Note: You don't have to read the whole post to answer. I'm naturally verbose.
Like many of you, I've been playing role playing games for a very long time. If it weren't for the allure of RPG's, I'd be in better health, have a nicer house, and much much more free time.
My question is this... do you want to be able to see all the numbers that are used behind the scenes? If you know what I'm talking about, you can stop reading here and reply. If you don't, here's a slew of examples and a couple rants. Please note that I'm making all the numbers up because that's all I CAN do.
Some of you will disagree on principal right away, but before you become dogmatic, imagine if they took away the ability to see one or two of the numbers you take for granted. Suppose you couldn't see the damage or delay on a weapon. Instead of damage 34 / delay 40 on your 2hs, you see damage moderately high / Speed fairly slow.
Do you want to know that having a skill of 215 gives a 58% chance of a successful combine on a 245 trivial item?
Do you want to know exactly what an extra 5 strength, atk, AC, dex, or int will do for your character? I am a level 65 enchanter, and I don't even know for sure whether I should worry about my charisma while I'm charming. I charm almost every single day, and I don't even know if I'm doing it right. I feel that I get some benefit, but I make tradeoffs for the extra charisma. At 305 charisma, I can only prance around with 312 int and 1800hp (Unbuffed). If I lower my charisma down to 201, I can sit at 345 int and 2300hp. I don't know which one is better... and I WANT TO KNOW!! This is not about charisma and charming... that is an old debate.
This is about knowing whether I should cast illusion: werewolf on the rogue for the 118 atk or NDT for the 120 dex. At the very least, the rogue should be able to figure out which one is better for himself. Is it worth the insane scarecrow laughter at all?? I want to see all the numbers so I can decide.
I want to see that specializing in evocation gives me a 34% chance of lowering my spell cost by 25%, while lowering my fizzle rate by 21%. I LOVE THE NUMBERS!!
I know that Sony wants to hide a lot of the details to prevent people from Min/Maxing. They think it homogenizes the set of skills that people will get. They also know that they can hide a lot of bugs from us by not letting us see what's happenning.
I recently went on a tirade about damage mitigation that could have been avoided if Sony just let us know how the stinking stuff all works. "Here's an aa... it increases damage mitigation by 2%". It took me 2 weeks and posting on 4 boards until I got someone that actually knew what it meant. (It was this board, and thanks) It turns out that it sucks, and I never should have gotten it over some of the other aa's that were available.
Like it or not, Sony, I LOVE to Min/Max. When I played D&D, I used to study the damage and combat formulas backwards and forwards. I knew exactly what weapons were the best, and when I got to a trap, I knew if my rogue had a good chance of disarming it. Even better, I could see the percentage, and I could see the GM roll the dice right in front of me. No mystic voodoo.
I know that there are a lot of chat room groupies playing EQ that don't care, and some that disagree with seeing any numbers at all. Just want to know where you stand.
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Do you want to see the numbers?
Do you want to see the numbers?Follow
I think seeing the numbers ALL the time would be unneccessary clutter. But I can see how having access to some of the numbers would help with decision making, particularly in spending AA points and buffing for raids. I for one, would like to know the numbers behind taunt....what kind of success rate should a lvl 65 warrior with max taunt have on mobs lvl 65 or below?
Hmmm...I suddenly see your point about hiding bugs by not showing the numbers....
Hmmm...I suddenly see your point about hiding bugs by not showing the numbers....
I for one would like to see the numbers. But I don't want to have them jamming up the interface. If they were there when I wanted to look at them and compare the data, that would be cool. Just to have some way to turn them off and on when needed would work for me.
IIRC the devs from SoE commented on this a while back. the #1 reason they do not release this information is to keep their competition from getting it and makeing a better system.
well they already have better systems so that point is mute IMHO.
also an other reason they have said they will not release that data is ppl will use it for exploiting things, and i could see that happening very easy with the kind of data that 'could' be avaliable.
personaly id love to have access to the nnumbers so i can make more informed choices about what i do and dont do.
well they already have better systems so that point is mute IMHO.
also an other reason they have said they will not release that data is ppl will use it for exploiting things, and i could see that happening very easy with the kind of data that 'could' be avaliable.
personaly id love to have access to the nnumbers so i can make more informed choices about what i do and dont do.
YES YES YES
Other numbers wanted:
I want to know exactly how much 2% of my mana is, and see mana go up or down by adding/removing wis/int, mana items, just like health.
I want weapons to show you the level they proc at.
I want items with haste to show the percent of haste.
It would be nice if the bind wound message told you how much it healed for.
Other numbers wanted:
I want to know exactly how much 2% of my mana is, and see mana go up or down by adding/removing wis/int, mana items, just like health.
I want weapons to show you the level they proc at.
I want items with haste to show the percent of haste.
It would be nice if the bind wound message told you how much it healed for.
Probably we would find the formuli from SOE inconsistant with the actual running of the game. It takes effort to put the code into english and/or english into the code. Each time there are chances for errors.
Thus, I don't think detailed explanations of, say, what atk does, are going to be forthcoming.
I'm all for *more* numbers. For example, haste % on items. There is some LDoN item with "haste" listed. Imagine spending 750 or 1150 adventure points (I don't recall exact numbers) and getting, say, a 20% haste item. (I believe actual one is supposed to be 31%?) This should be easy to implement. Further, casters could have a command /mana or something to tell them the ammount of mana they have (to the exact number, say "your mana is 208/341" or whatever).
But more than anything, I'm all for more communication from SOE. Even with all it's inherent imprecision, a statement like: "CHA helps on the following list of spells: (list ensues) but you don't get much benefit for a CHA above 250."
Look, they can announce these things with some simple disclaimer like "we do not guarentee the exact working of the following:" or something. I know it's complex, and I'm sure most of the time they will generally be right, but they will ***** up eventually. Such is life with complex code. My own code from 6 months ago looks like spagetti I can't imagine what 5 or 6 years worth of code looks like /shudder.
Basic things that we are not told irk me. For example, with this last message from SOE about exploiters being banned. I'd love to know if there was a plat dup bug or an item dup bug. Further, there was some talk about tradeskill prices: people could get profit from just combining items. I'd love to know if I find a new recipe which is profitable (to sell back to vendors) will I be banned for using it? Obviously, macro-ing is bannable, but what about just using an existing recipe? Let's take it to an extreme: what if it was a recipe with which I profit 100pp per combine. And I discover it and choose not to post in anywhere. Not what SOE intended? Sure is. Is it bannable? I would assume so, but in the past profitable recipies did exist (fletching at 202 trivial and the smithed toolbox spring to mind) and were nerfed without mention of bannings.
But it's not so much the whole "I could be banned!" thing, because it is pretty exotic, but the sort of everyday commonplace "wait a min, how does this work?" kind of thing which bugs me.
Thus, I don't think detailed explanations of, say, what atk does, are going to be forthcoming.
I'm all for *more* numbers. For example, haste % on items. There is some LDoN item with "haste" listed. Imagine spending 750 or 1150 adventure points (I don't recall exact numbers) and getting, say, a 20% haste item. (I believe actual one is supposed to be 31%?) This should be easy to implement. Further, casters could have a command /mana or something to tell them the ammount of mana they have (to the exact number, say "your mana is 208/341" or whatever).
But more than anything, I'm all for more communication from SOE. Even with all it's inherent imprecision, a statement like: "CHA helps on the following list of spells: (list ensues) but you don't get much benefit for a CHA above 250."
Look, they can announce these things with some simple disclaimer like "we do not guarentee the exact working of the following:" or something. I know it's complex, and I'm sure most of the time they will generally be right, but they will ***** up eventually. Such is life with complex code. My own code from 6 months ago looks like spagetti I can't imagine what 5 or 6 years worth of code looks like /shudder.
Basic things that we are not told irk me. For example, with this last message from SOE about exploiters being banned. I'd love to know if there was a plat dup bug or an item dup bug. Further, there was some talk about tradeskill prices: people could get profit from just combining items. I'd love to know if I find a new recipe which is profitable (to sell back to vendors) will I be banned for using it? Obviously, macro-ing is bannable, but what about just using an existing recipe? Let's take it to an extreme: what if it was a recipe with which I profit 100pp per combine. And I discover it and choose not to post in anywhere. Not what SOE intended? Sure is. Is it bannable? I would assume so, but in the past profitable recipies did exist (fletching at 202 trivial and the smithed toolbox spring to mind) and were nerfed without mention of bannings.
But it's not so much the whole "I could be banned!" thing, because it is pretty exotic, but the sort of everyday commonplace "wait a min, how does this work?" kind of thing which bugs me.
I WANT to see all the technical numbers on items (most of all lvl to proc), the trivial of the combine I just mamaged/failed and as I can see HP and mana in the inventory it would make sense to be able to switch the percentages to numbers as a choice for the interface so a caster can check in the midst of battle if/when he has sufficient mana.
I DON't want to see any more creature information than I'm getting at the moment - If I want every fight reduced to a simple calculation I wouldn't need the fancy graphics and a soundcard...
I DON't want to see any more creature information than I'm getting at the moment - If I want every fight reduced to a simple calculation I wouldn't need the fancy graphics and a soundcard...
Anonymous
Quote:
It would be nice if the bind wound message told you how much it healed for.
Easy. Take your skill in BW, divide by 4.
Anonymous
Grimfar wrote:
I for one would like to see the numbers. But I don't want to have them jamming up the interface. If they were there when I wanted to look at them and compare the data, that would be cool. Just to have some way to turn them off and on when needed would work for me.
I agree with Grimfar.
Recent Visitors: 130
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (130)
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Do you want to see the numbers?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC