Rework Rarity system before merging.

[Davih 1,340]

16 minutes ago, Tor said:

"I don't like the idea that favors the 24/7 creation spawn on 6 premed alts" - Did i string this togather well enough, so you can't recognise yourself in it?

Sure, perfect.

Now it only seems that you understood almost nothing about the suggestion, it would be much better than before, if you didn't make the real reason abundantly clear before.
Now, if you are done spamming this suggestion thead maybe we can move on.
I guess i'll see you with your usual -1 on the next suggestion thread that i'll make on literally any topic.


Edit: I'm done replying to you, please stop posting here and spamming the thread with the purpose of degenerating it.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Tor 529]

Just now, Davih said:

Sure, perfect.

Now it only seems that you understood almost nothing about the suggestion, it would be much better than before, if you didn't make the real reason abundantly clear before.
Now, if you are done spamming this suggestion thead maybe we can move on.
I guess i'll see you with your usual -1 on the next suggestion thread that i'll make on literally any topic.

Pretty much, all you want is fantastic chance reduced.

I was responding to you.

Don't flatter yourself.

[Archaed 2,280]

Question:

 

If this system was implemented, what would you do? 

 

Would you continue to farm rares? Would you stop and go live a peaceful life as a farmer on a remote planet? 

 

As a rare farmer, how would you approach breaking your proposed system? 

[Darnok 209]

Any random system will be bad because players will spam actions, instead of playing the game, that give them a better chance of success.

 

Maybe instead of random rare items, random rare resources are enough and we could forge/craft a rare item we want?

[Davih 1,340]

 

6 hours ago, Archaed said:

Question:

 

If this system was implemented, what would you do? 

 

Would you continue to farm rares? Would you stop and go live a peaceful life as a farmer on a remote planet? 

 

As a rare farmer, how would you approach breaking your proposed system? 

I multiaccount all the time. (mostly because this game is very slow and i get bored playing with just a couple accounts)
Occasionally i spam rares with some of those accounts, so yeah, i will definitively continue to spam creation when i want to make something rare+
You guys behave like rare spamming is the only thing that can be abused by multiaccounting.
Truth is there are several actitivies that can give good results by multiaccount and are perfectly manageable even with like 8+ accounts, few examples are:
- Making mortar
- Shipbuilding (2 days ago i built 4 knarrs from scratch in less than 18 hours - 80s worth! nerf shipbuilding i guess?)
- digging (dirt/clay)
- mining
- mass producing planks/shafts/nails - other things i'm not even thinking about
- Any mix of the above activities

All of those things could potentially put a huge dent in the economy, most of them will directly screw up economies that are most used from new players as a way to start funding their premiums. 
Creating rares is hardly an economy that new players try to use to fund their premiums, it's not really viable with just one account.
I'm not saying i'm doing those less often to go on an effort to protect those economies, i usually just spam rares because it's funnier to check for random results, but even if rare creation was removed from the game today, i could still make tons of silvers  multiaccounting with any of the above activities, just saying. (and probably crash those economies as an unintended result way faster than the rare+ tools one)

 

2 hours ago, Darnok said:

Any random system will be bad because players will spam actions, instead of playing the game, that give them a better chance of success.

 

Maybe instead of random rare items, random rare resources are enough and we could forge/craft a rare item we want?

 

This is already a random system, i'm not suggesting to introduce rare spamming in the game, rare spamming in the game is there from several years, even from before i started playing myself.
Answering like i am proposing to invent it doesn't make much sense.

Also i'm up for literally any system that, with enough effort, somehow introduces the possibility of actually having fantastic items, or why not, a whole new nice tier.

