Jump to content

  •  
- - - - -

Caps on Events?!

changeswithoutpoll changes why? wth

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 484 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:04 PM

So, earlier today we had arranged a larger team than normal for a HARD leveled Run the Gauntlet. After the 12 of us get into the room, 1/4-1/2 not being much more use than an a/d reduction on mobs later in the event, we were denied access by Learner due to there being "too many" and it becoming "too easy".

First of all, I'd like to ask since when have we ever had a cap on how many can enter an event, and why is this just coming out now after all this time? We used to run DTF's with 10-20 people min and there was never an issue of it being "too easy".
Second off, if it being "too easy" is a factor, why the hell are you allowing people with 300 CL and high 80's attack and defense enter the easy level RTG all the time?

Learner claims that the RTG was only created for 6-8 people, but we have had large teams before when hard was simpler and it was never denied access, so since when has there been a cap, and determination for an event being too easy and then being deemed no access unless we divided into two teams. Now, keep in mind earlier stating that 1/4-1/2 (4-6) are not strong enough for monsters after about 1/2 way through the event, so dividing them among the two teams would just ensure failure later for both teams as they wouldn't have the power at a MINIMUM requirement- thus the larger team.

But yet, it's 100% okay to let people be carried through easy/medium for a quick buck and the attendants get free exp regardless.

SO, I'll get to the point finally, do we as a community agree OR even want a cap on the amount of people entering an event? If so, what should it be? If not, why do you think so?

The key points of the channel conversations are below:

Fri Mar 20 18:32:15 2020 [EatsAllLife]: L?
Fri Mar 20 18:32:27 2020 [Learner]: a dozen people though I feel is too many for RTG
Fri Mar 20 18:32:47 2020 [EatsAllLife]: Since when is there a cap for events
Fri Mar 20 18:33:36 2020 [Lunatique]: I think it's a miracle ya got 12 ready to go at the same time.
Fri Mar 20 18:33:38 2020 [Learner]: all the more reson you shouldn't be in a Hrad?
Fri Mar 20 18:33:55 2020 [EatsAllLife]: So we aren't gonna let underqualified people attempt something now?
Fri Mar 20 18:33:57 2020 [GameOva]: whats the point of having a hard if we usually cant get enough for hard
Fri Mar 20 18:34:04 2020 [HugmePlz]: then i wouldn';t be going anywhere?
Fri Mar 20 18:34:07 2020 [EatsAllLife]: Guess you better poof all those giga's unless Hal/Omg is online.
Fri Mar 20 18:34:13 2020 [HugmePlz]: since the rest are going for hard
Fri Mar 20 18:34:23 2020 [EatsAllLife]: better not have ever done RTG with possessed.
Fri Mar 20 18:34:27 2020 [Learner]: it's the size of the horde I have issues with, since it's designed for 6-8 people to see if they can finish
Fri Mar 20 18:34:28 2020 [EatsAllLife]: or DTF
Fri Mar 20 18:34:45 2020 [Crafty]: extra hard when
Fri Mar 20 18:35:06 2020 [Learner]: SAW hasn't made it yet, or should I add a couple RD's?
Fri Mar 20 18:35:16 2020 [GameOva]: we gonna have caps on invasions soon
Fri Mar 20 18:35:19 2020 [EatsAllLife]: Okay, and we have crafty; a healer, idefix lower leveled, hug can't kill higher than cyc easily, lets not forget multi...
Fri Mar 20 18:36:54 2020 [GameOva]: the point of having a big group is to allow the smaller players the chance to see what they are capable of
Fri Mar 20 18:39:32 2020 [Lunatique]: if there is going to be a cap on how many can go at once though, then there should be a CAP, so that we don't go thru the work to organize an event
Fri Mar 20 18:44:10 2020 [Learner]: RTG was design for 6-8 people, 12 is way overkill

~Eats

#2 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2844 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:22 PM

Until now it hasn't been an issue. There is no reason for you to go so ballistic at all. I had even been in communication with the coordinator before had that the qty was excessive before even saying anything in channel. Events are designed with certain numbers and levels of people in mind and this was simply excessive for Hard.

#3 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 484 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:27 PM

View PostLearner, on 20 March 2020 - 06:22 PM, said:

Until now it hasn't been an issue. There is no reason for you to go so ballistic at all. I had even been in communication with the coordinator before had that the qty was excessive before even saying anything in channel. Events are designed with certain numbers and levels of people in mind and this was simply excessive for Hard.

