Upcoming Changes To The Pit Challenge Tier [MEGA]

Replies

  • Nauros
    5429 posts Member
    Options
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Only a graph is not a prove for what type of funtion it is, but it can give you an idea what type it might be. It will also not work. An exponential function is a function of the form f(x)=a*b^x where b is a positive real number. Here f(x) the increase and x = number of boosts. So let's assume it's an exponential function. We then have f(0) = 0, so it follows that a = 0 as b^0 = 1. So we have f(x) = 0, which I would really like, but I don't think CG will do this XD. Now you could say that we start at x = 1 and don't bother with x = 0 as that isn't really relevant for us. Although I think for coding it will be (not sure about that). We have f(1) = a*b^1 = 20 and f(2) = a*b^2 = 60. 2 functions and 2 unknowns (a and b), so we can solve this system of equations. We have ab = 20, this gives a = 20/b. We substitute a = 20/b in a*b^2 = 60 and get 20b = 60, so b = 3. So we get f(x) = (20/3)*3^x. But f(3) = 180 =/ 120, so exponential function also doesn't work here. Contradiction with assumption that the correct function was exponential.

    You can write it as a quadratic function as was shown already by @Ragnarok_COTF. Or what I think CG most likely have in their code: an arithmetic series. Which would be x_{n} = x_{n-1} + 20*n, with n = number of boosts, x_{n} the increase at n boosts and x_{0} = 0 (the starting point). Then we get
    x_{0} = 0
    x_{1} = 0 + 20*1 = 20 (correct)
    x_{2} = 20 + 20*2= 60 (correct)
    x_{3} = 60 + 20*3 = 120 (correct)
    x_{4} = 120 + 20*4 = 200 (correct)
    x_{5} = 200 + 20*5 = 300 (correct).

    I also agree the increase is way too high.

    The point of bringing up the graph was simply to demonstrate that the increases in offense at each interval, combined with the increase in speed (which the effects of are ignored in the equations people are presenting) result in a player damage graph that strongly resembles an exponential function. Thereby making the OP's claim that the "difficulty" (ability to do damage) increases "exponentially", practically correct.

    Yes, it might not literally be an exponential formula as written in the code - but in terms of how the mechanic effects damage output, the OP calling its effects "exponential" is, not completely inaccurate.

    But I do agree that we can stop the semantic debate, since we all seem to agree that level of difficulty the stacking increases of damage and speed at such small intervals is a change in difficulty that is significant enough to be concerned m

    I would disagree with that. The smaller increase in stats makes the quicker increase point manageable for teams that were already going good.

    Yes they scaled everything back, but in theory we saw a SLKR do 100%, which means he was hitting a very high penalty and could do very well in a similar situation in the new dynamic, of course he wont be doing 100%, but he will be pulling his weight (in theory). Opening up the floor to more teams/toons/players also has a large effect on the difficulty of the entire raid, which is not accounted for in your explanation of "exponential difficulty increase", and should be part of a list of factors that mitigate that, because those factors make it easier to deal damage (as you were limiting your argument to).

    That's a fair point - while the amount of damage 1 team could do has decreased significantly (regardless as to the specific mathematical descriptors used and whether or not they are accurate) but the option of using more than 4 teams may help mitigate the overall "difficulty" related to an entire roster.

    We won't know until we see things live. I do know that if there are guilds that were completing the raid that no longer are able, there will be quite the outrage. And that would be, for the most part, understandable from the perspective of those guilds.

    I agree. I also dont think we will hear any great praise from guilds who couldn't/wouldn't do it before who will now be able.

    I would however like to point out that there are many factors involved and a guild who could do it with 25-30 players not doing it now without full participation is not necessary a fair comparison. I also fully expect a higher % of failures for the first 2(ish) runs after the change than after that point. This change will have an almost new raid learning curve (almost).

    SLKR was a team requiring very specific modding, R8 and good RNG. I don’t think it was that big of an issue considering how much you needed to get it done but that’s just me

    Ok, and just so you are aware, the threshold limit of 2% is not directly related to him.

    Is it indirectly related to him? What other teams do you know that pulls any number beyond %20 in any phase?

    To the 2%, no, not really. The way it stacks is what seems to be designed to stop him.

    I believe that since they built that mechanic in they tested where he landed and other teams and the 2% was more based on the preservation of team order and keeping great doing great, good doing good and so on down the line, but the actual % he did doesnt really influence the 2% limit.

    So in theory, 5% could have muddied the waters allowing too many teams to keep previous % or close to, making it easier overall and not keeping a relative perspective on investment.

    How will the great keep doing great etc.? The definition of great will change? If something that previously doing %20 now does %3, and %5 %2.5 does this fit the your statements...or won't this happen?

    Scaling.

    If 20% was great, and now 10% is great. Someone who did 20, now doing 10, is still doing great....and so on down the line.

    What great is may change, but who is doing it shouldn't. Same for good and ok... make sense?

    Kinda does, but it probably won't fit your definition as anything over %2 will degrade too fast to make any difference=all teams reduced to a similar threshold, thus the differention in between them will evaporate.

    We already have teams that can pass the correct threshold, which is more than the 2% increase. Do you believe those teams will not be able to pass the 2% line?

    It's possible you just a negative view on things and that is skewing your view of this, as there is no practical knowledge to back what you are saying. The 2% line is much less harsh that the line we currently see.

    Yes, the 2% is less harsh, but the 6% line is much harsher - and currently there's no line before 20%.
    The raid have gotten a lot harder to beat in terms of teams (investment) needed.
    All teams which previously did more than 2% damage will now do less and all big hitters will do a lot less.
    I look forward to seeing how bad this is going to be, I wonder what our 20-30% SLKR runs will end up at for P2-3 and even more so where our 7-10% Rey P4 runs will end up.
    I'll stick to what I've posted before, final judgement is reserved until we've tried the thing, but the goalposts have certainly been moved, question is if by yards, miles or parsecs.

    Correct, most guilds are going to need more players involved per phase than previously because a small handful will not be taking down a phase.

    Honestly, I see Rey fairing nicely as her team will survive longer due to the lower increase.

    Oh nice, gonna expand our guild to 100 players then...
    How the heck can Rey team survive longer? It will face higher stats so it will die sooner. The only positive change is that her ultimate will actually do some damage now as well as protect the team for a while.

    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    Maybe not 100, but in our case, definitely more than 50.
    Fact: we barely make it now with full participation.
    Fact: most teams will be significantly less effective after the change.
    Conclusion: we will need more than 50 people or be back to grinding.
    That is my math, show yours instead of accusations of negativity. I want to be positive about it, I just can't.

    Sure, 50 players need to average 2% to make it work. This change doesnt effect anyone who can do 2% per phase.

    Teams that do more than 2% right now, will do more than 2% after the change, and some probably even more to help make up the difference for those players who cant do 2% per phase in each phase.

    I'm not asking you to be positive, but you seem to have drawn a conclusion out of nothing, and maybe reserving judgement may be more prudent until we all have some experience to build on.

