@micky1p00 there was no link to the database. The response was to wintersmoke stating that without sharing information it cannot be referrenced to publically. The response also included essentially stating personl experience that often goes unchallengedand as long as it matches the majority attitude and stating personal experience that is based on a collection of information being challeneged because it differs from the majority attitude.
Did I bring alleged database, or alleged ways to make AD as part of my argument ? I did not. Your info is being challenged because it's non-existent. Majority or minority has nothing to do with it.
By jumping around you are seemingly confusig yourself. "This end" is referring to a group of players and has been stated before in so many words.
Then please repeat those words, but in one sentence, because to me it's not clear who you speak for. Just a group of your friends ? Again you evade a simple question and create an obscure reference. Simply answer the question.
To us there are more than enough alternatives and positive RNG experiences for RNG not to be a problem whether it's craftable/buyable items (mysterious merchant, Dragonflight for example), +4 rings, around a quarter of the value of coalescent wards being spent on preservation wards and successfully upgrading, etc.
For the most part we play to have fun (in game/in chat), become stronger and help each other. Our community based play helps alleviate the stressors of the RNG system, if we do a few runs and don't get rare drops/+5's we often joke about it because for a lot of us the benefits of quite a few rare drop/+5's would produce only a moderate increase in viability.
Just in case you overlook some things again: - focus less on RNG - have fun with others - utilize alternative equipment
There is no alternative equipment to legendary dual slotted rings. My fun is to have the best char possible (min-max) can be (for example) Who are you to say that your way of fun is more right? Or stand in the way of me having fun as long as it doesn't impact you negatively.
Then can you finally clarify, you post after post, in every thread, and yet there is never a bottom line. I'm sorry if it's on my end, I may be too stupid to understand, so please just in simple words:
Do you, and not your end, or some obscure reference, but you, have an objection to an increase of ring drop rates? Or a solution of PRNG or cap as was suggested.
Can we have a simple answer? Do you object or not ? And not your end, or your beginning, you Trinity, object this?
@micky1p00 this is a different thread, and yes, you brought what was going on in another thread into this one as part of your argument. The statement to the OP asking if they had tangible numbers other than "I ran X, Y number of times" wasn't referring to the database itself, it was for a simple comparison of number of runs and what rewards granted. The RNG database was referred to by wintersmoke and seemingly that is when you jumped on it. Again when people go along with the majority their statements, often enough to be considerably argued go unchallenged.
+4 rings are also dual slotted. If players want to go for the +5's they very well can though until they get the ones they want they probably have +4's (or lower versions) equiped with those rings being alternative equipment (more available) rather than nothing equiped in the ring slots.
Others also mentioned in this thread in so many words that +4's fair well, are not necessary and chasing +5's can cause self inflicted pain and surprisningly, those statements were not challeneged when made by others, they weren't accused of taking the "moral high ground", etc. though when those statements were made from this end they were. LoL
Not match.
Please try again.
Or your entire mantra now, that you are being challenged ? I choose to challenge your statements. I don't wiggle, nor zigzag. Enough with the straw-man - Answer the questions. I've even put it in bold for you.
only to add underdark rings are 22 , with 1 000 runs in example with 8 rings 72% happy ppl come out with 10 000min game play each only in this, this is ~30min a day for one year only for one ring
There may be 22 Underdark rings but they drop at different places, so it reduces the number to 3-4 (can't remember exactly, have to check the collection) by instance, hence changing the overall result. My 2 cents, doesn't change the demonstration.
@micky1p00 Doesn't matter if the +4 rings being "better" was asked or not though the utility of them is part of the argument of alternative equipment. If a player doesn't have the +5's they want guess what comes next (and has a seemingly higher drop rate). If players want to continually spend time going for additional attempts at them that is their choice as well.
The fate of RNG doesn't solely depend on this thread.
The statements about "being challenged" was an observation of multiple posts from various people and at the time wasn't much more than that.
If you feel the responses are not in a form that you can digest, not articulated in a manner that you feel is satisfactory and or your questions are not answered then simply don't respond to them. You apparently don't approve of posts from this end yet continue to respond to them and try to dictate their structure/content for some reason(s).
