Tattoo Idea (in General)

Kong Ming January 27 2009 10:00 AM EST

Haven't been reading the forum threads for some time and kind of lost track of things. An idea struck me with the problems of tattoos. Most of us do not have a tattoo that is 'big enough' for our teams, NUBs have a problem catching up because they do not possess a big tattoo. So why not make all tattoos have the experience of the minion it is equipped to? That way, the tattoo do not level and have the experience of that minion. It solves the problem of inequality between those with the tattoo and those without one.

Of course, I would request for a refund of the prices that were paid to all those who have bought a large tattoo or else everyone in cb2 will hate me . ;)


Rawr January 27 2009 10:16 AM EST

Those are gonna be some big refunds

QBsutekh137 January 27 2009 10:19 AM EST

I'm torn on this, and not just because I have a big tattoo... *smile*

I agree that monster tattoos cause some inequality, I'm just not sure how MUCH inequality. If Mikel and I switched right now, he would still beat me, I'm pretty sure.

I need to think about this...

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 27 2009 10:25 AM EST

Hate isn't a strong enough word... interesting idea, but completely unimplementable here. Never mind that it would destroy my team completely, as the minion wearing the tat is my second to smallest.

QBJohnnywas January 27 2009 10:26 AM EST

Firstly, you're not talking about losing the experience of that minion that is equipping the tattoo right?

If that's the case: looking at my tattoo currently and doing some vague comparisons between the level of HP+DD on the familiar and the levels of the enchantments on my single minion, I'd go for this idea. Mostly because it would mean I would have a much bigger tattoo in comparison to what I've got now.

Yes, definitely, a huge bonus to tattoo for single minions.

QBsutekh137 January 27 2009 11:33 AM EST

Oh, I assumed the tattoo would just match the TEAM MPR, not the minion it is on. Solves that issue right there. I see the OP does state minion, though, not team. That would definitely not be a good idea for folks with mis-matched minion sized, and single minions would indeed rule all.

However, if a team depends on a large tattoo, then I think that is the exact unfairness that the OP is pointing out. The idea is pure simplicity -- just make tattoos the same size as your team, automatically. I am thinking someone would have to have thought of this already, but I can't for the life of me remember that being the case. Also throws a wrench in the whole RoE thing -- using an RoE would not only grow a team's MPR, but would "grow" the final tattoo a team strapped on AFTER using the RoE.

There would still be the strategy challenge of assembling a cohesive means of USING the tattoo, but a team couldn't just depend on attrition or USD to keep growing a tattoo until it was so massive as to cause an unfairness.

KM, am I anywhere close to your sentiment or what your original thoughts on this are?

QBRanger January 27 2009 11:40 AM EST


I have never liked the idea of tattoos being transferrable and always wanted them to be character dependant.

That is you get one, level 20 with a new character. They grow with that character and are not transferrable. They will transfer if you transfer the character though.

But since that horse has already left the building/city/state/universe, radically changing the way they are would be very disruptive to gameplay.

Therefore, no.

three4thsforsaken January 27 2009 11:40 AM EST

although I like the idea of boosting single minions, growing a tattoo I think is a fundamental part of this game that I really enjoyed. Since the beginning I loved the idea of having a piece of equipment that you could grow.

Feels like a step backwards by oversimplifying.

Kong Ming January 27 2009 5:00 PM EST

To sutekh137, that's what I was thinking of. That would make the RoE more attractive and solves the problem of not having a large enough tattoo. I was thinking of having the tattoo have the same power as minion its equipped to though a team's MPR could be possible as well.

Wizard'sFirstRule January 27 2009 10:32 PM EST

I don't really like tattoo being character dependent. It takes away the size of tattoo altogether (same MPR + used tats all the way = same size tat), but allowing it just moving around like this is silly. I would prefer it being account dependent (still can buy/sell, but loses the level of the tattoo, transfer with character also loses level).

Brakke Bres [Ow man] January 28 2009 1:37 AM EST

Inequality, is not a bad thing.

Who works the hardest, deserves a big tat.

Ancient Anubis January 28 2009 1:58 AM EST

excuse me nubs have the best chance of growing a tat through power leveling thanx to their free ba than anyone so i don't c why thats a problem. Also a tat is for many is like having another minion and when u recruit a new minion u never get one = to your largest minion in exp so why should a tat do it which is what would happen if single minion teams could this with their tat. It makes light work of the leveling and effort that has been put into the current best tats in the game.

Ancient Anubis January 28 2009 1:59 AM EST

Oh and good luck compensating me i bought my tat when the cb to us rate was still over 8us per milcb and i paid over 100% nw so if u got that kind of money then refund away. oh when i got the tat it was nw of 145mil so thats what over 1000us

Kefeck [BlackSmith] January 28 2009 2:02 AM EST

USD ftw! again.

Kong Ming January 28 2009 6:42 AM EST

That's what I do not like! Using USD to buy yourself a big tattoo, its quite a turnoff for someone like me who played for years to accumulate all the gears and money that I currently owned! Imagine a NUB took ages to learn the game and wasted his NUB. With the game getting more and more complex, I reckon a newbie will take at least a month to get going. And by the time he finds out what he has missed out, he may not be able to use his bonus effectively.

Ancient Anubis January 28 2009 7:07 AM EST

several people have recently showed how well u can power level a tat just look at the top tat holders oh and if i didn't take rangers tat who else would :)

three4thsforsaken January 28 2009 11:08 AM EST

quite frankly, if anyone has been running several EFFECTIVE NCBs for years and years they really should have a top tattoo. Have you been doing that?

three4thsforsaken January 28 2009 11:09 AM EST

by you I mean Kong Ming.

