BA Regeneration times. (in General)


QBOddBird June 9 2008 9:29 AM EDT

I've been thinking about it lately, and have even become a little vocal on the matter in a few other threads.

When Jonathan initially made the change over to the slower regeneration time, I hailed his change. At the time, he was mulling over keeping the slower regeneration rate - apparently he did decide to do so - and I as well as many other community members loved the ability to log in every several hours to burn our BA.

But really, I think that's slowly killing the game.

There's little competition. Up near the top, in the 6/20 BA regeneration zone, there is very little BA missed. The closer you to get to the top, the less is missed, of course. The problem is something NS pointed out long ago: there's just no leeway...You're not going to catch up to the guy ahead of you because he's not missing any BA either.

Plus, every single BA becomes invaluable - you can't miss any - and the rigid schedule of logging in every 9 hours becomes more of a ritual than playing a game. That's where I'm sinking in to right now, the 6/20 BA ritual...no playing around, retraining, testing stuff as much as there used to be.

Ranger used to do quite a bit of small retraining, etc. to work his strategy against whoever was beating him at the time. To do that now would be suicide, as it removes a small amount of MPR that equivocates to losing BA your opponent just isn't going to lose.


Really, I sincerely wish we had the old BA regen times back. Even better, I wish it regen'd faster. 20 BA every 10 minutes at the fastest regeneration time would not be too much...the fact is, though, the slower the regeneration the lesser the competition, and the faster the more.

There's just no way if I wanna be competitive that I can do that. I can't go hardcore and stop missing BA altogether, because I've already stopped missing BA...there's no "I'm going to sit down and bust it and catch up to the top, dedicate myself to it, catch up to those high-tier guys" because it cannot be done without starting over from scratch!

Putting the BA regen rate back to its original, or increasing it, would really help the game out a lot I think. For one, newbies always seem to wish they had more BA....consistently they fight it all out their first day, fight off all their free BA, then send a message in chat "when do I get more BA?" followed by "TWENTY MINUTES??" or something to that effect.



Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, and we've all grown comfortable to a log-in BA burn ritual, and we don't want it to change. We can all just grow along the scale, not gaining ground but not really losing it, only watching N*Bs move up and down the range.

Post here if you feel like this too...

Draugluin June 9 2008 9:47 AM EDT

I think its a great idea. Really fosters an extreme amount of competition.

However, I think it would really reduce the effectiveness of old characters, because NCB runs can be boosted even further with plain determination, and not missing any BA at all when a huge load of BA being missed is more or less the norm really gives a insane boost.

Perhaps it could be coupled with a longer bonus period in order to require maximum effectiveness to require much, much more commitment. Not that I'm saying missing sleep for four months is non-commital, but uhmm.. I dunno.

[SIBT]Gardiner Amarth June 9 2008 9:55 AM EDT

I agree with OB, we need more BA. Back in the CB1 days, there were a couple links to external sites, I don't remember which, where you could go and vote for CB as being the coolest game, or something to that effect. Doing so earned you some bonus BA once a week or something like that. It would be cool if something similar came back as well.

AdminG Beee June 9 2008 10:03 AM EDT

On a personal level I like the fact that I'm in the 6/20 and not having to log at awful times through out the day/night.

Doesn't really help the top with regards to a shake up though...


Mmm, half baked idea time.

Turn the BA refresh on it's head.
6/20 (with appropriate rewards) for the newbs, sliding up to 10/20 for the top dawgs. If you wanna stay there then you're gonna have to click.
How to make it not boring for newbs waiting on their refresh. I dunno - give them a load of "get more" BA that they can use but also on a refresh rate of four drops a day...

Dunno - I'm hungry and a bit sleepy so none of the above is probably workable.


Did I say already that I love the 6/20 for my own selfish reasons and any change to the refresh rate is likely to hit me in a negative only manner...

QBRanger June 9 2008 10:06 AM EDT

OB,

Do you not understand the "new" CB?

Everyone has to have everything equal. No advantage gained in any way.

Except of course, if your a new player.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 9 2008 10:08 AM EDT

while i understand your concerns, it would give people who do not have to work for a living a definite edge. much like world of warcraft is dominated by teen-agers and college students, carnage blender would likely become that as well.

i think what would actually foster more competition at the top is getting rid of the "disposable" team idea that the current system fosters. we have a lot of people who sell characters to make a run to get a bit higher this time. or we can just accept that this is the new competition, a steady run of ncb's to see who can take one higher. you get a higher ba regen for a bit as well!

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] June 9 2008 10:41 AM EDT

Ranger, you're confusing yourself now. Equal doesn't not have to mean easy.

If the BA regen rate was increased, to make it harder to burn all available BA at the top, that would still be 'equal'.

Frost June 9 2008 11:44 AM EDT

NO gentlemen thats to hard! :( must make it easier and fairer especially for new players they are not as smart so they get BONUS. Yea i like that good stuff good stuff

[RX3]Cotillion June 9 2008 11:53 AM EDT

I see things the exact same was as you OB. At least bring back x/10!!!

QBOddBird June 9 2008 12:54 PM EDT

Beee - it'd affect me in a negative only way as well. I'd either have to sell off Black Sophist (and happily go back to Hejin) or I'd lose ground.

But that isn't the point. More competitive players should be up higher. That includes those with more time to spend though, dudemus...if you have any suggestions though, please, go for it. You know well that I'd also like to see this 'disposable team' style of gameplay disappear, but I don't see how that fosters competition. In fact, that style of gameplay is the only thing that DOES foster it right now - the fact that you CAN abandon your old team which hasn't the chance of an icicle in hell and start a new team that can compete. =(

Talion [Axis of Evil] June 9 2008 1:06 PM EDT

"In fact, that style of gameplay is the only thing that DOES foster it right now - the fact that you CAN abandon your old team which hasn't the chance of an icicle in hell and start a new team that can compete. =("

Here's an idea... give transfered characters a lifespan.

If you created the character and raised it yourself (or simply bought it before this new idea was put into place), it is immortal.

If someone transfers you a character, then it has a 1 year life span (like naming). After that it gets retired forever.

The last owner could still recuperate items and gold that were on the character at the time of its death but could not transfer anything to that same character (i.e. it could not be used as a dead mule).

Lord Bob June 9 2008 1:11 PM EDT

I disagree. I'd prefer only needing to log in once every six hours and not every three like I did under the old system. With the x/20 regen rate, I can still remain relatively competitive and maintain a life outside CB.

I'd be all for generating more BA at 20 minute intervals, however. I think if done right it would be a great replacement for the N*B, which I despise. Instead of a ridiculous newbie bonus, just give lower ranked characters larger amounts of BA. Though I cannot say whether the extra activity would have an effect on the load placed on the server. There may be technical reasons as to why this might be a bad idea.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 1:17 PM EDT

Right...but Lord Bob, the whole concept is that people will miss BA.

Then there's room to make ground against others. It's the concept of NOT having your cake and eating it too. That way everyone doesn't just keep growing at the same rate...


Talion, that is a really interesting idea. I'm seriously going to be pondering the ramifications of such a change for quite a while now....I might just be in support of that too ;)

INDColtsFan18 June 9 2008 1:31 PM EDT

I need more BA, that's all im saying. I can't believe it used to be faster BA regens. Why would someone change that? To make there game die out and less people wanting to log in? Doesn't make sense to me..

Lord Bob June 9 2008 1:36 PM EDT

"Right...but Lord Bob, the whole concept is that people will miss BA. Then there's room to make ground against others. It's the concept of NOT having your cake and eating it too. That way everyone doesn't just keep growing at the same rate... "

Yeah, I don't like that. As mentioned earlier, that penalizes those people that work for a living, or do anything other than sit behind a computer nearly 24 hours a day and play CB. Maybe some are blessed (or cursed?) with a life that permits that level of dedication, but the rest of us aren't.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 1:40 PM EDT

So then, back to the question:

If your ability to hit all your BA isn't what you'd like to determine how well you compete against others, what should?


It seems like the quantity vs. quality argument, I suppose. What do you suggest be used to advance on the players above you if you are fighting exactly the same amount of BA with no challenge bonus?

Perhaps fighting people with higher PR should have a massively greater influence on rewards, so that fighting with less gear/ against higher opponents yields enough reward influence that one can advance?

Suggestions are EXTREMELY welcome, that's what I'm trying to foster here.

Suqataqus June 9 2008 1:49 PM EDT

As a NUB, I must say that I wouldn't mind my bonus dropping in exchange for a longer time frame. It would mean each individual BA that I don't burn (sleep has to come at some point) is less noticed in the end result. I don't think it's fair for me to join the race 3(?) years in and get a boost high enough to put me anywhere near the top in just 4 months.

However, I like the above suggestion regarding fighting people bigger than you have a larger influence on rewards. Assuming the top people can be beaten by lower people, it would eventually mean the top positions switch more rapidly. In my mind that creates a much more competitive environment, although there's always a few people who would rather sit on their throne for eternity rather than face competition.

AdminLamuness June 9 2008 1:56 PM EDT

Answers inline.

So then, back to the question:
If your ability to hit all your BA isn't what you'd like to determine how well you compete against others, what should?

I believe this still holds true. A player should try to use much BA as possible to compete. Worked in CB1, "should" work in CB2.

It seems like the quantity vs. quality argument, I suppose. What do you suggest be used to advance on the players above you if you are fighting exactly the same amount of BA with no challenge bonus?

