The Butterfly Effect and Todd (in General)


Max January 28 2008 9:52 PM EST

In order to combat the ever growing PR/MPR/AC issues that have been posted I was wondering what you all thought about having a server based weekly nerf.

This would be beneficial because it would force users to find the server nerf on a weekly basis, in turn, adding more to the game and increasing player retention. It is fun to have to figure out, or be the first to post about, the nerf of the week.

It would severely damage top players in such a way that they wouldn't be able to horde XP as much because if they wanted to stay top contenders they would have to train and un-train weekly.

It would increase player interaction and bring more enjoyment out of the game having to come up with the new strategy for the week, maintain character balance and encourage forum and chat participation.

The game wouldn't be limited to strategy by quarter or by general nerfing based on change month.

The game will become faster paced and unpredictable.

I think that server based weekly nerfs would keep the economy in check and decrease inflation.

Any thoughts?

Little Anthony January 28 2008 10:01 PM EST

I paid supporter-ship in order to take advantage of favorite list. Resorting the list every week is a burden (my 2 cents)

AdminLamuness January 28 2008 10:05 PM EST

Define server nerf. I thought I understood but then you go on to say "figure out...the nerf of the week". A random nerf? Please clarify.

three4thsforsaken January 28 2008 10:11 PM EST

It seems like fun, but it would be quite an uncomfortable switch.

It's something I'm sure we would enjoy if the game already had the mechanic, but will currently take too many people out of their comfort zone to be popular.

Max January 28 2008 10:14 PM EST

There is more than just your favorites list at hand.

I think if the server had a list of nerfs that it randomly pulled from. After a while we would know them all but even then we still wouldnï¾’t know what nerf will occur the next week because it is randomly pulled from a virtual hat.

The objective is to limit the ability for top players to remain top players by merely clicking or being big enough to wade through a change month.

NUB would be unaffected by this nerf but NCB would.

Having a cosmic celestial type nerf which is on a schedule would not be as effective but still push down top player abilities to sink all their money into one strategy and suppress USD relevance to the game.

Little Anthony January 28 2008 10:18 PM EST

you going to fix the wiki yourself every week?

QBOddBird January 28 2008 10:19 PM EST

A suggestion I've made before - similar in nature to this one - was to have bi-annual resets.

Everything's back to 0, everyone's weapons return to base NW, naming remains on things....

Basically, you can still spend USD on your weapons, but it's only going to last for the quarter (half?), so that reduces the amount of USD in the game. Naming still applies, so that's not lost. You keep your actual weaponry/armor, so no loss of items...and perhaps keep a scoreboard of past 'halves' that occured, so there's still a reason to push for the top. (I was the winner of the first CB Quarter ever!) ...plus, there's no more need for a NUB/NCB - they can learn the game during the remainder of that half and compete in the next one - and nobody gets oh, say, stuck at a score cap and is unable to rise to compete where they'd like.

...those are my thoughts, personally. :P

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 28 2008 10:20 PM EST

You spend as much time and energy into this game being in the top and then answer your own Question Max... Its not fair to those who have earned their right to be on top... and don't tell me it based off of usd... Mikel and Ranger both have awesome strats... and they would be just as competitive even if they hadn't spent one penny on this game. Why focus on bringing down those on top... why not focus on helping those that are trying to bring down the top with Strats and wise use of items...

Max January 28 2008 10:25 PM EST

Why would you have to? We would only have to fix the Wiki until the entire cycle of nerfs was found out. Each item adjusted based on a nerf. So, it adds more to the game even at that point.

We aren't talking life threatening stuff here LA.

When I BETA tested CB2 with about 6 others and when I played CB1 there were changes and no Wiki.

I'm not saying to get rid of the Wiki what I am saying is:

Suppress USD in game
Stabilize economy
Increase playability
Increase player involvement
Suppress overly large characters and force them to adjust
Suppress abnormally large AC, Weapons etc

What is wrong with next change month being a change in nerfing schedule to bi-weekly and at something 'random'. (Random being calculated nerfs put into the system that can be figured out) But, again, which nerf is selected is completely random.

Ulord[NK] January 28 2008 10:26 PM EST

Ranger has already offered, what is in my opinion, the best course of change for the game. A rolling bonus based on the PR gap between you and the top player, a nerf to ranged damage, a fix to BG and a tuning down of evasion. I also want a unicorn with wings for my birthday but that ain't gonna happen, not for a while anyways.

Max January 28 2008 10:31 PM EST

One unicorn coming up!

Draco, you missed my point. I am not talking about penalizing characters at the top. I'm talking about a great many other things.

Yes, helping new players is great. I see your name on the Mentors list...

Please before you think this is a top player bashing cycle re-read the post. Those of us that played CB1, transitioned it to CB2 and played CB2 know my intentions even if the logic isn't 100% it's still something to toss around.