    I have drawn my conclusion from the known information about the change. You keep going on about how I am overly negative while showing exactly nothing to support your view.
    Any team doing more than 2% will be less effective after the change, assuming that we are talking about the typical situation where everyone does their runs before the current bonuses kick in. Any team doing less will be unaffected. That means net negative change compared to the current state, because we are not doing exactly 2% each in every phase (and I'm not sure why you keep bringing up this unrealistic scenario), but most are doing much more in some phases and less in others. It follows that we will come up short after the change, not sure how you can consider this "out of nothing".
    I'm not disputing that scores over 2% will be possible, all I say is that they will be significantly reduced.

    If 2% is possible for all of your guild members than there is no problem, and since you agree that scores over 2% are possible you have a cushion.

    That seems like you are saying that any net negative to any single team or player can be easily distributed to the whole guild allowing you to make it through.

    There is nothing unrealistic about guilds on the edge of making a raid work, doing exactly the % needed across the board, that is always the initial plan and goal of how to develop into new raid content.

    Yes it is possible that you come up short, but it is also possible that with a proper plan and seeing the numbers of what actually works after the change that you will be ok. You didnt give much information and the reason I was focused on 2% is because any guild at the level of this content should be able to have all members put up 2%, and those numbers will be unaffected. Maybe I'm wrong about your guild makeup, but still a player putting up 4-5% should help make up for that. It's all an averaging effect.

    I'm am not being overly positive in this discussion, which is why I have stayed focused on the bare minimum each member would need to do (to answer your questionqhy I am focused on 2%), I wouldnt want to start putting out statements about teams doing 3,4,5 or even 6 % as some sort of normal, but it's all still possible, and very well might be part of the new normal we see.

    Stop playing dumb. Plese. You are better than that.
    Not everyone has teams for every phase. In fact, in middling guilds, most people probably don't. Therefore, it is usual to score nothing in some phases and compensate for it in others, to achieve the 2% average. No cushion, just non-uniform distribution. One would think that this doesn't need to be explained to someone actually playing the game.
  • Options
    This whole discussion is why raids are simply the worst game mode. From top to bottom, everything about them is lame and has been since day 1 of the original Pit. You need the entire guild to give their all but only a select few get any rewards worth the effort.
  • Options
    Kyno/Doja As one of the people who strongly advocated for raid changes both on reddit and here in the forums...

    All I can say is that these are amazing changes that directly address the actual concerns of the raid.

    Ignore the negative people who don't understand math or organizing raids and probably never did HSTR progression where everyone needed their 2% with much much more specific teams.

    Also tell Lucifer's Daddy to stop ignoring my DMs and do something about the cheater I know tons of people messaged him about, DM me for the history so I don't post it publicly if you want it.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Options
    This whole discussion is why raids are simply the worst game mode. From top to bottom, everything about them is lame and has been since day 1 of the original Pit. You need the entire guild to give their all but only a select few get any rewards worth the effort.

    That's why guilds existed in the first place.
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    This whole discussion is why raids are simply the worst game mode. From top to bottom, everything about them is lame and has been since day 1 of the original Pit. You need the entire guild to give their all but only a select few get any rewards worth the effort.

    Actually, the OG pit gave pretty good rewards at the time it was released. Still are good rewards honestly with the stun cuffs, stun guns, carbantis, etc. It’s funny how that raid gave the fairest and most level rewards and still does to this day really lol. Tank rewards are bad. HSTR outside of top 10 are terrible and even in top 10, the only upside is a chance for a crafted G12+ piece. Usually your crafted pieces or most salavge is....tank raid gear lmao.
    So yeah this structure has definitely not improved since the OG Rancor. I’ll give you that it’s gotten worse over time.
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Kyno/Doja As one of the people who strongly advocated for raid changes both on reddit and here in the forums...

    All I can say is that these are amazing changes that directly address the actual concerns of the raid.

    Ignore the negative people who don't understand math or organizing raids and probably never did HSTR progression where everyone needed their 2% with much much more specific teams.

    Also tell Lucifer's Daddy to stop ignoring my DMs and do something about the cheater I know tons of people messaged him about, DM me for the history so I don't post it publicly if you want it.

    The difference here is that there was no R5 gear gate to do HSTR. You could come up with g10/G11/G12 comps to do 2% no issues. So it wasn’t such a resource drain. Given the amount of gear choke points added since then, and the demand for resource management has gotten greater...this statement is not comparable to past raids. Now if they lowered the requirement to R3 or even just G13, then you’d have a point. But Doja confirmed the R5 gate isn’t going anywhere so...yeah
  • Options
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive
  • Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.
  • TVF
    36665 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all.

    And yet everyone complains about carbonite circuit boards.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Options
    TVF wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all.

    And yet everyone complains about carbonite circuit boards.

    Meh, they are manageable.
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Yea, I like that this is creating a counter incentive.
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol
  • MaruMaru
    3338 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    Yup, that's not a lot. We are obviously talking about rX vs r5 and not the gear to get something to g13. Even if they lowered relic reqs, that would be something like pulling it down to r3 instead of no req...and I doubt very much that will happen as well.
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    Yup, that's not a lot. We are obviously talking about rX vs r5 and not the gear to get something to g13. Even if they lowered relic reqs, that would be something like pulling it down to r3 instead of no req...and I doubt very much that will happen as well.

    Then they need to up the rewards or change the thresholds. Or regardless, change the junk rewards.

    Pinnacle end game content and this is what I get...lmao.

    xalbeditib50.png

    Tac challenge gear that I have thousands of, mk3 holos that I have hundreds of and tank raid gear...lmao
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Options
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Only a graph is not a prove for what type of funtion it is, but it can give you an idea what type it might be. It will also not work. An exponential function is a function of the form f(x)=a*b^x where b is a positive real number. Here f(x) the increase and x = number of boosts. So let's assume it's an exponential function. We then have f(0) = 0, so it follows that a = 0 as b^0 = 1. So we have f(x) = 0, which I would really like, but I don't think CG will do this XD. Now you could say that we start at x = 1 and don't bother with x = 0 as that isn't really relevant for us. Although I think for coding it will be (not sure about that). We have f(1) = a*b^1 = 20 and f(2) = a*b^2 = 60. 2 functions and 2 unknowns (a and b), so we can solve this system of equations. We have ab = 20, this gives a = 20/b. We substitute a = 20/b in a*b^2 = 60 and get 20b = 60, so b = 3. So we get f(x) = (20/3)*3^x. But f(3) = 180 =/ 120, so exponential function also doesn't work here. Contradiction with assumption that the correct function was exponential.

    You can write it as a quadratic function as was shown already by @Ragnarok_COTF. Or what I think CG most likely have in their code: an arithmetic series. Which would be x_{n} = x_{n-1} + 20*n, with n = number of boosts, x_{n} the increase at n boosts and x_{0} = 0 (the starting point). Then we get
    x_{0} = 0
    x_{1} = 0 + 20*1 = 20 (correct)
    x_{2} = 20 + 20*2= 60 (correct)
    x_{3} = 60 + 20*3 = 120 (correct)
    x_{4} = 120 + 20*4 = 200 (correct)
    x_{5} = 200 + 20*5 = 300 (correct).

    I also agree the increase is way too high.

    The point of bringing up the graph was simply to demonstrate that the increases in offense at each interval, combined with the increase in speed (which the effects of are ignored in the equations people are presenting) result in a player damage graph that strongly resembles an exponential function. Thereby making the OP's claim that the "difficulty" (ability to do damage) increases "exponentially", practically correct.

    Yes, it might not literally be an exponential formula as written in the code - but in terms of how the mechanic effects damage output, the OP calling its effects "exponential" is, not completely inaccurate.

    But I do agree that we can stop the semantic debate, since we all seem to agree that level of difficulty the stacking increases of damage and speed at such small intervals is a change in difficulty that is significant enough to be concerned m

    I would disagree with that. The smaller increase in stats makes the quicker increase point manageable for teams that were already going good.

    Yes they scaled everything back, but in theory we saw a SLKR do 100%, which means he was hitting a very high penalty and could do very well in a similar situation in the new dynamic, of course he wont be doing 100%, but he will be pulling his weight (in theory). Opening up the floor to more teams/toons/players also has a large effect on the difficulty of the entire raid, which is not accounted for in your explanation of "exponential difficulty increase", and should be part of a list of factors that mitigate that, because those factors make it easier to deal damage (as you were limiting your argument to).

    That's a fair point - while the amount of damage 1 team could do has decreased significantly (regardless as to the specific mathematical descriptors used and whether or not they are accurate) but the option of using more than 4 teams may help mitigate the overall "difficulty" related to an entire roster.

    We won't know until we see things live. I do know that if there are guilds that were completing the raid that no longer are able, there will be quite the outrage. And that would be, for the most part, understandable from the perspective of those guilds.

    I agree. I also dont think we will hear any great praise from guilds who couldn't/wouldn't do it before who will now be able.

    I would however like to point out that there are many factors involved and a guild who could do it with 25-30 players not doing it now without full participation is not necessary a fair comparison. I also fully expect a higher % of failures for the first 2(ish) runs after the change than after that point. This change will have an almost new raid learning curve (almost).

    SLKR was a team requiring very specific modding, R8 and good RNG. I don’t think it was that big of an issue considering how much you needed to get it done but that’s just me

    Ok, and just so you are aware, the threshold limit of 2% is not directly related to him.

    Is it indirectly related to him? What other teams do you know that pulls any number beyond %20 in any phase?

    To the 2%, no, not really. The way it stacks is what seems to be designed to stop him.

    I believe that since they built that mechanic in they tested where he landed and other teams and the 2% was more based on the preservation of team order and keeping great doing great, good doing good and so on down the line, but the actual % he did doesnt really influence the 2% limit.

    So in theory, 5% could have muddied the waters allowing too many teams to keep previous % or close to, making it easier overall and not keeping a relative perspective on investment.

    How will the great keep doing great etc.? The definition of great will change? If something that previously doing %20 now does %3, and %5 %2.5 does this fit the your statements...or won't this happen?

    Scaling.

    If 20% was great, and now 10% is great. Someone who did 20, now doing 10, is still doing great....and so on down the line.

    What great is may change, but who is doing it shouldn't. Same for good and ok... make sense?

    Kinda does, but it probably won't fit your definition as anything over %2 will degrade too fast to make any difference=all teams reduced to a similar threshold, thus the differention in between them will evaporate.

    We already have teams that can pass the correct threshold, which is more than the 2% increase. Do you believe those teams will not be able to pass the 2% line?

    It's possible you just a negative view on things and that is skewing your view of this, as there is no practical knowledge to back what you are saying. The 2% line is much less harsh that the line we currently see.

    Yes, the 2% is less harsh, but the 6% line is much harsher - and currently there's no line before 20%.
    The raid have gotten a lot harder to beat in terms of teams (investment) needed.
    All teams which previously did more than 2% damage will now do less and all big hitters will do a lot less.
    I look forward to seeing how bad this is going to be, I wonder what our 20-30% SLKR runs will end up at for P2-3 and even more so where our 7-10% Rey P4 runs will end up.
    I'll stick to what I've posted before, final judgement is reserved until we've tried the thing, but the goalposts have certainly been moved, question is if by yards, miles or parsecs.

    Correct, most guilds are going to need more players involved per phase than previously because a small handful will not be taking down a phase.

    Honestly, I see Rey fairing nicely as her team will survive longer due to the lower increase.

    Oh nice, gonna expand our guild to 100 players then...
    How the heck can Rey team survive longer? It will face higher stats so it will die sooner. The only positive change is that her ultimate will actually do some damage now as well as protect the team for a while.

    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    Maybe not 100, but in our case, definitely more than 50.
    Fact: we barely make it now with full participation.
    Fact: most teams will be significantly less effective after the change.
    Conclusion: we will need more than 50 people or be back to grinding.
    That is my math, show yours instead of accusations of negativity. I want to be positive about it, I just can't.

    Sure, 50 players need to average 2% to make it work. This change doesnt effect anyone who can do 2% per phase.

    Teams that do more than 2% right now, will do more than 2% after the change, and some probably even more to help make up the difference for those players who cant do 2% per phase in each phase.

    I'm not asking you to be positive, but you seem to have drawn a conclusion out of nothing, and maybe reserving judgement may be more prudent until we all have some experience to build on.

    I have drawn my conclusion from the known information about the change. You keep going on about how I am overly negative while showing exactly nothing to support your view.
    Any team doing more than 2% will be less effective after the change, assuming that we are talking about the typical situation where everyone does their runs before the current bonuses kick in. Any team doing less will be unaffected. That means net negative change compared to the current state, because we are not doing exactly 2% each in every phase (and I'm not sure why you keep bringing up this unrealistic scenario), but most are doing much more in some phases and less in others. It follows that we will come up short after the change, not sure how you can consider this "out of nothing".
    I'm not disputing that scores over 2% will be possible, all I say is that they will be significantly reduced.

    If 2% is possible for all of your guild members than there is no problem, and since you agree that scores over 2% are possible you have a cushion.

    That seems like you are saying that any net negative to any single team or player can be easily distributed to the whole guild allowing you to make it through.

    There is nothing unrealistic about guilds on the edge of making a raid work, doing exactly the % needed across the board, that is always the initial plan and goal of how to develop into new raid content.

    Yes it is possible that you come up short, but it is also possible that with a proper plan and seeing the numbers of what actually works after the change that you will be ok. You didnt give much information and the reason I was focused on 2% is because any guild at the level of this content should be able to have all members put up 2%, and those numbers will be unaffected. Maybe I'm wrong about your guild makeup, but still a player putting up 4-5% should help make up for that. It's all an averaging effect.

    I'm am not being overly positive in this discussion, which is why I have stayed focused on the bare minimum each member would need to do (to answer your questionqhy I am focused on 2%), I wouldnt want to start putting out statements about teams doing 3,4,5 or even 6 % as some sort of normal, but it's all still possible, and very well might be part of the new normal we see.

