Fixing boring unbalanced scenarios

[Razid1987]

Not sure where I ever said to remove gear progression completely
I like having strong gear, but in the case of a none-pve game, I value interesting fights higher than I'd value a great gain in power just by being around longer.
But yes, i agree, that there should be some kind of progression, that's why I never argued for complete removal, just for lowering the gain.

I value both highly, so I wouldn't play if both weren't there. The gear difference is, as far as I'm concerned, just a side effect of the progression ladder. You can't really have progression without someone at the bottom of the ladder. WoW tried to fix it by introducing welfare epics from Badges by the end of TBC and all through WotLK. It completely ruined the game for me, and as a result, I quit.

Closing the gap between the bottom and the top is something that might work, but it's a fine line. You're either gonna end with having it where the top is overpowered (As you claim it is now), or where the top doesn't feel like all it's work is paying off.
It's gonna be close to impossible to find the middle ground, where everyone is happy. And you know that no matter what, this is gonna be controversial. Half of the players are gonna end up wanting one thing, and the others are gonna want the opposite. No matter what you do, people are gonna complain.
So when all is said and done, what you're gonna end up with is that some people are gonna complain about how it's not how they want it, and that is exactly what we have now, as well.

[Idrinth]

I value both highly, so I wouldn't play if both weren't there. The gear difference is, as far as I'm concerned, just a side effect of the progression ladder.

agreed

Closing the gap between to bottom and the top is something that might work, but it's a fine line. You're either gonna end with having it where the top is overpowered (As you claim it is now), or where the top doesn't feel like all it's work is paying off.

It's hard to find a good point, agreed. The 6% quoted from me were gear within a single level for example - might make a blogpost to expand on how much stats what level may have, I don't think this is the best place to go through 40 levels with all rarities.

And you know that no matter what, this is gonna be controversial.

I know, I'm mostly trying to figure out how to keep "content", meaning players, ingame without them just rerolling lower tiers because they don't feel they can contribute. This is especially the case in scenarios, where numbers can't solve the power differences.

[Genisaurus]

It's worth remembering that the gear gap is currently inflated artificially. Remember the following points:

1. The current Tier 3 level cap is 35. When T4 is released, T3 will go back to being 22-31. We will not be using the 1.4.8 caps. The power level in T3 will essentially revert to what it was a month ago - lower even, since the number of people at level 30+ in Tier 3 and able to use full Devastator will be dramatically reduced.
2. Currently, for Tier 4, we are not sure how we will be handling gear beyond Invader. Which is to say, we are not sure how we will be addressing the power discrepancy between Warlord and Tyrant, or Sovereign and everything else, or if we should change anything at all. There will be a significant, perhaps artificial, delay before we reach that point. In any case, I don't recall too many players bemoaning the difference between Invader and Devastator on live, even as far back as launch.
3. We will not be implementing DF/WF as they were on live at all.
4. In lower tiers, not all of the gear is implemented yet. While absolutely nobody ever used Mayhem set on live after perhaps patch 1.2, it can help close a gear gap between Obliterator and Devastator, if the usual renown gear is not enough. The same goes for dungeon sets. Neither the PQ nor the dungeon sets have renown requirements, so they can be equipped very easily.

In general, I consider it bad policy to make significant changes to a system to compensate for deficiencies you know will be addressed in the near future.

[th3gatekeeper]

It's worth remembering that the gear gap is currently inflated artificially. Remember the following points:

1. The current Tier 3 level cap is 35. When T4 is released, T3 will go back to being 22-31. We will not be using the 1.4.8 caps. The power level in T3 will essentially revert to what it was a month ago - lower even, since the number of people at level 30+ in Tier 3 and able to use full Devastator will be dramatically reduced.
2. Currently, for Tier 4, we are not sure how we will be handling gear beyond Invader. Which is to say, we are not sure how we will be addressing the power discrepancy between Warlord and Tyrant, or Sovereign and everything else, or if we should change anything at all. There will be a significant, perhaps artificial, delay before we reach that point. In any case, I don't recall too many players bemoaning the difference between Invader and Devastator on live, even as far back as launch.
3. We will not be implementing DF/WF as they were on live at all.
4. In lower tiers, not all of the gear is implemented yet. While absolutely nobody ever used Mayhem set on live after perhaps patch 1.2, it can help close a gear gap between Obliterator and Devastator, if the usual renown gear is not enough. The same goes for dungeon sets. Neither the PQ nor the dungeon sets have renown requirements, so they can be equipped very easily.

In general, I consider it bad policy to make significant changes to a system to compensate for deficiencies you know will be addressed in the near future.

Geni, thanks for this! Have you guys talked at all about making the T3 gear cost less once T4 comes out? It takes a LONGGGG time to grind the emblems and what not for the gear... I know 2 pieces are BOE now, but even with that, it seems the cost for things (especially weapons) might be a tad too high for how fast you progress through levels? Just a thought... NO worries if nothing changes as it wont affect end game anyways.