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Archaed 2,280]

9 minutes ago, Davih said:

 

I multiaccount all the time. (mostly because this game is very slow and i get bored playing with just a couple accounts)
Occasionally i spam rares with some of those accounts, so yeah, i will definitively continue to spam creation when i want to make something rare+
You guys behave like rare spamming is the only thing that can be abused by multiaccounting.
Truth is there are several actitivies that can give good results by multiaccount and are perfectly manageable even with like 8+ accounts, few examples are:
- Making mortar
- Shipbuilding (2 days ago i built 4 knarrs from scratch in less than 18 hours - 80s worth! nerf shipbuilding i guess?)
- digging (dirt/clay)
- mining
- mass producing planks/shafts/nails - other things i'm not even thinking about
- Any mix of the above activities

All of those things could potentially put a huge dent in the economy, most of them will directly screw up economies that are most used from new players as a way to start funding their premiums. 
Creating rares is hardly an economy that new players try to use to fund their premiums, it's not really viable with just one account.
I'm not saying i'm doing those less often to go on an effort to protect those economies, i usually just spam rares because it's funnier to check for random results, but even if rare creation was removed from the game today, i could still make tons of silvers  multiaccounting with any of the above activities, just saying. (and probably crash those economies as an unintended result way faster than the rare+ tools one)

 

 

This is already a random system, i'm not suggesting to introduce rare spamming in the game, rare spamming in the game is there from several years, even from before i started playing myself.
Answering like i am proposing to invent it doesn't make much sense.

Also i'm up for literally any system that, with enough effort, somehow introduces the possibility of actually having fantastic items, or why not, a whole new nice tier.

 

To clarify I'm not intending to be combative, I apologise if I sound that way. 

 

What I'm asking is if the system you propose gets put in place, would that STOP the ability to farm rares, or does it just make fantastics more common and a new tier above? 

[Davih 1,340]

13 minutes ago, Archaed said:

What I'm asking is if the system you propose gets put in place, would that STOP the ability to farm rares, or does it just make fantastics more common and a new tier above? 

I guess you mean nerfing the non-premium accounts?
No, that wouldn't stop the ability to farm rares, it would just make it slightly less abusable, but, as OR pointed out, it's a pretty rewarding activity, and if you do it intensitvely enough you can pay for your premiums in a few days (but as from my previous example, buildings knarrs paid for 1 month premium on all my char in a single day), Nothing can stop it, besides denying mulitaccounting or denying rare creation completely.
But it creates a deeper market where you could sink the results of all those players doing those compulsive activities (its not like i'm the only one doing it), so i guess it coudl minorly help containing the damage and not having a market hopelessly saturated of every possible endgame tool. Finding a way to sacrifice rare/supremes tools for benefits would definitively help un-saturating those markets, but that's another matter.

Tuning improving to rare+ chances to be in line with creating chances, on the other hand, would put a few more rare+ tools back in the hands of casual and new players, spamming creation really shouldn't at least be the most rewarding way to create rare tools, because it's counterintuitive and a regular player who isn't aiming at making rares specifically would probably not do that.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Ekcin 2,416]

Reading that I ask myself whether excessive multiaccounting is not the core issue.

 

Get me right, I am not crusading against alts. I am using 4 premium accounts, 1 mainly as miner/crafter/fighter/explorer, and 3 WL priests, would not exclude an additional BL in the future. In addition I have a few f2p accounts, mainly spread arount the servers and clusters for peeking into their daily lives at times (especially on NFI). I do not consider that widely over the top, ymmv. 

 

But when it comes to mass accounts, I personally find it somewhat repulsive, and I wonder whether that is not a way to derail gameplay for the whole community. I already found it strange that some held in excess of 10 priests of the same creed just for optimizing linking. And having tons of accounts for bulk, or here rare creation, I have my doubts. It juist feels not fair, maybe just my impression.

 

It should be clear that a computer environment (not only in gaming) can emulate chance and randomness only in limited ways. We all (at least when familiar with mathematics) know that there is a tight relation between frequency and probability. When able to push the limits of frequency the chances can be heavily tilted.

 

I know gaming environments where the number of accounts played at a time is limited, e.g. to 8 or 4 accounts, or even 2 actively played. This can of course only be controlled by IP, yet it would just need a rule forbidding to push the limits using VPN which may be hard but not impossible to control. 

[Davih 1,340]

26 minutes ago, Ekcin said:

Reading that I ask myself whether excessive multiaccounting is not the core issue.

 

Get me right, I am not crusading against alts. I am using 4 premium accounts, 1 mainly as miner/crafter/fighter/explorer, and 3 WL priests, would not exclude an additional BL in the future. In addition I have a few f2p accounts, mainly spread arount the servers and clusters for peeking into their daily lives at times (especially on NFI). I do not consider that widely over the top, ymmv. 

