So I just noticed the "edge point specifics" help file exists. Seeing all the details for the first time, I have some thoughts. Hopefully constructive ones. My main pet peeve is that the current system in many ways creates perverse incentives. So...

1. PK: Award edge points for a solo kill, at any level, but cap them at a fairly low number. Say 20. No edge points for assists or non-solo kills and no points for having X kills by level Y. Also, you only get points the first time you kill a particular character. Subsequent kills of the same character get you nothing.

Reasoning:

a. Having high caps (like we currently do) creates pressure to kill as many people as possible, even when someone might otherwise show mercy (in the spirit of sportsmanship). If edge points are on the table then maybe I kill the guy in re-gear that I just killed 30 minutes ago because hey: edge points.

b. Giving points for getting a certain number of kills by a certain level incentivizes level sitting.

2. XP: Significantly lower the caps on explore and observation. Especially observation. Also, don't give points for having a certain amount of observe/explore by a certain level. Eliminate points for commerce xp altogether.

Reasoning:

a. Having high caps on observe/explore xp (especially the "gain a certain amount by a certain level") strongly incentivize "gaming" the system. That's why you see people hanging out on the Hamsah Docks for hours on end at low levels. The caps should be set such that an "average" long-lived character will hit them without ever "gaming" the system. A character whose exploration/observation is below average will suffer relative to a "normal" character, but the guy who "artificially" accrues as much explore/observe xp as possible won't gain an advantage over the guy who's just trucking along doing his thing.

b. Awarding points for bartering creates an incentive for me to barter even when I have plenty of gold and would rather spend it instead. That's silly.

3. Cabal related: Continue giving points when someone makes leader, but remove the points for retrievals.

Reasoning:

Making leader is essentially a role-play thing. That's worth incentivizing. So are retrievals, but giving edge points for them screws characters that aren't in a cabal. I feel like not being in a cabal shouldn't screw you out of many edge points. Cabal'd characters already have enough advantages.

4. Level/Age: Don't just give points for reaching old age; give them for reaching "mature" and "middle-aged" as well. Lots of characters don't even make it that far; we could stand to start the incentives a little earlier.

>So I just noticed the "edge point specifics" help file
>exists. Seeing all the details for the first time, I have
>some thoughts. Hopefully constructive ones. My main pet
>peeve is that the current system in many ways creates perverse
>incentives. So...
>
>1. PK: Award edge points for a solo kill, at any level, but
>cap them at a fairly low number. Say 20. No edge points for
>assists or non-solo kills and no points for having X kills by
>level Y. Also, you only get points the first time you kill a
>particular character. Subsequent kills of the same character
>get you nothing.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>a. Having high caps (like we currently do) creates pressure to
>kill as many people as possible, even when someone might
>otherwise show mercy (in the spirit of sportsmanship). If
>edge points are on the table then maybe I kill the guy in
>re-gear that I just killed 30 minutes ago because hey: edge
>points.
>
>b. Giving points for getting a certain number of kills by a
>certain level incentivizes level sitting.

I agree with most of this. I don't necessarily think that limiting the mechanical reward to solo kills is going to prevent people from engaging in cheesy (RP / sportsmanship wise) PKs, especially at lower levels, but there's only so much we can mitigate with an automated system.

>2. XP: Significantly lower the caps on explore and
>observation. Especially observation. Also, don't give points
>for having a certain amount of observe/explore by a certain
>level. Eliminate points for commerce xp altogether.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>a. Having high caps on observe/explore xp (especially the
>"gain a certain amount by a certain level") strongly
>incentivize "gaming" the system. That's why you see people
>hanging out on the Hamsah Docks for hours on end at low
>levels. The caps should be set such that an "average"
>long-lived character will hit them without ever "gaming" the
>system. A character whose exploration/observation is below
>average will suffer relative to a "normal" character, but the
>guy who "artificially" accrues as much explore/observe xp as
>possible won't gain an advantage over the guy who's just
>trucking along doing his thing.
>
>b. Awarding points for bartering creates an incentive for me
>to barter even when I have plenty of gold and would rather
>spend it instead. That's silly.

Exploration is one of those behaviors we want to encourage. We'd prefer characters be out and about interacting with the world and/or each other. I think the EXP/OXP system works well when characters are seeing new things for the first time and genuinely exploring, but falls apart when it's treated as a "chore" or scripted. I don't have a good solution to this problem right now.

In theory, characters regularly engaging in commerce is a good thing. In practice, it doesn't tend to actually contribute much to the rest of the game. Most of the time the system is simply rewarding people for one of two things: spending coin on things they were going to spend it on anyway or selling a thousand pounds of junk until half a dozen shopkeepers run out of coin. This would be an fun project to tackle some day, but it's low on my list of importance and ROI.

>3. Cabal related: Continue giving points when someone makes
>leader, but remove the points for retrievals.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>Making leader is essentially a role-play thing. That's worth
>incentivizing. So are retrievals, but giving edge points for
>them screws characters that aren't in a cabal. I feel like
>not being in a cabal shouldn't screw you out of many edge
>points. Cabal'd characters already have enough advantages.