Koshka January 28 2009 12:00 PM EST

But again, that requires regularly dumping your character and starting a new NCB. What about those of us that don't see characters as disposable, who form a long-term emotional attachment and are prepared to take a small hit on efficiency in order to nurture and grow their character? Shafted again, I suppose?

Kong Ming January 29 2009 8:45 AM EST

Nope, I always sell off the tattoo because I got bored with the same strategy.

I current have a 3 million over level JKF that I grew from 100k level or so I think. Now I'm doing HF and I do not want to change the JKF since its a supporter item so not sure what I am going to do with it. ;)

Brakke Bres [Ow man] January 29 2009 8:47 AM EST

raise the growth rates for lower tats!

Problem solved, or more created?

Kong Ming January 29 2009 8:53 AM EST

Not sure how it will work because smaller tattoos are supposed to level up faster then bigger tattoos in the first place.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 9:16 AM EST

Tattoo's gain 1/3rd of the XP a team does. If would seem reasonable then to stick MTL at 1/3 of the teams MPR.

But then, this just does exactly what the OP has suggested, and we might as well remove levels from Tattoo's anyway.

All Tattoos could work without inherant levels, so the only reason it would seem not to do this (and to have a MTL above 1/3 your MPR) is too allow someone to obtain a tattoo larger than normal, to boost thier team.

This then raises the whole inquality discussion about competing with someone who has a larger tattoo than you.

If they are larger than you, with a larger tattoo, due to XP rewards in CB there is no way (bonuses aside) you can earn more XP than them. Therefore you tattoo is always incapable of surpassing yours, and your only option is to look for an unsually larger tattoo yourself, and purchase one off of someone else.

Which kinda removes the draw to naturally level one yourself.

Rolling bonus would (among other options) solve this though.

chaosal January 29 2009 9:28 AM EST

The ability to purchase powerful tattoos does seem to approach game-breaking, but that's a story for another day.

As for growing tattoos, what about dropping your teams power to have the proportion more what you need? It certainly seems like a waste, especially since the way to do it (on low NW teams) would be to literally waste EXP, plus it would require more BA. To solve both of these problems, perhaps purchasing BA with EXP? Obviously the rate would have to be more than you could get from a battle otherwise a grind loop would break everything. It's pretty drastic, but not entirely unreasonable.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 10:26 AM EST

GL: How many times am I going to have to point out how game ending that would be for familiar strats?

QBRanger January 29 2009 10:28 AM EST

Maybe the game needs to be more minion dependant then item/familiar dependant.

Right now, even given the NCB/NUB, how possible is it for someone to get to the top without a super high level tattoo?

Was not the goal of the NUB to give new players a chance at the top? WIth tattoos as they are, that is not possible

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] January 29 2009 10:39 AM EST

How close to the top have I been on several occasions, without using a super high Tat? How many times did I cause havoc in the top when I used what was available to me at the time with nothing bigger than a 4.7-5 mil tat?

Not all strats are dependent on a huge or overly large tat. Its just most people don't think their strats out fully and plan to topple the top with what is available to them.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 10:46 AM EST

"GL: How many times am I going to have to point out how game ending that would be for familiar strats?"

The easy answer (I'm I've siad it before) is to then just buff the percentage of the DD/HP given by the Tattoo to whatever's needed to make it not suck. All changes require balance.

But Novice, why do you think it's ok (for exmaple) to have a 500K DD Familiar on a 250K MPR team?

When no naturally trained minion on said team could ever hope to have a DD as high?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 10:52 AM EST

Better exmaple.

A Team (and I'll use a single mage for the best possible DD size) has a mage with an equal spread of XP spent (I know you can skew this, but this is an example only).

1/3 XP on HP, 1/3 XP on DD and 1/3 XP elshwere (say split between skill, EO and ED for ease).

Add on a normally grown Tattoo and you've got a familiar with 1/3 of the Teams XP into DD.

The same as your home grown Mage.

What's the MTL limit? For ease I'll say x2 MPR (I know it isn't).

Get a massive Tattoo, and now you have a Familiar with 2/3 your total XP into DD.

Something your home grown Mage (on a single team even) can't ever hope to equal.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 10:54 AM EST

"Maybe the game needs to be more minion dependant then item/familiar dependant."

Surprised to see that from you Ranger. ;)

Shouldn't the largest USD wepaon rule all any more?

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 29 2009 11:04 AM EST

i will see if i can give actual numbers here, my jkf on my ncb is still operating, for this week, at its mtl. my mtl is just under 4.4 million. this means that he has(before stat boosting equipment):

2.2m hit points
1.1m strength
2.2 m dex
2.2 m uc

my four minions have equal xp distribution and they have:

a bit of xp into a skill, pretty negligible
around 2.2 m ed/eo's each

my familiar at 4.4m level ends up with 3.5 times the xp of any one minion and just under the total xp of all four minions added together.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 11:31 AM EST

When if you had grown it 'normally' it should be 1/3.

kevlar January 29 2009 11:33 AM EST

Ranger sounds right on

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 29 2009 11:37 AM EST

well, technically it has been grown normally, just on 3 different teams since 1/1/05. ; )

as for your point though, only jon knows what his visions for tattoos is in the game. i will agree though that his implementation of tats seems to be at odds with his stated vision for the game.

i like the idea of having tat level equal team mpr, just so everyone knows what my opinion is before arguing with me!

