Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Here you can make and discuss suggestions to improve the game. / Hier kannst du Vorschläge einreichen und diskutieren um das Spiel zu verbessern.

Moderator: Developers

User avatar
Banduk
Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Banduk »

I think we have a general balancing issue with magical gems.
Magical gem will work best, if the total amount of gems influx is about equal for each type. This is clearly not given due to IG politics.
At the moment the situation is the best for Cadomyr and worst for Galmair from the point of view of a character.

Why?
Since Bras 44 (46 IG month) the output for a rank 2 character was 222:191:154. A single Cadomyrian got over the last year about one and a half the amount of gems compared to Galmair.
Taking out the donation raids the distribution is 107:55:148.
That's ok because it shows the wealth of each realm. Any inbalance can be changed by IG driven politics such as donation raids. See Runewick what was 2 month ago far behind Galmair.

But at the end the distribution is critically unbalanced. The total influx of Cadomyrian gems is marginal, since there are a few chars only playing in Cadomyr. On the other end is Galmair, having a lot of player and moderate influx.
The situation get worse with the fact, Obsidian is the favorite Galmairian gem and additionally found at the most common gathering (mining). According to my records total obsidian influx is 2.5 times higher as sappire (246:105 over 1IG year). The influx by mining is about the same range as sappire influx by taxes.
At the end a lot of Galmairians have no chance to use his/her earned gems whilst the few Cadomyrian have all chances.

The fact who plays in which realm mostly is controlled by RP opportunities. IG politics have much more influence than any number of gems, a char can grind or coins a char can earn. But controlling the politics is not the task of game balancing.

My Proposals
So for the physical game balancing we need a mechanics, allowing a uniform influx of every type of gems independently from IG politics.
  • Calculating the number of gems based on taxes shouldn’t be touched. The total amount is neither too few nor too high from my point of view.
  • The balance in between the realms is ok and can be influenced by the player.
  • The probability finding a gem during mining and fighting shouldn’t be touched. The discussion in past showed this is a lottery what it should be.
  • The assignment of gem types to the realms shouldn’t be touched. This is a question of Lore.
But within these limits something can be done.
  • 1. It seems there is an unbalance in the output of gem types in a realm according to taxes of 60:40 or even worse. I had month where a rank 7 character got more than 10 of the favorite and none of the second. This distribution should be 50:50.
  • 2. We can change the type of gem, found with monsters, treasures and gathering. The best way would be to bind the type of gem to the emission rate last month.
    Since is not easy to realize a second best way could help to avoid the effect some gems become worthless due to gathering. Let’s find the miner, timber, herb collector, fighter … a random type gem.
  • 3. There should be a way to convert gems. Maybe 3 gems of one type can be converted into 2 gems of other types. So whatever unbalance we will have, the player can compensate.
    This might be a task for Raban, gives him a touch of a sorcerer or a dragon NPC in the deep of the volcano.
User avatar
Jupiter
Developer
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 11:23 am

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Jupiter »

1. It seems there is an unbalance in the output of gem types in a realm according to taxes of 60:40 or even worse. I had month where a rank 7 character got more than 10 of the favorite and none of the second. This distribution should be 50:50.
Yes, it should be. The script uses Lua's random function. We found that this function seems to be not really random, especially when used in loops. Vilarion created a better random function by using the C-random generator (or something like that) which works a lot better. So we can easily adjust that.
There should be a way to convert gems. Maybe 3 gems of one type can be converted into 2 gems of other types. So whatever unbalance we will have, the player can compensate.
That will not help at all. That's wasting gems. It's not correct that some gems are worthless. If you have a a lot gems of type X you can more easily create higher levels of that gem and that will still increase the boost for your weapon/armour. I believe who uses this NPC would be just wasting gems. But well, okay, let them waste them. I don't mind.
This might be a task for Raban, gives him a touch of a sorcerer or a dragon NPC in the deep of the volcano.
Raban is a druid.
User avatar
Kugar
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:07 am

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Kugar »

IMO the gems acquired from gathering should ALWAYS be a random type of gem.

Sure, on paper it looks neat to put a specific gem to a specific gathering action. It's very 'gamey'. Immersion breaking. Bleh...

Truth is, the cat is out of the bag. Everyone already knows how to get the specific gem they want. It's not intuitive, it's not exciting, it promotes ooc gameplay.

