Jump to content

Give completionists a chance to hit the cap of current Nightwave


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

They always tell us when a season ends 2 weeks in advance (that's DE's stated policy). 2 weeks was never going to be enough to catch up in standing - so it was clear that you needed to prepare well before they announced the end date. How far in advance? That's up to each player's individual judgement. You seem to have misjudged.

Maybe. Or maybe you are. We will never know for sure unless DE announces official stats about this season. If they do - it'll be interesting to have a look at them.

Actually, there are plenty of reasons to set a cap you don't expect people to reach. In software engineering, it is much easier to manage a data structure if you know exactly what range each of the values is going to be in. It's a similar reason to why a lot of games limit the maximum length of a user's name: to make the data structure it is stored in much more predictable in size.

One could argue that an example of the occurrence makes the possibility more than "strictly theoretical". And the idea of "reasonable" is pretty subjective and can be disagreed on. Since we are talking about the reasonableness of time spent farming the standing, it is completely valid to disagree on both how that time is distributed (November to January or May to January) and the optimal farming method (long missions, short missions, or some combination of both).

If reaching the cap is not expected, then farming fissures becomes an unnecessary extra that some people choose to put on themselves. Then the farm being unpleasant is irrelevant to the success/failure of the system.

You can't say if reach the cap is expected or not, DE needs to say that, my best guess is DE just never even tried making it "possible" or "not possible", they just increased it so no people would have complained about reaching it too soon, but now it's the exact opposite situation, like I said a mid ground would've been perfect, so everyone would be happy now

And if you may be somehow against that idea, it's your problem (a non existent one but you get the point)

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

They always tell us when a season ends 2 weeks in advance (that's DE's stated policy). 2 weeks was never going to be enough to catch up in standing - so it was clear that you needed to prepare well before they announced the end date. How far in advance? That's up to each player's individual judgement. You seem to have misjudged.

The absolute ending date is given to allow time to spend, rather than time to finish. And that's.. the recent announcement, not November's. It was never 'clear' how much grinding would be required, and the fact remains that grinding is implicitly unreliable and therefore should not be considered as expected in any way, shape or form.

Quote

Maybe. Or maybe you are. We will never know for sure unless DE announces official stats about this season. If they do - it'll be interesting to have a look at them.

The fact it's influenced heavily on happenstance and differing playstyles, despite actual mission time investment, already states that anything past task-driven standing is strictly anecdotal. And you even admitted to degenerative Steel Path farming, didn't you? 

Quote

Actually, there are plenty of reasons to set a cap you don't expect people to reach. In software engineering, it is much easier to manage a data structure if you know exactly what range each of the values is going to be in. It's a similar reason to why a lot of games limit the maximum length of a user's name: to make the data structure it is stored in much more predictable in size.

None of this states why the cap wouldn't be a reachable figure.

The standing value is already an unsigned int at least, and even assuming rank value is stored not derived, that minimally comes with a 255 limit in singular byte. 180 doesn't approach or divide into anything relevant, bitwise.

A field-length cap also generally allows you to utilise it. Even if it's storing strings with doubled length for the sake of Unicode accessibility since some 'characters' are double-wide, that's still allowing you to potentially use those characters to fill it out.

Quote

One could argue that an example of the occurrence makes the possibility more than "strictly theoretical". And the idea of "reasonable" is pretty subjective and can be disagreed on. Since we are talking about the reasonableness of time spent farming the standing, it is completely valid to disagree on both how that time is distributed (November to January or May to January) and the optimal farming method (long missions, short missions, or some combination of both).

It's still theoretical. Your 'example' doesn't mean anything more here than if you were the lucky turd who gets a legendary Arcane each and every time they run Eidolons. Reasonable expectation there exists somewhere within the standard deviations of the distribution, not on the leading fat tail. You did a nonstandard activity and/or had great circumstantial luck on when you happened to extract from missions, putting you on the extreme high end or the vague scatter-plot of unreliable glass enemy kills.

You can't disagree on the time distribution, because the cap wasn't stated that early on, and all precedent evidence gave no reason to believe that doing every task every day would be insufficient (considering the cap had to be extended multiple times). November is the absolute maximum timeframe as that is when the current cap was instantiated.

It's arguable whether it's the November cap-raise or the recent announcement which should declare reasonable timeframe of seeking the goal, but in either case, it's a greater or lesser extent of still being unreasonable.

Quote

If reaching the cap is not expected, then farming fissures becomes an unnecessary extra that some people choose to put on themselves. Then the farm being unpleasant is irrelevant to the success/failure of the system.

But the cap is expected. Not for everyone to reach, but to be realistically accessible to those who engage heavily with the system. Claiming otherwise is simply fallacy. "It is unrealistically accessible, therefore it is intended not to be reached" obviated the very real possibility that DE just threw it out there haphazardly and didn't realise it wasn't a sensible amount based on the possible task-driven standing we now know is available.

 

If the prestige cap was meant to remain irrelevant to actual accessibility, DE would at least set it so arbitrarily high from the start that nobody would expect to get there. Making it reachable and sequentially extending it with prolonging of seasonal task count confirms the intention to be a consistent accessibility which encourages tasks throughout.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

Good to see you so sure about that ;)

And gg you again skipped some things i said in the same comment, keep comment only things that make you look still in the right!

What exactly did you want me to reply to in that comment? If you insist, let us go through it line-by line:

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

Yeah but never by just doing non-endless missions

All we have is a snapshot of his activity over a couple of days. Yes, he did both endless and non-endless missions - what does that prove? That snapshot was taken during the "research" phase, not the "using the results to farm" phase, why do you think that the "using the results to farm" phase would contain the same mission distribution?

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

I also manage to get them spawning in open worlds very accurately even before I found that post.

ok. So you can predict the spawns in open worlds. That doesn't mean you can't predict them in normal missions.

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

I misinterpreted that kuva, yeah my bad on that one.

Yes you did, and yes it is! (I only included this one to make sure you don't accuse me of skipping something!)

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

No he clearly knows endless were better for that purpose, do you want me ask him if that's why to convince you?

Answered it the reply you are complaining about.

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

Yeah like I said you wanna prove all stuff wrong but when it's needed provide a hour proof worth of data, hell no you will do it.

I am so gentle i will do 2 hours of both type of runs to convince all of you sceptic ones.

At this point, this research would bring exactly zero value to me, so why would you expect me to spend hours of my time performing it? And then running back to you to show you my results (incl. the screenshots that you are demanding)?

You are the one advocating for change, so the burden of proof is on you!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

The absolute ending date is given to allow time to spend, rather than time to finish. And that's.. the recent announcement, not November's. It was never 'clear' how much grinding would be required, and the fact remains that grinding is implicitly unreliable and therefore should not be considered as expected in any way, shape or form

All valid points, but you are ultimately relying on the assumption that "reaching the cap" is the expected outcome. as you know, I've been arguing against exactly that assertion.

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

And you even admitted to degenerative Steel Path farming, didn't you? 

No, I admitted to farming enough SE to get the operator suit and the two Ephemeras. In practical terms, that turned into 6-7 survival runs of 2-3 hours each. Over the course of 8 months, this is statistically insignificant. I also farmed a lot of railjack, but mostly making sure my ship never gets boarded (hence minimising the number of glassed enemies I encountered).

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

None of this states why the cap wouldn't be a reachable figure.

The standing value is already an unsigned int at least, and even assuming rank value is stored not derived, that minimally comes with a 255 limit in singular byte. 180 doesn't approach or divide into anything relevant, bitwise.

A field-length cap also generally allows you to utilise it. Even if it's storing strings with doubled length for the sake of Unicode accessibility since some 'characters' are double-wide, that's still allowing you to potentially use those characters to fill it out.

None of it states the cap would be a reachable value either. It states that some cap needed to be set. And setting it to 255 would be odd for Warframe: everything in Warframe seems to want to be divisible by 30 (with some exceptions).

But every time a NW cap was reached by lots of people and that fact was reported on a DE stream, whoever was running the stream would always look really surprised to hear that. Furthermore, if DE were planning for people to reach the cap en masse, they would have been increasing it during the last big update before the fact, not haphazardly looking around for a good time to do so after the cap has been reached.

None of this is concrete proof, but it does lead me to believe that "players reaching the cap en masse" was never an intended situation.

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

If the prestige cap was meant to remain irrelevant to actual accessibility, DE would at least set it so arbitrarily high from the start that nobody would expect to get there. Making it reachable and sequentially extending it with prolonging of seasonal task count confirms the intention to be a consistent accessibility which encourages tasks throughout.

I suspect they thought they did: in season 1, nobody knew how much standing most players would grind for. So they though "let's give them TWICE as many ranks as we give prizes for" (i.e. 30 prestige ranks). That sort of worked, so the left it as is for season 2. Then Intermission 2 got away from them and when the cap was reached, they thought "OK, let's throw them another 30! That should be enough, shouldn't it?". And then Season 3 happened...

1 hour ago, TheLexiConArtist said:

Reasonable expectation there exists somewhere within the standard deviations of the distribution, not on the leading fat tail.

That's the thing: we don't really have a clue as to what the true distribution is! You have your anecdotal evidence, I have mine. But neither of us truly knows what the distribution is! Therefore our assertions as to what is and is not reasonable are effectively just subjective guesses!

And again, if reaching the cap was not the expected outcome - this too becomes irrelevant!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

And again, if reaching the cap was not the expected outcome - this too becomes irrelevant!

And if it was expected by an higher % of players everything YOU said will become irrelevant.

2 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

At this point, this research would bring exactly zero value to me, so why would you expect me to spend hours of my time performing it? And then running back to you to show you my results (incl. the screenshots that you are demanding)?

You are the one advocating for change, so the burden of proof is on you!

Sorry, but I can't let you say that, I am advocating and providing proofs, you don't!

Actually you trying "escape" that situation, 'cause you know we might be actully right about it and we were not saying nosense, so if you don't provide "opposite" proofs, which makes ours not valid, it means everything you said will be just words in this topic and smart people will automatically trust our point a lot more than your actual one.

And i am still here to understand why would you hate a situation were more people could've managed hit the rank this time, you can't feel superior if there are more people in that rank? the game economy would be completely be destroyed if people could buy more orokin potatoes and kuva? What's the thing you don't want to happen if DE pays attention to this post? 'Cause there has to be one reason if you are still there starting caring about this topic even more than me, OP of it.

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

Sorry, but I can't let you say that, I am advocating and providing proofs, you don't!

So far, the "proof" you are presenting consists of a survey you mismanaged and a spreadsheet you misinterpreted. Pretty sure that counts against you, not for you! At the end of the day, every time you attempt to provide actual data behind your assertions, that data (upon closer examination) actually argues against you! So why would I need to  add anything?

And what gave you the right to demand a higher standard of proof from others than what you are presenting to support your case? If you are asking for screenshots - what screenshots have YOU presented? If you are demanding 1-2-3 hour test runs - where is the data from the test runs YOU did?

36 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

And i am still here to understand why would you hate a situation were more people could've managed hit the rank this time, you can't feel superior if there are more people in that rank?

I don't hate that situation - I simply don't care whether it happens or not. What I do dislike are the people who, when failing to achieve something they want, demand that everyone else bends over backwards to still give them all the associated rewards!

41 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

Cause there has to be one reason if you are still there starting caring about this topic even more than me, OP of it.

Simple: COVID, Lockdown, I'm bored! And it's always funny to watch children rage!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

So far, the "proof" you are presenting consists of a survey you mismanaged and a spreadsheet you misinterpreted. Pretty sure that counts against you, not for you! At the end of the day, every time you attempt to provide actual data behind your assertions, that data (upon closer examination) actually argues against you! So why would I need to  add anything?

And what gave you the right to demand a higher standard of proof from others than what you are presenting to support your case? If you are asking for screenshots - what screenshots have YOU presented? If you are demanding 1-2-3 hour test runs - where is the data from the test runs YOU did?

I don't hate that situation - I simply don't care whether it happens or not. What I do dislike are the people who, when failing to achieve something they want, demand that everyone else bends over backwards to still give them all the associated rewards!

Simple: COVID, Lockdown, I'm bored! And it's always funny to watch children rage!

No all the data that confirms how much hours had to be spent if the glass fissures spawn were consistent and the data that right after confirms that it isn't 

Meaning the whole system revealed to be more tedious than it should just 'cause DE didn't some math before adding that last standing cap. 

That survey is still running, do you know how a survey works? It can still show some other people in the same average situation like me and the other 2 and the more people will appear there confirming this, the more you will learn you lost this argument, so let's reconsider that survey in the future not now that is useless to both our points! 

A 3 hour run is not enough data? Having a guy expert in those timers confirming they put a random value in it and all the examples showing how stupid this farm would have been if someone tried doing it on purpose are all STILL valid.

You are the child that doesn't want accept those, i did my job and i did it really good.

And why in 5 years playing as a completionist this is the first time this is happening? I did a bad job just now after all this time? You don't get this at all that's the thing i understood from all your comments. 

You just have that higher rank, and the will to want debunk everything said here without any opposite data and proofs that may prove this farm isn't insane and badly thought and executed. It created a random disparity with players who will be able buy more stuff from nova than others that played the same amount of time. This is not OK.

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

No all the data that confirms how much hours had to be spent if the glass fissures spawn were consistent and the data that right after confirms that it isn't 

Could you please rephrase this so that it makes some grammatical sense? I really don't understand what this sentence is supposed to say.

 

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

Meaning the whole system revealed to be more tedious than it should just 'cause DE didn't some math before adding that last standing cap.

"more tedious than it should" is a very subjective measurement. It would be good to quantify it in objective terms - otherwise it's just an unsubstantiated opinion. And the last part of your statement hinges on your assumptions about DE's intentions for the reachability of the cap - which is still under question.

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

That survey is still running, do you know how a survey works? It can still show some other people in the same average situation like me and the other 2 and the more people will appear there confirming this, the more you will learn you lost this argument, so let's reconsider that survey in the future not now that is useless to both our points! 

And how many additional answers has it gotten so far? Zero? Would that be because when the first respondent did not confirm your point of view, you immediately bombarded him with demands for detailed data? It's almost like you didn't want others to reply to the survey...

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

A 3 hour run is not enough data?

Where is that data? Whenever you ask me to provide data, you are demanding screenshots and detailed logs - should you not be holding yourself to the same standards? At least consider providing mission type/length and number of fissures encountered!

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

Having a guy expert in those timers confirming they put a random value in it and all the examples showing how stupid this farm would have been if someone tried doing it on purpose are all STILL valid.

As discussed above, that spreadsheet does not actually say what you are claiming it says. What that spreadsheet actually confirms is that you can predict the fissure timing to withing a 5 minute time slot (with fair reliability). This alone goes against a lot of the things you've been claiming (e.g. that means you can farm the fissures in non-endless mission as long as you make sure the missions cover the predicted 5 minute time slot)

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

You are the child that doesn't want accept those

Personal attacks! How novel...

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

i did my job and i did it really good.

Have you achieved the goal you've set yourself? Have you reached the cap yet? If not, then you haven't really done your job as well as you are claiming, have you?

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

And why in 5 years playing as a completionist this is the first time this is happening? I did a bad job just now after all this time? You don't get this at all that's the thing i understood from all your comments. 

It seems that the previous goals you've been setting yourself were easier to achieve. Or you simply didn't do as good a job on this one. If you want to play "as a completionist", you need to be prepared to do the required work. This time, you weren't.