 

But when it comes to mass accounts, I personally find it somewhat repulsive, and I wonder whether that is not a way to derail gameplay for the whole community. I already found it strange that some held in excess of 10 priests of the same creed just for optimizing linking. And having tons of accounts for bulk, or here rare creation, I have my doubts. It juist feels not fair, maybe just my impression.

 

It should be clear that a computer environment (not only in gaming) can emulate chance and randomness only in limited ways. We all (at least when familiar with mathematics) know that there is a tight relation between frequency and probability. When able to push the limits of frequency the chances can be heavily tilted.

 

I know gaming environments where the number of accounts played at a time is limited, e.g. to 8 or 4 accounts, or even 2 actively played. This can of course only be controlled by IP, yet it would just need a rule forbidding to push the limits using VPN which may be hard but not impossible to control. 

Ofc multiaccounting is the "core issue", always been, or at least always COULD have been.
But that's pretty much the foundation of wurm, to me multiaccount is what makes the game more complex and entartaining, i could hardly stand watching a single char completing 20+ seconds queues of actions without any interaction from me.

I kinda struggle to understand what you are saying about the issues with randomness, but the only clear fact is that the more accounts you have, the more you can produce. But limiting that would go against the core of the game itself, and good luck with it, and with managing people playing from the same ip address and such, also yeah, VPN are quite easy to use.

I think some of you here have been fixating a bit too much on my person, a little and funny side fact is that in the last 24 months of time, i did spam for rares maybe a total of 2-3 weeks, just to resize your ideas of how much an abuser of this current system i am. I aimed my multiaccount mostly towards a stupid amount of 4x chars- terraforming, especially surface mining. And made most of my golds with very-early channeling, farming, shipbuilding, ropemaking, selling dirt and several other ways. i could easily live off an pay all my premiums with just a single one of any of those activities.

Edit:
In a nutshell your thought process is: multiaccounting with 4 accounts is fine, because i can handle 4 accounts and that seems totally legit, but i'm not using more than 4, therefore i will consider having more than 4 repulsive and a way to derail gameplay that should be limited by ip.

...ok...

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Ame 99]

Those who do rare spamming with f2p alts currently, if they would need to sub to continue that certainly would also bring more real money to wurm too if they wanted to continue doing it with alts.
I dont have enough knowledge or experience with this whole thing but Davih does have and i would support this change.

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Ame

[Archaed 2,280]

Honestly, sounds to me like a better idea is making rares from improving actions better and more reliant on skill would do a better job of combating rare farming. 

 

Because all this suggestion is is "add a new tier of rarity and make higher tier rares easier to spam create" 

[Davih 1,340]

21 minutes ago, Ame said:

if they would need to sub to continue that certainly would also bring more real money to wurm too if they wanted to continue doing it with alts.

Truth be told, they can just prem up with silvers if they start getting enough, but at least that would make a bit of a money sink

18 minutes ago, Archaed said:

Honestly, sounds to me like a better idea is making rares from improving actions better and more reliant on skill would do a better job of combating rare farming. 

 

Because all this suggestion is is "add a new tier of rarity and make higher tier rares easier to spam create" 

Well, you say "all this suggestion is is "add a new tier of rarity and make higher tier rares easier to spam create" 

this isn't "all" of the suggestion.
In fact part of the suggestion was literally what you just said: "making rares from improving actions better" Make them reliant on skill is an idea, but i feel that might penalize new players a lot as well as the other idea.

I've had very little feedback on the "easier fantastics" and no feeback at all on the "new tier", anyway. 


Edit: just to be clear, i wouldn't advise on making improving to rare easier without the other fantastic/new tier changes, as it would just mean even more rares, and improving to rare already isn't that hard.
Most it could be done would be nerfing rare on creation a bit further, maybe with a patch note this time : D , but that's not what this suggestion was about.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Archaed 2,280]

7 minutes ago, Davih said:

I've had very little feedback on the "easier fantastics" and no feeback at all on the "new tier", anyway. 