Two cents.
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

Banduk wrote:Let’s find the miner, timber, herb collector, fighter … a random type gem.
:arrow: sounds good to me. i never understand some of the correlations between mag. gems and craft
Banduk wrote:There should be a way to convert gems.
:arrow: funny, but why not .....but keep in mind that this "gem-change NPC" should also reachable for non-fighters

####################################################################################################
kurze DEU Zusammenfassung:

1) Banduk schlägt vor, das die gefundenen magischen Edelsteine beim Rohstoffe sammeln zufällig sein sollten --> was ich eine gute Idee finde, manche Zuordnungen der Edelsteine zu bestimmten Handwerken habe ich sowieso nie verstanden
2) Banduk schlägt eine Art "Edelsteinumwandler" vor (als eine der Möglichkeiten nennt er einen speziellen Drachen) --> finde ich ebenfalls eine gute Idee, nur sollte auch daran gedacht werden, das dieser "Umwandler" auch von Nicht-Kämpfern erreicht werden kann

p.s.1 Banduks Vorschlag umfaßt viel mehr Informationen und Dinge als die, auf die ich mich hier beziehe.
p.s.2 Leider gibt es mal wieder keine deutschen Übersetzunugen bzw. Zusammenfassungern. Schade eigentlich.
User avatar
Evie
Developer
Posts: 1210
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 6:55 pm
Location: on a mana stream

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Evie »

Kugar wrote:IMO the gems acquired from gathering should ALWAYS be a random type of gem.

Sure, on paper it looks neat to put a specific gem to a specific gathering action. It's very 'gamey'. Immersion breaking. Bleh...

Truth is, the cat is out of the bag. Everyone already knows how to get the specific gem they want. It's not intuitive, it's not exciting, it promotes ooc gameplay.

Two cents.

See my mantis request on this very type of proposal and the responses. Feel free to add there. http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=11180
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Dear all,

I'd like to recall the idea behind the magical gems first. The conception of the gems is that they are a rare "commodity", each gem is supposed to be assigned to one faction. Each faction has one puzzle piece and once you complete the puzzle, you get a significant benefit (here: bonus on weapons/armour). To collect the lacking commodities from the other factions is supposed to be a major driving force for interaction. The main source for the commodities is enforced purchasing aka taxes.

The motivation to change anything here needs a clarification first. All the described facts and derived methods read to me like "I want to have gems from another faction without having to interact with its members.". As written above, this is not the intention of the magical gems. Also, the desire to get those gems creates a nice challenge in this game. Please note that there is no "gem fairness" or "right to get all gems". The set bonus is massive and hence, some effort shall be necessary to get it.

On the methods:

1. As Jupiter described, a different random generator can help the situation. But random is random. An "always 50:50 for everyone in every month" setting would just remove the "lottery aspect" and won't change a bit the overall situation. The gem trading within one faction would just die and we'd have no real reason for two types of gems each faction.

2. To bind the gem finding in gathering etc. to last month's output sounds utterly complicated but I'd be interested in an elaborated proposal how this should work.

2a. To randomise the gem output by gathering etc.: While I am not strictly against some more "lottery" in this game, I question the motivation for this. If it is to make access to foreign gems more easy and to reduce the influx of "faction gems" instead, I completely disagree with this approach. I gave my reasons here http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=11180 (and somewhere else I cannot remember) not to randomise the gems. If there is a real problem with gems from gathering, we can also:

2a1. Remove gem influx by gathering completely
2a2. Limit gems in gathering to the gems of the faction of the gatherer

Note that this secondary source for gems is already outside the conception. But it's fun, isn't it? I'll take the action to have a look at the assignment of gems to the gathering actions as per Mantis ticket http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=8292.

3. Gem converter NPC: This clearly looks like a way to bypass interaction. For normal items, we have such NPCs, called traders. They sell you an item at 10-20 times the money you get if you sell the same item and they only sell you items that are typical for the faction. Similar ratios might be acceptable for such a gem converter. At this moment, I see no dire need for a NPC to undermine the core conception of the magical gems.

In conclusion, two actions can be derived from this proposal:
  • Use a different random generator as described by Jupiter. Please file a Mantis ticket for this.
  • Review gem<->gathering assignment per Mantis ticket http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=8292. A random/partially random distribution will be considered if no satisfying distribution can be found.
Please, even if there is only good intent in this proposal, do not try to remove one of the last big challenges this game has to offer for long term players. Especially if this challenge can be overcome with interaction. Gems are endgame content!

