Nord Invasion in Bannerlord

[DR.]

The fact that the NordInvasion Fluffy Event House has not been super popular for people that want a new start says somthing i would think.  
http://forum.nordinvasion.com/showthread.php?tid=57535

Nothing would stop people just doing fluffy events all the time if they wanted a new start... I'm sure it would be a exception from the normal 2 events pr week.

[Malong]

We'll have the advantage of already knowing how the game works.

as well as posses some degree of skill

we'll also have better ethics

How did I miss this post?

[Ramos_Caoliki]

There are ways to make kiting work, simply enough have 4 player slot servers, with a further reduced drop chance. If people are going to negate the chance aspect of the game by soloing they should have a lower chance of getting loot.
Also Mixing Cav back in would be interesting, mixed servers would be better than the current, pure cade system which as the devs have stated leaves too many people essentially leeching and not actually contributing to the survival of the team.

[Malong]

If people are going to negate the chance aspect of the game by soloing they should have a lower chance of getting loot.

This argument has never made any sense. From here:

Beyond that, the complaint that solo players received all the rewards from their kills is and was always nonsensical. If any player does all the work and killing, they should have gotten all the rewards from their kills. But for some reason, this logic doesn't carry over to NI, and the borderline envy of the players that were able to handle bots on their own without other players somehow won out.

Also the same argument from this thread:

I'll preface this by saying this is not an official statement of the developer team's stance, these are my personal thoughts...

- Kiting should not be more rewarding than a balanced team of various classes.

Though you gave the disclaimer that your post is not on behalf of the development team, I think many people still have to ask why about the above point. In many players' minds, the reward is based on the task, and the sum of rewards is not based on the number of contributors. In other words, if you perform a task individually or with a group, adding more people does not increase the total reward. If take on a contract to complete a project, your employer does not care how large your project team is, you get rewarded at a rate specified in your agreement.

IBT "well that's life and this is a game," you strive for realism in other aspects of this mod (e.g. "small groups of players should not be able to defeat gods"), and it's not like the action of loading NI makes us logic-less Swadians.

TLDR: "If N players can accomplish the same as M players, the reward should be the same, regardless of if N != M"

[Bobo]

The fact that the NordInvasion Fluffy Event House has not been super popular for people that want a new start says somthing i would think.  
http://forum.nordinvasion.com/showthread.php?tid=57535

Nothing would stop people just doing fluffy events all the time if they wanted a new start... I'm sure it would be a exception from the normal 2 events pr week.

Very true. Should anyone like to see how a full reset would work then what stops him from starting a fluffy char, get some experience with it and come back with an opinion. Can be done any moment...

[Ramos_Caoliki]

If people are going to negate the chance aspect of the game by soloing they should have a lower chance of getting loot.

This argument has never made any sense. From here:

Beyond that, the complaint that solo players received all the rewards from their kills is and was always nonsensical. If any player does all the work and killing, they should have gotten all the rewards from their kills. But for some reason, this logic doesn't carry over to NI, and the borderline envy of the players that were able to handle bots on their own without other players somehow won out.

Also the same argument from this thread:

I'll preface this by saying this is not an official statement of the developer team's stance, these are my personal thoughts...

- Kiting should not be more rewarding than a balanced team of various classes.

Though you gave the disclaimer that your post is not on behalf of the development team, I think many people still have to ask why about the above point. In many players' minds, the reward is based on the task, and the sum of rewards is not based on the number of contributors. In other words, if you perform a task individually or with a group, adding more people does not increase the total reward. If take on a contract to complete a project, your employer does not care how large your project team is, you get rewarded at a rate specified in your agreement.

IBT "well that's life and this is a game," you strive for realism in other aspects of this mod (e.g. "small groups of players should not be able to defeat gods"), and it's not like the action of loading NI makes us logic-less Swadians.

TLDR: "If N players can accomplish the same as M players, the reward should be the same, regardless of if N != M"

It makes complete sense... if you're going to be the only individual getting the loot, the chance needs to be reduced or you're going to damage the market through effectively no real competition. 

If you're kiting, and you get lots of mats compared to a team that has to spread it out among 16 people, you have the most power to negatively affect the economy through setting the prices, you should do it for the fun and challenge not as a method of making money. 

If you reduce the drop rates to be on par with what'd you get on a 12-16 player server, you have another game mode but not a biased route of making money. 

