RNG-itis: a cure without (notably) changing probability
|
the problem (or reason why people complain about) with RNG is that 1000 fusing is no different than 1 fusing:
say u have a 0.001% chance to roll a 6L per fusing you use 1 fusing your chance is 0.001% for desired outcome you use 2 fusings your change is still 0.001% you use 1000 fusing guess what.. your chance is still 0.001% the amount of fusing spent actually wont increase the chances of getting the desired outcome. RNG sucks, long term or not. the only time its good is that extremely rare occasion where u get what you need for very little effort "note RARE" personally i agree with the OP. a system that takes into account that you have just spent 1000 fusing without a result. should then proceed to change that 0.001% into a 1% chance for the next attempt and then be reset back to 0.001% Tho 1000 is a bit stupid to begin with more like 100 e: dont forget the time and effort spent in getting so many fusing to begin with, its not like they drop by the bag full... i have had 2 5l drops and maybe if im lucky 200 fusing. that is 200 if i used all my alterations \ jewelers to make fusing but less than 100 actually drop as raw fusing.. why does there seem to be less chance in crafting the links than finding a drop? Last edited by Srafty#2116 on Mar 17, 2013, 2:37:21 AM
|
|
" Well, 0.0001 is a too low number for fusing, I don't want to bother with calculations but if im right from the top of my head you go around 1 to 10 every time you fuse with a higher chance towards the lower connected sockets. But considering fusing orbs feel really rare then yeah it makes it 0.001% to even try the fusing and then 1 to 100 to even succeed (with the high chance towards lower links part). So what I really see in all of this is the fact that the time you spent on the game is not rewarded in any way. For some gaming industry gaming information and to just learn more about games check out
http://extra-credits.net/ - One of the most informative websites about the gaming industry. |
|
|
Designing ARPG's (and several other types of games, such as roguelikes) seems to be a balance between how much you allow outcomes to be based on player skill and knowledge, and how much you allow outcomes to be based on RNG. In my opinion, at the moment POE is biased way too far in favour of RNG, mainly with regard to socket colours and links. Something which is so fundamental to your build and playstyle should not be so heavily based on RNG.
Having said that, I'm not sure how to fix this. I don't really feel qualified to evaluate the entropy based solutions suggested so far. Someone else suggested a solution which would make fusing and chrom orbs far rarer but have a far more certain outcome. I don't think this would work as it would make getting 3L and 4L's impossible to get during the midgame (and I think these start to become necessary during the midgame). |
|
|
In my opinion, the solution I like the best regarding the fusings/slots problem is to make a vendor that increases the amount of fusings/slots on an item (separate vendor for fusings and separate for slots). The vendors would take jewellers/fusings as a form of payment to upgrade the slots/links to an item. How much they take would depend on how strong the item is
|
|
" " Or if you already made a diablo clone why not use the horadric cube crafting system and get rid of the "lazy design RNG"? place a certain skill gem with certain currency item and item you want to craft/edit in a certain patern (think minecraft). And about the 'but the market prices' comments about items losing/gaining value - game doesnt have an auction house therefore global market is never the same and in any case with any changes it will one way or another fix itself. that how those things work For some gaming industry gaming information and to just learn more about games check out http://extra-credits.net/ - One of the most informative websites about the gaming industry. Last edited by Kirazor#5480 on Mar 17, 2013, 3:47:46 AM
|
|
|
I think the risk of losing a valuable orb to crafting is enough.
when you apply an orb to an item, there needs to be a chance to apply added bonuses or no bonuses (effectively wasting an orb). the current system where there is a high chance to actually ruin the item - isn't fair, and in many cases causes a situation in which that character becomes unplayable. also, the bonus chances need to be arranged in a diminishing series. like when using a Jeweler's Orb for instance: upgrade to 2 sockets = 100%. 3 sockets = 50%. 4 sockets = 25%. 5 and 6 = 10%. likewise, Fusing Orbs will by no means destroy existing links, ruining the current skill set the player uses. people will no longer be afraid to try and upgrade their main weapon or equipped armor, with the only risk being the loss of a valuable orb, that is rare to drop and expensive to trade. currently the whole crafting system is flawed, because it is something which completely disregards how good a player is in the game. an artificial and unfair increase in game difficulty, when that difficulty needs to come only from testing your skills as a player and punishing you for mistakes made. trying to upgrade your equipped armor isn't a "mistake" you should be punished for. Alva: I'm sweating like a hog in heat Shadow: That was fun Last edited by johnKeys#6083 on Mar 17, 2013, 4:44:03 AM
|
|
" I happen to agree with you that this is a design goal that games should strive to achieve. However ARPG's seem to be one of the game genres where the designers are least likely to make this a goal, and I think POE is one of the more extreme examples of this. 'Course D3 has similar problems with excessive randomisation, but never in a way that effects your skill choices. I think the genre as a whole needs to get away from thinly disguised slot machine mechanics, and focus more on rewarding player skill, both physical twitch skills (these are action RPG's after all) and mental skills (build planning and so on). |
|
|
I kind of agree. After spending 390 fusings to double re-5link my bow I am now officially taking a week long break from the game. Maybe that another 110 fusings wouldve gotten me there but the odds are so slim that going through 1k-2k fusings w/o a 6l wouldnt even be considered uncanny. Kind of sucks but whatever.
I think there should be a recipe for a 6L like 750 fusings + 6 socket item for those who are afraid of their luck. We can still pity ourselves when others spend 50 fusings on a 6L but still feel good that we might have never gotten one at all. |
|
|
The best proposal I've seen for fusings so far is have each one add -10 to +20 points towards fusing completion. The item would show it's current fusing level. Once you've reached a threshold, you get the links. Technically, there is a risk of going backwards, but you generally will go forwards, and you can see very clearly where you're at.
If you dropped a 5L to a 4L, chances are low that you would spend any time with a 4L, and you'd be back to a 5L lickety split. While technically this method will not allow you to hole-in-one straight to a 6L, I think this method has a lot going for it. Last edited by Courageous#0687 on Mar 17, 2013, 9:52:26 AM
|
|
" I don't like this because sometimes you want something to be 3L with a lone socket. For example: on my boots I have BBR for spell totem/summon skeletons/faster casting and in my lone blue socket I have my curse. This is literally the only way I can do it because every single socket otherwise is in use. |
|
