Stat Caps Should Return

[bmjclark]

We question this game premise because it isn't working, and want to see this game be more successful and have more players. Successful games have stat caps or no stats at all. This game is broken for the average player, and while it might subsist on its broken premise, it most certainly has not and will not grow because it isn't possible with this mechanic.

Think of most MMO games. There are stats there, but every now and then a new chapter comes and raises them a bit. I see no reason that couldn't work here, with seasons or something. We're not here to propose solutions, but to raise the issue.

First of all, Haven is not typical MMO and if You think 2 devs can relatively often push enough patches to rise statcap, You are wrong.
Second of all, "succesful" my bullshit. Statcap or not it is not a factor if it will be succesfull. If You want to play this game then hear this out. Game called "Cryofall" had more players when it was in beta than it has now (less than haven). The topic is similar, theme is different. You know what? Most of streamers and player leave the game once hitting the cap and discovering everything. THE SAME WILL HAPPEN TO HAFEN ON STATCAP.

There's probably a good chance most people wont even hit whatever stat cap is implemented if it's reasonable for 1. 2, this game already sees a mass exodus because stat grinding is just monotonous bullshit anyways.

[Mario_Demorez]

Fancy math mumbo jumbo

Well I do not believe the actually quality of the item and gear is what players need to be concerned about when they want to check how far they are behind others. They really should check the bonus, FEP, or the actually thing the object gives you based on its quality. If you consider a person that raises a q10 item to q210 versus another player who raised q1000 to q1200 both of them gained the same amount of quality points so sure, they will never be at the same quality if you just look at that. However, the bonus gain from the two objects aren't linear with quality, its a square root. That means the larger the quality the less of a reward in bonuses. So player 2 put the same amount of work and time into his q1000-q1200 grind but gained 3.75 less in rewards. So technically player 1 will always be behind in quality points but at some point the difference in quality will not matter too much because of the bonus difference. With less bonuses gained from their quality gains the overall gain slows down as well. I do believe spiraling takes more and more effort as you get higher in quality as well, so top players have to spend more time in gathering iron and clay while lower quality players gather less.

If you look at q0 to q1000 with any bonus modifier every 50 points you can see how the gain drops for the same amount of work as you get higher quality numbers. The difference between a gain of 50 qualities at q0-q50 and q950-q1000 is almost 9 times! The same amount of work for 9 times less of a reward?! Please buff higher quality numbers to where people who are loyal and faithful to this game get the same amount of reward! Joking aside, this is why people can catch up.

[pppp]

While you are right raising carrot q is the same number of cycles at every level, the same is not true for metal. Metal spiraling is percent based rather than fixed rate. A lucky hit gets you in one go from 200 to 240 but from 1000 to 1200. Other industries can be accelerated with high metal q.

[Mario_Demorez]

While you are right raising carrot q is the same number of cycles at every level, the same is not true for metal. Metal spiraling is percent based rather than fixed rate. A lucky hit gets you in one go from 200 to 240 but from 1000 to 1200. Other industries can be accelerated with high metal q.

I believe that the metal just raises the “cap” from bonuses. It still levels out in bonus after a while. The quality numbers of course keep increasing but each time in metal that you spiral you have to use more and more cast iron to raise the over all quality. And once again, raising the quality points by a set amount doesn’t raise the bonuses you get from metal items by the same amount. Quality is raised by a linear form in every aspect of the game, bonus from these qualities are rising by a squared function, this makes the amount of quality gained not as rewarding as you get higher and higher. This is the cap that already exist in the game.

[MagicManICT]

Fancy math mumbo jumbo

it's good to express how you think a system should work, but beyond that, if someone says it won't work because of math, you either need to prove how their math is wrong (or doesn't apply), or come up with a better argument. You can "feel" and "think" about a system all you want to, but if you can't work the math out, all your ideas and needs won't amount to a hill of beans. . A good system will need to work mathematically as well as meet with the wants of the players and some semblance of balance. It's a computer system, after all, completely based on logic and math

[Mario_Demorez]

Fancy math mumbo jumbo

it's good to express how you think a system should work, but beyond that, if someone says it won't work because of math, you either need to prove how their math is wrong (or doesn't apply), or come up with a better argument. You can "feel" and "think" about a system all you want to, but if you can't work the math out, all your ideas and needs won't amount to a hill of beans. . A good system will need to work mathematically as well as meet with the wants of the players and some semblance of balance. It's a computer system, after all, completely based on logic and math

Well I mean I did it all on a spread sheet on excel. I posted the numbers. I guess I should not have used the words "Think" and "feel." Its a fact that as quality points rise the reward drops and levels out. This is because of the developers favorite formula of a square root function. I created an excel sheet last world about metal spiraling and it also showed the same pattern, albeit the cap was much higher because of the crit success.

The quality and stats is what people see first and assume that since these are so much higher then theirs it is impossible to be as significant as the holder of the higher stats, but the actually effect of these stats is not in a linear relationship. As quality or a stat increases in value the effectiveness of that gain of points decreases. This is not something I "think" or "feel" but something you can see in the examples I gave.

here-


How I see this graph is that the higher the quality the lower the gain in bonuses are, effectively making the same amount of work for higher quality players payback less.

[MagicManICT]

Its a fact that as quality points rise the reward drops and levels out.

For the quality mechanics, this is true, but it isn't necessarily true for the combat mechanics. They don't function in the same way. There is still some of the same functionality, but I don't have the current formulas handy, and a guy with 22000 SR is going to hit way harder than a guy with 200. We're not even talking about the combat deltas and other factors of "stat vs stat."

[Mario_Demorez]

Its a fact that as quality points rise the reward drops and levels out.

For the quality mechanics, this is true, but it isn't necessarily true for the combat mechanics. They don't function in the same way. There is still some of the same functionality, but I don't have the current formulas handy, and a guy with 22000 SR is going to hit way harder than a guy with 200. We're not even talking about the combat deltas and other factors of "stat vs stat."

Well here we can agree. I do think combat stats could get a cap on them. Stats like agility, unarmed, and mc should have a strict cap of some number. But stats that effect crafting like strength and archery should have an invisible cap, after a point the only reason to up them is for crafting items and softcaps but at an arbitrary number they’re cap when used in combat. I’m all ok for a combat side combat cap.

[MooCow]

As you seem to think x*y < x*(y-z) can be true for positive integers: you suck at math.

Be nice, I never said x*y < x*(y-z), i said x*y ≈ x*(y-z) when y >> z. Which is catching up. Also the difference between peoples skill is based on a ratio, not subtraction. All ratios of polynomials with equal order converge.
Also see this http://www.havenandhearth.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=65592&p=830793#p830793
I would be happy to discus it in more depth, but I feel that this discussion of math pretty off topic.