QBRanger January 29 2009 12:48 PM EST

C'mon Draco.

The reason you could challenge at the top was using a highly abusive and since fixed skill--evasion.

Now that evasion is fixed, you would be hard pressed to duplicate what you had done.

QBRanger January 29 2009 12:55 PM EST


The view from the middle/bottom is not much different from when I was near the top.

However, where I fight now, almost everyone has a near MTL tattoo. Near the top it was not so.

But I stand by my point of characters now being very tattoo dependant, much more then items. This, after much debate with myself, is not a good thing for CB.

However, I do believe still that the biggest USD weapons should rule the game. Their ability however, is less with the counters Jon has introduced. Such as Encumberance and Weapon allowance.

I do now agree the best thing would be for CB transfers, esp for USD to be banned. But then hardly anyone would play a tank as it takes quite a lot of money to make a nice weapon.

Again, My solution would have been:

Make all characters start with a level 20 tattoo. Have all tattoos be non transferrable as with the T-shirts. Have the tattoo artist be changed to the old way-400k CB2 to change.

That way we do not have discordance between characters/tattoos and everyone is playing on a more equal playing field.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 1:52 PM EST

Why do people insist on making suggestions that would require a reset of the damn game?

Even IF it would add something to the game, it would effectively end the game as we know it with the loss of many many people.

The idea that a large tattoo is only available with $US is silly, there are examples that have been given in this thread of people who through hard work have managed to create massive tattoo's.

I for one think it was the last lowering of max tat that CAUSED this issue, without it someone being able to match Steeds level would have actually been possible.

So there is it, raise max tat, and even the playing field. A new user can buy an already upped tat during NUB period and raise it to a level that allows them to play in the top. How simple is that?

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 2:30 PM EST

Lowering the MTL stops the large tat's leveling, so people can catch up.

Increasing it would mean (and I'm deadly serious about this) that the player with the largest Tattoo wins CB.

You might enjoy that Novice, but I'm just as sure that would make as many people leave as you suggest lowering the MTL would.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 2:30 PM EST

And we suggest these large changes, because the game needs them, and has needed them for a very long time...

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 2:38 PM EST

Raising max tat makes it EASIER for people to get a large tat...

If tattoo's as an item type are too powerful, that item needs adjusting not game reset worthy changes.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 2:43 PM EST

I don't see the game play here being all that broken, I was sad to see going tatless eliminated as an option for multi minion teams. The death of the RoE as a viable long term choice was sad.

What you're suggesting is that the hard work and time people have put in be nerfed, what I'm suggesting is that anyone should be able to do the same (and even have a bit of an easier time at it).

What you're suggesting would require a reset, what I'm suggesting enables existing users to NCB and raise a tat and NUB's to save to purchase (with CB even) a larger tattoo and then raise it themselves.

Tattoo's aren't the problem with CB, it's NW-PR making items less desirable than they were in even CB1, where they did almost nothing that has the merchant economy in shambles. Socializing and equalizing tattoo's will simply increase that.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 2:47 PM EST

And harder to catch the already larger Tattoos...

Raising the MTL is *only* an option if we change XP gains so that you don't get more XP the larger you get (all smaller folk need to be able to generate more XP, even if it's only slightly more, to be able to catch MPR and Tattoo size of the guys above them).

A Rolling bonus (as I posted above) would also work.

Tha's the only way. And really the best to fix CB without needing any crazy 'resetting'.

But it won't happen, so we're left with no other option than to suggest other ways.

CB where the largest character gets the most XP, and therefore grows the quickest (and grows a tattoo the quickest) can't work. It's fundamentally broken.

The two Bonuses are band-aid fixes to this problem, that have never really dealt with it successfully.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 2:49 PM EST

"what I'm suggesting is that anyone should be able to do the same"

How do you catch the largest tattoo, on the largest character? Now that MTL is so big it's not capped and continues to level.

NUB can't help, at best you'll get to 95%. NCB is laughable, if you also include the cost of buying a large tattoo you then need to purchase BA for to level.

Sickone January 29 2009 2:54 PM EST

1. Keep current MTL, or decrease it ever so slightly (say, a -15% or max -20%)
While somewhat annoying, I believe most tattoos are "about right" at MTL, a decent trade-off between rewards (due to PR increase) at average-to-high levels, and a decent source of power for those in the low and very high levels.

2. Bump lesser tattoos growth rate close to or even equal to that of the MTL
This way, while not precisely awesome, they become useful for people starting. There's no absolute need to buy a "regular" tattoo when a "lesser" one will do just fine in most of the cases. You would not be forced to get a "greater" tattoo just to keep being competitive, and lesser ones would actually make sense.

3. Bump normal tattoo growth rate noticeably higher than MTL growth rate
This way, you can quickly "level up" any tattoos to your current MTL, even if you were behind before. A greater tattoo will ensure the fact you WILL eventually reach your MTL, even if it might take a long while.

Of course, 2 and 3 would have to be accompanied by a complete tattoo level adjustment with the ratios the growths are being adjusted.
So, let's say we decide to lower MTL by 15%, make lesser tattoos gain 90% of gain MTL while regular tattoos gain 150% of MTL gain.
0.85*0.9/0.3(3)=2.295 (all lesser tattoo levels get multiplied by this)
0.85*1.5/0.6(6)=1.9125 (all regular tattoo levels get multiplied by this)

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 2:55 PM EST

How would it be harder? You can begin leveling a tattoo earlier, which will allow you to level it for a longer portion of the N*B. IT's EASIER.

The problem is still NW-PR, or any other attempts to keep people from fighting high. It's those limitations that are keeping lower level chars from gaining ground on those in 6/20.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 3:03 PM EST

Glory/Relic ran three consecutive NCB chars and got a top 5 tattoo, with a max tat adjustment he could have done it even faster, and certainly matched Steed's level. It's been done.

LA over took the top MPR, as did Sut. It's been done.

QBsutekh137 January 29 2009 3:11 PM EST

Sut took it over with a goodly amount of USD, mainly spent directly on MPR (buying minions, about 90 million CBD spend on that...). I'm not sure you want to use me as an example for much of anything.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 3:13 PM EST

Let's call the largest Tattoo in th game 9 Mil, and the character it's on 4.5 Mil MPR.

I'll describe two situations, one where MTL is equal to MPR and one where it's twice as big.


The large tattoo gets reduced to 4.5 Mil in effectiveness fromt he lower MTL, and won't ever grow until the character it's on hits 9 Mil MPR.

A new player comes along, and purchases a large tattoo. They can purchase anything from 4.5 upwards, and be using thier tattoo at max effectiveness for thier size, like the 4,5 Mil character they are trying to catch.

They reach 4.5 Mil, with a bonus, while their original target has increased to say 5 Mil.

Tattoo effectiveness is equivalent across the board, with the 9 Mil tattoo helping out by already being large enough not to need leveling for a ot longer.

In reality, we're just in CBs usual MPR race.


The large tattoo is working at full effectiveness, providing 9 Mil worth of stats on a 4,5 Mil team.

A new player comes along, and purchases a large tattoo. If they can't buy the largest tattoo in the game, while they get to start leveling it earlie than usual, they are still Millions of levels behind the top Tattoo.

They reach 4.5 Mil, with a bonus, while their original target has increased to say 5 Mil.

Problem is, they've only got a tattoo as larg as they can buy (which isn't going to be 9 Mil) and the guy witht he 9 Mil Tattoo hows now level to 5 Mil MPR has increased his tattoo still more.

In reality, largest Tattoo wins CB.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 3:14 PM EST

LA overtook it using a RoE.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 3:14 PM EST

Should it cost less than 90m CB to take the top?

Using what I like to call "the PoisoN test" if you calculate just
what he's spent on BA alone it's close to 250m CB, that in no way
factors in the time he's spent playing.

90m CB to take the top spot (I realize it's more now) is a STEAL.

I don't even think LA spent that much on his whole setup, minion buys and all.

CB is FAIR, just not "fair enough" for some.

QBRanger January 29 2009 3:15 PM EST

I agree with novice on the raising MTL would only help people get higher tattoos for when their character is higher MPR.

Lowering MTL will prevent people from doing just that. And keep those with uber tattoos at the top of the tattoo food chain longer.

Having played at the top and now near the bottom, raising MTL is the way to go for more equality.

I still, however, stand by my statement that tattoos are much more important then MPR in how characters do at the top. Given the fact familiars get a huge boost to their DD level by the AoF. And the RBF has almost a perfect type of damage that minions cannot duplicate.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 3:19 PM EST

3) Max tat is raised. A new user fights high and well, at 3m mpr with a month and a half remaining of NUB he takes every penny he's made and puts it into a tat. He purchases a top 10 tat and levels it, matching
Steeds and beating the top.

It's possible... you want the cheap NCB scenario?

4) Max tat is raised. A user has a 3m level tat, he NCB's once, raising it to 5m, he spends another six months working his tail off, When he hits 2.5m mpr he is able to once again level his tat, it ends up being a 7m level tat. On his third go around he using his saving and buys some of his NCB BA, resulting in a massive 10m level tat.

Both of these are doable, and both can happen without eliminating the hard work of existing users.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 3:26 PM EST


OK, the new Player gets to 3 Mil MPR with lets say a full 2 Mil MPR left to go (as we'll be generous and say the bonus is set to 100% and he'll get to the 5 Mil the other guy - with the 9 Mil tat - does).

He goes out and buys a 7 Mil Tattoo. One of the Top Ten.

Now, he can't even level this until he gets to 3.5 Mil MPr, so he's got 1.5 Mil MPR space left to level it.

That will net him an increase of 500K on his tattoo giving him a 7.5 Mil Tattoo.

In comparison, the 9 Mil Tattoo is now 9.166~ Mil.

Both players are 5 Mil MPR, yet there is nearly a 2 Mil difference in effectiveness thier Tattoo's provide.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 3:27 PM EST

As for 4)

How large has the 9 Mil tattoo got to in over a yea worh of level Nov

Much larger than 10 Mil I'll bet.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 3:31 PM EST

Max tattoo : 11,026,809 (mpr just north of 4m)

An increase of Max tat is EXACTLY what would be required to allow for massive tattoo creation.

If you want a playing field that allows users the room to match the top in power, raise the max tat and end the backwards penalty to rewards for having gear.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 3:31 PM EST

It's about 500k levels every six months IIRC.

QBRanger January 29 2009 3:53 PM EST


I do understand and sort of support your point about lowering MTL.

However, that is grossly unfair to those that have and rely on their tattoos as they are.

Sort of the horse has already left the barn.

Perhaps, if there is a CB3, your ideas about tattoos, and some others including non transferable tattoos etc.. can be enacted.

But to radically change them now would be too radical a change to make for CB2. In this situation, raising MTL with a ROLLING BONUS, would be the fairest way for everyone playing.

However, it seems a Rolling Bonus is as rare as Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, Mideast Peace, the end of world hunger, and bipartisan politics.

I still do not understand why the Rolling Bonus is so bad for CB2, or perhaps I am too stupid to understand why it is worse then the NUB/NCB.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 3:56 PM EST

I agree Ranger. Raise the MTL and give us either a Rolling bonus, or change XP generation so the largest doesn't generate the most.

That would be the best thing to do.

But as I can't see that happening, I'm suggesting the only other band-aid fix I can think of.

And just raising the MTL without an XP change would be far worse...

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 29 2009 3:57 PM EST

even with all of that being said and my work on growing my tat since january of 2005, i still think that what would likely be best for the game is to take away the tattoos ability to level and just have it work at a level in ratio to team mpr, whether that is a 1:1, 2:1 or 1:2 i care little.

it would make strat > tat, which is good in my opinion.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 4:13 PM EST

The rolling bonus has fundamental flaws that make the N*B look tame.
I've stated them over and over and haven't got an answer, I'm not going to bother to rehash them here.

QBRanger January 29 2009 4:22 PM EST


I for one have not read your opposition to the Rolling Bonus in the past.

And I for one cannot see how it is worse then the NUB/NCB.

But I am perhaps not as intune with the game as I used to be.

Can you please explain what you mean for me please?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 4:24 PM EST

Start with the PoisoN test, from all the rolling bonus idea I've seen, no one has given any solution to the issue of BA purchase costs. I believe that if a bonus is going to match NWO's mpr it should cost the same amount that he has paid. Add in the fact that NOT buying BA would keep you at a higher bonus level, and I think it just falls apart.

three4thsforsaken January 29 2009 4:26 PM EST

I really don't see what's the big deal about people buying huge tattoos. In reality, the biggest ones are incredibly valuable and have prices comparable to their value. And their isn't like an excess amount of gigantic tattoos.

Are we really concerned about top tattoos because people have been buying them and abusing them (which I don't see) or because we just don't like the idea of someone getting one off easy after spending a hundred USD?

People can buy huge tattoos, but such events are rare and hardly effects the game as a whole. Even if they do grab top spot (which you'll need more than just a huge tattoo) it's not like the majority of CB suffers.

QBRanger January 29 2009 4:30 PM EST

Not entirely true.

BA costs with the Rolling Bonus would be as with the NCB.

Whatever the multiplier for the bonus gets used to calculate the new BA costs.

If you do not buy BA, you do not catch up to the top ranks. You do grow MPR, however you will never catch or get up to the top ranks.

With the rolling bonus, the bonus is just like the NCB, no increase to money rewards except for new players.

I personally see no negatives with a rolling bonus. It allows those with the current NUB to be able to slowly learn the game and then try to catch up. It allows older players to use older characters effectively.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 4:32 PM EST

You failed to deal with the fact that not buying BA keeps your bonus higher, which in the long run allows you to reach the same MPR with less money spent, this is wrong.

Sickone January 29 2009 4:51 PM EST

Who said that being able to reach a certain point without spending any money is wrong ?
You say that as if it's a given, as if there would be no question everybody should agree with it.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 29 2009 4:53 PM EST

A static MPR Nov. One your BA buying opposition has long since passed.

A Rolling bonus wouldn't be designed to ever allow you to keep pace with the top (who are buying all thier BA) if you didn't do the same.

Sickone January 29 2009 4:59 PM EST

Well, granted, you can't take over the top unless you spend more BA (or spend your BA more effectively), but it does grant you "cheap" admission in a place much closer to the top than some of those in the top who do spend all that cash would like you to be :)

Bottom line, a rolling bonus would even up the field a bit without you needing to spend inordinate amounts of cash, and people who did spend money like crazy in the past to get to where they are resent that idea that you would get relatively close without spending anything.

QBsutekh137 January 29 2009 5:02 PM EST

novice, if you think that to catch the top, people need to spend the same money, time, and thought as the top person -- well, then you aren't for the NUB/NCB at all. What you describe is impossible. One simply cannot spend the same cash, time and thought as someone who has been spending cash, time, and thought for the past 4 years straight.

So I don't get what your "PoisoN" test proves, other than to staunchly state there shouldn't be any bonuses at all.

QBRanger January 29 2009 5:10 PM EST

Right now you get 33% more BA per day if you buy it.

So you grow 33% faster if you buy all your BA.

The difference in the Rolling Bonus (RB) between not buying BA and buying BA will be far less then that 33%, given that in my scenario the maximum RB will be 200%. Or perhaps 400% for the first 500k MPR to let you grow to a point.

The benefits of growth with the RB buying BA certainly outweigh the ability to have a larger bonus without buying it.

And as Sut stated, there is no way one can duplicate the time, effort, or money (in CB2), that PoisoN put into NWO.

The NUB/NCB attempts to do that and fails on numerous levels. With a few kinks of the RB, it certainly is a fairer way for almost everyone to make a run at the top and not have only a limited time to do it.

I know Jon thinks characters are worthless, however, myself, playing the game, believe they are and should be valuable. The RB makes characters, especially abandoned ones, much more so.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 5:18 PM EST

I don't think I said time... if I did mention it I don't believe it was directly related to the PoisoN test.

I will admit I like the CB1 model for taking the top better, fight high and hard and play smart. CB2 is certainly a more level playing field, allowing folks access to bonuses you previously could only obtain with a massive ELB and a single minion tank. I don't however think that we should make this game all together brainless and reward people with a higher bonus to XP for fighting badly and not buying BA.

