The runaway RoE phenomenon - changemonth issue ? (in General)


Sickone October 1 2008 9:28 AM EDT

You probably noticed by now how the "top 10 MPR" looks like...

FTW (4360439)
King of Pain (4118741)
Oxcha (3995948)
NWO (3991954)
Aztroll (3870762)

In particular, notice the 241,698 MPR difference from #1 to #2, a difference that's about the same as that between #2 and #5.
___

Now, you can say a lot of things, but you can't deny the fact FTW is going to be getting increasingly farther apart King of Pain if he keeps on fighting like he does, and there's no reason for him to abandon the RoE while fighting offensively... soon enough, the sheer MPR difference will be large enough so it won't even matter at all anymore wether he uses a defensive tattoo at all or not.

Bottom line, I doubt there's a single person in here who still thinks the RoE is "working as intended 100% of the time".
While the concept of the RoE might be a good one (and I do love the idea of the XP focusing it can provide), it certainly needs more than just a bit of tweaking.

I have no idea yet how exactly the RoE could be revamped so it still is a decent alternative at any MPR size, but no longer... well... downright broken if the top MPR char can still easily use it at full potential.
___

A couple of ideas, which are far from perfect, but I want to see what you guys think... here goes the first...
The bonus numbers are pretty random and intentionally exagerated just so you can see the direction. Feel free to propose more sensible values instead.


The base idea would be to change the RoE so it practically becomes a "rolling bonus" item, but with a twist.

At the bottom level (on a minimal MPR character), the RoE will grant an overall +100% team XP bonus in exchange for a -80% CB$ penalty (double the XP for a fifth of the cash).
At the top level (on the top MPR character), the RoE will no longer grant any team XP bonus, but will grant a +20% CB$ gain.
In between, the bonuses granted are a linear interpolation of the above (so, for instance, at MPR equal to 50% of top MPR, the RoE will grant a 50% overall team XP bonus at a -30% CB$ penalty).

A small additional change, 50% of the total team XP gain flows into the rune wearer before XP distribution, as opposed to a 20% bonus on top of normal gains.

In other words, if you are the top MPR character of a 4-minion team (no team XP bonus from RoE), 50%+12.5%=62.5% of the base XP gains go to the rune wearer and 12.5% to each of the 3 other minions (before, it would have been 45% on rune wearer and 25% on each of the others)... if you are a 2-minion minimal MPR character, 50%*2+100%/2=150% of base XP goes on the rune wearer, and 100%/2=50% of base XP goes on the other minion (before, it would have been 70% on the rune wearer, 50% on the other).

Well, as a general idea, anyway :)
A more sensible value would probably be around 40%-50% XP bonus at minimum MPR (would average out as 20-25% in the long run if the player makes a run for the #1 MPR spot) instead of a whooping 100% given as example, but like I said, it was the idea, not the actual value that matters.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 9:44 AM EDT

The drawback to the RoE was supposed to be you lost out on using, and leveling a Tattoo.

But if you're so large MPR wise, that you don't need a Tattoo to beat your opponents, then there's no drawbacks to it, and no reason not to use one.

DoS [Demon Forging] October 1 2008 9:46 AM EDT

Good job LA!

Goodfish October 1 2008 9:55 AM EDT

The Rune of Enlightenment is what led America to its current path of disaster.

Sickone October 1 2008 9:58 AM EDT

Well, like I said, I think we can all agree it's not working 100% as intended, so any (other) ideas on how to "fix" it in a fair-ish way ?

Goodfish October 1 2008 10:00 AM EDT

I suggest we delete them without any compensation for their owners, and just to make sure everything stays balanced, reset everyone who has ever used one.

This would not include me. I've known since the beginning the Rune of Enlightenment only spelled doom for its users.

Kefeck October 1 2008 10:10 AM EDT

Your going to penalize LA because he's good, and puts alot of time into this game. That RoE is the one chance he's got to stay on top, without it there would be another nub or possible another player to easily overtake him.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 10:16 AM EDT

It doesn't work like that Plagues.

If a new user started today, and put in the same equivalent effort for 6 months, the system has been designed for them to reach 95% of the top spots predicted size in 6 months time.

That predicted growth would include the boost to MPR gain from RoE use.

In turn, a new user on track for that 95% figure (assuming 100% effort from both parties, and excluding Clan Bonuses to XP) could use an RoE to bypass the top spot.

As for making them fair, the system won't be fair as long as the larger you are, the larger rewards you get. That has to change first.

Goodfish October 1 2008 10:18 AM EDT

>>Your going to penalize LA because he's good, and puts alot of time into this game. That RoE is the one chance he's got to stay on top, without it there would be another nub or possible another player to easily overtake him.

What N*B is going to overtake 4.3 MILLION MPR? I can see a NUB who knows what he's doing (read: a multi who never gets caught) MAYBE getting to 3.5mil MPR during his NUB period. Maybe 4 million with a RoE... but then again, LA will have even MORE time to power himself up, and will likely be over 4.5 million by that time.

The Rune of Enlightenment is worse than the Great Depression.

Goodfish October 1 2008 10:19 AM EDT

>>As for making them fair, the system won't be fair as long as the larger you are, the larger rewards you get. That has to change first.

I hardly think this is the problem. But maybe I'm mistaken. Shrug.

Kefeck October 1 2008 10:24 AM EDT

No Borgin, on more than one account in the last 3 years has a nub overtaken number 1.

Relic October 1 2008 10:29 AM EDT

"What N*B is going to overtake 4.3 MILLION MPR?"

While LA continues to fight with a RoE full-time, no one and _that_ is the point of this thread as I take it.

I used my named RoE for my NCB run for 2.5 months and then switched to my main tattoo to level it. Had I stayed with my RoE I would have probably been really close or surpassed the top MPR, but my tattoo would not have broken 8 mil.

So, what I would like clarified is this: Does Jonathan intend for the RoE be a must use item to get to top MPR AND buying full BA, because from what I can see, that is the ONLY way it can be done.

Goodfish October 1 2008 10:31 AM EDT

>>No Borgin, on more than one account in the last 3 years has a nub overtaken number 1.

And at that point the highest MPR was correspondingly smaller. Sure, the N*B bonus scales (and the NUB one even moreso due to free BA), but... well, whatever. My point is moot. People at the top spend CBD (some heavily), and with money comes opportunity.

Keep the Rune of Enlightenment. Actually, make it triple experience! A 20% boost? Come on! I paid 11 dollars, I deserve 7k experience a battle!

/sarcasm mode

So I'm bitter about the RoE. Isn't it obvious? I want it gone.

Goodfish October 1 2008 10:33 AM EDT

>>So, what I would like clarified is this: Does Jonathan intend for the RoE be a must use item to get to top MPR AND buying full BA, because from what I can see, that is the ONLY way it can be done.

From the fact that the Rune of Enlightenment has been a staple of just about every SFBM (which is basically what everyone runs anyways), yes, Jon DOES intend the Rune of Enlightenment to be necessary. Just like AS and a PL+TSA Battery. Oh, and SG once you get up there.

*prays to the Gods of Changemonth*

Cube October 1 2008 10:57 AM EDT

"But if you're so large MPR wise, that you don't need a Tattoo to beat your opponents, then there's no drawbacks to it, and no reason not to use one."

I see 3 characters that beat his, and if he's not growing a tattoo IMO he's losing out on more.

Kefeck October 1 2008 11:01 AM EDT

I think he has the funds to get a nice sized tat, when the time is right. And I wouldnt call losing to 3 people enough incentive to not use the RoE.

Cube October 1 2008 11:02 AM EDT

Buying a large tattoo is just as hard as buying a large MPR character... In fact probably more expensive.

Kefeck October 1 2008 11:04 AM EDT

He's not even going to need an extremely large tat.? He could probally get by with a 1.5 million leveled one just because he's so far ahead in mpr.

Cube October 1 2008 11:19 AM EDT

Think about it this way.

Tattoo growth is 2/3rds max tattoo.

I have 9,329,586 raw levels trained.
Max tattoo is 4,664,753.

A DD familiar gives 1.25 the tattoo level (not to mention the AoF boost and such).
Means tattoo growth from the beginning would add (4,664,753 * 1.25 * 2) / 3 = 3,887,294 Effective levels to my char with a DD familiar.

The RoE would have added .2 * 9,329,586 = 1,865,917.

This may have been a problem with the ToE in play when you could get away with a pretty low level ToE and be just as effective, but that's been changed.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 11:31 AM EDT

He's not even going to need an extremely large tat.? He could probally get by with a 1.5 million leveled one just because he's so far ahead in mpr.

That's correct!. I have ~6mil tat (that i sold) 'cause i really don't need it. :P

ROE? Works great for those that need it :P

Kefeck October 1 2008 11:47 AM EDT

Score for me.. haha.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 12:29 PM EDT

Top MPR should only be a concern cause it makes 6 BA harder to reach. But a gap between top players shouldn't be as much as a concern.

I think a good solution would be simply to disallow RoE to be worn past 6 BA.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 1 2008 1:23 PM EDT

it would appear that some still labor under the assumption that teams should be able to "stay up" with the number one or even catch up. teams are disposable, if you did not get high enough in any run the system is designed where you can either be satisfied with what you have or you start an ncb.

la is doing us all a favor by increasing his mpr he also makes each of our successive runs end up higher. short of some type of rolling bonus, this is the reality we have to accept.

lostling October 1 2008 2:29 PM EDT

i thought that a large point of having the ROE around was for distribution of exp... how about we just let the minion that wields it get 30% more exp and the other minions lose ((number of minions -1) / 30%)

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 3:39 PM EDT

RoE should always yield more exp. Otherwise you are "losing" tat exp. RoE doesn't grow, and you are sacrificing a tat that does grow.

Sickone October 1 2008 3:53 PM EDT

"RoE should always yield more exp. Otherwise you are "losing" tat exp. RoE doesn't grow, and you are sacrificing a tat that does grow."

Well, maybe we finally reached "that" point where tattoos should be blacksmithable ? :P

Sickone October 1 2008 3:54 PM EDT

It would be a very nice cash sink indeed :)

Cube October 1 2008 4:41 PM EDT

Currently, the system works fine. Adding blacksmithable tattoos would cause a problem. Getting a top tattoo should and is just as hard as getting top mpr, that's why it's a trade off. (If LA spent USD to get around that trade off, I don't really see that as a problem).


"RoE should always yield more exp. Otherwise you are "losing" tat exp. RoE doesn't grow, and you are sacrificing a tat that does grow."

3/4ths is exactly right, this is why the RoE is not a problem because as I already pointed out, you are losing tattoo XP which actually can give you more levels & make them more effective.

AdminTitan October 1 2008 4:50 PM EDT

I think you're missing the point Cubicle, if a 6M+ tat was soooo important, than LA wouldn't have sold me his.

Cube October 1 2008 4:53 PM EDT

Novice's strat center's around a 6 mil tattoo; he loses to one person. Mikel's centers around an 8 mil tattoo; he loses to one person.

