Death Decay Poll

I gave my opinion. I do not feel i need to disect it. I am not a developer so i cannot say about other ways although for 4 years i have brought out hundreds of posts on topics such as these only to be ignored by the devs anyway. I find it pointless to do it anymore.

 

I'm sorry if you feel like my statements are "absolutes" - I'm happy to concede that this is the way that I personally feel and/or many of the folks I regularly game with, to quantify the "we". I of course cede that many people think its "fine" - although I quantify that by saying that most people who think its fine, I have later found, are losing <50k xp from a death, and are not feeling the full pain of the system in its current implementation.

With regards to the implication of forced activities though, while we could argue semantics and say that no, the game isn't taking control of my character and forcing it to do anything or not do anything, players are certainly being funneled toward certain activities due in no small part to this system; its implementation is affecting the overall game mechanics and player culture.

I'll give an example of what I mean by culture:
Before decay:
Anyone want to go help kill the xx boss for my quest?
A boatload of people came along, of various levels of power and experience, just for something neat to do even though it wouldn't be personally rewarding.
After decay:
Anyone want to go help kill the xx boss for my quest?
*Silence* *crickets* Eventually, a high level player who can solo said boss will go help the person.

It is very noticeable that (some) people are less likely to spend their game time, which often times is limited, engaging in activities which carry risk of death (grind tax) with no tangible benefit. Sure, some true altruists will still do this, but it seems that the system itself is in this instance, discouraging players from helping each other. It is the same thing when grinding experience. For most folks, xp grinding is a solo activity due to mob density being limited, adding additional people to the party doesn't really ramp up kill speed but decreases experience per person. As a result, if I know I have to grind so many hours to pay back a death, I'm less likely to let people tag along with me, whereas before, I'd drag people around all the time, letting them see new places they can't really solo yet, or see a dragon fight, or whatever.
I personally feel that the fact that this no longer really happens, due to xp loss on death, is detrimental to the game culture as a whole.

For many players (I refrain here from saying "we"), learning and wiping to challenging content is part of the fun of playing an MMO, and decay system has robbed many players of this experience by adding a "grind tax" to all but the most trivial of activities which makes the risk far far outweigh any potential rewards and, for some players, kills the enjoyment of the experience knowing that the next several days are going to be spent grinding trivial content just to get back where they were.

I've adjusted my original post to hopefully address some of this.

 

I don´t like it, just playing a few hours a week and when I die, I have to play very long to get back to where I was before death. Doubles if I die two times. So it is one step up, two down.

 

Oh, yes I mean the validity of these kinds of polls is pretty low, for the reasons you mentioned. I just meant would it settle the issue in the minds of those polling. Yeah- I mean it seems like sending out a survey to all backers to solicit feedback outside from the forum would be a good move all around. I would hope it covered much more than simply skill decay though!

I still like decay, for the reasons mentioned above. My view probably hasn't changed much either, except perhaps I hope that my statement of it has become more refined. However- if decay were removed I don't think I'd ragequit or not play the game anymore.

It's funny though... don't you think? Worrying about "wasted time" in a game. I mean... some would say that playing games are "wasted time" where one could be being more productive IRL. I'm not sure I'd want to know how much of my life I've spent playing games!

 

I see most people on this thread looking at it as 3-4 GM skills rather than looking at this long term.

Forget about how many GM's you have or are aiming for but apply the numbers after you have been playing for 3-4 years (which many of us are hoping to do). With diminishing returns on skills all that skill decay is doing is effectively making us feel the need to "self cap" our characters.

A few pages back someone mentioned they lose 55k xp and have about 50 million spent which doesn't look back. Looking long term, taking a skill such as Glancing blow from level 164 to 165 will cost you 54m xp for that skill alone. What do you get for that level? +0.05% avoidance? The loss of that xp isn't bad when starting out because skills are bottom loaded, (i.e. you get more bonus the lower it is so 10-20 might give you 10%, 20-30 another 9% etc) in a few years time people will start to lose millions on death as a punishment for playing a long time. Unless they want to cap themselves into mediocrity.