Nothing. Whatever is applied to the higher players should be applied to everyone as well. But here's the thing, we had a change such that training a skill is 12 now. We should revert this change back to the way it was. Doesn't it make sense? The higher you are, the more xp you are required to change. Otherwise, everyone pretty much has linear growth, which is why it's harder to catch up.

Perhaps fighting people with higher PR should have a massively greater influence on rewards, so that fighting with less gear/ against higher opponents yields enough reward influence that one can advance?

I still somewhat liked the old system where VPR vs. VPR determined your rewards.

Hm... this all brings us back to... CB1 > CB2 (still).

QBOddBird June 9 2008 2:29 PM EDT

oh, and this idea by Fex is AWESOME.

<Verifex> What if everyone gets a rolling bonus as long as they fight, and the more they fight the momentum builds for the bonus..
<Verifex> so if they stop fighting the bonus gets smaller and smaller until it goes away.
<Pheasant_Plucker> hey, that's a pretty clever idea
<Pheasant_Plucker> nice one Fex :D
<Verifex> Kinda like those kinetic-energy lightbulb bikes...

[Beo]AggroHippie June 9 2008 5:14 PM EDT

okay, OB is saying that he has to get up at night continue being competitive... how about increasing BA during a certain time (adjustable for supporters) that BA changes back to x/10?

Lord Bob June 9 2008 5:37 PM EDT

"If your ability to hit all your BA isn't what you'd like to determine how well you compete against others, what should?"

Even at x/20, most players are not going to get in every single ounce of BA. I don't. After all, I have to sleep sometime.

Those that are going far out of their ways every day to get in those few extra BA are going to eventually come out ahead. So yes, even at x/20, there is going to be some difference in the amount of BA two players of varying activity will use. Maybe not as much, but I think it's a good compromise.

Pheather June 9 2008 7:03 PM EDT

Except You're in 8/20, which means if you use all your BA, you have 6 hours and 40 minutes until it regens again. At 6/20 you have about 9 hours.

Wizard'sFirstRule June 9 2008 8:04 PM EDT

I would take it a step further and say 10/5 for new players and 6/5 for vets. (same regen curve). It should be an interesting change.

Tyriel [123456789] June 9 2008 8:10 PM EDT

Some people have school and/or work, you know, and can't be on CB every 2.5 hours to do their 6/5 BA, let alone the 1 hour and 20 minutes for their 10/5 BA. That's just too much.

I think it would be good for the 'average user' (the people that the change from x/10 to x/20 was made for) if BA went to x/10 or possibly x/15, and the BA regen was inverted, so you have less at lower MPRs, and more at higher MPRs.

Or you could just leave it alone and give me a 6/20 character, so I'll never miss any more BA, even with school. :) That shouldn't happen, though, IMO. People shouldn't be able to go to school for almost 9 hours and return home to less-than-full BA, especially at the top when it should be the most competitive.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 8:16 PM EDT

Lord Bob, there are 9 hours between 0 BA and 160 for me.

I sleep just fine, work just fine, without missing BA. Only reason I miss it is if I choose to do something else for over 9 hours.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 8:19 PM EDT

And yes, I realize that everyone can't believe I'm suggesting a concept where they can't hit all their BA.

But if I recall correctly, Jon dislikes rolling bonus because it lets those who are lazy get ahead.

Isn't that how this current system works? Just look at player responses. What I'm basically seeing here is: "I disagree with the concept of a game where I might miss BA."

And you're right, not everyone can get on every 2.5 hours. In fact, NOBODY can, that involves missing a ton of sleep and having no life. That's an equalizer - you might miss BA, but so will others. However, whoever is willing to dedicate more time to make themselves competitive would be capable of doing so.

Relic June 9 2008 8:55 PM EDT

Sorry OB, but running an effective NCB already takes a tremendous amount of my time, this would only exacerbate the problem of missing BA during workday hours.

It would be a major blow for those that are older and do not have the free time some have.

If we switched back to 10 min BA refreshes without upping the cap to 320, I would probably quit personally.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 9:55 PM EDT

So the preference is lack of competition rather than losing ground personally.

I understand that, as I would lose ground as well, but simply do not find it to be the game-enhancing choice. The idea is that the people who put in the effort to be at the top, would be.

three4thsforsaken June 9 2008 10:24 PM EDT

although I do find the idea attractive, I like the idea of hard work paying off and the ability to catch up, but I also always loved the idea about CB that the guy who logs in a few times a day has the same advantage as they guy who logs in every 20 minutes.

Sometimes other MMO games are incredibly intimidating because you know you can never beat that guy who logs in every day all the time. CB was kinda refreshing in that way.

But I also understand that the easiness of 6 BA is a bit odd since it makes it impossible to get an MPR edge.

