Make toming safe after a prayer

[Malong]

This pic is from March 9th, 2018 given it shows data rather than "guessing".  This was probably the highest points in Ni in terms of player numbers. We had a lot of looting happing at the same time. Is the player numbers just from the looting or is it just from the updates? It's both and other stuff...

Looting is in infrequent but when it happens a lot by chance or by a posable change in drop rate people want to play more as they think they have a better chance. Basically, once the ball gets rolling it gets faster and faster till eventually flattens out from a case of boredom.

What I suggest is updates spike player numbers in turn pushing the "luck" up. The luck is superficial its just a matter of how many people are rolling the dice unless the drop rate really did change.  

Spoiler

Quest Overhaul - Feb 16th
1.9.0 - March 1st
1.9.1 - March 2nd
1.9.2 - March 17th

Pic from here - March 9th, 2018

So you want to demonstrate:

Whenever an update is put out that affects stats alongside no other difference to any mechanics such as drop rate, the player activity increases.
Whenever an update is put out that affects maps alongside no other difference to any mechanics such as drop rate, the player activity increases.
Whenever an update to what upgrades are available alongside no other difference to any mechanics such as drop rate, the player activity increases.
Whenever devs hold special events alongside no other difference to any mechanics such as drop rate, the player activity increases.

and then you pick a time period when multiple legendaries were dropping a day on average (78 reported in the legendary item thread in a course of a month). Good job.

Looting is in infrequent but when it happens a lot by chance or by a posable change in drop rate people want to play more as they think they have a better chance. Basically, once the ball gets rolling it gets faster and faster till eventually flattens out from a case of boredom.

Or people stop playing when legendaries stop dropping as frequently. This also ignores the fact that this was after the material drop rate overhaul.

What I suggest is updates spike player numbers in turn pushing the "luck" up. The luck is superficial its just a matter of how many people are rolling the dice unless the drop rate really did change.  

But as players increase linearly, loot chance does not increase linearly with it. If a chance to "win" a roll is 1/n, then taking two rolls and winning either of them one is not 2/n, but rather [1 - ((n-1)/n)^2]. The population definitely "push[ed] the 'luck' up" far more than it should have from population increase alone.

The last stats update was for me July 13th.

Ok, using the item thread we can get an idea of how many runs are being done. Not everyone uses it so it's not perfect but it will give us a basic idea.

There isn't necessarily a link between number of drops and games being played. And secondly, more games being played in a day also doesn't necessarily imply more players are playing unless they're concurrent, which hasn't been established. This is not an adequate substitute for number of active players online and their duration from before and after.

The currently still ongoing halloween event is different in what way to normal gameplay? That's partly why I think I and others have not played Ni in about a week. It's not that much rewarding over normal modes and its not changeling vs rag... It's just a skin with no real reason for players to do more than once. I didn't have time to do the halloween event last year but no wonder people aren't jumping on it it's just the same thing no?

I'm sure if we looked at double XP week or even the upcoming Xmas event and did this to them they will outperform this halloween in terms of people playing and in turn looting.   

For me, it's because it's the same gameplay without better rewards.

This was not focused on why you are the only one left more why others left. It's no secret the DB events were the most successful or at least the way they did them. 

Edited before you replied.

Yes, you need to win some amount of your games for you to want to play those games. People argue about a % but I think it matters in what game you play. For any game, I would say you need to win at a minimum of 30% of the time to keep playing. For Ni how much is that minimum? More importantly what qualifies a win? I think most people say doing w15 is the win given its one of the only end goals in Ni. 

If I wanted to win all the time I would play normal or easy no? Why do you want to play rag when we don't need to? Normal and hard have stuff we can loot. Its all about the Risk/Reward Ratio. Rag has the best xp and the best gold but the loot is subjective in its cost. The only objective thing we can say without seeing drop rates is the loot on rag is harder to get. This is not even a factour people really think about anymore when pricing stuff because the market is flooded with duplicates and rag has become so easy it's not even worth saying.

What?

I can't find a study I like on risk/reward or other topics like it but im sure you could just look at the wiki if you really wanted to?

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

Risk and Reward is fun otherwise we would be happy to play on normal and never move away from it once we got to a certain point. Yea, it's fun to go on normal to kite once every so often with a full set of upgraded gear but I don't see this as fun or even entertaining most of the time... Why would I?

People play the highest mode you can comfortably beat unless they are actively looking for something from another mode.

[DR.]

Or people stop playing when legendaries stop dropping as frequently.

Not "or" it's both.

Once the ball gets rolling it gets faster and faster till eventually flattens out from a case of boredom.

---

---

This also ignores the fact that this was after the material drop rate overhaul.

So an update [material drop] affected the player numbers at a large scale yes. What do you think smaller updates do?

---

---

But as players increase linearly, loot chance does not increase linearly with it. If a chance to "win" a roll is 1/n, then taking two rolls and winning either of them one is not 2/n, but rather [1 - ((n-1)/n)^2]. The population definitely "push[ed] the 'luck' up" far more than it should have from population increase alone.

There isn't necessarily a link between number of drops and games being played. And secondly, more games being played in a day also doesn't necessarily imply more players are playing unless they're concurrent, which hasn't been established. This is not an adequate substitute for number of active players online and their duration from before and after.

If I do 100 dice roles or just 10 my chance to get 6 is 1/6 on each dice roll, yes no shit. If I do 100 dice roles I'm more likely to have more dices that laned on 6 than if I only did 10 dice roles. Yes, sometimes that group of 10 dice can be lucky and get more than the 100 groups as its all chance in the end.

The more rag runs people do the more dices are rolled it's that simple if the chances aren't being changed on us. The more rag runs that people play the more likely a loot will eventually happen. I can't keep track of how many runs are being completed every day and none can other than maybe a dev. The best way I could least find out ruffly how many runs were done that day is looking on the forum on that day. Looking at a wtb/wts tells us nothing really as we need evidence they played that day. This is hence why you can use loots as an ok judgement on how many runs are done each day.

Is that a perfect way to see how many runs get done each day? No, and I never said it was I said it would give us a basic idea. 

---

---

For me, it's because it's the same gameplay without better rewards.

So his the question then would you make rag harder knowing as an outcome you can give it better rewards.

I have not said anything about rewards when making rag harder as it would be a messy subject. If rag got harder by 5% even tho that can't really be measured easily I don't expect the buff in reward to be big. Something like this for example. Like 1.25x gold and XP then no change to drop rate.    

Idk my point is If we up the skill cap of rag we can make it have better rewards than atm. Before people say is that just making the rich richer well yea... but as I said I'm up for a system like this.

Like I said before I would nerf us then give us a way to get some or all stats back using a system that anyone can use. Not a gold/mats sink but a posable time or planning sink.

Here is the one I suggested but I'm sure we could find others that use the same method. If you plan the run beforehand you have a lot better chance to win. 

https://forum.nordinvasion.com/showthread.php?tid=73131

---

---

This was not focused on why you are the only one left more why others left. It's no secret the DB events were the most successful or at least the way they did them. 

Edited before you replied.

The question then is why did Db stop doing events and was there anything to stop that?

---

---

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

No its a matter of its all being gambling related data for the 3 I looked at just then and I don't have time to find one that shows what I'm looking for.

This is the 1st one on google for me and it does an ok job but ye maybe I just don't have the right keywords to find a paper on the subject.

https://fs.blog/2015/10/the-psychology-o...nd-reward/

The risk and reward "high" can be shown in classes as well. Ill use classes, I think you have. 

Mara for me gives me the biggest rush from having low armour and being a "2h" melee hero. The risk is massive to the point normal waves can kill me in less than 2secs but the reward is having really good other stats to make up for it.

Repeaterman for me is the opposite feeling. There is no skill in using that type of xbow to the point I question is this even fun. 

Warden is somewhere in the middle for me. Yes, there is a nice skill curve but being a ranged hero you have very little ways you will be killed vs a melee class. It's hard to make an accident that will kill you as warden but hard to become good at it if that made any sense. 


Maybe I should have looked up "Why do people find things that have a bigger skill curve more fun" but eh cbf doing more work at this point. 

---

---

Risk and Reward is fun otherwise we would be happy to play on normal and never move away from it once we got to a certain point. Yea, it's fun to go on normal to kite once every so often with a full set of upgraded gear but I don't see this as fun or even entertaining most of the time... Why would I?

People play the highest mode you can comfortably beat unless they are actively looking for something from another mode.

Maybe events think like this [most of the time] but the public is another deal altogether. 

How do people know they can comfortably beat a mode in public? I'm a sceptic the best of times when looking at teams saying "Yea maybe we will get to wave 9 of rag".

Most public hard runs start from a normal server and go to a hard server. Its the judgment of each player them selfs if they think they can do hard with that group of people. In the beginning, most will overestimate the team they had on the normal ending in a wipe.

[Cut-Me-Own-Throat-Dibbler]

I would imagine that most people play for some kind of progression. Whether that's gaining levels, grinding for materials or money, or legendary loot. If there's no meaningful progression for a while, people get bored. Sadly, once you hit level 52 and have acquired house crafted equipment, there isn't much to do except to hope that Lady Luck is your bitch and let's you find a legendary. And we all know how many people have gotten frustrated and quit over this issue, but unfortunately I do not see this problem getting solved any time soon - if ever.

And while my personal experience is hardly empirical evidence, Woody is right in one regard, though: while we grind for the ever elusive legendary loot,  map changes and events can offset boredom to a certain degree. I just wish there would be more and new maps.

As for Forward's original suggestion, a mechanism to make toming more predictable sounds to me like a swell idea, especially the "Swadian Gods disposition towards the team" one. Alas, like with the ideas for improving the loot system, I am doubtful such a change will find its way into NI for a foreseeable future.

[DR.]

I just wish there would be more and new maps.

Overlooking what makes a good map and if we need more new ones ill say this on that topic. I'm unsure how I feel about my idea here but its up to the people and devs.

I suggest maybe maps be on a posable rotation meaning we have only 5 or so maps to pick from at a given time.

Could do maps like upgrades so we have a set amount that is in each update but it's posable we may not see a map in half a year or whatever. Seeing any "old" map after such a long time could help with the being bored problem as it's not new but it will be something at lest.

Given you don't need to say what maps are in the rotation people would need to play or look at the servers to find out.

[Kriegstofu]

Or people stop playing when legendaries stop dropping as frequently.

Not "or" it's both.

Once the ball gets rolling it gets faster and faster till eventually flattens out from a case of boredom.

---

---

This also ignores the fact that this was after the material drop rate overhaul.

So an update [material drop] affected the player numbers at a large scale yes. What do you think smaller updates do?

---

---

But as players increase linearly, loot chance does not increase linearly with it. If a chance to "win" a roll is 1/n, then taking two rolls and winning either of them one is not 2/n, but rather [1 - ((n-1)/n)^2]. The population definitely "push[ed] the 'luck' up" far more than it should have from population increase alone.

There isn't necessarily a link between number of drops and games being played. And secondly, more games being played in a day also doesn't necessarily imply more players are playing unless they're concurrent, which hasn't been established. This is not an adequate substitute for number of active players online and their duration from before and after.

If I do 100 dice roles or just 10 my chance to get 6 is 1/6 on each dice roll, yes no shit. If I do 100 dice roles I'm more likely to have more dices that laned on 6 than if I only did 10 dice roles. Yes, sometimes that group of 10 dice can be lucky and get more than the 100 groups as its all chance in the end.

The more rag runs people do the more dices are rolled it's that simple if the chances aren't being changed on us. The more rag runs that people play the more likely a loot will eventually happen. I can't keep track of how many runs are being completed every day and none can other than maybe a dev. The best way I could least find out ruffly how many runs were done that day is looking on the forum on that day. Looking at a wtb/wts tells us nothing really as we need evidence they played that day. This is hence why you can use loots as an ok judgement on how many runs are done each day.

Is that a perfect way to see how many runs get done each day? No, and I never said it was I said it would give us a basic idea. 

---

---

For me, it's because it's the same gameplay without better rewards.

So his the question then would you make rag harder knowing as an outcome you can give it better rewards.

I have not said anything about rewards when making rag harder as it would be a messy subject. If rag got harder by 5% even tho that can't really be measured easily I don't expect the buff in reward to be big. Something like this for example. Like 1.25x gold and XP then no change to drop rate.    

Idk my point is If we up the skill cap of rag we can make it have better rewards than atm. Before people say is that just making the rich richer well yea... but as I said I'm up for a system like this.

Like I said before I would nerf us then give us a way to get some or all stats back using a system that anyone can use. Not a gold/mats sink but a posable time or planning sink.

Here is the one I suggested but I'm sure we could find others that use the same method. If you plan the run beforehand you have a lot better chance to win. 

https://forum.nordinvasion.com/showthread.php?tid=73131

---

---

This was not focused on why you are the only one left more why others left. It's no secret the DB events were the most successful or at least the way they did them. 

Edited before you replied.

The question then is why did Db stop doing events and was there anything to stop that?

---

---

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

No its a matter of its all being gambling related data for the 3 I looked at just then and I don't have time to find one that shows what I'm looking for.

This is the 1st one on google for me and it does an ok job but ye maybe I just don't have the right keywords to find a paper on the subject.

https://fs.blog/2015/10/the-psychology-o...nd-reward/

The risk and reward "high" can be shown in classes as well. Ill use classes, I think you have. 

Mara for me gives me the biggest rush from having low armour and being a "2h" melee hero. The risk is massive to the point normal waves can kill me in less than 2secs but the reward is having really good other stats to make up for it.

Repeaterman for me is the opposite feeling. There is no skill in using that type of xbow to the point I question is this even fun. 

Warden is somewhere in the middle for me. Yes, there is a nice skill curve but being a ranged hero you have very little ways you will be killed vs a melee class. It's hard to make an accident that will kill you as warden but hard to become good at it if that made any sense. 


Maybe I should have looked up "Why do people find things that have a bigger skill curve more fun" but eh cbf doing more work at this point. 

---

---

Risk and Reward is fun otherwise we would be happy to play on normal and never move away from it once we got to a certain point. Yea, it's fun to go on normal to kite once every so often with a full set of upgraded gear but I don't see this as fun or even entertaining most of the time... Why would I?

People play the highest mode you can comfortably beat unless they are actively looking for something from another mode.

Maybe events think like this [most of the time] but the public is another deal altogether. 

How do people know they can comfortably beat a mode in public? I'm a sceptic the best of times when looking at teams saying "Yea maybe we will get to wave 9 of rag".

Most public hard runs start from a normal server and go to a hard server. Its the judgment of each player them selfs if they think they can do hard with that group of people. In the beginning, most will overestimate the team they had on the normal ending in a wipe.

[Malong]

Or people stop playing when legendaries stop dropping as frequently.

Not "or" it's both.

Once the ball gets rolling it gets faster and faster till eventually flattens out from a case of boredom.

Just because both occur does not mean the cause is attributed to both.

This also ignores the fact that this was after the material drop rate overhaul.

So an update [material drop] affected the player numbers at a large scale yes. What do you think smaller updates do?

Depends what those updates are. You tried arguing that map updates affect player numbers. Seriously?

But as players increase linearly, loot chance does not increase linearly with it. If a chance to "win" a roll is 1/n, then taking two rolls and winning either of them one is not 2/n, but rather [1 - ((n-1)/n)^2]. The population definitely "push[ed] the 'luck' up" far more than it should have from population increase alone.

There isn't necessarily a link between number of drops and games being played. And secondly, more games being played in a day also doesn't necessarily imply more players are playing unless they're concurrent, which hasn't been established. This is not an adequate substitute for number of active players online and their duration from before and after.

If I do 100 dice roles or just 10 my chance to get 6 is 1/6 on each dice roll, yes no shit. If I do 100 dice roles I'm more likely to have more dices that laned on 6 than if I only did 10 dice roles. Yes, sometimes that group of 10 dice can be lucky and get more than the 100 groups as its all chance in the end.

The more rag runs people do the more dices are rolled it's that simple if the chances aren't being changed on us. The more rag runs that people play the more likely a loot will eventually happen. I can't keep track of how many runs are being completed every day and none can other than maybe a dev. The best way I could least find out ruffly how many runs were done that day is looking on the forum on that day. Looking at a wtb/wts tells us nothing really as we need evidence they played that day. This is hence why you can use loots as an ok judgement on how many runs are done each day.

Is that a perfect way to see how many runs get done each day? No, and I never said it was I said it would give us a basic idea. 

Not surprisingly you don't understand basic probability. First, it's not "luck," it's expected value with a large number of trials. Second, you picked a time frame when there were at least three times as many players, but the number of drops increased by more than a factor of three from prior to the drop rate change. Using your dice roll example, rolling a die three times increases the chances of rolling a given number from 1/6 to (16%) to (42%) or increasing by a multiplicative factor of 252%.

In other words:

The population definitely "push[ed] the 'luck' up" far more than it should have from population increase alone.

For me, it's because it's the same gameplay without better rewards.

So his the question then would you make rag harder knowing as an outcome you can give it better rewards.

I have not said anything about rewards when making rag harder as it would be a messy subject. If rag got harder by 5% even tho that can't really be measured easily I don't expect the buff in reward to be big. Something like this for example. Like 1.25x gold and XP then no change to drop rate.

Idk my point is If we up the skill cap of rag we can make it have better rewards than atm. Before people say is that just making the rich richer well yea... but as I said I'm up for a system like this.

If it was possible to quantify, the ratio of "reward increase" to "difficulty increase" is more than one, then yes. So yes to your example. This will never happen though.

