bob the mage wrote:In 100 kills we have gotten nothing worth mentioning besides one godly ranger charm.
exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.
Of course it is a hyperbole ._.
Hyperbole's make great use in writing as a way to emphasize or draw out a point, while they are not capable of being a point on their own.
In this case I used the hyperbole to respond to sarcasm giving it a double negative effect. In other words, it use was to create a contrast to show that it is neither awesome nor good.
This type of picking and choosing by the development team is annoying though. To be blunt, you all often read through these threads, skip over the largely substantive responses, and focus on making a case about the sarcastic, exaggerated, or other replies that make use of figurative language to respond to equally figurative sarcastic replies.
Replying to the one obvious hyperbole and pointing it out just derails the thread and reduces it to meaningless banter.
Rather instead I would like to call attention back to the original posts before the sarcasm kicked in.
First, Gwyd has downed BT 101 times now, with only 3 BT helms dropping. Mabon has downed BT 88 times with 0 helms dropping.
Secondly, to control for the change in drop rates, swee has divided his data recordings into three separate groups. The first is pre drop rate change, the second is post drop rate change only, and the last is a combined picture for the purposes of seeing in totality what has dropped. In all 3 pictures, the same image is shown.
Or to put it in a language you all are more familiar with:And yes, this is a hyperbole clearly...
(bolded to make it extra clear and obvious) The drop rates are much better, this doesn't mean they are reasonable. If you start at 1, and triple it, congrats you have 3. But if you need 20 or so to be reasonable, then you are still a ways off.
Thirdly, to look outside just one server, Mabon has killed BT 88 times, the third highest total BT kill count, and they have seen 0 helms drop. 0.
This, is not a hyperbole. This is the direct data from players there.
Lastly, to defend looking at one server within the time frame of only 100 kills and to reiterate why looking outside is an inappropriate scale.
For the overwhelming majority of players, we play on only one server. For every 50 players, maybe 2 play on more than one server. Regardless, loot stays on the one server. Thus, players only see loot on their server. If loot is only balanced in dropping across all servers, thats great, it should be, but it doesn't make it balanced for the players as the only loot that toon will ever have access to is loot that drops on that server. Thus, it is appropriate to only balance loot across all servers
Next looking at time frame. This is a trickier argument to make. For server balancing it is easy as it is either balanced, or it is not, as to within what time frame it should be balanced, this is a trickier inquiry that requires the establishment of a brightline.
To establish this brightline I would recommend looking at past bosses IN THIS GAME, as according to OTM, CH is a unique game, and as such just because bosses in a completely different game behave one way is no reason on its own that they should behave that way here.
Gele is arguably the next boss to replace both Mordy and Necro in terms of weapons and rings. Which means that a player that was at EG when mordy came out should have themselves fairly geared with mordy/necro gear by the time their clan starts killing gele, and should be stacked on any mordy/necro gear that is still required by the time gele is partially through its life cycle. Mordy came out summer of 2013, gele came out 2015. This is a span of 2 years. Which means that the average time it takes to get a clan of people well geared (no one should expect all to be in all godly gear, or even mostly godly gear, only the most active and serious of players should ever achieve this, the top of the top) in royal and majestic gear from that boss.
So in summary,
1) A boss's loot is fair and reasonable if the loot drops in a reasonable quantity within a reasonable time. Reasonable quantity should be enough to gear the numbers required to kill it at launch with majestic and royal gear and the top 5-10% of players with imperial and godly gear, with some of the middle ground players having some imperial and royal gear.
2) The reasonable lifespan of a boss is 2 years, with 4 being its maximum upper end.
3) 50 people were required to kill BT at launch, thus within the full reasonable lifespan of a boss, 50 players should be reasonably geared from it.
4) 2 years at 2 kills a week is 208 total kills. To fit the above margins for reasonableness, in this time period 10% of the drops should be top tier (godly), 30% mid tier (imp/royal), and the last 60% split between royal, majestic, and mighty. In the case of BT this would be 10%, 30%, 60%. In raw numbers for 4 drops a kills at 208 total kills, 83 godly, 250 imperial, 500 royal.
5) the BT drop rates in half that time are 1.8% high tier, 23.8% mid tier, 74.4% low tier.
6) Actual rates lower than reasonable, thus a buff should occur.Now a buff did occur, and with it the drop rates for most things have gotten a lot better.
There are still almost no godlies dropping, but the mid tier loot is dropping at a much more reasonable pace (with a guaranteed 25% drop rate of imperials+). The only thing on the table imo that needs a buff are helms and godlies. Godlies need a slight bump, but helms need a serious bump. 50 helms in 4 years, 25 helms in 2, would mean an expected 12 in 1. Since drop rates got buffed at 40 kills of the 101, that would change it to an expected 7.2 helms by now (so rounding down, to 7). Since the buff however we have seen 3 helms drop, which means that on average helms are dropping 50% less often than they should be to reasonably gear a clan before the bosses life span ends.
This is a lot more fair than say Mabon which has had 0 helms drop at 88 kills.So Tl;DR
yes I used a hyperbole to respond to sarcasm. But only bothering to respond to the one non topical part of an entire thread isn't helping the discussion. If VR doesn't want to comment so be it, but please stop toying with us or blatantly showing a lack of care.
There is a lot of serious content in this thread, lets focus on that instead. I don't want to have to write another essay on why only focusing on sarcastic side comments instead of actually bothering to comment on the whole thread isn't an argument against what we are saying...