With the complete loss of Random Pool C's and D's, there will be almost NONE on the market on either side.. Few people, if any, will 'waste' their precious merits buying something just to sell it.
I see almost no upside to the new Merit system, and lots and lots of Downside.
If they at least kept the 'random' pool C, they would continue to hit the market now and then, and since Pool C drops are and will continue to be a MASSIVE Crapshoot (will that be censored,? It shouldn't be..) that no one will waste their Merits on, it will at least keep some of those recipes available.
I don't like this one bit. I won't get Merits for running other people's story arcs, there are no Random Merits, and any of the TF's that I CAN do in my limited playtime are relegeted to the minimum reward available.
This 'forces' me to actually do what I haven't in the past - run the same stupid TF over and over for the 'best' reward I can find, and 'forces' me to just do it with one character.
I don't like it, in any scenario I can imagine. I usually try to look for the 'best' in any situation. I'm having trouble seeing one here.
My memory's not as sharp as it used to be.
Also, my memory's not as sharp as it used to be.
"The tip of a shoelace is called an aglet, its true purpose is sinister." The Question
Just a few comments to make...
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: MadScientist
Q: Pool C and D are no longer dropped anywhere in-game. To my knowledge, those will be the only items purchased from stores that never drop in the wild. My question is: What are your goals in making that design move? What do you expect that unique situation to achieve?
A: In the past, completing a Task Force gave you the option to choose a random IO recipe. This rolled on a reward table. All weve done is remove where you roll on the reward table. Instead of it being upon completion of a Task Force, now its purchased from a vendor.
[/ QUOTE ]
Please note that this change is not as innocuous as the 'All we've done...' tone implies. This change effectively increases the grind a player must trudge through to realize a reward he has arguably earned. This grind increase is not insignificant and will occasionally cause players problems.
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: EvilGeko
Q: Why not fix Katie and Eden instead of taking away their rewards?
A: We dont always have time between issues to make changes like this.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is one side of the paradox of "what are the devs supposed to be relative to players" that's whammying the players. The devs are supposed to be the ultimate experts and authorities over the coh gamespace, so in that vein it's proper for players to expect flawlessness from the devs' performance in that role. On the other hand, the devs are human, and the coh gamespace is proving to be a difficulty far beyond they're combined capability, and punishing them for that does no one any good.
So what are the players supposed to do? Hold the devs to an impossibly high standard? Or forgive them for stuff that makes the game really hard to deal with? Fixing Katie is the right answer but the devs can't do it. How are the players supposed to know what's the right way to address the devs over that?
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: _Synchotron_
Q: Why are merits untradable/unsellable? All the rewards they're replacing had no such restrictions, why these? If they have to be untradable/unsellable, why aren't they account-based, rather than character-based? If you run more than a couple characters at a time, this will fragment your merit pools and dramatically reduce the value of the merits you earn. If its a reward for time played, why should the particular hero I play matter?
A: Merits were designed to represent an individual characters accomplishments and time invested doing missions. Thus, untradeable and unsellable.
[/ QUOTE ]
I might humbly suggest this is an error in design. Merits actually represent the essence of loot, not the essence of accomplishment. It behaves as a currency, and it is almost exactly like influence/infamy. It does not behave as badges or souvenirs, which themselves more properly represent essences of accomplishment.
The current structure of untradeability, combined with the not-insignificant grind time being added to the reward-realization process, is very poor and basically represents a negative to people who play in a multi-alt style. Ultimately, this choice effectively discourages tf play for everyone except dedicated lvl 50 players.
I imagine datamining should show bits of this trend over time. The suggestion that merits be account based instead of character based is very reasonable and enabling and I would humbly prompt you to reconsider that.
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Healing_Phoenix
Q: Why is it that the Villain side SF payout is way less than Hero side TF payout? I feel that as a villain I'm being punished.
A: On average Villain Strike Forces take significantly less time to complete when compared to Hero Task Forces. Since time is the major factor when determining the number of Merits a task gives upon completion Villains on average receive less Merits per task, but roughly the same Merits per hour.
[/ QUOTE ]
Villain strike forces were designed to take less time in reaction to the fact that datamining hero tfs proved they were 'bad' in part due to their length. Essentially, when CoV was being designed, devs consciously forced the villain side to not have any 'bad' tfs, which the merit system is now effectively claiming are no longer 'bad'. The cumulative effect is that this aspect of the merit system is exactly a punishment of villains.
The correct answer is to go back and fix the villain sf design so that it has access to 'no longer bad' sfs with good rewards. But as seen previously in Synapse's post, the devs are likely not in a position to do this.
How should players then react to this paradox? Well, basically, the more that individual players can just absorb the hit with grace and dignity in the spirit of cooperation, the better the future experience for all parties should be. But it will certainly be human nature for individuals to reach their limits of absorption at some point and break down. Do the best that can be done I guess.
[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to conclude this first Merit Rewards System Q&A by repeating that the existing Merit Reward System is by no means the final version you'll ever see of it. Just like every system we've implemented into City of Heroes, we're always looking at ways of improving them and making them more fun for a larger group of players.
[/ QUOTE ]
Indeed. I have faith that the devs are intending on making the game better. Even if they get confused and carried away sometimes.
"A: The reasoning behind not initially having group members, that are not the mission owner, receiving Merit Rewards is that the original reward system didnt give mission helpers rewards either. However, we understand how some players might perceive this as a penalty for not being the mission owner and we will consider our options on how to best address this issue."
This is really going to mess up teaming, so I would strongly suggest not going live with a system where only the mission holder gets a reward.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(Not to mention a partial profit if you beat 3 or 4 missions and fail the huge challenge at the end.) Merits for AVs may also help balance KHTF, and maybe even bringing Eden up to something not laughable.
[/ QUOTE ]
Would the reason to explicitly not consider a merit per AV be the fact that people would farm the first 9 Mary Macombers in 12 minutes or less, then exit, quit, and re-form the TF? If so, would it be more workable to award any and all AV awards only on TF completion?
[/ QUOTE ]
then again, some AVs are already flagged as non-farmable (ie: no drop rewards, only XP/Inf). That may very well carry into a 1-merit-per-AV setup and so KHTF was not a good thing to bring into this discussion.
[ QUOTE ]
Q: Is it possible to, if not at launch, add purple recipes to the list at a suitable price? If not, could you explain the concept behind excluding these from the list?
A: Its technically possible, yes. However, purple recipes would be so expensive Merit wise due to the statistical likelihood of one dropping that we decided to omit them from the items on the list at this time. That isnt to say we wont ever add them to it in the future.
[/ QUOTE ]
I, for one, would give some serious thought to paying 10% of a large number for a random purple drop. Is that number too expensive, too?
Out of curiousity, what's the exact number? So we can have some perspective on it.
The actual drop rate of the Purples has never been stated by the devs (which is odd since we were given the other drop rates when IOs were introduced)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 Numina's Unique is 250 Merits...That's 5 Posi runs on 1 guy. How casual of a gamer can you be and still have time to do that and nothing else.
[/ QUOTE ]
How casual a gamer can you be and want a Numana's Unique?
My characters get maybe a few pool A recipe sets during their careers. Four or five if I'm feeling ambitious. The build you posted is alien to me. I seriously doubt there are very many casual gamers who would attempt such a thing now, let alone after I13 goes live.
[/ QUOTE ]
This all depends of course on how you define casual. If you define casual player as one that doesn't care or know about the fine details of the game, has no care about IOs, then you may be correct. If you define casual as a player that doesn't have a massive amount of time to devote to play the game then you are wrong.
I personally define casual as related to time investment. I am a fairly casual player, I don't have time to do 5 or 6 posi's for a numina, I did have time to run a katie before I logged off for a chance of a numina, which has paid off in the past. The best thing was that if I didn't get a numinas, I had a chance to get something else that was good and had enough inf to buy a numina from someone who got one and didn't want to use it.
I don't have that option now. Now I have to grind to get what I want. It just doesn't seem to be a very casual friendly system.
I had a big response set but based on what others are saying I think you get the picture that you guys are way way off track by trying to force a paying playerbase to play an open ended MMO ANY way other than the way "THEY" want to play.
Your attempt to get people to play the other content "YOU" want them to play makes no sense and cannot be explained away.
Very sad to see you guys doing this. Matt remember the old days with Pat Cook and FPS FB. "That" was a game made to allow players to do what they wanted and not what you as the devs decided for them take a note mate...
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
[ QUOTE ]
I personally define casual as related to time investment. I am a fairly casual player, I don't have time to do 5 or 6 posi's for a numina, I did have time to run a katie before I logged off for a chance of a numina, which has paid off in the past. The best thing was that if I didn't get a numinas, I had a chance to get something else that was good and had enough inf to buy a numina from someone who got one and didn't want to use it.
