Discussion: Disabling XP No Longer Increases Influence

[Peerless Girl]

1 minute ago, DR_Mechano said:

And you're telling me disabling the double inf when exemped option at that time was somehow a truly difficult task requiring hours upon hours of work. I'm sorry if I don't believe that.

You are unlikely to "believe" anything that doesn't suit your narrative, like much of the public, I've said my peace on it, you've said yours, anything further simply leads to arguing. The devs have their reasons I'm sure, I can only guess at them, it's not my place to know everything.

[Indystruck]

2 minutes ago, DR_Mechano said:

And you're telling me disabling the double inf when exemped option at that time was somehow a truly difficult task requiring hours upon hours of work. I'm sorry if I don't believe that.

If you don't have a lot of experience coding, I can see how it'd be easy to not believe. Some shit is tied together in ways that no one can imagine, not even the original devs going by some of the source code comments.

[Peerless Girl]

1 minute ago, Foxfyre said:

It does actually.  He was responding directly to what you said:

 

"And a year ago there were ZERO CoH's and there never would be again"

 

What server was in existence a year ago?

it was not an open server, not accessible to the general public, and those devs are not our current devs to my understanding, you'd have to take it up with them why it wasn't changed then. My guess is, much smaller population (just playing for fun, not trying to run a production game) it was less of an issue.

[Ruin Mage]

COH is notorious for being a hot mess code-wise.

[Foxfyre]

1 minute ago, Peerless Girl said:

You are unlikely to "believe" anything that doesn't suit your narrative, like much of the public, I've said my peace on it, you've said yours, anything further simply leads to arguing. The devs have their reasons I'm sure, I can only guess at them, it's not my place to know everything.

It wouldn't be a hard task, actually.  Probably just one or 2 lines of code to tell the feature to only work if character level = 50.

[Jimmy]

1 minute ago, DMW45 said:

I have to ask, *how* is it an abuse of the system, really?

 

It's using it as it was designed to be used--exemplaring and getting double inf for no XP, no more, no less.

 

In fact, it's even costlier to use it now than it was on live if you're under Vet Level 100

The feature (disabling XP) was designed to allow you to complete arcs without outlevelling contacts. It still does that.

[Peerless Girl]

1 minute ago, Foxfyre said:

It wouldn't be a hard task, actually.  Probably just one or 2 lines of code to tell the feature to only work if character level = 50.

That's probably like several hundred instances given some of the--nevermind someone above me said it before I did. CoH is spaghetti code of the finest design. One might even call it...cryptically written. *puts pinky in corner of mouth*

[DMW45]

Just now, Jimmy said:

The feature (disabling XP) was designed to allow you to complete arcs without outlevelling contacts. It still does that.

That's a separate setting, though?

 

Double Inf for No XP while exemplaring was it's own thing, and it wouldn't even help in not outleveling contacts, as it doesn't do anything when you're not exemplaring, whch you wouldn't be when doing normal arcs

[SwitchFade]

12 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

Can we please stop calling it an exploit?  It doesn't even fit the definition of one.  

The devs choosing to turn off a feature that was implemented YEARS ago at this point, that everyone knew about and everyone used is NOT an exploit.

There is an exploit.

[Indystruck]

Just now, Foxfyre said:

It wouldn't be a hard task, actually.  Probably just one or 2 lines of code to tell the feature to only work if character level = 50.

oh man never presume about coding a quick fix for something that's spent a decade getting more and more new code dumped ontop of it

 

one of my favorite examples of horrible cascades of code when people think "oh that's easy" is Soul Reaver 2, where running at a specific group of pigeons causes this resonance cascade of minor script issues that snowballs into preventing you from being able to beat the game

[Abraxus]

It's been said already that the change causing all the uproar was not done to discourage farming, but to encourage ALL forms of play equally.  From that, we seem to get a lot of folks making accusations on ulterior motives, contempt for the players, and not being transparent.  Really?  That's what folks think after almost a year here?

 

Seems like anything that makes the slightest changes (and this is slight in comparison to what COULD have been done if they truly wanted to discourage Farming), results in these kinds of outcry, and "DOOM".  The game goes on, we adjust to changes, the city lives on.  Unlike the live days, if you feel you just can't live with a change, you do have a choice in where you play.  But, the changes are what they are.  They don't do it to piss off a segment of the player base, and they have explained what their purpose was in doing this.  The fact that folks don't agree was almost certain.  Nobody wants anybody to leave, but ultimately, that decision will be up to the individual.  I personally feel it's an overreaction, but I am not reliant on these kinds of things, and so won't be greatly affected.  But, everybody has their own style, and if yours is affected to the extent that you just can't deal, do what you gotta do.  But, at least hang long enough to put together some solid data on the impact of this on those who DO rely on it, and submit it.  Give the Devs a chance to see and evaluate the information based on actual game play.  Not predictions of doom.  If you have an undeniable case to make, I'm sure they will listen.

[DMW45]

Just now, SwitchFade said:

There is an exploit.

There was a nerf along with the exploit fix

[Jimmy]

8 minutes ago, DMW45 said:

That's a separate setting, though?

 

Double Inf for No XP while exemplaring was it's own thing, and it wouldn't even help in not outleveling contacts, as it doesn't do anything when you're not exemplaring, whch you wouldn't be when doing normal arcs

The exemplar option was added when they changed Exemplaring to not completely disable XP gain when Super Sidekicking was added to the game. It was there to preserve the ability to not earn XP for lower level content for those that wanted it. It still does this.

 

Again, it wasn't intended as a means to aid in influence farming and it certainly wasn't intended to be abused for level 49 farms.

Edited March 31, 2020 by Jimmy
wasn't, not was

[Noyjitat]

3 hours ago, The Curator said:

The following change was omitted from the beta patch notes due to a related exploit:

• Influence gain can no longer be increased by disabling XP

We’ve made this change to reduce the influence income gap between players who farm and those that do not. The amount of additional influence gained by abusing level 49 missions simply wasn’t healthy for the overall economy of the game, and generally unfair towards those who play standard level 50 content instead of farming.

 

Additionally, there were various exploits that could be abused in order to further increase influence gain through this option.

 

Overall, we concluded it was best to remove the mechanic. Even with this change farming is still far more efficient than every other method of influence gain.

I don't get your logic regarding a healthy economy when you seed the market with salvage, recipes and enhancements and put an artificial price cap on everything with reward merits / market seed and inf to reward merits conversion.

 

If you're really going to keep this change you should remove all the previous ae nerfs or at the very least disable the market seeding and be consistent with your own logic.

[Replacement]

1 hour ago, Targren said:

You're wrong, or at least misunderstanding. It was hidden BEFORE this thread, from the beta patch notes. 

 

"The following change was omitted from the beta patch notes due to a related exploit:"  and combined with the dev response  in this thread that admits that the exploit could have been fixed without the nerf, means it could have been in the beta notes with no mention of the exploit. 

 

I'm annoyed by it, as a newer player who counts on my farmer to outfit my alts, but I really don't have any interest in banging on about it like others do. I said my piece and reported my bug.

 

So lets not get catty, shall we?  

Fair enough.  In an effort to cut out the felines, I'll quickly clarify before I exit this thread for good:

I wish you had said "surprise" instead of "stealth."  I simply feel stealth, in this context, comes with "dishonest devs" connotations that I took issue with.  That sorted, have a good day.

[Crysis]

8 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

It does actually.  He was responding directly to what you said:

 

"And a year ago there were ZERO CoH's and there never would be again"

 

What server was in existence a year ago?

SCORE server, which was the base of Homecoming, existed the entire time since shortly after the shutdown of Live  7 years ago. You had to “know somebody” to get in but this game ran in secret for the whole time until last year.

AFAIK, SCORE is still running even now.

 

[SuperDan]

5 minutes ago, ForeverLaxx said:

Not that I disagree with your premise, but the person you're quoting was using the "go to another server" as a threat against making "unpopular" changes. They weren't telling people to leave; they were telling the devs that if they tinker too much then they won't have any players anymore.

I actually wasn't making a threat at all. What I'm saying, simply, is there are choices now that didn't exist before.

 

Another poster grabbed the essence of what I was saying. We've seen a huge spike in active players the last few months, and it's stayed consistent throughout the week now that everyone is at home. But even then, the most populated server is around 1200 players at peak hours. My guess is 10-15% of those are farmers and multiboxers. And even at 1200 active players it's not always easy to fill a team. If over time you lose another 10% of players from nerfs, which I think may be generous but still possible, it's very noticeable if growth is stagnant.

 

I don't agree with everything the HC guys do, but generally my experience here has been fun, perhaps more so than live. But the CoH market is flooded with places to play right now, places that offer some intriguing options/powersets/playstyles that we don't get here. And if we know anything of the history of this game, it's that when the big nerfs start coming, the big players start scattering. This time they don't even have to give up CoH to leave.....

This isn't a doomsday post, but this nerf combined with the code of conduct changes that removes the ability to live stream, are some pretty big changes that a lot of highly active gamers don't like.

[DMW45]

1 minute ago, Jimmy said:

The exemplar option was added when they changed Exemplaring to not completely disable XP gain when Super Sidekicking was added to the game. It was there to preserve the ability to not earn XP for lower level content for those that wanted it. It still does this.

 

Again, it was intended as a means to aid in influence farming and it certainly wasn't intended to be abused for level 49 farms.

It doesn't make much sense to me, though.  It wouldn't much help in not outleveling contacts you'd be normally doing, and if you didn't want to earn XP regardless... you can turn XP off in general.

As for the second one, howso?  I mean, you said so yourself, it's meant to aid in influence farming--the devs who put it in certainly knew the AE was a thing when they did.