Estralis
User avatar
Vern Kron
Posts: 1565
Joined: Sat Oct 06, 2007 10:20 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Vern Kron »

I agree that there is some significant advantages to having gems be somewhat locked in that regard. The problem with this is the same problem that existed with the magic system in the old client:

The only way for a large majority of the player base to get the 'end game content' is through dealing with a select few players. Runewick and Cadomyr are great roleplaying communities, if you are within the community. However, if you are not a member of that community time frame, it seems a large portion of the time they move to Galmair.

New players and old players alike, because there simply is no reason for a character to exist in Cadomyr/Runewick at 10 pm est (or about 4 am ECT.) The character is left alone, the player is generally bored, waiting for other people to come to rp with them. But no one will go over and rp with them because half the time they don't know they exist, IG factors heavily discourage interaction in that regard, so these characters either move or quit.

The times there are people for my character to interact with people from these towns, are when traditionally I should be working in the real world. The idea of interaction and such can only exist when these worlds are allowed to collide, and despite all intentions, a large number of characters and even players do not have windows of opportunity for it.

So there is more of an issue beyond sheer 'amounts' being distributed, but the low populace levels of other towns immediately makes for serious issue: If the game's system is based on interaction, and those interactions cannot exist without a person having to take serious ooc steps to build up a populace of a town for the sheer sake of creating even a remote possibility of trade happening, the game is broken. Atleast as it stands, there is a small, tiny, chance of things improving through the dedicated gem out puts.

If the gem outputs from crafts were randomized, you would have a 1:4000th of a chance to get a gem, and then a 1/6 chance to get the one you -really- want. That puts the chance of getting a gem you want down to 1/24000.
User avatar
Banduk
Posts: 1288
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Exilant aus Trolls Bane

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Banduk »

Estralis Seborian wrote:Please, even if there is only good intent in this proposal, do not try to remove one of the last big challenges this game has to offer for long term players. Especially if this challenge can be overcome with interaction. Gems are endgame content!
I fully agree.
In general I can't see a need to let gems as a reward in gathering action. There are pure elements and treasure maps to find. No gems in a mine, sheep or whatever will remove the capability to bypass the gem intention by extreme gathering.

Estralis Seborian wrote:2a. To randomise the gem output by gathering etc.: While I am not strictly against some more "lottery" in this game, I question the motivation for this. If it is to make access to foreign gems more easy and to reduce the influx of "faction gems" instead, I completely disagree with this approach.
The motivation has nothing to do with getting gems of another faction. The point is, that every faction from point of game balance should be handled equally. What happened with obsidian nowadays? Mining is somehow a gathering performed by a lot of character from all realms often (maybe often not the right word, it sounds too weak for the general relation)
At the end there is a second strong influx of obsidian what leads to the situation, obsidian lost a lot of value and cannot be exchanged. A mining char of mine has a relation in gem available of 100:250. Bet which one is the obsidian. Bet what's the relation if you want to get gems from other realms? Roundabout 1:3. So any character in a realm with gems from major gathering get about 66% of the gem value for the same tax and donation like the other realms. That doesn't looks balanced.

Whatever gem you will bind to the major gathering crafts will do the same for the faction, these gem is related to. So any change is just a switch and a future need of readjustment. Whatever we try in balancing, there will be more and less popular activities.
If there is no binding (means random) this is not an issue anymore.

I'd like the idea, you find gems of your faction only (but please random), if there wouldn't be the issue with the Hempty. But I have no idea, how to handle outlaws. No gems? Doesn't sounds like an idea that cause no flame war.

No gems at all from gathering and fighting would be a solution too. There is a strong rare reward by pure elements. And since these are not bound to the realm balance. So any unbalance doesn't matter. There are just more or less rare pure elements.
Estralis Seborian wrote:3. Gem converter NPC: This clearly looks like a way to bypass interaction. For normal items, we have such NPCs, called traders. They sell you an item at 10-20 times the money you get if you sell the same item and they only sell you items that are typical for the faction. Similar ratios might be acceptable for such a gem converter. At this moment, I see no dire need for a NPC to undermine the core conception of the magical gems.
These gem converter should act as an emergency valve if by whatever reason gems cannot be exchanged for longer term (like nowadays a large part of obsidian). There are chars earning obsidian only and couldn't change whatever they tried.
I'd never agree a sell / by action. Gems must not be able to buy from a NPC. I even don't like you can sell them.
A convertion rate of 1:10 looks extremely hard, even a 1:2 relation is a real pain. Think a hard working normal miner char (maybe rank 4) get about 1-5 gems each IG month from the realm (plus 2-10 obsidian from the mine).
Annabeth
Posts: 502
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 9:49 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Annabeth »

As the player of the longest staying citizen of Cadomyr, and currently highest ranked one, I myself feel forced as a player to trade with Galmairians only and try to distribute Cadomyr gems into their group whenever I can, seeing how they have such limited access to trade with Cadomyr for magic gems. Sure it's not a right for them to complete sets but it sucks that they can't because of the way politics and playerbase distribution amongst towns are.