TheHatchetman January 28 2008 10:34 PM EST

Well i already had a winged unicorn giftwrapped for ya, Ulord. But with that attitude, I guess I'll just return to sender :P

Seriously though, those at the top have worked to get there. They earned it. It is unbalanced the way it is to an extent, but it is not unfair in any way. Put as much effort into the game as they have, and you may not make #1, but you can rest assured you will have a competative spot.

My fiftieth of a buck.

three4thsforsaken January 28 2008 10:36 PM EST

One thing I love about the game is that growth is based on everyones relative MPR.

The longer the game goes on the higher the average MPR will be and the faster it will take to get there. Although you might not be number one if you put in the time and effort, a competitive spot is always possible.

At least that's how I see it, tell me if I'm wrong O.o

Max January 28 2008 10:37 PM EST

I could care less about being on top. Has anyone noticed my USER ID number? Did anyone look at my oldest character? Outside of Jonathan I have the oldest account.

I don't care about being on top and never will. What I do care about has been discussed above. No one is penalizing top characters. If anything, it keeps it very interesting and those players like Ranger may like the new challenge! Adding more dimension to a game they spend a lot of time on may be what they want.

Stop looking at it from an OMG perspective.

three4thsforsaken January 28 2008 10:42 PM EST

But wouldn't penalizing top characters only change the gameplay for top players?

There seems to be plenty of competition to go around. The only effect such a thing would have would be for the people trying to reach the top, while most players are just trying to add a few more people to their fight list.

Max January 28 2008 10:46 PM EST

Top players couldn't XP horde, would need to train and untrain, equip different weapons, just like everyone else. Take a look at what that does to the big picture.

Grasshopper, you miss the forest because you stare at the tree.

Max January 28 2008 10:47 PM EST

It's not penalizing top characters.

GummyBear January 28 2008 10:47 PM EST

I don't like the idea :/

Sorry dude

Little Anthony January 28 2008 10:50 PM EST

i do not think this is realistic enough. Do you know how hard it is to change from a mage to a tank? Even re-training can be free. The additional required items are going to be huge. Too much to handle.

three4thsforsaken January 28 2008 10:51 PM EST

You know, I would really enjoy a weekly tournament with these rules.

TheHatchetman January 28 2008 10:55 PM EST

"It would severely damage top players"

-Max, 9:52 PM EST

Sorry, had to say it :P What you're speaking of changes the game dynamic entirely. It will still be just as difficult to get to the top, if not harder, as those at the top currently have enough of a MPR advantage to still wade through many nerfs... Non-USD spenders will have to try to sell their freshly-nerfed equipment and start with something weaker that now has an inflated price due to it's being the flavor of the week. USD spenders will be able to capitalize on the lowered prices for items that will be great in a couple weeks, eventually owning a decent-sized piece of every piece of equipment in the game.

Also, with an encouraged retrain happening on a regular basis, the cumulative MPR in CB will go lower and lower... No more milestones. Unless we want to be making threads like "Congrats to Ranger for finally dipping below 2m MPR!". The retrains will also effect tattoos... Everyone will have a tat at their MTL, so any work put into raising a tat, or money spent on instas will have been for naught...


While this is an interesting idea, it is a different game all in itself, only with a strong semblance to CB2 :P

Windwalker January 28 2008 10:57 PM EST

Suppress? Force? Control? Smacks of "Burn the Witch". I still think that those at the top have earned their positions by hard work and persistence.I see some new people come in and "expect" to be able to compete with people who have invested much time and effort to get where they are. The game has a good framework and is "fun" to play. I for one would have to say adios if things started to change weekly! I can hardly keep things straight now. New players need to realize that they are just not going to beat the best players in the game over the course of a few months. Not- NOT gonna happen.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 28 2008 11:00 PM EST

"Ranger has already offered, what is in my opinion, the best course of change for the game. A rolling bonus based on the PR gap between you and the top player, a nerf to ranged damage, a fix to BG and a tuning down of evasion. I also want a unicorn with wings for my birthday but that ain't gonna happen, not for a while anyways."

add to that list a weapons cap and i think you have the major balancing issues in the game all covered.

as for the idea of random nerfs, i think that would spice things up for vets but be hell on new players. we hope to be growing so i think i would have to say not!

QBOddBird January 28 2008 11:03 PM EST

Windwalker, it depends on how you define "control". Keeping something under control and controlling something are two entirely different things, and he clearly means the former.


Besides, you don't think it would be a good idea to suppress the influx of USD and USD-created weapons that cause such buffs as the one given to Evasion?

Max January 28 2008 11:15 PM EST

NUB is not in teh equation. They go unscathed.

Yes, hopefully, those of us trying to come up with news ways to bring in new users will get some support! Read post about YouTube and the contest for creative pictures.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 28 2008 11:32 PM EST

How many usd weapons are there and who own those weapons? Nightstrike, Mikel, Freed x10 or some such ridiculous amount, and Ranger... I'm not quite sure how much USD was put into Edy's MH but If I'm not mistaken... it used to be Ranger's but he sold it to Edy after he got a hold of Dawg's.

