Triple Softcapped - Add dimishing returns to Combat

[Chakravanti]

I've mentioned this several times without detailing exactly what this means and I called it 'double softcapped'. Currently Everything in the game already has a triple softcap. Those productions which are not triple softcapped will have the final products triple softcapped.

All examples are arbitrary and do not reflect a balanced system. While math is certainly one of my strong points the amount involved to show a balanced system is extensive. I can and would develop a balanced set of #'s given a show of approval from the devs on this concept even though at that I wouldn't expect it to be implemented as stated. There are flaws here, most notably the lack of KISS and the margin of character development which is entirely a side issue.

For those not up to speed on what I mean by 'softcaps' Here are the current three caps:

1. Increasing cost of character development
2. Diminshing returns in quality
3. Natural resources. This is a Quasi-hardcap, techincally it is a softcap but it functions as a hardcap depending entirely upon available resources which are technically a variable.

I wrote and delete about 10 paragraphs worth of Logorrhoea. The real point of it was that combat stats and skills need to give diminishing returns like the production tree and also be tied to the quasi-hardcap of natural resources. IOW STR & other combat related stats & skills (incl. PER, INT, AGI, etc.) should follow the Ql scale of development where 360 str = 60 damage and 90 str = 30. Rather than simple saying a weapon type does a certain fraction (or all) of str in damage because that does not provide diminshing returns on investments.

What is failing about the current combat system in development is that it is in fact absolutely no different than the current combat system. It says that all all else equal the character with higher stats will win. It does not create diversity of development. Granted that diversity of character development presupposes a a decreased gradation of effort to reward before reaching futility of investment based on chosen classes/credos/wtfever you want to call them. I knwo the devs may be fairly attatched to their current development in combat, and I may be wrong here, but I have seen no enthusiastic reaction to it. My analysis of the core concept of this system is that J&L are seemly trying turn 1v1 combat into chess and think that zerg should be a fair tactic toward overcoming a lack of character development. IN theory it sounds nice, in practice it's the same shit that already exists. The intense politics of H&H are in fact not based around combat and will persist regardless how well or how poorly you create the 'new' system.

This is where the genius of this system fails. Dev's have shot down any mention of decreased margin of character development that I've mentioned. Despite how absolutely awesome H&H is in every other aspect, I can assure you that PvP will suck big donkey dick while stat v. stat without diversity on a huge scale of character development exists. Not even mentioning warfare. This will remain true even if you implement a dimishing returns as suggested here.

[loftar]

Dev's have shot down any mention of decreased margin of character development that I've mentioned.

It seems you still misunderstand what it is that I am shooting down, so let me define it mathematically. Say that we define an abstract metric of "combat effectiveness", E, which depends on a combat stat S, which, in turn, depends on the amount of LP gained during the character's lifetime, L. Let us define the operator ≃ such that A ≃ B means "A scales as O(B)". In that case, the current situation is that E ≃ S and S ≃ √L and, therefore, E ≃ √L. We agree that this is not enough, and that it should probably be something like E ≃ √√L or E ≃ log(L) or something -- basically, that E ≃ f(L), where f(x) scales slowly. What you consistently continue to insist is that that has to mean that S ≃ f(L). What I argue is that S is entirely unimportant in this context, since it only plays a role as an invisible intermediary in the function mapping L to E, and that all that matters, in the end, is that E ≃ f(L). I could just as well have that S ≃ L^2 or S ≃ L!, and it wouldn't matter as long as the function mapping S into E scales slowly enough.

That is all I have been saying all along. Or, in other words, the development of character stats does not matter as long as the combat formulae compensate for it.

[Jackard]

big numbers scare me in a way words cannot

[Errol]

I... don't quite think I can follow.

[loftar]

big numbers scare me in a way words cannot

I am inclined to agree, and I wouldn't mind a discussion about the aesthetic properties of the stat numbers; but that is an orthogonal issue to their application in combat.

[Chakravanti]

You'de called a skill a stat but I understand what you are saying. My suggestion here is only that a character's melee skill be nerfed by the equipment they use same as anything else in the game. Like saw and axes for instance, I can't make better boards than I have a saw or harvest better hunted material than I have an axe. And so I propose that one cannot use a weapon any better than its quality.

I also understand that what you are disagreeing with me on is that I believe the margin of development should be accelerated. The ETA toward reaching futility of further investment should be much sooner than it currently is.

That is all I have been saying all along. Or, in other words, the development of character stats does not matter as long as the combat formulae compensate for it.

Perhaps you are right my inclination is to disagree but in truth I realize I cannot because this is not the core of the problem. The core of the problem is distinguishing between productive and destructive characters. Perhaps you can achieve this with credos by making peasants a class and making them somehow more defensible if they are affiliated with a destructive class that defends them. Adding traps an shit might achieve this too but what it comes down to is that it shouldn't be a ridiculous effort involved in making a PvP viable character. Frankly unless you are a HUGE town with the best resources.....OR you spend months grinding bears & BBB's then you're not combat viable.

