A Plea for Decay (Character)

[skltnk]

It'll be an infinite progression as it is today but with dying inbetween?

I don't know in what world the progression a_n+1 = ka_n+m is the same as arithmetic progression, but certainly not in the one where I live.

Seriously though. What will keep players from progressing infinitely to the point where the gap between them and those who just started to play is insanely big?

Why would you not simply let people work out in order to stay in shape instead? (Stat decay)

[loftar]

Seriously though. What will keep players from progressing infinitely to the point where the gap between them and those who just started to play is insanely big?

To make it concrete, let's take a simplified example where you inherit 50% of actual stat numbers (rounded down), and the "aging" mechanic allows you to effectively level up 100 "units" per character. In that case, each progressive character would see the following final values: 100; 150; 175; 187; 193; 196; 198; 199; 199; 199; &c.
The downwards rounding makes the sequence end at 199 whereas with no rounding, it would approach 200 asymptotically.

Now, lest there be any misunderstandings, I'm not advocating this system. It's just an example.

[Granger]

So I think the FEP system is not broken (might need some value rebalance here and there).
The broken aspect only is how much can You eat. I've "finally" reached a point, where with quality table stuff, I can eat pretty much cupboards of cupboards of food for relatively low cost (symbel repair 250XP), I just can nearly make never ending feast with my party. The only aspect is how long it takes to prepare food.

I agree with this. FEP in itself seems to be ok, the problem lies in how the numbers (quality, items, feast) interact that lead to food items giving 4-digit amount of FEP for near zero hunger change (which can be turned to effectively zero by rubbing low amounts of salt into it).

I think the other ideas Aceb wrote about don't really address the existing issue of unabling to close the gap to existing characters, ever, which imho is one of the main reasons given by the people who want new worlds.

I will keep my opinion about decaying character that is double punishes "casual" players over those "hardcores" who just simple have time or life doesn't hit them hard. Being unable to be active for whatever reason is already a punishment as other people will escape with quality and abilities. Decay won't hit active people that much how it will hurt less-active.

As the decay would hit the higher level ones harder (by it being a fraction of what is there) it disables them from 'escaping' (as they're effectively stalled at some point, depending on how hard they're able work against it) while still allowing them to be on top through constant activity. So yes, they would have the higher numbers - but with such a system so could you (and your group) when putting in a higher effort than they do. Sounds reasonable to me, as this would allow for taking a break and recovering from it afterwards (while with the current system the ones that continued continuously are guaranteed to be unreachable unless they themselves stop).

I fail to see how this would punish casuals twice, could you elaborate?

Seriously though. What will keep players from progressing infinitely to the point where the gap between them and those who just started to play is insanely big?

To make it concrete, let's take a simplified example where you inherit 50% of actual stat numbers (rounded down), and the "aging" mechanic allows you to effectively level up 100 "units" per character. In that case, each progressive character would see the following final values: 100; 150; 175; 187; 193; 196; 198; 199; 199; 199; &c.
The downwards rounding makes the sequence end at 199 whereas with no rounding, it would approach 200 asymptotically.

Where is the difference to having a hardcap at 200 (apart from increasing the time it takes to reach the cap - and raising the incentive from credos to kill off the character on a regular basis to make them easier)?

[Aceb]

[...]

My view looks like this:
Player A and B start the same at base 10.
Both players reach stats 100.
Player A have to stop playing because. We don't know why.
Player B reaches 200.
Player A comes back.
Player A reaches 200, while Player B reaches 300.

Now with decay in place:
Player B will be somewhere 300 while player A won't be possible to reach 200, as 150 or maybe or less with decaying.

Now I see it as double punishment because:
1. If You stop playing, You fall behind. I see that as punishment.
2. Decay mechanic make You fall further behind. True it might help You "reach" player B later in time, but question is, how long it would take? Would it be worth of greatly annoying people who work harder or just have possibility to do so?

Closing gap is always an issue because it's Time&Effort investment vs "I start later and can't catch up".

So the problem is:
Player 1 says: Why would someone who start later, had it easier to catch me?

Against Player 2 saying: If I can't catch up to You, You will be always a titan to me.

So the best answer I could come up, is that a Player A shouldn't have a possiblity to stand on the same ground as Player B. If player A spend 100 hours, and Player B joins the game, then the gap between Player A and player B should exist, BUT, if player C joins B, two of those should be able to have a chance to catch up as much as not being on the same ground as Player A, but have a fair chance to together push player A from that high ground, while not taking it by themself necessary.

And to make it fun, decay is the worst way possible.

