Should Larva implement PSO2 style drops along with classic style?

[Midori]

@Saith

If you aren't a liar, then you are ignorant. I thought you were knowledgeable about the game and smart in general, so I assumed you were knowingly being deceitful to us. I'm sorry to hear that's not the case.

The whole point of the new drop system is to make it better than the classic system for multiplayer. So of course it would be silly to play multiplayer with the classic system. That's not a problem. It's a solution. If 4 people are working together to get the same item, and one player gets 2 of the items before someone gets the item, that's totally fine. That will happen sometimes and the player who didn't get their item yet shouldn't be upset. He has the same chance of getting the item as everyone else. Also, the player who got 2 items could choose to give 1 to the other player if they wanted. It's the same thing for when people solo in separate rooms. If you are soloing for Red Ring and you see 2 banners for Red Ring go to the same player, do you get angry? If you understood that everyone has the same chance, you shouldn't have a problem with it. The whole concept of "banner stealing" makes no sense. Just because someone else gets the same rare you want doesn't mean it prevents you from getting the rare.

All of the crazy problems you tried to come up with to how the new system would discourage teamwork and multiplayer could be solved if you use the classic system, or they would exist in both. If you are really that paranoid about people not being honest about what items dropped for them, you can use the classic system. It shouldn't even matter what items they got anyway, since those aren't your items. If they want to give you items, they can. If an item drops for them, it's theirs and they can choose what they want to do with it. If having an extra player join would decrease your chance of getting items, you can ask them to leave, lock the room or use the classic system. The classic system has potential problems too, you know. Maybe we should just shut down the entire server because there is a chance of problem.

If the 4 players don't race for the Red Ring in TTF, because 3 of them agreed to give it to 1 player, it still sucks because those 3 nice, helpful players are essentially being punished for their good deed. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone could help everyone at the same time and have everyone benefit?

The drop rates wouldn't double because most players don't multi client. Most players solo with 1 account, so if they started doing multiplayer with the new system, they would actually get items twice as slowly as before. Sure, some hardcore players will solo with 4 accounts for twice the rares, but overall, it's likely the server will drop about the same number of rares or maybe less. If it does end up that many players solo with 4 accounts and items are dropping too often, the solution would be to restrict multiclient and/or reduce the drop rates, not make the game favor solo over multiplayer even more.

Multiclient is a problem. To prevent one person from using multi clients to get rares faster, we should restrict it in one way or another. We could disable multi client on the same PC, which means people would have to go through a much bigger hassle to solo with 4 accounts. If they had to use 4 different PCs, they wouldn't be able to control all accounts with the same controller anymore. People with big families or dorms can still play because each person has their own PC. Another idea is to just have a rule that says one person can't run quests with multiple clients. That would pretty much solve all of these problems instantly.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Midori

[velociti]

@velociti I don't think you understand exactly what I meant with how a multiple drops system works. With 4 people in the room the red ring rate would go down from 1/57 to 1/228, but when it hits 4 of them would drop, 1 for each person in the room. That would always equal the same amount of falz kills average for each red ring no matter how you chose to do runs, since although in a 4p room it would take average 4x longer to get the drop to hit, there would also be 4 red rings dropping when it happens. It would be something you only use when everyone in the room wants the drop and nobody actually wants to help the other people; since they can't decide what order drops would go because they can't be arsed to help after they get their own want satisfied, then everybody just gets it equally at same time. No matter how people do runs, it will be same average number of red rings dropping to number of falz kills, but multiplayer runs will still be easier and take less time to kill those falzs'.

My only gripe with the new system is that the rates drop so much that hunting anything will require 2x (or 4x) the amount of runs in order to obtain said item.

Are you saying that the server generates the same drop for all 4 clients in the room? --> If 200 meseta drops for 1 player, the other 3 players see 200 meseta? I thought we were under the assumption that the server would calculate a random drop for all 4 players independently, where one could get a rare, one could get nothing, another a random armor, and the other a monomate.

I'm pretty sure you didn't mean all players encounter the same drop, but I actually like this idea. If all 4 people can get the rare to drop at the same time, morale would be high for everyone and they'd be finished hunting together. (Like you said earlier there would be a banner problem, but it wouldn't matter, everyone in the room would get a rare, and people in the lobby who tabbed the room would see who else got it)

[Soly]

Getting a rare to drop for all the players in the room at once, is literally making it

drop * (player count)

I don't like that and if that were to be used, all the rare rates would be reduced in a linear way, so the rates would be 1/(player count) which is the same thing pretty much.

Of what has been exposed.

"Banner stealing", "Racing for items" and "Item Ninjas"

In a DFA (drop for all?) system, if everyone is working together, for sure this won't exist, but that requires you to get people who work together with you.

There are many instances of "I was hunting this item, this person joined (the room that had my name) I also called dibs, the [item] dropped, he grabbed it and ran away/dc"

That's what we try to work out here.

With drops per player.

-You can't banner steal because they are for you specifically, if it drops even 10 times in a row, the drops are yours, so are the banners.