LA's has an RoE; he loses to 3 people.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 4:56 PM EDT

I can beat Mikel with just 1mil RBF :P

Sickone October 1 2008 4:56 PM EDT

Correction... he *still* loses to 3 people.
Get enough MPR advantage and those three will go away too.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 4:56 PM EDT

ALso able to beat AA with 1mil TOE :P

Defensive tat is awesome!

Little Anthony October 1 2008 4:58 PM EDT

[URL=http://BannerBreak.com/][IMG]http://bannerbreak.com/banners/5/411/122289435898835050.gif[/IMG][/URL]
Just So You Know !

AdminTitan October 1 2008 4:59 PM EDT

Do you know why LA is losing to three people? Let me explain it to you. LA is using a RoE so he can get more exp, other than the obvious bonus that it gives you a 20% increase in exp, there is another advantage. While novice and mikel are getting an even distribution of exp, LA is getting 80% more on his damage dealer. That is huge at his level. LA is planning for the long run. He's allowing people to beat him now, because he knows in a few months he could continue to lose to noone and keep the RoE on.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 5:02 PM EDT

Thanks SNK4R if this link works

Sickone October 1 2008 5:05 PM EDT

You probably mean...

;)

Little Anthony October 1 2008 5:06 PM EDT

thanks mate, couldn't do it without help :P

Cube October 1 2008 5:20 PM EDT

Did you all miss my spiel about how Novice is actually gaining more levels because his EF grows?

And LA you beat AA with a 1 mil ToE, cause they ToE is messed up right now; doesn't make any sense as a tattoo really.

LA can have his MPR advantage, but tattoos grow faster than MPR. He's not going to "secure" any mpr advantage without also buying a large tattoo.

As his MPR grows everyone else's tattoos grow!

Little Anthony October 1 2008 5:21 PM EDT

so? I just buy a tat later :P




...'cause I AM RICH :P

lostling October 1 2008 5:21 PM EDT

N*B bonus

Tal_Destra 332% started August 29
the triad by lostling 318% started 5 july


seeing a trend? :) im predicting a NUB meltdown within a year... or half...

feel free to post your N*B rates and make a comparison

lostling October 1 2008 5:23 PM EDT

and yes yes LA if you have that much money gimmie

lostling October 1 2008 5:24 PM EDT

btw... LA was not using his ROE between july and august :) just a thought

AdminTitan October 1 2008 5:25 PM EDT

I started before the 6 months change, and mine is 466%, so that multiplied by 2/3 is around 308%.

Kefeck October 1 2008 5:35 PM EDT

August 27th gets me 331%.

LittleLauren October 1 2008 5:44 PM EDT

Maybe we should have a random minute each day where fighting costs no BA. It could be announced by the server in chat, or a notice could pop up on everyone's screen. That would be really fun!

Cube October 1 2008 5:46 PM EDT

Yep you can always buy a tat later, but I think of that as buying a character/buying minions to get mpr/buying BA while in NCB mode. Not too many people spend the cash to do that so I don't see it as a problem.

Sickone October 1 2008 6:08 PM EDT

Oh yeah, spending cash on CB$ was never a problem... that's why we don't have encumbrance and PR weights and... oh, wait.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 6:13 PM EDT

what people don't realize is at higher points of the game the point isn't to make the strat the best it can be, but rather just to make it better than the few people that aren't on your fight list. With top MPR, LA doesn't benefit from a tattoo because tattoos are useless, but rather because the few people that aren't on his fight list have so much NW or a gigantic strategic advantage over him that a tattoo won't help.

I love how we compare the RoE solely on LAs use of it.

In terms of everyone elses gameplay the RoE is definitely viable and not broken. It's one of the few benefits Vets have over NUBs since they have more RoE time.

Also people need to realize how much LAs MPR advantage gives him. It probably gives him a few extra million levels over other people, which is about how much a tattoo gives, more or less.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 6:25 PM EDT

Also, let's not miss out that the larger you are, the larger rewards you get, regardless of who you fight (And you won't have any negative penalties).

So you grow quicker, forgoing leveling a Tattoo. That makes you grow quicker. Which makes you grow quicker. (And earn more cash)

Quicker (and earn more) than anyone else.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 6:38 PM EDT

So if there is any problem it's with the top players using an RoE, not with growing characters using it. Then why not just not allow people in the 6 BA region use an RoE? I think it solves the problem simply and efficently.

Sickone October 1 2008 6:40 PM EDT

Exactly... people always assume that the 20% XP gain bonus is actually JUST a 20% XP gain... instead, it's actually (in the long run) a +20% MPR bonus, which actually equates with almost a 80% XP bonus.

Kefeck October 1 2008 6:42 PM EDT

No sick its only a 20 percent mpr bonus if you run a single minion team. right?

Sickone October 1 2008 6:43 PM EDT

Doesn't matter how many minions you have :)

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 6:46 PM EDT

80% exp boost? Why is that?

Sickone October 1 2008 6:47 PM EDT

The 20% RoE bonus is not a 20% extra on wearing minion, it's 20% of team XP onto the wearing minion.
In other words, if you are a 1-minion team, you get 120% XP on your single minion... if you are a 4-minion team, you get 60% XP on the wearing minion and 20% XP on each of the other three.

But with rewards calibrated in such as way that MPR grows linearly instead of XP, and the relationship between MPR and XP being exponential i.e. XP = 1.4307 * MPR^1.2501, when MPR is 20% larger, total XP on team is almost 80% larger.

Sickone October 1 2008 6:48 PM EDT

"80% exp boost? Why is that? "

Compounded interest :)

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 6:51 PM EDT

I don't understand the math.

Since it doesn't matter how many minions it is imagine I had a 1 minion team.

I put on an RoE and get 20% more exp from my 100% meaning I have a total of 120% exp.

how is 120% a 80% exp boost? or are you talking about something else?

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 6:54 PM EDT

Perhaps you mean in a 4 minion team where each minion gets 25% exp. Put on an RoE one minion gets 25% + 20% = 45%. That is a 80% exp boost for that 1 minion, but by no means a 80% boost in exp total.

Wizard'sFirstRule October 1 2008 6:58 PM EDT

LA can only have 120% of the next player's XP assuming equal effort (or something like that because RoE only give 20% XP or so), I am sure a proper tat, when fully levelled would give its user something equivalant.

Sickone October 1 2008 6:59 PM EDT

"Since it doesn't matter how many minions it is imagine I had a 1 minion team.
I put on an RoE and get 20% more exp from my 100% meaning I have a total of 120% exp.
how is 120% a 80% exp boost? or are you talking about something else? "

For the time being, yes, you do have JUST a 120% XP gain instead of 100% XP gain.

BUT

The higher in MPR/VPR you get, the higher your base XP gains are, so you get to that higher XP gain echelon faster, in other words, while your XP per battle at a certain level did indeed only increase by 20%, your actual XP gain compared to you not using the RoE at all is overall much higher.

ALSO

The higher in MPR you get, the higher the PR of the people you can beat is (this obviously is the only thing that doesn't apply to LA's FTW char since he already has most top PR chars on his fight list), so again, another additional XP bonus source.

For people in the lower brackets of the game, using a RoE is not 20% XP gains, it's closer to 80% XP gains (assuming you always fight the best opponents you can find).
For LA's FTW, it might not be quite 80%, more like 60% tops (since his opponents don't raise in PR all that much), but still, a LOT higher than the visual of 20% on the item description might indicate.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 7:08 PM EDT

thanks for the tip. I have unloaded a bit of PR by stripping armors while keeping the same list. It does give better average per 160 BA :P

PS: while everyone increase tattoo's NW, i don't. (in fact, i can stripped further closer to mpr) I expect that one day, everyone in top 20 would have over 5-6mil PR while i enjoy 4.5mil pr :P

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 7:12 PM EDT

Is there any evidence that top MPR gives significant bonuses? Is it really much different than 2nd top MPR? I think the exp boost you get from higher MPR is very minimal. Just like how one just gets more exp as your character gets bigger, after a certain point it seems minimal. the difference between 2.5 mil MPR exp and the amount with 3.1mil MPR seems very minimal with fighting the same targets.

"The higher in MPR/VPR you get, the higher your base XP gains are, so you get to that higher XP gain echelon faster, in other words, while your XP per battle at a certain level did indeed only increase by 20%, your actual XP gain compared to you not using the RoE at all is overall much higher. "

In terms of a growth plan, a tattoo with a higher challenge bonus easily beats this benefit. Sure you can pull off a 5% challenge bonus that would be multiplied by 120% which will make it a whooping 6% challenge bonus where a tattoo can put you well over 30% till within a few hundred mpr of 6 BA.

When a challenge bonus is not possible RoE might actually get you more levels, but it's minor. It's worth noting the efficency in tattoos. In terms of total levels, familiars give lots of levels of effect for their tattoo levels. So if we count levels, it'll probably end up still short.



"The higher in MPR you get, the higher the PR of the people you can beat is (this obviously is the only thing that doesn't apply to LA's FTW char since he already has most top PR chars on his fight list), so again, another additional XP bonus source. "

Doesn't that go for tattoo growth too? Or equipment boost? Or like...anything? Any strat inprovement increases PR of the people you can beat.

"For people in the lower brackets of the game, using a RoE is not 20% XP gains, it's closer to 80% XP gains (assuming you always fight the best opponents you can find).
For LA's FTW, it might not be quite 80%, more like 60% tops (since his opponents don't raise in PR all that much), but still, a LOT higher than the visual of 20% on the item description might indicate."

Evidence would be nice. Seriously. 80%? 60%? I mean RoE does give a boost that synergic with itself. But i seriously doubt it'll increase the effect by 300-400%





three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 7:13 PM EDT

Still, I still feel not letting 6 BA people use an RoE would be the best solution

Sickone October 1 2008 7:15 PM EDT

And if you still have any doubts whatsoever, look at Occam's Razor MPR growth graph.

I started as a SFBM. Up to around 850k MPR, I was using a RoE. From 850k to 950k, I used a RoE and a ToE. From 950k MPR upwards, I used only the ToE. At around 1.9 mil MPR I switched to single archer. At around 2.1 mil MPR, my NCB was over.

You MIGHT notice the fact that my MPR was growing almost linearly in the 0-850k and again in the 1-1.9 mil MPR ranges.
Also notice the steepness of those curves.
Now realize that XP grows exponentially when MPR grows linearly.

And tell me again the RoE actually means JUST a 20% XP gain bonus in the long run.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 1 2008 7:23 PM EDT

i think that it is great having choices. i also think that any change that further limits choices is bad.

we all have the choice of having a tat that levels with its own xp or using a roe that allows us to channel that xp onto our team instead.

Sickone October 1 2008 7:24 PM EDT

Just for hillarity's sake, the time it took me to gain the first 900k MPR as a SFBM was 3 times shorter than the time it took me to gain my last 900k MPR as a SFBM.
In other words, would I have been using the RoE instead of the ToE, I probably wouldn't have had 3.6 mil MPR due to the dead zone and such, but certainly pretty damned close to 3 mil MPR.

Again, if you need further evidence, look at the MPR growth rate of "God" (character God of Fire). Guess what he was using. Superimpose it over "Occam's Razor" and notice the differences.

So, actually, no, my 80% XP gain was a HEAVY UNDERSTATEMENT.
Would I have used the ToE from start to finish, I probably wouldn't have broken 1.5 mil MPR.
Would I have been using the RoE from start to finish, I probably would have went over 3 mil MPR.

1.5 mil MPR = aprox 75 mil XP
3.0 mil MPR = aprox 179 mil XP

RoE vs no RoE : over +135% XP gains.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 7:24 PM EDT

Sure, if you hadn't used an RoE throughout your NCB you would have 20% less exp total. If your strat had been a little better you would probably have alot more. You went single archer prior to the evasion change, and was wearing a RoE?

Sickone October 1 2008 7:30 PM EDT

No.

I was using the exact same strategy the character "God" still uses, a SFBM/RoE team with a ToE defensive tattoo.
I switched to ToE full time after reaching my MTL. He kept on using the RoE offensively, I guess.
The initial growth rates are almost identical.
After I began using the ToE offensively, I began growing much slower.

Only near the end of my NCB did I switch to an archer strat, and reinked to a ToA.
___

Just look at my char, show history graph, manually add character "god" and only look at MPR growth rates.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 7:34 PM EDT

LA highlighted a very good point.

Everyone using a Tattoo increases the PR as the Tattoo grows, which lowers rewards.

Lower rewards means you grow slower.

Unlike the exponential growth given by the RoE. All at the cost of a Tattoo you might not even need nor notice.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 7:35 PM EDT

"Just for hillarity's sake, the time it took me to gain the first 900k MPR as a SFBM was 3 times shorter than the time it took me to gain my last 900k MPR as a SFBM.
In other words, would I have been using the RoE instead of the ToE, I probably wouldn't have had 3.6 mil MPR due to the dead zone and such, but certainly pretty damned close to 3 mil MPR. "

The first 1 mil MPR should take so much less time because you should have 100% challenge bonus which is possible with an RoE.

And if you want a real shock. Look at Relic's character. He stopped using an RoE at about 2.1 million MPR. Yes his growth slowed down, but that was the point in which he probably lost most of his challenge bonus and was having a challenge penalty. But it by no means cut down his growth by 80%. Compare it to god (now atroll). Um... how is that a 135% boost?

Sickone October 1 2008 7:36 PM EDT



If that doesn't explain it I don't know what else will.

Cube October 1 2008 7:39 PM EDT

That has to do more with challenge bonus than the RoE. It's easy to be at 100% challenge bonus up until a certain point. I have the same effect on my characters, and I don't RoE.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 1 2008 7:39 PM EDT

that definitely shows we all have the choice of choosing to grow our team or a tattoo. i think it is great if people realize that there are two ways to go rather than the one we all thought was the only way.

choice is good! : )

Little Anthony October 1 2008 7:43 PM EDT

with 6mil tat (~) : 6mil PR
with ROE : 5.2mil PR.


good stuff :P

Sickone October 1 2008 7:46 PM EDT



You mentioned something about Toast's character using a RoE up to 2-2.1 mil MPR ? Well, here's the result...

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 7:47 PM EDT

Sick's point is the faded 'growth' lines behind the actual lines. Sure, even with a RoE your increase will lower as your Challenge Bonus decreases.

But check out the two steep lines (both RoE backed) and then the ToE back growth line.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 1 2008 7:48 PM EDT

The faded growth projection lines can be a little hard to see. ;)

Sickone October 1 2008 7:52 PM EDT

I have my monitor on "really, really bright" so I probably thought wrong they'd be easily visible for everybody :P

Cube October 1 2008 7:55 PM EDT

You'll also notice from his PR MPR graph that's when his challenge bonus went to 0%.

Cube October 1 2008 7:55 PM EDT

Sorry, make that Score-PR.

Sickone October 1 2008 7:59 PM EDT

Yeah, a portion of the lowering is because of that indeed.
But look at the comparison between God and Occam in the image above... even with a challenge bonus drop (see where the thing green line diverges from the faded thick green line) it still beats me out of the water growth-wise compared to my tattoo growth curve.
And his initial growth rate was actually lower than mine if you look closer.

Cube October 1 2008 8:02 PM EDT

I just noticed, God was a NUB; thus, the free BA, and probably lack of experience at the beginning leading to a lower growth starting out.

three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 9:29 PM EDT

what are you talking about Sickone? Since when is anyone's MPR growth linear past 2.1 mil MPR? Not Solaar's character, it's impossible.

My point is that if RoE has that so called 100% extra exp, then Aztroll should have much much more exp. Instead Aztroll hired much later (around 3.3 mil MPR) and only has 140k more MPR than Toast. And Aztroll was an NUB vs a NCB. Oh yeah, and Toast added a good 4 million levels to his tattoo in the process.

The reason that Toast has done better is because of his tattoo. His use of a Hal has allowed him to get a challenge bonus and make use of much much better targets throughout his NCB (he used to be a SFBM too!). In other words, the limitations of RoE help balance out the benefits of a tattoo vs exp gain. RoE doesn't give insane growth. Please explain how my logic is flawed.

(note, I don't really know how to post images, could you post a graph comparing Toast and God's growth for me please?)

And what's up with the graphs? Do you seriously believe you can keep linear growth? From 0-800k MPR you have a 100% challenge bonus, is that going to last throughout your NCB? Seriously? With an single archer strat? With only an RoE for armor? That would be... the best growth in the history of CB.



three4thsforsaken October 1 2008 9:30 PM EDT

"RoE doesn't give insane growth. "

and I by insane, I mean your so called 135% extra exp. Or 80% for that matter.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:05 PM EDT

MPR + score :



MPR only (with trends) :



My three separate trends are first the switch from a RoE to a ToE, the second split comes as the challenge bonus comes crashing down (and the final part, not figured as trend on the graph would be the end of the NCB).

