Dancer Archive
Thread: Resource buff reduced.
Thanks for the update. I'm seeing some indications that some thinnk 2% is still too high so I'm hoping some more testing on TC can be done.
There were some other ideas floated around as an alternative to the resource quality buff. I'm just curious if you think it's possible we could continue to ask for alternatives/additions (perhaps to be implemented at a later date)? Panthu for example posted an idea about increased color schemes or different skin appearances for weapons (and I think it could work for armor as well). Obviously that would involve time and effort from the art department as well as getting it to view properly with the rest of the code. But it might be something that could be seen as a "hey that would be cool. let me run to the cantina for a moment" rather than "I need that first. Let me load in the guild alt."
I was kinda hoping for 5%, but I guess I can live with 2.
I wonder if asking for a buff that decreases complexity is too far out of the picture? This would reduce factory times 
BUFFED QUALITY = QUALITY + (10% * (1000-QUALITY)/1000)
In other words, working it out for even numbers just to show examples:
OQ 100:
BQ = 100 + (10% * (1000 - 100)/1000 = 100 + 9% = 109
OQ 500:
BQ = 500 + (10% * (1000 - 500)/1000) = 500 + 5% = 525 (not bad!)
OQ 800:
BQ = 800 + (10% * (1000 - 800)/1000)) = 800 + 2% = 816 (still not bad)
OQ 900:
BQ = 900 + (10% * (1000 - 900)/1000) = 900 + 1% = 909 (see, getting smaller)
OQ 950
BQ = 950 + (10% * (1000 - 950)/1000) = 950 + 0.5% = 955
OQ 980
BQ = 980 + (10% * (1000 - 980)/1000) = 980 + 0.2% = 982
See how it is becoming diminishing returns? So the idea is, for under 900 resources you get some nice help... but for over 900, the help becomes less and less,and you'd still need a 1000 resource for perfection. Not much help for crap quality resources (under 500), but well, those are crap anyway, so a buff can't help ya there no matter what. The real help would come around the 600-850 or so level, which would be useful for the non-uber crafters, without stepping on the ubers' toes.
But, well.. that is probably too mathy for y'all.
C
I think that would be great Chess. But considering how players were dead set against the original plan without even participating in any testing, I'm not sure we could get them behind anything that requires further thought.
Chessack wrote:
Hey Eshie, I was thinking about this and... what about scaling it? For example, a 1% buff is pretty decent on a 900+ resource (950 to 960, almost), but is useless on a lower one (500 to 505 = who cares?). So what if they scaled it along these lines...
BUFFED QUALITY = QUALITY + (10% * (1000-QUALITY)/1000)
In other words, working it out for even numbers just to show examples:
OQ 100:
BQ = 100 + (10% * (1000 - 100)/1000 = 100 + 9% = 109
OQ 500:
BQ = 500 + (10% * (1000 - 500)/1000) = 500 + 5% = 525 (not bad!)
OQ 800:
BQ = 800 + (10% * (1000 - 800)/1000)) = 800 + 2% = 816 (still not bad)
OQ 900:
BQ = 900 + (10% * (1000 - 900)/1000) = 900 + 1% = 909 (see, getting smaller)
OQ 950
BQ = 950 + (10% * (1000 - 950)/1000) = 950 + 0.5% = 955
OQ 980
BQ = 980 + (10% * (1000 - 980)/1000) = 980 + 0.2% = 982
See how it is becoming diminishing returns? So the idea is, for under 900 resources you get some nice help... but for over 900, the help becomes less and less,and you'd still need a 1000 resource for perfection. Not much help for crap quality resources (under 500), but well, those are crap anyway, so a buff can't help ya there no matter what. The real help would come around the 600-850 or so level, which would be useful for the non-uber crafters, without stepping on the ubers' toes.
But, well.. that is probably too mathy for y'all.
C
Oh well... It was worth a shot.
C
Esharra wrote:
I think that would be great Chess. But considering how players were dead set against the original plan without even participating in any testing, I'm not sure we could get them behind anything that requires further thought.
Now be fair. Most didn't know anything about this until two days ago and then were told it was already on TC. The reaction was about what you would expect given the situation.
Since then there have been a lot of people floating very good ideas around. The problem is that the Devs make their move thenare surprised bythe reaction, rather than just asking for ideas in the first place.
They did ask, here.
SmedleyLlama wrote:
Now be fair. Most didn't know anything about this until two days ago and then were told it was already on TC. The reaction was about what you would expect given the situation.
Since then there have been a lot of people floating very good ideas around. The problem is that the Devs make their move thenare surprised bythe reaction, rather than just asking for ideas in the first place.
Message Edited by Warryyr on 08-25-2005 06:10 PM
It seems to me that it will do more harm than good.
It will not affect the hoarding. The hoarders--if anything--are the only ones to really benefit.
What it will do, as you say, Warryyr, is put a lot of pressure on us, and no real evidence that we will be any better offthan we are now.
Esharra wrote:
I think that would be great Chess. But considering how players were dead set against the original plan without even participating in any testing, I'm not sure we could get them behind anything that requires further thought.
Chessack wrote:
Hey Eshie, I was thinking about this and... what about scaling it? For example, a 1% buff is pretty decent on a 900+ resource (950 to 960, almost), but is useless on a lower one (500 to 505 = who cares?). So what if they scaled it along these lines...
BUFFED QUALITY = QUALITY + (10% * (1000-QUALITY)/1000)
In other words, working it out for even numbers just to show examples:
OQ 100:
BQ = 100 + (10% * (1000 - 100)/1000 = 100 + 9% = 109
OQ 500:
BQ = 500 + (10% * (1000 - 500)/1000) = 500 + 5% = 525 (not bad!)
OQ 800:
BQ = 800 + (10% * (1000 - 800)/1000)) = 800 + 2% = 816 (still not bad)
OQ 900:
BQ = 900 + (10% * (1000 - 900)/1000) = 900 + 1% = 909 (see, getting smaller)
OQ 950
BQ = 950 + (10% * (1000 - 950)/1000) = 950 + 0.5% = 955
OQ 980
BQ = 980 + (10% * (1000 - 980)/1000) = 980 + 0.2% = 982
See how it is becoming diminishing returns? So the idea is, for under 900 resources you get some nice help... but for over 900, the help becomes less and less,and you'd still need a 1000 resource for perfection. Not much help for crap quality resources (under 500), but well, those are crap anyway, so a buff can't help ya there no matter what. The real help would come around the 600-850 or so level, which would be useful for the non-uber crafters, without stepping on the ubers' toes.
But, well.. that is probably too mathy for y'all.
C
Do you understand what the buff would do?
The worse your resource was, the more you would be rewarded. Thats like saying, ok the A students, you keep your A, but the C students, we feel bad for you, so you get to have a B for free...
Have you read 1984? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
OMG that is scary that people would come up with that idea, rewarding people more for doing worse.....
Heorot wrote:
Do you understand what the buff would do?
The worse your resource was, the more you would be rewarded. Thats like saying, ok the A students, you keep your A, but the C students, we feel bad for you, so you get to have a B for free...
Have you read 1984? From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.
OMG that is scary that people would come up with that idea, rewarding people more for doing worse.....
I don't think going to the cantina to make better use of the resources one has is a "reward." It seems to me that it is an attempt to make the best use of all available opportunities to make one's circumstances better.
Of course, the crafters against our resource use buffing would like to believe that they earned the rewards, when in reality they were just at the right place, at the right time. I imagine in a sense, the slot machine jackpot winner earned their jackpot as well. But I wouldn'tsay it was due to hard work. It had more to do with being at the right machine, at the right time.