test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Enchant Upgrade System in Mod 16

hercules125hercules125 Posts: 427Member Arc User
edited February 28 in PvE Discussion
Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

Alternative:
Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

Comments

  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Posts: 2,956Member Arc User

    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Or one where if you X amount of wards it consumes the wards and it upgrades. For instance, a 5% chance should use 20 wards and it is done an automatically and consumes all 20 wards. Instead of a player wasting ward after ward after ward, only realizing it took them around 50.
  • silvershard#4275 silvershard Posts: 95Member Arc User
    edited February 28
    So, basically doing away with Coal Wards?
    Or making them considerably cheaper than 100 Pres Wards?

    Since the lowest refinement probability in the game is 1% (or 1 in 100) the most Pres Wards you would need to use would be 100 before being granted automatic success.

    So since 100 Pres Ward = 1000 Zen, 1 Coal Ward = 1000 Zen. No one in their right mind would use a Coal Ward for a 1% chance when they are guaranteed success with 100 Pres Wards with a possibility that they will actually use fewer than 100 for the process and be left with spares.

    If you can convince Cryptic to stop selling, or reduce the price of, Coal Wards and make Pres Wards do a better job... it might just work.
  • thefiresidecatthefiresidecat Posts: 3,224Member Arc User

    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Or one where if you X amount of wards it consumes the wards and it upgrades. For instance, a 5% chance should use 20 wards and it is done an automatically and consumes all 20 wards. Instead of a player wasting ward after ward after ward, only realizing it took them around 50.
    I think you are better off with preswards than coal wards. even difficult enchants usually come around before you've gone thru 100. I have had two r 12s go thru more than 100 in the last 3 years. (and I've done a lot of them) I only ever switch to coals for level 14 and I'm quite sure I've spent far less doing it that way than going for coals before that. you're better off just buying off the ah if you're using that many coals. In my experience what you are asking for here would actually end up being more expensive than how it is now.
    xbox guild

    Main toons
    Tiberius Rex SW Combat hr 17.4k
    Rincewind CW 18k


    PC imaginary friends special events only

  • silvershard#4275 silvershard Posts: 95Member Arc User

    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Or one where if you X amount of wards it consumes the wards and it upgrades. For instance, a 5% chance should use 20 wards and it is done an automatically and consumes all 20 wards. Instead of a player wasting ward after ward after ward, only realizing it took them around 50.
    I think you are better off with preswards than coal wards. even difficult enchants usually come around before you've gone thru 100. I have had two r 12s go thru more than 100 in the last 3 years. (and I've done a lot of them) I only ever switch to coals for level 14 and I'm quite sure I've spent far less doing it that way than going for coals before that. you're better off just buying off the ah if you're using that many coals. In my experience what you are asking for here would actually end up being more expensive than how it is now.
    This.

    Even with the 3%, 100 Pres Wards is a better long term strategy than Coal Wards for anything other than 1%.
    I think I've probably had 2 or maybe 3 go past 100 (never by a huge amount) and I've more than made up for those losses by hitting a 3% in under 30 a couple of times.
  • thefiresidecatthefiresidecat Posts: 3,224Member Arc User

    So, basically doing away with Coal Wards?
    Or making them considerably cheaper than 100 Pres Wards?

    Since the lowest refinement probability in the game is 1% (or 1 in 100) the most Pres Wards you would need to use would be 100 before being granted automatic success.

    So since 100 Pres Ward = 1000 Zen, 1 Coal Ward = 1000 Zen. No one in their right mind would use a Coal Ward for a 1% chance when they are guaranteed success with 100 Pres Wards with a possibility that they will actually use fewer than 100 for the process and be left with spares.

    If you can convince Cryptic to stop selling, or reduce the price of, Coal Wards and make Pres Wards do a better job... it might just work.


    it doesn't work that way. you are not guaranteed to get it with 100 preswards on a 1 percent. each roll is separate it isn't cumulative.
    xbox guild

    Main toons
    Tiberius Rex SW Combat hr 17.4k
    Rincewind CW 18k


    PC imaginary friends special events only

  • mdarkangel#4696 mdarkangel Posts: 324Member Arc User
    I would be all for an option to use a number of preservation wards ex. 10% Do you want to use 10 pres wards to guarantee success, or attempt one at a time.
  • silvershard#4275 silvershard Posts: 95Member Arc User

    So, basically doing away with Coal Wards?
    Or making them considerably cheaper than 100 Pres Wards?

