Regarding the xp penalty on respawn (with GRAPHS!)

[granny]

*drolls*

[Paha]

Enough to say, you folks better just trust that we got plenty of math done on our end. This ain't the first time... (Help me. Johannes won't let me go from the basement!)

[Corrigo]

Ouch! I was aware that the point I picked was not mathematically relevant to the case at hand, but thought it statistically relevant due to the fact that level 6-7 has always been somewhat considered the cut-off point between easy and hard on EFU if you know what I mean.

It certainly wasn't an arbitrary selection.

[Corrigo]

Besides, if we factor in the XP gain over time and consider that it is the same for each player, it becomes a common factor in each case and thus negligible, and even if you do, it would be dependent per case on a single variable, that being player effort (which, though hard to mathematically quantify, eliminates any notion of favoritism, be it personal or mechanical). We would then be able to insert a constant as XP per unit of effort which would be global for the server. I don't think such a constant would ever need be adjusted regardless of lowering XP rates at higher levels due to the continued appearance of new options throughout most of the scale up to the upper ranges.

If we then consider rather than the time needed to recover lost XP the effort needed to recover lost XP (as invested time is also different from player to player) it remains a common factor and has as such little bearing on the case made.

[Ebok]

The rate of XP gain matters, you brought it up yourself after Howland's post. Just because there are a ton of ways to gain exp now, does not mean that those tonnes of ways are misleading. Its a treadmill. It pulls people back to a manageable average rather then leaving piles of people are the highest levels of the server. The reason there are lots of ways to gain this exp is to allow people to run on the treadmill in a hundred different ways. It is to keep interest, rather the providing only one quest available to someone of a certain level.
[INDENT]What the Dms have been asserting is that just because someone is higher level does not mean they are more successful at influencing the world around them. This statement reveals that regardless of your level, you ability to shape the world is what our DMs hold in high regard. [/INDENT]All reducing the death penalties will do is make it easy to level up for everyone, increasing the numbers of higher levels, demanding that more people level up to participate in the new average server challenge. It actually forces people to level up MORE not less. It will reduce the range of quests being taken, and increase demand on more higher level quests, which will slowly allow people to reach higher and higher levels. In effect, all it does is drag out the level range. It increases the disparity between the lowest levels and the highest levels.
[INDENT]Since those that tend to get to high levels through questing do so in a relatively short period of time, they need to be hit with very harsh penalties for death. This creates the risk of getting higher level. In other-words:

The Risk takers are those that try to remain higher level then 6th or 7th.

Note that I'm defining Risk in this case purely on merits of the accumulation of exp, not on any role-playing discussion. There are MANY ways to be a risk taker on efu, many ways to make it harder or easier, many ways to make it more fun or more boring. Some don't have the options for all of these due to lack of players (options).[/INDENT]My point: Death Penalties are not designed to enforce certain behaviors, they are designed to keep the average of the server nearest a certain point which the DMs consider to be the best ranges. Raising the average levels in this way has HUGE impacts on class balance.

Therefore, the issue is not that players lose a lot on death, but that players see the only true way to advance is through leveling up.

[nammykun]

My point: Death Penalties are not designed to enforce certain behaviors, they are designed to keep the average of the server nearest a certain point which the DMs consider to be the best ranges. Raising the average levels in this way has HUGE impacts on class balance.

Therefore, the issue is not that players lose a lot on death, but that players see the only true way to advance is through leveling up.

^THIS^

[Numos]

My point: Death Penalties are not designed to enforce certain behaviors, they are designed to keep the average of the server nearest a certain point which the DMs consider to be the best ranges. Raising the average levels in this way has HUGE impacts on class balance.

Therefore, the issue is not that players lose a lot on death, but that players see the only true way to advance is through leveling up.

First I'd like to say I agree that in part the death system is to keep the average level in the 6-8 range. It seems an ideal place for the server, and there's a very delicate mechanical balance surrounding it. I acknowledge that.

But I otherwise disagree with you. Every aspect of a game is in some way related to behavior modification. You lose a lot on death so you try not to die, which is vital to maintaining the integrity of a Horror-Survival setting. It makes heroes heroic, and cowards live to tell the story. And I don't think the issue is that people aren't looking for other ways to advance their PCs. Everyone whose been on EFU at least a few months certainly understands that advancement can come in the form of friends and allies, political standing, and ferreting out lost lore and secrets. EFU is a story-telling server and no one would be here if they didn't have some desire to take part and watch it unfold.

But if dropping from 8 to 6 is really that soul-crushing and discouraging, if a random assassin vine or leopard causes someone to drop a character, it might warrant tweaking. Even if it has no bearing on the story people do derive enjoyment from seeing their PCs gain new abilities, spells, and equipment. Perhaps an increased penalty for 9+ characters?

[Ebok]

But if dropping from 8 to 6 is really that soul-crushing and discouraging, if a random assassin vine or leopard causes someone to drop a character, it might warrant tweaking.

Or it might just show that they aren't taking the dangers of the island seriously enough.

____


Since you edited. 9+ already get increased penalties. Your graphs show this.

[Numos]

Or it might just show that they aren't taking the dangers of the island seriously enough.

____


Since you edited. 9+ already get increased penalties. Your graphs show this.

Maybe a poor example as those are very preventable hazards. But sometimes you do just get unlucky from a flurry of critical strikes, crashing at an inopportune moment, latency, and whatever else.

The penalty, 33%, is always the same. I'm suggesting a different percentage be deducted per bracket as opposed to bending an expontential curve to a linear progression. If I am understanding correctly the goal isn't so much to make 7-8 difficult to reach as it is 9-10.

[Ryan]

But sometimes you do just get unlucky from a flurry of critical strikes, crashing at an inopportune moment, latency, and whatever else.

And these are precisely the kinds of deaths that afflict veteran players (the careful ones, anyway) the most AND are the most likely to cause someone to retire a character prematurely.

If you lose your level eight cause you decided to take a chance and run into a room filled with traps, hoping you could absorb just enough damage to survive, well, tough titties.

Losing your level eight because your connection decided to fail at the most inopportune time takes the choice out of your hands and is just arbitrary and frustrating. If there was just some system or script to monitor these kinds of deaths (the ones suffered by random bugs or lost connections) it'd be better, but the DMs hands are basically tied whenever you bring these sorts of things up with them, so... yeah, another system might be better.

[Corrigo]

I was feeling bored and my mind drifted to this old topic for some reason. I guess it's related to the fact that I've been doing a lot of statistics work in Excel lately.

Though I don't really play on EFU anymore, I decided to incorporate the respawn bonus added a couple of months ago into my calculations and came up with the following graph:



Note that calculations are made on the basis that the respawn bonus is fully regained. Obviously, when you're on a dying streak, the total respawn penalty will still be higher than this (and, therefore, on average, probably still is).

As you can see, the point chosen for statistical reference in the initial argument is not much closer to the high range of level 8.

For the sake of argument, would you say that implementation of the respawn bonus has influenced the average character level, and, more specifically, where would you judge the average character level to be both now and before the implementation of the respawn bonus?

[Talir]

This is a nearly three year thread with suggestions not implemented. Locking.