Talisman League Mechanics

Gotta agree these should have their own equipment slot.

"

(The item level of the output Talisman is one standard deviation above the average item level of the input Talismans)

Ok, so if I input 5 level 60 talismans, I'll get a level 60 talisman, because the average item level is 60 and the standard deviation is 0.

But if I input 4 level 60 talismans and 1 level 10 talisman, I'll get a level 70 talisman, because the average item level is 50 and the standard deviation is 20.
The calculation for that is (10+60+60+60+60)/5/5=50,
and (((10-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2)/5))^0.5=(((-40)^2+10^2+10^2+10^2+10^2)/5)^0.5
=((1600+100+100+100+100)/5)^0.5=(2000/5)0.5=400^0.5=20
My calculator got the same answer.

By my calculations,
4 level 60 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 71 talisman,
4 level 71 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 85 talisman,
and 4 level 85 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 100 talisman.
So, even if your algorithm always rounds down, it will only take 64 level 60 talismans and 61 level 1 talismans, all at tier 1, to get to fight Rigwald for a level 100 tier 4 talisman.

I'm not sure if you guys had intended for people to be able to get higher level talismans by including single low level talisman, but this system would give a substantial disadvantage to players who prefer to just learn by playing, compared to players who look up every specific mechanic. It also seems potentially overpowered.

I think that I can see what you guys are going for though. The relationship between item level and item value is definitely going to be nonlinear, so giving a talisman that averages the item level of the input talismans would end giving players a reward that was disproportionately low for the input. Also, many players are going to want to start sacrificing talismans they get for higher level talismans as soon as they start playing, and ideally the Rigwald encounter would be of a level appropriate for the player, even if the player is level fifty but has been sacrificing talismans from level 1 to level 50 working their way up to Rigwald.

I suggest of of three solutions.
1) Cap the level of the output talisman at the level of the highest-level input talisman.
2) Set the level of the output talisman at the average level of the input talismans plus half of the standard deviation.
3) Use a function that will roughly correspond between item level and value, then have the output talisman be the level that corresponds to the average value of the input talismans. For example, if x is the item level of the output talisman; a, b, c, d, and e are the item levels of the input talismans; and you estimated that the value of the talisman would be proportional to the cube of the item level, then x=((a^3+b^3+c^3+d^3+e^3)/5)^(1/3).

If you guys do want a system that allows players to get a talisman with a higher item level than any of the input talismans, you could still do so by other means. Including a fixed level bonus in the algorithm or including stone circles that give a level bonus of their own would also have that effect, but it wouldn't be counter-intuitive, which would make it more usable for players who haven't researched the advanced mechanics.

Edit: The wording was been changed since I made this post.

"

(The item level of the output Talisman is slightly better than the average item level of the input Talismans)

I am not sure am I getting the right idea....but usually a rare amulet with good affix starts out somewhere ilvl 73.

So does that mean people will be force to run lvl 71+ maps in order to have a chance to have good affix on the talisman ?

would that also mean for a person to even attempt to get 1 good tier 4 talisman would required to run MORE THAN 125 lvl 71 maps. (given that you can not guarantee all of them is going to be rare.)

Let's say you are extremely luck and every lvl 71 map you run drops a rare talisman and you only spent 5 minutes each map....

That would still requires you to spend 625 minutes, or somewhere close to """ 10.5 hr """ for just ONE ilvl 73 tier 4 talisman ?!?!?!?!




If the above assumption is correct, then why would anyone even bother to pick up normal and magic talisman at high level maps if it has a chance to roll the next tier talisman into a normal or magic mods. The amount of time to get 1 good talisman would be pretty unseasonable.

ps. sorry for my poor English.

"

Invasion lol

Invasion was the best thing to happen to this game.

Still.

JFC has an excellent point. If we're using the definitions of the words used then the math comes out such that using a lower level item can result in a higher level one.

GGG, do you guys want to rephrase the wording there? Using the standard deviation like that will only cause problems for both players and for you guys when players inevitably wonder why the numbers are the way they are.

"

JFC_Bass_Chant wrote:

"

(The item level of the output Talisman is one standard deviation above the average item level of the input Talismans)

Ok, so if I input 5 level 60 talismans, I'll get a level 60 talisman, because the average item level is 60 and the standard deviation is 0.

But if I input 4 level 60 talismans and 1 level 10 talisman, I'll get a level 70 talisman, because the average item level is 50 and the standard deviation is 20.
The calculation for that is (10+60+60+60+60)/5/5=50,
and (((10-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2+(60-50)^2)/5))^0.5=(((-40)^2+10^2+10^2+10^2+10^2)/5)^0.5
=((1600+100+100+100+100)/5)^0.5=(2000/5)0.5=400^0.5=20
My calculator got the same answer.

By my calculations,
4 level 60 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 71 talisman,
4 level 71 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 85 talisman,
and 4 level 85 talismans and 1 level 1 talisman will output 1 level 100 talisman.
So, even if your algorithm always rounds down, it will only take 64 level 60 talismans and 61 level 1 talismans, all at tier 1, to get to fight Rigwald for a level 100 tier 4 talisman.

I'm not sure if you guys had intended for people to be able to get higher level talismans by including single low level talisman, but this system would give a substantial disadvantage to players who prefer to just learn by playing, compared to players who look up every specific mechanic. It also seems potentially overpowered.

I think that I can see what you guys are going for though. The relationship between item level and item value is definitely going to be nonlinear, so giving a talisman that averages the item level of the input talismans would end giving players a reward that was disproportionately low for the input. Also, many players are going to want to start sacrificing talismans they get for higher level talismans as soon as they start playing, and ideally the Rigwald encounter would be of a level appropriate for the player, even if the player is level fifty but has been sacrificing talismans from level 1 to level 50 working their way up to Rigwald.

I suggest of of three solutions.
1) Cap the level of the output talisman at the level of the highest-level input talisman.
2) Set the level of the output talisman at the average level of the input talismans plus half of the standard deviation.
3) Use a function that will roughly correspond between item level and value, then have the output talisman be the level that corresponds to the average value of the input talismans. For example, if x is the item level of the output talisman; a, b, c, d, and e are the item levels of the input talismans; and you estimated that the value of the talisman would be proportional to the cube of the item level, then x=((a^3+b^3+c^3+d^3+e^3)/5)^(1/3).

If you guys do want a system that allows players to get a talisman with a higher item level than any of the input talismans, you could still do so by other means. Including a fixed level bonus in the algorithm or including stone circles that give a level bonus of their own would also have that effect, but it wouldn't be counter-intuitive, which would make it more usable for players who haven't researched the advanced mechanics.

I love you <3

not to be a negative nancy, but i bet someone will find a way to mess the mechanics of talisman up, theres always that one person in the community who has to ruin the fun.

Not bad ;)

"

Serleth wrote:

"

Invasion lol

Invasion was the best thing to happen to this game.

Still.

Yeah. I think Bex meant Beyond, not Invasion.

"

yotmato wrote:

Is the rarity of the talisman dropped by a monster affected by players IIR stat?

Nope.

"There's no chance or conditionality here."

"The rarity of the Talisman is affected by the rarity bonus of the Talisman."