    Since the lowest refinement probability in the game is 1% (or 1 in 100) the most Pres Wards you would need to use would be 100 before being granted automatic success.

    So since 100 Pres Ward = 1000 Zen, 1 Coal Ward = 1000 Zen. No one in their right mind would use a Coal Ward for a 1% chance when they are guaranteed success with 100 Pres Wards with a possibility that they will actually use fewer than 100 for the process and be left with spares.

    If you can convince Cryptic to stop selling, or reduce the price of, Coal Wards and make Pres Wards do a better job... it might just work.


    it doesn't work that way. you are not guaranteed to get it with 100 preswards on a 1 percent. each roll is separate it isn't cumulative.
    It WOULD work that way if the system of automatic success at the maximum chance as suggested above were implemented.
    So, as suggested, if a 5% chance were guaranteed success after 20 Pres Wards, the same rule would mean that a 1% chance would be guaranteed on the 100th Pres Ward... BUT might be achieved at any point in the previous 99 leaving whatever you didn't use as a free bonus.
    Making 100 Pres Wards a FAR better option than 1 Coal Ward at the same price.
  • silvershard#4275 silvershard Posts: 95Member Arc User
    Unless I misunderstood, and that suggestion is instead to effectively turn Pres Wards into a currency, and remove all chance from the refinement process?
    In which case, again...
    Why would Coal Wards need to exist? .
  • mdarkangel#4696 mdarkangel Posts: 324Member Arc User
    Another option I wouldn't mind having, increasing the amount of preservation wards we can apply increasing the percentage of success. Ex. 10% chance, 1 pres ward keeps it at 10%, but 2 pres wards increases the chance to 20%, 3 would increase to 30%, and so on up to 10 wards offering 100%. Both of my options would require adjustments to the percentages to make the math a little easier.
  • mebengalsfan#9264 mebengalsfan Posts: 2,956Member Arc User

    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Or one where if you X amount of wards it consumes the wards and it upgrades. For instance, a 5% chance should use 20 wards and it is done an automatically and consumes all 20 wards. Instead of a player wasting ward after ward after ward, only realizing it took them around 50.
    I think you are better off with preswards than coal wards. even difficult enchants usually come around before you've gone thru 100. I have had two r 12s go thru more than 100 in the last 3 years. (and I've done a lot of them) I only ever switch to coals for level 14 and I'm quite sure I've spent far less doing it that way than going for coals before that. you're better off just buying off the ah if you're using that many coals. In my experience what you are asking for here would actually end up being more expensive than how it is now.
    You have no idea how many times I burned through a 100 for 10% or 5% chance. I simply give up now and buy coal wards when I have a 10% chance in front of me. My luck is that bad.

    One R12 to a R13 I used 230 wards. Yeah 3% my butt.

    Like I been stating I'm very unlucky with upgrading things and LB. Though +5 rings drop very easily for me.
  • thefiresidecatthefiresidecat Posts: 3,224Member Arc User
    edited February 28



    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Or one where if you X amount of wards it consumes the wards and it upgrades. For instance, a 5% chance should use 20 wards and it is done an automatically and consumes all 20 wards. Instead of a player wasting ward after ward after ward, only realizing it took them around 50.
    I think you are better off with preswards than coal wards. even difficult enchants usually come around before you've gone thru 100. I have had two r 12s go thru more than 100 in the last 3 years. (and I've done a lot of them) I only ever switch to coals for level 14 and I'm quite sure I've spent far less doing it that way than going for coals before that. you're better off just buying off the ah if you're using that many coals. In my experience what you are asking for here would actually end up being more expensive than how it is now.
    You have no idea how many times I burned through a 100 for 10% or 5% chance. I simply give up now and buy coal wards when I have a 10% chance in front of me. My luck is that bad.

    One R12 to a R13 I used 230 wards. Yeah 3% my butt.