I'm satisfied with my current gem sets so I couldn't care less about trying to achieve a certain amount of a specific type of gem, so I mostly sit on galmair gems these days. Still, my character alone can't satisfy all of Galmair when it comes to trading them, and most other characters are interested in trades that only benefit their own set completion as they should be. I try to limit how much I trade with each person so everyone gets a chance but, when it comes to trading gems with Anna each month its first come first serve. (and on low donation months even a rank 9 like her can get as low as 5 gems.. or was it 11? 2 latents and 1 slight/limited was the lowest I can recall in recent times.)

So I definitely think some kind of balancing of gems could be made so the trades become more of a 1:1:1 ratio between the towns and not like it is currently where theres a flood of Galmair gems.
User avatar
Achae Eanstray
Posts: 4300
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:03 am
Location: A field of dandelions
Contact:

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Achae Eanstray »

I agree some type of more accurate balancing is needed. Two languages, two different times players play and limited player base lead to some not even seeing other characters in another town. Answer honestly... how many actually arrange gem transfers ooc? Has this gem exchange encouraged roleplay for your character..or is a major source of roleplay for you? Even if in game.."want to trade gems.. what do you have.." etc etc, trade or not. Not much related to roleplay on the whole. Is this a significant part of the roleplay experience?

Gems definitely should remain rare.. my experience is obsidian gems are no longer very rare.
Fooser
Posts: 4725
Joined: Mon Dec 23, 2002 2:25 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Fooser »

Guys, there's a way to deal with this.

Invasion.

This time we won't lose.
User avatar
Estralis Seborian
Posts: 12308
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 9:14 pm
Location: Sir Postalot
Contact:

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Estralis Seborian »

Thanks everyone for the comprehensive analysis of the situation!

By doing some basic calculations and by checking database values, I now fully understand the problem. I can see that the gem influx within a faction (so for Galmair Obsidian vs. Sapphire) is imbalanced due to the assignment of one gem to one gathering action. Not every gathering action is and can be done in the same frequency and hence, we end up with some gems being pretty common, compared to others. This disparity has its impact on other aspects like the described "Cadomyr vs. Galmair" issue but the core problem is the gem influx itself.

It is clear for me that something needs to be changed and the main motivation is to have equal influx potential for all gems. This does not mean that all gems will get into the game in the same number, but they should could (is that even English?). So the desire to get from other factions will stay the same and won't be affected.

Concerning the influx control, I will investigate possible solutions in this order:
  1. Keep assignment "one gathering action, one gem" and revise distribution over gathering actions (I don't have high hopes I'll find a proper solution but I'll try)
  2. Change to "one gathering action, two gems" (partial random). In the example of mining, mining then would give Obsidian and Sapphire, the Galmair gems. Big risk here is that secondary towns (for mining: Cadomyr) then have even less motivation to trade
  3. Change to "every gathering action, gems of the faction" (partial random). Every gathering action would give the gems of one's faction. Outlaws would either randomise or get no gems. A rather artificial solution that takes away the "special surprise" of gathering findings
  4. Change to "every gathering action, every gem" (full random). Every gathering action can give any gem (random). This is the fallback solution that is best for balancing and worst for posing a challenge one can overcome with dedicated actions.
  5. Remove gem influx by gathering completely. I'm not in favour of this but it is a valid fallback solution in case nothing really works
I will do the same evaluation with pure elements. The options 2 and 3 drop out as there is no faction assignment of pure elements. 5 drops out for obvious reasons ;-). This leaves 1 and 4, so either random or the current approach. Please note that I first need to finish my work on a) new crafting recipes b) general influx numbers for all(!) resources before I can come to these special resources in the same work package aka Milestone II.

Tracking tickets:

http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=8292
http://illarion.org/mantis/view.php?id=11180

Estralis
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

@ Estrali thanks for the information

point 1) i hope you will find a solution
point 2) i dislike the idea of geting 2 different magical gems for one action
point 3) my char hate the idea BUT I like this one .... this support the trade between the towns and their members // you dont need to craft something special to get a special gem ...you always get the gems of your faction // outlows could get gems of any kind (they dont get gems as a reward of taxes)
point 4) sounds interesting for all crafters to get all type of gems --> but will prevent any trade between the towns
point 5) I hate this idea .... taxes, trade and craftinig are the only ways for NON-fighters to get gems - fighters can find all kind of gems in treasures or monsters (?)

