NW/PR link - Yay or nay? (in General)

Synco June 22 2005 11:43 PM EDT

Networth to PR link, yay or nay?
(Optional) - If yay, give 1-2 sentences why.
Just wanted to know about what the majority of CB thinks. My guess is "nay", but hopefully, I'll know by the end of this thread.

LumpBot June 22 2005 11:45 PM EDT


BrandonLP June 22 2005 11:46 PM EDT


Icewindvz June 22 2005 11:47 PM EDT

nay =)

InebriatedArsonist June 22 2005 11:47 PM EDT


Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 22 2005 11:55 PM EDT


My support for this has always been based on a simple scenario, two characters with exactly the same stats and items. If one has more NW than the other (weapons, tattoo or armor) then the added NW would affect the outcome of the battle. It seems to me then that it should also affect the battle rewards. With battle rewards being based on defender's score relative to attacker's PR, then NW to PR linkage is the best way to accomplish that.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:02 AM EDT


What dudemus said.

I have yet to see a nay explain why net worth should not be a part of Power. I get a lot of: "Oh dear, the economy!" and "Poor newbies with rentals, I swear they are leaving by the HUNDREDS!", but no one has ever answer the simple question:

Why should net worth be exempt from the Power total? And if all you have are anecdotes, I got a whole bag of "shush" here for ya already.

Anyone? Bueller?

BrandonLP June 23 2005 12:12 AM EDT

I guess I should explain my nay stance:

My present problem with it is the way armor is calculated into the situation. I believe there should be an allowance for armor, much like there is for weapons. Heck, combine the two for all I care.

Undertow June 23 2005 12:17 AM EDT


It got to the point that my character wasn't able to take on anyone at his pr. Well, NW/PR link fixed that right up.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:22 AM EDT

Excellent point, Brandon.

However, that was not the question.

The question was yea or nay to the NW/PR link. Sounds like you are a "yea", but would like to see some tweaks. So why did you say "nay"? You really want it gone?

Blarg June 23 2005 12:24 AM EDT

nay. If you don't want to fight people at your PR and get beaten because of their NW, fight by score.

BrandonLP June 23 2005 12:27 AM EDT

If I had to choose between what it is now and what it was, it would be a very close call, but I think the old way would win. Hence, my nay. With just a minor tweak to armor, this would be one of my favorite changes yet.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] June 23 2005 12:29 AM EDT


And Chet have my reasons not been verbose enough for you? I bet they were for the rest of CB :) And I say YOU are guilty of it makes sense as an explanation, everything you have said falls back on that and rewards. Fight by score. Change rewards to sore on score comparison. Poof. All the stuff you do not care about, or I should say would care to be gone, would rebound, so I know where your true desire lies :)

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:42 AM EDT

Sefton, your reasons have all been anecdotes and secondary cause/effect strawman arguments. Verbosity is not equal to eloquence or illumination.

So, answer my question here (with no elaboration...just a straight answer):

Do you think net worth affects a team's "power"?

(Just a yea or nay, please, and we can go from there. This is not a trap.)

Oh, and also, if we could leave the personalized innuendo and ulterior motives out of it, I would be very appreciative. I have absolutely no secrets or "true desires" that have not already been clearly lain out. Check the FB + DM thread to see every "desire" as I now see it. It's all there. I have no secrets now, nor have I ever, and am really getting sort of tired of the undertones in some of your posts about my commentary and so-called "influence". I am entitled to my opinion just as you are, just as we both have one voice each.

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] June 23 2005 12:49 AM EDT

OK Chet, yes NW reflects power and it reflects just fine in score. I have said that many times, many ways.

I am not sure there is any difference between calling someone's arguments anecdotal and strawman, without saying why, and me saying you have other reasons, without saying why.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:58 AM EDT

I don't have to say why. I never accused you of anything other than not directly answering my question. Because you hadn't. Now you have. So my issue is gone.

Your views on score are very intriguing, and I am still thinking it over. As my gut reactions tend to just go with what seems correct in a philosophical fashion, the score concept seems divine. It is like the stock market. If you assume the market is equal and open, then stocks _must_ be priced correctly by definition.

If we can assume that score cannot be "played with", such as folks saying "I will pay you not to attack me, so my score goes up, and then someone else can attack me and reap huge rewards!" then yes, your idea is sound. I am just not sure I buy that.

It is my "gut" feeling that rewards are based on PR because PR is much less easy to "game" than score. There are controls on equipment and tattoos, and MPR can only be earned slowly and steadily. Score can fluctuate WILDLY, especially if someone decides they want to start messing with things. For example, what if my Power lies all in NW, and I build my score to 1 million. I then strip and let a newbie slay me so he gets huge rewards. Is this "fair"?

PR has been used for rewards because it is more of a benchmark. Now that benchmark includes Net Worth. I am not convinced that using score is the answer.

moser June 23 2005 1:00 AM EDT

I can switch ammo at will and cause various people to suddenly lose against me depending on which ammo set I use, how does that fit in?

Blarg June 23 2005 1:01 AM EDT

Alright Chet, lets go back to CB1. What was PR originally meant to measure? Some calculation involving XP trained right? Score indicated mostly two things: NW and strat effectiveness. Sure, score could've been easily manipulated if the strat is effective to certain high score characters, but once that person ran out of BA, everyone else at that score level would pound the character back to where it should be.

Now, NW played a large part in it too, see SirMonty(still CB1). 600k some PR, 1800000 score. Anyone fighting at PR would get whupped, and anyone fighting at score would basically have a fair fight.

Cut to CB2. NW adds to PR. Why? NW should effect score, not PR. If everyone fought at score, then people would get a sense of their true "power". People at the same MPR as a guy with a massive NW would not care, because the person with the massive NW would have a much larger score. On CB1, I see score as the true indicator of "power". "Power rating" should be kept as it was in CB1, an indication of how much XP has been trained on this character.

Power rating \= "Power"
Score = "Power"

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] June 23 2005 1:03 AM EDT

If gyaxx took off all his gear I bet he would give some small players some nice rewards. Seems the same to me. Why not base it on score to score comparison, because in the end, should not your power fluxuate based upon your strat not whether you equipped big DB's or not? I mean if I totally relearned my strat such that I had the same gear, but put exp into the wrong places, then my PR would stay basically the same (minus the relearn penalty) but my score would drop as now my strat no longer is effective?

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 1:14 AM EDT

Sefton, if you took off all your gear, your PR would plummet. A lowbie could just as easily fight someone at their more "natural" PR and reap the same rewards. Isn't that the whole reason to base rewards more on PR than score? I think I have missed your point.

Blarg, as I stated before, I totally agree with you -- if score were not so easy to change. An "honest" score is most DEFINITELY a better indicator of "success" than any other metric. But score has other problems. It depends on a lot of other things and can be radically changed in a small timeframe (anyone who saw Ranger's score dip below 1 million earlier today simply because of lack of ammo can attest to that fact). Jonathan has made a distinct effort to make sure PR can not fluctuate wildly in any short timeframe. That is because rewards are based more on PR than score (or entirely, hell, I never have figured it out completely).

Whatever controls rewards has to be locked down so that is cannot be gamed. PR has been the traditional thing to have controls on. Maybe now we are seeing that we should try to make score more "honest" and lock that down. But wouldn't that be the same as just using an all-encompassing PR to that effect?

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] June 23 2005 1:17 AM EDT

Yah my point was I can game the PR/NW link as easily as score.

Blarg June 23 2005 1:20 AM EDT

so ranger's score dropped because he didn't have a part of his strat working? shocker. What "lot of other things" effects score other than NW and strat?

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 1:21 AM EDT

Yes, you can, but not in a short timeframe. There is the equipment lock-in to deal with (though I suppose that could be gamed if you just had 2 of everything).