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

You just have that higher rank, and the will to want debunk everything said here without any data and proofs this farm isn't insane and badly thought and executed.

So far, I've been able to use your own data to prove my point and debunk your false assumptions. Why would I need to seek out more of it?

1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

It created a random disparity with players than will be able buy more stuff from nova than others that played the same amount of time. This is not OK.

Randomness? In Warframe? Who would have thought!

In all seriousness, that's the nature of the game! Last time I had to run 15 radshares to get the rare part out of a relic, I didn't go cry about it on the forums - I just had a laugh at it and continued farming relics. Because that's the nature of the game! Sometimes RNG is your friend, sometimes it isn't. If you can't accept that - games like Warframe are not for you.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

It seems that the previous goals you've been setting yourself were easier to achieve. Or you simply didn't do as good a job on this one. If you want to play "as a completionist", you need to be prepared to do the required work. This time, you weren't.

Randomness? In Warframe? Who would have thought!

In all seriousness, that's the nature of the game! Last time I had to run 15 radshares to get the rare part out of a relic, I didn't go cry about it on the forums - I just had a laugh at it and continued farming relics. Because that's the nature of the game! Sometimes RNG is your friend, sometimes it isn't. If you can't accept that - games like Warframe are not for you.

So RNG just favourite you this time, YOU weren't prepared to do the required work either, so you have no rights to tell others they didn't

Those 2 points conflicts with each other.

27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

Could you please rephrase this so that it makes some grammatical sense? I really don't understand what this sentence is supposed to say.

"All the data that confirms how much hours had to be spent (that spreadsheet tests has all the timestamps) if the glass fissures spawn were consistent
It means without having the unluck to missing some due to extractions skipped, fissures that can't randomly spawn or 'cause they didn't programmed them to spawn every mission type; we don't know if they just forget to do it or made it on purpose...
"And the data that right after confirms that it isn't" (Like I said I will post a video comparing doing endless and non-endless missions in the same amount of time just to further prove that.

27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

As discussed above, that spreadsheet does not actually say what you are claiming it says. What that spreadsheet actually confirms is that you can predict the fissure timing to withing a 5 minute time slot (with fair reliability). This alone goes against a lot of the things you've been claiming (e.g. that means you can farm the fissures in non-endless mission as long as you make sure the missions cover the predicted 5 minute time slot)

I wasn't talking about the spreadsheet here but about what semlar told me on discord, 'cause he learned how that timer worked, so read carefully and stop distorcing whatever I say and make confusion please.

 

27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

And how many additional answers has it gotten so far? Zero? Would that be because when the first respondent did not confirm your point of view, you immediately bombarded him with demands for detailed data? It's almost like you didn't want others to reply to the survey...

I did more questions to be sure it was a valid subject, you even accused me of missing one more question you then made right after, like you said i did all that questions and you still weren't satisfied by them!

27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

Where is that data? Whenever you ask me to provide data, you are demanding screenshots and detailed logs - should you not be holding yourself to the same standards? At least consider providing mission type/length and number of fissures encountered!

Again both my orb vallis run and the spreadsheet (I can do a similar one myself so maybe you will shut up), gives an accurate esteem of time needed to invest which is too much even compared to farms with a drop chance of 0.1% (those would've took less time, a lot less...)

27 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

"more tedious than it should" is a very subjective measurement. It would be good to quantify it in objective terms - otherwise it's just an unsubstantiated opinion. And the last part of your statement hinges on your assumptions about DE's intentions for the reachability of the cap - which is still under question.

If there's a portion of unsatisfied player by this it means it wasn't so perfect like you wanna make it look like, everything can be better and improved if people points things out, is the best thing to do if you really like a game and really support developers not only with money

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

So RNG just favourite you this time, YOU weren't prepared to do the required work either, so you have no rights to tell others they didn't

It seems that I did the amount of work I needed to do - since I'm about to reach the cap (even though I never set that as a goal - you did). Or are you under the impression that the goal was to suffer the grind, not to get the standing?

And don't give me that "luck" nonsense - 8 months is long enough for the Strong Law of Large Numbers to kick in, negating most luck-based variance.

13 minutes ago, Radu10 said:
30 minutes ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

Could you please rephrase this so that it makes some grammatical sense? I really don't understand what this sentence is supposed to say.

"All the data that confirms how much hours had to be spent (that spreadsheet tests has all the timestamps) if the glass fissures spawn were consistent (it means without having the unluck to missing some due to extractions skipped spawn taht can randomly happen and mission type 'cause they didn't programmed them to spawn everywhere, we don't know if they just forget to do it or made it on purpose) and the data that right after confirms that it isn't (Like I said I will post a video comapring doing endless and non-endless missions in the same amount of time just to further prove that.

Try again. Punctuation and a sensible sentence structure might help.

14 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

I wasn't talking about the spreadsheet here but about what semlar told me on discord, 'cause he learned how that timer worked, so read carefully and stop distorcing whatever I say and make confusion please.

Yet the spreadsheet shows that (with a bit of calibration) you can predict the timetable for all the fissure over the next few days with reasonable accuracy.

This model may not be good enough for a timer you'd put on a website (it may require periodic manual re-calibration), but it is absolutely good enough to use in one's personal farming.

...at least that's what the data you introduced implies!

19 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

I did more questions to be sure it was a valid subject, you even accused me of missing one more question you then made right after, like you said i did all that questions and you still weren't satisfied by them!

we both know that's not what happened. And anyone who looks at the survey thread will figure it out!

23 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

Again both my orb vallis run and the spreadsheet (I can do a similar one myself so maybe you will shut up), gives an accurate esteem of time needed to invest which is too much even compared to farms with a drop chance of 0.1% (those would've took less time, a lot less...)

Have not seen the data from your own run (you don't seem to be too keen on presenting it), but the spreadsheet you did present suggests that you can semi-passively farm that standing while doing other things (with very minor adjustments). Actually, it states that you can efficiently gain NW standing while doing anything in-game except kuva survivals or the arenas - as long as you are willing to occasionally wait a couple minutes before starting the mission.

What other resource/item in Warframe can you efficiently farm while doing almost any in-game activity of your choosing?

30 minutes ago, Radu10 said:

If there's a portion of unsatisfied player by this it means it wasn't so perfect like you wanna make it look like, everything can be better and improved if people points things out, is the best thing to do if you really like a game and really support developers not only with money

Nothing in this world is perfect, and there will always be someone who is unhappy with the outcome. If said portion only consists of 2 (or even 3) players - then this portion is statistically insignificant and should be ignored. Because if you start making changes whenever 2 players (out of many thousands) cry about something, you will most surely drive the game into the gutter.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2021-01-13 at 4:05 PM, Radu10 said:

Nonono...

I went in orb vallis, and grabbed the timer he made based on those data (open this Nightwave Challenges - Semlar.com) and possible fluctuations, I went 5 minutes before it reaches 0 and stayed for other 10 minutes, got 0 glass detected fissures...

I wish it could've been so easy, only consistent way is to stay for hours in orb vallis/open world maps, but first spawn can happen in 1 minute or a lot more than 25 unfortunally.

And my point still remains why did they made this system like that this time?!

Can you imagine if they did something like that for something more important like idk:
for example getting a specific relic era mission; not always be able to do an axi mission for 25 minutes after last one appeared and you can't even predict exactly when next would pop up? Community would have been going crazy about it! Now just because it's happening for something a lot less "important" (even if it still counts for completionists), people who not really care about it, can't just say it's well done and logic, and fine just like that.

And you can't neglect this, people complained about farmings a lot easier and fair than this one, but they still reported it and DE sometimes even made it simpler for them, even if it wasn't that bad for me and wasn't a farm that "important" anyway.

You clearly dont get the system. It is based on the real life clock. A spawn can fluctuate between 22 - 26 minutes and at rare occasions it skips a rotation, pushing it to 44 - 56 minutes. You cant go in and wait for the timer to hit zero and then wait for another 10 minutes, since that just means you got a skip rotation and 10 minutes is never a widow of time that it can spawn in after a previous spawn or a skip. So you should have waited 26 minutes in that mission after you saw it was a skip i.e it not spawning when the timer reached zero, since I'm quite sure his zero on the timer is based on maximum minutes possible for a spawn to occur, so if that timer hits zero it means it is a skip.

And the reason this spawning system is a thing is because you dont need to use it to reach the main goal, it is a bonus and nothing else. It's has a supporting role to keep the acts the main focus of the NW series' 30 main ranks. So it is well made, logical and fine. If it was needed for the 30 first ranks it would be a different story.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2021-01-13 at 10:55 AM, Radu10 said:

Things never get better by themselves 

Forum and tickets serve this purpose, what you don't understand about this? 

Do you want me come under your post saying DE doesn't need address them 'cause i personally not have issues with whatever problem you may and may will report? 

That's the purpose of this forum? Make some issues harder to address by saying they are fine, even when people provided data proving how actually insane this is? 

 

You are generalizing something in a manner it should not be generalized. I did not understand your response at first because it had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Forums are there to allow discussion. If you find issue with any suggestion I might bring up, feel free to argue why you dislike it. 

Bug reports are basically the only thing on the forums that shouldn't have much discussion, and if there is, it might be to inform the OP that what they are reporting on isn't a bug or to support their claim that it is. All other threads are bound to have people disagreeing due to different tastes in what they like about warframe.

As the other poster mentioned you seem to move goal posts a lot, yet there are already a few defences against the arguements you put forth.

1. You seem to argue a lot that reaching 180 is too difficult. 

Many players have complained that reaching max rank is frustrating since standing gets wasted, so having max rank difficult to reach is good.

2. You seem to argue getting 180 takes too much time.

Time taken is 100% irrelevant if all you are looking for is a round number on your screen. It is your choice whether you want to reach it, as such it is up to you to decide whether it is worth the effort:

If it is worth the effort, do it and don't complain on the forums.

If it is not worth it, then don't do it and don't complain on the forums about something that you are/were unwilling to put the time into.

In both cases, you were able to do it and it was 100% your own decision whether or not to do it. Given the insignificance of a number combined with the fact that you wish to call yourself a completionist, there should be no reason for you to ask for more standing if you were perfectly capable of doing this yourself if you decided to put in the effort. 