:arrow: I´m sure all will work on the best solution they can find .... problem is identyfied .. now we can wait for a solutiion
User avatar
Alyssa El'anir
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:08 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Alyssa El'anir »

Maybe we could get a poll up on the five different ideas just to see which one the players would favor the most?
User avatar
Lord Arcia
Posts: 912
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2004 1:52 am
Location: Tol Vanima
Contact:

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Lord Arcia »

3. Change to "every gathering action, gems of the faction" (partial random). Every gathering action would give the gems of one's faction. Outlaws would either randomise or get no gems. A rather artificial solution that takes away the "special surprise" of gathering findings
What surprise? You mean how for the first two rare drops someone is surprised to see that cutting down trees sometimes will give an emerald? That information is posted in the forums.
What I do like about this is it might actually give an incentive to be an outlaw.

4. Change to "every gathering action, every gem" (full random). Every gathering action can give any gem (random). This is the fallback solution that is best for balancing and worst for posing a challenge one can overcome with dedicated actions.

I'm not sure that this exactly the answer either, because it's pretty cool that Runewickers sort of have control over rubies and emeralds.


A suggestion that I thought of.

mining have a 50% chance to drop obsidian, and 10% chance to drop the others.
woodcutting 50% emerald, and 10% on others.
etc etc etc.
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

as a side note:

1) i think the "spots" where you can gather some materials and magical gems has also a big influence :arrow: example: there are much more mining spots (and you get more things from one spot) than honey-spots (bee hives) --> so it is normal that you got more obsidians than emeralds

2) from Findos 40 up to Irmas 47 ((excluding 5 month -> not ig or crash server => 106(?) ig month with gems)) my char got more than 1000 (calculated to lvl1) magical gems of his fraction (ONLY taxes - nearly 290 goldcoins) + he found a lot of "fraction" gems when crafting
:arrow: may be this number of gems is to much to make them rare :?:
Ragorn
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Ragorn »

GolfLima wrote:as a side note:

1) i think the "spots" where you can gather some materials and magical gems has also a big influence :arrow: example: there are much more mining spots (and you get more things from one spot) than honey-spots (bee hives) --> so it is normal that you got more obsidians than emeralds

2) from Findos 40 up to Irmas 47 ((excluding 5 month -> not ig or crash server => 106(?) ig month with gems)) my char got more than 1000 (calculated to lvl1) magical gems of his fraction (ONLY taxes - nearly 290 goldcoins) + he found a lot of "fraction" gems when crafting
:arrow: may be this number of gems is to much to make them rare :?:
Poor Galmair. I know that a rank 7 char in cadomyr easily can get level 5 gems (plural!) in only one "good" ig month. One level 5 gem equivalents to 81 latent gems ...
How many gems gets a rank 9 char in cadomyr in a "good" ig month? Is it in the range of level 7 gems (plural) , a single level 7 gem equivalents to 729 latent gems?
Also questionable is, how such a high rank is justified for a player char. Why do we have at least two rank 9 chars in a small community like cadomyr?
In Galmair, with its larger community, there are only 3 rank 8 player chars (chancellors). Additionally complicating is, their rank is temporary!
The high ranked chars in the both small communities are not temporary - that meens guaranteed high gem output every month.

Proposals:
1) Completely rethink the monthly calculation of gems. E.g. a larger player base should be honored, not punished.
2) No exceptions for the ranks. Maximum rank 7 with tasks. Possible solutions to get higher ranks: 1) can be granted temoparatily 2) Honor the time a player plays a char, e.g. after 1 (real) year ingame with regular logins and onlinetime, rank 8 can reached. rank 9 and 10 after the second and third year. 3) "daily login bonus": regular daily logins and online time for one (real) month grant a temporary rank 8 for the next ig month, etc. (these are just ideas!)
3) Gathering: Remove magical gems from gathering completely, since this only supports powergaming par excellance. And Estralis, you also get rid of all those complex problems in your alternatives 1 to 4.
4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution. E.g. Akaltut: reward with a level 4 gem in one of the later quests. Rewarding with coins is completely useless for chars doing a quest series at this level. Soalpain: increase latent ... to level 3 gem for example. Add a chance for a latent gem in the daily qests, etc.
User avatar
Jupiter
Developer
Posts: 3477
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 11:23 am

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Jupiter »

Ragorn points out a certain problem that comes from the fact that the gem out put calculation contains a multiplication with the rank of the one receiving the gems. That means: The more high rank chars a faction has the more gems are given out in total. That is indeed a problem but it is not such a big deal. We do not have many > rank 7 chars. So while I also consider it problematic it is not a huge injustice.

