Out With Drop Tables! In With Token System.

[Brasten]

Tokens would be like credits. A controlled distribution to players, who accumulate it over time. We can see where credits have gotten us.

 

+1 however to these ideas (underlined):

Agreeded. A pure token system is just currency. However exchange of massive duplicates is the better way. Team Fortress 2 has a way there where you have to combine duplicates into stuff you want. This is one of the better backstops I've seen since it requires active play to eventually arrive

It's why I don't like the current Mod Fusion system. Yet another RNG is not what's needed. While it is okay to have a TF2 style crafting/token system with an option for RNG, the ultimate end is to let a player build their way out of S#&$ luck.

It's what I call making a backstop for bad luck. The Devs can still dictate the amount of time it should hypnotically take, but this way it won't take more then that time.

=====

Another idea is a not a token system but a Bounty System. Pick a particular type of time/mod etc. that you want. Every time the system take a roll on the RNG containing that item AND you don't get it, a point toward a progress bar. Once the bar is full you can claim the item. Far more complex. TF2 style progressive crafting would be better.

[JoshuaRenard]

you know there's an easier idea.

 

1. Keep old drop tables.

 

2. For those that have probably done the same thing 50 times, add a token system which exchanges a large amount of spare items to get the missing piece. For example, 30 Frost Prime Chassis for 1 Frost Prime Blueprint.

 

I think this way both lucky players and grinders will benefit and if the 2nd option makes the game too easy, please remind yourself the hardest warframe to acquire and ask yourself, why would you want anyone to endure 1 more minute of attempting to get that nonexistent systems... RNG is RNG but nobody deserves to farm 20+ hours to get just one simple warframe because that is how much time it took me to get the regular Frost parts.

Totally agree with you. I often am very lucky, but sometimes, the RNG just doens´t fell like giving me ANYTHING at all. And I bet many other people know this feeling.

 

Keep the RNG system, add a token system or something similiar for unlucky ones, profit.

[plznohurtme]

93 runs to get Nova Systems

57 runs to get Frost Prime Systems.

46 runs to get Rhino Systems.

Over 50 Void Keys to Braton Prime.

 

Tell me this is not an unmanaged grindfest because you or some others got lucky on the diceroll. Tell it to people who ran and still run for Blaze and Hammershot at 1.05% drop chance. Tell it to the people who are still trying, after fixed drop rates, to get a Dakra Prime Blade. How cynical does one have to be to be against a tangible, transparent system because one rather takes the chance with an arbitrary, uncaring randomized system, and defend it because one is so deep in the Skinner Box that an RNG system (that does not care about your efforts. At all. Ever.) is preferrable to having clear input for clear output?

 

My apologies for these blunt words, but you are might be a victim of endorphine conditioning.

And if you bothered to read the whole post instead of picking up the line you didn't like you'd see that I don't think the current system works. It doesn't.

[Ced23Ric]

And if you bothered to read the whole post instead of picking up the line you didn't like you'd see that I don't think the current system works. It doesn't.

 

You are promoting a luck-based system because you got lucky. That is a core problem in your perception. You advocate a broken, uncaring, unrelating system, because you want to have the chance to bypass a long grind. The issue is, though, that you will be unlucky at another point and take a lot more tries. If you think a token system is bad, because you have a set bar to make it to, you are not for RNG - you are for a lower bar. You don't want to grind at all.

 

Advocating a system with severe backlash in that regard because you got lucky on an item is no stable basis for this debate. You got Paris Prime in ~8 runs. I grinded 12 T1 Defs before I got the Paris Prime BP. Let's not talk about how long it took to get 5 parts. Being a statistical outlier does not make your experience a standard, it makes you lucky. And not everyone is.

 

A token system is fair. You know the effort, you can slice it as you like, and you will get, guaranteed, what you want. How that does not strike you as morally and technically better as a system that maes your fellow player suffer, just because you had more luck that day, is hard for me to understand.

 

Allow me to make a poor strawmen here: "As long as I get lucky, this system that makes other player bite their desks is fine to me. Rather have a chance unrelated to any outside factor than make it fair for everyone."

[Blatantfool]

93 runs to get Nova Systems

57 runs to get Frost Prime Systems.

46 runs to get Rhino Systems.

Over 50 Void Keys to Braton Prime.

 

Tell me this is not an unmanaged grindfest because you or some others got lucky on the diceroll. Tell it to people who ran and still run for Blaze and Hammershot at 1.05% drop chance. Tell it to the people who are still trying, after fixed drop rates, to get a Dakra Prime Blade. How cynical does one have to be to be against a tangible, transparent system because one rather takes the chance with an arbitrary, uncaring randomized system, and defend it because one is so deep in the Skinner Box that an RNG system (that does not care about your efforts. At all. Ever.) is preferrable to having clear input for clear output?

 

My apologies for these blunt words, but you are might be a victim of endorphine conditioning.

 

 #rekt

[plznohurtme]

You are promoting a luck-based system because you got lucky. That is a core problem in your perception. You advocate a broken, uncaring, unrelating system, because you want to have the chance to bypass a long grind. The issue is, though, that you will be unlucky at another point and take a lot more tries. If you think a token system is bad, because you have a set bar to make it to, you are not for RNG - you are for a lower bar. You don't want to grind at all.

 

Advocating a system with severe backlash in that regard because you got lucky on an item is no stable basis for this debate. You got Paris Prime in ~8 runs. I grinded 12 T1 Defs before I got the Paris Prime BP. Let's not talk about how long it took to get 5 parts. Being a statistical outlier does not make your experience a standard, it makes you lucky. And not everyone is.

 

A token system is fair. You know the effort, you can slice it as you like, and you will get, guaranteed, what you want. How that does not strike you as morally and technically better as a system that maes your fellow player suffer, just because you had more luck that day, is hard for me to understand.

 

Allow me to make a poor strawmen here: "As long as I get lucky, this system that makes other player bite their desks is fine to me. Rather have a chance unrelated to any outside factor than make it fair for everyone."

You're still incapable of reading, how sad. I blatantly said that I favor a RNG system with some sort of safety net. Perhaps you're thinking emotionally over your agitation on getting screwed by RNG and it's preventing you from comprehending what other people are typing.

Edited September 26, 2013 by plznohurtme

[Namacyst]

As i see it the 120 ammo drums, 86 fast hands and 123561 XY i collected so far could be used as tokens to trade for something i still have 0 of, right? Sure, Transmute tries to do that but it sucks and does not work on BP's.

 

If DE would just give us options besides selling for BP's & Mods we have collected a S#&$load of while suffering under the RNG it would make things easer and we would not need a Token system.

[Ced23Ric]

You're still incapable of reading, how sad. I blatantly said that I favor a RNG system with some sort of safety net.

 

This is where we miss each other in the discussion. You are going off the assumption that I am against you despite you making concessions, and I am ignoring these concessions. I am not. I am pointing out that an RNG system is not, by default, a tangible input/output systems, and thusly inherently flawed because it is uncaring, unfair and has no correlation to what you did. Since your justification to support an RNG system, regardless of concessions, is your personal luck and positive experience, I am asking you to defend your position in the face of those who did not have your luck.

 

You are, again, advocating in favour of an unfair system because it favoured you. That is a selfish base of discussion and has nothing to do with my personal emotional predisposition. You may project emotions on me, but you would be false to assume that. I have all those items, I am no longer grinding, and I am not complaining about my personal grind. I am giving you counter examples. You made personal records admissable arguments, so I am adding my own.

 

There is nothing sad about opposing your position that has little care for those less lucky than you. I am not doing this for my own sake, as you may have missed to notice. Calling me sad does not eleviate the problem I am pointing out, and a safety net is an inherent sign of a flawed core system. Like I said in a different post - Fool's idea is a good interrim solution in the transition phase, but the pricing is horrible. Spending halfa mil on a frame because RNG decided to hate you is not a safety net able to mitigate the disproportionate spread of drops, it is a oneshot solution for one item. This is not applicable to multiple items, as not many new players are sitting on millions.

 

I played this account since reset, avidly, and I have 2 mil stashed. With Fool's system I can afford to "transmute" for 4 items, then I am out of cash, a boatload of (argueably rare) resources and cannot afford to continue without extensive farming. instead of grinding the part, I am now grinding other parts and resources and credits on top.

 

Please take a step back and look at your position again.

[Mabswer]

-snip-

yea, but this wont remove the Grindiness of the game, there would be most likely even more grinding than ever with that.

[Blatantfool]

 Just a tidbit Ced - but that 2 Mil would go a lot further with my idea then you give it credit. I put a lot of importance in the idea that you can lower the price of the item transmute by having many duplicates.

 

 So though I say I think Item Transmute should be 500k for a Void item to start, it'd actually be significantly lower the more you play normally, a people already do.

 

Say you are talking about Braton Prime? Those 20+ Braton Stocks or whatever that people get this huge number of - those would help you kill the Item Transmute Pricetag down to something more agreeable.

 

 4 of them go for 500k, but I'd specifically have DE implement a feature where if all 4 transmuting items belong to one recipe you can actually keep piling parts from the same recipe in. 8 duplicates would cut it by 25%. 12 by 50%. 16 by 75% (Which I'd argue would probably be the cap on the discount. Doesn't necessarily have to be though. If you've grinded more then 20 parts from the correct recipe up I figure you probably deserve the 100% stage of the transmute discount.)

 

 

 So now you'd only sink 125k into the void item of your choice. My system would address the fact that you've been grinding away for ages and have many of the 'wrong part' and so it kill the pricetag. 

 

 Since, in this example, you've been grinding Void that whole time - the item would definitely be paying for itself at this stage. It is just a matter of when you decide you've done too much waiting around for it to drop at this stage.

[plznohurtme]

This is where we miss each other in the discussion. You are going off the assumption that I am against you despite you making concessions, and I am ignoring these concessions. I am not. I am pointing out that an RNG system is not, by default, a tangible input/output systems, and thusly inherently flawed because it is uncaring, unfair and has no correlation to what you did. Since your justification to support an RNG system, regardless of concessions, is your personal luck and positive experience, I am asking you to defend your position in the face of those who did not have your luck.

 

You are, again, advocating in favour of an unfair system because it favoured you. That is a selfish base of discussion and has nothing to do with my personal emotional predisposition. You may project emotions on me, but you would be false to assume that. I have all those items, I am no longer grinding, and I am not complaining about my personal grind. I am giving you counter examples. You made personal records admissable arguments, so I am adding my own.

 

There is nothing sad about opposing your position that has little care for those less lucky than you. I am not doing this for my own sake, as you may have missed to notice. Calling me sad does not eleviate the problem I am pointing out, and a safety net is an inherent sign of a flawed core system. Like I said in a different post - Fool's idea is a good interrim solution in the transition phase, but the pricing is horrible. Spending halfa mil on a frame because RNG decided to hate you is not a safety net able to mitigate the disproportionate spread of drops, it is a oneshot solution for one item. This is not applicable to multiple items, as not many new players are sitting on millions.

 

I played this account since reset, avidly, and I have 2 mil stashed. With Fool's system I can afford to "transmute" for 4 items, then I am out of cash, a boatload of (argueably rare) resources and cannot afford to continue without extensive farming. instead of grinding the part, I am now grinding other parts and resources and credits on top.

 

Please take a step back and look at your position again.

So you say you're not ignoring the safety net proposition but you proceed to ignore it. RNG with a safety net is nothing about luck or my feelings at all, you're the one that brought that up completely. I don't think you understand what anyone is talking about when they say put a safety net on RNG and you're also making the assumption that what he said is the exact demand.

Let me try to explain this in a simple fashion so that you can wrap your head around it since it doesn't look like you get it. RNG means you have a chance of getting something and so long as you're guaranteed a drop you will get something every single run (take new golem for example). You could be really lucky and get it done in 3 runs or you could be statistically unlucky and never finish it with the current system. The suggestion at hand is to simply put an upper bounds on it so that people would never have to do infinite runs and never get what they're after. This can be set to any number it isn't important what that number is so long as it's a reasonable expectation. Again using golem as the example let's say that DE allows you to take 4 systems and turn it in to a helmet or chassis now if you've been super unlucky and haven't gotten one piece but you've gotten 4 of another then you're set (this would take a maximum of 9 runs). This is where they have a few choices in my opinion, they could either make scaling cost (like Fool's idea) or they could just set a number and have either a free or low cost conversion (think maybe buying a bp to change them).

I don't see how you can possibly argue against using a system like this and it being unfair or favoring the lucky in an unreasonable fashion. It is the best of both worlds, an upper bounds on the farming is set, but there's still the randomness involved so that potentially it could be done sooner. This way you might get lucky, but either way you know what you're working towards if RNG doesn't go your way.

By all means if you've understood this (which is honestly doesn't seem like you do) then you can continue to disagree, however at that point it's impossible for me to make it any more clear to you and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Aretak]

RNG can only work as a supplement to a proper loot system when it's as S#&$ty as it is now. It's always been bad but it's only getting worse and DE's stubbornness at properly reviewing/testing the tables is terrible.

[Ced23Ric]

I don't think you understand what anyone is talking about [...]

Let me try to explain this in a simple fashion so that you can wrap your head around it since it doesn't look like you get it.

By all means if you've understood this (which is honestly doesn't seem like you do) then you can continue to disagree, however at that point it's impossible for me to make it any more clear to you and we'll just have to agree to disagree.