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
@micky1p00 Doesn't matter if the +4 rings being "better" was asked or not though the utility of them is part of the argument of alternative equipment. If a player doesn't have the +5's they want guess what comes next (and has a seemingly higher drop rate). If players want to continually spend time going for additional attempts at them that is their choice as well.
The fate of RNG doesn't solely depend on this thread.
The statements about "being challenged" was an observation of multiple posts from various people and at the time wasn't much more than that.
If you feel the responses are not in a form that you can digest, not articulated in a manner that you feel is satisfactory and or your questions are not answered then simply don't respond to them. You apparently don't approve of posts from this end yet continue to respond to them and try to dictate their structure/content for some reason(s).
Again, for the third time, I've asked a simple question.
Then can you finally clarify, you post after post, in every thread, and yet there is never a bottom line. I'm sorry if it's on my end, I may be too stupid to understand, so please just in simple words:
Do you, and not your end, or some obscure reference, but you, have an objection to an increase of ring drop rates? Or a solution of PRNG or cap as was suggested.
Can we have a simple answer? Do you object or not ? And not your end, or your beginning, you Trinity, object this?
Then can you finally clarify, you post after post, in every thread, and yet there is never a bottom line. I'm sorry if it's on my end, I may be too stupid to understand, so please just in simple words:
Do you, and not your end, or some obscure reference, but you, have an objection to an increase of ring drop rates? Or a solution of PRNG or cap as was suggested.
Can we have a simple answer? Do you object or not ? And not your end, or your beginning, you Trinity, object this?
@micky1p00 there was no link to the database. The response was to wintersmoke stating that without sharing information it cannot be referrenced to publically. The response also included essentially stating personl experience that often goes unchallengedand as long as it matches the majority attitude and stating personal experience that is based on a collection of information being challeneged because it differs from the majority attitude.
By jumping around you are seemingly confusig yourself. "This end" is referring to a group of players and has been stated before in so many words.
The overall context is the rquest to change the RNG of rings/the system to obtain them which shapes the context of the responses. You are essentially still implying that the statements from this end (at least some) are stating that no requests should be made because others will follow even after it was clarified that that is not the case.
To us there are more than enough alternatives and positive RNG experiences for RNG not to be a problem whether it's craftable/buyable items (mysterious merchant, Dragonflight for example), +4 rings, around a quarter of the value of coalescent wards being spent on preservation wards and successfully upgrading, etc.
For the most part we play to have fun (in game/in chat), become stronger and help each other. Our community based play helps alleviate the stressors of the RNG system, if we do a few runs and don't get rare drops/+5's we often joke about it because for a lot of us the benefits of quite a few rare drop/+5's would produce only a moderate increase in viability.
Just in case you overlook some things again: - focus less on RNG - have fun with others - utilize alternative equipment
Okay, My bad. I worded that line umm... awkwardly. Let me be clear. You can say whatever you want. You can make any claims that you would like. However, anything that you claim, is strictly your opinion, and nobody else is under any obligation to take you seriously. Unless you have proof of your claims. "Any argument that can be asserted without evidence, can be refuted without evidence." You can make the argument that your opinion is more valid than anyone elses', you can even refer to your mythical data to support your argument. But since that data is kept under lock and key... why should anyone believe that your assertions are anything more than your opinion? This is why the theorycrafters post the results of their testing publicly.
This is one of many discussions regarding various RNG occurancies and shortcomings. The truth is that RNG if not carefully planned, can destroy a game. The reason for this is that it defeats the purpose of hard work; when players do many times a task that takes time and effort, they expect some kind of reward. Adding RNG to this makes, a few of the people happy and many more unhappy. Worse is that there is no quarantee that their luck will change. For example, imagine 2 friends, playing every day in the same party doing the same dungeon/BHE/etc, hunting for the same item. After a considerable amount of games (what "considerable" means is subjective ofc) you may find one of them having the item multiple times and the other lacking it. The person who lacks the item has no perspective that luck will change. He knows he may get it on the next time he tries or not get it after x more tries. This situation eventually will frustrate the said player and make him want to quit (some items can be bought, some not, but this is beside the point). Hard work and RNG can't coexist on the same mechanic. In my opinion some things should only be hard work (time gated or other mechanic) and some other things can be RNG based, but should not require considerable effort.