Like how at the moment one day a mat drops in value 15k because 'X' person cant be bothered to sell it at the given price, so now everyone must drop their prices or be stuck without selling their loot. You can use the flawed argument that everyone who doesn't agree with you is essentially "jealous of my wealth" but its no way to run a game economy.

[Malong]

It makes complete sense... if you're going to be the only individual getting the loot, the chance needs to be reduced or you're going to damage the market through effectively no real competition.

If you're kiting, and you get lots of mats compared to a team that has to spread it out among 16 people, you have the most power to negatively affect the economy through setting the prices

You either didn't read or wanted to ignore the counterpoints since you brought up the exact same argument that has been countered and never refuted. To reiterate:

Beyond that, the complaint that solo players received all the rewards from their kills is and was always nonsensical. If any player does all the work and killing, they should have gotten all the rewards from their kills. But for some reason, this logic doesn't carry over to NI, and the borderline envy of the players that were able to handle bots on their own without other players somehow won out.

[T]he reward is based on the task, and the sum of rewards is not based on the number of contributors. In other words, if you perform a task individually or with a group, adding more people does not increase the total reward. If take on a contract to complete a project, your employer does not care how large your project team is, you get rewarded at a rate specified in your agreement.

IBT "well that's life and this is a game," you strive for realism in other aspects of this mod (e.g. "small groups of players should not be able to defeat gods"), and it's not like the action of loading NI makes us logic-less Swadians.

TLDR: "If N players can accomplish the same as M players, the reward should be the same, regardless of if N != M"

As for the market, supply, and competition: that is only a factor if the number of materials dropped to kiting players matches or surpasses those of non-kiting servers. Only then could there be a possibility. There has never been any evidence of this being the case. In its current state, deciding to play with fewer or more players is a simple calculation of expected value. Being that there are far more instances of events and fuller public servers, this does not appear to be the case.

...you should do it for the fun and challenge not as a method of making money. 

You shouldn't dictate what other players do for fun. For the record, I don't kite, and I don't play for rewards. But there are plenty of reasons people play the game, but I would guess that most play for loot. You are essentially saying that the reason most people play is invalid.

You can use the flawed argument that everyone who doesn't agree with you is essentially "jealous of my wealth" but its no way to run a game economy.

That wasn't even the argument. It's that there's some very illogical viewpoint that: "these few players can accomplish as much as our 16 players, so they should get less." The reward system already favors the latter group to the point that it's barely based on any merit. Where does anyone get equal rewards regardless of effort and ability, or that more capable people get their rewards handicapped?

[Ramos_Caoliki]

It makes complete sense... if you're going to be the only individual getting the loot, the chance needs to be reduced or you're going to damage the market through effectively no real competition.

If you're kiting, and you get lots of mats compared to a team that has to spread it out among 16 people, you have the most power to negatively affect the economy through setting the prices

You either didn't read or wanted to ignore the counterpoints since you brought up the exact same argument that has been countered and never refuted. To reiterate:

Beyond that, the complaint that solo players received all the rewards from their kills is and was always nonsensical. If any player does all the work and killing, they should have gotten all the rewards from their kills. But for some reason, this logic doesn't carry over to NI, and the borderline envy of the players that were able to handle bots on their own without other players somehow won out.

[T]he reward is based on the task, and the sum of rewards is not based on the number of contributors. In other words, if you perform a task individually or with a group, adding more people does not increase the total reward. If take on a contract to complete a project, your employer does not care how large your project team is, you get rewarded at a rate specified in your agreement.

IBT "well that's life and this is a game," you strive for realism in other aspects of this mod (e.g. "small groups of players should not be able to defeat gods"), and it's not like the action of loading NI makes us logic-less Swadians.

TLDR: "If N players can accomplish the same as M players, the reward should be the same, regardless of if N != M"

As for the market, supply, and competition: that is only a factor if the number of materials dropped to kiting players matches or surpasses those of non-kiting servers. Only then could there be a possibility. There has never been any evidence of this being the case. In its current state, deciding to play with fewer or more players is a simple calculation of expected value. Being that there are far more instances of events and fuller public servers, this does not appear to be the case.

...you should do it for the fun and challenge not as a method of making money. 

You shouldn't dictate what other players do for fun. For the record, I don't kite, and I don't play for rewards. But there are plenty of reasons people play the game, but I would guess that most play for loot. You are essentially saying that the reason most people play is invalid.

You can use the flawed argument that everyone who doesn't agree with you is essentially "jealous of my wealth" but its no way to run a game economy.

That wasn't even the argument. It's that there's some very illogical viewpoint that: "these few players can accomplish as much as our 16 players, so they should get less." The reward system already favors the latter group to the point that it's barely based on any merit. Where does anyone get equal rewards regardless of effort and ability, or that more capable people get their rewards handicapped?

No, Because they aren't counterpoints, and they do not refute the argument of Kiting being too lucrative in its current form for individuals who are able to do it. 

Your argument is an argument for whatever someone earns they rightly deserve, which works fine in the real world, not in a game economy where regulation is required to an extent to ensure a balanced experience. Which was exactly why it was a focus point for kiting removal along with the aspect of it taking away from teamwork, you cannot deny this. 

If you want Kiting in the game, my suggestions solve the issue many people had, which is, that people who are able to do it benefit far too greatly compared to a team-based style where their chances of loot are reduced, whilst ensuring you have another option for game play. You can be up in arms as much as you wish arguing people deserve the same drop rates because they did the same run, but they really are not, 9-12 bots is not the same as 80+ bots, especially since the quantity of bosses is exactly the same so the number of legendaries theoretically dropped is the same.

It is no longer so much the case because kiting has been made much more difficult than it was previously, this was not the case for a very long time.

It's not my dictation that people shouldn't play for legendaries or money, they're an integral part of the game, the problem is when people forgo any interest in real teamwork simply for the sake of profit, which isn't the right reason to play a team game, that's why imo a 4 player style kite server would be an interesting Co-op experience on a smaller basis than a 16 player cading session, whilst not making it a better money method of the 16 man cading / whatever new style setups are implemented.

And it is not at all illogical to say kiting is better than the 16 player cade, refer to my point of the same quantity of bosses thus the same reward, except its now 100% yours, 50% or 25% and not 1/16 chance. I agree a 16 player cade is easier, and will logically produce more mats due to a higher quantity of bots, but the 1/16 chance of getting that loot still makes kiting a better alternative where the variables for you getting the drops are significantly greater. Unless you're playing as part of a house, but then being part of a house at this point in the game is a guaranteed method of success, we are however discussing the future when NI games may not be entirely dominated by well-established houses.

I will concede that I should've focused more on kiting as a source of legendaries than mats, but the point is still valid in that a solo kiter is the guaranteed recipient of the drop. And its not about capping the individual, it's about balancing the game modes to rid them of blatant biases that currently exist in order to protect an economy that is extremely susceptible to an influx of goods. Like we saw when Hardened metal rose and dropped in price drastically depending often on kiting runs, the fact the price went from what? 3-4k back up to 8k clearly highlights the potential dangers.

Regardless, I doubt we'll see a change in opinion from the devs in terms of kiting unless they entertain the idea of a smaller team like Cav and a balance to drops.

[Winter]

Fun fact: your drop rates are not diminished by having additional players on the server. The idea that you have 1/16th of the chance to get loot in a full team is wildly inaccurate. In fact, someone in a team of 4 has only about half the chance of looting a legendary as someone in a 16 man team.

[Malong]

No, Because they aren't counterpoints, and they do not refute the argument of Kiting being too lucrative in its current form for individuals who are able to do it. 

Your argument is an argument for whatever someone earns they rightly deserve, which works fine in the real world, not in a game economy where regulation is required to an extent to ensure a balanced experience. Which was exactly why it was a focus point for kiting removal along with the aspect of it taking away from teamwork, you cannot deny this. 

So you think it's fine that expected value of getting a drop in a run should vary depending on number of players in the server?

As for "works fine in the real world" I anticipated and answered here:

IBT "well that's life and this is a game," you strive for realism in other aspects of this mod (e.g. "small groups of players should not be able to defeat gods"), and it's not like the action of loading NI makes us logic-less Swadians.

If you want Kiting in the game, my suggestions solve the issue many people had, which is, that people who are able to do it benefit far too greatly compared to a team-based style where their chances of loot are reduced, whilst ensuring you have another option for game play.

You can be up in arms as much as you wish arguing people deserve the same drop rates because they did the same run, but they really are not, 9-12 bots is not the same as 80+ bots, especially since the quantity of bosses is exactly the same so the number of legendaries theoretically dropped is the same.