Now tell me how many others this would impact other than the usd users... I hate changes that would impact all users based on a few users... Why don't we fix evasion, BG's, Robf, Nub/Ncb Bonus and anything else that needs fixing before we worry about the little influx of USD... And let me also say this... Ranger proved that he doesn't need any usd in his team to beat anyone in the game...

And who here hordes Exp... Not Me... and I would Say the only reason Ranger does is to let others drop into the 6/20 sooner than they would have if he kept training.

Max January 28 2008 11:40 PM EST

This would fix it without having to fix anything else. Make it bi-monthly or a monthly change.

Try and think more three dimensionally. Do you fight in the desert with green camouflage; do you fight in the winter with brown camouflage? Why can't CB evolve into a seasonal battle dress that is in the form a set nerf in random sequence?

I see your points though, you are protecting those that have fought a long time to get where they are at and you think anything that takes away their posture is bad.

This has very little to do with the top players. The thread title is merely a reminder why CB 2 was made.

Reset. Reconfigure. If that doesn't work, upgrade firmware. If that doesn't solve it, RMA!



QBOddBird January 28 2008 11:47 PM EST

How about this? I'll only look at the massively boosted gears. I'm rounding up when it's off by like...2M.

2 90M+ VB
4 100M+ MH
2 100M+ ELB
1 100M+ MsK
1 100M+ SoD
1 100M+ ExBow
2 100M+ DBs

That's a total of 12 items that are -ridiculously- large. Many other greatly USD-boosted items exist as well, though generally not to the proportion of a weapons, since its PR is free.

There are -many- USD users. It easily is not a small influx of USD into the game, it is a rather large one. And of course, it is expected of any USD-user to be opposed to a change where USD's influence is lessened, since that takes away their advantage. (yes, I've used it before myself. Nevertheless, I'm not blinded to how it affects gameplay.) Quite simply, it allows for re-shifting of wealth into hands that otherwise would not have attained it, and giving said people an advantage.

Godpanda January 29 2008 1:43 PM EST

I have alot to say about this, but not the patience to say it nicely.

Great idea, Max. Very good idea. Seriously.

*stares at everyone who disagrees* You all need to do some serious soul searching as to why it's bad.

Mojo Patroneus [My2ndClan] January 29 2008 1:47 PM EST

I would have to second this idea; it would add some variability to the game.

I think it might be effectively implemented like what one sees in Hero's of Might and Magic where you have 'Week of the ...'. Each week either provide a bonus or penalty (maybe both?) to some aspect of the game.

'Week of the Slow' - Evasion functions at 70%
'Week of the Fleet' - Evasion functions at 130%
'Week of Frost' - CoC is 20% more effective
etc...
etc...

Mojo

QBsutekh137 January 29 2008 2:06 PM EST

I am not sure people would really re-train every week, would they? I know I wouldn't. Do you have any idea how hard it is to get and keep MPR on a large skill/spell/intrinsic?

If I have to retrain my large fireball, that would be a huge loss of MPR. Far more than I could make up in a week.

So, people would tend to build boring, but balanced strategies. It's like during times of crisis when gold prices go up -- people would decide what the "gold" was as far as tactical consistency and would invest in that alone (since weekly nerfs would represent never-ending "crises").

NW would still reign supreme, too. A big MgS is still going to be a big MgS. So let's say a nerf makes it less effective for a week. You take off your MgS and put on an MS. If AC gets nerfed, you just take off the shield altogether and wait until the next week. If a tattoo type gets nerfed, the people with cash win again because they can afford to re-ink more easily each week.

People would hoard valuable equipment and swap it in and out over a very generic strategy based on the "gold" standards of CB. AMF would still be useful, regardless of nerf. DM too, probably. Those are just examples. HP would still be obvious gold, even if PL, TSA, and VA got nerfed. I can't see native HP getting nerfed, and even if it did, it would get nerfed for everyone (native HP is quite common these days).

I think the idea is interesting, I just don't think as many people would go for it as you might think. Heck, if this did come to pass, I would simply go forge for a while and wait while everyone else lost ground training and re-training. Then I could come back later (hopefully during a week where nerfs didn't affect my strategy) and take the top score.

Would that be smart playing on my part? Would it be good for CB?

Making the nerfs be monthly instead of weekly might help a bit, but I still think many folks just wouldn't change a thing.

Stephen Young January 29 2008 2:33 PM EST

I agree with Sutekh. In fact, usually when Jon makes a change that negatively affects my strat during a change month, I don't change anything. I like my strat.

--Steve.

QBsutekh137 January 29 2008 2:42 PM EST

Yes, but few people have the Foundation of Awesome that is ROBOT DESTROY! *smile*

DH January 29 2008 3:30 PM EST

I usually make it a point to never get involved in "great ideas for the game posts" but this ones got me baffled.