    Stop playing dumb. Plese. You are better than that.
    Not everyone has teams for every phase. In fact, in middling guilds, most people probably don't. Therefore, it is usual to score nothing in some phases and compensate for it in others, to achieve the 2% average. No cushion, just non-uniform distribution. One would think that this doesn't need to be explained to someone actually playing the game.

    Ok, thank you for more information. I was unaware that you had players that couldnt put a minimum
    score into the raid. As I said earlier I was basing everything off the information you had given.

    You asked for the simple math to back up what I was saying, I gave it to you. I'm sorry if you do not like it, and its unfortunate you think that your guild will not be able to meet that, there is still hope, unless you are literally just scraping by, IDK.

    I would think that most players in guilds and successfully doing the raid would have some ability to out up 4 teams of varying ability to score in the raid, but that is just me.
  • Options
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Yea, I like that this is creating a counter incentive.

    Me as well. Think it's great for the game
  • Nauros
    5429 posts Member
    Options
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Only a graph is not a prove for what type of funtion it is, but it can give you an idea what type it might be. It will also not work. An exponential function is a function of the form f(x)=a*b^x where b is a positive real number. Here f(x) the increase and x = number of boosts. So let's assume it's an exponential function. We then have f(0) = 0, so it follows that a = 0 as b^0 = 1. So we have f(x) = 0, which I would really like, but I don't think CG will do this XD. Now you could say that we start at x = 1 and don't bother with x = 0 as that isn't really relevant for us. Although I think for coding it will be (not sure about that). We have f(1) = a*b^1 = 20 and f(2) = a*b^2 = 60. 2 functions and 2 unknowns (a and b), so we can solve this system of equations. We have ab = 20, this gives a = 20/b. We substitute a = 20/b in a*b^2 = 60 and get 20b = 60, so b = 3. So we get f(x) = (20/3)*3^x. But f(3) = 180 =/ 120, so exponential function also doesn't work here. Contradiction with assumption that the correct function was exponential.

    You can write it as a quadratic function as was shown already by @Ragnarok_COTF. Or what I think CG most likely have in their code: an arithmetic series. Which would be x_{n} = x_{n-1} + 20*n, with n = number of boosts, x_{n} the increase at n boosts and x_{0} = 0 (the starting point). Then we get
    x_{0} = 0
    x_{1} = 0 + 20*1 = 20 (correct)
    x_{2} = 20 + 20*2= 60 (correct)
    x_{3} = 60 + 20*3 = 120 (correct)
    x_{4} = 120 + 20*4 = 200 (correct)
    x_{5} = 200 + 20*5 = 300 (correct).

    I also agree the increase is way too high.

    The point of bringing up the graph was simply to demonstrate that the increases in offense at each interval, combined with the increase in speed (which the effects of are ignored in the equations people are presenting) result in a player damage graph that strongly resembles an exponential function. Thereby making the OP's claim that the "difficulty" (ability to do damage) increases "exponentially", practically correct.

    Yes, it might not literally be an exponential formula as written in the code - but in terms of how the mechanic effects damage output, the OP calling its effects "exponential" is, not completely inaccurate.

    But I do agree that we can stop the semantic debate, since we all seem to agree that level of difficulty the stacking increases of damage and speed at such small intervals is a change in difficulty that is significant enough to be concerned m

    I would disagree with that. The smaller increase in stats makes the quicker increase point manageable for teams that were already going good.

    Yes they scaled everything back, but in theory we saw a SLKR do 100%, which means he was hitting a very high penalty and could do very well in a similar situation in the new dynamic, of course he wont be doing 100%, but he will be pulling his weight (in theory). Opening up the floor to more teams/toons/players also has a large effect on the difficulty of the entire raid, which is not accounted for in your explanation of "exponential difficulty increase", and should be part of a list of factors that mitigate that, because those factors make it easier to deal damage (as you were limiting your argument to).

    That's a fair point - while the amount of damage 1 team could do has decreased significantly (regardless as to the specific mathematical descriptors used and whether or not they are accurate) but the option of using more than 4 teams may help mitigate the overall "difficulty" related to an entire roster.

    We won't know until we see things live. I do know that if there are guilds that were completing the raid that no longer are able, there will be quite the outrage. And that would be, for the most part, understandable from the perspective of those guilds.

    I agree. I also dont think we will hear any great praise from guilds who couldn't/wouldn't do it before who will now be able.

    I would however like to point out that there are many factors involved and a guild who could do it with 25-30 players not doing it now without full participation is not necessary a fair comparison. I also fully expect a higher % of failures for the first 2(ish) runs after the change than after that point. This change will have an almost new raid learning curve (almost).

    SLKR was a team requiring very specific modding, R8 and good RNG. I don’t think it was that big of an issue considering how much you needed to get it done but that’s just me

    Ok, and just so you are aware, the threshold limit of 2% is not directly related to him.

    Is it indirectly related to him? What other teams do you know that pulls any number beyond %20 in any phase?

    To the 2%, no, not really. The way it stacks is what seems to be designed to stop him.

    I believe that since they built that mechanic in they tested where he landed and other teams and the 2% was more based on the preservation of team order and keeping great doing great, good doing good and so on down the line, but the actual % he did doesnt really influence the 2% limit.

    So in theory, 5% could have muddied the waters allowing too many teams to keep previous % or close to, making it easier overall and not keeping a relative perspective on investment.

    How will the great keep doing great etc.? The definition of great will change? If something that previously doing %20 now does %3, and %5 %2.5 does this fit the your statements...or won't this happen?

    Scaling.

    If 20% was great, and now 10% is great. Someone who did 20, now doing 10, is still doing great....and so on down the line.

    What great is may change, but who is doing it shouldn't. Same for good and ok... make sense?

    Kinda does, but it probably won't fit your definition as anything over %2 will degrade too fast to make any difference=all teams reduced to a similar threshold, thus the differention in between them will evaporate.

    We already have teams that can pass the correct threshold, which is more than the 2% increase. Do you believe those teams will not be able to pass the 2% line?

    It's possible you just a negative view on things and that is skewing your view of this, as there is no practical knowledge to back what you are saying. The 2% line is much less harsh that the line we currently see.

    Yes, the 2% is less harsh, but the 6% line is much harsher - and currently there's no line before 20%.
    The raid have gotten a lot harder to beat in terms of teams (investment) needed.
    All teams which previously did more than 2% damage will now do less and all big hitters will do a lot less.
    I look forward to seeing how bad this is going to be, I wonder what our 20-30% SLKR runs will end up at for P2-3 and even more so where our 7-10% Rey P4 runs will end up.
    I'll stick to what I've posted before, final judgement is reserved until we've tried the thing, but the goalposts have certainly been moved, question is if by yards, miles or parsecs.

    Correct, most guilds are going to need more players involved per phase than previously because a small handful will not be taking down a phase.