 

Disagreeing with your point - not everyone's, mind you - does not mean that I am failing to comprehend your position. Explain to me how the necessity of a safety net is in any way, shape or form making a system viable? The RNG system, in its core, is flawed. The propositioned safety net shifts grind, while this amended system still has imbalanced input/output coefficients.

 

Counterquestion(s): What is so hard to understand about prefering a system that is fair to everyone, does not favour anyone based on chance and has a tangible input/output coefficient? Why would you defend a system that needs a crutch to become bearable, and even then, spells a disproportionate effort to reward ratio, based on chance - not effort?

 

You are calling me dense, in other words, yet insist that a system that cannot be bargained with, does not care about the player's efforts, needs a crutch, is favourable to a transparent, clear solution. I understand that you like the dice roll, and the vague grind more, and you have positive experiences with it. Do you understand, with the same objectivity, that others have not? That there will always be outliers who will need the crutch more than the luck provides for them? Do you think it is fair that player A gets something in 5 runs, and player B needs 25 runs? I have a hard time following that position, both from a logical and from a moral standpoint.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Ced23Ric

[JerichoFayne]

 I am in favor of adopting some sort of safety net to prevent the grind for simple goals like Warframes from repeating for too long.

 

 However I am still unconvinced that a token system is the right solution.

 

^^^^ This.

 

Tokens vs RNG....either way is going to result in endless grinding.  The exchange rates for tokens will be so high that getting anything will take a very long time.  On top of that...there will no longer be a need for diversity.   Players will use the fasted, quickest means to get tokens, so there will be a constant battle between DE & the players to try to get us to run different missions.

 

I'd be interested in seeing a "Combo Breaker" system that short circuits the RNG if it keep awarding the same drop.

[plznohurtme]

Disagreeing with your point - not everyone's, mind you - does not mean that I am failing to comprehend your position. Explain to me how the necessity of a safety net is in any way, shape or form making a system viable? The RNG system, in its core, is flawed. The propositioned safety net shifts grind, while this amended system still has imbalanced input/output coefficients.

 

Counterquestion(s): What is so hard to understand about prefering a system that is fair to everyone, does not favour anyone based on chance and has a tangible input/output coefficient? Why would you defend a system that needs a crutch to become bearable, and even then, spells a disproportionate effort to reward ratio, based on chance - not effort?

 

You are calling me dense, in other words, yet insist that a system that cannot be bargained with, does not care about the player's efforts, needs a crutch, is favourable to a transparent, clear solution. I understand that you like the dice roll, and the vague grind more, and you have positive experiences with it. Do you understand, with the same objectivity, that others have not? That there will always be outliers who will need the crutch more than the luck provides for them? Do you think it is fair that player A gets something in 5 runs, and player B needs 25 runs? I have a hard time following that position, both from a logical and from a moral standpoint.

I didn't ever say that I don't understand why some people want a token system, simply that I find the pure concept to be horrific. I've never had a problem with properly implemented RNG in any game that I've played in the last 20+ years and don't see a reason to dislike it now. I haven't ever and will never play a game where my time is 100% in the hands of what the developer chooses and that's exactly what a token system gives. It dictates how much time everything will take and invariably there will be an optimum manner in which to acquire any token limiting choices further. The only way to introduce variance to any system is through RNG of some sort.

I've had my fair share of both negative and positive experiences when acquiring loot, it's all part of the game (took me a really long time to see flow and I still haven't seen rage with hundreds of hours played, granted I haven't actually tried to get it, but still). I'm not sure if you've experienced the difference in acquiring void gear since they changed just the void RNG tables around in 10.1.0, but it's a much different experience than it has ever been before. This was just by tightening up the loot tables, but making no overall systemic changes at all. Acquiring the Nekros from Golem... I haven't seen any horror stories yet (not that they won't come and haven't happened), and that partly comes from guaranteed drops... yet another small adjustment that has made things better.

Again I've long since accepted that RNG is a thing in gaming, and so long as it's decently implemented there will be a fair amount of positive and negative. I do think it's perfectly fair that someone may get something in 5 runs that takes someone else 25 runs assuming that nothing malicious was done to cause it (I'm suggesting that the average number of attempts it takes anyone is somewhere between the two, say somewhere around 15). These two experiences may very well be reversed on the very next item that they're going for, this is the nature of random. Morality doesn't enter into chance, but I do understand why someone would be opposed to the random nature, because nobody wants to be last. On the flip side do you understand why some people wouldn't like mandatory farming (ex: oh yay I have to go run 10 t2 void survival missions to get my mag prime chassis blueprint with no chance of getting it, or something else sooner)?

There will always be bad experiences with random, however properly setting up loot tables alone goes a very long way, and adding a safety net would just cement that it cannot get out of control. Virtually every game genre utilizes RNG to some extent or another and it's done for specific reason: to mix things up and have an unpredictable element. Personally I wish they could go through and properly setup RNG throughout the game to balance everything, but given how much overall work they still need to do I'm not sure how feasible it would be. This is why I think a safety net is even needed at this point.

I'm also curious if you don't like RNG period (meaning critical strike/multishot/thunderbolt etc), or if it's just RNG rewards?

Another random thought that popped into my head (probably a bad thing it's 5am) is perhaps I've missed it, but what are your thoughts specifically on the type of token system you'd like to see implemented? If there's one thing I've found throughout this thread alone is that not everyone is thinking of the same thing although talking about the same thing (preconceived notions and all).

Edited September 26, 2013 by plznohurtme

[Ced23Ric]

The only way to introduce variance to any system is through RNG of some sort.

I'm not sure if you've experienced the difference in acquiring void gear since they changed just the void RNG tables around in 10.1.0, but it's a much different experience than it has ever been before. This was just by tightening up the loot tables, but making no overall systemic changes at all. Acquiring the Nekros from Golem... I haven't seen any horror stories yet (not that they won't come and haven't happened), and that partly comes from guaranteed drops... yet another small adjustment that has made things better.

Again I've long since accepted that RNG is a thing in gaming, and so long as it's decently implemented there will be a fair amount of positive and negative. I do think it's perfectly fair that someone may get something in 5 runs that takes someone else 25 runs assuming that nothing malicious was done to cause it [...]

 

On the flip side do you understand why some people wouldn't like mandatory farming?

There will always be bad experiences with random, however properly setting up loot tables alone goes a very long way, and adding a safety net would just cement that it cannot get out of control.

I'm also curious if you don't like RNG period (meaning critical strike/multishot/thunderbolt etc), or if it's just RNG rewards?

Another random thought that popped into my head (probably a bad thing it's 5am) is perhaps I've missed it, but what are your thoughts specifically on the type of token system you'd like to see implemented?

 

In sequence:

 

I'd disagree here. A token system allows you, the player, to do things at your pace an leisure. You can control what you acquire when. Not everyone has the same focus and not everyone wants Boar Prime but rather would get Braton Prime. With the current system, people wanting the same thing play together and get excess loot. Instead of being able to play with everyone, because everyone gets tokens to be used on whatever a player wants, we are now limiting compatible assisting players because of the limited drop tables. Additionally, we are acquiring stuff we decidedly don't want or already have, regardless of our desires and efforts. "Mixing it up" should not be the reward portion, but the game portion of an experience. Give us random encounters, minibosses, spontaneous loot rooms like in the void, but in every mission, etc. Mix up the gameplay. Make it exciting to play the missions instead of repeating the same patterns over and over. Make the journey part of the goal.

 

Played Void U10 before and after the fixes, which I fought for quite vocally on these forums. The changes were made because someone checked up on them, datamined the rates and exposed them. Without that exposure and the rightful complaints of players, those change would not have come, DE would not have admitted fault and would not have acted. We had to check DE to keep them honest, and the damage is still there, still lingering. I won't go deeper into this, though. The blood is bad enough. Yet, even the amended rates had people grind their little hearts out to get Magpie Systems. And the double grind of getting T3 keys to get a 9% chance increase to get those over T2 keys is RNG with RNG with RNG. That still sucks.

 

I do not like unfair rewards, in any game. I do not like random loot of equipment, either. Fought it in Firefall, and managed to get it through - no more random superior loot, no more critical crafting sucesses, but an even base for all players. They reintroduced random loot drops in a much more feasible fashion: Better than standard gear, but still just sidegrades to crafted stuff. And that is good addition of random loot and RNG into a reward system. It keeps things far, makes the boost tangible, but ultimately, just a bridge to the gear you are working towards for real.

 

I do understand your point that mandatory farming is soul sucking. But the current system is even worse. It is soul sucing without an end you can hope for. In the current RNG world, you can only roll again, roll again, roll again. You don't know when you get off, or if you get off before your resources run out. A plight you know is better than a plight you cannot fathom, in my books.

 

Yes and no. I agree(d) that the safety net of part transmuting is a good solution, but only in an interrim away from RNG in the way it is working right now. Yes, the current system, if kept, needs that safety net. No questions there. But no, the current system is not a system I would like to see kept. I would like to see it changed to a token system, where effort X equals reward Y, for every player.

