Jump to content
Burns

Viscosity Thread

Recommended Posts

First thing i noticed: Announcement said visc would increase by 2 every 6 hours. That seems acceptable.
Now, 5 hours after implementation, i'm facing +12 already, which goes way too fast for my humble opinion. Checking up on lost souls in remoter lands regularly to get them out will be impossible with that pace.

PS: Sorry to not give it a whole day, but 4 per hour is just very unlike 2 per 6 hours. I'm considering that a bug, and i don't think playing with a bugged feature gets us useful feedback. Edited by Burns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seems like viscosity climbs too fast indeed with average number of players - even major highways are now very viscous (GoE-Raven's Peace about 100AP I heard)
I would also suggest making exploration rewarding - with minor vp ve bonuses depending on luck and local viscosity (two separate terms in formula; grinders bonus and explorer bonus should be separate I believe)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Slightly related note: with teh viscosity being implemented, I'd now love to see the indication of AP (+ Viscosity) needed on each and every arrow. For a reason that I did not undersatnd (if any), some locations don't provide this information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I believe it all started at 20 viscosity, and has been falling on used paths.

I tried beating a path between Winds and the Paper cabin, but there are many others there to do that.

I am in the far east now, seeing what can be done.

xreig - 100ap per step would be quite a shocker.... ie bug....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think he meant the total sum of walking there, Fyrd.

I would also like to point out that a minimum of 1 as it seems to be now is good, but I would consider raising the base AP in locations..maybe 10 or 15. If enough people walk through it gets down to 0, if it's too little, the cost will be higher.

I think that would fit well with the current concept.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Certain locations should surely be perpetually low, or at 1. Keeping the 0 viscosity at 1 AP means that people walking by will increase the amount of time it stays at this low value of 1 Edited by Chewett

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems that rather than associate AP cost with location pair (->connection) the new feature bases AP cost entirely on location and its viscosity. As a consequence gates are no longer present in AP-cost sense (example: MB gate is down to 1AP as I write it, Tribunal gates will be the same in terms of cost as the rest of the path)
I would suggest to replace pure viscosity with a combination of viscosity location term - and location pair specific term (term similar to one before the change). Edited by xrieg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aside from ap cost being affected by viscosity influenced by how often people go there, I would suggest a cost personalization based on number of times a person has been there as well (visits here), probably as a function with diminishing returns reducing AP cost by a certain %. This would make people who often visit a certain place capable of moving more freely on that area (could also spawn various interesting "explorer" roles).

And while we're at it, instead of just AP cost, why not make viscosity influence exploring points costs as well (some places might take less AP, but require some Xpl)? Right now those are almost unused since they are only consumed when you first explore a scene, so this might be a good chance to put them to use again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few remarks/questions following the recent adjustments.

1. Thanks for fixing the tooltip details in the Tribunal. I would ask to fix it too for other locations that do not have it. Not necessarily with the name of the place you are about reach (e.g in the labyrinth) but at least with the number of AP (+viscosity) required.

2. It seems from what i read that "exploring" is closely associated in Mur's mind to "team work". I am a bit surprised with that. Did I get it wrong, or is that the real intention? Udagard suggested to correct this with a "personnal" viscosity, which makes sense in my eyes. Although the "personnal" viscosity, if acceptable, would have to be more like "number of times visited [i]in the last x days[/i]" rather than the brute "number of times in that location"

3. It is my feeling that the last change in the Tribunal makes some locations very hard to each for MP3s and MP4s. Either because they don't have all the knowledge for getting the needed Ap (which makes sense) or... because they would face an XP cap very fast while exploing those locations with appropiate team. (Correct me if i'm wrong on that). It's a matter of concern to me: should those locations be kept away from those kind of players who are willing to find the way but will face their own MP limitations too quickly?

All in all, I like the change though! Edited by Passant the Weak

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Passant the Weak' timestamp='1309940700' post='87220']
(...) at least with the number of AP (+viscosity) required.
[/quote]

I agree - one should know when leaving the beaten path and entering wilderness.
However, Labirynth locations should probably have permament AP cost (and definitely should not have the information above displayed) - it's a maze by deifnition and crossings are independent one from another

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A problem with showing viscosity in the labyrinth is that it might make finding your way through easy. All you have to do is follow the road with the lowest viscosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Viscosity in the labyrinth turns it into something of a death-trap for people who get lost.... I think it ought to have special rules... something that makes explore points more important than ap..... Edited by Fyrd Argentus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[color="#8B0000"][font="Palatino Linotype"]My concern is for the newbies. The LHOs can run the path to keep viscosity down. Once they get to the park, will they be able to move with the changes to the gate?

Many are running to try and keep viscosity down, but how long will that really last? Rats in a maze comes to mind.[/font][/color]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
East lands are not for newbies.
Labyrint should be a death trap.
Team work can be in many ways, traveling in teams is defenetly one.
Viscosity/name tooltips will be added whenever i have work to do in a place without and i consider it needs some. It is not priority. Eventualy in this way all will get their flags.
Eventualy the team work will stop and only some paths will be kept "fluid"

Theoretically, current popular places won't be affected in any way, while other more deep locations will be locked in a more natural way. In this way i can remove keys on certain places and let only viscosity to guard them. This means anyone could eventually enter if he manages to break the viscosity (team work again). Also visc leaves a new type of traces to see where people "migrated", longer and "different" than chat trails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Muratus del Mur' timestamp='1309998370' post='87273']
In this way i can remove keys on certain places and let only viscosity to guard them.
[/quote]
If WP controlled access for a given location will be replaced by viscosity controlled access, will WP spent for access be returned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I too think that the maze should be treated differently. If a person new or old goes in it (even if they know the maze), with the viscuosity settings, it will take forever to build up the AP to move from one location to another. Perhaps that's indended, but it will certainly make the maze very undesirable to be in. I think this will simply have a net effect that people will not travel the maze at all.

Even for people that know what lies on the other side, it will be a deterrent to go there, effectively making that place quite lonely. So then what is the point of having lands if no one goes there? What is the point of having expansions if there is no life there?

This is just my oppinion, right or wrong =) Edited by Esmaralda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely the maze and GG is just another example of the tribunal? I would have thought some GG guys would club together to patrol it and keep the costs down, simiarly as has done with the tribunal. As Mur as said its up to us to decide what the AP costs are, as we can effectively decide them based on if we care about to do some work moving around there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think part of the point was also that it makes it pretty easy to find the path through by looking at the visc at each location for the low amounts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see your point Chewett, but I don't think I agree with it. I don't like the fact that it is expected that players patrol lands to make it easy for other people to move in the lands. That's a chore added to the game experience that doesn't give any personal reward. Yes, people can certainly band together and patrol the lands to keep costs down, but for how long? How much until people just give up and hang out at one spot and forget the harder to reach lands?

I also don't see the maze the same as the tribunal. The tribunal is not a maze and the path is always clear in the tribunal. The maze is a maze, and quite hard to go through it. There's usually no one in the maze and it's feels very lonely when traversing it. I doubt most people will be willing to patrol the maze when it's not used all that often currently (not to mention that if someone were to patrol it, why would they patrol any of the wrong locations in the maze, and not just the correct path?)

*edit* Grido beat me to the punch about the maze patrol. Grr, slow typing skills. =) Edited by Esmaralda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote name='Muratus del Mur' timestamp='1309998370' post='87273']
Labyrint should be a death trap.
Team work can be in many ways, traveling in teams is defenetly one.
[/quote]
On the other hand it would be a bit weird to organize team trips through labirynth... With viscosity standard in labirynth it will not become a deathtrap, options:
1. it would be crossed regularly - and newbies exploring labirynth will only have hints 'OK, high viscosity, let's come back'
2. it will not be crossed regularly - and ppl will organize group excusrions (!!!???)
3. it will become dead zone and the only ppl visiting GG will be those with other than Labirynth means to get there
If old permanent AP cost per step is not deadly enough why not employ random numbers generators - every character entering any Labirynth location would have AP randomly generated in each direction - say between 1 and 90 (chars buffer would have to be flushed occasionally probably). It would make it much more difficult to cross and explore - and as each char would have individually assigned AP costs, not that prone to group exploring

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fitting in with the new viscosity could there be a day (perhaps 1 a season) where viscosity in locations such as Labyrinth, Tribunal (not places that are currently locked) where viscosity has no effect on AP cost. Things would go back to how they were before. I imagine the day called "Day of endless flow" or similar.

The Warrior

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Should locations like alliance rooms and rebel influence rooms really have Viscosity? They're as much a location as alliance chat, but without the chat, y'know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Forum Statistics

    15,915
    Total Topics
    174,101
    Total Posts
  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
  • Recent Event Reviews

×
×
  • Create New...