Max i don't understand why you brought up the point about how old your account is. I've been playing the game since the days when todd and spydah were two seperate entities and that doesn't give me any sort of "holier than thou" status. you want the game to be more competitive? play more. you specifically stated your idea would "severely damage top players"
how does that make the game more competitive. as for player interaction? the only interaction that it would generate between me and other players would be frustration. it wouldn't encourage chat and forum discussion, it would degrade it everytime the nerf came. i cant see how stabbing someone in the eye with a nerf spoon would help "player" retention one bit. personally once my frustration levels got high enough, i'd leave. Secondly or thirdly...im not sure what point im on...random nerfs every week would tax admins and Jon to a point where improvements would grow more and more infrequent. I don't know how much control the admins have over the game, but i assume not enough to "nerf" things...which would mean Jon would have to do it. Im no coder, but that sounds like a lot of work. alot more than some of the valid ideas that have been floating around here lately. oh and i sure as heck wouldnt want to be the guy doing wiki every week.

am i getting the wrong idea here? first you want to "severly damage top players"

then you say " It's not penalizing top characters." and "This has very little to do with the top players. "

please, give this old grumpy man some peace of mind and clarify what you really intended with this post. also as harsh as this post might sound...I mean no disrespect.

~The player formerly known as Dirty Hippy~

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2008 4:03 PM EST

not that I think we are in as dire a position as some folks do... but I will say that this idea would end up being a net loss as entertainment goes. If it truly was a repeating set of bonuses and negatives to certain items and attributes it would certainly end up being just as ho hum as what we have now. If there was a random nature to it then documenting things would be impossible.

There has to be a better way of keeping the top ranks fresh without obliterating the stability and documentation that are cornerstones of CB. I'll admit that some parts of this idea are attractive, but I can't see it being good for the game.

Max January 29 2008 4:41 PM EST

Hael it was in reference to an accusation that I wanted to penalize top players and want to climb the ladder of PR faster. As if I believe it is now unfair and that something is owed to me.

So, not houlier than you, but good looking out and keep skipping over the important stuff!

Anyway, it's not a 'the game would be better if' post. It is just something to toss around. And, God for bid, someone wanted to hear others opinion, and, oh my, learn more about the game! What a shame! Use the forum and have community interaction? You are right. Let's not post anything you don't agree with.

Also, let's point out hollier than thou's to people who post about what is a 'good post' and what is a 'bad post'. Ah, yes. I love finger pointing, reminds me of the demographics.

Amen. :-)





Max January 29 2008 4:43 PM EST

Sorry for double post,

QBsutekh137, thank you for you analysis. It was what I was looking for. Very thought out and answered a lot of my questions and answered those I didn't know I had! Thanks :-)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2008 6:34 PM EST

Sorry if this was mentioned above, but if high NW items are the main issue for the suggestion, maybe introducing a max NW cap (like the Max Tattoo level) could be a viable solution?

Increasing PR for wearing very large items doesn't cut it as a penalty.

Especially if you don't get a fighting down penalty...

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2008 8:06 PM EST

and might I add... awesome to have you back Max.

lostling January 29 2008 8:40 PM EST

somehow... i dont see the point... nerf this nerf that... people can USD an item and then keep it... after the week/month is up they can bring it out of storage again... doesnt much of a difference...

personally i think the way to stop stagnation is for jon to introduce more variety of weapons and armors... (and make sure every waepon and armor has a separate effect) (or jon can just edit the current newbie weapons avaible) currently as it stands it is like 1 item every what? 6 months... considering among weapons only like 5 are commonly used... whats the use of the rest of the worthless weapons?

DH January 29 2008 8:47 PM EST

Max,
I wasn't accusing you of anything. i was quoting directly from what you said in your posts. I really wasnt trying to offend you and stated that in my post. I just wanted clarification on your "good idea" I have never been one for sugarcoating so i apologize if i came off overly harsh. I never said you couldnt have an opinion. To me, you confused me. did you want a system that severely damages top players as you stated in your initial post? or did you want something else as you stated farther down on this thread. This post in itself does generate community interaction as you intend your idea to do. because this thread has responses, feedback, interaction doesn't mean the idea itself will. as a matter of fact it would though. and in my opinion which i always state clearly and loudly was that i couldn't see how this system would do anything better than what we already have. also, that i thought the feedback would spark alot more negative than positive. this is my opinion. my opinion didnt attack you, i didnt say " you are dumb, max" or "bad post" i merely suggested that it seemed unwieldy and more complicated than other valid ideas. i even stated it in what i thought was a way that included it as a valid idea. no need to get bent out of shape when someone states that they dont like it. I just didn't get why you needed to point out how long you been here. it sounded alot like what i discribed.

Maybe what i should have said is: "I don't get it max."

DH January 29 2008 8:50 PM EST

not to double post. i take that back max. my wording on valid ideas was poor...but not intended

Obscurans January 29 2008 9:06 PM EST

How about simply making weapon damage modifier cost go up with extra x's? To make a monstrously sharp x1000 sword even sharper is harder than improving a cheap stock blade...

Making it not exponential, but arithmetic would probably suffice. Say cost of an X is $9k base and each point beyond the first costs $30 more. Every x300, cost of improvement doubles base. So by 2k (I'd assume this is the insanity) you're paying 4-5x average.

Retroactively change existing weapons to reflect the new effect of the added NW?

QBsutekh137 January 29 2008 9:15 PM EST

Obscurans, an outstanding idea...

...and also how it used to be. *smile*

Weapon x used to cost exponentially more as it got larger. And so, NW of the weapon had to be factored into PR. Going from an x of 100 to 101 meant a LOT more than going from 5 to 6. Jonathan made it a constant to make all that stuff easier to calculate.

Sadly, he didn't do equivalent things at the time, such as removing lop-sided items that act as mage-busters from the game (MgS, for example). In retrospect, it would have been a perfect time for that. Now Evasion has clouded the whole debate, since the + on weapons (about the only way to fight it, and a weak one at that) is still progressively more expensive.

Mikel January 29 2008 11:24 PM EST

This type of CB would be very little fun for anyone. Changes done too fast would seem to discourage new users more so than old hands.

We'd all have Vanilla strats and those that have tons of various high nw gear would still out rank people with lesser gear.

So my BG"s get nerfed, Out come my Tulks or EG's. Big Whoop, I'd just switch gear around to maintain a competitive advantage over most others out there.

What does you being the 9th registered account in the game have anything to do with your current knowledge in the game? You want respect? a Halo?

Some of us have worked our butts off to be where we are (and not everyone has used USD to get there), do you log in every day and spend all of your ba for the last 3-4+ years? or are you just looking for a quick ticket to the top?

Max January 29 2008 11:52 PM EST

Mikel, you...missed...the...enitre post. :-)

Nothing to do with working buts off etc. Did you even bother to read ANYTHING?

Jeez, I thought one person overlooking the obvious was upsetting but, yet, you somehow manage to show us that ignorance surely is bliss.

No, I don't claim to know the game as well as a lot of players.

Your other comment about new players is just nother lame comment. It also proves you read nothing considering it was pointed out that NUB would be immune.

Please, if you are going to put us through another one of your off-the-cuff, read one sentence, ignore everything else comments--may I have mercy on your soul.

I am actually amazed if you even read 50% of what is being discussed.

What this post has morphed into are actual solutions to a problem that DOES and has existed.

*Eh eh eh dont stop reading and post just yet trigger happy one**

The problems presented here are genuine and real. Everyone with more knowledge of the game than me knows its true. We are trying, AS A COMMUNITY, to come up with viable solutions.

Please, slap yourself for me.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 2:09 AM EST

Max, Jan 28
"In order to combat the ever growing PR/MPR/AC issues that have been posted I was wondering what you all thought about having a server based weekly nerf."

I thought this game was all based on getting the highest you can and having the most Mpr you can have, well at least thats what I thought burning every set of BA and training your Exp for mpr was for, for the last few years. This game is fun for some of us and for others it is a competition and a time for us to compare notes and talk about what we do and we don't do for our strats.

"This would be beneficial because it would force users to find the server nerf on a weekly basis, in turn, adding more to the game and increasing player retention. It is fun to have to figure out, or be the first to post about, the nerf of the week."

It may be fun for you, but there are some of us that would be very annoyed with so many nerfs every week that half of us would quit due to the repetitiveness of it all... even more so than it is now. I like a few others would quit right when it starts... yeah that sure is player retention.

"It would severely damage top players in such a way that they wouldn't be able to horde XP as much because if they wanted to stay top contenders they would have to train and un-train weekly."

Yeah, I thought you said it wouldn't do much to the top players in the game... well it won't... even though you say it was meant to damage the top players... Looks like a little bias there to me. Some like Sut and Mikel and a few others would just change what equipment they use of their massive amounts of equipment sitting on their pack mule chars. Who wants to untrain with a huge hit to their mpr when they have worked so hard for it.

"It would increase player interaction and bring more enjoyment out of the game having to come up with the new strategy for the week, maintain character balance and encourage forum and chat participation."

Maybe for NCB or NUB chars that are willing to change their strat and train/untrain and lose all the time and exp they have put into their characters.

"The game wouldn't be limited to strategy by quarter or by general nerfing based on change month."

So what was this meant for? It is a strategy game... I have seen many items become the flavor of the month but I have also seen many people stick with certain strats even after they are nerfed... just because that is what they wanted for their strat.

"The game will become faster paced and unpredictable."

How can you make a turn based game faster paced? And as far as I'm concerned it is Unpredictable... Not knowing which ncb will rise up to the top and become a contender.

"I think that server based weekly nerfs would keep the economy in check and decrease inflation."

Inflation will be in any game based economy... especially if there will be an influx of game money from new players.

"Any thoughts?"

So you don't really want people opinions, you would rather bash everything certain people say and not listen to anything that they say.


