View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0004658 | Valley 1 | Gameplay Issue | Oct 7, 2011 8:53 am | Jan 28, 2012 9:04 am | |
| Reporter | zebramatt | Assigned To | |||
| Severity | major | ||||
| Status | closed | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 0.519 | ||||
| Summary | 0004658: Always most efficient to go for caves which are the lowest level for a given gem tier | ||||
| Description | PROBLEM: At the moment, you find tier 2 gems from level 10, tier 3 from 20, 4 from 30, etc. This means that it is currently always most efficient when searching for a gem of a particular tier to go for the lowest level region for that tier. JUST ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION: One way to solve this might be to muddy the lines a little. For example, a level 5 region might give you a 50% chance of getting a tier 2 gem and a 50% chance of getting a tier 1 gem. Level 6: 60/40, level 7: 70/30, 8: 80/20, 9:90/10, 10:100; then level 11 might have a 95% chance of giving you a tier 2, and a 5% chance of a tier 3. Level 12: 90/10, 13: 85/15 and 14: 80/20. Or, you know, whatever level gates for whatever probabilities you like. It'd still be important to have a dead cert level for each gem tier but now there's incentives both ways - go higher and you'll definitely either get what you're after, or maybe a shot at something even better. Go lower and it'll be easier but you might get the tier below instead. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Internal Weight | Feature Suggestion | ||||
| related to | 0004323 | closed | Chris_McElligottPark | Loot more randomized |
| related to | 0004640 | resolved | Chris_McElligottPark | Item spawning behavior given level differences within tiers |
| parent of | 0004776 | closed | Blurring gem tier level breaks - another way (caution advised) |
|
|
I agree, this wasn't something that was all that important when each tier was only 5 levels, but now, I think this would really add something to the game. |
|
|
While I do think there needs to be something done about the level efficiency I don't like the idea of adding randomness on such a scale (it's a dice roll whether you get what you're looking for after fighting a boss which could get VERY frustrating). It might make more sense to influence the dust drops in some way while leaving the gem itself alone. |
|
|
You typically want to put some effort into upgrading your gear when you reach a new tier, and then use that until you need more. Because of this, you probably aren't going to be scouring the later levels in a given tier for gems -- you'd already have them from earlier. |
|
|
@KDR: If you go for level 10, it's 100% - no dice roll. If you go lower, the boss will be easier but there's an element of randomness. The chances are at 9 or 8, you'll still get what you're after. Lower and it's more of a gamble. @jerith: I think you can mitigate that by adjusting the (illustrative only) possibility figures. Even with the figures above, you only have a 1/5 chance at level 14 of getting more than at level 10. I concede that you might accumulate a few higher tier gems without even trying, however, so it's a fair comment. And it does make level 15 more of a gate: you suddenly have a coin flip chance at the higher tier stuff. Perhaps a better approach would be to have it rolling with your civ level? So rather than it being set at level 10 for the 100% chance, any region which is equal to your current civ level has a 100% chance of giving you the current tier gem, with a sliding scale on either side? |
|
|
Also, it occurs to me a buffer of a level or two would be useful. So +/-1 same level could be 100%, maybe. That way you retain the ability for players to play up or down a level to tweak the difficulty without any shift in the gems received. |
|
|
Honestly I only ever go looking for gems in underground levels equal to my level or one or two levels above. It's better for the exp too anyhow. |
|
|
I'm not sure i like the dropping of lower-tier gems in a range. It just adds a point of frustration if you go through a boss fight and get something useless. Preferably have more gems drop when in a high-end cave. I also really like the more-dust idea. Maybe once more gems and resources get added later, the rarer ones could be up-shifted by 5 levels and that would take care of things on its own |
|
|
Hm. It's odd. At the moment, you have 0% chance of getting a tier 2 gem from anything lower than a level 10 chunk. I propose the game give you a 50% chance at level 5 of getting one... and somehow the fact that you MIGHT get a tier 1 is worse than DEFINITELY getting a tier 1... I'm not all that married to this idea, as it happens, but I'm struggling to see the weight in this particular counter! |
|
|
When you give players the CHANCE to have something happen that influences the way they play. Given that we're talking about very low frequency events here I think the rewards should be guaranteed. Yes, you can go into the regular tier level to get your gem at a 100% chance but it'll have a psychological impact. |
|
|
But it's up to the player to choose! I'm not proposing it be kept a secret. |
|
|
If I understood the upcoming changes correctly, tiers will be completely taken out, yes? If so, this isn't really a problem anymore. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 7, 2011 8:53 am | zebramatt | New Issue | |
| Oct 7, 2011 8:56 am | tigersfan | Internal Weight | => Feature Suggestion |
| Oct 7, 2011 8:56 am | tigersfan | Status | new => strongly considering |
| Oct 7, 2011 8:57 am | tigersfan | Note Added: 0016051 | |
| Oct 7, 2011 4:38 pm | KDR_11k | Note Added: 0016137 | |
| Oct 7, 2011 4:45 pm | jerith | Note Added: 0016139 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 5:00 am | zebramatt | Note Added: 0016196 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 5:54 am | zebramatt | Note Added: 0016198 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 7:09 am | Spork | Relationship added | related to 0004323 |
| Oct 8, 2011 8:57 am | Dizzard | Note Added: 0016212 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 10:33 am | Sherlock | Note Added: 0016219 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 11:58 am | zebramatt | Note Added: 0016225 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 12:02 pm | zebramatt | Description Updated | |
| Oct 8, 2011 1:41 pm | KDR_11k | Note Added: 0016239 | |
| Oct 8, 2011 1:50 pm | zebramatt | Note Added: 0016240 | |
| Oct 10, 2011 11:11 am | zebramatt | Relationship added | parent of 0004776 |
| Oct 13, 2011 2:32 am | zebramatt | Relationship added | related to 0004640 |
| Dec 13, 2011 11:14 am | Toll | Note Added: 0017809 | |
| Jan 28, 2012 9:04 am | tigersfan | Status | strongly considering => closed |
| Apr 14, 2014 9:28 am | Chris_McElligottPark | Category | Gameplay - General Complaint => Gameplay Issue |