The game was initially said to have no skill cap and level what you want but with decay its putting a system in place that actively punishes people for playing a long time and taking advantage of one of the games initial selling points.

 

and that need to be as long as there are PVP Scenes - and imho it need to be far more punishing or additonal diminshing returns or decays.

 

This has nothing to do with PVP.
I has to do with seeing progression, regardless how little actual benefit that 0.05% gives you, you always feel that you are getting better and being rewarded for playing a long time.

 

Not really. I hate the idea of balancing things around PvP, personally. If someone's spent 5 years playing the game and gearing themselves up, I think they fully deserve the 2% "bonus" they get to their skills - even in PvP. From what I have seen, player "skill" (not skills, but like, buttonmashing capability), gear, and deckbuilding play far bigger roles than having skills lightly higher. The small "edge" that investing YEARS into a game gives you, I think, is fully deserved. Again, you have to think long term. I don't think you want people who have been playing the game a week to be able to compete with people who have been here years. The years of time someone invests should mean something, otherwise what incentive do you have to invest those years?

There are other ways to address this also. If PvP is the only reason to have these limits, then add some sort of PvP scaling system like many other games do, to keep a balance. I really don't think this is necessary though. The benefits beyond level 100 are fractions of a percent.

 

not a week but exactly this!

edit: i else doubt that we can get more peopled involved into pvp over time.

 

I'm good with a cap, being punished and forced to regrind is just distasteful.

 

Progression in WoW is about patience more than anything, but it still has it rewards. Every time a new expansion comes out, all that progress becomes instantly meaningless. That game is painfully redundant and boring as a direct result. If decay has the side effect of making it possible to provide new content without new level races with every episode, it would be very welcome indeed.

That said, I am in for the fear of death. I don't need any other motivation.

 

I think I should clarify that I'm not against there being a death penalty - I think death should be meaningful.
I'm also not against some sort of skill cap or extreme diminishing returns (such as we have now)
I don't really like the idea of going backwards, but I could even embrace it if it were implemented differently.

My main issue is linking it to dying, because the people who are struggling/dying more often really don't need another penalty slapped on.
By linking it to dying, you discourage risk-taking, or attempting anything challenging. If I want to see if I'm strong enough to do something yet, I wait until the QA build, I don't risk my xp on live. I think the fact that myself (and others) do this is indicative that there's something wrong with the system.

"Risk Vs. Reward" has been shouted from the mountaintops since these forums began, but the risk of catastrophic xp loss far outweighs any potential reward you get for doing harder content. Boss loot is still pretty horrible, a group of us did bosses for 8 hours the other day without a single decent drop and the curing salt and wax that the dragon drops now doesn't really make the loot any less "meh." Unless you can faceroll it solo in 3 minutes or less, its just not worth it.

I think the problem is here is that skill decay is trying to do too many things.
1. Its trying to serve as a death penalty
2. Its trying to cap high level players
3. Its trying to add "risk vs. reward"

The realty is,
1. Its making the death penalty so bad many players don't want to do anything that has the slightest chance of getting them killed.
2. Its not capping high level players; its annoying to them yes, but when you grind 10+ hours a day every day its just a speedbump.
3. The risk is too high for potential rewards as things stand now. I can get more exp/money per hour grinding green stuff with little chance of killing me even if I go afk, than doing any zone that can potentially kill me.

I'd much prefer they just cap skills at 120 if there's a concern about balance, than put us through the 1 step forward, 2 steps back routine.


Think about it this way - a long term view.

Right now, I'm adventure level 101. I have played since persistence. 90% of my time has been spent mining and getting incidental xp doing so. I never did control points or any sort of xp"group". But I have played about 10-12 hours per day since persistence doing my thing. I took a month off when decay was introduced because it made things really awful, and the person I used to run around with most quit playing the game because RL concerns often pulled her away from the keyboard and she'd come back dead and having lost hours of work. Sometimes I miss a day where I don't log in for RL reasons. But I'm really really active, I just don't really enjoy "grinding xp". I'm usually grinding cash, which is a whole different issue. In the event that I do grind xp, its a one-off event for an evening or two, I don't have the attention span to do it day in, day out. In 11 months since persistence with my playstyle habits I have gotten this far, and when I die it sets me back 2-3 evenings worth of xp progress. This is frustrating for me, so I don't do anything that can potentially get me killed.