I don't have that option now. Now I have to grind to get what I want. It just doesn't seem to be a very casual friendly system.
[/ QUOTE ]
A question: I've meant to ask it a lot of times before, so don't think I'm picking on you. Why does the option to spend a reduced amount of merits for a random role not serve the same purpose? Everyone talks as though the random roll will no longer be a choice that can be made. The only difference I see is that it will take more than one Katie, but you can still do it.
It's a serious question. I'm not sure why that option is so universally discounted.
Edit: I'm not as dumb as I sound. I'm just not entirely convinced that the market for inf purchases of these items will completely dry up. If it does, then you're right because the random roll will be so bad a bet that it would never make sense. But as long as there are people who would rather spend inf to get items than grind for merits, why wouldn't some of us spend merits to get items that we may sell?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: IronTiger
Q: Why do pool D random recipes cost more than pool C random? The price for a specific pool D is the same to a Pool C in most cases.
A: The cost of pool D rewards are higher due to the significantly higher likelihood of getting the desired enhancement with a single roll. Taskforce reward tables have substantially more items on them than Trial reward tables.
[/ QUOTE ]
You are aware that by that logic, Task Force random drops should cost something like 2 Merits, not 20?
[/ QUOTE ]
I gotta agree -(maybe not on the precise numbers), but there seems to be a breakdown in the logic here somewhere...
And, I think some industrious players will figure out a way to do both "Rabbit-runs" and then "Turtle-Runs" - they find a way to game the average data-mined times.
FWIW, I almost never Team, I' like to group for "Zone Invasions" (Rikti & Zombie) and that's about it really.
I'm of the opinion that one of the M's in "MMO" is for misanthrope 
- you know, those people that like to stay home in a hermit like manner, playing games on their computer for hours & hours!
I have lots of free time to play but - it's frequently interrupted time - I have to "drop what I'm doing" and attend to other things - ALOT...
This makes me a poor teammate to start with, and that along with the many other reasons mentioned here about "soloing" being more rewarding - I agree, the XP "Bonus" for teaming is a disincentive IMO.
The thing I love about Merits is that I can get them outside of TF's!
I'm really happy that I'll finally have a way to get the more desirable recipes I want - that doesn't mean spending 100's of millions of inf - that I've never had all at once.
Partially due to my Alta-holism, Base Building, and playing the markets some but not enough to outspend the 'status quo' marketeers, and admittedly its also largely due to the fact that, after 4 years of playing (of and on) I still don't have a 50.
I'm okay with that - heck I haven't even seen a few of the upper level zones, and I haven't been through (=exhausted) all the stories/content yet!
Yeah, It blows when trying to out spend people who are playing with lvl 50's most of the time. But the bright-side/reward for this is pretty fraking AWESOME though = I'm not at all bored with the game yet! 
As noted above - the existing drops ALREADY tend to be better solo than in a group, and having Merits for story arcs only be awarded for the mission holder is a really bad idea - FOR most players that is... It'll make solo'ing all that much more common.
Which is kinda nice for ME, It means I can come out of my "perma /hide" more often - without feeling like an [censored] every time I try to explain & say "Nope sorry, I really don't want to run mishes OR team up for killer XP fighting/doing (whatever)."
I don't get why MY TIME playing running Story Arcs (and hopefully 'regular missions' will have some Merit Reward) is worth 1 merit per 12.5 mins. and people running Task Forces' TIME is worth 1 merit per 5 mins.
I DID read this:
[ QUOTE ]
The reason for this major difference is due to the considerable time and effort Task/Strike Forces can take to set up and complete, so naturally these tasks grant a much greater reward.
[/ QUOTE ]
But I'm at bit of a loss here... I'll explain,
I know some of the market folks decided a few months back that the market was understocked with "desirable recipes" so they started a (iirc) "Market Liberation" group.
They setup, and planned scheduled TF Run's on certain days each week, they had several threads about it - organizing teams to do this on different servers and timezones & whatnot.
They setup specific characters designed to team together, and even had some characters that they setup with builds meant to run specific TF's!
The first time Dual Builds were Mentioned I saw people talking about having 1 build for TF "A" and a 2nd build for TF "B".
Obviously they were going to get better at doing the TF's and do them faster & faster with practice - especially when they're doing the Runs with the same general set of players (or from a relatively small group regular "Runners" participating in their endeavor).
