Jamosite Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 (edited) I have a request. i understand quality is now changed for looted items but i and many others find it insanely silly to get an item under 95 quality. in live it was 95 to 125. I know this isn't going to be like live but i would like to petition a request to change this for the future of the game Truly I want to see 100 quality + and the reason i say this is because you can pull an item from a corpse and it defaults to 100 quality. so i guess in short This is a petition for the Devs to give us 95 and up on looted items. ====- if it is not changed , you will have higher level folks camping the bosses to get at least a 100 quality item. if you left it at 95-125 you give everyone a chance to go after the good stuff everything in italic is my opinion only from what i have viewed so far in the short time qualities have changed and does not represent the views of the server, stress test , devs or Santa clause. Edited January 27, 2011 by Jamosite 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kemperor1 Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Agreed, especially for stuff like GoD and the like. I'd be rather unhappy to go to the trouble to get a group together and run the gauntlet and get an 88q gun/other item. Guess it could be viewed as a reason to come back but I'd prefer 100 or at least 95 and up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyp [LDEV] Posted January 26, 2011 Report Share Posted January 26, 2011 Sorry, we have screenshots that disprove your theory. Although, you can expect that it will be rarer for them to come out that low on a regular basis. Also, the poll is a bit loaded. I would suggest you modify it so that it does not take into account your bias if you wanted any serious consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Del[IS] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Sorry, we have screenshots that disprove your theory. Although, you can expect that it will be rarer for them to come out that low on a regular basis. Also, the poll is a bit loaded. I would suggest you modify it so that it does not take into account your bias if you wanted any serious consideration. Tru dat. I wouldn't want too much loot to be very low (90-) quality, but if everything looted were 110%, for instance, loot would be boring! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irrelevant Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Well I clearly remember my very first FoTM in live was 87% -it got down to 83% before i spaced it and upgraded hehe. But yes if its going to be made rare that drops are below 90ish % quality, that would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terrell [BT] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Had an 85% HoDo on my JE in Live. Used it until Sunset. Don't really have a problem with some under 100% items, but would prefer that 100% be the most likely drop quality. 85-125 sounds reasonable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Del[IS] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 We could always make it unreasonably complicated and model loot qualities as a normal distribution with a mean of 100% with a standard deviation of 10% or so. That way, 68.2% of loot would be 90-110%, etc. There would be a small chance of loot falling above 130% or below 70%, but of course there would also an extremely minuscule chance of loot popping out at 400% or 0%. Sounds fun to me. Hmm... where did my pocket protector go... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkkHero Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Nerd alert! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kemperor1 Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Hope my next uber loot is well over mu % Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tienbau Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 We could always make it unreasonably complicated and model loot qualities as a normal distribution with a mean of 100% with a standard deviation of 10% or so. That way, 68.2% of loot would be 90-110%, etc. There would be a small chance of loot falling above 130% or below 70%, but of course there would also an extremely minuscule chance of loot popping out at 400% or 0%. Sounds fun to me. Hmm... where did my pocket protector go... that's pretty easy to do, but we just put min/max cutoffs to stop it going above 200% or below 80 or so%. On computers the best way to model a normal dist is to add together a lot of smaller random ranges. What we then do is to chop off the bottom, to restrict the lowest probability but leave the top end (up to 200% or course), to make it a bit more exciting. So more than likely the loot will be in the 95->120% range, but there will always be that small chance it's going to be awesome. After the loot change, it's become somewhat boring, IMO because you know whatever it is, it ain't going to be that good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenu [CDEV] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 as soon as I saw that bell curve graph I knew it was going to be a good post I think it should be 85-125, like live. 100% would be the most likely. I never even saw a 125% of anything good, though I did see a few 85% and about an equal number of 115%. It would make sense to me that 85% would have the same chance as 115% and 125% was a bit more rare. The differences between 115 and 125 was pretty small though, so people didn't care that much. so generally you would find at about 2/3 of the time you got 100% quality. I think in live, quality of loot only came in 5% intervals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyp [LDEV] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I'm pretty sure it was 75% to 125% or I got a raw deal on a few items and I need to take it up with EA's customer service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamosite Posted January 27, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Thank you for the vested interest in this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lannister Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I'm pretty sure it was 75% to 125% or I got a raw deal on a few items and I need to take it up with EA's customer service. I think something similar to the distribution model that CDev mentioned was what they did in Live. Sub 100% did happen occasional, but not as often as they are now. We did two runs of the FB yesterday netting the normal loot and very few items were above 100%. We looted two of each smiter (wrath and fury) and all were below 100%. If the game was up I would send you a picture of my 75% Caster. Talk about elation followed by disappointment... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitelighter Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 my 75% Caster. Talk about elation followed by disappointment... Lol and I thought my 80% HB was bad luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryprx Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Although, you can expect that it will be rarer for them to come out that low on a regular basis. I tested this claim yesterday. Looted 10 items from hulks and exactly ONE of them was over 100% (105%). Only 4 of the 10 were even above 95%, so maybe I'm not understanding what you mean by "rarer". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r8rsfans75 Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 We could always make it unreasonably complicated and model loot qualities as a normal distribution with a mean of 100% with a standard deviation of 10% or so. That way, 68.2% of loot would be 90-110%, etc. There would be a small chance of loot falling above 130% or below 70%, but of course there would also an extremely minuscule chance of loot popping out at 400% or 0%. Sounds fun to me. Hmm... where did my pocket protector go... A normal distribution showing standard deviations? I got a solid A in Fundamentals of Statistics in college. Standard deviation is about the only thing I remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjeron Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 The biggest problem with sub 100% quality items is how the item stats scale. Under 100%, the buffs and recharge/thrust/damage scale directly, 75% has stats at 75% of the base. Above 100%, stats raise at a much reduced rate. Examples: GoD @120%: buffs increased by 6.6% of base, damage increased by 10% of base. stat increase 1/2 and 1/6 of quality increase Sting of the Mordana @167%: buffs increased 22%, reload decreased to 76.6% (+30% dps of base). stat increase 1/3 and 1/2 of quality increase Black Caster @75%: buffs decreased to 75% of base, reload increased by 33% (75% dps of base). stat decrease is 100% of quality decrease. HotM @92%: buffs decreased to 92% of base, recharge decreased to 92% of base. stat decrease is 100% of quality decrease. Black Power 9 @148%: buffs increased by 15.8%, recharge increased by 16.8%. stat increase 1/3 of quality increase Maybe if the stats didnt drop off so fast below 100% it wouldnt be so bad, but as is below 100% quickly becomes worthless, if they werent already. Another problem: some buffs dont get better with quality above 100%, but all buffs get worse with quality below 100%. Some consistancy would be nice. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riia [LDEV] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 The biggest problem with sub 100% quality items is how the item stats scale. Under 100%, the buffs and recharge/thrust/damage scale directly, 75% has stats at 75% of the base. Above 100%, stats raise at a much reduced rate. Examples: GoD @120%: buffs increased by 6.6% of base, damage increased by 10% of base. stat increase 1/2 and 1/6 of quality increase Sting of the Mordana @167%: buffs increased 22%, reload decreased to 76.6% (+30% dps of base). stat increase 1/3 and 1/2 of quality increase Black Caster @75%: buffs decreased to 75% of base, reload increased by 33% (75% dps of base). stat decrease is 100% of quality decrease. HotM @92%: buffs decreased to 92% of base, recharge decreased to 92% of base. stat decrease is 100% of quality decrease. Black Power 9 @148%: buffs increased by 15.8%, recharge increased by 16.8%. stat increase 1/3 of quality increase Maybe if the stats didnt drop off so fast below 100% it wouldnt be so bad, but as is below 100% quickly becomes worthless, if they werent already. Another problem: some buffs dont get better with quality above 100%, but all buffs get worse with quality below 100%. Some consistancy would be nice. Hi You are correct!! The stats on all items are royally screwed up if quality drops below 100%. Thanks for pointing out these errors. We will endeavor to get the server code correct. Thanks again!! Riia 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryprx Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 Hi You are correct!! The stats on all items are royally screwed up if quality drops below 100%. Thanks for pointing out these errors. We will endeavor to get the server code correct. Thanks again!! Riia I don't know how to state this without sounding derisive and pissy so please forgive... If you guys knew that this code was incorrect and would cause items to become "royally screwed" by the change, why did you implement it without fixing the code issue first? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjeron Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I don't know how to state this without sounding derisive and pissy so please forgive... If you guys knew that this code was incorrect and would cause items to become "royally screwed" by the change, why did you implement it without fixing the code issue first? It doesnt sound they knew about it, and I've never seen any mention of it before, by other players or devs. Nor has there been any reason for players to consider using sub 100% items until now, so they were just passed over from corpse to vendor, never bothering to look at the actual stats, since you would have to equip and repair it before they updated correctly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyp [LDEV] Posted January 27, 2011 Report Share Posted January 27, 2011 I don't know how to state this without sounding derisive and pissy so please forgive... If you guys knew that this code was incorrect and would cause items to become "royally screwed" by the change, why did you implement it without fixing the code issue first? First, my "claim" was not that it is that way at this very moment. This system was just implemented, once it is closer to finalized it will act much like the standard distribution that CDel describes. Programming is an iterative process. You start with a block of shite, and fine tune it until it does everything you want with no fat. Second, obviously we didn't know about it doing what it did, otherwise Riia would have not said "Thanks for pointing this out." What we KNEW is that items had this range in live. What wasn't happening was that it wasn't dropping like this but instead up to 180% quality which was (very very very very + 10e^126) bad, at least for the game overall. We're going to make the decisions for the game that make the game better in the long run, even if it hurts folks who are testing in the short term. If you don't want to deal with this kind of thing, the only other option you have is not to play until we're finished, but that is of course up to you because frankly the more people we have hitting the server, the quicker we find these bugs and fix them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tienbau Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I don't know how to state this without sounding derisive and pissy so please forgive... If you guys knew that this code was incorrect and would cause items to become "royally screwed" by the change, why did you implement it without fixing the code issue first? The code is added by someone, it might work but not correctly, but at least there's something there we can tidy up and fix later. I've never looked too hard at how the stats are calculated - they are pretty heavy looking algorithms and there's a lot of comments around them that make it look as though whoever did it knew what they were doing. Probably just needs a little tweak somewhere - I suspect it was written before items took quality damage, so < 100% never really got tested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irrelevant Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 (edited) I'd support a higher than 125% cap. I know 180 was overboard but what about capping it at 140-150 range? of-course using a normal model so drops above 125 become ultra rare, but the hard cut-off be at 140-150 somewhere in that range? EDITED after reading whole thread hehe Edited January 28, 2011 by irrelevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tienbau Posted January 28, 2011 Report Share Posted January 28, 2011 I'd support a higher than 125% cap. I know 180 was overboard but what about capping it at 140-150 range? of-course using a normal model so drops above 125 become ultra rare, but the hard cut-off be at 140-150 somewhere in that range? yep I think we're all agreed that 95-120 should be the norm, but with a rare chance of hitting above 120. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.