That's a valid point, but one we have to set aside to some degree. Whether its cabals or religions or even class type (e.g., a healer versus a more offensive build) there will always be choices that yield less opportunity for certain things.

The direction I'd prefer to go on this one is to continue to award edge points for the most difficult (as our code identifies them) raids and retrievals, but not for ANY raid or retrieval. Participating in cabal wars isn't inherently reward-worthy in my opinion, it's part of the proposition of joining a cabal. However, taking risks and getting in the mix even when the deck isn't stacked in ones favor is one of those behaviors we'd like to reward.

>4. Level/Age: Don't just give points for reaching old age;
>give them for reaching "mature" and "middle-aged" as well.
>Lots of characters don't even make it that far; we could stand
>to start the incentives a little earlier.

I don't disagree with this in principle, but right now I'm also not looking to increase the pool of edge points, especially not ones that are virtually free. If/when I do another round of refactoring you'll probably see this, but at the expense of another category.

I wonder if you guys realize the extent to which obsv/explore XP has been gamed at this point. In my short time back I've been given lists of obsv/explore areas/mobs/points of interest and their values. ListS(more than 1). Script runs for Hamsah docks boats, etc. I still can't bring myself to do it, but hey, at least I have the choice I guess even though it sets me back vs all the players that do these things.

I don't have a solution either, but this aspect of CF bugs me the most since I've returned.

edit: I'm also going to go on a limb and say this system is why lowbie groups are so frustratingly hard to put together. Can't give up edges for the sake of leveling too fast and interacting with people. And any group I have managed to put together in the low levels, have been newer players that most likely aren't even aware of this system.

We do.

Not only have we seen what's floating around, we see people actively using it. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on when someone completes half a dozen NPC quests in a span of time measured in seconds instead of minutes.

If it were up to me, I would gladly take the EXP/OXP system and probably the entire edge system too out back and shoot them myself. I'm more than willing to admit that (I think) despite our best intentions these features simply didn't work out in the long run, or at the very least the game evolved in a direction that largely ruined them. Unfortunately, these are things that come with deep roots and strong opinions, and that makes change difficult and time-consuming.

Now having said all of that, I also don't see these things as some terrible blight upon CF either. They aren't perfect systems and I wouldn't defend them so, and while they may not fulfill their original intended design as well as we'd like, I do think a lot of people exaggerate the degree to which they negatively impact the game.

I think Isildur is making a lot of sense in his posts and his ideas kind of open things up to where the tedium of getting edge points can be lifted quite a bit.

I think the system itself is good idea and can be awesome if it gets tweaked a bit.

in game tho

>edit: I'm also going to go on a limb and say this system is
>why lowbie groups are so frustratingly hard to put together.
>Can't give up edges for the sake of leveling too fast and
>interacting with people. And any group I have managed to put
>together in the low levels, have been newer players that most
>likely aren't even aware of this system.

I think this particular aspect hurts the game enough to warrant a change. No one wants to spend 20 hours pre-level 20 farming obs/exp/pk's/etc. except those that expect a return on that investment relative to other players later on in the game.

This means new players are faced with a *very* un-social game where once everyone and their brother was trying to get a group together to rank as quickly as possible.

Do you have any stats on # of levels gained solo over time? I'd be very curious to see that trend...

>I think this particular aspect hurts the game enough to
>warrant a change. No one wants to spend 20 hours pre-level 20
>farming obs/exp/pk's/etc. except those that expect a return on
>that investment relative to other players later on in the
>game.

I think you're making a few bad assumptions here.

>This means new players are faced with a *very* un-social game
>where once everyone and their brother was trying to get a
>group together to rank as quickly as possible.

I think you're making a few bad assumptions here too.

>Do you have any stats on # of levels gained solo over time?
>I'd be very curious to see that trend...
>

Sort of. What we log is somewhat inconsistent and mostly level 20+, but if a sample size of 416 characters and 13,312 level gains at level 20+ (counting only characters who reached 51), the total number of solo levels gained was 2,476, or roughly 18%.

Half of the people on 20- rank (vets) are perfecting skills/grinding edge exp. lowlevel levelsitters are exceedingly numerous (even I have two, but that's just for learning PK ropes on different classes :) ). My experience is that finding lowlevel ranking group is not an easy task if you intend to rank quickly for some reason.

The only way I managed to do it is when I was speedranking warrior I was just inviting everyone in who group - and that paid off real quick. When I tried to do the same with less self-reliant class - didn't work :)

Low levels provide better opportunities for skill learning and edge exp grinding, hence levelsitting. I don't know if that's for better or worse.

This is sort of the problem with the whole game now. The imms say they want to reward effort, but it really means grinding. And it's basically impossible to be competitive at this game without ten to twenty years of game knowledge. You need to know where to get the best gear or you won't be competitive, you need to know (have scripts) where to explore and what to look at or you won't get edges and won't be competitive, you need to know how and where to grind skills or you won't have perfected skills and won't be competitive. It just really overall doesn't make the game worth playing at this point.

I'll give you the best set you can get alone at a certain level with all the tricks and perfected skills and I'll give a 20 year (skilled) vet outfit gear and 75% skills and he would still stomp your b hole. Skill grinding and gear only gets you so far (depends on build) but it isn't the reason you're getting curb stomped.