So they're "Average Times" are bound to go down, right?
SO... [u]Because - they've essentially done the smart thing and put in the[u] [ QUOTE ]
considerable time and effort Task/Strike Forces can take to set up and complete
[/ QUOTE ] [u]before hand and in a "work smarter not harder style", organized a group of players to do this regularly - thus eliminating some of the standard hassle.[u]
INSTEAD of a haphazard (aka) "Pick-up group" manner.
i.e. = (Having to go through that same hassle with a new group of random people - every stinking time they want to run a TF!) - All of those players - AND EVERYONE ELSE is being penalized for it?
Please, Explain to me how that's fair?
Or better yet - remotely logical? 
=*Its so many kinds of freaking wrong, I'm not even sure how to feel about this...*
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
City of Heroes didn't fail, City of Heroes was killed. If a 747 dropped on your house, you'd say you were killed, not you failed to find a safer dwelling.
|
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Healing_Phoenix
Q: Why is it that the Villain side SF payout is way less than Hero side TF payout? I feel that as a villain I'm being punished.
A: On average Villain Strike Forces take significantly less time to complete when compared to Hero Task Forces. Since time is the major factor when determining the number of Merits a task gives upon completion Villains on average receive less Merits per task, but roughly the same Merits per hour.
[/ QUOTE ]
A follow-up to this question is required. Have you considered the 24 hour timer in this? Consider a villain that does a task force every night at the same time, consider a hero that also does a task force every night at the same time .Or every other night, what ever. So long as they both complete the same number of TFs over the same suitably long time span.
The hero has the ability to earn 40, 50, or even 90 merits per 24 hour period.
The villain can only earn 35 in that same period.
Will anything be done to address this? Or am I oversimplifying the dimishing returns on the 24 hour drop window?
[/ QUOTE ]
You are over simplfying, it a per character and PER TASK.
So in the time it takes a hero to run Doc Q for those 90 the villan could run 2-3 seperate TFs
[/ QUOTE ]
And still end up 5 merits short.
"Sorry bucko, but CoH and CoV are the same game." -BackAlleyBrawler
"Silly villain, CoX is for Heroes!" -Saicho
Cardiff, you are looking for logic where there is none or that which is used is built upon watery sand and would liquify under a strong wind....
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
[ QUOTE ]
So, I need to spend 7+hrs running TFs to earn myself 1 Knockback Recipe?, when before I may just have been lucky enough to get it as a drop after a single TF OR recieved a Recipe I could sell to buy the one I wanted??, how is THAT a better system?
[/ QUOTE ]You could never receive a Karma or Steadfast KB protection recipe from a Task Force reward window.
They're pool A.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Back Alley Brawler
Did you just use "casual gamer" and "purpled-out warshade" in the same sentence?
|
[ QUOTE ]
Villain strike forces were designed to take less time in reaction to the fact that datamining hero tfs proved they were 'bad' in part due to their length. Essentially, when CoV was being designed, devs consciously forced the villain side to not have any 'bad' tfs, which the merit system is now effectively claiming are no longer 'bad'. The cumulative effect is that this aspect of the merit system is exactly a punishment of villains.
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT. Maybe it will sink in.
"Sorry bucko, but CoH and CoV are the same game." -BackAlleyBrawler
"Silly villain, CoX is for Heroes!" -Saicho
You know... if a developer for hero side suddenly pops up claiming that evil shall never triump over the forces of good followed up with some classic heroic pose picture. I just may laugh.
<QR>
1. If the intent is to allow any market involvement with the Merit system, and since we know that Infamy is more valuable than Influence, how can any system justify having the same fixed reward rates per hour on both sides? Even if you were to assume that COV players had the same Merit earning potential, the fact that at some point for the system to work Pool C's have to make their way to market, means that the flat pricing and flat earning rates of Merits per hour is an inherent penalty against Villain players.
2. In the Base Design Q&A thread it was stated that the reason for lowering the Salvage storage requirements was to prevent hoarding and encourage participation in the Market, which is inevitable now that Base Salvage is no more. My question is why this seeming contradiction in game design? With Merits you explicitly state that you are giving people a way out of the market, while with the other hand you are pushing other people into the market. This is really something Positron should answer I suppose as the overall vision is part of what people are having trouble understanding. (As well as the unrelated question of why introduce something that encourages ghosting, which seems to fall more under philosophy than mechanics.)
3.