Your suggestion on those fronts is essentially what power creep is, adding in new tiers of power to water down the existing items and then provide something that people strive for more. It's short sighted and ultimately self serving here

 

8 minutes ago, Davih said:

Well, you say "all this suggestion is is "add a new tier of rarity and make higher tier rares easier to spam create" 

this isn't "all" of the suggestion.
In fact part of the suggestion was literally what you just said: "making rares from improving actions better" Make them reliant on skill is an idea, but i feel that might penalize new players a lot as well as the other idea.
 

I honestly think your suggestion here only works if creation of rare tool parts other than archaeology created parts is removed. You then also have to look at success chances when imping, it means lower level players have it harder, and makes imping far below your skill more rewarding than imping at your skill, which is another miss in the plans.

 

I'd rather see any rarity chances come from a 50% chance while improving your items, with a modifier based on how far above/below your skill the item ql is. 

 

 

[Davih 1,340]

20 minutes ago, Archaed said:

Your suggestion on those fronts is essentially what power creep is, adding in new tiers of power to water down the existing items and then provide something that people strive for more. It's short sighted and ultimately self serving here

More or less, yeah, and i don't think it's either a bad idea or shortsighted, why would it be? It's about time to have something like this to spice up the Pve-crafting game a bit more. Not sure what you mean by self serving. But please keep in mind that the "watered down" supreme and rare items would still be very viable and offer very little difference in terms of usability and power compared to the fantastic (or an hypotheric new-linear tier) It doens't ramp up much, so i guess 99% of the actual benefits and satisfaction would be in having a few more purple lines of text in your inventory...
 

20 minutes ago, Archaed said:

I honestly think your suggestion here only works if creation of rare tool parts other than archaeology created parts is removed. You then also have to look at success chances when imping, it means lower level players have it harder, and makes imping far below your skill more rewarding than imping at your skill, which is another miss in the plans.

 

I'd rather see any rarity chances come from a 50% chance while improving your items, with a modifier based on how far above/below your skill the item ql is. 

Wurm is a complex game, playing around randomly with things just randomly messes up the market a bit, but doesn't change the essence of it. Removing parts that make tools rare? sure, so what we do about saws, needles,  small anvils and all the other "oneshot" items? we just create 2 different tiers of rarity difficulty, and the "hardest" one isn't particularly out of hand, i did make a lot of supreme even before archaeology, you just need to quickly grind the parts first, no big deal. cause with high skills and tools you can churn out 6 heads in less than 20 seconds, who on the other hand, is risking to make useless tool heads rare because he takes 18 seconds to craft just one? take a guess! noobs once again.

The 2nd part of your suggestion would particularly hurt the rare yield on "sweet spot imping" . which is what people use for skilling, not to make rares.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Ekcin 2,416]

2 hours ago, Davih said:

..
Edit:
In a nutshell your thought process is: multiaccounting with 4 accounts is fine, because i can handle 4 accounts and that seems totally legit, but i'm not using more than 4, therefore i will consider having more than 4 repulsive and a way to derail gameplay that should be limited by ip.
...ok...

I appreciate that you removed the accusation that my comment were a personal attack which it is not and never was. I do not know the person, much less a one playing multiple accounts, and have nothing than good to say about the player Davih once on what is now SFI.

 

But you misunderstood or ignored what I wrote. In fact, already using 2 or 4 accounts for just spamming stuff to break the chance based system is questionable in my opinion, and I would not do it. There are some players who condemn alt usage altogether, but I consider that over the top and contrary to a sandbox game. And sure, there is no fix limit, and it is matter of personal choice even to extremely multiaccount as long as the rules do not forbid it.

 

But it was you who proposed changing the rules in the first place. And I fail to consider it just to disenfranchise every basic account player only to force multiaccount rare spammers to sub (which will hardly abhor any of them).

 

During public slayings the loot of the unique is (most times) rolled on just a chance based system. Any alt is declared to be excluded from the roll. It does not need to explain why.

 

 

[Davih 1,340]

Public slaying rolls are player-created and totally free and generous circumstances where someone basically decides to give away stuff for free, it's not a game rule and wouldn't make much sense to count alts in.

literally anything else can be multiaccounted, not just rare creation spam, and most of the activities give very good rewards for doing that, as from my previous examples

I don't see much difference in using multiple accounts to break a chance and using multiple accounts simply to produce more stuff.