Now, in 11 months I have gotten this far and when I die I lose a few days. For someone who plays more casually than I do, it may take them 2, 3 years to get this far, yeah? In which case when they die, the setback is going to be that much worse. If you're losing 50k xp now because you're adventure level 80ish, it may not seem like a big deal. And it isn't. But if you keep playing at the same rate, earning a few hundred K a day, eventually you're going to reach the point where you die and lose a week's worth. And I really think, that is horrible.

I don't think robbing us of progress is necessary; I think the diminishing returns already does more than enough to limit high level players and that additional penalties aren't slowing them down. If you want a cap to design content around, then put a cap. If you want people to specialize, then give incentives for specialization. What we've got is a system that encourages players to branch out and level passives from all over the place and then punishes us for doing so by increased xp loss. I don't think this is sustainable long term, as the average player level rises, more and more people will have taken longer to "get there" - to the point at which decay just ruins the game experience. And the longer it takes you to get there, the worse it will sting when you arrive.

 

Bingo, mate

The fact that is also serves a system that rewards skills, puts in a soft cap and actually helps bridge the gap between the more casual player and the hardcore is cherry on top. Guess i'm the odd one out here but I do LOVE the system!

 

Curious about what level you are, what zones you fight in and the exact amount of XP you lose per death. Without the numbers, claims are meaningless.

 

Really? Catastrophic? Drama much? lol

I'm lvl 102 and lose <100k XP on death, far from catastrophic and into the minor annoyance territory. Adjectives like this are pretty meaningless without information : what level are you, what zone do you fight in and how much do you lose per death. Then we can see what "catastrophic" is to you.

 

Thanks for clarifying, and for rephrasing some of what you previously wrote. This makes it easier for me to navigate the conversation.

Well you have said a lot! But I think this kind of encapsulates it:

Right now, Jaan is adventure level 72. She uses Necklace of Civility and Spirituality buff to bring that up to 80. She is a Druidess, and so will gather just about any resource she sees. However, she rarely goes mining per se. One time early on, I payed for her to spend an hour in a CP while it was still possible to stand outside the gate. (I would have brought her in, but the escort insisted she stay outside.) The hour was worth about 1 million xp, and so that's how much she ever got out of the control point situation before it got fixed. I have played about 10-12 hours per week since persistence, with having taken several weeks off for travel. Most of the players I have known since persistence (that have played with any sort of regularity) are at or above Jaan's level. So I think it is far to say that she represents pretty much the "bottom of the barrel" in terms of how far a regular player could have come in the last year or so.

Now for me... and especially with the recent changes to decay, I must say I really don't think about it one tiny bit. It is totally not on my radar in terms of thinking about whether or not it would be worth it for me to play. I guess the difference for me is that, with Jaan being at the bottom of the barrel, pretty much anybody she groups with is an "xp group". So really at the end of the day, if I am playing solo I am not too concerned about whether or not I am minmaxing xp gains since I know the next time I go out adventuring with others, Jaan is going to earn way more xp than she ever does alone.

She is also going to die a lot, and so pretty much incurs whatever the "max" amount of loss there could possibly be for her. I see it as the cost of doing business. *shrug*

So what is the difference between us? Looks like a few major things:

1. It sounds like you might just be a better player than me to begin with.
2. You have way more time available to play than I do.
3. You are a member of a guild full of high AL players, who share information and resources

This is all fine with me, of course!

But where I am trying to go with this I suppose is in two directions simultaneously.

One is the argument where decay is too harmful to new players, or those further back in the growth curve. I just think this is baloney, because I am the player back there in the growth curve and, trust me, it doesn't harm me in the way people say it does. If there is somebody out there with a character at Jaan's level that is adamantly against decay as it currently stands I would definitely like to hear their perspective.