[ QUOTE ]
Before I answer your questions, I'd like to give you some information about the Merit Reward system. As most of you understand average (median) completion time is the primary metric we chose to use to determine the how many merits a task would grant. In fact, longer tasks give an additional 5% bonus to the number of merits they award for every 100 minutes of average time. Lastly, we use difficulty as a factor to round out numbers. So, some tasks get bonus merits because of their overall challenge. A good example of this is the Lord Recluse Strike Force. It normally would grant 18 merits due to its relatively short average completion time, however because of its difficulty it gets a +7 bonus granting a total of 25 merits!
Taskforces give an average of 1 merit every 5 minutes of average time (12 merits an hour), Trials give an average of 1 merit every 4.5 minutes (13-14 merits an hour), and Story Arcs give an average of 1 merit every 12.5 minutes (4-5 merits an hour). The reason for this major difference is due to the considerable time and effort Task/Strike Forces can take to set up and complete, so naturally these tasks grant a much greater reward.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next, the Merit Reward cost of items on the merit vendor are a bit more complex. The factors that go into determining the costs are: rarity, the drop table they originally came from, set bonuses, and then a few modifiers like perceived value and whether they are unique or not. You end up with some really powerful enhancements like Numina's Convalescence: +Regen/+Recovery as being very expensive as you would imagine because, it's high level, has good set bonuses, has a high perceived value, and drops from a Task Force reward table. This particular recipe goes for 250 merits. Another set I've seen mentioned a number of times is Crushing Impact. Some players wonder why its so cheap, only going for 50 merits each. The reason this set is so much cheaper is: it's an uncommon drop (not rare), has good (but not amazing set bonuses), and its perceived value varies. They can get up there in cost on the Auction Houses, but they're no Numina's.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think at the heart of it, this is what troubles me very much about the Merit system as it is currently implemented. I appreciate that our feedback has been at least given a good hearing, and some of it, like the Knockback uniques and the Random drop pricing has been tweaked.
But from my point of view, much of the system relies on a set of somewhat subjective views of what many things are worth.
One would be that you value the Merits/hour formula in a way, in relation to Story Arcs that seems to be way too harsh of a penalty for the trouble of starting up a team. I mean, it doesn't seem balanced that the penalty for that is to slash merit earnings by 66%. For setup time? While at the same time, because you don't really count setup time when Datamining times for the LRSF, but there is no way that thing is getting run in an hour an a half without many players spending almost as much time gathering materials.
Second, it seems assumed that giving longer tasks a further bonus is a good thing, and it may not be, it may be exactly what leads people to ghost through missions and discover exploits. The more logical way, IMO when adding a system like this, would be to scale the rewards for the longer tasks. So sure Dr. Q would still give the most Merits, but it would be something like 75 merits. Another benefit of that is that people wouldn't be tempted into thinking of 3 Dr. Q's=Any Shiny they want. In order to get that shiny, they would have to embark on and complete the 4th Dr. Q, so the question of spped running, while it would still be done, wouldn't be given as heavy of an incentive.
Third, you refer to the pricing of Recipes, and you cite an number of factors, but it seems needlessly complicated and also too dependent on the subjective value of some items. "Amazing set bonuses" is entirely in the eye of the beholder, and can change with FotM builds or new Powersets and proliferation of old ones. By trying to give each IO some kind of subjective value, you will create a distortion somewhere in the market for items.
[ QUOTE ]
The Merit system gives players who dont like to fiddle with the markets the chance to buy that IO enhancement theyve always wanted but havent been able to afford with influence/infamy. It also gives players a way to have greater control over supply and demand on specific items by allowing players to buy that incredibly overpriced recipe listed on the Auction House, thus decreasing the demand for the item on the auction house.
[/ QUOTE ]
To me, you can't believe that in its current implementation that Merits will take care of demand at the marketplace. We (especially in COV) have a market where most of the items are already in short supply. The Merit system will take needed supply out of the market. The people who don't run TF's and were previously able to exchange Inf for the Pool C drops of those that do, will find that they need to spend more Inf to get recipes that can now be bought in a deterministic way. In this way, the balance of trade between the suppliers of Pool A and B recipes and the suppliers of the new Pool C recipes favors those Pool C suppliers, as they deal in a currency that has a property (determinism) that is intrinsicaly more valuable than Inf.