[LadyGoo]

Any type of punishing mechanics = stupid. Decay doesn't feel rewarding. It is a punishment in a nutshell. Especially the skill decay, for not playing constantly and grinding it, for excelling in skills.
If you want to resolve something, make it via rewards, not punishments.

[Thedrah]

can the level cap actually be done by achievement? like a troll heart to allow a 1k or 2k stat cap? that fits viking lore, right?

or make it tied to lineage and make people 'breed' characters for higher stats
or a large resource sink to get higher stats. paying homage to valhalla or something. maybe ask the gods for strength
or tie it into dungeons, like higher stats from defeating the beaver dam

or all of the above and have diminishing returns. that way people aren't simply eating everything not nailed down but have achievements behind it
and the 'breeding' for higher stats would make it so you don't lose the achievements from death as... badly, maybe give family heirloom a reason to exist

[LadyGoo]

can the level cap actually be done by achievement? like a troll heart to allow a 1k or 2k stat cap? that fits viking lore, right?

Yeah, this sounds more like a thing. I am worried that it would be heavily abused by top-tier factions, as they (we, for the whiners) are the ones who have the easy access to such stuff.

You can make the new guys catch up to the top tier players in a more elegant and rewarding ways, than making everything to decay. You can make the new players have additional % of LA tested against the highest stats on the server, you can make food and curious less tedious to make = killing botting and botting advantages, you can make it harder to grind the stats after some point (like 1000 stats), you can make it so that you do not have to harvest your crops every 2 days to keep the quality up and etc.

The right direction, IMHO, is to make farming/crafting more accessible (automated on the client side). Simple things like crafting from the piles of stuff around you will make food and curios easier for everyone, not only the factions. Farming is another thing. The stockpiling of the items (fibre, straw, putting seeds into the nearby barrel) could make it so much easier for everybody else. We already have the actual mechanics for that in the game in form of land levelling. Then proceed to whatever stat caps and etc.

[pheonix]

Every time i hear about stat decay the first thought is that its the same people who sit smoking weed drinking themselves unconscious, no job and no money whinging about anyone that has a home and a job. You think the people with 10k stats dont deserve these stats because you started after them? they put in more time and effort to get to the point of 300-400q pies that they eat and managing dozens of cows for cheese production is easy? you think that players should be punished for putting in more effort then you and dragged down to your level.

In all honesty stat decay is the laziest mechanic idea and you should be ashamed to bring it up.

We could have quests to unlock tier levels on accounts or
tier credos to unlock better foods
animals that give better bonuses to food in darkness regions of maps
fix the feast system to make stat bonuses harder to get and more rewarding to make different foods
implement a cap that can only be increased by killing bosses in dungeons or randomly from monsters
make a stat cap based off killing animals.

Any of these ideas is 10x better then, good work at increasing your stats but its been an hour so fuck you im deleting some off you because you have work harder then some 100stat noob.

[Siqle]

The right direction, IMHO, is to make farming/crafting more accessible (automated on the client side). Simple things like crafting from the piles of stuff around you will make food and curios easier for everyone, not only the factions. Farming is another thing. The stockpiling of the items (fibre, straw, putting seeds into the nearby barrel) could make it so much easier for everybody else. We already have the actual mechanics for that in the game in form of land levelling. Then proceed to whatever stat caps and etc.

^^^^^^^ this all we would have to do is start a few stock piles and put one thing in each like we do with dirt, then harvest the entire area including the stockpiles and it just fills them instead of dropping it on the ground. this would be SUCH A TIME SAVER.

[Granger]

Player A have to stop playing because. (Meanwhile player B continues.) We don't know why. Player A comes back.
...

So the best answer I could come up, is that a Player A shouldn't have a possiblity to stand on the same ground as Player B.

Your standpoint that A should never be able to reach the level of B should he ever fall behind (that's how I read it) is the most quoted reason for 'give new world'.

the first thought is [plently of unfounded bullshit based on claiming to be a mindreader]

Possibly you should put more thought to it instead of regurgitating prejudice.

You can make the new guys catch up to the top tier players in a more elegant and rewarding ways, than making everything to decay. You can make the new players have additional % of LA tested against the highest stats on the server, [...]

How does that help with qualities getting out of hand?

Any type of punishing mechanics = stupid.

The consequence of that stance would be to remove any possibility of damage to characters. That stat decay isn't the best since bread in slices is clear, the question if it might be less bad than what we currently have (or what might be better than both) is still open - that what this topic is about.

Please keep QoL mechanics to their respective topics.