3. You seem to keep referring to the spawns as random.

They were understood within a month of release. 25-25-25-50 minute intervals between them activating and previous posts suggest only 2-4 minutes variation from the pattern.

4. You seem to want anecdotal evidence of people reaching the cap.

Anecdotal evidence is irrelevant when it has already been shown to be mathematically possible,  the only thing anecdotal evidence would show is that there was someone like you who is a completionist and cared enough to reach the maximum. Any anecdotal evidence of people not reaching the cap when not trying to will not prove anything other than a lack of people trying. 

Edited by PhiThagRaid
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2021-01-13 at 9:30 PM, TheLexiConArtist said:

still theoretical. Your 'example' doesn't mean anything more here than if you were the lucky turd who gets a legendary Arcane each and every time they run Eidolons. Reasonable expectation there exists somewhere within the standard deviations of the distribution, not on the leading fat tail. You did a nonstandard activity and/or had great circumstantial luck on when you happened to extract from missions, putting you on the extreme high end or the vague scatter-plot of unreliable glass enemy kills.

If we are talking statistics here, wouldn't a "completionist" not have to care about the distribution at all? If it is possible,  a completionist can do it. 

(First off, NW fissures are way less random than in game drops, so this analogy does not fit in that regard)

I am somewhat insane with the goals I set for myself, so let's use my goals as a similar analogy:

I'd like to get one of each mod and arcane of each rank. Most people only need 1 of each of the max rank. In case of arcanes, the regular person would need 21 of each, yet for my own goal I need 21+15+10+6+3+1=56 of each. Would it make sense for me to ask DE to increase the drop rate of Orphix Venom's currency because I am wont be able to fill my collection before the event ends after I decided to never run a mission that went above 22k and decided to rather split my time trying to farm the mech mods by running the lower tier of the event where the mods drop faster, but the currency slower? (Assuming I will never sell the arcanes)

I think the above scenario is very comparable to OP's based on all his posts, yet, I believe that due to my goal being mainly a completionist's goal and I was unwilling to put in the effort to achieve my goal that it is not the system that needs to change, but I who should have put in the work to achieve my goal.

Back to the statistics you were mentioning, let's say I was trying to get my arcanes through Eidolon hunts and I got 50 of each legendary arcane, yet for 2 months hit a dry spell where I only got rare arcanes, as a completionist should I complain that the drop rate is too low or accept that a completionist challenge is bound to be more difficult than the developers intended the rest of the game to be?

(I have indeed previously asked on the forums for something that would improve my ability to achieve some of my insane goals, yet I have only asked for a method to obtain things which were otherwise only obtainable once. {For mods I believe this to be acceptable, since extra copies does not make any build stronger outright, but would only add more versatility})

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PhiThagRaid said:

3. You seem to keep referring to the spawns as random.

They were understood within a month of release. 25-25-25-50 minute intervals between them activating and previous posts suggest only 2-4 minutes variation from the pattern.

Just to confirm: I was hunting another lich today (my pointless goal is to get all lich weapons to 60%), caught a glass fissure at 21:05 UTC (I'm in the UK). So I decided to time my missions (none of them endless, none longer than 10 mins) to the 25 minute cycle. Was aiming to start a 10 minute mission 5 minutes before the expected fissure time (although could have used a smaller buffer). Was always able to do another 1-2 shorter mission in between the ones where I was looking for a fissure.

After the 21:05 one, caught glass fissures at 21:54, 22:19, 22:44 and 23:07. Was in-mission but did not see fissures around 21:30 or 23:32 (consistent with every 5th cycle skipping). Don't even try asking for screenshots though - dealing with them on the Switch is a pain, so I never bother.

But it is starting to look like the fissure times are rather predictable after all! Who would have guessed...

 

P.S.: NW Season 3 Rank 30+145, with 360 extra standing. Remaining tasks are expected to give another 3K(this week)+43.5K(next week). To reach the cap, need to farm another 3140 standing in 10 days.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PhiThagRaid said:

You are generalizing something in a manner it should not be generalized. I did not understand your response at first because it had nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Forums are there to allow discussion. If you find issue with any suggestion I might bring up, feel free to argue why you dislike it. 

Bug reports are basically the only thing on the forums that shouldn't have much discussion, and if there is, it might be to inform the OP that what they are reporting on isn't a bug or to support their claim that it is. All other threads are bound to have people disagreeing due to different tastes in what they like about warframe.

As the other poster mentioned you seem to move goal posts a lot, yet there are already a few defences against the arguements you put forth.

1. You seem to argue a lot that reaching 180 is too difficult. 

Many players have complained that reaching max rank is frustrating since standing gets wasted, so having max rank difficult to reach is good.

2. You seem to argue getting 180 takes too much time.

Time taken is 100% irrelevant if all you are looking for is a round number on your screen. It is your choice whether you want to reach it, as such it is up to you to decide whether it is worth the effort:

If it is worth the effort, do it and don't complain on the forums.

If it is not worth it, then don't do it and don't complain on the forums about something that you are/were unwilling to put the time into.

In both cases, you were able to do it and it was 100% your own decision whether or not to do it. Given the insignificance of a number combined with the fact that you wish to call yourself a completionist, there should be no reason for you to ask for more standing if you were perfectly capable of doing this yourself if you decided to put in the effort. 

3. You seem to keep referring to the spawns as random.

They were understood within a month of release. 25-25-25-50 minute intervals between them activating and previous posts suggest only 2-4 minutes variation from the pattern.

4. You seem to want anecdotal evidence of people reaching the cap.

Anecdotal evidence is irrelevant when it has already been shown to be mathematically possible,  the only thing anecdotal evidence would show is that there was someone like you who is a completionist and cared enough to reach the maximum. Any anecdotal evidence of people not reaching the cap when not trying to will not prove anything other than a lack of people trying. 

I agree about the forum functionality, it never hurts having different opinions on any subject.

Yes I say it's too difficult to reach, 'cause in S2, if someone wanted finish get the missing ranks, after doing all possible weekly acts, could just spam a bunch of zealot boss fight 'till he was done with it. Whoever hit that final cap did it on purpose, unless he simply done that boss over and over for fun.

Consider the gap there was actually 0 ranks (it lasted 15 weeks*43500=652500), so everyone who played the whole series hit the cap anyway and I agree it was way too easy, but if there was a 20 extra ranks to get like now it would be still possible to do if you wanted doing the zealot.

In this series you can spend 100 hours, probably even less to reach from 0 a rank of 160-164. (considering also the 5 story acts)
Considering you can at best get 900 standing in 3 hours, by never skipping a glass fissure during most of this 8 months (the more the time this lasted the more hard would be never miss a spawn), to get those last 16-20 ranks are required 667 total hours by never skipping a glass fissure, so realistically the time required is even bigger.

Ofc you can remove the 100-300 hours you may have played during this whole season, you still needed more than 300 hours to do it on purpose. Please list me a "farming" in this game more tedious than this considering the time needed. (maybe reaching MR 30, but you can do it in no limited time)

Last point yes I want to see other opinions from people who wanted hit the cap, 'cause I got accused to have been just bad at get it, and we all know it can't and it's not a reason.

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

It seems that I did the amount of work I needed to do - since I'm about to reach the cap (even though I never set that as a goal - you did). Or are you under the impression that the goal was to suffer the grind, not to get the standing?

And don't give me that "luck" nonsense - 8 months is long enough for the Strong Law of Large Numbers to kick in, negating most luck-based variance.

Sure is long enough... Go read the previous comment I made, so let's bring here those 667 hours (the best scenario) and let me do some math: this season like you said last a total of 259 days, to hit the cap you had to play 3 hours a day with never skipping even one! And not in just 60 days or 90, it's almost an entire year.

Realistically not many players would play so consinstent in such a long time, and I'm not even considering "by just playing" during those weeks all the potential skips of fissure spawns (in such a long lasting series they can be a lot), the total amount of hours can easily reach 800/900 hours range.

Also like I said in the other comment, it feels so stupid that 16/20 final ranks requires countless times the amount of time needed to earn 160 ranks, the progression is linear for those first 160 than it just becomes unfairly big with no given reason, they just didn't noticed is still my best guess.

21 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

Yet the spreadsheet shows that (with a bit of calibration) you can predict the timetable for all the fissure over the next few days with reasonable accuracy.

This model may not be good enough for a timer you'd put on a website (it may require periodic manual re-calibration), but it is absolutely good enough to use in one's personal farming.

...at least that's what the data you introduced implies!

It also confirms how much time is needed to never skipping a glass fissure by doing the math I did above. So it still favourites both of us.

21 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

we both know that's not what happened. And anyone who looks at the survey thread will figure it out!

Here I just have no idea what are you trying to imply here.
All I can say is I am not done with this topic, I will probably redo that survey, in the most clear and objectively way, under your directives.
So maybe you will stop find excuses and nitpicking about everything.

21 hours ago, (NSW)BalticBarbarian said:

Nothing in this world is perfect, and there will always be someone who is unhappy with the outcome. If said portion only consists of 2 (or even 3) players - then this portion is statistically insignificant and should be ignored. Because if you start making changes whenever 2 players (out of many thousands) cry about something, you will most surely drive the game into the gutter.

You are such a young player :) (you started too late to aknowledge game community and how DE treats them, don't try the victim role again) :)

Go tell this to Conclave players, I will go get pop-corns and be ready to enjoy the show!

"Mr. I like imperfect things and nobody has to move a thinger to try change them"

 

Edited by Radu10
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, SneakyErvin said:

You clearly dont get the system. It is based on the real life clock. A spawn can fluctuate between 22 - 26 minutes and at rare occasions it skips a rotation, pushing it to 44 - 56 minutes. You cant go in and wait for the timer to hit zero and then wait for another 10 minutes, since that just means you got a skip rotation and 10 minutes is never a widow of time that it can spawn in after a previous spawn or a skip. So you should have waited 26 minutes in that mission after you saw it was a skip i.e it not spawning when the timer reached zero, since I'm quite sure his zero on the timer is based on maximum minutes possible for a spawn to occur, so if that timer hits zero it means it is a skip.

And the reason this spawning system is a thing is because you dont need to use it to reach the main goal, it is a bonus and nothing else. It's has a supporting role to keep the acts the main focus of the NW series' 30 main ranks. So it is well made, logical and fine. If it was needed for the 30 first ranks it would be a different story.