Sacredpeanut October 1 2008 10:09 PM EDT

I agree with three4thsforsaken, this talk of 150% + gains in XP due to the RoE is ridiculous.

Simply comparing the gradient at an arbitrary point on someones MPR cure when they were using an RoE and comparing it with the gradient at an arbitrary point along the curve of someone without an RoE doesn't prove anything because as others have said, MPR doesn't increase in a linear fashion.

RoE increases XP gains by 20% (or close to), simple as that, - the only one other factor that could "boost" RoE gains is if using an RoE enhanced challenge bonus i.e. if MPR was better "bang for the buck" than tattoo PR. In my experience however, my tattoo have always given pretty good "value for money" in terms of PR compared to what I would get for the equivalent MPR.

Sickone, there's no way if we both started an NCB at the same time and I didn't use an RoE and you did that you would end up with more than twice my XP (assuming equal number of fights). If you disagree, I'm happy to put a wager on it. Likewise, there is no way that LA's team is growing at more than twice the XP rate of say Mikel's team.

I'm not a huge fan of the RoE myself but its power is being greatly exaggerated IMO.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:12 PM EDT

As you probably notice, I have 4 trend lines with 3 drawn (RoE, ToE, CB breakdown, end of NCB), the graph of "God" has 3 trend lines with 2 drawn (RoE, CB breakdown, NCB end) while Toast only has two, both drawn (RoE, CB breakdown) as his NCB only finishes today.

The trend divergence is quite clear - replacing the RoE with a ToE was FAR WORSE for my growth than losing the challenge bonus.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:18 PM EDT

"comparing it with the gradient at an arbitrary point along the curve of someone without an RoE doesn't prove anything because as others have said, MPR doesn't increase in a linear fashion"


It's obvious from the graphs above that the MPR growth *IS* almost linear given consistent challenge bonuses.
That's why I included the score on the first graph in the pair above.
The loss of consistent challenge bonuses occurs for all participants between 1.5 and 2.0 mil MPR, with a curved line in the growth graph right there while the challenge bonuses sink, afterwards the MPR growth re-becomes nearly linear again.
Yeah, it might not be QUITE linear, but the SHAPE and RATIO of the drop in gains are obvious near the challenge bonus breakdown area.
And also, you can easily notice just how much more damaging the loss of a RoE is compared to the loss of consistent challenge bonuses.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:19 PM EDT

I mean come on, the "faded" lines are only 6 pixels thick, and the growth graphs stay inside the lines nearly the whole time.
How much more linear than that do you want them to be ?

QBOddBird October 1 2008 10:19 PM EDT

"that definitely shows we all have the choice of choosing to grow our team or a tattoo. i think it is great if people realize that there are two ways to go rather than the one we all thought was the only way.

choice is good! : ) "



Choice is good, but not when one choice is clear-cut better.


You could have a Vorpal BoNE or a Tulwar! It's your choice!

It is clearly a better choice to continually increase your gap between 1st place to 2nd than have a big tat, and to have a chance at the top rather than give up the chance for a tattoo.

Relic October 1 2008 10:22 PM EDT

"It is clearly a better choice to continually increase your gap between 1st place to 2nd than have a big tat, and to have a chance at the top rather than give up the chance for a tattoo."

The market does not agree. Huge tattoos are worth way more than high MPR characters.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:23 PM EDT

And it's also not a choice anyway... it just shows that the only good way to grow a tattoo is to keep restarting NCBs and use a RoE up to the point where tattoo is at MTL, then swap with the tattoo.
Not only that, but you will actually get HIGHER in MPR with your character that way in the end, EVEN IF you don't even buy all your BA. It will just take much longer to do so.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 1 2008 10:28 PM EDT

The cost of a big tattoo is nothing to sneeze at...

I will say that this does highlight the fact that PR is a very poor representation of true power.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:28 PM EDT

"The market does not agree. Huge tattoos are worth way more than high MPR characters. "

EXACTLY.
It should be obvious reaching about 75% of top MPR is a no-brainer for a RoE team, and it's also a no-brainer that the top MPR will keep increasing at a "RoE rate" from now on until LA's FTW char becomes inactive.
However, a large tattoo is more valuable than a character of similar MPR because it takes SEVERAL NCBs to get it that high, while in the process a lot of high-MPR characters are simply discarded since they're practically useless... and the higher you get your tattoo, it becomes exponentially harder and requires more and more NCB runs to properly level.

If anything, I'd argue that regular tattoo growth should be FASTER than MTL growth in order to mitigate for this and keep them on even footing with the RoE. A doubling of tattoo growth rate seems appropriate. That, or they should be blacksmithable. Either way is fine.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:30 PM EDT

Actually, the more I think about it, I believe it's a good alternative.
Just double the levels of all tattoos in existance and double their growth rate from now on, and the "RoE issue" ceases to be an issue.

Sickone October 1 2008 10:34 PM EDT

Ok, maybe not double, but at least a +50%, preferably slightly above 50% though (so that tattoos used a long time have a chance to eventually catch up with MTL).

Sacredpeanut October 1 2008 10:41 PM EDT

My point is that drawing lines on MPR curves is such an arbitrary process that you can "prove" almost anything. Here's my attempt at dissecting Toast's growth.



The green is his growth rate after changing to a tattoo and the blue is his growth rate with the RoE.