I am just trying to say that whatever governs rewards needs lockdown, and it looks like Jonathan has decided to place that focus on PR. That's all. I am not saying I disagree with using score as that lynch pin, provided it too can be controlled in some fashion.javascript:document.reply_form.submit()

QBSefton [Black Cheetah Bazaar] June 23 2005 1:26 AM EDT

And as far as Ranger dipping low, is he not less powerful without ammo than with? Granted he only loses to like 5 or 6 people on his list without ammo, but he was less powerful without it, yet his PR stayed the same, and he gave those 5 or 6 people a lot of good rewards. So you can game this system too. Thats my point. And even if its anecdotal and strawman, there are negatives to this system. The negatives of the score system seem to only center around rewards. Everything about this seems to center around rewards. I personally to not think the anecdotal and straw man negatives are worth making sure rewards are just right. Actually Im very sure they are not. Have you seen a significant rebalancing of your rewards since the new system has been in place for a month. Are they so much greater or more "true" now than then before the change. I mean this is a change to a system that has been on CB for at least the 11 months I have been here. If Spid on CB1 had his NW added to his PR could you have beaten him? Would he have been more vulnearable? Would he have been anything but more number 1 than before? I just do not get it. Why this is so important to be worth any negatives. Even one small negative, whats the "gain"? All I ever hear is its like a more "true" representation of ones power. Thats it?

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 1:32 AM EDT

Yes, the current system can be gamed in ways too. I would never say otherwise.

I have no idea if my rewards are more "balanced". I don't keep track enough to know.

We have to agree to disagree. I think this change IS worth the negatives (and we should all continue to be vocal until those negatives can be remedied), and yes, it is simply because it is a more "true" representation.

AdminG Beee June 23 2005 3:06 AM EDT


It makes sense. The more Power you have due to armour or weapons then the higher your Power Rating should be. I'm not even convinced that much, if any, tweaks are required. I see a lot of negativity due to the fact that people are getting less than what they used to, and I suspect that if NW/PR link was there when CB2 started no one would have been talking about it. Yep, strategies would have been different, but hey, welcome to CB and constant changes. Todd said it before... roll with the changes or die, because that's what CB is all about.

Lumpy Koala June 23 2005 5:21 AM EDT


G Bee said it all.

Phaete June 23 2005 5:26 AM EDT


Embrace the change.

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] June 23 2005 5:45 AM EDT

A grudging yay
Jon made some sweeping changes to armor in order to better fit NW into PR and I think some further changes are required. It does make sense to have gear reflected in PR, just my gut still doesn't like it for some reason.

Manta June 23 2005 5:58 AM EDT

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than before.

By the way, Sefton, your proposal is intriguing. However, I agree with Chet: score, as it is now, is too easy to game. People could simply unequip most of their stuff while they do not fight, lower their score, and get higher rewards when they come back to fight (often unequipping ammo is enough, or equipping a mage shield on the mage...).

To take Ranger example: it is true that he is weaker when he is away and is without ammo, and the current system reflects that by lowering his score, and hence giving less rewards to people defeating him in his weakened status.
However, he is not a jot weaker than usual when he comes back and re-equip ammo, and the current system does reflect that by NOT raising his rewards when he fights.

Unless you find a solution to it, I do not think it can be adopted.

AdminShade June 23 2005 5:58 AM EDT


hasn't done me any bad, in fact i have run into some really nice things from it :)

QBRanger June 23 2005 6:11 AM EDT

No, Boo, Hiss, Bad, Evil.

I understand the reason behind the linkage however it needs to be tweaked just a lot.

I think my reasons have been very well documented.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 23 2005 7:32 AM EDT

I'm hot, can't concentrate and feeling kinda bad...

I hope this isn't too garbled.

I'e been thinking about PR and Score and have come to the conclusion both are needed. Maybe not so much int he absolute values, but the ratio between them. That is the basis of how 'good' a CB character is.