[Archaed 2,280]

2 hours ago, Davih said:

More or less, yeah, and i don't think it's either a bad idea or shortsighted, why would it be? It's about time to have something like this to spice up the Pve-crafting game a bit more. Not sure what you mean by self serving. But please keep in mind that the "watered down" supreme and rare items would still be very viable and offer very little difference in terms of usability and power compared to the fantastic (or an hypotheric new-linear tier) It doens't ramp up much, so i guess 99% of the actual benefits and satisfaction would be in having a few more purple lines of text in your inventory...
 

Wurm is a complex game, playing around randomly with things just randomly messes up the market a bit, but doesn't change the essence of it. Removing parts that make tools rare? sure, so what we do about saws, needles,  small anvils and all the other "oneshot" items? we just create 2 different tiers of rarity difficulty, and the "hardest" one isn't particularly out of hand, i did make a lot of supreme even before archaeology, you just need to quickly grind the parts first, no big deal. cause with high skills and tools you can churn out 6 heads in less than 20 seconds, who on the other hand, is risking to make useless tool heads rare because he takes 18 seconds to craft just one? take a guess! noobs once again.

You still imp all those items... 

 

You also don't want to churn out six items in 20 seconds, and you know this. The rarity window is 20-30 seconds and you only want to be doing one action in that time. 

 

I feel you're getting awfully defensive when the idea of eliminating creation rares is suggested, even though youve admitted this system you have suggested would still have you farming creation rares 

[Davih 1,340]

33 minutes ago, Archaed said:

You still imp all those items... 

 

You also don't want to churn out six items in 20 seconds, and you know this. The rarity window is 20-30 seconds and you only want to be doing one action in that time. 

 

I feel you're getting awfully defensive when the idea of eliminating creation rares is suggested, even though youve admitted this system you have suggested would still have you farming creation rares 

You don't want the 6-7 items you churn out to be rare in the first place if the rarity doesn't transfer , so you obviously do that as fast as possible to prevent getting rares in that phase, as they are useless. I'm just pointing out there's not much change in that, and noobs would be the ones that gets hurt the most not being able to churn out those "potentially useless rares" fast enough.

And, actually, if you want to eliminate rare creation chance completely, i wouldn't shed a tear about it.(as long as it doesn't eliminate completely the chance to even have some non improvable rare items)...
But this thread wasn't really about that, it was about fantastic items being basically impossible to obtain, a proposal about a further tier, and the fact that this could help the depressed state of the market in SFI (but wouldn't be bad for NFI either, or both if and when they get merged), sadly those ideas aren't really even getting discussed.

 

  

33 minutes ago, Archaed said:

youve admitted this system you have suggested would still have you farming creation rares 

I will continue to occasionally farm creation rares as long as it's possible because, believe it or not, i think there's nothing wrong with doing that and i have fun doing it, so i'll keep doing it wheter or not this idea/system gets implemented. I really fail to see the point here, i don't think i ever claimed having this new system would stop me or anyone from farming rares.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Archaed 2,280]

So it wasn't about addressing the mechanics you have been abusing through the use of multiple alts, but adding new rares for those alts to farm for? 

 

Sorry, I honestly thought you wrew hoping to fix the system, not gain more from it. My bad

[Davih 1,340]

11 minutes ago, Archaed said:

So it wasn't about addressing the mechanics you have been abusing through the use of multiple alts, but adding new rares for those alts to farm for? 

 

Sorry, I honestly thought you wrew hoping to fix the system, not gain more from it. My bad

Seriously, you actually went through 8 more replies just so that you could finally steer the focus away from the real discussion enough to drive me into admitting something that was clear from the beginning in order to claim this biased nonsense?

My proposal was pretty clear from the start, and it ALSO contained ideas about "containing the problem of abuse" but it's obviously not the main focus, and never was.

I'm not here to fix the system because it's basically not really fixable, i'm here to give ideas on how to make it more interesting, and how to fix some of  "the damages" that this system had created over the years on old servers, with or without my presence.