But I prefer an other solution than Ragorn (cap rank influence at 7): We calculate the whole "cake" independent from the rank of the single character. Then, the cake is split up and every citizen gets a piece. The higher the rank, the bigger your piece.
This has means that the high rank chars get more than the low rank chars but the total amount if not changed. If you consider that unjust as well, I say deal ingame with it.
User avatar
Alyssa El'anir
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:08 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Alyssa El'anir »

Ragorn wrote:
GolfLima wrote:as a side note:

1) i think the "spots" where you can gather some materials and magical gems has also a big influence :arrow: example: there are much more mining spots (and you get more things from one spot) than honey-spots (bee hives) --> so it is normal that you got more obsidians than emeralds

2) from Findos 40 up to Irmas 47 ((excluding 5 month -> not ig or crash server => 106(?) ig month with gems)) my char got more than 1000 (calculated to lvl1) magical gems of his fraction (ONLY taxes - nearly 290 goldcoins) + he found a lot of "fraction" gems when crafting
:arrow: may be this number of gems is to much to make them rare :?:
Poor Galmair. I know that a rank 7 char in cadomyr easily can get level 5 gems (plural!) in only one "good" ig month. One level 5 gem equivalents to 81 latent gems ...
How many gems gets a rank 9 char in cadomyr in a "good" ig month? Is it in the range of level 7 gems (plural) , a single level 7 gem equivalents to 729 latent gems?
Also questionable is, how such a high rank is justified for a player char. Why do we have at least two rank 9 chars in a small community like cadomyr?
In Galmair, with its larger community, there are only 3 rank 8 player chars (chancellors). Additionally complicating is, their rank is temporary!
The high ranked chars in the both small communities are not temporary - that meens guaranteed high gem output every month.

Proposals:
1) Completely rethink the monthly calculation of gems. E.g. a larger player base should be honored, not punished.
2) No exceptions for the ranks. Maximum rank 7 with tasks. Possible solutions to get higher ranks: 1) can be granted temoparatily 2) Honor the time a player plays a char, e.g. after 1 (real) year ingame with regular logins and onlinetime, rank 8 can reached. rank 9 and 10 after the second and third year. 3) "daily login bonus": regular daily logins and online time for one (real) month grant a temporary rank 8 for the next ig month, etc. (these are just ideas!)
3) Gathering: Remove magical gems from gathering completely, since this only supports powergaming par excellance. And Estralis, you also get rid of all those complex problems in your alternatives 1 to 4.
4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution. E.g. Akaltut: reward with a level 4 gem in one of the later quests. Rewarding with coins is completely useless for chars doing a quest series at this level. Soalpain: increase latent ... to level 3 gem for example. Add a chance for a latent gem in the daily qests, etc.
You really should fact check. I'll come back tomorrow and correct you if no one else has but right now Im too tired. But an example:
Chancellors of Galmair get rank 9 all three of them, plus theres the left hand of the Don at rank 10, meanwhile Cadomyr has one rank 8 and one rank 9. The rank 9 has been playing that character since the start of the VBU and actively participated in Cadomyr, that's the justification right there.
Q-wert should be able to elaborate more on the Cadomyr situation
Also their gem gain is by no means THAT high.
Ragorn
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Ragorn »

You really should fact check. I'll come back tomorrow and correct you if no one else has but right now Im too tired. But an example:
Chancellors of Galmair get rank 9 all three of them, plus theres the left hand of the Don at rank 10, meanwhile Cadomyr has one rank 8 and one rank 9. The rank 9 has been playing that character since the start of the VBU and actively participated in Cadomyr, that's the justification right there.
Q-wert should be able to elaborate more on the Cadomyr situation
Also their gem gain is by no means THAT high.
Level 9 rank output was an estimation / question ;-)
Its true that I did not know that Galmair chancellors have level 9 now.
I intentionally left out left hand, since it is played by a gm.
But that all does not really matter for my proposal.
Nevertheless, I see no real justification for higher gem output for all those character that stick unchanged at their positions since years.
ALL players participate activeley in their communities.
But since this topic does not belong to this thread, please open another one, if someone wants to continue that.

