Are you guys crazy? (in General)


miteke [Superheros] March 7 2007 9:33 AM EST

O.K. I've read the poll results and wondered WHY? Why would you choose to have a weapon cap instead of changing weapons to modify PR? Wit a weapon cap everyone has to struggle to maintain their weapons at just the right NW for their MPR. This caused a tanking in the market when it was the case for armor since there were only a few folks who wanted a piece of armor at any particular level. It particularly RUINED the prices for high end armors. I just don't get it.

Nerevas March 7 2007 9:39 AM EST

I understand it as you can equip any size weapon you want. If the weapon is over your cap it simply limits its effectiveness to whatever your cap is. I don't see how that would affect the economy..

Nerevas March 7 2007 9:39 AM EST

Oh and for the record I'm for the pr weighting.

bartjan March 7 2007 9:46 AM EST

Yes.

I stopped reading after the subject line, however.

miteke [Superheros] March 7 2007 9:49 AM EST

Poll results:

2 crazies and one sane (2 if you count me).

QBRanger March 7 2007 9:51 AM EST

Perhaps you do not completely understand the most popular choice.

Weapons will work just as tattoos.

If your weapon is over the Max Weapon Allowance it will just function as a weapon of the MWA. No struggling to keep your weapon at just the right NW. If your weapon is over, you can grow into it, just like your tattoo.

Contrary to all the thoughts of the armor market tanking, I think that is not entirely true. High NW wanted armors go for 70% of the NW, since the armor adds PR according to the minion who wears it.

Please give examples of high end armors that do not sell.

The reason I am not as much for adding PR according to the weapons size is that this puts tanks at an immediate disadvantage compared to a mage of the same size.

As Jon noted, and I agree, a tank has to have a weapon of a certain size to deal damage comparable to a mage. So adding PR boosts a tanks PR in order for it to do the same damage. Therefore lowering the tanks rewards.

QBOddBird March 7 2007 10:00 AM EST

Right, I like the idea of being able to have as big a weapon as I want and still be able to equip it, but it just works as the largest possible weapon I could hold. There is no need to struggle to maintain weapons at just the right NW, it actually would make things easier - takes all the thought out of how much NW you need to have or how much you are allowed to have, just tack on what you want and you will be able to use it when you grow into it.

QBJohnnywas March 7 2007 10:00 AM EST

Prices did drop for a long time where armour is concerned. But I wouldn't say it ruined the market. It ruined the seller's market maybe, but there are two sides to a market.

Prices are rising again anyway; to the point that you can't buy a medium to large ELB or Morg unless you are cash rich or can take out a loan. I know a lot of people who wouldn't mind seeing them drop some.

AdminG Beee March 7 2007 10:07 AM EST

Who you calling crazy?

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] March 7 2007 10:11 AM EST

Are YOU crazy ;)

What you say is completely opposite from what it would really mean.

"Why would you choose to have a weapon cap instead of changing weapons to modify PR? Wit a weapon cap everyone has to struggle to maintain their weapons at just the right NW for their MPR."

With a cap like that used for tattoos you can equip any sized weapon and not worry about PR.

As far as I can remember there has never been such a system for armor so I don't know about it ruining the market.

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] March 7 2007 10:15 AM EST

what does interest me is how the cap would work regarding +/x and multiple weapons.

QBJohnnywas March 7 2007 10:15 AM EST

I believe Miteke is talking about the linking of NW to PR, the first time around, back in May 2005.

Prices did fall around that time, but they were falling anyway because of tattoos making body armour a difficult choice for tanks; prices also dropped when camping stopped.

People are still going to pay money for big weapons; you might see smaller weapons drop in price but then again, you might not.

The insta market will probably take off if a change like this is implemented.

QBRanger March 7 2007 10:18 AM EST

I think multiple weapons would work an a per minion basic. Like armor gives PR per the minion using it.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] March 7 2007 10:18 AM EST

the point that you would have less choice about how you upped your weapon is interesting, if you had a x100 +100 ELB, would it shave off both X and + (thus rendering the weapon almost useless as there would be no x)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] March 7 2007 10:19 AM EST

"Please give examples of high end armors that do not sell."

HoC. ;)

:P

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] March 7 2007 10:31 AM EST



Yes. Yes, they are. Every last one of them.

QBJohnnywas March 7 2007 10:35 AM EST

Just the guys? :P

QBBarzooMonkey March 7 2007 10:36 AM EST

I voted "whatever". Can I play with madness, or what?

:P

Hyrule Castle March 7 2007 10:38 AM EST

im a mage, i'd rather tanks and melee people got nerfed... gives us mage MAYBE a lil light...?

miteke [Superheros] March 7 2007 10:44 AM EST

Hmmm. When the market tanked I thought it had to do with caps, but, as someone reminded me, it was because PR was tied to NW making high NW items far more costly than their value. I withdraw my suggestion that it will tank the market.