All of this should have been more than clear enough at this point, i was trying to understand what was the point you were getting at with all those replies, and... that's it? That was your master plan?

Leading  me to admit what was already obvious and making up an unrelated and biased truth out of it? I'm really disappointed, lol.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Davih

[Darnok 209]

11 hours ago, Davih said:

This is already a random system, i'm not suggesting to introduce rare spamming in the game, rare spamming in the game is there from several years, even from before i started playing myself.
Answering like i am proposing to invent it doesn't make much sense.

Also i'm up for literally any system that, with enough effort, somehow introduces the possibility of actually having fantastic items, or why not, a whole new nice tier.

 

 

Ok, so maybe something completely new?

 

Player chooses max 3 normal items, something like care for items, because some players are sentimental, and he cannot change his choice for 1 Wurm a year, in addition, items gain a different color, but have no additional properties other than charge bar that player has to fill. Items cannot be of same type.

 

Filling item bar is based on normal gameplay and performing actions with these items, but in order not to create a boring requirement, each item fills bars of all 3 selected items.

Player must perform several hundred actions each day RL to meet requirement and add some % progress to bar of each of 3 items.

If you have charged your items to 40% and you have important things in real life, no problem, you lose nothing, even after few weeks when you return you will finish what you started.

 

When bars are charged at 100%, 2 items are destroyed, but one becomes rare.

Charging items and creating 1 rare item will take 1 Wurm a year per player whether player play 1 hour per day or 100 hours per week.

But everyone will be rewarded and should be pleased, because reward will not be useless for anyone, unless he has chosen useless items himself.

 

Further, to get a supreme item, a player must choose 3 rare items, but filling item bars may require more actions per 1 RL day and filling may take more than 1 Wurm year.
Finally, 2 rare items will be destroyed and the third will turn to supreme.

 

A similar rule with fantastic, that is, we choose 3 supreme, 2 are destroyed and 1 is turned into fantastic. Only higher requirements.

 

You want to go higher than fantastic? No problem.

 

The obvious problem with this idea is alts, in every MMO I hate alts, but I have no idea how to solve this problem with one simple feature, so instead I think game should be just more difficult for players who have an army of alts.

 

Difficulty may be that players will have to feed their characters. For several hundred years of its existence, only in the last 200 years, humanity has stopped worrying about lack of food, so maybe food production should be more difficult?

Maybe actions that fill items bar should use some resources, so average single-character player will have a slight problem and some challenge, but someone who tries to spam would already have huge problem with limited resources in his area?

In one suggestion, I suggested that bandits could attack deeds of active players, if there are many characters controlled by many players on deed, such an attack will not be a problem, but if someone is spamming alts, they usually do not have appropriate weapons on them and alts do not have skills to fight so for him such a bandit attack would be a problem.

 

EDIT

You could add a skill requirement:

normal-> rare - available to everyone free and premium, but requires at least one level 15 skill.

rare -> supreme - requires at least one skill of level 50+

supreme -> fantastic - requires at least one skill of level 80+

 

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Darnok

[CreZ 284]

Inserting a new tier between supreme and fantastic so there is more content to collect or possibly sell (and content that is actually feasible to obtain) doesn't seem such a terrible or self-serving goal to me. He's just requesting some more content that would make the gaming experience more enjoyable to him and possibly others. That is what this subforum is ostensibly about isn't it? 

 

Is this the area where I would most like to see dev efforts focused? Nah, but I don't have an issue with it either. 

 

 

I also agree with the point that's been lightly mentioned a few times during all the dance-off fun, that maybe rare creation:imping could use a poke to reward behaviors that are actually within the flow of gameplay rather than gaming the system.

[Etherdrifter 2,518]

7 hours ago, Archaed said:

I feel you're getting awfully defensive when the idea of eliminating creation rares is suggested, even though youve admitted this system you have suggested would still have you farming creation rares 

Well, I'll add something in here - nerfing creation rares would nerf priests (its the only way we can get rare items since we can't imp).

 

You'd need to add something similar such as rare casts raring an item to balance it out if you wanted to make improvement and skill linkage a thing (and given how many people have probalby cheesed the channel grind before the nerf, would that really be viable?).