    Honestly, I see Rey fairing nicely as her team will survive longer due to the lower increase.

    Oh nice, gonna expand our guild to 100 players then...
    How the heck can Rey team survive longer? It will face higher stats so it will die sooner. The only positive change is that her ultimate will actually do some damage now as well as protect the team for a while.

    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    Maybe not 100, but in our case, definitely more than 50.
    Fact: we barely make it now with full participation.
    Fact: most teams will be significantly less effective after the change.
    Conclusion: we will need more than 50 people or be back to grinding.
    That is my math, show yours instead of accusations of negativity. I want to be positive about it, I just can't.

    Sure, 50 players need to average 2% to make it work. This change doesnt effect anyone who can do 2% per phase.

    Teams that do more than 2% right now, will do more than 2% after the change, and some probably even more to help make up the difference for those players who cant do 2% per phase in each phase.

    I'm not asking you to be positive, but you seem to have drawn a conclusion out of nothing, and maybe reserving judgement may be more prudent until we all have some experience to build on.

    I have drawn my conclusion from the known information about the change. You keep going on about how I am overly negative while showing exactly nothing to support your view.
    Any team doing more than 2% will be less effective after the change, assuming that we are talking about the typical situation where everyone does their runs before the current bonuses kick in. Any team doing less will be unaffected. That means net negative change compared to the current state, because we are not doing exactly 2% each in every phase (and I'm not sure why you keep bringing up this unrealistic scenario), but most are doing much more in some phases and less in others. It follows that we will come up short after the change, not sure how you can consider this "out of nothing".
    I'm not disputing that scores over 2% will be possible, all I say is that they will be significantly reduced.

    If 2% is possible for all of your guild members than there is no problem, and since you agree that scores over 2% are possible you have a cushion.

    That seems like you are saying that any net negative to any single team or player can be easily distributed to the whole guild allowing you to make it through.

    There is nothing unrealistic about guilds on the edge of making a raid work, doing exactly the % needed across the board, that is always the initial plan and goal of how to develop into new raid content.

    Yes it is possible that you come up short, but it is also possible that with a proper plan and seeing the numbers of what actually works after the change that you will be ok. You didnt give much information and the reason I was focused on 2% is because any guild at the level of this content should be able to have all members put up 2%, and those numbers will be unaffected. Maybe I'm wrong about your guild makeup, but still a player putting up 4-5% should help make up for that. It's all an averaging effect.

    I'm am not being overly positive in this discussion, which is why I have stayed focused on the bare minimum each member would need to do (to answer your questionqhy I am focused on 2%), I wouldnt want to start putting out statements about teams doing 3,4,5 or even 6 % as some sort of normal, but it's all still possible, and very well might be part of the new normal we see.

    Stop playing dumb. Plese. You are better than that.
    Not everyone has teams for every phase. In fact, in middling guilds, most people probably don't. Therefore, it is usual to score nothing in some phases and compensate for it in others, to achieve the 2% average. No cushion, just non-uniform distribution. One would think that this doesn't need to be explained to someone actually playing the game.

    Ok, thank you for more information. I was unaware that you had players that couldnt put a minimum
    score into the raid. As I said earlier I was basing everything off the information you had given.

    You asked for the simple math to back up what I was saying, I gave it to you. I'm sorry if you do not like it, and its unfortunate you think that your guild will not be able to meet that, there is still hope, unless you are literally just scraping by, IDK.

    I would think that most players in guilds and successfully doing the raid would have some ability to out up 4 teams of varying ability to score in the raid, but that is just me.

    Nooo! Not minimum score. Teams only for some phases! Posting in some phases but not others still gets non-zero score. Am I really that unclear?
    I will give myself as an example, so far I ended up in top 10:
    P1 - Padme, around 3%. Will be mostly unaffected, maybe down to 2.8 or so.
    P2 OR P3 - Shaak, 5-6%. Will be probably drastically cut due to one less AA from Rex.
    The other one, depending on where I use Shaak - 0
    P4 - Rey, around 6% (mostly held back by suboptimal mods). Will probably be significantly cut. And some leftovers that do maybe 2% all together.
    See? Not 2% in each phase, nor complete zero, but a score varying by phase. Others may have fewer teams ready, plus we heavily rely on SLKR teams doing 15+% in P2/3. Now guess what happens when the higher scores get cut...
    And keep in mind that I am one of the stronger members. If everyone had a roster like me, we would probably have no problem.
  • Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    If you are an active player that plays daily and does well in both arenas as well as other modes these items aren't hard to gather at all. Many have these items in large amounts and still don't use them unless it puts them "ahead" of the game. It's those players that have to decide now if they want to make their toons to r5 if their guild fails. I love this! Love it. Did i mention I loved it? Love it!
  • TheJEFFtm
    917 posts Member
    edited March 2021
    Options
    One thing I haven’t seen discussed in here to point out to the Naysayers; if your guild was almost/barely squeaking by the raid, with the shift going from ‘quality’ to ‘quantity’ of teams, it is probably going to prove more effective to break down the big damage teams back into their component parts.

    Instead of an uber P4 team of JKR, Rey, JKL, GAS, Hoda (or whatever variation you run, there are several) that nets 6-10%, (Currently, likely 4-5% post change) you can break it down to Rey with any resistance and use damage immunity and whirlwinds to net a few percent. GAS gets his 501st back and likewise does 3-4%. JKR goes back to being a mark mass assist team, JKL/JML can also become burst damage assist teams for a couple percent+ each. Instead of 1 team capping at 10ish%, you are likely looking at a combination of teams that can do 10-12% (conservatively).

    SLKR does get hurt, but he likewise probably becomes a pure FO team that can still do 5% plus (Or more) in any of the first 3 phases, with another lower damage FO team pretty much ready to go just from prerequisites.

    P4 Zerg teams get a lot better, Malak (wether solo or in a squad) almost certainly survives to do 3 life drains for 0.6% plus ancillary damage (that is 30% of P4 right there, with just 50x a single toon!). CLS goes from desperation Shoots First and a couple counters for 0.5-0.7% to a solid 1-2% squad. Separatist led (usually GG) Jango survives longer than 2 turns of damage immunity, and GG/B1 will likely survive long enough to get multiple attacks as their compatriots go down.

    Padme, Imp troopers, and other random teams will still be nearly as effective as prior, admittedly some of the Vader compositions likely take a hit, but should still be able to swing at least one big culling blade smack once you are at the 2% mark to go to 4-6% for the run.

    Ultimately, while you may have to Relic out/up a few more toons to round out the squads, you are likely to already have the building blocks of several good new teams, I would be very much surprised if anyone who doesn’t have SLKR sees their total damage for the raid actually increase in fairly short order after it goes live.
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    If you are an active player that plays daily and does well in both arenas as well as other modes these items aren't hard to gather at all. Many have these items in large amounts and still don't use them unless it puts them "ahead" of the game. It's those players that have to decide now if they want to make their toons to r5 if their guild fails. I love this! Love it. Did i mention I loved it? Love it!