PvP is where the fun is at when the boredom factor of grinding kicks in. Permadeath is cool as fuck but it sucks big donkey dick when it means that you lose months of investment every time it happens. I'm not suggesting eliminating Permadeath, but I would like to be able to participate in PvP beyond spending a week to create a 'murder alt' that is only good for killing people that leave scents. That's not exciting. I want to be able to log out my crafter and log in my PvPer and be able to fight barbie when he shows up at my doorstep. Honestly IDC if I win or lose. As long as winning is viable and I pose a threat to those who invade.

PvP is the metagame here because it is the source of politics. Combining a PvP-PK Anywhere game with the Haverst Moon aspect is the greatest thing since ShadowBane. I'll be frank here about what I mean because I've mentioned SB before. What's fantastic about this game is it's more or less it's PK anywhere (With the exception of certain 'safe zones') GvG aspect. H&H has that but it's too flawed atm but that's not an insult because I recognize it's developmental status. What sucks about SB is WoW style mob farming. What I LOVE about H&H is that WoW style mob farming is replaced with Harvest Mooning. With the exception of LP. This is what led me to make my earlier suggestion about removing LP. I really hate WoW. I hate WoW style mob farming. Currently WoW style mob farming is exactly what hunting is. Better AI and a move involved process in hunting that isn't just PvE would be epic and combined with balancing combat and warfare would probably bring me back to H&H. The only reason I tolerate PvP farming in SB is because it doesn't require huge fucktons of it to be PvP viable. GvG viable requires a bit more but between a guild is about equal to what is gained farming up alt XP.

This combination of Harvest moon with full on PvP has the potential for kingdoms and militant PvPers to be served by Harvest Mooners who want players to protect them from other raiders. Forming a symbiotic relationship between crafters and PvPers.

This is why I say that development should be purely about resource consumption. THe grind for consuming should not be an arbitrary timeline and should be reflected purely on the effort involved in consuming resources. If I am a PvPer joining a clan I don't want to farm mobs for a few months before I can PvP. I want to PvP NOW. If I am a harvest mooner I want my resources to go to that player NOW so they can protect me now.

If anything in this game should have a greater margin of development it's peasants/crafters. Harvest mooners LOVE slowly gaining the ability to create better and better shit.

That said I'm also not saying PvE should be removed. I enjoy from it time to time and I know other do I'm only saying that PvP viability should not be contingent on a killing 1000 bears. Maybe some form of sacrificing some items gained from a hunted animal.

Hunter brings home a bear, harvests materials from it and sticks them in a cupboard. Harvest mooner comes by and crafts the shit into food tools and Items to be sacrificed. PvPer comes along and eats 1/3 the food and sacs 1/3 of the items. Resources are distributed evenly among the three people involved...theoretically, IMBA all resources to PvP should be possible but balance should show rate of development for 1/3 involvement in the process (e.g. protection).

Where IMBAing all resources to one aspect of the trio should show that IMBA because PvPer develop rapidly to effectiveness or the HMer develops slowly into the ability to produce better items from future harvests. If they don't invest in protection then the mooner will die with his investments. If they don't invest in the hunter they don't get the better resources to begin with. I don't want to play the harvest moon game on my PvPer just to get some LP for it. I don't want to PvE on my PvPer to make it viable. I just want to feed it fucktons of resources I've produced on my mooner. I want to play my PvP toon PvPing. I want to play my mooner....mooning (LOL). I want to play my hunter...hunting. ALts should be an integrated part of the game by reflecting cost of development not necessarily associate with actual time spent playing on THAT character BUT should reflect time spent playing the game naturally. This is not an unachievable dynamic.

PvP should be an integrated part of the game and I'm just hoping you have that in mind.

[loftar]

Not to waste too much time in writing a lengthy reply right now, I agree with many of your points. Hunting should be changed almost completely, creature levels should (probably) be removed, weapon/armor/shield quality should a major factor in melee combat and many things should be done about PvP. In particular, the best thing would be if PvP loss didn't necessarily mean death -- if the winner actually had some incentive not to go all the way and instead keep his victim alive.

I may write up a new Dev Diary entry on this subject later.

[warrri]

I pmed you my suggestion about an arena like 2 months ago, with necessary changes to the scent system so that participating would not mean that any retard can track and kill you because you kod someone in a fair duel... you didnt even reply.
The sparring option on the test server looks very nice and fulfills what i wanted even better than my suggestion and can be used to arrange tournaments and whatnot. Implement this for total win as fast as possible!

[loftar]

I pmed you my suggestion about an arena like 2 months ago, with necessary changes to the scent system so that participating would not mean that any retard can track and kill you because you kod someone in a fair duel... you didnt even reply.

Indeed, I didn't really bother since I had already described the sparring idea in the forums several times previously. ;)

[warrri]

I pmed you my suggestion about an arena like 2 months ago, with necessary changes to the scent system so that participating would not mean that any retard can track and kill you because you kod someone in a fair duel... you didnt even reply.

Indeed, I didn't really bother since I had already described the sparring idea in the forums several times previously.

Oh sorry, guess i skipped those posts