You raise a good point that fewer players also means fewer bots, but there's no quantitative relationship between some number of bots and difficulty. The smaller team of players already works with fewer resources (players and items, namely), which balances in that regard as well. There's also far lower margin of error as fewer teammates and items are available to save people from mistakes.
By lowering the incentive for other play styles, you lower interest in that play style altogether. It's also idealistic to say everyone that kited did it for the fun of it with no mind on items. Look at this comment concerning the Halloween event servers (from here):

the new game mode, in my opinion, is too difficult for too little reward even at the lowest levels. I believe the community agrees because the event servers are completely empty right now.

It's not my dictation that people shouldn't play for legendaries or money, they're an integral part of the game, the problem is when people forgo any interest in real teamwork simply for the sake of profit, which isn't the right reason to play a team game, that's why imo a 4 player style kite server would be an interesting Co-op experience on a smaller basis than a 16 player cading session, whilst not making it a better money method of the 16 man cading / whatever new style setups are implemented.

And it is not at all illogical to say kiting is better than the 16 player cade, refer to my point of the same quantity of bosses thus the same reward, except its now 100% yours, 50% or 25% and not 1/16 chance. I agree a 16 player cade is easier, and will logically produce more mats due to a higher quantity of bots, but the 1/16 chance of getting that loot still makes kiting a better alternative where the variables for you getting the drops are significantly greater. Unless you're playing as part of a house, but then being part of a house at this point in the game is a guaranteed method of success, we are however discussing the future when NI games may not be entirely dominated by well-established houses.

There's no forgoing of any teamwork for soloing, and even two players kiting together is a form of teamwork. Can you demonstrate any interval of time where more successful Odin kiting runs took place than full servers? In my experience people then gravitate to those servers and it becomes a "teamwork" run anyway. Also, how many players have even singularly beaten an entire mode with no teamwork? It's certainly fewer than the number of full public servers or house events.
As far as "same number of bosses" that's only true per full successful run, so you're only talking about the potential for it to be the same. If a kiting player or team dies, then they haven't killed all five bosses, while the full server in a successful run would have. Secondly, the counts aren't the same unless there are as many kiting games as there are "teamwork" games, and that's clearly not true either. More bosses are certainly being killed in "teamwork" games than kiting games.

And it is not at all illogical to say kiting is better than the 16 player cade, refer to my point of the same quantity of bosses thus the same reward, except its now 100% yours, 50% or 25% and not 1/16 chance. I agree a 16 player cade is easier, and will logically produce more mats due to a higher quantity of bots, but the 1/16 chance of getting that loot still makes kiting a better alternative where the variables for you getting the drops are significantly greater. Unless you're playing as part of a house, but then being part of a house at this point in the game is a guaranteed method of success, we are however discussing the future when NI games may not be entirely dominated by well-established houses.

I actually did the math on this. For your stated numbers (12 bots per wave in a 4 player server, and 80 bots per wave in an 80 player server), within a given wave, your claim that it's more lucrative in the 4-person server because of loot splitting is only true if a bot has a greater than 1.70% expected value of dropping something. This is a slight simplification, since drop rates aren't uniform (e.g. some bots drop nothing), bot spawns aren't uniform (i.e. there isn't an equal mix of everything), and rates of bot growth per additional player on the server isn't linear. But drops aside, there are already more quantitative benefits to having more players in the server, in more assist xp per kill, more bots to kill (and more xp, assist xp, gold). Hopefully this dispels the myth that dividing by fewer players favors the fewer players.

I will concede that I should've focused more on kiting as a source of legendaries than mats, but the point is still valid in that a solo kiter is the guaranteed recipient of the drop. And its not about capping the individual, it's about balancing the game modes to rid them of blatant biases that currently exist in order to protect an economy that is extremely susceptible to an influx of goods. Like we saw when Hardened metal rose and dropped in price drastically depending often on kiting runs, the fact the price went from what? 3-4k back up to 8k clearly highlights the potential dangers.

The influx of goods only happens on the assumption that kiting brings in as many or more boss kills than "teamwork" games. It's never been demonstrated that servers of <= 4 players have killed more bosses than servers of 16 players. Given how little evidence I've seen of groups of <= 4 players being able to kill Odin at a rate even close to the amount of, let's say, houses killing Odin 2-5 times on a single semiweekly event.

Fun fact: your drop rates are not diminished by having additional players on the server.  The idea that you have 1/16th of the chance to get loot in a full team is wildly inaccurate.  In fact, someone in a team of 4 has only about half the chance of looting a legendary as someone in a 16 man team.

Semantics are important here. Do you mean 1/16 chance to get a drop in a full team after a drop has been generated but before it goes to a player? Shouldn't the generation of drops be agnostic to the number of players in a server?