QBRanger January 29 2009 5:26 PM EST

"I don't however think that we should make this game all together brainless and reward people with a higher bonus to XP for fighting badly and not buying BA. "

We do this with the NUB. They even do not have to buy their BA, it is free.

I do agree, sometimes making a level playing field makes things too equal.

Or what about this? The RB only would apply to bought BA.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 5:44 PM EST

It is NOT "free".
The BA is pre-bought.
If I have to say that again I'm going to scream.

At this point you're putting high heels on a lipstick smeared pig...
The rolling bonus sounds good, but under the hood it's seriously iffy.

Lets take a look at what it would mean if bought BA were "rolling bonus" BA. It would need to cost about four times what NCB BA costs now, unless this rolling bonus is designed to let you catch up in around the same amount of time people normally get out on a murder wrap.
This would mean that it would obviously have to be optional, since normal chars wouldn't want to be unable to buy BA.
Trying to put a 200% bonus to all XP into bought BA would mean an 800% bonus by my lousy math, those fights would have to be against very specific targets which would take some actual thought.

It still seems to me that it could still be problematic, but maybe not. I'll have to chew on it.

Sickone January 29 2009 5:47 PM EST

"I don't however think that we should make this game all together brainless and reward people with a higher bonus to XP for fighting badly and not buying BA."

Ok, first off, you seem to have an AWFUL lot of misconceptions and hostility towards bonuses designed to help newcomers and returning players alike.

You already admited you like the CB1 model better, and that's quite a step back - even Jon specifically stated he wants to make CB2 never need a CB3, unlike the *mistake* he considers the overall CB1 growth model to have been, which has proven to be unfavourable for people who haven't been there from the start.
It is CB2's goal to make sure that people have the ABILITY to get close to the top at any given time, if they put in some amount of effort. That is not up for debate, it's a given, "the word of god", Jonathan. Now, what IS up for debate is the exact method and conditions required for people to catch up to the top.

Right now, you have the NUB and the NCB.
The NUB is significantly more advantageous than a NCB, and it gives a massive advantage to those who APPEAR to be genuine new players, with the assumptions that new players don't really know what to do and therefore deserve more help, while older players should have had a massive amount of resources of some kind stockpiled.
Now, I state that this here is the first mistake of the current system... some newcomers (and let's assume they are genuine newcomers) actually know or find out fast what they would need to do, while a lot of "veterans" don't really have that much value on them (especially not those who barely played in the 4/6 first months).
By making NUB extremely profitable and NCB much less profitable for worse results or a heavy drain if you expect similar results, you are discriminating heavily against older players.
Not only that, but you have the culture of "disposable characters", since once the N*B period is over, that's where that character can ever hope to be. Your only chance to get higher in rankings is a fresh NCB, which we already surmised is vastly inferior to a NUB.

A decent and fair system will allow any character to catch up with every other character, given slightly higher effort and effectiveness over a long period of time, with time needed to get there being the only variable, dependant on the extra effort involved.
Not just that, but a decent and fair system will allow people to get reasonably close (but still far enough to matter) to other people even if they don't put in a whole lot of effort.

Another misconception is that a system like that would promote lazyness.
Well, yeah, you can easily be forgiven for believing that, but that only shows you don't know all that much about human psychiology.
A system where you KNOW your efforts are pointless, now THAT system promotes lazyness - since unless you are one of the best, you might as well not even try at all.
A system where you know persistent efort WILL eventually get you to anywhere you want to, now that system automatically rewards activity, since you have the certainty that you can do it as long as you just work as much as you can, and that your results will be somewhat proportional to the effort... sure, you do get some diminishing returns (more and more effort, less and less additional benefits), but you DO get additional benefits for additional effort, and that's what matters in the end.

And finally, the matter of time - a rolling bonus would make sure of only one thing : that your absence becomes less and less important as time goes by... and at the same time, that your cash spending on BA becomes less and less important as time goes by.
At no point will your absence nor your spending be irrelevant, just gradually diminished as more time passes.

Sickone January 29 2009 5:51 PM EST

"It is NOT "free".
The BA is pre-bought.
If I have to say that again I'm going to scream. "

If you are comparing it to a non-bonused character that started when CB2 started, then yes, you are right, it's not free, it's just pre-bought.
What we are all comparing it with is the NCB.
The NCB gets no cash bonus at all, so compared to a NCB, yes, *all* of the BA is free. Not only that, but you get a cash bonus the NCB doesn't get.

Hey, what if you take away 50% of the NCB's cash bonus and DO give it 0-cost BA ? It would still be inferior to the NUB in every possible way. And it's not free, it's pre-bought ! At a big discount !

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 5:54 PM EST

"A decent and fair system will allow any character to catch up with every other character, given slightly higher effort and effectiveness over a long period of time, with time needed to get there being the only variable, dependant on the extra effort involved.
Not just that, but a decent and fair system will allow people to get reasonably close (but still far enough to matter) to other people even if they don't put in a whole lot of effort."

This is almost exactly how I would describe the CB1 model...

You could take any char, and design it to beat specific higher level chars, and gain ground on the top.

Sickone January 29 2009 5:56 PM EST

"This is almost exactly how I would describe the CB1 model...
You could take any char, and design it to beat specific higher level chars, and gain ground on the top."