Other game developers have realised this problem and use some mechanics to counter "randomness". For a "true" RNG (resetting after each roll) they keep the chances of success relatively high so eventually success occurs. Another approach is a mechanic which increases the chances of success after every failed roll (this applies on a specific item and resets after a succesful roll). A third method I have seen is that when doing an event (dungeon/BHE/etc) there is a chance of getting a full item but also in the end players get a feeder item. These feeder items can be combined to get the full item. For exemple, you can get item X as direct drop (RNG) or combining 50 X parts (hard work). Each part is given after succesful completion of said dungeon/BHE/etc.
Any of these methods can reduce the consequences of randomness in the playerbase and I hope cryptic will consider them before it is too late.
@wintersmoke initially in this thread in response to the OP it was stated that some players actively engaging in exploring RNG (which was not a reference to the RNG database itself though which you later referred to) and if it were to be discussed could be done with some actual numbers instead of simply the "50/50" chance examples the OP presented even though ring RNG is not 50/50, though the example can illustrate how RNG can work, just not necessarily how ring RNG does. And since the OP provided no tangible ring RNG numbers but rather simply "x number of runs", the time and effort to produce and calculate a ring RNG sampling wasn't put in, in other words, wasn't shared.
If people are going to argue "facts" then argue facts, if people are going to argue hypotheticals then do that though trying to argue "I ran X, Y number of times and got nothing" is hardly equivalent to arguing "after X number of runs, this, this and this happened and based on that, XYZ" while having the information to suppport it recorded/documented. The latter surely isn't the only way though when it comes to discussing something specific like RNG, specifics will indeed strengthen the discussion.
Essentially when trying to discuss RNG it's going to take more than hypotheticals, if not it's just going to be more and more people sore at RNG presenting "inflated" accounts. Again arguing and presenting tangible information against hypothetical, non-verified information is not something that is done from this end for the most part, in cases where there are hypotheticals being argued, the information gathered/to be gathered and calculated from this end is often simply referred to.
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
@andreask arguably games that have those mechanics are pay-to-play. With a P2P game the company is getting revenue from each player monthly to cover various operating expenses. In a free-to-play game like Neverwinter revenue generated comes from players willingly spending money (for the most part?) though the operating costs still exist even if they are fewer players spending money than not.
With those type of systems (not stating that they are bad) the player base that doesn't pay will be even less inclined to partake in the benefits of spending money and those that do spend money will arguably be less inclined to continue spending/the same amounts. If Neverwinter were P2P it would be a different story.
RNG isn't just in regard to rings. anytime a player: - spends less on preservation wards than a coalescent ward to upgrade. - gets 30k RAD as a level up reward. - various rare items from lock boxes, etc. - wins a loot roll. - gets a free coalescent ward. - etc.
that's still RNG. Though even with all the positive RNG experiences a number of players still bash a particular part of RNG for whatever reason(s) as if it is the only part that exists and not having +5 rings bars progression, not stating that they can't or are wrong for doing so.
It's kind of like a restaurant increasing the portion sizes for various meals (for example if x serves 12 people and would only serve 8 people after the increase), sure it may encourage some to eat there more often or others to start eating there but if the "more ofteners" and new customers don't compensate for the lost revenue due to not being able to serve the same amount of guests for more revenue as before the restaurant would stand to "lose money".
ALL Rights Reserved for any and all suggestions, ideas, etc. from this user.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY "No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
micky1p00Member, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 3,594Arc User
edited September 2017
Now that @trinity706#8838's end and not end was asked clearly if he objects and that end choose not to object, It's clear on this end, that that end does not object to the increase of drop rate for said rings. I think it's safe to assume that the discussion about that end becomes superfluous.
We at the rest of our ends, should refrain from feeding that end. It's obvious that that end is based on un-provens like player payment behavior and associations with non-buyable bound items like said rings.