Further more you suggest that some recipes are incredibly overpriced, but from the point of view of a player, the question is their entire build, not just the cost of one uber-recipe. By slowing down the supply of Pool C's in general, it slows down everyone's progress, and I believe this will be expressed in generally higher prices for many things. The point being that in the general case, the goalposts have been pushed back, and the people who that seems to least effect are the ones that already prosper under the current system.
Uh.... I'm not sure there was a question in that last part there...
[ QUOTE ]
Poster: Kitsune9tails
Q: What is the intended relationship between the Merit system and the markets?
A: The Merit system gives players who dont like to fiddle with the markets the chance to buy that IO enhancement theyve always wanted but havent been able to afford with influence/infamy. It also gives players a way to have greater control over supply and demand on specific items by allowing players to buy that incredibly overpriced recipe listed on the Auction House, thus decreasing the demand for the item on the auction house.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is the one I don't get. With these merits and no more random, there won't be any recipes on the AH, or the few that are will be even costlier. Hell even the Fear and Confuse sets are going to cost more now, for the few people that do use them. As other posters have mentioned, who the heck is going to piss away merits on Pool C random, when the devs even admit :
[ QUOTE ]
The cost of pool D rewards are higher due to the significantly higher likelihood of getting the desired enhancement with a single roll. Taskforce reward tables have substantially more items on them than Trial reward tables.
[/ QUOTE ]
which is translated to "pool c has too much crap", which is what we've been saying on the market forum for 18 frickin months!!
At this point, you guys are locked in to the merit system. So the best way to make it bearable is going to be fixing the pool C drops. Make it so that we actually get something worthwhile with our merits. Drop the fears, confuses, etc into Pool A or B. Or weight the numbers to match the powers in the game.
OK, so I'm not a big fan of formless worry, which means I needed numbers. Here's what I looked at.
I took my lvl 37 Night Widow build and figured out what Pool C/D IOs I was using. I consider my needs to be modest, but you'll have to judge that for yourself. The list isn't long or exotic, here they are:
Kismet - Def/End/Rech (x2)
Gaussian's - Rech/End (x2)
Impervium Armor - Res/Rech
Dark Watchers - Rech/End
Sciroccos - Acc/Dam/End (x2)
According to City of Data, all of these are Pool C recipes. None of them cost very much on the BM today and are easily attainable without farming missions or running that many SFs (neither of which I do - I run missions - lots and lots of missions).
I have a few more planned for my future, but let's start with these. After compiling this list, I was feeling pretty good - much shorter than I thought it would be (most of my IOs are Pool A/B), so I was all ready to be wrong. Did I mention that I really want to be wrong about this?
Next step - how many merits would this cost, so off to test. Using the numbers currently on test the above list would cost 1575 merits. OK, now that's a bit higher than I was expecting, guess I figured only the LOTG and such were 200+ merits - not so, the cheapest thing on my list is 135, the rest are all >= 200. Feeling less happy (I don't want to be right) I next took a look at the story arc rewards. There is actually a very good list being compiled by folks here on the main forums (pushed by Catwhoorg). This probably isn't the full list quite yet, but if you add up every single story arc reward in there you get 301 merits (or at least I did).
OK, so now I'm depressed. Let's assume we're not seeing 1/2 the rewards (doubtful, but possible) - that would mean 600 merits available over a villain career via story arcs. The problem is that is from *every* arc, at *every* level. My IO list above is from my lvl 37 toon. Also, you can't actually run *every* arc - not unless you use Oro. But even if you do you still come up with only 1/5 to 1/3 of the merits needed to by my piddly little list. Also, to get these rewards *I* have to be the arc holder. I can't run other folks arcs. I can't SK up. Doing so will only make the problem worse.
I'm really not very happy right now. What am I missing (please tell me I'm missing something). I can't believe the devs intend for this major an impact on my particular approach to the game. Am I somehow acheiving something I'm not supposed to - I don't farm, I don't speed run, heck I don't even stealth newspapers except on rare occasion. I must be missing something.
[ QUOTE ]
At this point, you guys are locked in to the merit system. So the best way to make it bearable is going to be fixing the pool C drops. Make it so that we actually get something worthwhile with our merits. Drop the fears, confuses, etc into Pool A or B. Or weight the numbers to match the powers in the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why was this not the way it was originally or changed after the above became more than clear? Makes too much sense.
The development team and this community deserved better than this from NC Soft. Best wishes on your search.
First off I would say welcome.
Second I would like to point out the flaw of taking average task force times for your basis of rewards.