If you worry about 2+ players picking up something at once and getting a banner first or getting it overwritten with someone else's.. damn... you already have the drop, it wont be the end of the world

I know is nice to have the name across the top of the screen... you could wait until the banner finishes.

Or it probably wont happen most of the time because getting drops is a random thing.

-You can't race for items because you don't see them, well.. you can still race for your own items. Not much to say here

-You can't ninja drops because of the previous reason.

So yeah... this stuff is to help people who play with everyone, I could think of (but too lazy) of a few instances of people who ninja'd drops and they were "friends" with the person who was hunting the item so even "friends" don't escape this situation.

I don't know how people would react to this system if we reduce DAR in a linear way. sure if we don't do it that way, DPP will have a better chance at "giving more items" but remember drops aren't

going to drop after n kills where n goes into a rate of 1/n

The following points are for 1 player specific player in the situation

-4 different rooms with DFA will have a chance of 100% * 4

Extra effort and time needed to control all clients.

-4 clients in the same room with DPP will have a chance of [insert reduced value here] * 4

Less effort and time needed because you have to just move these clients to the room and wait for everything to be dead, however that's still some effort of moving clients around, have all 4 open at once, etc

-4 different players with DFA will have a chance of 25%

Every drop has to be shared, that 25% could turn into a middle finger if someone decides to be a dick (which has happened multiple times, even with people who have agreed to give up the drop that was called for X player)

-4 different players with DPP will have a chance of [insert reduced value here] * 1

Definitely not 100% but at least you are assured that whatever you see, is yours.

I think is a good trade-off this DPP system, sometimes people might decide to go solo for item rate reasons but that's up to every player.

I haven't seen many people quad-logging different rooms for a specific item (besides Midori lol) but if this DPP turns everyone into a greedy bastard then it will probably have a worse than DFA reduction and call it a day.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Soly

[Midori]

@ Soly

Thanks for explaining all of that and giving comparisons using math.

I also think that it's pretty funny how I am one of the most vocal advocates for the game favoring multiplayer, but I also solo with 6 accounts often.

[Misombre]

@Midori "We could disable multi client on the same PC, which means people would have to go through a much bigger hassle to solo with 4 accounts."

Well, that's basically the only way to fix properly the multiclient "issue" so that every people in the same house can play the game.

But, there is a big but, to do that it would require the mac address (or physical address)... and it is not as easy as you can think. Not even to mention that little smart'n sneaky ones would find a way around it (emulation perhaps).

Now my two cents is : just let's give it a try !

We can speculate as much as we want, argue for that or that or doge, but at the end, we need a big old try period to know what it will really be about.

Can it be that worst ?

Perhaps... but if we are being honest, at worst we will not like it, but it will unlikely broke the game (beside the fact that it is optionnel so...). At best we will (mosly) like it and it'll be great.

Also keep in mind that people love to complain, so either a change is made or not, there will always be complainers (specially french people e__e you know what I mean guys =) on both sides. What am trying to say is that complaints doesn't mean that something is wrong with the game, it can also mean that people doesn't understand how lucky they are to have the game as it is.

Am aware about that, so I clearly say it : am playing PSO and at the end of the day that's all I wanted when I first join this server, so I don't care if something is done or not. But, this doesn't prevent me from wanting this DPP too because I can see the benefits (I actually have tried DPP on another server and it's kinda great tbh) and, at the end of the day, I will still be able to play PSO so...

[Trefleex]

Lol in events theres much dual loggers with there force for s/d and ra too spam bosses

I only support the idea if something about dual logging can be done if its ganna be done should be done 100% ok

[Soly]

Well, that's basically the only way to fix properly the multiclient "issue" so that every people in the same house can play the game.

But, there is a big but, to do that it would require the mac address (or physical address)... and it is not as easy as you can think. Not even to mention that little smart'n sneaky ones would find a way around it (emulation perhaps).

There isn't any "multiclient" issue, yeah, before Sega would not allow it because pretty much GameGuard, you can't open PSO2 if it's already running or even if you have PSOBB.open.

The issue would be people using multiple accounts to "get more drops", which is different and would have to be approached in a different way

If it comes down to it, the game has an identifier similar to MAC addresses, it would be fairly easy to use with the IP and determine how many accounts of that combination are connected (if whatever Sega made works)... the "fake bans" were caused by this identifier which is not unique.

Even then you can still use different computers and there will be always a way to bypass limitations.

With that said, I don't see a point in reducing the amount of accounts that can be used at once, you can still somehow log them back in.

I did say we could reduce it to at least 2 to let people dual log to transfer items or stuff like that... but that leaves people who dual log with other people who dual log in the same IP with a very poor experience.

You can argue that there aren't many people who dual log with others in the same house but at this point it is unknown and also nobody knows how many people will be quad-logging DPP... so that's not a valid point against DPP.

All the complains against DPP seem to be that people think other people will be quad-logging getting more items than themselves

Definitely we have to watch over it, and if it goes south it can be adjusted.

Edited May 5, 2016 by Soly

[dmoney1969]

Just make it a "not allowed" and a bannable offense for quad logging with one person in the PS02 system. Thanks for explaining things Soly. =o)

[Berrymilk]

Getting a rare to drop for all the players in the room at once, is literally making it

drop * (player count)

I don't like that and if that were to be used, all the rare rates would be reduced in a linear way, so the rates would be 1/(player count) which is the same thing pretty much.

Of what has been exposed.

"Banner stealing", "Racing for items" and "Item Ninjas"

In a DFA (drop for all?) system, if everyone is working together, for sure this won't exist, but that requires you to get people who work together with you.

There are many instances of "I was hunting this item, this person joined (the room that had my name) I also called dibs, the [item] dropped, he grabbed it and ran away/dc"

That's what we try to work out here.

With drops per player.

-You can't banner steal because they are for you specifically, if it drops even 10 times in a row, the drops are yours, so are the banners.

If you worry about 2+ players picking up something at once and getting a banner first or getting it overwritten with someone else's.. damn... you already have the drop, it wont be the end of the world

I know is nice to have the name across the top of the screen... you could wait until the banner finishes.

Or it probably wont happen most of the time because getting drops is a random thing.

-You can't race for items because you don't see them, well.. you can still race for your own items. Not much to say here

-You can't ninja drops because of the previous reason.

So yeah... this stuff is to help people who play with everyone, I could think of (but too lazy) of a few instances of people who ninja'd drops and they were "friends" with the person who was hunting the item so even "friends" don't escape this situation.

I don't know how people would react to this system if we reduce DAR in a linear way. sure if we don't do it that way, DPP will have a better chance at "giving more items" but remember drops aren't

going to drop after n kills where n goes into a rate of 1/n

The following points are for 1 player specific player in the situation

-4 different rooms with DFA will have a chance of 100% * 4

Extra effort and time needed to control all clients.

-4 clients in the same room with DPP will have a chance of [insert reduced value here] * 4

Less effort and time needed because you have to just move these clients to the room and wait for everything to be dead, however that's still some effort of moving clients around, have all 4 open at once, etc

-4 different players with DFA will have a chance of 25%

Every drop has to be shared, that 25% could turn into a middle finger if someone decides to be a dick (which has happened multiple times, even with people who have agreed to give up the drop that was called for X player)

-4 different players with DPP will have a chance of [insert reduced value here] * 1

Definitely not 100% but at least you are assured that whatever you see, is yours.

I think is a good trade-off this DPP system, sometimes people might decide to go solo for item rate reasons but that's up to every player.

I haven't seen many people quad-logging different rooms for a specific item (besides Midori lol) but if this DPP turns everyone into a greedy bastard then it will probably have a worse than DFA reduction and call it a day.

This is how I have always felt/thought about the new drop option. Thanks :3

[Midori]

Just make it a "not allowed" and a bannable offense for quad logging with one person in the PS02 system. Thanks for explaining things Soly. =o)

This. And for the players who never check the forums and aren't aware of the rule, you could do a warning first and a ban for repeat offenders.

Why should it even be allowed in the first place for one person to run multiple accounts in order to get items faster? How does this benefit the game? One account should be good enough for solo.

[Trefleex]

This. And for the players who never check the forums and aren't aware of the rule, you could do a warning first and a ban for repeat offenders.

Why should it even be allowed in the first place for one person to run multiple accounts in order to get items faster? How does this benefit the game? One account should be good enough for solo.

No really need when they logging there can be a big message no dual logging allowed pso2 dropstyle

[Larva]

@Midori "We could disable multi client on the same PC, which means people would have to go through a much bigger hassle to solo with 4 accounts."

Well, that's basically the only way to fix properly the multiclient "issue" so that every people in the same house can play the game.

But, there is a big but, to do that it would require the mac address (or physical address)... and it is not as easy as you can think. Not even to mention that little smart'n sneaky ones would find a way around it (emulation perhaps).

Now my two cents is : just let's give it a try !

We can speculate as much as we want, argue for that or that or doge, but at the end, we need a big old try period to know what it will really be about.

Can it be that worst ?

Perhaps... but if we are being honest, at worst we will not like it, but it will unlikely broke the game (beside the fact that it is optionnel so...). At best we will (mosly) like it and it'll be great.

Also keep in mind that people love to complain, so either a change is made or not, there will always be complainers (specially french people e__e you know what I mean guys =) on both sides. What am trying to say is that complaints doesn't mean that something is wrong with the game, it can also mean that people doesn't understand how lucky they are to have the game as it is.

Am aware about that, so I clearly say it : am playing PSO and at the end of the day that's all I wanted when I first join this server, so I don't care if something is done or not. But, this doesn't prevent me from wanting this DPP too because I can see the benefits (I actually have tried DPP on another server and it's kinda great tbh) and, at the end of the day, I will still be able to play PSO so...

Yep we will always have someone complaining for something. Is just like ice creams no had the same flavor as a favorite.

Anyway we already said what will happen.

Topic close... Too much drama.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk