Huh? (in General)


FailBoat[SG] October 5 2011 8:02 AM EDT

Whats up with the sheer number of people around the 7k MPR that have 700k+ Scores? This is just plain silly...

Quyen October 5 2011 8:04 AM EDT

someone(natasha) is upping the scores of low MPR players.

TH3 C0113CT0R October 5 2011 9:05 AM EDT

lol i noticed it aswell, not sure how its happening but... I LOVE IT!!!! lol it gave me a ton of Clan members to bash and give me atleast 50% challenge bonus :P

QBRanger October 5 2011 11:30 AM EDT

This was well discussed in this thread:

http://www.carnageblender.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003DjW

Basically there are super specialized strategies that allow people with low MPR to fight up very high.

They include:

DM sinks
EC sinks
the exbow

Once someone starts using such a strategy, the cascade soon follows.

Areo is the prototype of such a strategy. Someone who should not be able to fight up as high as he is, but due to a spell or items, can easily.

QBRanger October 5 2011 11:32 AM EDT

http://www.carnageblender.com/inspect_opponent.tcl?opponent_id=144961&opponent_name=Anomander+Rake

Joel is another using a massive DM going after RoS characters with almost no native HP.

http://www.carnageblender.com/inspect_opponent.tcl?opponent_id=133673&opponent_name=Joel

Joel's example is not as extreme as he has to use a lot of MPR compared to the exbow which needs very little to do massive effects in battle.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 11:38 AM EDT

Ranger, that doesn't happen to be what caused this. That only really affects active chars. Nat is adding giant amounts of score to the system which affects all chars, b/c she is fighting both active and not active chars.

QBRanger October 5 2011 11:41 AM EDT

Nat is adding giant amounts of score to the system which affects all chars, b/c she is fighting both active and not active chars.

Ah, did not notice that an admin is gaming the system artifically adding score to the whole system.

Thanks for the update.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 11:43 AM EDT

Well any player can do it, you can do the opposite and take score out of the system if you want.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 11:50 AM EDT

Actually for quite awhile, Mikel did the opposite. And then Sickone. I do recall a few people getting their panties up in a bunch, but nothing was done.

QBOddBird October 5 2011 11:54 AM EDT

Your justifications aren't enough, as you've failed to remember that the definition of "gaming the system" is "doing something Ranger doesn't think you should do"

TH3 C0113CT0R October 5 2011 12:02 PM EDT

ouch!

QBRanger October 5 2011 12:07 PM EDT

So OB,

You think gimping a character with 5M score just to draw 10k PR characters is correct? Something Jon wanted people to do?

Remember when you tried to game the system by getting full xp for draws? And Jon quickly shut that down.

This is just pure score manipulation.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 12:10 PM EDT

You think Jon wanted people to gimp their char and SM to 10k PR chars and make it impossible for an NCB to make the top 20?

Yet Jon didn't do anything then either... and it was quite out in the open.

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:11 PM EDT

There's a pretty significant difference between:

Gaming the system so that everyone in your clan gets 100% challenge bonus / full fight rewards without having to bother with strategy or even winning fights during a bonus run

and

gimping a higher level character so that lower level characters can draw them and boost their score


I know you can tell the difference, you don't have to play dumb with me

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 12:16 PM EDT

I'd like to see people stopped from gimping a high level character so a new bonus created one can spend 1600BA on them first, please.

Then we can get worried about score manipulation. ;)

If the former isn't an issue, then go nuts, abuse Score as much as you want.

Hell, win the lottery, then purchase all the characters above/below you so you win the game for all I'm concerned (that's in general, not aimed at anyone here). Lateral thinking and outside the box strategy.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 12:21 PM EDT

I'd like to see people stopped from gimping a high level character so a new bonus created one can spend 1600BA on them first, please.

Hey, I'd like to see a system that didn't reward the lazy like the NCB, one that was actually hard and rewarded long term dedication.

I'd like to play a game where rares are rare.

I'd like to play a game where people aren't punished for having large weapons and armor than other people, yet USD doesn't give you a free win.

But, hey, those aren't going to happen.

Areodjarekput October 5 2011 12:22 PM EDT

I agree with Ranger - Nat is gaming the system in order to artificially generate score, in order to make the early stages of NCBs easier. She admitted that that was her intention for doing this in chat. I don't know about people SMing lower characters to make running an NCB more difficult, but I do hope to crack the top 20 and show you it can be done :)

gimping a higher level character so that lower level characters can draw them and boost their score

The flaw in that logic is that the character is not gimped SO THAT a lower score character can draw them, but is gimped and is actively drawing characters to generate score. The difference is that, if a character was gimped to achieve that, their score would be drained by people who could beat them in the mid ranks, and the lower level characters would not continue to draw them, because you get better rewards from winning.

I'd like to see people stopped from gimping a high level character so a new bonus created one can spend 1600BA on them first, please.

This score generation has created this issue on a mass scale. New NCBs will be able to get 100% CB on 10k MPR characters with 800k score for weeks, not only one day.

QBRanger October 5 2011 12:28 PM EDT

Gaming the system so that everyone in your clan gets 100% challenge bonus / full fight rewards without having to bother with strategy or even winning fights during a bonus run

and

gimping a higher level character so that lower level characters can draw them and boost their score


I know you can tell the difference, you don't have to play dumb with me

I do not have to play dumb. It seems I am very dumb. I have no idea what you mean by the first part of this statement.

I am only typing about what the OP user stated. The issue at hand in this thread.

Nat is actively gaming the system like Areo states and agrees. Actively seeking out lower level characters to boost their score.

I feel and I alone feel, in the world according to Ranger only, by myself with nobody else involved (just to clarify to OB) that this is just plain wrong.

Is it wrong for someone with a 1600 BA NCB to attack a purposely gimped character to max early rewards? Possibly, but then again, they have to attack. What is being done now is just simple plain manipulation.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 12:33 PM EDT

Possibly, but then again, they have to attack. What is being done now is just simple plain manipulation.

You think Jon wanted people to gimp their char and SM to 10k PR chars and make it impossible for an NCB to make the top 20?

Yet Jon didn't do anything then either... and it was quite out in the open.

It's like I'm invisible.

QBRanger October 5 2011 12:38 PM EDT

No Titan.

I read your post. I know Jon did nothing then and I disagreed with him then as well.

Purposely manipulating scores is bad for the game as a whole. While you help one person, others get effected negatively.

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:40 PM EDT

Okay, I'll explain.

In the first case, there was a game mechanic that needed addressing. There is no reason why draw rewards should be equivalent to fight win rewards, particularly when it isn't a win.

In the second case, a user is taking advantage of properly working existing reward mechanics and is sacrificing a character to do so.

In the first case, everyone involved makes a gain because a mechanic is bad.

In the second case, the user involved takes a sacrifice in order to change score.


So unless you are arguing that it is a literal game mechanic problem that people can intentionally create bad strategies, they are very, very different.

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:41 PM EDT

In the first case, there was a game mechanic that needed addressing. There is no reason why draw rewards should be equivalent to fight win rewards, particularly when it isn't a win.

to clarify further - the result of the given fight was a win to both players. That was the game mechanic issue.

QBRanger October 5 2011 12:48 PM EDT

Ah,

I do not feel so utterly stupid anymore as you explained it well. My head hurts learin' stuff.

Now the first point is well understood. Yes, it was a bug in the program that allowed 2 people to get full rewards from 1 fight. And Jon fixed it. But it was an abuse of sorts.

What is being done now is simple score manipulation, plain and simple. So what if one person, who has no real character now, is using their BA to artifically elevate scores. It still reeks of manipulation. A "let's mess with the scores" just for the sake of it.

There certainly are ways to get great NCB rewards from the getgo but this just to me only or perhaps a few others, reeks.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 12:48 PM EDT

But, hey, those aren't going to happen.

I agree, which is why I no longer fight. :(

AdminTitan October 5 2011 12:50 PM EDT

What Nat is doing will do this ->

CB will go up for all chars as they are fighting for the first 2 weeks. If Natasha continues, that 2 weeks will simply increase. Until if she continues forever, they will be getting ~100% CB their entire NCB. That would probably be a little much. As is though, it's very hard for an NCB to make the top 20.

Here's a little story. I made Construct, and then transfered it to novice with less than 2 weeks left of the char. I missed less than 2-3 full days of BA. And used plenty of tricks in the book, some that aren't even possible. I spent upwards of 150M on these tricks and buying BA. Missed lots of sleep, even got rules changed b/c of it. All said and done.... 91% of the top MPR. Not very many people are going to do that well. Areo's going to be the only person that's even going to get close, probably for a long time. Although the system is in better shape then when I ran my NCB.

There are problems:

- NCB rewards sprinters over long term players
- NCB is both equally very easy and very hard at the same time
- NCB makes semi-large chars to small chars worthless
- NCB favors USD players

There are problems, Nat is not attributing to them. It's a system, there needs to be a better one.

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:52 PM EDT

That's my point - this "reeks" to you, but it's perfectly allowable behavior within the confines of the game, makes use of properly functioning mechanics, and you have to essentially give up a character to do it.

(Granted, "giving up" a character is not such a huge penalty in this game due to the 'restart if you don't hit the top' issues with 6/* BA and N*B, but nonetheless this is a penalty of some measure.)

That's why I say "gaming the system" means "doing something Ranger doesn't like." That's literally the basis behind your accusation.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 12:52 PM EDT

/applaud

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:52 PM EDT

I was trying to avoid it, but that's what I see as the problem as well, Titan - the N*B system.

QBRanger October 5 2011 12:52 PM EDT

Hey, I'd like to see a system that didn't reward the lazy like the NCB, one that was actually hard and rewarded long term dedication.

Like CB1 used to be. Gosh I miss that game.

I'd like to play a game where rares are rare.

Like CB1 used to be? I remember waiting for at least a month to get my first rare. An exec sword. And feeling pride getting it forged 1M NW. Like it was my Excalibur.

Now with the NUB, they get an item they want in less than a week, possibly short of supporter items only.

I'd like to play a game where people aren't punished for having large weapons and armor than other people, yet USD doesn't give you a free win.

Like CB1? See a recurring theme here?

But, hey, those aren't going to happen

Why don't we get CB1 back? Or at least a restart of CB1 with all the rules, or lack thereof in that game.

I started CB1, I think 2 years after it opened. And I never felt bad about never being able to catch the top players. I loved fighting my way up. And getting those elusive rares.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 12:53 PM EDT

(That was for Titans post. ;) )

QBOddBird October 5 2011 12:55 PM EDT

Like CB1 used to be. Gosh I miss that game.

i know right :(

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 1:03 PM EDT

I don't miss CB1.

It had issues that needed to be fixed, it's just that the ones Jon chose for CB2 just really weren't that good. :(

Josh [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 5 2011 1:25 PM EDT

Ranger, CB1 was always about community and was never about achieving number one. The N*B changed that in CB2. I see that the majority of people have left in the time I was gone and now the community is rather small. Far more have left than new people have joined and are actively playing. The only hope I could have for re-opening a CB1 game/realm/tournament would be trying to bring back all those players that quit. I don't see text based games having much life anymore. If they did, wouldn't CB2 do a better job of maintaining players? Wasn't that the point of the NUB?

Don't say USD had no effect on CB1 though. It did. It was not as noticeable though as there were less high level characters and there wasn't an insane amount of money floating around in the game. The N*B, disenchanting, and tattoo have made a pretty poor economy. NUB makes a ton of money and large character and seems that a lot leave after that. Disenchanting adds money back into the game that normally would have been trapped on an item (in a way, so does the salvage yard). NCB's level tattoos and then can sell either their original or the one they just leveled to the store and pump more money into the game. The only actual cash sink left is buying BA.

Josh [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 5 2011 1:35 PM EDT

GL, what issues needed to be fixed that were so major he couldn't fix them with a large changemonth within CB1? Heck, we got through a 60% rescale without much complaint. The community there could handle a lot. They apparently couldn't handle CB2, though.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 2:37 PM EDT

That there was no real way for players to compete for the top spot.

That and the coding for Tattoo's, I think. ;)

Josh [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 5 2011 2:54 PM EDT

There was no way for players to compete for the top spot, and yet, CB1 managed to maintain a community and hold on to new players better than CB2.

AdminTitan October 5 2011 2:56 PM EDT

There was no way for players to compete for the top spot, and yet, CB1 managed to maintain a community and hold on to new players better than CB2.

Correlation != causation

QBRanger October 5 2011 3:00 PM EDT

Correlation != causation

Does not mean that there cannot be a correlation between things.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 3:02 PM EDT

There was no way for players to compete for the top spot, and yet, CB1 managed to maintain a community and hold on to new players better than CB2.

Changemonths.

And Jon.

CB2 currently lacks both.

Josh [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 5 2011 3:05 PM EDT

Pretty sure a large number of people didn't transition from CB1 to CB2. I'm also fairly certain a number of veterans that quit, quit over something CB2 brought to the table they weren't a fan of. I was one of them. This has been noted through forums.

I cannot speak to the inability to maintain new players. Though, since the NUB was supposed to improve that and I never really saw any improvements, I can comfortably say I don't think it really helped.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 3:09 PM EDT

A lot of folk didn't like losing everything they put into CB1.

The Bonuses helped draw in new players, and keep them (while not being ideal solutions, and causing a fair few issues themselves)

It's just CB2 stagnated.

Josh [Cult of the Valaraukar] October 5 2011 3:22 PM EDT

I stand by my opinion that I don't think it improved anything. I believe the majority (not all) of people who ran a good NUB and stuck around would have continued to play without one. It wasn't like CB1 never got new players. I think the rate of maintaining new players was mostly the same for both games. It has gotten worse for CB2 now that it has stagnated with the loss of changemonths and Jon. Though, how would that really have any effect on a NUB? That only really speaks to vets quitting in the last 2 years. Plenty quit well before.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] October 5 2011 4:12 PM EDT

Without the introduction of the NCB, I was close to leaving CB a long time ago.

But the community drove CB and things like stagnation, and even the Wiki, left the community with little CB-ness to actually talk about. Which I feel is a major reason people don't stick around as much.

Or just drop by from time to time to see if anything's changed.

QBRanger October 5 2011 4:37 PM EDT

But the community drove CB and things like stagnation, and even the Wiki, left the community with little CB-ness to actually talk about. Which I feel is a major reason people don't stick around as much.

Without bi or tri monthly changemonths that is entirely correct.

Almost all strategies have been dissected numerous times.

Without anything new with respect to real game play, there is nothing left CB wise to discuss.
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=003ETi">Huh?</a>