 

It just seems more like just 'using' the system rather than 'abusing' the system.

 

[Foxfyre]

1 minute ago, Abraxus said:

It's been said already that the change causing all the uproar was not done to discourage farming, but to encourage ALL forms of play equally. 

This logic relies on that fact that some people feel that other peoples equal play somehow harms their own.

 

If a person chooses to spend all their time farming, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time PvP'ing, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time RP'ing in Atlas, that does not affect you.

And on the odd chance that something DOES come along and affect you...you can quit team/kick from team/ignore/gignore and move on.

This is just a continuation of the fact that everyone has to have their noses in everyone elses business, honestly.  

 

Play your game the way you enjoy it, and let others play the game they way they enjoy it.  

[ShadyCoh]

I find it amusing people saying it was not known as a exploit when its clearly pointed out in "how to farm" guides as your patrol xp bonus not going away as time passes. Where in normal play patrol xp end as time goes by until you log out in the correct places.

 

 

[Jimmy]

Just now, DMW45 said:

It doesn't make much sense to me, though.  It wouldn't much help in not outleveling contacts you'd be normally doing, and if you didn't want to earn XP regardless... you can turn XP off in general.

As for the second one, howso?  I mean, you said so yourself, it's meant to aid in influence farming--the devs who put it in certainly knew the AE was a thing when they did.

 

It just seems more like just 'using' the system rather than 'abusing' the system.

 

Sorry, typo. That was meant to be "wasn't intended".

[ForeverLaxx]

1 minute ago, SuperDan said:

I actually wasn't making a threat at all. What I'm saying, simply, is there are choices now that didn't exist before.

 

Your intentions aside, what was said is certainly a threat. The idea of "make too many changes and people will leave" is exactly the kind of thing used for that. It warns against being "unpopular" in favor of keeping the people who are already here (who, by the way, have no guarantee to stay anyway). It strikes me as the "cool parent" who's more concerned with being their kid's friend than being their authority figure/compass.

 

No one likes nerfs, even if they're good for the game overall, because no one likes losing their toys. Some people might leave for it, some won't, but the fear of losing players is not a reason to avoid change.

[Peerless Girl]

Just now, DMW45 said:

It doesn't make much sense to me, though.  It wouldn't much help in not outleveling contacts you'd be normally doing, and if you didn't want to earn XP regardless... you can turn XP off in general.

As for the second one, howso?  I mean, you said so yourself, it's meant to aid in influence farming--the devs who put it in certainly knew the AE was a thing when they did.

 

It just seems more like just 'using' the system rather than 'abusing' the system.

 

As Number Six said above, while the option existed (and turning off XP didn't exist in CoH either until SS went in which Jimmy mentioned--we had to drown ourselves in PILES of XP debt to not outlevel arcs back then...I was one who did, and it was even worse before the debt cap). The knew what they did, yes, but as Six said before, it didn't become as much of an issue UNTIL XP didn't stop at 50, when the vet levels were added, then that exacerbated the INF gain (since you're now still gaining "XP" when level 50s didn't used to) and inflated the market. Least that's my understanding. @Number Six?

[Peerless Girl]

2 minutes ago, Foxfyre said:

This logic relies on that fact that some people feel that other peoples equal play somehow harms their own.

 

If a person chooses to spend all their time farming, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time PvP'ing, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time RP'ing in Atlas, that does not affect you.

And on the odd chance that something DOES come along and affect you...you can quit team/kick from team/ignore/gignore and move on.

This is just a continuation of the fact that everyone has to have their noses in everyone elses business, honestly.  

 

Play your game the way you enjoy it, and let others play the game they way they enjoy it.  

This logic is specific to devs of games who have to look at the health of the ENTIRE PLAYERBASE not just in a vacuum of "what other people do doesn't harm me" that players can do. 

[Zeraphia]

Just now, Foxfyre said:

This logic relies on that fact that some people feel that other peoples equal play somehow harms their own.

 

If a person chooses to spend all their time farming, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time PvP'ing, that does not affect you.

If a person chooses to spend their time RP'ing in Atlas, that does not affect you.

And on the odd chance that something DOES come along and affect you...you can quit team/kick from team/ignore/gignore and move on.

This is just a continuation of the fact that everyone has to have their noses in everyone elses business, honestly.  

 

Play your game the way you enjoy it, and let others play the game they way they enjoy it.  

I do take issue with your post, although I have seen you in game, hi foxy! 🙂

 

People farming does very much so affect the game and the economy and very well does affect the majority of the player populace and their opinions are still valuable and contribute heavily to the state of the game. I don't disagree with the sentiment to let others play the game they want to play it, however, the choices on what people do as a market do very well influence what I can or cannot outfit my characters with and how much of the content on this game I love I am able to fully enjoy!

 

Cheers and thank you for all your hardwork on the Hami Raids!!!! =D