Like I said in the comment above this one, this series linear progression isn't linear anymore after rank 160-164, and you had to spend more time for those last ranks than the whole series 'till that point.

That's why the glass fissure system wasn't well made, they had to keep the ranking up more linear in terms of time needed to get each rank up.
But if those final ranks required still a bit more than usual I would't complained about it, but now it's just way too much. 

A middle ground in terms of hours needed by either having a better standing gain or more frequently glass fissures spawning, like every 5/10 minutes, would've been perfect for everyone.

It's not a black or white situation.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Radu10 said:

let me do some math: this season like you said last a total of 259 days, to hit the cap you had to play 3 hours a day with never skipping even one! And not in just 60 days or 90, it's almost an entire year.

That is not how averages work! You can play less time one day and more time on another day while still getting the same average. And I did say a few pages ago that I estimate I've been playing an average of 4.5 hours per day. That does not mean that I played exactly 4.5 hour every day - I played less on some days and more on others.

If you want to do the maths - let's be precise about it:

The season lasts (according to you) for 259 days or 37 weeks. At 43500 guaranteed standing a weeks (tasks), this is 1609500 standing. Adding the 7K standing we got for each of the 5 completed crime scenes (you did complete the crime scenes?), we are at 1644500 guaranteed standing, with 155500 left to obtain. Dividing by 259, that's 600 standing (or 4 fissures) that you need to catch per day (on average).

As I have demonstrated yesterday, you can easily catch 5 fissures in 2 hours and 2 minutes (say 2.5 hours) while doing other things (with minimal adjustments). Note that these are not even in-mission hours - these are in-game hours. And don't start making excuses about "luck" - as stated yesterday, I was predicting exactly what missions I'd be encountering a fissure every time (except the skip cycles - which too are predictable once you encounter the first one of them).

Now back to yourself: you said that you've been playing for an average of 4 hours a day over the course of this season - which is significantly more than the 2.5 hour figure established above. Therefore, you should have been getting significantly more standing than you did - even accounting for some of your playtime being ineligible for fissure (kuva survivals, the Index, etc.).

So stop blaming everyone else and try to understand why whatever you were doing was so inefficient!

2 hours ago, Radu10 said:

Realistically not many players would play so consinstent in such a long time,

Not many players call themselves "completionists" and set themselves the goal of reaching this standing cap! If you do call yourself a completionist and did set yourself that goal - then be prepared to put in more effort than those who don't and/or didn't.

2 hours ago, Radu10 said:

t also confirms how much time is needed to never skipping a glass fissure by doing the math I did above.

If you want to be a completionist - be prepared to put in the time!

2 hours ago, Radu10 said:

Go tell this to Conclave players, I will go get pop-corns and be ready to enjoy the show!

I am one of those Conclave players! I don't play as much of it as I would like, but I do really enjoy it when I'm able to find a match!

And if you actually have a look in the Conclave section of this forum, you'll notice that quite a lot of the threads are about how to make it more popular. So the focus is not on asking DE to fix something very few people care about - the focus is on trying to make the game mode more popular so that more of the playerbase could enjoy it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Radu10 said:

You are such a young player :) (you started too late to aknowledge game community and how DE treats them, don't try the victim role again) :)

I may have less playtime in warframe than some - but that does not mean anything as far as the argument in this thread goes! Yet you seem to be bringing up the date I started playing warframe every time your arguments fail on the merits. Why would that be?

Or are you talking about my age? Do you feel more comfortable if you assume that someone who has better arguments (as well as spelling and grammar) than you is younger?

And as far as DE treating their community goes - they are doing OK. Sure, they do have their faults and missteps. And sure, they have made (and are making) many rather odd decisions. But overall, by modern standards, they are pretty decent. Compared to something like Activison or EA, DE are pretty much angels!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Radu10 said:

Like I said in the comment above this one, this series linear progression isn't linear anymore after rank 160-164, and you had to spend more time for those last ranks than the whole series 'till that point.

That's why the glass fissure system wasn't well made, they had to keep the ranking up more linear in terms of time needed to get each rank up.
But if those final ranks required still a bit more than usual I would't complained about it, but now it's just way too much. 

A middle ground in terms of hours needed by either having a better standing gain or more frequently glass fissures spawning, like every 5/10 minutes, would've been perfect for everyone.

It's not a black or white situation.

 

No that doesnt mean the glass fissure system is bad, it means it works as it should and the ranks beyond 164 were added in order to simply cover the series to the end for those that still want to grind. without DE having to spend pointless time to nudge the ranks in perfectly to line up with the end date. It is also linear, since you still need 10k per rank, the ways to obtain those 10k are just different but should have also been obtained over time during the whole season. By your own logic one could say the glass fissure system is far superior to the systems of other nightwaves since it allowed for a total of 180 extra ranks to be added as opposed to the previous max of 90.

And no a middle ground wouldnt have been perfect for everyone since it would still mean development time wasted on something that ends half a month later and where the core gameplay has already ended 2 months earlier more or less. Which in turn would mean more waiting time for other content pieces for those that have no interest in prestige at all or care nothing for reaching 180. It would also not be perfect for the whole bunch of people that strongly dislike glass fissures spawning once they're done with the basic NW ranks.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...