I stopped grinding till my head almost exploded, and landed an Orange ring I was previously obsessing over...go figure. As for my "THE END" comment...it was a lol high five to @micky1p00 lighten up or your head truely will explode.
@wintersmoke initially in this thread in response to the OP it was stated that some players actively engaging in exploring RNG (which was not a reference to the RNG database itself though which you later referred to) and if it were to be discussed could be done with some actual numbers instead of simply the "50/50" chance examples the OP presented even though ring RNG is not 50/50, though the example can illustrate how RNG can work, just not necessarily how ring RNG does. And since the OP provided no tangible ring RNG numbers but rather simply "x number of runs", the time and effort to produce and calculate a ring RNG sampling wasn't put in, in other words, wasn't shared.
If people are going to argue "facts" then argue facts, if people are going to argue hypotheticals then do that though trying to argue "I ran X, Y number of times and got nothing" is hardly equivalent to arguing "after X number of runs, this, this and this happened and based on that, XYZ" while having the information to suppport it recorded/documented. The latter surely isn't the only way though when it comes to discussing something specific like RNG, specifics will indeed strengthen the discussion.
Essentially when trying to discuss RNG it's going to take more than hypotheticals, if not it's just going to be more and more people sore at RNG presenting "inflated" accounts. Again arguing and presenting tangible information against hypothetical, non-verified information is not something that is done from this end for the most part, in cases where there are hypotheticals being argued, the information gathered/to be gathered and calculated from this end is often simply referred to.
Oh, Sweetie... I think u need a database for your forum posts! I didn't bring up the database. I didn't even know about it. I'm a PC player, after all, & I wasn't invited. I found out about the database when YOU bought it up in an attempt to justify your opinions. Most of us at here to discuss our opinions. We are never going to argue facts with you, because you never produce any. Instead we discuss our opinion of the way that RNG prevents the majority of players from achieving BIS status. Which you seem to have no problem with. And we do. And you wonder why you are always fighting an uphill battle. We put forth ideas such as " I have ran XYZ content 1k times, and have gotten 0 results." because we don't have aspreadsheet running in the background to track every little piece of trash we pick up. For most of us, this is a game. A form of entertainment to release the stress of school/life/family drama. We don't want to turn it into a job. So we keep it simple. We run eGWD to get the chest piece, or eSOT to get the head piece. If we drop the required gear, it's a win. If we don't it's a loss. Noone is saying that we get noting from the run. We are saying that we did not get the desired outcome of the run, and what we got was a little treasure, & the need to run again. Some of the players on this forum are telling you that they have "won" the right to run an unwanted piece of content 1k, 2k, even 3k times... and you seem to have no problem with that. You even tell them they should quit whining & get back to the grind. Given the fact that many players have made it this far proves that we can handle the grind... we just wish it wasn't an open ended grind. We object to the idea that the VERY BEST gear is something that can be ground for so many times that the majority of players don't get it until after (LONG after in some cases) it has become obsolete.
I stopped grinding till my head almost exploded, and landed an Orange ring I was previously obsessing over...go figure. As for my "THE END" comment...it was a lol high five to @micky1p00 lighten up or your head truely will explode.
There are a number of posts in other forums about this. "I got tired of the grind & gave it up. (1 week, 2 weeks, 1 month later) I ran XYZ to help a guildie & look what dropped! LMAO"
greywyndMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 7,158Arc User
Preaching to the choir about the corpse gifts. I rarely see any.
I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
Preaching to the choir about the corpse gifts. I rarely see any.
Oh... My... Gawd... Becky!!! Did you, like, hear?!? Some toon ran, like, eLOL? And, when they, like, killed the dragon? They ran under the dragon's wing, right? And they found, like, an epic artifact there? Bodacious!!! They took, like, a screen shot and everything!!! We should, like, totally run that, like, right now?!?! K thanks, bye!!! as HAMSTER if!
1
greywyndMember, NW M9 PlaytestPosts: 7,158Arc User
No. Some toon ran CN. No drops from the beholder, Cthulhu, or Orcus. On the other hand the chests were most rewarding.
I'm not looking for forgiveness, and I'm way past asking permission. Earth just lost her best defender, so we're here to fight. And if you want to stand in our way, we'll fight you too.
Comments
Please try again.
Or your entire mantra now, that you are being challenged ? I choose to challenge your statements. I don't wiggle, nor zigzag.
Enough with the straw-man - Answer the questions. I've even put it in bold for you.
The fate of RNG doesn't solely depend on this thread.
The statements about "being challenged" was an observation of multiple posts from various people and at the time wasn't much more than that.
If you feel the responses are not in a form that you can digest, not articulated in a manner that you feel is satisfactory and or your questions are not answered then simply don't respond to them. You apparently don't approve of posts from this end yet continue to respond to them and try to dictate their structure/content for some reason(s).
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
Can we have a simple answer? Do you object or not ? And not your end, or your beginning, you Trinity, object this?
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
Again, for the fourth time, I've asked a simple question.
Can we have a simple answer? Do you object or not ? And not your end, or your beginning, you Trinity, object this?
Other game developers have realised this problem and use some mechanics to counter "randomness". For a "true" RNG (resetting after each roll) they keep the chances of success relatively high so eventually success occurs. Another approach is a mechanic which increases the chances of success after every failed roll (this applies on a specific item and resets after a succesful roll). A third method I have seen is that when doing an event (dungeon/BHE/etc) there is a chance of getting a full item but also in the end players get a feeder item. These feeder items can be combined to get the full item. For exemple, you can get item X as direct drop (RNG) or combining 50 X parts (hard work). Each part is given after succesful completion of said dungeon/BHE/etc.
Any of these methods can reduce the consequences of randomness in the playerbase and I hope cryptic will consider them before it is too late.
If people are going to argue "facts" then argue facts, if people are going to argue hypotheticals then do that though trying to argue "I ran X, Y number of times and got nothing" is hardly equivalent to arguing "after X number of runs, this, this and this happened and based on that, XYZ" while having the information to suppport it recorded/documented. The latter surely isn't the only way though when it comes to discussing something specific like RNG, specifics will indeed strengthen the discussion.
Essentially when trying to discuss RNG it's going to take more than hypotheticals, if not it's just going to be more and more people sore at RNG presenting "inflated" accounts. Again arguing and presenting tangible information against hypothetical, non-verified information is not something that is done from this end for the most part, in cases where there are hypotheticals being argued, the information gathered/to be gathered and calculated from this end is often simply referred to.
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
With those type of systems (not stating that they are bad) the player base that doesn't pay will be even less inclined to partake in the benefits of spending money and those that do spend money will arguably be less inclined to continue spending/the same amounts. If Neverwinter were P2P it would be a different story.
RNG isn't just in regard to rings. anytime a player:
- spends less on preservation wards than a coalescent ward to upgrade.
- gets 30k RAD as a level up reward.
- various rare items from lock boxes, etc.
- wins a loot roll.
- gets a free coalescent ward.
- etc.
that's still RNG. Though even with all the positive RNG experiences a number of players still bash a particular part of RNG for whatever reason(s) as if it is the only part that exists and not having +5 rings bars progression, not stating that they can't or are wrong for doing so.
It's kind of like a restaurant increasing the portion sizes for various meals (for example if x serves 12 people and would only serve 8 people after the increase), sure it may encourage some to eat there more often or others to start eating there but if the "more ofteners" and new customers don't compensate for the lost revenue due to not being able to serve the same amount of guests for more revenue as before the restaurant would stand to "lose money".
“There are changes that can be made that don’t require coding...” - TriNitY
"No amount of coding will change human behavior" - TriNitY
Ongoing Issue: Legitmate Players Banned for Botting (Console) and the Future for "Dedicated" Players
Suggestions: (Implemented) \/\/ Rearrange Character on character Select Screen
We at the rest of our ends, should refrain from feeding that end. It's obvious that that end is based on un-provens like player payment behavior and associations with non-buyable bound items like said rings.
I cannot count how many peeps are running around with Orange rings fully slotted with rank 12 enchants and AP enhansments. HOW DID THEY GET THEM?
Answer....
They farmed their asses off! As did I, and I do not even use them with my current build.
THE END.