So it's our fault you weren't prepared for a larger size, and we are punished for it. Gotcha. Perhaps things like this are why the playerbase is diminishing, getting new people, then they leave shortly after. Why did it just become an issue? and why was a group of 12 too much. It's not really fair to us to plan and get a large group for you to then disperse us- how would we even begin to decide teams? No two players in that room were similar in strength aside from warlock and omg. Lets not forget we hardly ever have enough to do one, so when there are many people online for once at the same time, we want to do one, and have to divide, or sacrifice our places? I can't remember the last RTG I was able to do, and this one I can, you deny the event because we have 1/2 a team too much.

#4 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2844 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:43 PM

SAWolf simply designed the events with certain things in mind, and I'm trying to adhere to that. So I asked that a smaller group be involved. It is up to the IM to decide if an Event can be started with that, and the person trying to start the even had been talked to before all thta about there being too many.

You could even have split it into two groups, and instead just decide to bitch you can't exceed the design specs. Instead you don't want to cooperate at all.

#5 Warlock

Warlock

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 611 posts
  • LocationLuton-London

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:44 PM

While i am kinda bummed about how it happened, waiting with the full team and then some having to depart. But i do see his point, will just have to keep that in mind in the future. He did mention to me that he thought even 10 was too much, but i proceeded to ask more people to join

#6 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 484 posts

Posted 20 March 2020 - 06:48 PM

View PostLearner, on 20 March 2020 - 06:43 PM, said:

SAWolf simply designed the events with certain things in mind, and I'm trying to adhere to that. So I asked that a smaller group be involved. It is up to the IM to decide if an Event can be started with that, and the person trying to start the even had been talked to before all thta about there being too many.

You could even have split it into two groups, and instead just decide to bitch you can't exceed the design specs. Instead you don't want to cooperate at all.

View PostWarlock, on 20 March 2020 - 06:44 PM, said:

While i am kinda bummed about how it happened, waiting with the full team and then some having to depart. But i do see his point, will just have to keep that in mind in the future. He did mention to me that he thought even 10 was too much, but i proceeded to ask more people to join

Isn't everything designed with certain things in mind? What are your guidelines to what is too much then? Cause 6-8 hard level players, and 4 easy-med doesn't seem to make it any easier on us. But yes, many of us stepped out, and as you know, a 2nd wasn't ran because of your "wants" and design specifications that weren't to the public. Aside from that, assembling a team and knowing it is outside your comfort zone already shouldn't be classified if you were just gonna say no anyways. Speak out. So if we are going to have limits, they need to be decided here and now. Not when you deem that time fit.

#7 idefix

idefix

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationStockholm

Posted 20 March 2020 - 08:52 PM

I think part of the issue is that there is no incentive to complete it with as few players as possible.
E.g if the reward would be fixed and split evenly among all players (instead of everyone receiving the same gold/exp per island), then players wouldn't necessarily want to have twice the number of players there, because reward would be halved.

The second part of the issue is that the difficulty is fixed, while the number/level of players isn't. Hard mode is actually really hard, and you need some of the really high level players to be on the team to be able to complete it. Otherwise we simply couldn't clear the fluffies, feros and chims.
The med RTG is super easy in comparison, I could even solo it.

All of this combined causes a situation where:
  • Medium level players don't want to do med RTG, because it's way too easy. Medium level players can't do hard RTG unless high level players are joining.
  • We rarely have enough players to get a team for hard RTG. Usually only have the opportunity during the weekend.

The two possible solutions as far as I can see:
  • Adjust the difficulty based on number of players / level of players. If we go in with 12 players, could we just have twice the number of mobs?
  • Adjust the med RTG difficulty, or introduce a new RTG between med/hard, intended for the players that can't do anything except die against fluffies/chims/feros. Cycs / bears / tigers are still quite a tough combination, and we have plenty of players within that range I think.

Third option would be what was mentioned earlier, the insane-difficulty RTG. But medium-level players would just be cannon-fodder there; it's the same reason why lvl ~40 a/d players wouldn't join hard difficulty RTG now. They can't do anything there.

Just my 2 cents.

#8 ohmygod

ohmygod

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Locationaustralia

Posted 22 March 2020 - 05:19 PM

Yawn.

Always nerfs in this game when "players" look like they might be having fun.

I would rather faceroll an rtg with 20 players than mine ores and mix by myself.....

#9 CoduX

CoduX

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 1213 posts
  • LocationLand Down Under

Posted 29 March 2020 - 05:47 PM

View Postohmygod, on 22 March 2020 - 05:19 PM, said:

Yawn.

Always nerfs in this game when "players" look like they might be having fun.

I would rather faceroll an rtg with 20 players than mine ores and mix by myself.....
I have to agree this this statement

#10 Zian

Zian

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 500 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 30 March 2020 - 10:19 AM

Learner may have stats/data re: win/loss for all our events? I think statistics can tell us if OL Events need changes to Rules OR tweaking event design.

Example: We all knew RTG would require a new HARDER level cause of the community a/d's increasing.

Regards
Z

#11 EatsAllLife

EatsAllLife

    Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 484 posts

Posted 01 April 2020 - 05:28 AM

View PostZian, on 30 March 2020 - 10:19 AM, said:

Learner may have stats/data re: win/loss for all our events? I think statistics can tell us if OL Events need changes to Rules OR tweaking event design.

Example: We all knew RTG would require a new HARDER level cause of the community a/d's increasing.

Regards
Z

I don't really see how the next level will be much different when we start hitting mid 90's. We can't keep going forever- since we are getting limited on reasonable monsters...

#12 Zian

Zian

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 500 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 01 April 2020 - 06:14 AM

View PostEatsAllLife, on 01 April 2020 - 05:28 AM, said:

View PostZian, on 30 March 2020 - 10:19 AM, said:

Learner may have stats/data re: win/loss for all our events? I think statistics can tell us if OL Events need changes to Rules OR tweaking event design.

Example: We all knew RTG would require a new HARDER level cause of the community a/d's increasing.

Regards
Z

I don't really see how the next level will be much different when we start hitting mid 90's. We can't keep going forever- since we are getting limited on reasonable monsters...

If we want to increase the numbers of participants, we could modify current easy, medium and hard levels by adding more mobs, change the mix of mobs (CLs), etc. The down side is when you don't have a large team then smaller teams my fail more often and RTG my no longer be a fun, great event. Comments?

Regards
Z

#13 idefix

idefix

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationStockholm

Posted 01 April 2020 - 11:43 PM

View PostZian, on 01 April 2020 - 06:14 AM, said:

View PostEatsAllLife, on 01 April 2020 - 05:28 AM, said:

View PostZian, on 30 March 2020 - 10:19 AM, said:

Learner may have stats/data re: win/loss for all our events? I think statistics can tell us if OL Events need changes to Rules OR tweaking event design.

Example: We all knew RTG would require a new HARDER level cause of the community a/d's increasing.

Regards
Z

I don't really see how the next level will be much different when we start hitting mid 90's. We can't keep going forever- since we are getting limited on reasonable monsters...

If we want to increase the numbers of participants, we could modify current easy, medium and hard levels by adding more mobs, change the mix of mobs (CLs), etc. The down side is when you don't have a large team then smaller teams my fail more often and RTG my no longer be a fun, great event. Comments?

Regards
Z

Going back to my previous point, why can't the amount and difficulty of mobs automatically scale up/down based on the number and/or CL of the players going in to the RTG?

Wouldn't that resolve the issue at least partially? If there's few players, then it's a bit easier, and the more players the more difficult it gets.

#14 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2844 posts

Posted 02 April 2020 - 06:04 AM

That's not how SAW wrote the .def, and not as simple to do as you think. All the Events are defined in .def files with no special code in the server for any of them so that IM's can help create them.

#15 idefix

idefix

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 51 posts
  • LocationStockholm

Posted 02 April 2020 - 12:57 PM

Right, so we would need to create a wide range of DEF files, and then the system could select (or IM manually selects) the correct DEF file based on the players combined strength (total CL? number of players? based on something)?

Sounds like a lot of work and harder to change things the more DEF files there are, keeping everything somehow in sync.

#16 SAWolf

SAWolf

    IM

  • Full Member
  • PipPip
  • 100 posts

Posted 03 April 2020 - 07:06 AM

Okay, let me throw my 2 cents in. I think this can all be easily solved by adding the level caps to each of the RTG levels.

