Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CrzyRndm

Looking at Loot

Recommended Posts

TL;DR

Lab Assault / Survival (Sky, Kings, ...) have similar drop rates per time, unless I was extremely unlucky with lab while being insanely lucky with survival. Whenever we talk about bad loot, we are talking about non-rewarding items. Rewarding items are upgrades... being an upgrade ends up into Ultimate sooner or later and that's what I always read... Ultimate. I'm sorry if I took it wrong. I'm not against a fix of the mass of 1/1 myths and godlies but I don't want too see minimum guaranteed stats... blanks (such as 1/1 myths and godlies) have to be part of rng-based games.
___________________________________________


@Caimen0 quote:I have done 3 full Moraggo Survival runs for weapons and did not get a single supreme or above. I ran both a partial (build sucked) and full King's Game run and got nothing but bad Trans and disappointment. I ran survivals for a total of ~8.5 hours and got horse***. That is a waste of time if ever I saw one.

I then received 200 lab runs (~10 hours) and got 13 Ultimate and 1 Ult++. The staggering difference is disgusting, and running survivals is made practically useless in my experience. There is nothing "fair" about 8.5 wasted hours and getting nothing. Compound this with the chance of getting DPS armor with less than 4 resists and you have an excellent reason to avoid Survival altogether.

I wasn't talking about Moraggo for obvious reasons. The map is way too easy to drop Supreme/Ultimate armor on a regular basis. Kings Game on the other hand drops regularly at least one Supreme / Ultimate armor piece per run. Even before the change to the RNG has been released. A Kings Game survival takes me roundabout 90 minutes starting on wave 19/20 (depending on Upgrader I choose to use).


3 minutes per run is pretty fast, however the point is... then you receive. You cant farm survivals while being afk, so your "waste of time" feeling is obviously biased. The actual guy who runs you has probably another feeling but then of course... they are often not prepared for actual survivals since this runs will be usually offered by people who are in need of currency or as payment for received items.


Survivals are pretty fine, with loot which usually doesn't has so much and high negatives than Lab Assault easily rewards you with. Based on your experience with Lab and mine with survival drop rates are pretty equal which I always said.


@Caimen0 quote:If you bothered to look at my Steam profile, I have indeed played DDE. I played 60 hours then got bored and uninstalled it. Over a year ago.

It's the same game, with some really cool additions. Why did you get bored so fast? Assuming because it was way to fast-paced stat-wise? Well assumptions, so poop, haven't said anything.


@Caimen0 quote:

One final point: The ease at which you can beat maps in DD has no impact on what gear you will or should get. If that were the case, as I mentioned on the Steam forums, the level cap would be 78 and the best you could get would be Trans items. We have maps like Akatiti, Tinkerer's Lab, Moonbase, and Buccaneer Bay that give out copious amounts of Ultimate its despite being able to be beaten with 2k stats. Your assertion that "rare items should be rare" is pointless because there are like 6 things total in Dungeon Defenders that are "rare", and they aren't rare because of difficulty. They're rare because it just takes a massive amount of runs to get them. Ultimate Seahorses are rare, but it's not hard to do a seahorse run. At all. It takes all of 10 minutes at most. Good Ultimate+/Ultimate++ armor is rare, but it's not because Lab Assault or survivals are hard. It takes 3 minutes to run Lab once with little effort (hell, you can get Ultimate++ from Insane. I've even seen Ultimate armor come from Hard); I can do full armor runs in survival by only upgrading beams and auras, then going afk for the wave. Ultimate Crystal Blades and Crystal Staffs are rare, but that's because you get them from Insane, which has a rather low quality multiplier, and furthermore have low stats on the items themselves.

The only maps in the game that really support rarity via difficulty right now are NMHCMM TL / WW / Akatiti, and we already know what's at the end of them: nothing special. We can get better versions from Insane. Hopefully Embermount changes that.

And here is the broken logic...

First I didn't say that Sup+ has to drop less or more on any difficulty or on any map. I don't want a change of the drop rate because it is fair enough. Whose who haven't reached high-end yet can receive a nice boost with a drop of Sup+. The high-end player are still able to watch out for perfection but they are not forced to do it in order beat anything. They are doing it just for their ego, the challenge itself. Some will loose their ambition, some will change their goals. Do you get a cookie if you have reached your personal goal? Usually no. What happens if you have fulfilled your goals? You give the game a rest after a few runs/hours. Be honest the grind has kept you playing, the treasure... the unicorn you may get. Making things more common just means to effectively shorten your overall playtime since you don't play DD to progress but to complete it. That's done within 200 hours at most at NM, especially with maps like Lab Assault and Moonbase.


Back to broken logic... "rare" isn't limited to the rarest items of the game, to an extraordinary small number. There are more and less rarer items, more and less common items. As higher the quality as rarer is the appearance of armor for obvious reasons. Just because you have reached Level 100 with your heroes doesn't mean you have to actual run around with Ult+/++. It doesn't mean something has to get more common just based on Level. The Level requirement just exists to not give someone a sudden boost, to actually force some kind of progression. That is working great for sub 74 but looses its point for 74+. Let's say 78+ since Transcendent drops are common enough and the actual stats doesn't differ much to Sup+ or at least doesn't make a real difference. That said, Sup+ is more a kind of "very" good transcendent and therefore rarer than a non-capping trans. You may get the point, no clue if I explained it well enough.


@Caimen0 quote:

I want the item generator fixed, but not to increase the drop rate of Ultimate items. I want to remove the 1/1 myth crap that should have been a higher tier. Once the item generator is fixed, change spawn rates so you still get roughly the same Ultimate drop rates as before. If I can agree with you on anything, it's that the current item drop rates are in a good spot as it stands. My issue with the system isn't the lack of Ultimate, it's the frequency at which unusable Mythical items drop.

Whenever I read your statements about loot (such as "For starters, I think a complete rewrite of the loot generator is probably in everyone's best interest. It's honestly just a mess."), you are referring to bad drops, to non-rewarding items, with your playtime and progress in mind we just can talk about Sup+. That's why you were referring to Bay as being a rewarding map for your heroes, to be known to get something you can use for your high-end toons. Progression is just fine and the loot generator works well enough for actual starters.


@Caimen0 quote:If a new player finally beats Sky City, the chances that they get a terrible Steam Saw with less than 100 upgrades is pretty damn good (in my experience). The current item generator punishes new players going through high end maps. (See Crystalline Dimension) Even if those 1/1 myths turn into 1/200 myths, that to me is a problem solved, because now newer players to nightmare get to see  the power of those higher weapons without necessarily getting an Ultimate on their first run. Why are Gladiuses and Clavas so popular among new players? Because they frequently drop as Ultimate, with high stats, and with decent upgrades most of the time. Why were Eagle Crested Standards not very common before Moonbase with new players? Because the chance of getting a myth with terrible upgrades was the norm. (also, new players aren't very happy about Kraken or Ancient Dragon, either, but...)

Here is the big deal of Nightmare... You have the chance to get an extraordinary good reward but you can also draw a blank. For more common "good" (quotes because of the extraordinary good items from Nightmare many players already have) rewards you play on Insane with the drawback that you won't pull the jackpot people are looking for. Anyways, with maps like Moonbase, Lab Assault and Akatiti, you are able to progress that far that you are able to beat the game on Nightmare (at least stat-wise) even though you never touched it before. Progression wasn't easier anytime. People are rushing through the game within no-time and then... there is the wall. They suddenly "stuck". Often it's not an issue of stats but missing experience, building methods, fighting strategies, judgement about items. A pretty good example is a discussion I've had last year with a guy who said lab gear is just junk... not knowing that the actual stats he should care about is health and damage, he has set the focus on all stats. Whenever I see someone writing "total tower stats", calculating tower stats all together, I just think... gosh...


As wrong that is, it is also wrong to focus only on damage which are doing a lot of people... that's why they are actually hunting these op weapons. With 4-5k stats you don't really have to think anymore; aura stack, buff, gas, archers... done. High stats are driving away the strategy part of the game. If a build fails... it must be caused by low stats rather than using a wrong strategy or doing something really stupid like luring Ogres to crystals.


Eagles were actually very common since the beginning. The discover of the Bloodshot Staff being such an op elemental weapon (the only one besides the Bone Staff) changed it a little bit. However I barely see anyone running around with an Obsidian Clava. Why? Because the guides which are out there doesn't explicitly say anything about them. Currently it's the Fusion Rift they are running around but lots of them are bad such as for the other extraordinary good stuff. Weapons are used because someone said "this and that is the best to choose from" rather than comparing actual damage numbers from stuff their actually own right now.


That being said; Nightmare has to be taken as a challenge, what it was made for. it wasn't made for progression so I strongly disagree with a minimum reward guarantee such as your 1/200 myths. For actual starters the loot generator is/was just perfect. Of course there is also progression on Nightmare, e.g. you need roundabout 500s stats to complete the base game on NM but ~1k for Shard and some bonus maps and 2k+ for the latest bonus maps. There isn't an obvious golden threat through the game, which makes it hard for beginners to progress smoothly. I've tried to give a possible golden thread recently by creating a new guide , it's just one of several ways to master the jumps in difficulty.


Unlike other games where you jump from map to map on a single difficulty to complete a playthrough. You have to play in DD with the difficulty settings. If the next map is too hard then you basically have three options...

A: You play the current map again on the same difficulty or harder.

B: You play the next map on an easier difficulty and come back at a later time.

C: You play a previous map on a harder difficulty.


I agree though that we have a huge number of total blanks, much more than mediocre items an high-end player wouldn't use anyways. The pure number of 1/1 myths and godlies is a hint for an issue with the loot generator, which I totally agree to be worked with but at the end blanks (also items with 1^ just not that many) are fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think that the loot progression early on is way to fast compared to what it used to be pre lab. I have seen way to many people who have taken the tdps>lab approach to the game to try and jump to end game as fast as they can. the problem with this is they start to think that they "need" high stats in order to beat easier maps. I have seen alot of people who have thought that there 5k stats are not enough to run aka so they need to farm more lab. I think that those who dont learn how to beat the game with 2-3k stats will never be as good as those who have beaten the game with low stats. I hear people saying all the time that they have no idea how to beat this challenge or this surv when they have 8k stats or higher and i want to slap everyone of them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opening also brought up matter with the item comparer. Reading this thread I haven't seen too many replies addressing that so here is my thought on the matter.

Currently the comparer tries to make decisions fully automatically without any input or guideline from the individual player and as mentioned it often leads into results that don't suit the player's needs. In my opinion a better approach to this would be to allow the player to give s general ruleset based on which the comparer makes its decisions.

For example, an "item comparer settings" button could be added to character gear overview screen on the right pane and clicking it would open a comparer settings screen on the left pane. the settings pane could look similar to the character stat screen with all the possible stat icons. There the player could highlight the stats that that he/she deems interesting. Then during item comparison the comparer would simply take the stat values of the highlighted stats on the item plus any unused upgrades then factor in tier bonus and compare it to a value received from the player's currently equipped gear piece of same type.

Example
Player has selected tower attack and tower hp as stats of interest.
Currently equipped: mythical gloves with 122 tower hp, 170 tower attack, and 32/60 upgrades used
    >>> score = (122 + 170 + (60-32)) * 1.3 = 416
Item being under comparison: mythical gloves with 100 tower hp, 120 tower attack, and 1/117 upgrades used
    >>> score = (100 + 120 + (117-1)) * 1.3 = 436.8
Result: green thump as even if its slight, there is a potential gain in the stats selected in comparer settings.

Of course other possibly useful settings in the comparer settings pane cold be check boxes like "must be of same material", "must be able to equip", "must be [weapon, pet, gloves, boots, ...]" and such.

This kind of simple comparison wouldn't by no means be perfect and it is ultimately up to the player to decide if the new item is really an upgrade or not. It would however reduce the amount of running around checking every item as the player would know that there is at least possibility in stat gain for the stats he/she has selected when a green dot lights up in the mini map.

Regarding on where to store the new setting data... It was mentioned that changes in save files is pretty big no. In my opinion new setting data the comparer would require could be saved even locally to a new? separate file.  Any modifications to it would have no impact on item generation but only change which items are shown as green. Thus I can't see any risk of exploiting the system. Only drawback with local files would be possible loss of those settings if one would sometimes use another computer to play. This could be possibly mitigated by including the said settings as part of the data steam cloud sync handles.

- Xq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@_Xq_ quote:

The opening also brought up matter with the item comparer. Reading this thread I haven't seen too many replies addressing that so here is my thought on the matter.

... Well thought out comments ...

I don't have a lot to add to this, the biasing system is pretty much required, the comparison rating is sensible (actually, I will be taking the idea of adding the set bonus into the equation, totally skipped over that...), and you even noticed that they can be saved locally (steam cloud settings may not be something we can change though :()

(speaking just about armour for the moment to keep it relatively simple) However, there is a minor flaw that I really want to see how you resolve. At the very least, we have two types of characters in this game with totally different stat requirements (hero/tower). The hero on the map can only ever be of one type, so how do we fairly compare against the other(s)?

PS
Our second update does include some changes to the comparer, mainly focused around resolving issues with the existing implementation (ie. upgraded items having a much lower rating than should be expected). Biasing is still on hold pending time required for working out all the kinks that are guaranteed to arise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply.

Regarding the flaw with multiple heroes... One way to approach this could be to make the comparer settings separate for each character on the account. Then during comparison process the comparer would need to compare a new item's score against list of score values created from equipped items of same type across all characters on the account. If the new item's score exceeds any score on the list then the item is a potential upgrade to at least one of the account's characters.

This however can create another inconvenience as sometimes the player may want for example to keep a separate set of characters with lower stats for lower level (or more challenging) play. Depending on the strength of the gear on those characters the comparer may end up showing half the drops as green on higher level maps even though the player wouldn't be looking for upgrades for the secondary characters. To solve this maybe something like a check box type list on which characters to include for the comparison would in my mind be pretty much required.

The next issue would of course be managing the settings information as to avoid changing save files the information would need to be stored elsewhere but would still require additions to the save(load) process. A possible solution to this could be to create a function/method that is called after regular character save(load) process that would load(save) the comparer data from(to) for example local files (default values in case of missing / corrupt data) and then (in case of load) add it to the new comparer data fields under character data.



Regarding complexity of non-armor items... I used a piece or armor in my initial message to keep the message more compact and simple as the purpose of the message was to transfer the idea I had on the matter instead of loosing too much focus into specifics. One way to simply non-armor (or accessory) comparison could be to use the rule set of the new item to break down all the stats of interest of the equipped item into how many "upgrades" it would take to turn an item with all zero stats into the equipped item (at least when selected stats are concerned) and add unused upgrades to the value to get a score. Then using again the rule set of the new item, break down the respective stats on the new item to get how many "upgrades" the item already has in its select stats. Add unused upgrades of the new item to this value to get a score to compare against the score value of the equipped item.

Example

Take an imaginary system where weapons normally get base 100 damage / upgrade, 1 attack rate / upgrade, and 1 reload speed / upgrade. If a weapon is of ultimate quality, the damage/upgrade value receives the 1.4 multiplier. The character used in comparison has a has damage, fire rate, and reload speed selected as stats of interest in comparer settings.

New ultimate weapon: damage = 1000, fire rate = 3, reload speed = -33, 1/123 upgrades used
    breakdown of existing stats: 1000/(100 x 1.4) + 3/1 + -33/1 = -22.857 (about), now add (123-1) unused upgrades
    >>> score = 99.143 (about)
Currently equipped non-ultimate weapon: damage = 10000, fire rate = 6, reload speed = 4 50/52 upgrades used
    note: breakdown uses the rule set of the new item
    breakdown of existing stats: 10000/(100 x 1.4) + 6/1 + 4/1 = 81.429 (about), now add (52-50) unused upgrades
    >>> score = 83.429 (about)
Result: Green thumb. And indeed, even if we fix the bad reload to the same value as in equipped weapon and up the fire rate, the remaining upgrades will push the new weapon's damage to 12480 while the current weapon's maximum damage with the same side stats is 10200.

One flaw in the method above is that depending on the player's choices the unused upgrades may or may not have greater value under the rule set of the new weapon due to the new weapon's 1.4 multiplier on damage / upgrade value versus 1 of the equipped one. To this I haven't found a definite solution but one approximation would be to assume that the player would dump the unused upgrades only to damage. To include this the comparator would need to simulate the upgrade process to get a fully upgraded version of the equipped weapon and break down the equipped score from that. Though, this assumption could potentially cause a large skew in the comparison if large number of unused upgrades exist on the equipped weapon. We can't know for sure, only assume, how the player wants to spend the points after all.

The comparison gets even more difficult if the character (say, a jester) has a blaster rifle equipped and the item being looked at is a bloodshot staff or a gladius. To take weapon type mismatches into equation can fast turn the method overly complex. Yet making too many assumptions results in poor comparison results in these kind of mismatched cases.

Anyway, sorry for the wall of text. I don't really know how to explain this in compact form.

- Xq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Walls of text aren't a problem (I tend to make them all to often myself... >.>). Just to clarify on the save/load situation, local is fine (ie. where graphics settings and the like are currently stored). The save file with all the heroes and items is pretty well locked down. I'm not entirely sure what gets included in the steam cloud synch, or what's required to add to that at this time.

Carrying on: I hadn't actually considered making an assessment for all of a players characters. I think it might have a few too many problems though. To add to your note about someone with low stat heroes, keeping local/remote data synched up could be real fun and indicating to the player which hero's it is an upgrade for is probably going to be awkward as well (the "yes it's green, now explain why" issue is back...)

The way I'm planning on tackling this is fairly similar, just keeping it to the active hero. Quite simply, instead of a single set of rating rules, we have several. Each item is rated by all of them, taking the highest as its actual rating. So if we take a piece of armour that is hero biased mostly into HP, it rates ok on my hero rule set, very poorly on the tower ruleset, and outstanding on the hero tank ruleset. the rating it uses is the one from the tank ruleset. Now we compare it against a more well rounded hero item, and its rating comes from the hero rules. it gets highlighted because the hero rating is greater than that of the tank rating, but in a different colour (defined per ruleset maybe?) so we can tell it's not a direct upgrade. The "tank" rating ends up giving us a benchmark we can use for all the rulesets, even if we aren't directly comparing stats

Weapons, I've already tried the calculate the [[9935,hashtags]] method. It works for items you could probably compare directly, but it doesn't account for the different rates of upgrading damage at all so it falls over fairly quickly. Damage needs to be reasonably directly compared (with upgrades taken into account of course). The problem lies in trying to balance them with hero stats in the equation. As an extreme example, Pawn Shots can get 200k+ damage, which somehow needs to not completely overshadow any hero stats while the same equation needs to work on things with damage that'll stop at under 10% of that. Log/Exp scaling hides differences on really high damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@EagleOne quote:

Survivals such as Sky City and Kings Game are giving regularly at least 1 Sup/Ult (armor) per run. Sky City takes about 60 minutes for me with transcendent armored builders, Kings Game roundabout 90 minutes but with higher drop rates than Sky City. That's a fair drop rate to me, more than fair. The game is already pretty easy with the new bonus maps like Tavern Defense and Akatiti. Challenges such as Lab Assault and Moonbase are making it even easier.


I've played tons of survivals and I also did tons of Lab Assault. In my opinion drop chances for Supreme+ is just as high as for survivals on maps like Sky City / Kings Game.



I have done 3 Kings Game Survivals now, NMHC, 0 sup, and above and junk trans.  Got a few so so trans pieces on Aquanos NMHC, and 12/12 absolute junk seahorses, so bad I would be embarrassed to give them away so I sold them.  I guess the RNG doesn't like me or I have no luck?  All I'm saying is that if one is running NMHC survival, drops should be better than insane, or at least have a floor on stats and number of upgrades.  Because at this rate for me survivals are just a waste of my time, I have better luck in loot rewards from beating TD campaign on insane or NM, and the only place for accs in quantity are lab.  Think I got 3 or 4 last 35 wave survival I did and they were lvl 30ish accs.  Never tried doing a full sky city survival yet though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@anotherengineer quote:

I have done 3 Kings Game Survivals now, NMHC, 0 sup, and above and junk trans.  Got a few so so trans pieces on Aquanos NMHC, and 12/12 absolute junk seahorses, so bad I would be embarrassed to give them away so I sold them.  I guess the RNG doesn't like me or I have no luck?  All I'm saying is that if one is running NMHC survival, drops should be better than insane, or at least have a floor on stats and number of upgrades.  Because at this rate for me survivals are just a waste of my time, I have better luck in loot rewards from beating TD campaign on insane or NM, and the only place for accs in quantity are lab.  Think I got 3 or 4 last 35 wave survival I did and they were lvl 30ish accs.  Never tried doing a full sky city survival yet though.

3rd rewrite since the great forums are continuously logging me out and deleting my text -..-


So I keep it short...

Yes, unlucky such as me today with Lab... did 40 runs... nothing to show for... it's called unlucky strikes. However NMHC survival is for sure better than Insane... camp rewards are generated different... and then I'm referring back to the possibility of an extraordinary good draw but also about the blanks.


The system worked for a long long time now... Lab has ruined it a bit... people are spoilt by success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drops in survival are random, which means a small sample size is not a good indicator of average drops. I have run 100's of survivals and have had stretches with no sup+ for 5 or 10 in a row, but have also gotten as many as 5 sup+ in one run, and have had a streak of over 10 consecutive runs with sup+. Of course sup+ are also random, so I have let quite a few remain on the ground to sell.

@anotherengineer quote:

I have done 3 Kings Game Survivals now, NMHC, 0 sup, and above and junk trans.  Got a few so so trans pieces on Aquanos NMHC, and 12/12 absolute junk seahorses, so bad I would be embarrassed to give them away so I sold them.  I guess the RNG doesn't like me or I have no luck?  All I'm saying is that if one is running NMHC survival, drops should be better than insane, or at least have a floor on stats and number of upgrades.  Because at this rate for me survivals are just a waste of my time, I have better luck in loot rewards from beating TD campaign on insane or NM, and the only place for accs in quantity are lab.  Think I got 3 or 4 last 35 wave survival I did and they were lvl 30ish accs.  Never tried doing a full sky city survival yet though.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In response to CrzyRndm's message on previous page.

It seems I misunderstood the earlier question about the multiple types of characters and gave a reply according to how I understood it at the time. Regarding the approach you described I see a couple of possible issues too, at least when I consider how I use my characters. While my roster does handle several different roles, there is normally only one role for each character.

As an example: I'll define rule sets for a builder and a fighter in comparer settings. I start a map, build it, and swap to my fighter for the combat. Now at some point I get a loot drop that is highlighted. I'll go and check the item and find it to be a nice piece of tower gear, obviously highlighted because of the good score from builder rule set. Well, my fighter has no use for it due to having a different role so I'll store the item for later comparison. The combat ends and I'll swap to my builder and see that while the item's general strength was stronger than my fighter's gear it is inferior to my builder's gear. So the item ends up not being useful for either of my characters in this example.

The problem as I see is that by keeping it just with the active character it may be hard to get a reliable comparison from an item unless the item fits with the purpose of the said character. And that is one reason why I suggested comparison for multiple characters simultaneously. Regarding the color coding, the item tiers for mythical and above are already color coded. Would adding two (or more?) colors into the mix might make it harder to interpreter?

Of course it may be just that I haven't correctly understood your approach.

Regarding the two issues you brought up for my approach, local / remote data sync shouldn't be too much of a problem in my view. I tried to describe a possible solution to this with the chapter where I was describing the save / load routine additions and the method there was supposed to be one that would not require any changes to the actual remote save files. Though, a player would still experience a loss of comparer settings if he/she would change computer without copying/transferring the setting file. Regarding the issue "yes it's green, now explain why", maybe a name tag with the name of the receiving character could be places somewhere? Or then just rely on the player knowing approximately what kind of gear each of his/hers characters are looking for.

One thing that has also come to my mind is that regardless of approach it would probably be wise to keep the (improved) non-biased comparer as a default one and the biased one as something the player needs to manually activate before coming into effect (saved setting). The reason being that a new player may not be sufficiently aware on how the game works to create proper rule sets from the start.



What comes to [[9935,hashtags]] method, I fail to see how it would fall too badly as long as we aren't comparing weapons that use different mechanics (such as rifle vs sword). As long as the method answers to the following questions:

#1 If we had a blank version of the new item, how many upgrades would it take to turn it into the actual new item for the select stats. Upgrading uses the upgrade rules of the new item, the result may also be negative.

#2 If we had a blank version of the new item, how many upgrades would it take to turn it stat wise into the same item as the receiving character currently has equipped for the select stats. Upgrading uses the upgrade rules of the new item, the result may also be negative.

#3 If we take #2 - #1 do we get a value that is less than the amount of free upgrades on the actual new item. If yes then it should take less than the available upgrades to turn the new item equally powerful as the equipped one.

The above questions are enough if the equipped weapon is fully upgraded and similar enough. If not then we would need to make an educated guess where the remaining upgrades would go (damage in case of a weapon?) and "upgrade" the equipped weapon according to its upgrade rules to get the "actual new item" stats for #1.

What comes to the example about the strong weapon vs weapon with less potential maximum damage. Yeah, comparing a pawn shot to say, blaster rifle could become challenging so maybe if the player has selected dps stats in comparer settings (damage, fire rate, extra projectiles) the comparison algorithm should combine those values into a dps value and see how many upgrades it takes to push the dps on the evaluated item to its current value (and same for the equipped one) and use that along with other upgrade count sources.

When it comes to high damage overshadowing hero stats: if say, hero damage is selected as stats of interest and the new item spawned with -200 in that stat then it would take -200 upgrades to get from 0 to -200 so that stat alone would cause a large penalty to the item's score on its own I see bigger problem being a much greater value in selected hero stat overshadowing damage (like -100 equipped, +400 new). Then its up to the player to set the stats of interest so that specific hero stats are left out from comparison if high overall value of said stats on said character make changes caused by single item in that stat mostly irrelevant (due to logarithmic investment-return scaling). Other approach would be of course to add hero damage stat and its logarithmic scaling into the mentioned dps calculation.

- Xq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@mayhem_zero quote:

 I have run 100's of survivals

Something I absolutely don't have the time for.

I barely have the time to complete any survival unless I start on wave 28, or just AFK it, in which case I get mana and XP but no loot.  And which is the reason why more people do lab runs compared to survivals. 

It all comes down to the time vs progress curve.  if a typical survival is about 90 min.  I have done ones from wave 1 to 35 and they are closer to 3 hrs, so 3 to 5 of them = about 6-15 hours, and after 15 hours of work if there is nothing to show for it, most people call it quits.  Time is a precious commodity in life, people don't like wasting it, and others don't have any to waste.  Not saying sup and up should drop like flies, but for a certain level of difficulty on a given map with a particular level of challenge drops should still be random, but should at least fall in a normal distribution type curve.  With Decent Myth being center on NMHC end game maps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@anotherengineer quote:


@mayhem_zero quote:

 I have run 100's of survivals

Something I absolutely don't have the time for.

I barely have the time to complete any survival unless I start on wave 28, or just AFK it, in which case I get mana and XP but no loot.  And which is the reason why more people do lab runs compared to survivals. 

It all comes down to the time vs progress curve.  if a typical survival is about 90 min.  I have done ones from wave 1 to 35 and they are closer to 3 hrs, so 3 to 5 of them = about 6-15 hours, and after 15 hours of work if there is nothing to show for it, most people call it quits.  Time is a precious commodity in life, people don't like wasting it, and others don't have any to waste.  Not saying sup and up should drop like flies, but for a certain level of difficulty on a given map with a particular level of challenge drops should still be random, but should at least fall in a normal distribution type curve.  With Decent Myth being center on NMHC end game maps.

Nope, a guraanteed drop will lead to just one thing (survival has actually a much higher consistency than Lab Assault, I only pick up trans pieces if they are double capping or close to)... people will go straight forward to that kind of map to boost themselves, skipping lot of the game... they already do since they only have to join 1! run on NM on one of the latest maps to boost their xp like crazy. Then moving over to Lab. New players haven't an easier time to progress than ever before. They only know Lab Assault because they don't even try other things before they haven't reached 4-5k stats. If you are able to do 20-30 lab runs in a row... to play for 2 hours in a row... then you obviously have the time to do it.


You start obviously not on Wave 1 of a survival -.- Please don't construe strange cases to talk bad about survival. Sup/Ult starts to drop on Wave 20+ to my experience (most ultimates I've got were dropping on Wave 23). Using my 5k transcendent-armored builders, I'm able to let the build alone... I usually leave the chair and do other stuff or I'm watching TV.


I haven't had too much time lately. Below results have for sure a too small sample size to judge about it and the RNG change affected it but at the end I say the drop rate is too high.


Palantir NMHC Wave 18-30 (2 Summoners)
7 Supremes, 1 Ultimate
4 Supremes, 1 Ultimate

Kings Game NMHC Wave 18-30 (2 Summoners)
3 Supremes, 2 Ultimates (3rd Feb)

Tavern Defense NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
4 Supremes, 2 Ultimates

Winter Wonderland NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
3 Supremes, 2 Ultimates
6 Supremes, 4 Ultimates (31st Jan)

Buccaneer Bay NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
7 Supremes, 3 Ultimates
4 Supremes, 1 Ultimate


Tinkerer's Lab wasn't bad either but I'm using Monk there since the goal of running it is to get my hands on a tube. Haven't touched Akatiti yet because I'm pretty sure Summoner only means continuing maintenance. Another note, these survivals takes some more time than 90 minutes, but regularly they are done within 2 hours.


We don't need a Buff... if we need anything then it is a nerf of Lab. But then again; people enjoy the game on different ways... However, saying Lab is better is just plain wrong... Lab has given me 1 Ult++ til yet... survivals 2 and ww camp 1 :) (that doesn't mean survival is better but it also doesnt mean lab is better)


With all the experience collected both are worth to be played... survival is just a lil bit harder since you actually have to use a strategy, to actually have a variety of prepared builders. People are saying survival isn't worth because they are already well progressed with stuff from Lab. Getting better items including trans gets harder and harder also while exclusively playing Lab. Lot of people needs to realize that there is no point into progression beyond 6k. While you are going to massage your ego with an increased, more common dropping Sup+, new players will be boosted more and more... They already have no clue about the game... there is such a huge lack of knowledge which could have been collected so easily while playing regularly the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While your experience is all well and good, the fact of the matter is that some people just don't have that luck.

My last 2 King's Game survivals for armor netted literally nothing above Trans, and disappointing trans to say the least - had I gotten even a single UltI might consider running them more often, but I find that survivals are consistently bad. Beyond the stunning lack of sup+ for me, all the armor that did drop was horrendous, with at least 60% of the trans only having 3 or less resistances.  This is not, in my mind, an acceptable level of gear to be dropping from a 1.5 hour map. (18-30 NMHCMM) If I were to do Lab Assault for the same amount of time, I would get on average 1-3 supremes, maybe an Ultimate, and *usually* a nice accessory, maybe an ult++ pet. Not to mention that 99% of the armor will have all 4 resistances. In comparison to Lab Assault, for me, survivals have a VERY long way to go.


Since we're talking about Survival, I might as well touch on Weapons too. In the past ~ month I have done:

3 Moraggo runs

2 Aquanos runs

2 Sky City runs

In total I have gotten ~10 ultimate weapons (no u+ or ++), none from Moraggo. (It seems nobody else is capable of getting ult from Moraggo either, so the loot generator for that map might be messed up or something). For the most part, all of these weapons have had 1 or 2 stats above 400. Since I am looking for tower weapons, this is quite clearly unacceptably low. (yeah, yeah, high standards, etc.; I don't care) Basically i can't farm myself a good tower lance for the life of me. I might as well just go spam akatiti and in the time it takes to run 3 Aquas (its the map that seems to be the most generous right now) I could get a slew of Ultimate obsidians and maybe a good sparus or two while Aquanos gives me a hot load of crap. Survivals are outclassed in every aspect right now, and I wish that wasn't the case.

Tower gun? Buccaneer Bay.

Tower [anything else]? Akatiti Jungle.

Armor? Lab Assault.

Accs? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Only the Seahorse and Cat are worth doing NMHC survivals for unless you want a certain core drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@EagleOne quote:


Nope, a guraanteed drop will lead to just one thing (survival has actually a much higher consistency than Lab Assault, I only pick up trans pieces if they are double capping or close to)... people will go straight forward to that kind of map to boost themselves, skipping lot of the game... they already do since they only have to join 1! run on NM on one of the latest maps to boost their xp like crazy. Then moving over to Lab. New players haven't an easier time to progress than ever before. They only know Lab Assault because they don't even try other things before they haven't reached 4-5k stats. If you are able to do 20-30 lab runs in a row... to play for 2 hours in a row... then you obviously have the time to do it.


You start obviously not on Wave 1 of a survival -.- Please don't construe strange cases to talk bad about survival. Sup/Ult starts to drop on Wave 20+ to my experience (most ultimates I've got were dropping on Wave 23). Using my 5k transcendent-armored builders, I'm able to let the build alone... I usually leave the chair and do other stuff or I'm watching TV.