Ill use the ITF as an example. Typically when I put together a pick up group it takes anywhere from 1 hr to 1 hr 45 min. An average of that would be fairly accurate.
However a SG I recently joined runs it in about 40 min or less and they do that 4 or more times a day.
Heck even their average STF time is only 40 min. On sunday they ran it 5 times because of multiple accounts and many many 50s built for speed runs.
What I am getting at is these elite groups are going to skew the averages because they run so many more tfs than the average Joe.
If you wish to slow down the earnings of these people I understand it but why not do it through a diminishing returns system on their debuffs rather than blanketing all players with a slower rate of reward. Many SG's utilize super team, fire rad teams for one and lots of people use vengance stacking. Deal with this problem so speed TF's are no longer possible and you will have a much easier time balancing rewards.
The point I am making is the rewards seem VERY low to the average player. The elite might think so but they are not to worried about it because they can blow through a TF in half the time or even less than an average team can.
Just my opinion I will now await all the elite players to begin flaming me because I dared to suggest the devs deal with the overpowered problem of debuffs. I would love to go back to the day when a player could join a TF and see no two characters with the same build instead of half the team being fire rad or fire kin.
*readies fire extinguisher*
[ QUOTE ]
I'm really not very happy right now. What am I missing (please tell me I'm missing something). I can't believe the devs intend for this major an impact on my particular approach to the game. Am I somehow acheiving something I'm not supposed to - I don't farm, I don't speed run, heck I don't even stealth newspapers except on rare occasion. I must be missing something.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nope...You are pretty much right on the money. Many of us have seen it, evidently, the DEVs have too much "datamining numbers" in their way to see the common fact of it.
My SG pals and I are talking about it on TS right now, and I'm playing another MMO as we talk. Normally I would be in CoH, but with the only thing IMO to look forward to in I13 is a new hero set that will never be as outfitted as my other 15 level 50s, I'm really starting to look at other games out there.
Hope they change it but if not, YOU CAN HAVE MY STUFF...
Cheers...
BALANCE IS A NERF
Liberty Server
@Energy Aura and @Ill Conceived on Global
Han Solo: [laughs] Hokey religions and ancient weapons are no match for a good BLASTER at your side, kid.
Going back to Energy_Aura's post:
[ QUOTE ]
Here is an example build for discussion purposes:
[...]
So here is the breakout:
Impervium Armor: Resistance - 220
Aegis: End/Rech - 200 (x2) = 400
Scirroco's Dervish: Acc/Dam/End - 200 (x2) = 400
Mako's Bite: Dam/Rech - 200 (x2) = 400
Luck of the Gambler: Def/+Rech 7.5% - 200 (x2) = 400
Numina's Convalescence: +Regen/+Recov - 250
Miracle: +Recovery - 240
Devastation: Dam/Rech - 220
Unbounded Leap: +Stealth - 240
For a grand total of 2770 Merits 2770/55 (Posi Run Hero Side) = 51 times WITH THE SAME GUY. Times 200 minutes (less than your data mine at current) = 10200 mins (170 hours or 7.1 days). The 3 hour break for claiming Merits would be absorbed into the next running of Posi, so 7.1 days of back to back Posi would get 1 character their Merits.
And this isn't even a high end build in my book. My Ill/Rad or Stone Tanker would cost 2-3 times more in Merits.
[...]
55 Posi's on one guy (as Merits don't transfer)? THAT'S INSANE
[/ QUOTE ]
Here's an idea: trade in 1000 points for 50 random rolls.
I actually counted: there's 53 things in pool C at level 40.
You won't get "one of everything". I'm not going to work out the numbers for what percentage of how many items you WILL get.
But you'll get more than six of them. I'd bet real money on that.
As for the other 44 or so items you got... think any of them will sell for the vast monies that you "would need to buy anything on the market"?
Here's the level 40 list of pool C shinies that you DON'T want on that build:
Touch of Death: A/D/E
Decimation A/E/R
Devastation: Chance to Hold
Positron's A/D/E
Numina's H/R
Impervium: Psi Res
Gift of the Ancients: Defense
Gift of the Ancients: Runspeed
LOTG: End/Rech
Freebird: Stealth
Celerity: Stealth
I'm probably counting a couple of unwanteds, and overlooking a couple of juicies.
But there's about 11 "sell for a lot" plus 9 that you want. Out of 52.
Now if you WANT to spend 3000 merits instead of 1000, that's your business. But don't pretend that it makes sense.