Learner's main concern is with 20 players going in lower levels will hang back and gain the same reward as the players who do most the work and it will be boring with everyone speeding through.

Easy RTG should be for players with combat skills at 30 - 55
Medium RTG should be for players from combat skills at 50 - 75
Hard RTG should be for players from 70 to 90...maybe no upper cap on this one.

Insane will be everyone above 75 however I think that Insane will have a slightly different set up as this event must be hard enough to require 8-12 players and might even have a 1 life re spawn.

Now IMO the lower limits of these events are more important then the upper limits for 2 reasons.
1. If there is no lower limit a 30 a/d player can amble into Hard hang back and do nothing but still get rewarded just for being there. This will then require IMs to police these event which we'd all like to avoid.
2. If I higher level player wants to go help out a group of newbies on an Easy or Medium why not? The rewards are far less then their own level and the cool down will prevent them from doing both events every week. You don't win any prizes for running through an Easy RTG in 10 mins, you just end up having to wait longer to do your Hard RTG that gives much better exp.

Put in these limits for the event in question (that had the issue of 20 players wanting to enter) how many would have been kicked out due to being under cap?

As to the different RTGs strengths the Meduim at the moment has some levels that have 3 random options. I've tried to make them as:
Option 1: Slightly easier mobs but tons of them.
Option 2: Standard average amount of mobs basic progression.
Option 3: Slightly harder mobs but fewer of them.
This gives the Meduim basically multiple flavours without having to have a Medium-Hard, Medium-Medium and Medium-Easy....and it is random.

I still need to apply these changes to Hard. This will allow for more variation in the event, keep it interesting and challenging. No! DCW island will still stay the same. ;-D

Regards
SAWolf

#17 shadowgate

shadowgate

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • LocationUnited States

Posted 03 April 2020 - 10:00 AM

If we are going to go the route of having minimum requirements then I believe it should be CL specific and not lvl specific. Because while I don't do much with my alt, he is a fighter build and can handle his own through most of the hard RTG. It would suck for him not allowed to go simply because of lvls.

I understand and agree with the minimum requirement so people don't get free exp and gc. But if that is the goal then there would need to be a max to prevent the abuse of the lower lvl players letting the high lvl player kill everything and they get essentially free rewards. But if we do start putting caps on RTGs like that, then we can't fall into the trap of thinking that a/d lvls alone translate to fighting ability.

#18 Learner

Learner

    God

  • Administrators
  • 2844 posts

Posted 03 April 2020 - 11:03 AM

View Postshadowgate, on 03 April 2020 - 10:00 AM, said:

If we are going to go the route of having minimum requirements then I believe it should be CL specific and not lvl specific. Because while I don't do much with my alt, he is a fighter build and can handle his own through most of the hard RTG. It would suck for him not allowed to go simply because of lvls.

I understand and agree with the minimum requirement so people don't get free exp and gc. But if that is the goal then there would need to be a max to prevent the abuse of the lower lvl players letting the high lvl player kill everything and they get essentially free rewards. But if we do start putting caps on RTGs like that, then we can't fall into the trap of thinking that a/d lvls alone translate to fighting ability.
CL currently is accurate only for Melee type stuff (and then you can fake it still), can't properly rate a Mage or Ranger at this time. That will take more formulas to be added for each 'type'.

#19 shadowgate

shadowgate

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 12 posts
  • LocationUnited States

Posted 03 April 2020 - 11:42 AM

True, that's why personally I would rather just stick with the way it is now. It isn't often that we get more than 10 people for an rtg anyway, so I think we can let anyone who can enter an rtg go but just have the amount of participants capped at 10 or so.

#20 ohmygod

ohmygod

    Advanced Member

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 619 posts
  • Locationaustralia

Posted 03 April 2020 - 07:10 PM

Quote

Now IMO the lower limits of these events are more important then the upper limits for 2 reasons.
1. If there is no lower limit a 30 a/d player can amble into Hard hang back and do nothing but still get rewarded just for being there. This will then require IMs to police these event which we'd all like to avoid.
What if a player wants to range / heal(use offensive magic) / summon and not melee?

You dont need an A/D of 75 to range kill a level 650+ mob or provide the healing that might keep your team mates alive.

Also due to the sad mixed "training spawns" that have worked their way into the game why not let lower level players get free xp by tagging along with a group of others? They can only do it once per week.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: changeswithoutpoll, changes, why?, wth

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users