    You do realize that signal data and carb boards are not easy to come by and the boards are a massive bottle neck for relic progression right? If many had them in large amounts then nobody would be asking for more ways to get the circuit boards.
  • StarSon
    7477 posts Member
    Options
    Nauros wrote: »
    Nooo! Not minimum score. Teams only for some phases! Posting in some phases but not others still gets non-zero score. Am I really that unclear?
    I will give myself as an example, so far I ended up in top 10:
    P1 - Padme, around 3%. Will be mostly unaffected, maybe down to 2.8 or so.
    P2 OR P3 - Shaak, 5-6%. Will be probably drastically cut due to one less AA from Rex.
    The other one, depending on where I use Shaak - 0
    P4 - Rey, around 6% (mostly held back by suboptimal mods). Will probably be significantly cut. And some leftovers that do maybe 2% all together.
    See? Not 2% in each phase, nor complete zero, but a score varying by phase. Others may have fewer teams ready, plus we heavily rely on SLKR teams doing 15+% in P2/3. Now guess what happens when the higher scores get cut...
    And keep in mind that I am one of the stronger members. If everyone had a roster like me, we would probably have no problem.

    As long as everyone else in your guild can do similar you can still clear.

    2.8% from Padme in p1 means you only need 35 of them
    3.5% from Shaak Clones in p2 means you only need 29
    You can use the other 21 in p3 and then you only need 27% from other teams (surely you have a few Kylo?)
    Your Rey in p4 is probably still about 4%, so you only need 24 others.

    Does your guild have all those teams? I don't know, but they're pretty common teams so it's possible.
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Options
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nauros wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Only a graph is not a prove for what type of funtion it is, but it can give you an idea what type it might be. It will also not work. An exponential function is a function of the form f(x)=a*b^x where b is a positive real number. Here f(x) the increase and x = number of boosts. So let's assume it's an exponential function. We then have f(0) = 0, so it follows that a = 0 as b^0 = 1. So we have f(x) = 0, which I would really like, but I don't think CG will do this XD. Now you could say that we start at x = 1 and don't bother with x = 0 as that isn't really relevant for us. Although I think for coding it will be (not sure about that). We have f(1) = a*b^1 = 20 and f(2) = a*b^2 = 60. 2 functions and 2 unknowns (a and b), so we can solve this system of equations. We have ab = 20, this gives a = 20/b. We substitute a = 20/b in a*b^2 = 60 and get 20b = 60, so b = 3. So we get f(x) = (20/3)*3^x. But f(3) = 180 =/ 120, so exponential function also doesn't work here. Contradiction with assumption that the correct function was exponential.

    You can write it as a quadratic function as was shown already by @Ragnarok_COTF. Or what I think CG most likely have in their code: an arithmetic series. Which would be x_{n} = x_{n-1} + 20*n, with n = number of boosts, x_{n} the increase at n boosts and x_{0} = 0 (the starting point). Then we get
    x_{0} = 0
    x_{1} = 0 + 20*1 = 20 (correct)
    x_{2} = 20 + 20*2= 60 (correct)
    x_{3} = 60 + 20*3 = 120 (correct)
    x_{4} = 120 + 20*4 = 200 (correct)
    x_{5} = 200 + 20*5 = 300 (correct).

    I also agree the increase is way too high.

    The point of bringing up the graph was simply to demonstrate that the increases in offense at each interval, combined with the increase in speed (which the effects of are ignored in the equations people are presenting) result in a player damage graph that strongly resembles an exponential function. Thereby making the OP's claim that the "difficulty" (ability to do damage) increases "exponentially", practically correct.

    Yes, it might not literally be an exponential formula as written in the code - but in terms of how the mechanic effects damage output, the OP calling its effects "exponential" is, not completely inaccurate.

    But I do agree that we can stop the semantic debate, since we all seem to agree that level of difficulty the stacking increases of damage and speed at such small intervals is a change in difficulty that is significant enough to be concerned m

    I would disagree with that. The smaller increase in stats makes the quicker increase point manageable for teams that were already going good.

    Yes they scaled everything back, but in theory we saw a SLKR do 100%, which means he was hitting a very high penalty and could do very well in a similar situation in the new dynamic, of course he wont be doing 100%, but he will be pulling his weight (in theory). Opening up the floor to more teams/toons/players also has a large effect on the difficulty of the entire raid, which is not accounted for in your explanation of "exponential difficulty increase", and should be part of a list of factors that mitigate that, because those factors make it easier to deal damage (as you were limiting your argument to).

    That's a fair point - while the amount of damage 1 team could do has decreased significantly (regardless as to the specific mathematical descriptors used and whether or not they are accurate) but the option of using more than 4 teams may help mitigate the overall "difficulty" related to an entire roster.

    We won't know until we see things live. I do know that if there are guilds that were completing the raid that no longer are able, there will be quite the outrage. And that would be, for the most part, understandable from the perspective of those guilds.

    I agree. I also dont think we will hear any great praise from guilds who couldn't/wouldn't do it before who will now be able.

    I would however like to point out that there are many factors involved and a guild who could do it with 25-30 players not doing it now without full participation is not necessary a fair comparison. I also fully expect a higher % of failures for the first 2(ish) runs after the change than after that point. This change will have an almost new raid learning curve (almost).

    SLKR was a team requiring very specific modding, R8 and good RNG. I don’t think it was that big of an issue considering how much you needed to get it done but that’s just me

    Ok, and just so you are aware, the threshold limit of 2% is not directly related to him.

    Is it indirectly related to him? What other teams do you know that pulls any number beyond %20 in any phase?

    To the 2%, no, not really. The way it stacks is what seems to be designed to stop him.

    I believe that since they built that mechanic in they tested where he landed and other teams and the 2% was more based on the preservation of team order and keeping great doing great, good doing good and so on down the line, but the actual % he did doesnt really influence the 2% limit.

    So in theory, 5% could have muddied the waters allowing too many teams to keep previous % or close to, making it easier overall and not keeping a relative perspective on investment.

    How will the great keep doing great etc.? The definition of great will change? If something that previously doing %20 now does %3, and %5 %2.5 does this fit the your statements...or won't this happen?

    Scaling.

    If 20% was great, and now 10% is great. Someone who did 20, now doing 10, is still doing great....and so on down the line.

    What great is may change, but who is doing it shouldn't. Same for good and ok... make sense?

    Kinda does, but it probably won't fit your definition as anything over %2 will degrade too fast to make any difference=all teams reduced to a similar threshold, thus the differention in between them will evaporate.

    We already have teams that can pass the correct threshold, which is more than the 2% increase. Do you believe those teams will not be able to pass the 2% line?

    It's possible you just a negative view on things and that is skewing your view of this, as there is no practical knowledge to back what you are saying. The 2% line is much less harsh that the line we currently see.