 

Short and simple: Crits behave decently enough due to volume and frame of effect. That kind of RNG is fine to me. Rewards are something solid and defining. That kind of RNG is Skinner Box (ab)use and I find personally nefarious in it's core, regardless of intentions and implementation through repetition or copying others.

 

My ideas on a token system are, that every area has one kind of Token. Mercury token, Derelict token, Void token ... etc. And those are then spent on items form that specific area. I can now take my three buddies and hit the Void. A gets a Boar Prime part, B a Braton barrel, C a Forma BP and I enjoy my Magpie BP.

[TwiceDead]

I don't think people can trust DE's hidden RNG anymore.

 

We have always joked about the RNGod, but this is a new level.

 

Something drastic has to change, a token system could be that.

Joke? Did you just call the great RNG god a joke?!

 

Heretic! Everybody grab your pitchforks! We shall sacrifice his necktie(that he has probably hidden in the darkest most forgotten corner in his room out of embarrassment for wearing it) at the Shrine of the one and almighty RNG god! In order to ease it's fury so it doesn't rain bad luck on us all! 

YOU GOOD SIR ARE PREACHING FALSE AND UTTER BLASPHEMY! YOU ARE A GLASS OF FILLED NONSENSE!

 

We need good numbers my dear believers! And the only way to achieve this is to keep the RNGod pleased on his high throne above gods! 

 

[Brasten]

My ideas on a token system are, that every area has one kind of Token. Mercury token, Derelict token, Void token ... etc. And those are then spent on items form that specific area. I can now take my three buddies and hit the Void. A gets a Boar Prime part, B a Braton barrel, C a Forma BP and I enjoy my Magpie BP.

Which is funitonaly the idea behind a safety net to an RNG. Be it tokes or recrafting of randomly generated junk the point is to set a maximum amount of play an effort a player HAS to do to aquire a particular item. Using an RNG in this station means a player (or new player) who is lucky can get some time shaved off on their perpetual catchup (cause we know DE isn't going to slow down the junk dump) game with veteran players.

Lets stand the RNG vs Token on its head and start with Token. Assume DE had this system in place today. Eject your bais. Would you object to adding an RNG to it that had the potential to cut the acquisition time by 25%. If it's supposed to take 20 runs the RNG could bring you down to 15.

At base we are all asking that there be some system in place that sets a maximum amount of times the player has to play to get an item. And that this time not be as onerous as say 2.5 years of play time. The suggestion that of adding an RNG elements to cut down that time isn't a bad one when you start with the assumption that the Maximum time is the intended time.

(FYI random luck hates my guts normally. I will never play at Vegas because my luck is so mediocre. Which is why I almost always insist on some form of Safety net to any RNG. Some way to thanks the lemons and ferment them.)

Edited September 26, 2013 by Brasten

[plznohurtme]

Give us random encounters, minibosses, spontaneous loot rooms like in the void, but in every mission, etc. Mix up the gameplay. Make it exciting to play the missions instead of repeating the same patterns over and over. Make the journey part of the goal.

This should be done period no matter what they do with anything else game wise.

 

Played Void U10 before and after the fixes, which I fought for quite vocally on these forums. The changes were made because someone checked up on them, datamined the rates and exposed them. Without that exposure and the rightful complaints of players, those change would not have come, DE would not have admitted fault and would not have acted. We had to check DE to keep them honest, and the damage is still there, still lingering.

This I agree with completely and it's a shame that this is what was required to make a change that should have been there always (why should braton prime stock drop from 5 different missions etc). I think a lot of the problems with the RNG stems from the fact that they don't appear to have internal checks on the system and thus these bugs aren't established until the community finds them out. There's still a bug (or at least there was, not sure if there still is) regarding the drop of Bronco Prime Barrel vs Braton Prime Barrel and this was after the "fix". There should really be someone who is assigned to take a look through these systems who isn't designing them to check on it and make sure everything is working intentionally.

 

I do not like unfair rewards, in any game. I do not like random loot of equipment, either. Fought it in Firefall, and managed to get it through - no more random superior loot, no more critical crafting sucesses, but an even base for all players. They reintroduced random loot drops in a much more feasible fashion: Better than standard gear, but still just sidegrades to crafted stuff. And that is good addition of random loot and RNG into a reward system. It keeps things far, makes the boost tangible, but ultimately, just a bridge to the gear you are working towards for real.

I agree completely with the concept of RNG allowing for "better" loot being a foolish system designed to do nothing but trap you into a giant time sink. I do not think that using a RNG system for that is a good idea in any way shape or form, because at that point it simply says "x was luckier than y and thus better". I've seen those system used in other games (predominantly RPGs) and I've felt that it was silly every time. In my estimation an item should be the item it was intended to be and not randomly something better.