Max, Jan 29
"Mikel, you...missed...the...enitre post. :-)

Nothing to do with working buts off etc. Did you even bother to read ANYTHING?

Jeez, I thought one person overlooking the obvious was upsetting but, yet, you somehow manage to show us that ignorance surely is bliss.

No, I don't claim to know the game as well as a lot of players.

Your other comment about new players is just nother lame comment. It also proves you read nothing considering it was pointed out that NUB would be immune.

Please, if you are going to put us through another one of your off-the-cuff, read one sentence, ignore everything else comments--may I have mercy on your soul.

I am actually amazed if you even read 50% of what is being discussed.

What this post has morphed into are actual solutions to a problem that DOES and has existed.

*Eh eh eh dont stop reading and post just yet trigger happy one**

The problems presented here are genuine and real. Everyone with more knowledge of the game than me knows its true. We are trying, AS A COMMUNITY, to come up with viable solutions.

Please, slap yourself for me."

Oh yeah thats right... you don't have the "NUB would be unaffected by this nerf but NCB would." until your second post and the fifth overall post... sounds like your biting peoples heads off when you didn't even put it all into one post... Why should people read every post in a thread when the thread is based off of the first title post... Grow up... stop attacking people... and take criticism with a grain of salt.

Max January 30 2008 2:16 AM EST

Ok.

Just don't wonder why people don't stay or don't post in fear of being flamed.

Also, forget the idea of open discussion and modifying thoughts based on serious responses.

Also, you might as well ditch the idea of having any type of discussion because there are a few elite individuals here who like to swat.

And yes, if you READ the entire post you would get the FLOW of the discussion and if you didn't because it is too long then DONT RESPOND.

Grow up?

Dork.

QBOddBird January 30 2008 2:22 AM EST

Yeesh, when did this all get so personal and turn into insults mixed with biased criticisms? It was just a suggestion, to everyone attacking...just "I wondered what you all thought about this idea."


On a totally unrelated note:

"And as far as I'm concerned it is Unpredictable... Not knowing which ncb will rise up to the top and become a contender. "

I can answer that right now. None of them. Name a NCB that's going to get anywhere close to the top and become a contender...there's a stuck score zone that causes challenge bonus to rapidly drop, so I can promise you now that there's no unpredictability there.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 2:29 AM EST

Hoseguy001 He is pushing his way to the top...

Max January 30 2008 2:31 AM EST

Correct.

Our economy is in shambles. Things are over inflated. Our sand box needs re-leveling without resetting the game.

If you think Jonathan doesn't know this or is concerned you are mistaken, especially if we inroduce FB soon and we bring in new players.

We all need to get together and come up with some serious ideas as to how to level the sand.

This isn't about those on top being omnipotent or USD vs CBD. This is about getting and keeping players with a chance to fight to the top.

For those that weren't here for CB1 or its end, this stage of CB2 smells familiar.

I do appreciate the words of those players that actually put thought into their responses and I do appreciate those that just blast anyone and everything as well, I just don't like you as players.

Maybe it's for not and CB2 will become CB3. *shrug*

In case it's missed:

We all need to get together and come up with some serious ideas as to how to level the sand.

This isn't about those on top being omnipotent or USD vs CBD. This is about getting and keeping players with a chance to fight to the top.

QBOddBird January 30 2008 3:18 AM EST

You are correct, DrAcO - I suppose in terms of relative MPR, Horseguy got pretty far on his NCB. I'm very impressed with how far he managed to take it.

Nonetheless, with 7 days left to go he is 22nd in MPR. 2.16M MPR versus Ranger's 3.4M MPR (plus untrained exp) - as far as I am concerned, that means the N*B is -still- broken. Nobody's going to N*B their way up to challenge Ranger, and that's 100% predictable. It just isn't currently possible.

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 3:29 AM EST

Not yet OB, but with more characters in the 2 mil mpr range it will give more choices for the lower people to fight... to gain challenge bonus. And if the score system were changed a bit to grant more score per victory and less per loss... it would let all users gain a better challenge bonus...

Max January 30 2008 3:48 AM EST

What about lessoning the amount of money *significantly* to buy BA during N*B?

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 4:18 AM EST

Nub BA is free to buy... and the Cash rewards for Nub ba have been reduced again... NCB Ba is still 2.5 times as expensive as normal BA and NCB cash bonus is still the same as it is for normal characters.]

Lessoning the amount of money gained during a Nub will give a nub no chance at all of attaining any top position... they would have no money to buy any equipment to stay competitive.

While we have already discussed bringing the price of BA down for NCB to give more people a chance of buying all ba and catching up to the top mpr... nothing has been done about it yet.

Now with my idea of bringing the score per victory up... it should give a higher Challenge bonus for anyone from 2 mil mpr down to about 1.1 mil.

QBOddBird January 30 2008 12:14 PM EST

I am -still- on the wagon with the rolling bonus (up to, say, 200% bonus) that decreases as you catch the #1 (V)MPR as the best idea to date.