I haven't had too much time lately. Below results have for sure a too small sample size to judge about it and the RNG change affected it but at the end I say the drop rate is too high.


Palantir NMHC Wave 18-30 (2 Summoners)
7 Supremes, 1 Ultimate
4 Supremes, 1 Ultimate

Tavern Defense NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
4 Supremes, 2 Ultimates

Winter Wonderland NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
3 Supremes, 2 Ultimates

Buccaneer Bay NMHC Wave 18-35 (2 Summoners)
7 Supremes, 3 Ultimates
4 Supremes, 1 Ultimate


With all the experience collected both are worth to be played... survival is just a lil bit harder since you actually have to use a strategy, to actually have a variety of prepared builders. People are saying survival isn't worth because they are already well progressed with stuff from Lab. Getting better items including trans gets harder and harder also while exclusively playing Lab. Lot of people needs to realize that there is no point into progression beyond 6k. While you are going to massage your ego with an increased, more common dropping Sup+, new players will be boosted more and more... They already have no clue about the game... there is such a huge lack of knowledge which could have been collected so easily while playing regularly the game.

I'm not looking for Sup+, I could care less about hi-end gear.  I'm just looking at decent 3.5k myth & trans and that's good enough for me, I don't even like spending the time building to lvl 100.  Lvl 83 for sup accs is good enough for me.  I can start on any wave for a survival, there is no rule against starting on wave 1.  But as I have said for myself, a few KG and Aquanos survivals and I can't even put together 1 (half decent - 3k ish) trans tower set, seems kinda like whats the point to me................Maybe that's just my luck though.  I have a better 1/1 myth tower set than my 1 and only trans tower set.

My last Aqua NMHC, 2 decent myths, 3 decent trans, all of different types (only had a summoner out)  I could care less if I never got an ult piece of armor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Caimen0 quote:

While your experience is all well and good, the fact of the matter is that some people just don't have that luck.

You mean like others are not that lucky on Lab like you and the few who are saying Ult++ every 250 runs? That's a matter of view...


@Caimen0 quote:My last 2 King's Game survivals for armor netted literally nothing above Trans, and disappointing trans to say the least - had I gotten even a single UltI might consider running them more often, but I find that survivals are consistently bad. Beyond the stunning lack of sup+ for me, all the armor that did drop was horrendous, with at least 60% of the trans only having 3 or less resistances.  This is not, in my mind, an acceptable level of gear to be dropping from a 1.5 hour map. (18-30 NMHCMM) If I were to do Lab Assault for the same amount of time, I would get on average 1-3 supremes, maybe an Ultimate, and *usually* a nice accessory, maybe an ult++ pet. Not to mention that 99% of the armor will have all 4 resistances. In comparison to Lab Assault, for me, survivals have a VERY long way to go.

I highly doubt your results about Sup/Ult regarding survival and compared to Lab. 40 runs a 4 players (120-140 mins), I got nothing not even an accessory which was worth keeping. I wouldn't mind if I get carried like you... and that's also the actual point which you try to hide and makes you biased against survivals... You don't have to do anything on Lab to get your stuff. Whatsoever, trans armor is also meh on Lab. What do you want with trans pieces of 170-220 ups? Survival has a much higher drop rates of 250+^ trans. Why is the armor actual bad from survival/lab? Because you and me are pretty much running around with best of the best gear... you don't get the point that you probably have already such good stuff that the likelihood to find an upgrade is lower and lower?


I also doubt that you are changing your accessories regularly on a weekly basis and of course you will have no usage for most of the U++ pets which will be rewarded there. However all these facts you just have described... you don't think... let's say... maybe... that's the reason why Lab Assault is overpowered? It is dropping a huge variety of stuff, armor, pets, weapons, accs... all with possible very good stats... while it requires almost nothing to do... you are spoiled. (not meant offensive, just an observation)


@Caimen0 quote:

Since we're talking about Survival, I might as well touch on Weapons too. In the past ~ month I have done:

3 Moraggo runs

2 Aquanos runs

2 Sky City runs

In total I have gotten ~10 ultimate weapons (no u+ or ++), none from Moraggo. (It seems nobody else is capable of getting ult from Moraggo either, so the loot generator for that map might be messed up or something).

I also doubt your statement about the weapons... the weapons are dropping much more as ultimate than armor... However, Moraggo and Aquanos are freaking easy to complete with lower stats, it doesn't make sense that these maps are dropping ult stuff like candy... Funny that we are again talking about ult quality stuff and drop rates since you claimed before to not want to change this actually. I know some people who have gotten their Ult++ pristine items there, especially on Moraggo. Does it took a while? For sure. Why? Jackpot items are freaking rare?


@Caimen0 quote:For the most part, all of these weapons have had 1 or 2 stats above 400. Since I am looking for tower weapons, this is quite clearly unacceptably low. (yeah, yeah, high standards, etc.; I don't care) Basically i can't farm myself a good tower lance for the life of me. I might as well just go spam akatiti and in the time it takes to run 3 Aquas (its the map that seems to be the most generous right now) I could get a slew of Ultimate obsidians and maybe a good sparus or two while Aquanos gives me a hot load of crap. Survivals are outclassed in every aspect right now, and I wish that wasn't the case.

Clearly unacceptable low... LOL? This has nothing to do with high standards. That's entitlement!!! Thanks, but no thanks, I don't need a link to a definition of this word... again. I tried to encourage you to play DD:Eternity since it seems you care much more about the stats than the game itself. Please move over to compete your 10k+ stats within a few days/weeks, the game is pretty similar, offers a lot of actual cool features. Come on, you cannot expect to progress even more after 4000 hours into this game.


Although it's just me who says survivals does more fun and is also well giving... there are others who agree to this. However, if you certainly think that Lab is much better than anything else... what about a nerf of Lab? It doesn't make sense to buff a major part of the game, survival and older campaigns just to be in line with Lab Assault. It would be much easier to nerf the single map which gives way too much and good stuff.

@Caimen0 quote:

Tower gun? Buccaneer Bay.

Tower [anything else]? Akatiti Jungle.

Armor? Lab Assault.

Accs? AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Only the Seahorse and Cat are worth doing NMHC survivals for unless you want a certain core drop.

Tower Gun? Aqua, Sky, Kings, Tink, Bay...

Tower Spear? Aqua, Sky, Tink, Aka...

Tower Sword? Sky, Aka, Bay...

Tower Staff? Moraggo, Aka...

Armor? Lab Assault? You mean godlies and myths? The bad Trans pieces? Too high standards?


Again you are not talking about Ult and the damn low drop rates :D I would love to prove you wrong with your statements about survivals unfortunately I'm not willing to upload hours of video material... so you may want to join my survival runs anytime? Or I join yours, or we do some Lab Assault together? 


