Chris new changes about decay.. death.. 10000 xp for newbies...

It went in over a year ago in full force, but it was bugged. By the time it was fixed, he decided to roll it out a little bit at a time to get people's "feet wet". They are/have put in numerous other features and polish and bug fixes since decay began to officially roll out about half a year ago, and continue to do so. It is a thing to give a soft barrier to a soft cap so that it isnt a hard cap.

 

I cant help that this is an exaggeration as i am an endgame player and lose nowhere near hours of XP. This only seems to be the case if you have severely pushed the soft cap past end-game for a marginally better character, or in some cases a MUCH better character, which i agree SHOULD be very difficult to push any further.

At max decay, i lose maybe 60-70k XP from my pool. I die fairly regularly and still continue to advance skills, some well beyond 100. This is enough to make me wary of death but not prevent me from taking risks. Last i checked a few months ago i was level 80, and that is endgame level.

The only people losing "hours" of XP are gonna be folks who raced to be the highest level early on, and even with that, youd have to have a crap ton of GMs to be affected by that.

It's the same people on the forum complaining about it so loudly anyways. And probably these same peopel who are willing to grab and shake a newbie screaming "dont die or youll lose HOURS of training!" Which (for NEWBIES) will not happen anyways, since it does nto happen once you first reach the end-game

 

Last release, some people complained of losing over a million XP. At 300k an hour, that is four hours. It is a lot better now but that is always subject to change.

 

That is far beyond endgame level and only applicable to the few highest level people in the game EDIT: IF they claim thats a single death. If its over multiple deaths, they would have had to die once every 24 hours without having gone out to kill anything (jumping off the roof perhaps?).. I am joe averageplayer who doesnt minmax his character and jsut plays the game. I am at endgame, and i lose 60k if i try hard to, which takes me an annoying 20 mins or so to earn back, but i rarely try to eearn it back. Usually it come sback naturally while i do stuff.

 

https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/forum/index.php?threads/xp-loss-on-death.88702/

 

Decay as a penalty is the only thing he hasn't moved on . Literally everything else in the game was altered based on player feedback.

 

i am 80ish and i lose 60-70k. 98 is waaaaaaaaaaaay beyond 80(Alot bigger gap that 60-80) , and 80 is a decent endgame level.

 

They should start a Poll to check how many ppl like the current Decay System. Casual like it, active players hate it. I thought Porta listen to the ppl, but it looks like Chris does what he wants

 

They do what they want, and literally all of those things have been change din soem way base don player feedback.

 

Yup, just throwing that link out for reference. I think decay was changed again this release to not hit as hard on ur 1st death in 24 hrs.

"Second, to soften the blow on deaths and spread out the cost a bit, each death will only apply half the current decay amount. So if you haven't played in a day (or a week) you would have 24 hours built up. First death will apply 12 hours of decay leaving 12 hours of decay. Second death will apply 6 hours and leave 6 hours. Third death, 3 hours...etc"

I can see how this could confuse players.

 

Sorry i was in argue-mode due to the nature of this thread I just talked to a coupel of peopel who hate decay and are around my level (not super level grinders). Both of thier situations were that they die WITHOUT doign anything between deaths, and gradually lose thier XP that way, which can be solved by the daily XP boost.

 

Polls aren't reliable sources of information in small crowds that may or may not contain enough qualified individuals. Qualified, in this case, means people that play the game regularly or recently in something similar to its current state. I haven't played for more than fifteen minutes, maybe once a month, since persistence/launch last summer. I'm sure I'm not the only person regularly visiting these boards hoping to like what they see, while not bothering to log into the game.

This community is full of passionate people. Some want a new RPG home. Some see the potential for a cool system or two that'll give them experiences they enjoy. Some are evaluating the RMT (real money trading) potential for the game (hint, there is almost none - I'm referring to currency farming/selling here, not account/pledge selling.) And some people are just defending their investment, or needing an outlet to vent buyer's remorse.

Whatever the reason, we don't need a poll to tell us that next to graphics, combat is likely the next biggest problem this game faces in both perception and execution. Almost every single person from the gaming communities I'm a part of left because the game looks dated (especially the UI) and/or because combat sucked, made little sense, and was going through FAR too much iteration and potential exploitation for a game that effectively launched almost a year ago.

That was a long-winded rant saying that asking the players what they want on a large scale that only allows for a sentence or two of input via a poll/vote isn't helpful unless the decision(s) being made are simple and clean cut - which none of the problems this game has are.

 

@TheBalance Chris actually gave a survey to the playerbase a couple of months ago, where two of the questions included "What do you hate most about combat" and "what do you like most about combat", as this quarter was originally going to focus heavily on combat balancing.

This was one of the big factors in the addition of the Heat system for locked skills.

 

I check these forums a few times a week. First I've heard about that survey - either way, not too interested in the results or reasoning behind it for the same reasons I stated above. Asking random folks what they want with minimum potential input does not provide useful data.

People often say one thing, and do/think something else. My dad always said, "Don't tell me, show me." Doesn't apply 100% to this scenario, but it's applicable to the broad strokes here. Are the changes bringing people back into the game regularly, and keeping them here for more than a week? If yes, you know you got it right. If no, try again.

 

They just need a better poll as the last time. Based on the Account data, to check online time or hours played. Not that lazy Google s**t.
If they stop listen to the ppl they also could "sell" the game to EA again

Login once a day for 1 min doesnt bring the players back. They just get the daily and log out again.

 

@TheBalance https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...sed-major-combat-system-change-for-r42.88681/ is the thread that came after the combat survey was taken. Those "40%" he throws out at the beginning are from that survey which. The number of people who took the survey were slightly above the number of people who log in from steam on average at the time.
https://www.shroudoftheavatar.com/f...e-able-to-view-the-results.87744/#post-799678

He posts results here includign number of people who took the survey and thier opinions, and how they intend to handle them. Just incase ya feel a itch to look

 

I've heard EA already tried and port refused. They continue to listen to and take feedback from the player base as they always have. To say they do not is making a false statment.

 

Wowza, where did you hear this Arkah?

 

....... except decay only happens when you are active! When you are exercising! Perversely decay actually leads people to exercise LESS because they don't want to die and lose XP. The more I sit on my ass in SOTA, the more XP I keep. It's insane.

 

The logic is retarded re decay. Why is there no decay in PVP? Simply because they want to encourage people to PVP and challenge themselves. Removing decay in PVP is used as bait to draw people to the activity. Thus one must believe that if the same logic applies, decay to death in PVE must be the opposite. This discourages people from challenging themselves. The logic is promote PVP activity and retard PVE activity. Why don't we want all people to enjoy challenging play? Thus the conclusion that either the devs want us to PVP as the desired activity or if not then the logic is retarded and does not make sense.