Abolition of the N*B, introduction of the rolling bonus so that all characters, both new and old, may compete!

Note: rolling bonus is separate from the challenge bonus in my viewpoint. All rights reserved.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 30 2008 12:58 PM EST

the rolling bonus idea is all well and good...
How do you do BA cost?
How do you calculate NUB bonus cash?

QBOddBird January 30 2008 1:00 PM EST

"Abolition of the N*B"

There would be no need for a NUB if everyone had a rolling bonus.

As for BA cost, instead of going by refresh rates, it could round to the nearest cost (I'm not making a formula) based on VMPR.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 30 2008 1:19 PM EST

the nub would not be there any longer as someone said. as for the cash rewards, just keep giving them the free ba and even extend the time frame for free ba to compensate for the lack of nub bonus cash.

TheHatchetman January 30 2008 1:21 PM EST

Another issue with a rolling bonus would be sellouts, playing like lostling (not saying lostling's a sellout, just referencing his play-type...), and retraining every time they get high enough MPR that their Challenge bonus starts to slip. Not sure about you guys, but I find those who sell out every time they get a couple bucks annoying, and see their actions as a slap in the face of CB... I should also point out that I've nothing against those who play for longer than a few months and sell out due to having to leave for their own reasons, as they are a much different case than those sit there, counting their nickels and pennies as they spend their BA...

Got a little off topic, but those are my thoughts on the subject. Aside from all this, rolling bonus sounds fine... This would also allow more vets to start playing their 1-1-05 chars and be competitive. Not sure what this means to most, but I'm sure at least some of the CB population would enjoy that. ^_^

QBOddBird January 30 2008 1:25 PM EST

That's true, but rolling bonus wouldn't be a -cash- bonus, it'd be EXP bonus. Perhaps NUB could get a small cash addition to their rolling bonus.

Nonetheless, as you just said, that happens already. It's just the problem with USD in the game. It's also why I'm also kinda in favor of the 'resetting everyone 2x/year' policy that would make USD use much less advantageous.

Godpanda January 30 2008 1:27 PM EST

Oh, be realistic, DrA. NW wise, a NUB will probably never catch up to the veterans. Even WITH USD. No one wants to be told they're doing so well because of a problem within the game. But that doesn't mean it isn't true.

The NUB is skewed with unrealistic expectations. You're asking a NUB to be utterly and completely prepared minute 1, and off to a flying start. If they're slow by 3 days, they're losing a huge mount of money and experience. Delay the NUB by a month, a week, hell, A DAY, and you'd see much better results from them, at least I believe so.

To propose an alternative idea to Max's original one, why not free, weekly/monthly retrains? This would, number one, make the game more FUN. Constant strategy changes all around are what make this game fun. Stagnation is boring. Points for doing it:

- Changemonths will move smoother, because regardlless of what happens, players can adapt.

- Strategy is the lifeblood of this game. The huge retrain costs are annoying. Half the reason NCBs are done isn't for competition, but for strategy fun. At the cost of many, many millions of CB.

- Basically, more fun.

QBOddBird January 30 2008 4:01 PM EST

Constant free retrain means this:

I'm getting farmed, I notice, I retrain to anti-that strat. They are unable to farm me, when they leave, I retrain back.

People who have items for multiple strats are at a significant advantage, making CBD/USD transactions that much more appealing.


In essence: bad idea. Just because Jon did it once and we liked it doesn't mean it should be a constant.

Godpanda January 30 2008 4:26 PM EST

Didn't say constant. Once a week or month. And why does it matter if they retrain to beat you? You can do the same to them.

Adminedyit January 30 2008 5:37 PM EST

"a NUB will probably never catch up to the veterans"

Tell that to Little Devil

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 5:56 PM EST

Edy... don't forget to mention that he isn't a USD user...

QBOddBird January 30 2008 5:57 PM EST

For one, in '06, the N*B was a little different, and the gap when you caught up was smaller.

Managing to pull 1.2M MPR when the top player is 1.5M MPR is good enough. Later on*, that's 3.3 vs 3.5, which becomes a negligible difference.

Right now, top NCB's manage 2.2 at best versus 3.5? How long until 1.3M MPR becomes a negligible difference? Besides the difference in percentage...one is something like 80% of the top MPR, the other is like 60%. You can't always use examples of the past to illustrate that a current problem doesn't exist.



*Later on defined as 2 years of hard fighting later.

QBOddBird January 30 2008 5:59 PM EST

Yes, please don't forget to throw in a defensive statement for yourselves about the lack of an outside advantage.

I would say refusing to stoop to USD usage should cause us to give him more credit for achieving what he has, don't you think, DrAcO? ^_^

QBsutekh137 January 30 2008 6:11 PM EST

I think Draco WAS giving him more credit, OB...

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 30 2008 6:17 PM EST

Yes I was giving him more credit... and I will give credit to Little Devil and Poison for running awesome mage strats without the use of USD...

Godpanda January 30 2008 8:59 PM EST

Little_Devil also happens to be the top clan MVP of ALL TIME. He happened to get into the top clan. He is an outstanding player. -Outstanding-.

But what OB says holds true. And, even then, you give me one out of how many NUBs?

Max January 31 2008 11:52 PM EST

So, I think we have this so far for ideas and if I missed any let me know so we can get a final list down.:

The idea: There has to be a better way of keeping the top ranks fresh without obliterating the stability and documentation that are cornerstones of CB while allowing new users the ability to compete should they remain in game a while.

1. A rolling bonus based on the PR gap between you and the top player add to that list a weapons cap/AC cap
fix evasion, BG's, Robf, Nub/Ncb Bonus

2. How about simply making weapon damage modifier cost go up with extra x's? To make a monstrously sharp x1000 sword even sharper is harder than improving a cheap stock blade...

Making it not exponential, but arithmetic would probably suffice. Say cost of an X is $9k base and each point beyond the first costs $30 more. Every x300, cost of improvement doubles base. So by 2k (I'd assume this is the insanity) you're paying 4-5x average.

3. Weapon x used to cost exponentially more as it got larger. And so, NW of the weapon had to be factored into PR. Going from an x of 100 to 101 meant a LOT more than going from 5 to 6. Jonathan made it a constant to make all that stuff easier to calculate.

4. Lessening amount of CBD to get BA for N*B

Want to add anything let's do this...

As long as we move forward in our discussions we are bound to come up with something useful...


QBOddBird February 1 2008 12:21 AM EST

Once upon a time:



"My goal was to calibrate the bonus such that a char under bonus can achieve 95% of the XP earned by a veteran, given equivalent effort. (This is not the place to argue with the 95% number or the duration of the NUB. I'm just setting out the facts here.)

In math, we represent this as finding a bonus N such that

0.95 * [vet's xp in 12.5 months] = (1 + N) * [new user's bonus-less xp in 4 months]

Let's normalize to xp per 1 month (XPM):

0.95 * 12.5 * [vet's XPM] = (1 + N) * 4 * [NUB XPM]

But this assumes equivalent effort. We need to adjust for one or the other fighting more battles per month (BPM). In other words, we don't want to penalize a new user for fighting extra battles, or reward him for fighting less, when we proceed to use actual numbers to calculate N:

0.95 * 12.5 * [vet's XPM] / [vet's BPM] = (1 + N) * 4 * [NUB XPM] / [NUB BPM]

Equivalently,

0.95 * 12.5 * [vet's XPB] = (1 + N) * 4 * [NUB XPB]

where XPB = XP/battle = XPM / BPM.

Now solving for the "correct" NUB is trivial.

N = -1 + (0.95 * 12.5 * [vet's XPM] * [NUB BPM]) / (4 * [NUB XPM] * [vet's BPM])

Now we can start plugging in numbers. We'll pick Ranger's and Kitty's numbers as the highest vet and NUB representatives, respectively -- for this we want to use maxima, not averages.

battles xp months played* BPM XPM** XPB**
Ranger 400223 47332812 10.6 37756 4115896 118
Kitty 125939 43540595 2.99 42120 6331335 150
* actually "sets of 30 days played"
** kitty's current bonus is 1.3, so XPM had to be divided by 2.3

N = -1 + (0.95 * 12.5 * 4115896 * 42120) / (4 * 6331335 * 37756)
= 1.15

Thus, all NUB and NCB have been multiplied by (1.15 / 1.3) = 0.887, adjusted for the lifetime of the bonus. E.g., kitty's new bonus is about 0.71 for its remaining month.

I'm explicit about the process here to the point of tedium for the benefit of those of you who still keep an open mind. Those of you who do not will continue to hate on the NUB anyway, of course.

Final thought: you might think from the BPM numbers that Kitty's lead is due to larger BA purchases. This is not the case; both purchase about the same amount -- which is to say, Ranger has bought about 3x as much as Kitty, having been around about 3x as long. In any case, chosing to spend money on BA instead of items is a strategic choice; the only problematic area is when USD comes in, but trying to USD-proof CB is not what is being addressed here."



I quoted all that to say: I hope Jon's working on recalibrating that so that a N*B can actually reach that 95% goal with equivalent effort. And yes, the only option is equivalency, thanks to */20 and the 6 BA refresh.

Mikel February 1 2008 12:34 AM EST

Just fixing the bugs in step 2 would need to be done first before you try changing any of the game dynamics (other than the N*B).

Windwalker February 1 2008 12:57 AM EST

Epiphany makes some valid points about the NUB expectations being unrealistic.If the actual start of your NUB was delayed by a period of time to learn just a little about the storm you just walked into it might make a big difference to some. I'm not sure how this could be done. It's just a very complex game to be off and running with the clock ticking..
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=002KyH">The Butterfly Effect and Todd</a>