You know, my shop is full of capping trans pieces collected from survivals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can doubt my statements as much as you want. I don't care. I will in return doubt your statements about your armor runs, because in my experience, every survival map drops ***. Just because you get nice things from survival DOES NOT mean that EVERYONE will have the same experience. Ever heard of the saying "your mileage may vary"? That saying applies to literally everything in this game.

It is a fact, however, that the best tower weapons in the game come from Akatiti Jungle and Buccaneer Bay. I know the spawn caps on those items, and they cannot be beat by any survival drop. If you want the most efficient use of your time, you go there.

Also, I have done multiple runs with others - ask Uticontra (viraL) or Genetycs about our last forays in Sky and Aqua survival looking for a u90 ab2 capping lance. It was pretty ***ing pathetic. We found a total of 2 that fit the "capping ab2" part, both of which had maybe 2 stats above 400, only 1 of which was useful.


Also, I'm fine on the capping trans bit, but thank you for the offer. :)

msXkaza.jpg

Edit: I just read through you post again, and it seems I missed you using the word "entitlement" again. Please stop. "entitlement" is feeling like you deserve something that you have not yet earned. I want items with somewhat decent stats to spawn. Never once did I ask for a perfect 4x 490+ tower stats survival weapon. Even if I spend the next 100 hours farming survival, I would be happy if all the weapons spawn with 3-4 stats above 400. I don't care if they are perfect tower weapons, DPS stat sticks, or just have useless combinations of 400+ stats. I just want the weapons that drop to have a possibility of not being terrible.

That may be high expectations, but there is no reality in which that attitude is entitlement. Stop using a word that you don't know the meaning to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First off it wasn't an offer to give you capping trans... I don't want to give you anything. You said survival is dropping just meh trans... of course capping trans is meh for you. You couldn't be more spoiled. Interesting to see that you say survival has different drop rates and the luck differs from time to time... it's the same thing for Lab Assault... you know?


Saying you get regularly 1-3 sup and 1 ult within 30 lab runs... so basically all 10 runs something "nice" then you are already miles ahead from my experience and others who are running survivals. You are not going to replace your gear with better lab gear like you try to make us believe it.


I invited you or asked you to play together because I wish that I would have that luck on labs like you while you most likely profit by my luck on survivals. So we would be able to prove each other.


However, back to your Aqua lance issue and your more than questionable comparison... I do think your stats hunting (wanted to use another word but anything what it leads to is an infraction... you can't name things by the name here) is blinding you. You compare unique survival drops with campaign rewards? Really? Do I really need to say something about the broken part of your comparison? Sometimes I'm wondering when you have started to play the game. Shard maps were introduced when 1k was freaking high end. The shard maps came along with higher limitation... myths were introduced and a bit later transcendent. I'm also not happy about Bay Rewards as already said at the Steam Discussions. Way too good, way too easy to obtain... The whole game, endgame, turns into a game for casual players. Join 1! NM run... do TDPS by your own a few times... run some Lab Assault... reach endgame within a few days. I know, I know... endgame isn't 4-5k stats for you... while not a single map requires that high stats to be beaten -.-


Your constant complaining about getting max possible stats is... oh wait... high standards... not entitlement :D I have no clue how someone like you is able to play a game with RNG based elements for so many hours right now. There is no purpose for higher, best possible stats than massaging your ego. You say you want an easier "endgame" progression? While higher stats just massage your ego... new players are getting boosted more and more.


The beginners are the most important group of players, progression should be made for them not for "high" endgame players. Endgame is 4-5k... just because U++ exists doesn't mean you have to run around with it... get over it... you won't? Then #%&$§#& grind for it but don't ruin a nice game. It's not nice? You've played it for 4k hours -.-


Go play DD:E if you are after stats... go play DD:E if you don't want to grind (well some gold farming needs to be done to upgrade your stuff)... go play DD:E if you want an even easier game... Running around with U++ or with highest possible stats is for sure cool and I'll pull my hat if you reached 'em. You know... you don't have to farm it by your own... that's why trading has been added. To trade for items you are not able to get your hands on.


I know you and some others will not get the point... it's just sad that high-end player are thinking they still have to progress at all costs. You guys couldn't care less about new players... (oh wait you may you do... wanna a more casual game? DD:E is perfect! It's a great game with cool features... sadly too easy... perfect for people who don't want to spent 100+ hours in this game.)


....

100 hours = 2000 lab runs (at 3 minutes per run) = 200 Sup/Ult pieces (at 1 "nice" piece per 10 runs) = uber endgame :)

Really? Asking for more?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just recently... from one of the 2 bay survivals...

0491E70FD8D4F54A47C273FCE949913683C4C7BD

and this one from one of the 2 palantir survivals
E1078759629AC424B332A51F64580F71E2F1B42E

Yes, two u++ boots :/ ... but I guess I faked this... oh and the ups are way too low i guess? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@EagleOne quote:

Really? Asking for more?

I don't think anyone is asking for better loot from the current maps. If they are, I wouldn't agree. What I, and presumably a lot of others want, is more variety. The "more" is simply asking survival drop rates to be on par with lab for the harder maps, and maybe a bit better if any future maps that come out prove to be exceptionally difficult. Alternatives for farming ++ tower pets would be nice too. If I recall correctly, more maps should be dropping accessories on par with lab in the coming update. This isn't a matter of entitlement because I want ++ everything. This is me simply asking that if I desire some of this gear, I don't have to think "well I better do lab assault" every time.


Lab gives the best chance at high end armor (which, like it or not, is something players enjoy getting. It's not needed to complete maps, but it's part of the game.), so the request is for other options to be on par. Survival can give good armor, too, of course, but certainly not to the extent which lab gives. Now would nerfing lab level the playing field? Of course it would, and if Lab had been released a week ago, I might have supported the idea. But it's been years. The damage has been done; gear from lab is equipped on nearly every character you see. Decreasing the item spawns from lab wouldn't fix the years where it's been farmed with current drop rates. However, if the survival drops rates are made to be equal to Lab, the issue would be solved without having to worry about prior drop rates.


tl;dr:

Currently, this is (a low estimate for) lab:

100 hours = 2000 lab runs (at 3 minutes per run) = 200 Sup/Ult pieces (at 1 "nice" piece per 10 runs)

What I want for survival (an equally low estimate):

100 hours = 50 survival armor runs (at 2 hours per run) = 200Sup/Ult pieces (at 4 "nice" pieces per run)

^- if this is what you currently experience, you are certainly the exception. If everyone had this experience, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Genetycs quote:

I don't think anyone is asking for better loot from the current maps. If they are, I wouldn't agree.