I did want to add back to the previous discussion however. Doing a few SCs yesterday, specifically Reikland and Nordland, I made it my mission to take and hold the MID point on both scenarios. Which we did. I had about 4-5 games in a row on these maps, and I held mid the entire game, even waited there after everyone zerged on to other nodes and sure enough, caught some WEs trying to be sneaky

However why I bring this up, is eventhough we held mid (which I have always been told ticks for more points than the outer two) and our kills were ~ even with destro AND they never held nodes very long, they got A LOT of "initial ticks" and ended up winning several of the games even.

Now, I know there are a TON of other factors here and I 100% agree, my PUGs were horrible... However it just seemed VERY odd to me that we DOMINATED them on the "cap" game by holding mid and "trading" between the other two, and they didnt get any more kills than we did, and we held mid the entire game, yet we still lost....

This is the type of thing that I guess just makes no sense to me. What I think WOULD make sense is to REMOVE the "initial cap" points you get and merely increase the "ticks" from points over time. When you promote the initial cap points, this is what promotes zerging from one node to another. (If both teams do it, sure its not a zerg - dont wanna get into this again) but the issue is mainly there is no "skill" or "Strategy" here rather than just stick with the group, hope you outnumber or out-force your enemy and you dont care if they back-cap you or not, in fact its almost BETTER if they do as you can re-cap it and get a point tick for yourself PLUS the kills in zerging a back cap (there it WOULD be a zerg since 99.99% of the time a back cap is a smaller force) and end up netting MORE points than the other team.

All this does is promote a "zerg" mentality rather than having strategy to win based on taking and then HOLDING points.

This is just my opinion here, I know many "LIVE" guys wish Scenarios didnt have any "BO"s and it was all basically just slayer on every map. However it just rubs me the wrong way when our team tries to do the objective by taking and holding nodes, then defends them and loses eventhough they did so well. Versus other games I played last night (after doing this defense mentality) ALL I did was follow the "zerg" and we ended up CRUSHING them... To the point of 100% ignoring caps or the bauble and we just set there farming players in spawn...

It just feels, to me, that not enough emphasis is put on the "objectives" of the game.

[Genisaurus]

Geni, thanks for this! Have you guys talked at all about making the T3 gear cost less once T4 comes out? It takes a LONGGGG time to grind the emblems and what not for the gear... I know 2 pieces are BOE now, but even with that, it seems the cost for things (especially weapons) might be a tad too high for how fast you progress through levels? Just a thought... NO worries if nothing changes as it wont affect end game anyways.

When T4 is released, the T3 scenario weapons will undergo the same cost reduction that the Tier 1 and 2 weapons underwent a few patches ago (roughly a 66% cut). Coupled with two pieces of the set now dropping and being BoE, I should hope this addresses any concerns about affordability/acquisition rate.

[th3gatekeeper]

Geni, thanks for this! Have you guys talked at all about making the T3 gear cost less once T4 comes out? It takes a LONGGGG time to grind the emblems and what not for the gear... I know 2 pieces are BOE now, but even with that, it seems the cost for things (especially weapons) might be a tad too high for how fast you progress through levels? Just a thought... NO worries if nothing changes as it wont affect end game anyways.

When T4 is released, the T3 scenario weapons will undergo the same cost reduction that the Tier 1 and 2 weapons underwent a few patches ago (roughly a 66% cut). Coupled with two pieces of the set now dropping and being BoE, I should hope this addresses any concerns about affordability/acquisition rate.

You guys rock. Nuff said.

[Shibirian]

Geni, thanks for this! Have you guys talked at all about making the T3 gear cost less once T4 comes out? It takes a LONGGGG time to grind the emblems and what not for the gear... I know 2 pieces are BOE now, but even with that, it seems the cost for things (especially weapons) might be a tad too high for how fast you progress through levels? Just a thought... NO worries if nothing changes as it wont affect end game anyways.

When T4 is released, the T3 scenario weapons will undergo the same cost reduction that the Tier 1 and 2 weapons underwent a few patches ago (roughly a 66% cut). Coupled with two pieces of the set now dropping and being BoE, I should hope this addresses any concerns about affordability/acquisition rate.

I am (still) not so sure if 66% cut for weapons would be "enough" so to speak. I mean, I leveled my SM solely with T3 SC and no ORvR to lvl31 (with 28%exp on the way to 32). Right now I got 56 emblems, Balancers of the Duelist and Solerets of the Duelist. I am not so sure if I could have a full set with that (theoretically speaking before leaving T3 then), even with the drops, given the costs for helmet and breast. I don't even want to think about a weapon at this point. Of course, I know right now without T4 that's not a problem, and later there's downgrading with emblems, but still I thought I mention that.

[Genisaurus]

Geni, thanks for this! Have you guys talked at all about making the T3 gear cost less once T4 comes out? It takes a LONGGGG time to grind the emblems and what not for the gear... I know 2 pieces are BOE now, but even with that, it seems the cost for things (especially weapons) might be a tad too high for how fast you progress through levels? Just a thought... NO worries if nothing changes as it wont affect end game anyways.