The gem output for rank 7 chars in cadomyr/runewick in good months IS a fact.
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

Alyssa El'anir wrote:4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution.
:arrow: this is realy NOT fair. I havce a "peaceful" NON-fighter charakter -> this charakter cant fullfill most of the task (most of the tasks has something to do with fighting) please keep that in mind - your prosposal is prefering fighters and keep non fighters down -> one day magical gems should also have some practical use for peacefull non-fighter char.
User avatar
Alyssa El'anir
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:08 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Alyssa El'anir »

GolfLima wrote:
Ragorn wrote:4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution.
:arrow: this is realy NOT fair. I havce a "peaceful" NON-fighter charakter -> this charakter cant fullfill most of the task (most of the tasks has something to do with fighting) please keep that in mind - your prosposal is prefering fighters and keep non fighters down -> one day magical gems should also have some practical use for peacefull non-fighter char.
FTFY
User avatar
Kugar
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 6:07 am

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Kugar »

GolfLima wrote:
Alyssa El'anir wrote:4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution.
:arrow: this is realy NOT fair. I havce a "peaceful" NON-fighter charakter -> this charakter cant fullfill most of the task (most of the tasks has something to do with fighting) please keep that in mind - your prosposal is prefering fighters and keep non fighters down -> one day magical gems should also have some practical use for peacefull non-fighter char.
Ragorn didn't say 'fighting quests'. Not all quests are for fighting - I have personally witnessed a few peaceful quests where player(s) have gotten rewards. Also, I have seen players who merely attend a fighting quest and not participate in fighting and be rewarded. It's not unfair at all. If anything it's a good incentive for players to attend quests.

A couple of facts:

A bundle of players in this game receive very little gems.
A small few of players in this game very much gems.
A bundle of players in this game have the opportunity to work hard and fill in temporary high rank position.
A small few players in this game hold permanent high rank positions (under the rule that they play often and throw up a quest regularly).

Those are the facts. Deal with them however you like :P

p,s Oxi doesn't count, it's a gm! Also, he is really weak so he obviously doesn't even use his gems! :lol:... Seriously.

DISCLAIMER: I mean no ill feelings to anyone so please do not take what I will say the wrong way.
User avatar
Alyssa El'anir
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:08 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Alyssa El'anir »

Kugar wrote:
p,s Oxi doesn't count, it's a gm!
Oxi was his player character before he became GM, so unless the fact that its a player character has changed...
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

@Kugar
1) all I want to say is....keep in mind there are some charakters wont fight all the time and they also need the same chance to get gems as reward .... for me the prosposal looks like a big imbalance in fafour for fighters - may be my mistake

2)
Kugar wrote:A bundle of players in this game receive very little gems.
A small few of players in this game very much gems.
A bundle of players in this game have the opportunity to work hard and fill in temporary high rank position.
A small few players in this game hold permanent high rank positions (under the rule that they play often and throw up a quest regularly).
:arrow: true
User avatar
Kamilar
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Running away

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Kamilar »

Obviously there are players heavily invested in keeping things the same which makes me suspect massive unfairness though I don't personally care all that much but with so many strong opinions, I feel like I need one too. It does make me think the gem output should cap at rank 7 though because as Ragorn points out, all long-term players contribute. Also, no matter who knows what player characters a GM may have, it's very bad form to discuss it on the public forums and used to be considered a punishable rule break. Just saying, no one likes being outed.

That said, I think the problem with gem distribution is ultimately the problem with player distribution. Old Illarion supported one town where most players were focused in Trollsbane with a smattering of players in other settlements. New Illarion supports exactly the same thing. We have players/characters that want to be with everyone in Galmair and those that want to be only with a select group of people in Runewick and Cadomyr. Gem distribution hasn't changed that and isn't likely to.

My understanding of the new Illarion lore is that the gems of power are meant to change hands from time to time. Maybe it's time to rearrange them.Even switching Galmair's gems to favor sapphires instead of obsidians for a while might help. Also, reassigning gems from resource gathering is a fast fix and would allow some time to evaluate the effect before making big and complex changes.

Making Galmair's pie smaller to be shared among the lion's share of players while a small handful of characters share an equally sized pie seems wrong. Forcing players to move their characters around for ooc reasons to take advantage of gem distribution is crummy too.

Also, GolfLima makes an excellent point. In old Illarion one thing that made the game really stand apart from all the others was the possibility of playing a character that never picked up a weapon. I don't really see that option present in new Illarion if you ever want to walk your character outside. The gems need to stay in resource gathering, in my opinion or that change in game culture becomes worse.