    Like I been stating I'm very unlucky with upgrading things and LB. Though +5 rings drop very easily for me.
    I never do more than 20 at a time on any given enchant. if it's being stubborn I shelve it til later. if you keep pushing thru on a bad day you end up wasting a lot. some days the luck is better than others as far as I can tell. it also seems like sometimes you just get a bad enchant. there have been some enchants that I cycle thru other enchants i'm up grading and the other enchants will upgrade even at a higher level faster than these stubborn ones. I've been tempted to just sell the ones being stubborn and stick with the ones that are easy. even the ones I classify as stubborn don't usually go over 50 wards though
    xbox guild

    Main toons
    Tiberius Rex SW Combat hr 17.4k
    Rincewind CW 18k


    PC imaginary friends special events only

  • dread4moordread4moor Posts: 979Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    I wouldn't mind better odds on refinement.
    But no way will they make Pres wards into currency (100 pres= guaranteed success).
    That would eliminate the value of coal wards which are a significant revenue source for them.
    They'll never do it.

    In the current system, Coal Wards are a market segmentation tool. FTP players grind out AD and buy Pres Wards. Coal Wards are not targetting the FTP market at all. They are "pay for convenience", for people willing to pay to not click "refine" 100 times.

    I'd welcome a bump in the refining odds as much as you, but every %chance increase equates to 100s of people who will not buy Coal Wards because the odds crossed their "odds worth clicking for instead of paying" threshold.

    Highly unlikely they will throw away money like that for no benefit to them.
    JrUzbQw.jpg?1
    I am Took.
    "Full plate and packing steel" in NW since 2013.
  • lowjohnlowjohn Posts: 1,010Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    If we're making requests, I want something more like STO's refinement system. In STO, you spend RP to up both item level and quality (green -> blue -> purple -> UR -> gold, similar to Neverwinter's artifacts), and the RP items you spend add different amounts of Rarity Upgrade Chance. Once you put in enough to get a Item Level upgrade, your item levels up and it rolls the rarity upgrade chance, then both measures drop to zero again. If you're already at max IL for the item, the rarity upgrade DOESN'T reset, so you just throw in more RP to up your Rarity Upgrade Chance and roll again.

    So imagine that instead of a 10% chance to upgrade an item that you can click on over and over until it works, you put in the RP and got a 3%, then some of the last RP vanishes. You put in more RP and now the chance is 6%, and some vanishes. More RP -> 9% -> more RP -> 12% etc etc etc.

    (I've had items in STO get as high as 56% before actually rolling over and levelling, but that's a different problem).

    Basically, chances of getting an upgrade are lower but every time you fail to upgrade it, your chance on the next attempt goes up.
  • kolatmasterkolatmaster Posts: 3,074Member Arc User
    Just a few more hours till things are on preview... Some more patience and we will see what's up! ;)
    va8Ru.gif
  • hercules125hercules125 Posts: 427Member Arc User

    So, basically doing away with Coal Wards?
    Or making them considerably cheaper than 100 Pres Wards?

    Since the lowest refinement probability in the game is 1% (or 1 in 100) the most Pres Wards you would need to use would be 100 before being granted automatic success.

    So since 100 Pres Ward = 1000 Zen, 1 Coal Ward = 1000 Zen. No one in their right mind would use a Coal Ward for a 1% chance when they are guaranteed success with 100 Pres Wards with a possibility that they will actually use fewer than 100 for the process and be left with spares.

    If you can convince Cryptic to stop selling, or reduce the price of, Coal Wards and make Pres Wards do a better job... it might just work.

    Not if you set the cap at greater than 100. In every example I gave, I set the cap at higher than what you'd expect. For example a 10% upgrade you would expect 10 tries, but I'd set the cap at some higher number, say 20. Doesn't completely make coal wards useless - it just sets a reasonable limit to the pain of those of us who have horrible experiences with the RNG.


  • klangeddinklangeddin Posts: 876Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    edited March 2
    They should have just removed wards from the game, raised chance to 100% everywhere and balanced it by raising the RP and reagent costs to upgrade. the 1% items could have just added in a fixed AD cost.

    But we can't have nice things, can we? Gotta keep that RNG, disguised gambling for ludopaths in there, right?
  • wintersmokewintersmoke Posts: 1,343Member Arc User

    Just a few more hours till things are on preview... Some more patience and we will see what's up! ;)

    Mod 16 drops on Preview server

    Devs: "you're welcome!"
  • r000kier000kie Posts: 437Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User
    Pretty sure the guaranteed success will occur sometime after the % chance of success, on the downward slope of the bell. Aka for 10% will not be after 10 wards, not even 20, but around 30. So coal wards for 1% or 3% will still be legit.
  • wintersmokewintersmoke Posts: 1,343Member Arc User
    r000kie said:

    Pretty sure the guaranteed success will occur sometime after the % chance of success, on the downward slope of the bell. Aka for 10% will not be after 10 wards, not even 20, but around 30. So coal wards for 1% or 3% will still be legit.