When T4 is released, the T3 scenario weapons will undergo the same cost reduction that the Tier 1 and 2 weapons underwent a few patches ago (roughly a 66% cut). Coupled with two pieces of the set now dropping and being BoE, I should hope this addresses any concerns about affordability/acquisition rate.

I am (still) not so sure if 66% cut for weapons would be "enough" so to speak. I mean, I leveled my SM solely with T3 SC and no ORvR to lvl31 (with 28%exp on the way to 32). Right now I got 56 emblems, Balancers of the Duelist and Solerets of the Duelist. I am not so sure if I could have a full set with that (theoretically speaking before leaving T3 then), even with the drops, given the costs for helmet and breast. I don't even want to think about a weapon at this point. Of course, I know right now without T4 that's not a problem, and later there's downgrading with emblems, but still I thought I mention that.

You might be right. I've mentioned it before, but there are other people I need to convince. But running the numbers...

Assuming:
a. You buy the boots and gloves on the AH, or get them as a drop
b. The cost of a weapon will be reduced by ~66% to 165 emblems for a 2H
c. You win half your scenarios with 500 points
d. Of the half you lose, manage to at least get 200 points on average
e. It takes 2,631,340 experience to go from level 22 to hitting 30

1. Buying a 2H weapon (or 2x 1H weapons) and the remaining 3 pieces of the set will cost 550 emblems.
2. It will take about 138 scenarios at the above win rates to reach this goal.
3. This leaves a budget of about 19,000xp per scenario that you are allowed to gain.

If you exceed that number, or fall below the assumed performance, you will not have enough emblems to have purchased all of your gear by the time you reach level 30, the required level to use the last items on your list. So the questions are, do you gain more or less than 19k experience per scenario, and by how much more or less? Are these fair assumptions to make about the average win rate for players?

I can't come up with these answers and calibrate fair prices without data. If you want to track your win rates, final scores, and xp/renown gained for every scenario you do... this would be exactly what I need to get an idea of where prices should be.

[th3gatekeeper]

2. It will take about 138 scenarios at the above win rates to reach this goal.
3. This leaves a budget of about 19,000xp per scenario that you are allowed to gain.

Nice work!

I guess the question that should be asked would be:

"Should people expect if they leveled off mostly pvp, they would have full 5/5 + weapons before they exit the tier?"

If the answer is "NO". Then I think its probably fair as is... People would need to choose. Also your assuming they buy 2 pieces... To me, it seems buying would be a "shortcut" not whats "required" to get the gear before leaving the tier...

If the answer is "YES". Then i think its a fair point that the sets should be reduced.

I can tell you that several of my characters I leveled solely off PVP in tier 1 and tier 2 and on NONE of them i was able to buy all the pvp gear + weapons for those levels. It was always a trade off that usually ended with me getting 1-2 pieces of the RvR gear and the SC weapon.

I would LOVE if ALL the numbers were cut down even further so that if a person leveled off PVP they could expect these things later in the tier.

I dont know if 66% is enough, but it sure is a HECK of a lot better than now.

You guys MAY want to consider reducing the price a little more... to make it more "realistic" to achieve a full set + weapon during the tier via PVP.

Another option (I heard this used to be a thing?) is create an "armor swap" where you could trade say Dev gloves for duelist gloves...

This way if you leveled via a combination of RvR and SCs you might have a better shot at getting a 4/5 piece and a weapon.

[Dabbart]

I have been "testing" the gains from SCs on my AM. Lvling almost entirely off pug SCs without taking any kill quests. For this I went DPS cause; A, it's fun and B, SC emblems provide the gear I need. I understand that getting medal gear is harder due to ORvR and such. But the principle remains the same.

Lvl 15/18 I got all the braggart gear and SC weapon, and I managed to get emp and elf INF maxed. I saved up enough that I have 36 T2 SC emblems already and the glove/boot off AH. I have no doubt that I will have full t2 (challenger i think?) gear only slightly after I can actually use it.

If I am able to sustain the rate of gain on my Emblems and get INF gear that I need, I see no reason that I wont have a nice stash to swap to T3 emblems once I get there to jump start me. But we shall see, it is slightly slow going I will admit, but no real point in gaining that until the t3 items are cheapened for this "test".

Now this is obviously with a different lvl requirement for each tier, but I had full braggart and almost got my weapon before rank 12, and that was with ORvR.

The point here, is that the kill quests are the reasons that players aren't able to get the gear they desire. Kill quests greatly accelerate your XP, it seems to give you more than double the total XP gained from a winning SC per 25 kills(if you take all 3 zone's worth). This is not factoring in the 150 kill quest. So, if you want the item's or gear from a certain area, why are you maximizing your xp gain? Slow down, and get the gear if you want it. Or powerlevel through.

TLDR: Stop taking kill quests if you don't want to leave a tier quickly. Stop fighting in zones that you have max inf for the same reason. Sometimes you have to be patient, there is no rush to the finish line.