[Davih 1,340]

2 hours ago, CreZ said:

Inserting a new tier between supreme and fantastic so there is more content to collect or possibly sell (and content that is actually feasible to obtain) doesn't seem such a terrible or self-serving goal to me. He's just requesting some more content that would make the gaming experience more enjoyable to him and possibly others. That is what this subforum is ostensibly about isn't it? 

 

Is this the area where I would most like to see dev efforts focused? Nah, but I don't have an issue with it either. 

 

 

I also agree with the point that's been lightly mentioned a few times during all the dance-off fun, that maybe rare creation:imping could use a poke to reward behaviors that are actually within the flow of gameplay rather than gaming the system.

I didn't consider an intermediate level, but i wonder how that would work with the current bonus for rarity.

for a simple example: enchant decay is reduced by 5%/10%/15% with R-S-F , a tier between supreme and fant would be like... 12.5? Maybe it could also need some further adjustment, but yeah, i guess both a tier in the middle and one sfter fantastic could both work.

Anyway, don't mistake this, making rares by multiaccount-improving is almost as viable as making them with rare spam, maybe with less accounts cause it's more annoying to handle, so the last mentioned adjustment (rebalance chances of creation and improving to rare) would only serve to benefit casual players more, it's not stopping multiaccount raremaking that much.

On the other hand, Ether is right saying that removing creation would nerf priests, maybe it's not so important as priests are usually alts, but a main priest would be hugely penalized and unable to make a rare, yeah, i like the idea of casting items into rarity though  

[Finnn 3,318]

TL;DR for now..

…so as I was skimming through the thread I can see one thing.. it's request to make spamming rare/+ items easier for the same small group of people that exploit the existing not at all that amazing system allowing to be abused with spam-creation.

 

This shows 2 issues.. it's way too easy to abuse the existing system, and this is obviously not the way to fix the issue by adding more fuel to it.

In addition there's that bug report that rarity window is canceled by right clicking or other server-sent event... but afaik that bug have never been fixed.. while normal players have way lower chance to make anything rare or better... few know of that and only create, to utilize the system to the max...

 

Why don't we have a better rarity system where skill matters more to make better items, either by having inspiration and:

- turning normal items into rare/+, and upgrading it's rarity at better rate than current(rare roll that rolls "rare" tier, is same as rolling a failure.. could somehow stack... to eventually upgrade the item)

- receiving blueprint item for same item type or similar item type( if it's weapon.. could be similar piercing/slashing/bashing/etc weapon not just exactly the same ), alternatively like forestry reports for almanac.. getting a *thought/plan* for same weapon or similar one.. possibly a skinned rare/+ version, etc etc etc....

* think of the *blueprint/plan* as item/skin/bone.. possible to convert existing items or upgrade such into the better tier is it's such.. or it could be a less-convenient option like only forcing the making of new item rare or w/e tier.. could be rng 2 states ... possible to convert existing or just "mold" for new item.

Chances for such items should be better with skill or something else.. not just boosting deed bonus..

It's already easy to spam a few alts and spam create.. new players do it, old players do it.. it's all the same as long the inspiration action doesn't roll creation failure.

 

I personally HATE the DUMB mechanic with server chosen time... why aren't actions directly having % chance to turn items rare/+... why does it have to be at specific random server time... that only forces people to bot through creation or improving, ... for hours to focus and get into that random window, INSTEAD of just playing the game and enjoying the random outcome that could just all the same happen any time.. while players do actions if it's % chance per action.

Similar to the halloween system failed inspirations with bad outcomes.. failed improvement action.. or rolling outcome not changing item rarity like.. normal remaining normal... could be stacking and eventually give another inspiration sooner or force inspiration roll that skips normal - remaining normal(or keep rerolling until it gives better outcome..)

 

Past rmt... this game needs to get a bit more FUN to play... and not just dip down in the mud of tons of actions and rng..

 

Current and suggested system here seems to only benefit botting behavior. YES, yes.. humans do it.. whatever.. it's not how anyone would be intending or recommending other to play the game, though, is it?

Edited September 19, 2021 by Finnn