You may want to read Caimen0's posts again... he clearly is asking for better stuff, no... he is complaining about the bad loot, the trash loot other maps are offering. I don't think capping myths and trans is crap. His desire is Ultimate stuff with best possible stuff. 400ish stats on an ultimate is unacceptable low? What in freaking hell is going on? You don't think that's pure entitlement rather than "high standards"... LOL


@Genetycs quote:

What I, and presumably a lot of others want, is more variety. The "more" is simply asking survival drop rates to be on par with lab for the harder maps, and maybe a bit better if any future maps that come out prove to be exceptionally difficult. Alternatives for farming ++ tower pets would be nice too. If I recall correctly, more maps should be dropping accessories on par with lab in the coming update. This isn't a matter of entitlement because I want ++ everything. This is me simply asking that if I desire some of this gear, I don't have to think "well I better do lab assault" every time.

I want more variety too... but instead of buffing all other parts of the game which was and is working well enough... you don't think nerfing a single map which clearly gives out too much good stuff is the better choice than f***ing up the rest of the game to be in line with Lab? If we would have an issue to clear anything in this game I would agree of buffing other parts of the game. Lab Assault has ruined a lot, Caimen0 is a perfect example of someone who feels entitled to get something more valuable for more work. Lab Assault was designed to be a hard map.. and it actually is a hard map IF people would kill the EVs regularly. I'm sure it wasn't intended to be that easy but it is what it is now.


However the point is; Lab gives way too much good stuff for the requirements it has and for the effort you have to put into. People say other parts of the game are bad, items are ***ty because they already earned so overpowered items from lab that other items are for real looking bad compared to the stuff they own. Lab Assault isn't required to beat the game... Lab Assault isn't the only way to progress. Lab Assault is known to be a shortcut regarding progressing... people fall into the trap? And now they want a better gaming experience from other maps?
They clearly shouldn't have played Lab Assault in first place. Please don't say now that they had no clue about it... common sense please. It's obvious that a map is overpowered if it is giving stuff way better than it takes to do it.


@Genetycs quote:

Lab gives the best chance at high end armor (which, like it or not, is something players enjoy getting. It's not needed to complete maps, but it's part of the game.), so the request is for other options to be on par. Survival can give good armor, too, of course, but certainly not to the extent which lab gives. Now would nerfing lab level the playing field? Of course it would, and if Lab had been released a week ago, I might have supported the idea. But it's been years. The damage has been done; gear from lab is equipped on nearly every character you see. Decreasing the item spawns from lab wouldn't fix the years where it's been farmed with current drop rates. However, if the survival drops rates are made to be equal to Lab, the issue would be solved without having to worry about prior drop rates.

Wrong! Lab doesn't have the best chance at high end armor. That's what I'm saying... the chances of good loot is equally for Lab and survival... but you can't compare survival on Aquanos/Moraggo a map which has been released when 1k was high-end with Lab. I never referred to these maps. Sky is harder than the other shard maps and also has higher chances at loot, such as kings. I don't get it why we need to reinvent the wheel if a spoke (Lab) is broken. The difference it has is simply the difficulty it takes to do it. While you are in need of a variety of builders with solid stats which requires some time to prepare, you really don't need anything else than a drill type weapon and some Jump'N'Run skills to complete Lab. Of course people running it more often... of course people experience that Lab is giving "better"... of course they expect that actual harder parts of the game are giving better. That's the trap... that's oddness of Lab... it isn't in line with rest of the game! That's why it is commonly called to be a shortcut. It is clearly wrong to get other parts of the game to work like Lab... to act like a shortcut.




@Genetycs quote:tl;dr:

Currently, this is (a low estimate for) lab:

100 hours = 2000 lab runs (at 3 minutes per run) = 200 Sup/Ult pieces (at 1 "nice" piece per 10 runs)

What I want for survival (an equally low estimate):

100 hours = 50 survival armor runs (at 2 hours per run) = 200Sup/Ult pieces (at 4 "nice" pieces per run)

^- if this is what you currently experience, you are certainly the exception. If everyone had this experience, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The estimation I made was based on Caimen0's statement of getting basically 1 nice piece per 10 runs... You say that's a low estimation? Means you experience even higher rates, 1 piece every 8, 6 or 4 runs? I can call myself lucky if I get a nice piece every 20 runs. I'm certainly not the exception but as I said it isn't a huge sample size too judge from but that's also the case for Lab. While you seem to be 3-5times more lucky than me on lab it seems I'm 3-5times more lucky on survivals than you.


I want to go back to

Lab gives the best chance at high end armor (which, like it or not, is something players enjoy getting. It's not needed to complete maps, but it's part of the game.)

I do get it that there are players who enjoy getting high stats, I do like it by myself (my focus is health and damage) but why do they feel entitled? You say they don't feel entitled? Why they are complaining again? They think they have invested enough time for their goal... and still they are hunting... they are getting frustrated that they are still hunting... Too high expectations maybe? Too high "standards"?


ffs just why? Do they get a cookie? Are they able to beat anything, others are not able to do? I ran around with trans... most likely I'm one of a few with highest high-end trans. It's not that survival wouldn't drop capping ults, I do have capping ult sets in my inventory. I just don't see any reason to run around with 7.5-8k stats if full-myths 3.5k and trans-armored 5.5k for afk'ing is enough. So you want full Ult? You keep doing Lab anyways, since you are buying runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@EagleOne quote:
You keep doing Lab anyways, since you are buying runs.

nothing else you said was worth responding to because you seem stuck on a lot of preconceived notions but this is hilarious


as if i can afford to buy lab runs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


@Genetycs quote:

nothing else you said was worth responding to because you seem stuck on a lot of preconceived notions but this is hilarious


as if i can afford to buy lab runs

Thanks, being unable to respond with argues and answers, shows me that I've given a solid reasoning :) I actually couldn't care less about Lab Assault if you guys wouldn't request a buff for the rest of the game. Makes just no sense.


EDIT: 31st Jan
Haha, certain individuals are saying I do hate Sup+Ult and I would be just jealous. That's what I hear from random players in my public runs ^^ Really? That childish? If you have an issue with my opinion, this is the place to discuss it *derp*

If you want proof of my ownership of Sup/Ult just join my games -.-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@_Xq_ quote:

In response to CrzyRndm's message on previous page....
- Xq

When you put it that way... ( can't say I wasn't aware of the weaknesses in the approach I was planning, but the bad points never look so imposing until someone else tears them apart...). Local/Remote synch is a non-issue now I've checked over a few things (I couldn't remember if the "unique" hero ID code was permanently saved or just used per session. A: It's permanent, if weird. Why they decided to only use a 16 bit range of each of 4 32-bit integers for the ID I just don't even.)

I'll have to see how things go, but it's quite possible both systems could be easily tested (better yet, I'd find a way to combine all the advantages into a single system...) since they use a lot of common features. You've atleast convinced me they're equally flawed ;). Don't know when I'll get the time to do anything about it though -.-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...