The result is far far less than the claimed 150% greater XP growth.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 10:43 PM EDT

sound so easy heh? Several NCB's hihihi!
Let me translate into what it really means :
6 months * x = Several NCB;
1 NCB - actual tat gain = last 2 months or so. and this function tends to get smaller. Meaning, at some point in the future, you 'd see yourself restarting to get ROE for about 4 months (dispose team anyway) and gain tattoo level for last 2 months. While doing that you 'd see x*y*z amount of cb2 in Credit Purchase.
while I, LA, shall spend about 150mil in 1 swoop and pwn :P

Oh yeah, all it takes is 1 sellout to get that good tattoo (no need to wait for "several NCB"
Soon or later tattoo will get so big to the point the only person can afford it is : Armor Store.

Relic October 1 2008 10:50 PM EDT

Perhaps we also need to look at PR for tattoos. Look at FTW compared to Toast. I have over 200K more PR and 50 million less NW. My tattoo alone is accounting for over 100 million of my NW. FTW has no tattoo NW at all and more NW but less PR. It doesn't add up to me.

Relic October 1 2008 10:52 PM EDT

FYI, my tattoo NW is 146.6 million.

Little Anthony October 1 2008 11:48 PM EDT

Tattoo NW should add just like any ELB that can deal great damage. Seems fair to me. You cannot just have a junction hal naked with AOF only for minimum PR and hit hard. :P

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 1 2008 11:52 PM EDT

"Choice is good, but not when one choice is clear-cut better."

if you are saying that the roe is so much better, why is anyone using tats still? it would seem to me that most are using tats except during their growth stages. how many others in the top 25 or so use a roe as their main tat?

Wizard'sFirstRule October 1 2008 11:55 PM EDT

yes, everyone is posting charts.

...

The more I think about it, the less RoE is a problem. Using a RoE give you more MPR, but doesn't change the sum between tattoo + MPR. Ignoring other equipments, the MPR modified by only tatto doesn't change. Using a RoE has other benefit like lowering your PR, but other tatto actually let you fight higher, so I think that's a wash.

...

I think the only meaningful chart to use is comparing PR of teams with RoE and other tattoos in the long run (after the initial boost of PR from changing tattoo.

Sickone October 1 2008 11:55 PM EDT

Ok, big mistake on my part... I forgot to simplify the *1.43something so all results I mentioned ?
They're all 43% off on the "too high" scale.

So, in reality, it's more like +20% MPR means +26% XP, +50% MPR means +66% XP, +100% MPR means +138% XP.

Grrr... :(

Sickone October 2 2008 12:02 AM EDT

Can't believe I had to catch my own mistake though, nobody else pointed it out.

Still, the only thing that changes is the "amount of actual long-term XP bonus" you get from wearing a RoE compared to wearing nothing.
However, this DOESN'T change the graph shapes presented above, nor does it mean there's less of an incentive to use a RoE.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 2 2008 12:14 AM EDT

"Can't believe I had to catch my own mistake though, nobody else pointed it out."

i can only speak for myself, but i quit looking at any of your numbers after this statement:


"So, actually, no, my 80% XP gain was a HEAVY UNDERSTATEMENT.
Would I have used the ToE from start to finish, I probably wouldn't have broken 1.5 mil MPR.
Would I have been using the RoE from start to finish, I probably would have went over 3 mil MPR.

1.5 mil MPR = aprox 75 mil XP
3.0 mil MPR = aprox 179 mil XP

RoE vs no RoE : over +135% XP gains. "

all of the probably wouldn't and probably would being equated to a hard number was just a little too much conjecture to mean anything worthwhile to me.

Goodfish October 2 2008 12:20 AM EDT

I don't think anybody should be saying negative about the RoE unless they've never used it.

In that case, I still say it gets deleted or replaced.

Or I can always hope for a nuke-from-orbit sort of thing and go with the "wait for CB3" option.

It's very disheartening knowing that even using all my BA, I will never reach even the top 20. I'm almost two months into my NCB and still haven't hit a million MPR, which people say I should've hit two weeks ago. Then again, I should've used a Rune of Enlightenment as well.

/me despairs for the sake of CB-manity (and womanity to be fair).

three4thsforsaken October 2 2008 12:25 AM EDT

:D

now things are starting to make sense

Sickone October 2 2008 12:28 AM EDT

Funny you quoted that specific part, since THAT specific part actually is still partially valid :D
If I would have remained a SFBM/RoE mage, and pumped all cash into BA during XP bonus times, I would have gotten up to aprox 3 mil MPR instead of just 2 mil MPR (the 1.5 mil MPR was an underestimation), and that IS a roughly 66% XP differnce.
But the difference comes not from just the RoE, but from the switch from a RoE to a ToE and the fact I stopped buying BA on a regular basis during XP bonus times.

I just might have to start a second SFBM/RoE NCB and follow the exact same steps I used to take before on my first NCB, but KEEP on going as SFBM until my NCB is over, and keep pumping all CB$ into BA during XP bonus times until the end.
You know, just to prove a point, even if it will come over half a year later.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] October 2 2008 12:33 AM EDT

you really would have to have two characters, sfbm and have them fight the exact same characters at the same time for any comparison to mean anything though. even then it wouldn't work due to the fact that the toe mage could fight higher up while the roe would have less mpr. those things might balance out, but you couldn't have the same fight list due to them and thus the results would differ.

there really is no way to compare the two, there are just too many variables. we are left with anecdotal evidence only, which is fine and dandy as long as it isn't billed as a hard percentage advantage and taken for what it is worth.

Sickone October 2 2008 12:46 AM EDT

Well, there is a simple way, actually.

We both create one NCB at the same time, we both use the exact same gear (minimalistic : only a base HoC other than a tattoo), we both train XP the exact same way (1/3 HP, rest FB sounds like the best overall to me, wouldn't you agree?).
I use a RoE, you use whatever tattoo you want to use from the get go.
Your tattoo has to be a level 20 tattoo when you start, and you have to keep it on at all times.
We both buy BA only during XP bonus time, we try to keep the same number of fought battles, and we don't upgrade any gear on our characters (what would be there to upgrade anyway).