On the other side is the argument about why it is harmful to the elite players, giving them no incentive to play. I am more inclined to see the reason in this position, and thus align myself with your perspective. However what prevents me from getting on board with this is the simple fact that you have spent something like 5 times as many hours in me over a year into a game that is still in pre-Release.

I mean- you said it yourself your AL is over 100. And the game won't be launched for another six months! Allowing players to have characters leveled beyond the scope of Episode 1 before it even launches doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Potentially catastrophic even.

Have you considered trying out something just totally different from what you normally do between now and Launch time? I mean- if you just kept leveling at the pace you have been another 6 months I am afraid that your character would become something truly unattainable by almost any new player who isn't willing to totally twink out their main. Whereas now it sounds like it is still barely attainable within the time frame of a single episode (approx. 18 months).

Would you feel less constrained if you had more character slots, perhaps?

 

Considering im Adv level 92, and my death decay is currently 144k...
And it doubles at 100...
I want to point out that your posting misleading information as well.

The split of the exp loss per death being 1/2 then 1/2 etc etc is and was a huge change in the right direction. Maybe that is whats causing some confusion?

Maybe your on enough, die regularily enough your never at max decay?
Maybe for people who dont want to play 5-6 hours at a time, coming back on and loosing 150-200k, and having to spend half hour - 45 minutes in their farming zone just to RECOUP, isnt appealing?

Like ive said in other threads.
If i didnt play SOTA 2-4 hours each time i turned it on, i wouldnt play at all.

Now i just dont turn it on as often.

 

I think this would make for a fascinating test case. From this table we know that the difference in xp between 92 and 102 is 93,015,007 xp.

But how much decay there is really depends on the distribution of that xp within the skills. Would you both mind sharing how many skills you have:

Under 40
41 - 80
81 - 100
101+

 

Losing 150-200k xp for the "first half" of my penalty is pretty much everything I'd expect to earn in an average evening of play, gone. I think that's pretty crappy. I could see a small setback, or a 10 minute timeout, or even gear taking additional damage when you go splat, as viable disincentives to die. But negating my entire play session, I feel is excessive.

@Jaanelle DeJure
I don't think extra character slots really would mitigate this, as all characters really need to invest a reasonable amount in widespread passive abilities to be self sufficient. While its certainly not *required*, most folks are going to want to get any helpful passives to the level 80ish range. And stop there, because the diminishing returns means you'll invest twice as much xp as you already have for very very minimal benefit. I actually do have an alt on a second account that I toy around with but my experience on said alt is not indicative of the "new player experience" when she's running around with +14 bling and gets dragged around by myself or my friends to places she's got no business being to get some starting pool. Even despite that though, I don't find the death penalty on the alt to be that bad. I think she's around level 70 or so and if she dies, its a drop in the bucket. No big deal whatsoever. I don't think its new players so much that decay hurts, it really doesn't start to sting until you get into the lvl 90+ range, and the new change so your first "woopsie" only takes half is a huge step in the right direction. I still think the loss is unnecessary however. It seems to me that either a) the amount lost is so trivial it doesn't affect you or b) the amount lost is so large that it makes you change the way you play (ie take no risks). Depending of course on your level of progression.

Whether there is decay or not, people are going to level. People are going to grind. Those with the inclination to mainline caffeine (someone on the forums said this once, and I love the image of it) are going to grind and level up despite decay. As you say, we're in pre-release, and there are people who have over 6-7 times my total xp already and likely well beyond this. This system is not serving to stop them, and because of this and the cultural changes that occur as a side effect of it, I think the system needs to be, if not scrapped, at least re-evaluated. I think many folks like me don't have a problem investing time into a game - years even. What I do have a problem with is wasting my time acquiring experience that just "disappears" - and I don't see that being one of the bullet points on the free trial ads ..."Play Sota! Kill monsters, gain xp...and then lose it! Because reasons."

 

I will, but i was under impression that its based on total EXP, and skills are irrelivent?