My two coppers.
User avatar
Alyssa El'anir
Posts: 184
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:08 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Alyssa El'anir »

Kamilar wrote: It does make me think the gem output should cap at rank 7
Agreed.
Either that, or both that and Merung's proposal about making it a set amount per town, would be great.
Kamilar wrote:Also, no matter who knows what player characters a GM may have, it's very bad form to discuss it on the public forums and used to be considered a punishable rule break. Just saying, no one likes being outed.
Slightly is known to be the one GM who doesn't care that people knows who he is as a player.
And I think Oxi should be considered in this topic as a player character at rank 10 and not a GM character, since Slightly would no doubt keep him as his player character after eventually resigning from his GM position, just like he had him before he was a GM, meaning he would be the only GM with the bonus of having a lot of gems as a result of being GM if we were to conclude Oxianas position IG being the result of him being a GM.
I'd rather think it's a seperate matter and that it's his player character that reached it on his own, since otherwise it would just seem very unfair to other GMs who don't have rank 10 player characters to keep after their eventual resignation.
That's why I consider Galmair to have one rank 10 and three rank 9s, since the gems will be kept by Oxiana even after his players GMship. (Unless as I said Oxiana is suddenly counted as a GM character and will be deleted if Slightly resigns?)
User avatar
Achae Eanstray
Posts: 4300
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2006 7:03 am
Location: A field of dandelions
Contact:

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Achae Eanstray »

My personal 2 cents, even though a GM doesn't mind who knows their personal char doesn't mean they appreciate being discussed and theorized about that char...at least I wouldn't, putting myself in the same shoes so to speak...

As far as gems go. Galmair has more people in one day playing then any other town, that would rebalance gems along with resources. No one wants to jump in and change something that might be detrimental down the road also.

I believe Estralis has made a mantis ticket. Is this proposal ready to be closed or is there more to say in spite of the ticket?
User avatar
GolfLima
Posts: 1472
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 3:06 pm
Location: hier und dort

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by GolfLima »

question is if there ar e some good ideas to "balance" the gem output

1 ) are there to much or to little output?
2 ) balance of gem types?
3 ) how could the gem output improve player interaction? (trade / conflicts btw players or towns ....something like that)
4 ) .... other things ... that are not in my mind at the moment
Last edited by GolfLima on Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ragorn
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:33 pm

Re: Rebalancing of Magical Gems

Post by Ragorn »

GolfLima wrote:
Alyssa El'anir wrote:4) Quests: Increase magical gem output in quest rewards. Since here the chances are equal for all chars, this is a fair solution.
:arrow: this is realy NOT fair. I havce a "peaceful" NON-fighter charakter -> this charakter cant fullfill most of the task (most of the tasks has something to do with fighting) please keep that in mind - your prosposal is prefering fighters and keep non fighters down -> one day magical gems should also have some practical use for peacefull non-fighter char.
GolfLima, the main reason that I posted something here was an interesting statement you made: your rank 7 Galmair char received around 1000 latent gems in the last 106 (!!!) ig months.
I also know, that during these months high donations were made to the town, many months before the merinum syndicate, but that resulted in max. level 3 gems only (not 100% sure, correct me GolfLima, if I am wrong).
I also know, that rank 7 chars in the other towns, in months with high donationsm receive(d) more than 1 level 5 gem.
This means, the number of gems a char in Galmair recieved in around 100 ig months, can easily received in only 2 or 3 ig months in the other two fractions.
That is the main imbalance imho.

Rethinking/reconcept the calculation formula should be the main point and I would really like to see, that Estralis puts his focus on this topic.
Rebalancing the gathering is a nice, but honestly, its effect is marginal.

Quests: It was ment generally, not only for fighting quests. But sadly currently there are mainly fighting quests. I would like to see some difficult/complex non fighting quests, but they will be done by the fighters also :) Differenting between fighters and non fighters, mages, crafter, alchemists - this is another issue. Since currently, as I understand, the game is designed that every char can "spezialize" in any art, this is even your decision, if your char does not fight. But generally, quests are available for ALL chars. And that's what I ment, that it is fair, to put more gems there, because every char has theoretically the same chance to reach the rewards. Also non fighters can get them, if they join groups of fighers.

Usage of magical gems:
Pre VBU, one of my char had a hammer with magical gems included. Sadly I/he lost it ...
I think, this is a nice featue for crafting (only) characters => proposal

The fact, that NON fighting characters are generally disadvantaged is another topic.
And I really would appreciate, if this would change in the future.

Ranks:
After reading the responses, I think a "magical gem output related rank cap" would be a good solution.
It would solve all those mentioned issues, e.g. what happens if a gm resigns, etc.
Locked