Mini-guides: Force Field Defenders, Blasters, Market Self-Defense, Frankenslotting.
So you think you're a hero, huh.
@Boltcutter in game.
This is a question out of my personal curiosity.
I don't know if you can share this information or not.
I don't know how long a datamine time frame is but assuming it's a month long recording.
Just how many times is *specific taskforce/strikeforce* being run?
It's mainly a curiosity just to how large a number is being used in devision of the times to get the average.
And to see if Katy(sp?) and Eden are over 9000. >_>
Err I mean, how much more the quicker are being run over the slower. I would expect a larger number like anyone but right now its a question of HOW much larger.
I think this is the crux of the issue. Will the players take what's behind door number 3 or will they save up for what they really want.
It seems pretty clear that the devs are betting that most folks will take the random roll and sell what they don't want. Thus the market for Pool C/D recipes will remain what it is.
Consider me less than convinced. I think in the end it is going to hinge on which route the farmers/speed runners choose. The data would suggest they run the most of the TFs (otherwise we wouldn't be seeing the reward skews we do), so that means they contribute the most to the influx of recipes across the Pool C spectrum (from crap to spectacular).
Are they going to take the roll and sell what they don't want or are they going to hoard and only buy LOTGs (and Numinas, etc...). Not being one, I don't know. Hey Squez - which is it - you rolling or saving?
In this post and the followup two posts later I threw together a made-up dataset showing the concern I have about using median and mean times through datamining all of the runs.
After the followup, the dataset had 4 groups of players contributing towards the time, but only 1 group of players was causing the greatly reduced reward.
I suggested that instead of datamining all of the runs, that representative runs are used instead and weighted equally to the rewards, so that 25% of the players aren't setting the rewards for the other 75% simply because they're rapidly running the same thing with multiple characters to max out their rewards.
I understand that this is a Q&A thread and not a suggestions thread, so I'll turn this into a question: are there any plans to adopt this sort of reward structure and revisit the merit awards for the various tasks instead of setting times based on a lower percentage of the population running a higher percentage of the high-reward tasks?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by PleaseRecycle
it has gone from unconscionable to downright appalling that we have no way of measuring our characters' wetness.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brillig
It's hard to beat the entertainment value of Whackjob Wednesdays.
|
[ QUOTE ]
.
) 4 times
As a casual, how fast is your AVG Eden trial?
[/ QUOTE ]
Hmm well right now... 15 minutes but that was because after the first wipe at the first wall everyone quit *wusses >_<* and I've never gotten another chance at the trial since. I really wanna run that thing but need to get another character that high again first.
[ QUOTE ]
How about a KTF?
[/ QUOTE ]
Umm... I think that took an hour more or less. Then again, only done this once as well.
Happly, it was successful though
[ QUOTE ]
2 trials regular players don't speed through now don't get enough reward to buy a common SO. Each of the said TF's have numerious AV's you have to defeat to complete. But not worth a common SO.
You know what'll happen when the powergamers and farmer turn there attation to other tfs?
[/ QUOTE ]
They will do them, they get altered if they can or reward lowered until they can alter it to bring it back up or it just stays lowered.
[ QUOTE ]
Granted, i also don't belive "loot" is the be all end of all of this game, but without any reward, what's your modivation to run content AGAIN you've already ran a DOZEN times?
[/ QUOTE ]
I like it.
It's been a long time since I've done the respec task force, I need to see if I can get on a team for one.
Over the course of having and playing this game.
I've done a failed Eden. Just one, never had another chance.
Positron... 6 times.
Synapsisesad? (yep, can't remember how to spell that
Doc Q... one mission of it.
Sister Psyche twice.
Manticore three times.
Kathy? (sp?) once.
Hollows Trial once got to then end with seven people only to realize we couldn't do it with seven people. (lousy no good quitting >_<. that sucked)
Respec 9 times, 2 times, and never.
With Villians, did the circle guy's task force once and their respec force once.
Yeah... the date I signed up to the forums is a month give or take a few days after I got the game. I may have missed a couple but those I listed are the guessed total number of times I've run task forces or trials. All the other time I have been consantly making, deleting and playing multiple characters on this game. Playing home system, got into a good series of books, played some other game, played this game. Wash, rinse, repeat.
My next goal if I can actualy focus enough to do it is get a villian to 50. Thus my second 50 will be created.
1 50 Hero, 1 50 Villian
Then I can get fake spider legs attached to my back.