    Yes, the 2% is less harsh, but the 6% line is much harsher - and currently there's no line before 20%.
    The raid have gotten a lot harder to beat in terms of teams (investment) needed.
    All teams which previously did more than 2% damage will now do less and all big hitters will do a lot less.
    I look forward to seeing how bad this is going to be, I wonder what our 20-30% SLKR runs will end up at for P2-3 and even more so where our 7-10% Rey P4 runs will end up.
    I'll stick to what I've posted before, final judgement is reserved until we've tried the thing, but the goalposts have certainly been moved, question is if by yards, miles or parsecs.

    Correct, most guilds are going to need more players involved per phase than previously because a small handful will not be taking down a phase.

    Honestly, I see Rey fairing nicely as her team will survive longer due to the lower increase.

    Oh nice, gonna expand our guild to 100 players then...
    How the heck can Rey team survive longer? It will face higher stats so it will die sooner. The only positive change is that her ultimate will actually do some damage now as well as protect the team for a while.

    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    Maybe not 100, but in our case, definitely more than 50.
    Fact: we barely make it now with full participation.
    Fact: most teams will be significantly less effective after the change.
    Conclusion: we will need more than 50 people or be back to grinding.
    That is my math, show yours instead of accusations of negativity. I want to be positive about it, I just can't.

    Sure, 50 players need to average 2% to make it work. This change doesnt effect anyone who can do 2% per phase.

    Teams that do more than 2% right now, will do more than 2% after the change, and some probably even more to help make up the difference for those players who cant do 2% per phase in each phase.

    I'm not asking you to be positive, but you seem to have drawn a conclusion out of nothing, and maybe reserving judgement may be more prudent until we all have some experience to build on.

    I have drawn my conclusion from the known information about the change. You keep going on about how I am overly negative while showing exactly nothing to support your view.
    Any team doing more than 2% will be less effective after the change, assuming that we are talking about the typical situation where everyone does their runs before the current bonuses kick in. Any team doing less will be unaffected. That means net negative change compared to the current state, because we are not doing exactly 2% each in every phase (and I'm not sure why you keep bringing up this unrealistic scenario), but most are doing much more in some phases and less in others. It follows that we will come up short after the change, not sure how you can consider this "out of nothing".
    I'm not disputing that scores over 2% will be possible, all I say is that they will be significantly reduced.

    If 2% is possible for all of your guild members than there is no problem, and since you agree that scores over 2% are possible you have a cushion.

    That seems like you are saying that any net negative to any single team or player can be easily distributed to the whole guild allowing you to make it through.

    There is nothing unrealistic about guilds on the edge of making a raid work, doing exactly the % needed across the board, that is always the initial plan and goal of how to develop into new raid content.

    Yes it is possible that you come up short, but it is also possible that with a proper plan and seeing the numbers of what actually works after the change that you will be ok. You didnt give much information and the reason I was focused on 2% is because any guild at the level of this content should be able to have all members put up 2%, and those numbers will be unaffected. Maybe I'm wrong about your guild makeup, but still a player putting up 4-5% should help make up for that. It's all an averaging effect.

    I'm am not being overly positive in this discussion, which is why I have stayed focused on the bare minimum each member would need to do (to answer your questionqhy I am focused on 2%), I wouldnt want to start putting out statements about teams doing 3,4,5 or even 6 % as some sort of normal, but it's all still possible, and very well might be part of the new normal we see.

    Stop playing dumb. Plese. You are better than that.
    Not everyone has teams for every phase. In fact, in middling guilds, most people probably don't. Therefore, it is usual to score nothing in some phases and compensate for it in others, to achieve the 2% average. No cushion, just non-uniform distribution. One would think that this doesn't need to be explained to someone actually playing the game.

    Ok, thank you for more information. I was unaware that you had players that couldnt put a minimum
    score into the raid. As I said earlier I was basing everything off the information you had given.

    You asked for the simple math to back up what I was saying, I gave it to you. I'm sorry if you do not like it, and its unfortunate you think that your guild will not be able to meet that, there is still hope, unless you are literally just scraping by, IDK.

    I would think that most players in guilds and successfully doing the raid would have some ability to out up 4 teams of varying ability to score in the raid, but that is just me.

    Nooo! Not minimum score. Teams only for some phases! Posting in some phases but not others still gets non-zero score. Am I really that unclear?
    I will give myself as an example, so far I ended up in top 10:
    P1 - Padme, around 3%. Will be mostly unaffected, maybe down to 2.8 or so.
    P2 OR P3 - Shaak, 5-6%. Will be probably drastically cut due to one less AA from Rex.
    The other one, depending on where I use Shaak - 0
    P4 - Rey, around 6% (mostly held back by suboptimal mods). Will probably be significantly cut. And some leftovers that do maybe 2% all together.
    See? Not 2% in each phase, nor complete zero, but a score varying by phase. Others may have fewer teams ready, plus we heavily rely on SLKR teams doing 15+% in P2/3. Now guess what happens when the higher scores get cut...
    And keep in mind that I am one of the stronger members. If everyone had a roster like me, we would probably have no problem.

    Yes I understand, I never said complete 0.

    I see how you may have problems if everyone in your guild is not able to put up a minimum score in the raid. I agree that guilds in this situation may have trouble moving forward, but still have some hope with players putting up numbers to not be at 0.

    You are likely to end up in a decent range, 2-3% ish, with the numbers you out there, and it has remained to be seen what SLKR will do to help lower the per phase numbers needed. If he can do 5% that is 1.5 people that are covered for that phase.

    So you have all 50 participating currently?
  • TVF
    36665 posts Member
    Options
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    Yup, that's not a lot. We are obviously talking about rX vs r5 and not the gear to get something to g13. Even if they lowered relic reqs, that would be something like pulling it down to r3 instead of no req...and I doubt very much that will happen as well.

    Then they need to up the rewards or change the thresholds. Or regardless, change the junk rewards.

    Pinnacle end game content and this is what I get...lmao.

    xalbeditib50.png

    Tac challenge gear that I have thousands of, mk3 holos that I have hundreds of and tank raid gear...lmao

    You're dreaming. All raids have junk gear possible. Even the normal Pit that everyone loves to say has fantastic rewards. I can't count how many times I've gotten useless mk5 furnaces, mk6 nub techs, or mk7 sec scans.

    This is how raids work. Good gear and bad gear are all possible.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    TVF wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    MaruMaru wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Padme will easily get 2% in a phase, cls will easily get 2% in a phase, Vader will easily get 2% in a phase, shaak clones will easily get 2% in a phase, Rey will easily get 2% in a phase, slkr will easily get 2% in a phase, troopers will easily get 2% in a phase.... Throw in kitchen sink and you've killed it 2 times over.

    Do you not have these teams on your guild? And most of those teams are still EASILY over 5%. It's ONLY a 20% increase from 2-4...

    Padme and CLS are 10 toons at RELIC 5.
    Vader is another team requiring 15 toons at relic 5. To get Rey or SLKR you need 12 toons at relic levels a piece, including the GL’s themselves. That’s 26 more at relic 5 and above. So 41 toons at relic 5. R5 is a gigantic resource threshold and one that not many people can just toss resources at will.