    150%
  • lowjohnlowjohn Posts: 1,010Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User

    r000kie said:

    Pretty sure the guaranteed success will occur sometime after the % chance of success, on the downward slope of the bell. Aka for 10% will not be after 10 wards, not even 20, but around 30. So coal wards for 1% or 3% will still be legit.

    150%
    Do you have a link to where it says it will always be 150%? I saw the dev post about how 1% sets the Streak Breaker to 150, but not confirmation that they're all set to 150% of expected value.
  • hercules125hercules125 Posts: 427Member Arc User
    I'm just curious if the streak breaker logic was already in the works, or done in response to this thread....
  • pteriaspterias Posts: 661Member, NW M9 Playtest Arc User

    I'm just curious if the streak breaker logic was already in the works, or done in response to this thread....

    I'm sure it was already in the works, probably for months. This isn't remotely the first time this has been brought up, people have been complaining for years. Changes like this can take a long time from plan to implementation. They may have been planning on doing this for a long time and were just waiting until another refining update to put it in.
  • wintersmokewintersmoke Posts: 1,343Member Arc User
    lowjohn said:

    r000kie said:

    Pretty sure the guaranteed success will occur sometime after the % chance of success, on the downward slope of the bell. Aka for 10% will not be after 10 wards, not even 20, but around 30. So coal wards for 1% or 3% will still be legit.

    150%
    Do you have a link to where it says it will always be 150%? I saw the dev post about how 1% sets the Streak Breaker to 150, but not confirmation that they're all set to 150% of expected value.
    No, that dev post, assuming that the r14 -> r15 is 1%, was what I was referring to...
  • krumple01krumple01 Posts: 587Member Arc User

    Well, since they're revamping everything else, how about doing something that the player base would actually appreciate?
    Right now, I cant tell you how many times a 10% upgrade has taken 40+ attempts, or a 5% taken close to a stack of preservation wards. And no, it isn't balanced by the number of times it goes below the expected attempts - that rarely happens.

    How about a system where your chance of success increases as you make attempts? It doesn't necessarily have to be +10% per attempt for a 10% upgrade, but some amount to put a reasonable cap on tries. Maybe +4 or 5% per attempt?
    For a 3% upgrade, perhaps +1% per attempt, and so on.

    Alternative:
    Instead of adding a percent chance after each attempt, just put a cap on the number of tries. So a 5%, could have a cap of 30 tries. A 3% could have a cap of 60, and so on.

    Have you taken a math class?

    Essentially what you are suggesting is going to be a static amount of wards then.

    If the % chance of failure because that's really what it is, not success. Most players dont understand this. At a 10% success chance you have a 90% chance of failing each attempt.

    What you want to do is increase the odds of a successful chance as a ward is "spent".

    What you are proposing can also be achieved by telling the player, okay you want to make this next upgrade then you need a stack of 27 pres wards that all get eaten but you have 100% upgrade chance.

    Also this doesn't change anything. You will still need to spend the same amount to balance out the system.

    If you make enchants "easier" to upgrade their price comes down, reducing their value. If its easy to have rank 15 enchants then brand new players will have all rank 15s by the time they hit level 10.

    You reduce the value of pres wards, reducing the rewards that are granted upon getting a pres ward.

    Right now pres wards on PC auction house are around 5k each, give or take a few hundred depending on if you are buying in bulk or get lucky on a generous post. If you make it easier to upgrade enchants this price will drop, not a little but a lot based on just how easy you made upgrading.

    Over all though the numbers balance out.

    If you have 10 enchants that you are trying to get to rank 14, the odds are you will spend just as much as every player has.

    Sure some players get lucky with a first or second try %5 success chance but then a few weeks later spend more wards than statistically possible. This balances out over the long haul based on how many enchantments you are attempting to upgrade.

    Players seem to conveniently forget when they got exceptionally lucky and only remember the times when they had bad luck and went well over the statistical success rate.


  • hercules125hercules125 Posts: 427Member Arc User
    @krumple01
    You do realize this has already been implemented in mod 16, right?
Sign In or Register to comment.