Total PR records how much investment a character has, from xp earned to size of tattoo and how much cash has been spent on equipment.

Score records how well someone has put thier PR to use.

The ratio between the two give an indication of overall, how powerful a character is.

Without score, there is no way to determin which team out of two with equal PR (xp, tat and NW) is the better.

Without PR to base upon, score is meaningless in determining how good or 'powerful' a character is.

PR is investment (from number of fights to cash spent), Score is application (from stragey to choosing to only fight people that give you the best rewards).

I hope this makes sense and gives a reason why PR should include NW of items.

I'm not claiming the system works as well as it could, I still think that PR increases sue to NW should be based on the improvements specific items actually give.

I just didn't want to make yet another post on this subject.

The best character in CB2 would be the one with the largest Score to PR gap. The number 1 slot is the strongest character, but not necessarily the 'best'.

I hope this makes sense...

QBRanger June 23 2005 7:40 AM EDT

Then I guess with a score to pr ratio of only 1.2 my strat is not very good. Perhaps I should just use a base character with a FF since those characters don't need to train xp.

AdminG Beee June 23 2005 8:13 AM EDT

As far as score to pr ratio is concerned I've been trying to understand why it can't be implemented and is such a bad idea for a long while... even back in the CB1 days when granted, it wasn't the best idea.

In the days before MPR I even thought we had a chance of getting it included. I don't think we ever did run that poll.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 23 2005 8:47 AM EDT

Ranger, Im guessing you could drop your PR some and still keep your score.

I suppose what I'm saying is your investment is overkill compared to the people you're fighting. But the bonus to that is large win streaks.

Who would be the better character out of you, or someone with your score but less PR, MPR and NW?

I really can't word this at the moment... Air conditioning should be compulsory.

There's a legal minimum temperature is at before you have to stop working, but no maximum.


[EG] Almuric June 23 2005 8:59 AM EDT


Perhaps there should be a little bit of a tweak - slightly larger weapon allowance and a bigger armor allowance.

There's lots of room for tweaking, though. Perhaps it shouldn't be based on NW, but on effect. I.e. a 100 AC, no matter whether it's from one Adam or a whole bunch of leathers should be treated the same. A $1 mil NW Tulwar shouldn't necessarily give you the same PR as a $1 mil NW BoNE. The BoNE is much better, so should perhaps add more PR.

But, that's tweaking. Overall, I think if you have high NW, that should be reflected in your PR.

WeaponX June 23 2005 9:40 AM EDT

Nay. the reason being and this is in no way taking a shot at jon but it was rushed and very poorly implemented into the game. it either should have been done from the start or never put in period. fact is it was done 5 months into the game when everyone had there plans formulated and teams like gyaxx and Descent no matter how much they were warned could not expect the dramatic decrease in rewards. if gyaxx was not in the top 10 he would never get there with the way things are now. imo this linkage should not be based on NW but items themselves should have a set PR requirement or then face the reward penalty if you are short on PR.

{CB3}-HR22 June 23 2005 10:42 AM EDT


TheEverblacksky June 23 2005 11:08 AM EDT

maybe.... it should be a little lower.... but it keeps my rewards from being outrageuos.......... jon knows how to balance the game and he will adjust accordingly. i get 200-300 per fight................ Duke was in the 500's the other day, guess what we would get w/ no extra PR, think about it.

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] June 23 2005 11:19 AM EDT

I can now tell exactly who my strat isn't working against, NW included in PR means that I can see whether I am losing to NW or strategy and allows me to tweak accordingly.
I think this is a huge advantage for all and outweighs the negatives (I am still yet to see a large negative explained clearly)

WeaponX June 23 2005 11:24 AM EDT

NNF have you seen the economy lately? better yet have you seen new players play beyond a week in a while? the negatives are in front of you just look

miteke [Superheros] June 23 2005 11:37 AM EDT


Base it on affect, not NW.

