Baldur's Gate : The Sword Coast Chronicles : NWN2 Persistent World

*Stronghold peasant voice* Berred's test results were fine, but that's all. Not good, not bad, just fine.

Okay, more seriously now:

I seriously screwed myself over by picking a character who, as it turned out, doesn't have a regen cloak yet. In conjunction with the fact that I hadn't replenished my supply of bandages, it didn't take long for me to rack up a couple of deaths, and while I did turn a tidy profit in the Cloakwood mines (a -6 CR reduction, like Lamir's test yesterday), I ultimately died my last death when my wounded sorcerer's evocations all bounced harmlessly off a batiri wizard, resulting in a minor net loss of XP and a profit of about 5-7k gold. There was someone else running the mines that I could've teamed up with, but I judged that this would unduly contaminate the test.

On to the good side: Many of the same assertions I made last night also seem applicable to Berred. I seriously handicapped myself by not using consumables (except the occasional healing kit, but I didn't bring enough of those), and I got cocky late in the adventure. I also screwed up from a building perspective, apparently failing to pick even a single SR-ignoring spell on a blaster; an error which I compounded by going to a place where several mob types unexpectedly had decent SR, and by rationing my spells on the dubious notion that I could melee a few of them to death. Furthermore, while he did eventually die, I feel fairly confident in my assessment that he got more XP than he previously would have... and a lot more money.

DaloLorn wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 6:24 am
Precisely why this should have been announced as a proper, controlled experiment instead of being rebranded as such after the fact. But alas, it is what it is, and the team is now in the difficult position of having to balance genuine improvement (if it turns out this was at least a step in the right direction) with the PR impact of appearing to ignore feedback. Kitunenotsume's post pretty aptly summarised my concerns on that front.

Ged, Ged, Ged... That is so not helping anyone...

We're getting the message loud and clear that the admins simply don't care about player fun or feedback. Believe me, it's been noticed and derided in several Discords.

Read the public dev blog post again. The players don't matter. "I don't like that everyone hates the change so I'm just not going to listen to them anymore and continue to push through change that everyone hates."

With a healthy dose of calling us liars for not having tried the changes. Well, Bob and I have, so me can soundly say it's a huge kick in the teeth to our leveling experience.

As in, the experience was massively cut down from one day to the other, when scaling was removed. And so we moved on from the Cloakwood mines to the orcs in the Sharpteeth wood, where our PCs had to go back and rest after the first fight.

Life in epics is... life in epics.

Kana's visit to Durlag's (continuing the -6 CR pattern, though I had intended to visit the -3CR Labyrinth before being stymied by a locked door) netted her only a mediocre 23 XP per kill, on account of the epic XP reduction. (For comparison, Lamir got 35-40, and Berred got ~30.) However, for once, I haven't died at all; her traditional weakness has been mediocre damage output for a fighter of her level, and between having the ability to fine-tune my AB/AC, and being a low-epic martial, I had enough endurance to defeat even the most dangerous opponents I ran into.

Loot has, as before, been unimpressive... but even though I had to burn a potion of Heal during a particularly intense encounter with an undead wizard, I was able to... oh. Okay. Virtually no profit - Kana is absolutely terrible at selling loot, and the RNG gods were not with her to begin with.

Still, it compares quite favorably to the last time I took her out for a spin, especially considering I didn't get all my XP deleted this time.

FallingStar wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 1:40 pm

DaloLorn wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 6:24 am
Precisely why this should have been announced as a proper, controlled experiment instead of being rebranded as such after the fact. But alas, it is what it is, and the team is now in the difficult position of having to balance genuine improvement (if it turns out this was at least a step in the right direction) with the PR impact of appearing to ignore feedback. Kitunenotsume's post pretty aptly summarised my concerns on that front.

Ged, Ged, Ged... That is so not helping anyone...

We're getting the message loud and clear that the admins simply don't care about player fun or feedback. Believe me, it's been noticed and derided in several Discords.

Read the public dev blog post again. The players don't matter. "I don't like that everyone hates the change so I'm just not going to listen to them anymore and continue to push through change that everyone hates."

With a healthy dose of calling us liars for not having tried the changes. Well, Bob and I have, so me can soundly say it's a huge kick in the teeth to our leveling experience.

Ged is not an admin, nor does she speak for the rest of the team.

Also, not that it makes things much better, she's not calling you liars quite as much as she's calling you uninformed and unable to properly inform yourself.

Bobthehero wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 1:43 pm As in, the experience was massively cut down from one day to the other, when scaling was removed. And so we moved on from the Cloakwood mines to the orcs in the Sharpteeth wood, where our PCs had to go back and rest after the first fight.

Out of curiosity, what levels were you, and what kind of builds? Even soloing as a blasting sorcerer, I had to rest roughly once per 10-20 fights.

Bobthehero wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 1:43 pm As in, the experience was massively cut down from one day to the other, when scaling was removed. And so we moved on from the Cloakwood mines to the orcs in the Sharpteeth wood, where our PCs had to go back and rest after the first fight.

And it wasn't fun having to do the same mines over and over, which is, to my understanding, what the admins are trying to discourage with this change. Do I need to make some meaningless graph for our point to be taken seriously at all?

DaloLorn wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 1:53 pm
Ged is not an admin, nor does she speak for the rest of the team.

Also, not that it makes things much better, she's not calling you liars quite as much as she's calling you uninformed and unable to properly inform yourself.

Out of curiosity, what levels were you, and what kind of builds? Even soloing as a blasting sorcerer, I had to rest roughly once per 10-20 fights.

You're right. That makes it worse. Being told by someone who's apparently not an admin and doesn't play the game that we're uninformed about our experiences and our feedback is pointless.

DC bard and melee ranger, RP builds for the most part, levels 11.

All builds are RP builds, or should be. In that it is the player that CHOOSES to RP the Sheet, or not. If I make use of my depth of knowledge to maximize mechanics, don’t for one (do-me) second think I’m not RPing my build, thank you very (do-me) much.

And yes, opinions are written and read. The Admin and Dev asked for your patience over the next month. If you can’t give that, then maybe it’s a personal problem. For (do-me) sake!

Steve wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 2:43 pm The Admin and Dev asked for your patience over the next month. If you can’t give that, then maybe it’s a personal problem. For (do-me) sake!

Get 'em Steve!

Anyways... you know, before the spawn rates had been increased to, quite frankly, absurd levels, and the CR scaling thing came along, we all slogged through it anyways. It seems to me that some players got pretty spoiled by the spawn rates before this change, and monsters coming out of every hole, nook and cranny in waves to gift them XP(while they cranked out level 30 characters in a month or 2 circle grinding specific zones). So how about we dial things back a bit, take a chill pill, and reflect on how generous the XP gains here actually still are.

Steve wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 2:43 pm All builds are RP builds, or should be. In that it is the player that CHOOSES to RP the Sheet, or not. If I make use of my depth of knowledge to maximize mechanics, don’t for one (do-me) second think I’m not RPing my build, thank you very (do-me) much.

And yes, opinions are written and read. The Admin and Dev asked for your patience over the next month. If you can’t give that, then maybe it’s a personal problem. For (do-me) sake!

I think it is entirely fair to ask for a month of play-testing the change.

Similarly I think also think it is entirely fair to seek an apology from the members of staff that forced the change, without prior information, and the change hidden in the patch notes.

So let's see how things stand in another 3 weeks from now. Hopefully by that time an apology or at least admission of a mistake made, is put forward by the staff involved. Not on what was done, but by how it was done and communicated (or lack thereof).

Snarfy wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 3:07 pm
Get 'em Steve!

Anyways... you know, before the spawn rates had been increased to, quite frankly, absurd levels, and the CR scaling thing came along, we all slogged through it anyways. It seems to me that some players got pretty spoiled by the spawn rates before this change, and monsters coming out of every hole, nook and cranny in waves to gift them XP(while they cranked out level 30 characters in a month or 2 circle grinding specific zones). So how about we dial things back a bit, take a chill pill, and reflect on how generous the XP gains here actually still are.

Steve wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 2:43 pm And yes, opinions are written and read. The Admin and Dev asked for your patience over the next month. If you can’t give that, then maybe it’s a personal problem. For (do-me) sake!

What exactly are you implying here? We don't even know each other but you can try DMing me if you want to make it a personal problem. There's a habit of mocking player efforts.

I'm deriding the general tone of the admins seeing that the changes are unfavored by the playerbase and deciding to leave them for a month anyway to "see how we adapt". Introducing something negative into the environment and hoping we forget about it in a month. Doing this experiment on the live server without a whisper to even fellow staff members is a poor outlook.

I've already stated that I don't crank out level 30 characters in a month. Try 6+ months because I don't grind that often, or for extended lengths of time at once, so to reduce the XP gains makes the experience even less gratifying.

gedweyignasia wrote: ↑Fri Feb 11, 2022 12:50 pm Which area were you grinding for this? What level was your PC in each? I assume the build is the same? Were you partied up or solo?

Exact same build, loop, solo. 30% drop on XP over time.

zhazz wrote: ↑Wed Feb 16, 2022 3:09 pm I think it is entirely fair to ask for a month of play-testing the change.

Similarly I think also think it is entirely fair to seek an apology from the members of staff that forced the change, without prior information, and the change hidden in the patch notes.