Capping would work but it is still not the optimal solution as it will certainly decrease the value of high end weapons that most folks get no additional benefit from. I still think, however, that a formulae that just simply calculates PR better would be the best solution on many levels:

1) No more invisible PR (i.e. two characters with the same MPR but vastly different power level of weapons having the same PR)
2) High end weapons still desirable for all.
3) Not all weapons at the same NW are equal, but a PR formula could factor that in. You could factor in constant specials (i.e. not related to enchantment bonuses) like vampiric drain reasonably if a good PR formula were used.

It seems like a decision between doing it the right way or doing it the easy way.

What advantages does capping have over a decent PR formulae?

QBRanger March 7 2007 10:53 AM EST

With a MWA high end weapons would perhaps be even more desirable.

Why you ask? Well, let us say you buy a massive 100M NW MH. But your MWA is only 50M. Great, you can grow to it and not worry it will raise your PR through the roof. Currently, people stay away from those high NW weapons due to that very reason. It will super raise their PR.

Take my MH. Only a few people could even think of equipping it. But with a MWA, anyone could use it/equip it, without worrying about the PR it gives.

Underage Drinking March 7 2007 11:29 AM EST

this is all freeds fault

miteke [Superheros] March 7 2007 1:10 PM EST

That is an interesting point PM. You gain the advantage of being able to equip large NW weapons without having your PR boosted more than you would like. You may not WANT to have a character that is all offense and would prefer the game to automatically tone down your weapon and not factor in the extra bonuses. I'll buy that. O.K., you're not all crazy. There, happy?

But I still think the PR weight scheme is a better one and also handles most cases better. My main problem with the PR scheme is that the formulaes are bound to be off at first and will require a period of adjustment before they faithfully represent PR. That kind of thing can get annoying in the short term. I still want it though. Too bad we could not have both :)

[T]Vestax March 7 2007 1:27 PM EST

Oh don't say that. We're still all crazy. There's just a bit of method to the madness is all.

Mikel March 7 2007 2:16 PM EST

I don't care for it. the PR system is working just fine. if you do this, then saving xp to keep you pr down so that u can maintain a 100% challenge bonus with your ncb/nub will ruin the game. if this is going to get implemented, then I would also like to see a max cap of untrained xp come into play, like when you firsrt start a character. Disallow fighting/BA regen until you have trianed trained all or most of to get back below that cap.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] March 7 2007 2:23 PM EST

Exp still adds to your vpr, which will decrease your fight rewards anyways. At least that is how it is supposed to work.

Mikel March 7 2007 3:33 PM EST

it does, but what if you are using it to keep your PR down so you can keep a 100% challenge bonus? Instead of growing and getting a 60% challenge bonus? The only time I would think that you can have unlimited exp sitting there is during free retrain time so that you can test out how much of something you need. Other than that, people don't need to store more than 500k exp per minion.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] March 7 2007 5:35 PM EST

You won't get a 100% challenge bonus because vpr is used to calculate fight rewards. From the wiki:

Virtual Power Rating (VPR) is a combination of trained minion Experience as well as untrained. VPR is used when calculating Battle Allocation rate, Forging Efficiency, Fight Rewards, Max Tattoo and clan Power Rating allowances.

Mikel March 7 2007 6:51 PM EST

what about armor PR that's not being added because you haven't trained yet? Myself:
Score / PR / MPR: 1,806,178 / 1,140,026 / 946,106
Nightstrike:
Score / PR / MPR: 1,565,988 / 926,734 / 799,699

we are roughly the same in MPR, he's just untrained, now do you get it? he's able to hit up enough to keep his rewards maxed out, I have been training as I go along. I'm getting lower exp than he is on average because I'm fighting closer to my true power and the targets are better up higher.

Go look at our graphs. he's pretty much flat lined, while mine goes up. Yes I know all out how VPR is factored into the rewards, I'm the one that found out that it wasn't working.

kevinLeong March 7 2007 7:00 PM EST

To put what Mikel is saying another way, when you fully train all your xp you are being double penalized in your fight rewards. From my sketchy understanding of the way things work, VPR & PR, and Scores are used to calculate fight rewards. VPR includes untrained exp, but PR does not. Because PR is also taken into consideration, a lower PR + VPR + Score is better than having a higher PR + VPR + Score.

At least thats how I think it works, NightStrike could explain it much better than I can.

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] March 7 2007 7:07 PM EST

Then clearly I don't understand how pr/vpr work in relation to each other. My line of thinking is by leaving untrained exp you are fighting at the trained pr as far as CB is concerned, but based on what you are showing me the game doesn't calculate things that way.

QBOddBird March 7 2007 7:11 PM EST

horseguy: Look at it this way.

Both have VPR of 900k, due to untrained EXP being factored in.

One has MPR 900k, the other has MPR 700k.

With armor adding, say, 10% PR penalty, the guy who has it all trained is getting 90k PR from armor PR and the other is only getting 70k PR.

Because the untrained guy's PR is lower, he gets higher fight rewards. He's only got 970k VPR while the other has 990k VPR.

Better explanation?

horseguy001 [Battle Royale] March 7 2007 7:16 PM EST

So...

It's not the difference in mpr and vpr that causes greater fight rewards, it's how equipped armor reacts with mpr and not with vpr that is affecting the fight rewards.

Do I get it yet...I think so? Thanks for the help :D

[T]Vestax March 7 2007 7:44 PM EST

XP rewards are much more complicated then they appear. It has always been acknowledged that the score of the opponent you fought compared to your PR plays a large role. Actually seeing that number doesn't change that.

I still find that, spite a 100% challenge rating, my best rewards are often from those with a 50% challenge rating. I could beat on MrChuckles' mad creation all day and still not fetch the best rewards from him. Why? Aside from score versus PR, I'm positive that either your opponents HP or the total damage inflicted plays a role as well.

I also know that I fetch much greater rewards from MrChuckles then I do from 1 PR/20 HP/4 Minion teams. Therefore, I also positive that the PR or MPR of the team you are against also matters. Mix all that in with VPR and you can't really be sure what your rewards will be until you actually get into a fight.

That being said, Mikel's hypothesis is that reserving your XP to keep the challenge rating bonus at 100% outweighs the negatives of VPR. Aside from that your tattoo still gets level gains and/or your Max Tattoo Level still goes up. If this change is made, your weapons NW cap should also increase spite not expending XP. Somehow this all adds up to a great advantage to the untrained minion teams. At least that is Mikel's opinion.

I personally don't think this amounts to what he thinks it does, but I'm open to either of us being right.

Zoglog[T] [big bucks] March 7 2007 7:44 PM EST

Armour uses MPR for it's calculation as the untrained exp factored into VPR is 'invisible'.
So by saving up 2million exp for example on a mage with high level AG's and CoI, your total VPR will be a lot lower than if you had it all trained.

AdminJonathan March 7 2007 10:06 PM EST

NightStrike's VPR is about 1.18M, so I think that's working as designed.

AdminJonathan March 7 2007 10:06 PM EST

... and yes, that is directly factored into challenge bonus.

AdminNightStrike March 7 2007 10:29 PM EST

Jon, I think what people are referencing is that if you fight someone and get, say a 60% bonus, then train 2m XP, you'll get, say, a 50% bonus. It appears that the VPR added by armor is based only on trained XP (now that PR based on minion XP came into play).

My VPR is high, but if I trained all of my current XP, it'd be massively higher, and I wouldn't be able to fight at all.

And Mikel... first, I don't get 100% anymore. Second, you're taking credit for my work :)


Here's some contrived examples:

Minion 1: 100k XP
Minion 2: 100k XP
MPR: 13,063
PR after armor, 25,000

Untrained XP on minion 1 = 100k, so that adds 22,743 - 13,063 = 9,680 VPR, making the total be 34,680 for purposes of rewards. If minion 1 trained all of that 100k, it would indeed add 9,680 to his MPR, however the PR added by his armor would go up non-linearly due to how armor PR works now. The final total after training will be greater than 34,680.

Mikel, I do what I do because training XP will only hurt me. I'm at a very bad place right now where nothing I train will help me win. I borrowed PM's +201 DB's and they did virtually nothing. I seem to be proving empirically what others have known all along -- UC just plain doesn't deliver enough damage, and its PTH is way too low to get through Evasion / DB.

AdminNightStrike March 7 2007 10:31 PM EST

"That being said, Mikel's hypothesis is that reserving your XP to keep the challenge rating bonus at 100% outweighs the negatives of VPR."

Come on, now... credit where it's due.....

[T]Vestax March 7 2007 10:36 PM EST

*NightStrike's

AdminNightStrike March 7 2007 10:41 PM EST

Just to make sure I'm not crazy, I just proved this again. I fought someone, trained a million XP, and fought again. Challenge bonus dropped by 7%.

Mikel March 7 2007 10:54 PM EST

Oh I take no credit for this, I've already had more than my share of VPR troubles in the past. But like you said, if you hadn't trained that 1 mil xp, then you're target would've have a 7% better challenge bonus. :)

[T]Vestax March 7 2007 11:01 PM EST

Ha, Mikel is one of the key reasons why we have VPR. :)

1 MPR / 600k FF team for the win!

As for the credit, you can both have it. Actually, I vote we make you both fight for the credit. I'm up for a ladder match.

AdminNightStrike March 7 2007 11:58 PM EST

"Ha, Mikel is one of the key reasons why we have VPR. :) "

Mikel *IS* the reason we have VPR.

[T]Vestax March 8 2007 12:13 AM EST

Well, I didn't want to just come out and say it. I'm a bit more wary these days about assigning credit... thanks to you.

Anyhow, to get back on the topic... yes, I am.
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=00230N">Are you guys crazy?</a>