The question then is why did Db stop doing events and was there anything to stop that?

Because they stopped looting once a week.

In other words, you pulled it out of your ass.

No its a matter of its all being gambling related data for the 3 I looked at just then and I don't have time to find one that shows what I'm looking for.

This is the 1st one on google for me and it does an ok job but ye maybe I just don't have the right keywords to find a paper on the subject.

https://fs.blog/2015/10/the-psychology-o...nd-reward/

That's not even a study...

The risk and reward "high" can be shown in classes as well. Ill use classes, I think you have. 

Mara for me gives me the biggest rush from having low armour and being a "2h" melee hero. The risk is massive to the point normal waves can kill me in less than 2secs but the reward is having really good other stats to make up for it.

Repeaterman for me is the opposite feeling. There is no skill in using that type of xbow to the point I question is this even fun. 

Warden is somewhere in the middle for me. Yes, there is a nice skill curve but being a ranged hero you have very little ways you will be killed vs a melee class. It's hard to make an accident that will kill you as warden but hard to become good at it if that made any sense. 


Maybe I should have looked up "Why do people find things that have a bigger skill curve more fun" but eh cbf doing more work at this point.

Now you're just babbling.

Risk and Reward is fun otherwise we would be happy to play on normal and never move away from it once we got to a certain point. Yea, it's fun to go on normal to kite once every so often with a full set of upgraded gear but I don't see this as fun or even entertaining most of the time... Why would I?

People play the highest mode you can comfortably beat unless they are actively looking for something from another mode.

Maybe events think like this [most of the time] but the public is another deal altogether. 

How do people know they can comfortably beat a mode in public? I'm a sceptic the best of times when looking at teams saying "Yea maybe we will get to wave 9 of rag".

By looking at the support items and gear of the players on the public team.

Most public hard runs start from a normal server and go to a hard server. Its the judgment of each player them selfs if they think they can do hard with that group of people. In the beginning, most will overestimate the team they had on the normal ending in a wipe.

Citation needed. There are plenty that jump directly into hard, and others that are from failing Ragnarok games.

And while my personal experience is hardly empirical evidence, Woody is right in one regard, though: while we grind for the ever elusive legendary loot,  map changes and events can offset boredom to a certain degree. I just wish there would be more and new maps.

Unless you can demonstrate a link between map changes and overall population increases, this is just an isolated incident. You recently rejoined without any new maps being added.

[Cut-Me-Own-Throat-Dibbler]

And while my personal experience is hardly empirical evidence, Woody is right in one regard, though: while we grind for the ever elusive legendary loot,  map changes and events can offset boredom to a certain degree. I just wish there would be more and new maps.

Unless you can demonstrate a link between map changes and overall population increases, this is just an isolated incident.

For one thing, I never claimed it increases population. I said it can offset boredom, which is not necessarily the same thing. Also, my statement made clear from the beginning that it is my subjective opinion and thus not meant to demonstrate your desired link.

You recently rejoined without any new maps being added.

By now I did come back three times. I started 2012, came back in 2014, 2018, and now. Each time the game was different, even though admittedly the last time not so much. The points for the "new" cading system were overhauled and some maps were slightly different. But in combination with the 6 months or so which I was gone, the game was no longer stale to me. Again, others might feel different, but you know what they say about opinions, right?

[Malong]

And while my personal experience is hardly empirical evidence, Woody is right in one regard, though: while we grind for the ever elusive legendary loot,  map changes and events can offset boredom to a certain degree. I just wish there would be more and new maps.

Unless you can demonstrate a link between map changes and overall population increases, this is just an isolated incident.

For one thing, I never claimed it increases population. I said it can offset boredom, which is not necessarily the same thing. Also, my statement made clear from the beginning that it is my subjective opinion and thus not meant to demonstrate your desired link.

Good relevance to the discussion at hand then.

[Cut-Me-Own-Throat-Dibbler]

Good relevance to the discussion at hand then.

You mean like your walls of text concerning "Make toming safe after a prayer"? Touché.

[Malong]

Good relevance to the discussion at hand then.

You mean like your walls of text concerning "Make toming safe after a prayer"? Touché.

So I replied to something directed at me, and it's not relevant...? Good reading comprehension and ability to follow a thread, Cut-Me-Own-Woody-Dibbler. Anyway, I'll bold it for you so you shouldn't miss it (but it wouldn't surprise me if you still did):

Me or you we can play rag for challenge, for fun or for whatever. It's a fact majority of players play this game for a loot. If doubt, ask PCK.