So let's see how things stand in another 3 weeks from now. Hopefully by that time an apology or at least admission of a mistake made, is put forward by the staff involved. Not on what was done, but by how it was done and communicated (or lack thereof).

Coding in a toggle like the XP toggle feat could've let QC derive pre/post values of varying build archetypes without the month duration needed, values tweaked faster than a 30 day period wait, and a solid conversation then during the testing with the playerbase before final implementation.

So what should we do, exactly? Sit on it for a month, have this thread go cold and the negative responses fade away and have the data collecting carry on for however long? Because there's a lot of grumbling thatshould be eye opening, and not left with the answer ''Deal with it for a month'' it's not like we'll magically start loving those changes in March

A last reply.

1. It is obvious that when an Admin makes a change where the overall Staff are not included in "giving their opinion," there is backlash. Do I think this resonated with Valefort? Absolutely. Why do I think that? Because I had a POLITE private conversation on Discord. Will future actions by Admin(s) be different? There is nothing but time to tell in this. So either you have faith, or you don't, that it will get better. Does continued wailing help anything here?
2. Are these changes an "experiment" or are they permanent and "just f'ing get used to it, proles!"? It was explicitly stated that Staff needed a month of time to gather data, to either support or refute their theory. Thus, I at least, interpret that as still an open ended trial. Because I know just how much time and effort goes into steering this Server, developing for this Server, supporting RP on this Server, I myself am willing to at least be polite about it, because if said Staff decide to quit over getting constantly bombarded with complaints, the Server is going to die even faster.
3. BGTSCC is not a democracy, and if you even for one minute think otherwise, you're just fooling yourself. You play at the pleasure of other people. If you can't handle that, well....
4. No discussion or disagreement or debate or dialogue goes very far when a person takes a very personal and exaggerated tone. There a six ways to Sunday and more to say your piece in disagreement, without going full nuclear option. Do you think that Valefort nor Ged want to be verbally abused here on the Forum? Even if you think it's stupid, and someone writes out their viewpoint in a clumsy way, does that mean they should not be afforded patience and understanding?
5. I'm not making an excuse for those involved in the changes. They have to stand up for what they are trying to do. Sure, it would be better for them, and for us, if we as a community had some faith that what the Admins are doing is good, even in the "hot" immediate moment that we disagree. At this moment, I do not see either Ged or Valefort declaring permanency. And if the changes are still made permanent, then well, no one is forced to play on BGTSCC in the first place. I'm not advocating a paradigm where Staff self-destruct the Server via poor insight and action, and we should all just "suck it up." It's just a (do-me) game, in the end. A. GAME.
6. We all could be wrong. Just think about that for a second, maybe two. And chill out.

All builds are RP builds, or should be. In that it is the player that CHOOSES to RP the Sheet, or not. If I make use of my depth of knowledge to maximize mechanics, don’t for one (do-me) second think I’m not RPing my build, thank you very (do-me) much.

We comfortably understand that when people say, "RP build," they mean "not mechanically optimized," and likely designed RP-first with mechanics assigned to match versus designed mechanics-first with RP assigned to match. There's no fight to pick here, so please don't.

1. It is obvious that when an Admin makes a change where the overall Staff are not included in "giving their opinion," there is backlash. Do I think this resonated with Valefort? Absolutely. Why do I think that? Because I had a POLITE private conversation on Discord. Will future actions by Admin(s) be different? There is nothing but time to tell in this. So either you have faith, or you don't, that it will get better. Does continued wailing help anything here?

When a change goes in without consultation and the immediate and overwhelming response prior to and post-playing is negative, the appropriate response is an apology and a rollback of the change, not tepid expectation that maybe things will be done differently next time. Therefore, continued wailing.

2. Are these changes an "experiment" or are they permanent and "just f'ing get used to it, proles!"? It was explicitly stated that Staff needed a month of time to gather data, to either support or refute their theory. Thus, I at least, interpret that as still an open ended trial.

The data used to justify this change showed that players favor certain areas for XP gain. It didn't account for mob design, proximity to rest/merchant hubs, ease of access, or, most telling, that the popular areas are the immediate landing spots for PCs who RCR; if you were to leave the areas the same and disable RCR, you would find a much less grossly imbalanced distribution of XP over areas.

The purported justification for the change was to move players into other areas. I'm personally not a fan of the crap-in-one-sandbox-to-make-the-other-more-attractive approach, and neither do I think we need to be dictating to players how and where they spend their time in game. I certainly wouldn't at this stage of the game's cycle conclude, "Well, the trick here is to make the areas they like less good."

3. BGTSCC is not a democracy, and if you even for one minute think otherwise, you're just fooling yourself. You play at the pleasure of other people. If you can't handle that, well....

No one suggested this, but it's reasonable for the existing community to feel like their desires should be respected.