 

I do understand your point that mandatory farming is soul sucking. But the current system is even worse. It is soul sucing without an end you can hope for. In the current RNG world, you can only roll again, roll again, roll again. You don't know when you get off, or if you get off before your resources run out. A plight you know is better than a plight you cannot fathom, in my books.

I also agree with this given the nature of this game and the way that the RNG has been implemented up until this point which is why I want an upper bounds placed upon it.

 

I'd disagree here. A token system allows you, the player, to do things at your pace an leisure. You can control what you acquire when. Not everyone has the same focus and not everyone wants Boar Prime but rather would get Braton Prime. With the current system, people wanting the same thing play together and get excess loot. Instead of being able to play with everyone, because everyone gets tokens to be used on whatever a player wants, we are now limiting compatible assisting players because of the limited drop tables. Additionally, we are acquiring stuff we decidedly don't want or already have, regardless of our desires and efforts. "Mixing it up" should not be the reward portion, but the game portion of an experience.

 

My ideas on a token system are, that every area has one kind of Token. Mercury token, Derelict token, Void token ... etc. And those are then spent on items form that specific area. I can now take my three buddies and hit the Void. A gets a Boar Prime part, B a Braton barrel, C a Forma BP and I enjoy my Magpie BP.

I mixed the order of what you said in this last part, because I think they go together, or at least my opinion on it hits both.

While it does allow you to choose what you acquire it also cements you in doing it in the developers time. I doubt it's the same story for everyone, but I've tried some things out that I never would have if it wasn't for the RNG system giving me not what I was looking for. This isn't ideal for everyone, I understand that, however to some small extent it does drive people to try new things. A token system is extremely rigid and forces everyone into a specific mold that cannot be broken.

To the opposite end though another thing that I think has to be done by DE (not just the community) is transparency about what drops where. It should say what the chances are of things dropping in a general sense so if you go do a t3 extermination mission on the lobby screen it should say: Frost Prime Chassis Blueprint - common, Forma Blueprint - common, Frost Prime Systems Blueprint - uncommon, Dakra Prime Blade - uncommon, Forma - rare. Transparency, reasonable drop rates and some sort of upper bounds easily provide a much better experience than either a pure RNG system or token system could hope to provide on their own. There's still a sense of chance without the looming dread of 75 missions later you're still without what you were looking for.

 

At base we are all asking that there be some system in place that sets a maximum amount of times the player has to play to get an item. And that this time not be as onerous as say 2.5 years of play time. The suggestion that of adding an RNG elements to cut down that time isn't a bad one when you start with the assumption that the Maximum time is the intended time.

I would agree completely with this as well.

[Ced23Ric]

[...]

 

I am happy we found two coexisting positions with, based on where this started, a lot more respect for one another. Turning the scenario around (upper cap, lower time possible via RNG, RNG becomes a beneficial, not detrimental system) made me rethink my stance to some degree. At the end of the day, anything that combats the current arbitrary cruelty is welcome.

 

Just please also understand that I tend to go for clear-cut solutions. Aim high. Ideally, we would not face a long grind of the same content to receive an item, but find us working through a chain of events/missions and enjoy the game(play), and at the end, get rewarded with an item. Ideally. Sadly, we are currently far from that.

[Brasten]

Ideally, we would not face a long grind of the same content to receive an item, but find us working through a chain of events/missions and enjoy the game(play), and at the end, get rewarded with an item. Ideally. Sadly, we are currently far from that.

This is sadly the trap of a Themepark. Creating event chains that are memorable and worth replaying are far harder then dumping items into a market system. No developer can develop content faster the players play it. The answer especially with easter game developers is to create horrendous grind walls to try and both slow players and profit. Unfortunately that is all DE has going for this game. The severe lack of Lore and a way for players to interact with it beyond a linear story. Currently item grind is all there is functionally to this game. It is fun, don't get me wrong, it's a far more enjoyable game then ME3MP and many other shooters with powers I've played. However there is no greater story to keep the fanbase involved. Something to do with the uber-weapons we quest for.

[shinydunsparce]

^^^^ This.

 

Tokens vs RNG....either way is going to result in endless grinding.  The exchange rates for tokens will be so high that getting anything will take a very long time.  On top of that...there will no longer be a need for diversity.   Players will use the fasted, quickest means to get tokens, so there will be a constant battle between DE & the players to try to get us to run different missions.

 

I'd be interested in seeing a "Combo Breaker" system that short circuits the RNG if it keep awarding the same drop.

 

Except a token system is the exact opposite of an endless grind. Even if it takes a long time, it would be appropriate to the reward hopefully, and still be better than having the possibility of NEVER getting it. Players already use the fastest means to do void runs to get rewards, so that doesn't matter.

[LoKor]

^^^^ This.

 

Tokens vs RNG....either way is going to result in endless grinding.  The exchange rates for tokens will be so high that getting anything will take a very long time.  On top of that...there will no longer be a need for diversity.   Players will use the fasted, quickest means to get tokens, so there will be a constant battle between DE & the players to try to get us to run different missions.

 

I'd be interested in seeing a "Combo Breaker" system that short circuits the RNG if it keep awarding the same drop.

 

Who said the tokens are just one type? They can put each type of mission drop different type of tokens and an item would require x amount of each.  That means everyone will be doing all of them or whatever that is required. 

[plznohurtme]

I am happy we found two coexisting positions with, based on where this started, a lot more respect for one another. Turning the scenario around (upper cap, lower time possible via RNG, RNG becomes a beneficial, not detrimental system) made me rethink my stance to some degree. At the end of the day, anything that combats the current arbitrary cruelty is welcome.

Agreed, turns out actually getting to the root of opinions helps, I know I'm completely guilty of not finding out other people's thoughts before making judgment and that's all it really required.

The thing I hate about the current system is simply the fact that it's not consistent. Even if you look at the recent void changes as a positive (I do, though I still think a cap is beneficial) they're one of the only things that actually got well balanced as such. We still have tons of stuff throughout the game that is just spread out and doesn't allow you to go from mission to mission accomplishing something.

 

Just please also understand that I tend to go for clear-cut solutions. Aim high. Ideally, we would not face a long grind of the same content to receive an item, but find us working through a chain of events/missions and enjoy the game(play), and at the end, get rewarded with an item. Ideally. Sadly, we are currently far from that.

I would love this to be honest... rewarding the player for actually accomplishing something and there simply isn't enough of that in the game right now. I think the new survival mode is a great general concept, but I'd like to see more timed things and goals that actually force people out of their comfort zone. Even survival could be made better seeing as right now we basically have three tiers for rewards and then it's pointless aside from farming experience or if there are materials/mods those enemies drop.

Along with that I'd like to see some sort of relevance/minigame aspect to the missions that we do to at least tie things together. I'm not sure that lore is super important right now, but at least something to tie it together, I'd made a post about it some weeks ago, but as with a lot of stuff it just got buried.

There's also a lot of walling off and balance issues that could seemingly be easily resolved but there has been no sign of change.

A token/choice reward if it was based off of accomplishment of a differing series of missions or escalating difficulty wouldn't rub me the wrong way the way that just switching to a token system leaving things as it does. I think that's a core problem with shifting to a token system right now: if things stayed as is it would be dull, but if they were to redesign mission structure so that you could chain things together to get different rewards I could easily see the benefit to that.

[Genuinetheo]

 

You are promoting a luck-based system because you got lucky. That is a core problem in your perception. You advocate a broken, uncaring, unrelating system, because you want to have the chance to bypass a long grind. The issue is, though, that you will be unlucky at another point and take a lot more tries. If you think a token system is bad, because you have a set bar to make it to, you are not for RNG - you are for a lower bar. You don't want to grind at all.

 

Advocating a system with severe backlash in that regard because you got lucky on an item is no stable basis for this debate. You got Paris Prime in ~8 runs. I grinded 12 T1 Defs before I got the Paris Prime BP. Let's not talk about how long it took to get 5 parts. Being a statistical outlier does not make your experience a standard, it makes you lucky. And not everyone is.

 

A token system is fair. You know the effort, you can slice it as you like, and you will get, guaranteed, what you want. How that does not strike you as morally and technically better as a system that maes your fellow player suffer, just because you had more luck that day, is hard for me to understand.

 

Allow me to make a poor strawmen here: "As long as I get lucky, this system that makes other player bite their desks is fine to me. Rather have a chance unrelated to any outside factor than make it fair for everyone."

 

What? No 50+ Void runs to get the Paris Prime? Your other numbers are a bit exaggerated, as though you crunched them in to exert magnitude of the issue. It is no slight for me to say that I have run well over 200+ Void runs to get Paris Prime BP myself, but I could be overexaggerating a tiny bit, ignore the stack of Paris Prime parts I had saved up for the day I finally got the BP (which was actually a few days ago, but I have been hunting for that for months).  The issue here is not numbers, more the idea that a token system will omit the need for people to get lucky--rather they are always lucky. When everyone is a winner, there is no real winner.