And it would take you exactly t=infinity to get there with equal effort from that moment on.
The goal was to get people close to "there" in a reasonable amount of time, be it 4, 6 or 12 months.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] January 29 2009 6:01 PM EST

Were you on CB1?
Did you watch the top overtaken by a less than two year old char?
Did you see Wildflower hit 2m MPR?

If you're complaint is that cheaters get the NUB, then fine I'll join in your paranoid duck hunting fantasies. The bottom line is that cheaters have ruined enough of this game that I don't care anymore.
I want new players to have the shot the NUB gives them, and don't want that removed because lamers aren't getting caught 100% of the time.

The NCB doesn't cost enough in my opinion, I've already stated that.
Pay the same price PoisoN paid, that's what would be fair.

kevlar January 29 2009 6:50 PM EST

"I want new players to have the shot the NUB gives them, and don't want that removed"

I just got a new found respect for Novice.

QBRanger January 29 2009 7:21 PM EST

I want new players to have a shot as well.

However, not a steroid induced enhancement but a fair one to all.

Including those who have played the game for over 4 years.

Dark Dreky January 29 2009 7:27 PM EST

"lamers aren't getting caught 100% of the time."

I have to agree with you. To elaborate, I'd say they are getting caught around 2% of the time... if that.

I sold out once because of the obvious and disgusting amounts of cheating NUB's, and I feel that it's getting rather out of control as of late. Why not make the NUB exactly like the NCB? Where's the harm in that? The NUB won't get as much money? Who cares! Make 'em work for their rares and weapons. Why is that so bad?

As for the tattoo thing, I like the idea but it seems rather impossible to implement at this point =/

kevlar January 29 2009 7:37 PM EST

I understand that Ranger, I'm just trying to figure out/read what everyone is suggesting what a 'fair to all' way to do it would be

kevlar January 29 2009 7:37 PM EST

I do disagree that "fair" should be based on how long someone has played the game though

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 3:29 AM EST

Sick's long post is excellent. Sums everything up.

Nov I was there for CB1 (even if it was only towards the end). The top was taken by serious USD spending, to get more uber weapons than the top. Don't spend that cash, you get nowhere.

"A system where you KNOW your efforts are pointless, now THAT system promotes lazyness"

It's why I've not fought seriously for ages. I never built up that stockpile of cash, nor threw away three/four teams worth of NCBs to power level a tattoo.

All I do know is wait for a new change to come in, test if for a while to see how it works, then go back to waiting.

I can't ever seriously compete, so I don't bother.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 3:33 AM EST

"I want new players to have the shot the NUB gives them"

Cool, then let's limit all accounts to 6 months (with an option to make it perm if you hit the number one spot).

Because if you don't make it then, you never will.

And the game (bonus rates, items, mechanics) has changed so much since NWO's run.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 3:34 AM EST

And as for power leveling a tattoo now, I'd have to spend a year and a half, to two years, just power leveling a tattoo, before making a serious competitive run for the top.


AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 3:40 AM EST

4! (Sorry, I really am too used to other sites that hate double posting but expect you to edit in new thoughts.)

If we had a rolling bonus, I would instantly pick up my old Jan 1st character (which is currently sitting with no minions) and play him.

For the rest of my CB life.

The drive would be knowing that no matter how long it takes with him, continueing to play with him *will* see competitive growth.

Even if it takes me two/three years just to get to thwere the top is now, and everyone else has moved one, the drive would be there to stick with my character and make him grow.

Now, there's no drive at all.

And has anyone been keeping tabs on active/new users? There's about 250 active users, and I'm one of them. I don't think I've spent a single BA since well before Xmas.

Sickone January 30 2009 3:52 AM EST

"I want new players to have the shot the NUB gives them, and don't want that removed because lamers aren't getting caught 100% of the time. "

And instituting a reasonably capped rolling bonus AFTER the N*B period is over would not hurt anybody.
But it would all but eliminate the need for disposable teams.

"The NCB doesn't cost enough in my opinion, I've already stated that.
Pay the same price PoisoN paid, that's what would be fair."

So how do explain then the *FACT* that simply waiting for the top spot to grow an additional 33% means you get to grow as if you purchased all your BA without spending a single dime ? Well, true, that's what would happen if he stopped playing, but your argument is that everybody should spend that regardless of wether the top player kept playing or not...
...oh, everbody except a NUB, that is, it seems...
Why should a genuine new player get preferential treatment compared to a person that tried out CB a year ago, played a couple of days, then quit for some reason, and he decided to give it another try, to give you an example on the far end of the possibility spectrum ? Why should the NCB cost insane amounts but at the same time the NUB should be so advantageous ? How the heck can you stand such an insanely strong cognitive dissonance ?

three4thsforsaken January 30 2009 3:53 AM EST

I don't think people realize how powerful the new NCB system is with the 6 month time frame and the new score system. The amount of time you can stay with 100% challenge bonus is so much higher than it was before. People can definitely play competitively with a large time commitment and mediocre monetary planning (like buying equips ahead of time).

And by competitive I mean 3.5 mil MPR in 6 months, with maybe a 5 million + tattoo.

three4thsforsaken January 30 2009 3:57 AM EST

And what's the deal with all this hate for the NUB hate? This game is dominated by NCBs last time I checked. Sure, NUBs get a huge money bonus and some extra ba, but they have a ton going against them.

At least in an NCB you can start out with a decent sized tattoo, all your equips prebought, supportship taken care of, and a decent strat/growth plan to boot.

I see not evidence of rampant abuse of NUBs, but what I do see is the need for CB to be friendly to new users, cause if you haven't noticed, CB will only survive with new users/ new users buying supportership.

three4thsforsaken January 30 2009 3:59 AM EST

Pardon the engrish, I wrote that pretty fast :(

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 30 2009 7:24 AM EST

"I don't think people realize how powerful the new NCB system is with the 6 month time frame and the new score system."

i agree and feel that 3m mpr can be reached without buying ba and 3.5 to 3.6 mpr should be easy with some bought ba.

Kong Ming January 30 2009 7:26 AM EST

Not too sure about 3 million but my last NCB ended with just over 2 million MPR ;)

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] January 30 2009 8:40 AM EST

i am basing that on the data from my current run which can be seen here:

i only started buying ba the week starting january 23rd and then only during xp bonus time. i have missed very few natural ba though.

the forecasted 3.5m mpr is assuming that i can average at least 100k mpr growth per week, so far my average is over 130k though. ; )

Sickone January 30 2009 9:21 AM EST

Considering the top MPR is over 4.6 mil MPR, and that you're supposed to be able to get to 95% of that with full BA purchase and unknown but supposed maxed fighting bonuses, this means you should be able to reach 75%*95%=71.25% of that (or 3.3 mil MPR) without purchasing a single BA during your entire run, but also not missing any BA.
By purchasing all BA, but only during XP times and never otherwise (2 out of 7 days out of +33% possible, also with the +60% XP bonus coming up as around +15% growth rate in general - for less than 1/3 of the full BA possible purchase price overall), that means you should be able to get closer to 3.8 mil MPR by the end of your run.

Sickone January 30 2009 9:23 AM EST

Of course, that's only highly theoretical, and your growth rate will very likely start to suffer badly when you get past 2, or at best 2.5 mil MPR, so you end up noticeably lower.
Still, getting over 3 mil MPR without any BA purchase (or the occasional XP-time purchases) is not only possible, but actually quite normal right now.

three4thsforsaken January 30 2009 11:46 AM EST

there are several factors that people haven't taken into account:

first of all, there are only a few NCBs (if any) that has run a 6 month NCB with the new score bonus, and I haven't seen any that has completed it incredibly competitively (the most competitive NCB I've seen is toast, by Relic which was a 4 month one. 3.7 mil MPR).

2nd of all, we are going to see more people with high MPR in the next wave of NCBs. This is important because the more people at this high mpr/score area, the easier for other people to catch up because it'll be easier to keep 100% challenge bonus

finally, for the first time in several months, LA finally isn't messing up the N*B and 6 BA with a RoE

Also worth noting, I don't feel N*Bs should reach 95% top MPR by default. Why? Because of hiring. If single minions could reach 95% mpr by normal means, hiring them would great mess up 6 BA among other things.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 12:10 PM EST

How much would hiring one minion, let alone three at 4.6 Mil MPR cost?

QBRanger January 30 2009 12:17 PM EST

In the age of sub 2 dollars/million CB2, hiring minions at a high MPR is not as prohibitive for some people as before.

three4thsforsaken January 30 2009 1:04 PM EST

I only need to hire one to add like 400k MPR.

Anyways, for the whole 95% thing, hiring has to be in the equation.

Sickone January 30 2009 1:47 PM EST

"How much would hiring one minion, let alone three at 4.6 Mil MPR cost?"

Well, we already have one "single minion" character pretty high up already, at 4,106,968 MPR.
That means he has roughly 265 mil XP on that minion.

Hiring a new "expensive" minion should cost him roughly 88.4 mil CB$ and yield around 29.4 mil XP on the fresh minion (2.45 mil raw levels), if I'm not mistaking.

Hiring all three minions with the "expensive" option should cost him 265 mil CB$ (a bit under 500$) and boost his total team XP to roughly 353 mil... or, in other words, around 5.17 mil MPR.

Wasp [Demon Forging] January 30 2009 1:48 PM EST

This is the 100th post : )

-Another useless peace of information brought to you by... Wasp!

Sickone January 30 2009 1:53 PM EST

This is now a thread about how we should chip in together and fund SingleMinion's new minion purchases so he can take the #1 MPR spot :))

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] January 30 2009 3:14 PM EST

"In the age of sub 2 dollars/million CB2, hiring minions at a high MPR is not as prohibitive for some people as before."

Yay for USD?

QBRanger January 30 2009 3:15 PM EST

Horray for USD!!!

Be more assertive!!!

Cube January 30 2009 5:25 PM EST

"Hiring a new "expensive" minion should cost him roughly 88.4 mil CB$ and yield around 29.4 mil XP on the fresh minion (2.45 mil raw levels), if I'm not mistaking."

Your grammar is mistaking.

Also, you didn't factor in the 200k to change the name of his character heh.

Sickone January 30 2009 6:15 PM EST

I know I'm not a native English speaker, but... what's wrong with it ?

To me, it seems the equivalent of "if I'm not making any mistakes right now", should be "if I'm not mistaking", which I used.
If I would have wanted to say "if I am not misunderstood", then I could have said "if I'm not mistaken", I guess.

Cube January 31 2009 4:49 PM EST

Sorry, I forgot. I guess nothing is technically wrong with it; it's just not commonly heard as "mistaking" by itself for no particular reason.

It's typical to say "If I'm not mistaking anything". For some reason it seems unnatural to say mistaking without an object. Without an object, you'd usually hear mistaken.

kevlar January 31 2009 4:59 PM EST

Cube go outside and have some fun. Seriously.
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=002eSJ">Tattoo Idea</a>