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, taking away the universal damage threshold was great. I hope they never do something as lame and ridiculous as that again in any game mode or future content ever. Whoever thought of that needs to ride the pine for a bit.

    I get lowering thresholds due to this change. However given the gear gate to even get it, as well as the lack of consistently good or flat rewards which doesn’t really validate such a high gate, the current 2% and compounding increases per threshold is too much. Either flatten the increase to just a base 20% per threshold non compounding or bring it to 4 or 5% thresholds for the current stacking stats. It’s not an unreasonable ask nor is it undermining their intent to make the raid more inclusive

    R5 isn't hard to get at all. There are many who just don't want to do it due to GAC matchmaking concerns. This is just turning into a gearing party and I like it. Keep them r5s coming in and collect.

    Lmao Wat? “R5 isn’t hard to get at all”. Aside from the gear prior to G13 now you need to spend 160 carbanti boards, 160 bronzium wiring, 90 chromium transitors, 20 arodium heatsinks, 75 blue signal data, 65 green signal data and 15 crystal signal data. Now multiply that by 5 for a full team for one run of 2% depending on the team. For possibly G5 gear rewards and 1 r8 relic mat.

    That’s not a lot? Lol

    Yup, that's not a lot. We are obviously talking about rX vs r5 and not the gear to get something to g13. Even if they lowered relic reqs, that would be something like pulling it down to r3 instead of no req...and I doubt very much that will happen as well.

    Then they need to up the rewards or change the thresholds. Or regardless, change the junk rewards.

    Pinnacle end game content and this is what I get...lmao.

    xalbeditib50.png

    Tac challenge gear that I have thousands of, mk3 holos that I have hundreds of and tank raid gear...lmao

    You're dreaming. All raids have junk gear possible. Even the normal Pit that everyone loves to say has fantastic rewards. I can't count how many times I've gotten useless mk5 furnaces, mk6 nub techs, or mk7 sec scans.

    This is how raids work. Good gear and bad gear are all possible.

    Comparing the OG rancor rewards with the gear you listed is not comparable to the Crancor. All that gear you listed was very much needed when the OG Crancor raid was the “pinnacle” of end game content all those years ago. Back then mk3 holo’s were in great need too.
    Even the tank raid from 2017 had needed gear at the time which I got two of in the current endgame years later.

    There’s a point to there being “bad” gear in raids yes. However no raid before ever had a hard gear cap to play, nor did it coupled with it, reward gear that hasn’t been in demand or needed for years. If this is end game content then we deserve end game rewards. There’s “junk” gear like g12 pieces I I have plenty of I could use for relic material. That would be fine. However an endgame raid requiring R5 toons should not be rewarding tac challenge gear people have in excess by the thousands.
  • Options
    For what it's worth, and to be fair, I am not in a guild that can complete CRancor, or even come close, but just as an outside perspective, it seems to me like this change is going to make teams less effective when the boss has no %health buffs, and more effective once it gets down 20%, but certainly by 40%. The complaint in this case then is that the raid is guaranteed to be more difficult than it was previously, when all attacks per phase were being done at the same time, so there was never any buff. That is a valid concern.
    However, that also required extreme coordination, and often guild members holding one attack in airplane mode for sometimes as long as 8 hours. It is not fair to expect that the need for coordination would go away but the raid would stay on the same difficulty. That defeats the entire purpose of the raid being a guild effort.
    There is the obvious concern that some guilds who were relying too much on a few teams will no longer be able to beat the raid, and that is in some respects a problem, but it also reflects on the idea that raids were designed to be a guild effort, even if excess timed coordination was never part of the puzzle, and you should not be able to beat a new raid with only a few members. It's supposed to take most of the guild. Any guild that was beating the raid with full participation before will now most likely find it easier to beat, not harder. Therefore, this seems like an improvement, as it rewards completing the raid in a way that supports guild participation and support.
    That being said, an adjustment of the rewards is also required. At the moment, there is no incentive towards anyone in the bottom half of the guild to put in a considerable amount of effort, time, and attempts to get negligible rewards, while the top half gets all the goodies. If only this element of the raid is changed, but the rewards do not become more balanced, this is not a good solution.
    superawesomepi#1512 | My Youtube | swgoh.gg
  • Recurve
    97 posts Member
    edited March 2021
    Options
    Kyno wrote: »
    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    There is also simple math that tells you 1 person with 1 team could solo the raid, so that point of simple math really doesn't stick.

    You are just assuming that there are 50 people with 4 teams each doing 2% per phase, I could easily assume 10 people with 4 teams each doing 10% per phase, OR 100 people with 2 teams each doing 2% per phase... yes math is simple.

    Also please note that in phase 4 there are a lot of teams that struggle to get over 1% let alone close to 2%.

    And yes Rey will lose less stats per turn, but then again once you start hitting the thresholds guess what, the team will die faster.
    Post edited by Recurve on
  • Kyno
    32087 posts Moderator
    Options
    Recurve wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    There is some very simple math that shows you dont need 100 people, but I know you just want to be negative.

    I dont mean she will do better than she did, but I feel like the setup will allow her to last a little longer than teams of a similar grade/score.

    There is also simple math that tells you 1 person with 1 team could solo the raid, so that point of simple math really doesn't stick.

    You are just assuming that there are 50 people with 4 teams each doing 2% per phase, I could easily assume 10 people with 4 teams each doing 4% per phase, OR 100 people with 2 teams each doing 2% per phase... yes math is simple.

    Also please note that in phase 2 there are a lot of teams that struggle to get over 1% let alone close to 2%.

    And yes Rey will lose less stats per turn, but then again once you start hitting the thresholds guess what, the team will die faster.

    No, not really, as that math would need to involve in game mechanics and values that would show an impossibility due to the values.

    You can assume what you want, but we know players can get 2% per phase, as that is possible now, and this change doesnt effect that.

    Yes some teams do struggle with certain %s of score, but luckily this change opens this up to multiple teams being able to be run by one player. This allows players to do more damage to either raise their scores or make up for others. Also, we have the opening up of the availability to allow more players to get involved.

    Either way it is possible that many guilds, even ones that dont think they can do it, may be proven wrong and be able to make it with some slight adjustments to play and planning.
  • Options
    Recurve wrote: »

    Also please note that in phase 2 there are a lot of teams that struggle to get over 1% let alone close to 2%.

    Padme, Vader, Clones, SLKR, CLS, Rey, Jedi, Troopers, all EASILY, I'll repeat again, EASILY get over 2%.

    Are you just pressing auto with bad mods?
  • Ravens1113
    5215 posts Member
    Options
    Bear654687 wrote: »
    Recurve wrote: »

    Also please note that in phase 2 there are a lot of teams that struggle to get over 1% let alone close to 2%.

    Padme, Vader, Clones, SLKR, CLS, Rey, Jedi, Troopers, all EASILY, I'll repeat again, EASILY get over 2%.

    Are you just pressing auto with bad mods?

    And now with a 2% threshold will not do as well as they would have beyond that if the thresholds were 5%.
Sign In or Register to comment.