 15:35
#37
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy

What happens if I roll beast vh on my antigua but craft it into argent peacemaker?

ven, 10/11/2013 - 15:59
#38
Portrait de Canine-Vladmir
Canine-Vladmir
these players....

They see a UV fix thread and they all just go.....bananas.
its a game, why you be raging?

ven, 10/11/2013 - 16:13
#39
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

That is a good question.

Either you build it into that new thing or you have to reroll/be stuck with a bad UV, which sucks.

sam, 10/12/2013 - 01:54
#40
Portrait de Thunder-The-Bright
Thunder-The-Bright

since it seems like every PvP elitist can farm fire crystals, and that everyone else can too a little slower, let's make it so:
you pay punch for a low and low only UV. when you get it, you can re-roll for another UV, or pay more and upgrade it. "pay more" is in cr and some fire crystals according to weapon star level. this will eliminate a bit of randmoness while making the access to good UVs more challenging to do. for this to be though prices for the first roll should be decreased while in the high end it should cost way more.

sam, 10/12/2013 - 09:19
#41
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

I agree with that 100%, but you knew that already.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 07:12
#42
Portrait de Feyi-Feyi
Feyi-Feyi

Imo this is a way to impose scarcity on UVs.
By having a RNG, and UVs which are essentially worthless, the total amount of gear which has the best UVs for that particular item is reduced.

Imposing this scarcity is a good thing, because it creates a player based economy for them.
Say a player crafts a flourish and gets ASI vh. Now, he feels like he has no need for it, but would like that new promo costume..

Also: you can't touch the (arguably) biggest crownsink in the game. Not without riots.
I know I would be angry when the stuff I worked for becomes essentially craftable.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 07:47
#43
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Feyi

You gotta divorce yourself from your personal feelings and think about what's best for the game.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 07:52
#44
Portrait de Voza-Il
Voza-Il
I agree. Doesnt affect

I agree. Doesnt affect lockdown, and improved PvE playing.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 08:02
#45
Portrait de Zeddy
Zeddy
@Khamsin

I'm not sure having whales ragequit is best for the game.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 08:25
#46
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Zeddy

"I'm not sure having whales ragequit is best for the game."

Maybe not. But whose to say there aren't enough moderate sized fish that would pay $$$ to balance them out, as I said in my earlier post.

Also, I think that most whales have already burned most of the money they were going to burn. Unless 000 is going to add a new set of striker gear that is better than skolver that will force those players to reroll their triple maxes, from where I'm sitting it probably seems more economical to bring the price down to get more people spending.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 10:37
#47
Portrait de Feyi-Feyi
Feyi-Feyi

Everyone having triple maxes isn't best for the game either.
People who have those either payed for CE (supporting a game is no bad thing, with people always complaining about P2W)
or worked/played smart for the gear.

So, give me a reason why people who didn't put in the same effort deserve the same rewards?
Everyone starts out with the same chances in this game. Same story for the RNG, same chances.
It's fair play imo.

Also: watch the 'whales' throw money when the gunner update lands.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 11:07
#48
Portrait de Draycos
Draycos

Everyone [has] the same chances... [therefore] it's fair."
"Give me a reason why people who didn't put in the same effort deserve the same rewards."

You do realize what RNG stands for, right? R.andom N.umber G.enerator? Emphasis on "random"? As in, you have no control over how much "effort" you end up putting in? Y'know, the entire reason I want UVs changed?

"It's a huge crownsink; don't ruin it!"

I never mentioned anything about drastically reducing how much it'd take to get the best possible gear. I want no-randomized-setbacks progress. See also: TTB said "for this to be though prices for the first roll should be decreased while in the high end it should cost way more." I replied, "I agree 100%".

"The whales will drop a lot of money when the gunner update hits."

And having consistent progression won't stop them from doing just that. Hell, it'll probably draw more people in to the UV system, like Khamsin keeps saying.

dim, 10/13/2013 - 11:05
#49
Portrait de Khamsin
Khamsin
@Feyi

"So, give me a reason why people who didn't put in the same effort deserve the same rewards?"

Because that's the way it works with almost everything in the game. Over time it is made easier to get gear. Shadow lairs, elevators, orbs, locking in UVs, reducing the prices of UVs.. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. You would understand if you been here since the game started.

The list goes on and on and on.

Heck, I'm willing to bet you wouldn't have dropped money for UVs in the old system, where it was like, 400k for a 3 UV roll, and you couldn't lock in, so you just had to pray you got super luck.y

dim, 10/13/2013 - 11:48
#50
Portrait de Deleted-Knight
Deleted-Knight
Small change, still fix problem?

Guys, we have to take into account that OOO almost never implements large-scale game mechanics changes (and it takes a long time to implement too). While revamping the UV system may seem ideal, it just isn't realistic. I think we should come up with an easier fix to underlying problem.
Some suggestions that have come up, like increasing the buffs of certain UVs look promising. People should support those ideas instead of the ones advocating sweeping changes. The whole point is to get OOOs to see the obvious benefits of implementing the suggestion.

A think a minor change to Punch's shop would also mitigate this problem:
Make it so that when a player does consecutive rolls they can't receive UVs they received before.
If a player chooses to do more than one roll in one go, any UV rolled would not be included in the possibilities of future rolls. If the player changes the UV target gear, the history is "erased" so all UVs are possible again.

For example: Suppose I want CTR VH on my brandish by rolling 1UV tickets
I'm not taking into account that higher staged UVs are rarer
1) On my first roll, I have a 31/32 chance of not getting my desired UV. Suppose I got Gremlin LOW.
2) On my second roll, I can't get another Gremlin Low, so I have a 30/31 chance of not getting my desired UV. (so far it's the same as current mechanics)
Suppose I got a Beast HIGH.
3) On my third roll, I can't get Gremlin Low or Beast HIGH, making it a 29/30 chance of not getting my desired UV. (under current mechanics, it would still be 30/31)
4) This guarantees that I can get any UV I want with at most 32*20 = 640k crs.

This makes the total amount of money spent on UV-tickets proportional to the likelihood that the desired UVs were received. It does not remove the RNG, but it restricts it's outputs more and more as more crowns are put in. Punch is still a great crown sink, and players have the security of knowing how much money it would take to guarantee a particular UV. The UVs are kept as is, but players are given the ability to effectively choose what UV they get, provided they have enough money. If someone is too lazy to save up money for UVs, then they don't really deserve "linear improvement" in their gear. You should get rewarded for being economical, not so much for being lucky.

  • 1
  • 2
  • suivant ›
  • dernier »
Créé avec l'aide de Drupal, un système de gestion de contenu "opensource"