Perhaps we should find a medium between the two extremes.

Tyriel [123456789] June 9 2008 10:25 PM EDT

I think x/15 is a nice compromise between those who want more competition and those who want the people with school/work taking away from CB time (like themselves) to stand a chance.

10/15 gives you 4 hours, 9/15 gives you 4.25 hours, 8/15 gives you 5 hours, 7/15 gives you 5.5 hours, and 6/15 gives you 6.5 hours to get on before you start losing BA.

Want more competition? Invert the BA regeneration from what it is now, so you have to work harder as you get higher.

That's just my opinion on it.

QBOddBird June 9 2008 10:55 PM EDT

I agree with that concept as well, Tyriel.

Why as you approach the most competitive zone of the game is less required of you? As NS recently put it, that's just counterintuitive.

Lord Bob June 10 2008 12:04 AM EDT

"Except You're in 8/20, which means if you use all your BA, you have 6 hours and 40 minutes until it regens again. At 6/20 you have about 9 hours."

And this game shouldn't always revolve around the top 6/20 players. I see plenty of competition around the lower ranks with the x/20 rate, so the way I'm looking at it, BA regen is perfect as it is.

Lord Bob June 10 2008 12:05 AM EDT

I will say I'd be happy with Tyriel's x/15 though.

QBOddBird June 10 2008 12:07 AM EDT

Who says it is revolving around them? The point is that there is NO competition there.

And if you're seeing plenty of competition around the 8/20 and higher regen rates, Lord Bob, doesn't that insinuate that a higher regen rate is encouraging competition?

QBOddBird June 10 2008 11:58 AM EDT

<NightStrike> OB - a key point also about the regen change is that now, no one has to spend a single BA during money time

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 10 2008 12:16 PM EDT

"And if you're seeing plenty of competition around the 8/20 and higher regen rates, Lord Bob, doesn't that insinuate that a higher regen rate is encouraging competition?"

asking for game changes based on isinuations is probably not the best way to get jon to make a more restrictive change (in that people that are now doing fine would likely be doing worse, especially those with full-time jobs that do not allow internet access or game playing) and one that causes more server load (giving the ones at the top the most ba in a day when they are proven to use most of their ba is counter-intuitive in a resource management aspect).

especially when it seems that the current vision of the game is multiple runs at the top, not steady team development over time. i think that the rolling bonus would truly be the best way to encourage more action at the top and if it is not implemented then it must not fit jon's vision.

QBOddBird June 10 2008 12:43 PM EDT

(giving the ones at the top the most ba in a day when they are proven to use most of their ba is counter-intuitive in a resource management aspect).


Obviously I am not basing a request for a game change on an insinuation, I was pointing out something in what Lord Bob said. Please read the original post before posting, kthx. Besides, we were at a higher regen rate previously if you recall. It's not like I'm asking for something ground-breaking, it'd be a return to how things previously were.

"especially when it seems that the current vision of the game is multiple runs at the top, not steady team development over time. i think that the rolling bonus would truly be the best way to encourage more action at the top and if it is not implemented then it must not fit jon's vision."

Yes, that is how it seems. However, multiple other players and I have expressed our dissatisfaction at a 'throw-away team concept'. Granted, Jon's vision for the game is where it will go, but I'm fairly certain that players telling him it is driving him away will have an effect. There's no point to effecting changes that drive off your audience.

"(giving the ones at the top the most ba in a day when they are proven to use most of their ba is counter-intuitive in a resource management aspect)"

I don't even understand what this has to do with anything. You're suggesting that gameplay should be sacrificed in exchange for efficiency?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] June 10 2008 12:50 PM EDT

if we do ever see an influx of new users from facebook, the server needs to be able to handle the battles or we get lag. we have seen it before over the years and it is ugly. i believe, at least to some extent, the ba change was to prepare for this influx.

turning things topsy turvy as you suggest would likely increase server load. at our current population that is likely not an issue. with growth it could be. i guess my point in general is that we are likely to change jon's idea on the rolling bonus rather than your current proposal in my opinion.

furthermore, the idea of more movement at the top being equivalent to more competition is just flawed in my mind. you would then have a smaller number of people competing due to the more restrictive nature you are requesting and likely end up with that smaller number being in exactly the same situation we have now.

PoisoN June 10 2008 12:51 PM EDT

I like it the way it is. I don't think it would add more fun to go back to the level where the competition is mainly focused on who logs in most. But the lack of game play is another topic.

The players on top already demonstrated that they can do that best. And players who are not - well they did not used their NUB properly, spend time with forging or did (not) similar things which stopped them before 6/20.

And don't forget the benefits at lower levels, 1 BA is not so valuable so you can experiment a bit with your strategy and you are much more interesting for a clan.
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=002SFC">BA Regeneration times.</a>