Each item should have the following stats:

constant PR bonus
% PR bonus

constant PR bonus per +
% PR bonus per plus

So a MCM might have the following:

constant PR bonus=0
% PR bonus=.01

constant PR bonus per +=0
% PR bonus per plus=.001

Thus a +30 MCM would give a .04% bonus to PR.

A Morgul Hammer might have the following:
constant PR bonus = 0
%PR bonus = .01
constant PR bonus per pth = 500
%PR bonus per pth = .01
constant PR bonus per ptd = 700
%PR bonus per ptd = .015

Thus a +30 MH would give a
+.01+.03+.045 = .085% bonus to PR
and a 15000 + 21000 constant bonus.

So a 100000K PR Character would have an adjusted PR of
108,500 + 15,000 + 21,000 = 144,500

The numbers I used are completely unjustified, but should give the general gist of my idea.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 11:38 AM EDT

Megaman, what you perceive as a negative is not necessarily something someone else perceives as a negative. What about the positive NNF just mentioned? That is a positive I find to be VERY compelling. Now the only reason I lose is because of my sucky strategy instead of to a heretofore undeclared "power" facet.

The economy, for example, is not that important to me. New player retention, however, is. That is why I advocate folks being vocal (in constructive fashion) about the things they see frustrating new folks and offering ideas to fix. Rental reform, education, tighter rules when equipping items...these are just a few ideas, some excellent, some whack (mine are usually whack), but they ALL help brainstorm on tweaks to make sure we aren't losing folks, or at least losing as few as possible and perhaps gaining a few others we might have lost previously.

Synco June 23 2005 11:41 AM EDT

Well, it sounds like it's mostly yay, but there still needs to be tweaking. I agree 100% with what Almuric said.

There's lots of room for tweaking, though. Perhaps it shouldn't be based on NW, but on effect. I.e. a 100 AC, no matter whether it's from one Adam or a whole bunch of leathers should be treated the same. A $1 mil NW Tulwar shouldn't necessarily give you the same PR as a $1 mil NW BoNE. The BoNE is much better, so should perhaps add more PR.

Yeah, my example was going to be with a 2 mil NW comp and 2 mil NW ELB. Same PR, same NW, but the ELB user would win. It seems that a lot of people want armor changes. Maybe a armor window like the weapon window...? Based on MPR, there would be a certain allowance on NW not adding to PR.

New question - Do you think PR or score is more important when determining rewards?

WeaponX June 23 2005 12:15 PM EDT

chet. it is obvious looking at score and what someone has whether or not you stand a good shot to beat him. PR is a meaningless stat now and only means something in reward calculations. if you feel the need to shed a tear because a lower MPR player with high NW can beat that is your issue. why should A the economy take a nose dive. B new players be forced to have a nearly naked char. C campers unless in the top ten are fairly powerless in the fact that they cannot spend much of the money they earn this makes camping primarily a USD occupation and correct me if i'm wrong but was it not the point of this to make USD less of a factor in the game? i do not see a true positive to this link other than making a few players like yourself more powerful.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:32 PM EDT

A well-made argument, except this change has not made me any more powerful, so I am not sure what you mean by that.

I find PR to now be a very meaningful stat as far as determining how well my strategy is working, and what style of team it works well against.

If you inspect every single opponent in earnest, then yes -- you can determine of someone has a decent chance of beating you. That is not what NNF was pointing out, however. He was saying that it is easier to analyze strategies (that is why a lot of us are here...not just the economy) and compare/contrast the rock/scissors/paper nature of the game.

I have never shed a tear over CB.

WeaponX June 23 2005 12:35 PM EDT

Chet it has made you more powerful in the fact that you will not see alot of high NW tanks and that is your main glaring weakness

Starseed^Lure June 23 2005 12:37 PM EDT

Nay - and now my argument which I've yet to see anyone deal with:

I like playing different strats and I like moving my equipment around to see how certain teams would work. During these times of experimentation before pr/nw link I could do so without greatly sacrificing how much money/xp I can get per day.

2 players play and equal amount of BA for a few months. One stays with one char, and the other makes 3. I feel that everything else being equal that these 2 players should be able to attain roughly the same rewards. Though it should be stated that rewards have never favored the player who started 3. Now, however, it is impossible for me to transfer and of my equipment to another char and hope to attain anything close to profitability.

We used score to measure a players power before and we still use it now. I think that if I transfer equipment to one of my lower chars that I should be able to make due with my rewards. I like playing multiple strats and experimenting; NW/PR linkage has made that impossible.

WeaponX June 23 2005 12:38 PM EDT

that is a very good point starseed

Quark June 23 2005 12:39 PM EDT

Yay, qualified for at least armor allowance.

And moser - seekers are like any item with special properties. It's not always NW that counts, just who it targets. is my 2.6 mil NW exbow worth 2.6 mil against a tank team vs. an all mage team? Are seekers worth the same against both? NW won't account for all special properties, but it does account for a generic effect of good equipment.

And I think the economy will normalize over time. And for new players, maybe a larger % exemption on NW for their first two weeks, first 2k BA, whatever - let them get the feel for the game and then add complexity.

QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 12:49 PM EDT

Mega, I am still not following you... How am I more powerful by not seeing a lot of high NW tanks? I regularly get schooled by tanks with even modest net worth. Check out Spid, The Extras, and Azn Pryde. There are probably many more, but they don't fight me because I don't have a "C" in front of my name. They all display my "glaring weakness" (a very true observation) quite well. In fact, that actually helps make my point. By comparing PRs now (with NW included), I can see what I am vulnerable to and strong against. ToAs wipe me out _easily_. Mages have a hard time. Fun stuff.

Also, being in the top ten means any of those huge tanks above me can beat up on me. The reason they generally don't? Because I am not in a clan. That has absolutely nothing to do with the NW/PR linkage.

So, can you explain to me again how this change has made me more powerful? My fight list did not change (have actually lost a fair number since going mage-buster), my rewards did not change (as far as I can tell), and I have fewer losses only because of my personal decision to opt out of clans. Like I said, I'm just not following your conclusion here...

Icewindvz June 23 2005 12:57 PM EDT

Rock, scissors, paper? This is CB2, and CB2 is a game that way more then just rock, scissors, and paper. And if you just want to play rock, scissors, paper this bad, then why don't just go play rock, scissors, and paper instead? And stop mess up our CB2!

For any RPG game a player who spend a great deal time and energy should have some kind advantaged over newbie. If not, then there will be no competition anymore, and the game itself will lose its purpose. I believe if we do what ever the rock, scissors, and paper thing, CB2 will become a BBS instead.

WeaponX June 23 2005 1:02 PM EDT

Chet my point is this. NW/PR means anybody who is trying to climb the MPR charts will find it alot easier doing so with a mage team. a tank focused team requires NW and now NW decreases rewards. also you say your rewards have not changed well i am willing to bet all those tanks above you have been seeing decreased rewards since the change.

[EG] Almuric June 23 2005 1:08 PM EDT

I haven't seen decreased rewards. I deliberately do not fight anyone whose Score is below my PR. Nothing's changed about that.

[Banned]Monty June 23 2005 1:10 PM EDT


QBsutekh137 June 23 2005 1:13 PM EDT

Another good point. Tanks above me are Top Ten and are exempt from reward problems, or so I have always thought. I think they get kind of crappy rewards, but the same type of rewards they got before the linkage. Ranger, Sefton, or Almuric can correct me if I am wrong on that.

You would be exactly right about mages being more common if ToAs weren't as powerful as they are. As I stated above, even with only modest NW, a ToA tank can still be very powerful, at least against me!
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001OXI">NW/PR link - Yay or nay?</a>