We both join the same clan we create specifically for this test so we also get similar (if any) clan bonuses.
Heck, even better... have many others start a SFBM NCB and have them all join the clan, this way we can all enjoy a high clan bonus most of the time, to make the differences even more obvious.
Some of us will use RoE, others will use other tattoos.
Target searching should be relatively easy, since all in a certain group (be it the RoE group of the ToE / other group) would probably be able to beat the same targets... heck, I bet there would be little difference (if any) in the targets we'll be able to beat.

At the end, we add them all on a graph, compensate for any number of battles fought/won/lost differences (if any get significant), and we have our answer once and for all, no arguments needed other than the solid proof.

Wizard'sFirstRule October 2 2008 1:00 AM EDT

seems good, but I can't afford to abandon my character to participate, unless I get 60m for doing it.

Goodfish October 2 2008 1:05 AM EDT

Open Central Bank for strict, moderated testing. ;)

three4thsforsaken October 2 2008 2:17 AM EDT

wait, what are we trying to prove now?

DoS [Demon Forging] October 2 2008 2:26 AM EDT

I'd be up for it, except for the part about "start with base tattoo" and the crappy gear part. Although, I would use a RoE for like 2 months... so I would be a split group >.<.. wat? :X

TheHatchetman October 2 2008 2:40 AM EDT

"wait, what are we trying to prove now? "
-three4thsforsaken 2:17 AM EDT

If it's:

"Choice is good, but not when one choice is clear-cut better."
-QBFruitscapades October 1 10:19 PM EDT

Then I think:

"I'd be up for it, except for the part about "start with base tattoo" and the crappy gear part. Although, I would use a RoE for like 2 months... so I would be a split group >.<.. wat? :X"
-DoS 2:26 AM EDT

sums it up pretty well... Especially seeing as DoS wasn't even trying to prove that :P

Sickone October 2 2008 3:26 AM EDT

Well, the "crappy gear" part ensures you're as close in PR to MPR as possible, hence delaying the drop in challenge bonuses as long as possible...
...in defence, you could use whatever gear you want (it won't affect the test much, if at all), but offensively all but base gear needs to be stripped down (and only the HoC + tat make sense at base, maybe some spellboosters too, tops, but +0 ones are harder to get for all participants).

three4thsforsaken October 2 2008 3:47 AM EDT

but why SFBM? SFBM is kinda a weaker strat right now, and benefits less from a tattoo than others. It would make more sense to compare a strat that requires a tattoo to one that is able to uses an ROE with less pain.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 2 2008 3:47 AM EDT

Prooving stuff, and actual calculations aside, doesn't everyone see the problem with this?

If the Top Spot is growing even 20% faster (and it's a bit more, due to lower PR than those using Tattoos) than everyone else (and no one else can match the base rewards the Top Spot gets either), how in the current system do you catch them?

Sure, they might lose to you now, but given enough time for thier ever increasing MPR to make a difference and they'll beat you.

And everyone else in the game.

And no one else will be able to grow as fast.

I'd hate for the quick and easy fix to be just disallowing RoE use on the Top MPR charcater.

Sickone October 2 2008 3:57 AM EDT

Well, "their" argument is that the total tattoo-granted levels (41.66% for a DD familiar) are a higher total growth in raw levels compared to the growth in raw levels granted by the RoE (only 20% their version, at least 26% reality), so that it's a fair trade.

three4thsforsaken October 2 2008 3:58 AM EDT

is RoE that much of a problem beyond among top MPR people? I think it seems fine for just a growth plan.

Little Anthony October 2 2008 3:58 AM EDT

give me a 6mil level tattoo; i will abandon my ROE right away :P (free)

QBJohnnywas October 2 2008 4:01 AM EDT

Seems a shame that an idea of fixes in this situation would be to effectively punish the higher MPRs for gaining MPR too quickly.

I will say, and maybe somebody else has said it in this thread (too much info to read properly!), that the new score system has made things - worse (?). Being able to get positive challenge bonuses in the 6/20 range means potentially faster growth for somebody using a RoE up here. This past week I've been getting 60 -70% challenge bonuses. If I was clan fighting too and using a RoE...that's some big XP rewards...

three4thsforsaken October 2 2008 4:03 AM EDT

that's true the score glitch has potential to be abused with the RoE. But I don't think RoE is at all unbalanced otherwise.

Wizard'sFirstRule October 2 2008 6:15 AM EDT

I agree with 3/4. I don't think I have seen a good argument that RoE is OP. Giving 80% XP so RoE user get higher MPR is not a valid point, unless you can show that the 80% XP is more useful than the XP a normal tattoo would have got, in every situation.

Sickone October 4 2008 8:59 AM EDT

Another interesting fix for the RoE would be a change that doesn't even TOUCH the RoE itself.

First, boost all base XP gains a bit (not much, say 10%)
Then, LOWER the "fighting below PR" limits of 6/20 to, say, around -20% (or, well, at least something instead of no penalty at all), and do something similar to the lower BA regeneration brackets too.

Sickone October 4 2008 9:07 AM EDT

The "80% XP" was a calculation error, I forgot to simplify a rather large factor.
It's "just" a 26% XP gain, assuming same challenge bonus.
Ok, granted, nowhere close 80%, but after you also take the challenge bonus difference into account, it's more like somewhere closer to 30% or even higher.

three4thsforsaken October 4 2008 1:55 PM EDT

yeahhh ><

that sounds much more reasonable
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=002YZC">The runaway RoE phenomenon - changemonth issue ?</a>