No #### skill comes in but the fact of the matter is that you give a newbie the 75% skills and the outfit gear and the vet the gear they're going to have and it's just more and more of a deck stacked against anyone who isn't a vet.

And to be fair, this is just my annual or so look to see if this game is still alive so nobody's stomping my bhole :-P

asd

How do you define being "competitive" in a game like Carrion Fields?

I'm not skilled at PK. I don't grind explore/observe (because #### that). I hardly prep. I don't focus much on gear. I certainly don't use scripts, aliases, macros, or triggers. I put almost zero effort into roles/descs. I'm a casual in every sense of the word.I still feel like I can have a pretty strong affect on PK events and cabal wars when I'm caught up in them. Which to me, means I'm "competitive" without any of what you list as required for it.

Yes, sometimes I lose a battle and think, man that could have gone better if I had mastered defenses. Doesn't mean I didn't put up a good fight despite it. Sounds to me more like you are saying those things are required to be Mr. Billy G. Badass, rather than just "to compete."

If you're taking an "I need to stomp everyone all of the time" mentality CF is going to be an awful experience.

If you can dial that competitive nature back a notch and set some alternative goals, you can simultaneously have fun and still be a pretty successful PKer. And yes the extreme focus placed on optimizing skills and finding the most pimped out gear fits into ultra-competitive mode.

I agree with the comments above about skill vs. maxing. The most prolific PKers in CF history might have maxed skills too, but it was mainly skill that landed them the majority of their PKs. Furthermore it was due the fact that they could consistently throw down, manage risks, and be deadly that they had nice sets of gear.

Note: You/you're used collectively here. Not directed specifically at Tsunami.

Telling me I've made "a few bad assumptions" with no backing is a lot like saying, "you are wrong but I'm not going to tell you why" and isn't very helpful, at least in my opinion, to an open dialogue.

>>Do you have any stats on # of levels gained solo over time?
>>I'd be very curious to see that trend...
>>
>
>Sort of. What we log is somewhat inconsistent and mostly
>level 20+, but if a sample size of 416 characters and 13,312
>level gains at level 20+ (counting only characters who reached
>51), the total number of solo levels gained was 2,476, or
>roughly 18%.

I was fairly specifically talking about levels below 20 and the trend over time (like over the last 10 years) to see if that number (solo ranks) was increasing. Specifically because I remember very clearly a time when I was *always* looking for a group.

Then several changes in practicing, observation, exploration, etc. changed that. Now I'm almost never looking for a group until I've hit the point where I can't solo rank. My experience, anecdotal as it is, suggests I'm not the only one playing this way.

I also observed similar trends between 20 and 25. I assume it was largely due to people solo ranking for skill spam or whatever. I'd offer a group as a low-level tank (even for characters like mages) and 4/5 times I'd get turned down.

Once you hit 30 groups are easier. Once you hit 40+ it's even easier. It's the low level hurdle which seems to be a speed bump. It's also precisely the level range that most new players tend to lose interest.

The obnoxious thing about this is that what (I assume) happens is that guy X and Y see guy Z, an enemy, spamming their skills solo and think "Hey if guy Z is doing it I don't want to lose my edge, I need to do it too!" You end up with this bizarre incentive/social convention that everyone needs to run around solo for 25 levels until mobs become too tough or just downright unprofitable to solo rank.

Not sure how to fix it, to be honest. Or if it can (or does even need to) be fixed.

If someone is trying to spam they could spend 20 hours spamming then 30 mins ranking in a group. So the ranking stats will imply people group a lot when in fact they might be refusing most of the time in order to get 15 pks and max edge points.

it balances out though because spamming dirt kick/disarm/bash/trip by level 20 takes about as long as questing/soloing a mage to 20

>I don't necessarily think that
>limiting the mechanical reward to solo kills is going to
>prevent people from engaging in cheesy (RP / sportsmanship
>wise) PKs, especially at lower levels, but there's only so
>much we can mitigate with an automated system.

The lower cap is what I think mitigates the pressure to kill as much as possible. If I know the cap is low enough that I'm eventually going to get all the edge points I can from PK without engaging in unsportsmanlike behavior then there's no incentive to engage in that behavior. Because I'm going to get my points eventually.

Only giving points for solo kills (and not giving any points for killing the same person more than once) just limits the incentives to the behaviors we want to promote. They're not a silver bullet, but they might help.

>Exploration is one of those behaviors we want to encourage.

I get that. Really, I do. Thing is, once you know an area it's literally impossible for you to explore it again. You can visit all the rooms and look at stuff, but that's not really exploring because the areas is already "known" to you.

Allow me to hash out my suggestion a little more. Consider a vet playing a long-lived character. He is primarily interested in PK, but has comprehensive area knowledge and is probably going to go on some exploration trips to get gear, preps, etc. Or just to find people to kill. Call the exploration and observation XP that character will have at ~400 hours X and Y respectively.

Now consider a newbie who never really goes anywhere exotic and is mostly led around by the leader of his ranking groups. He also plays his character for a long time. Call the exploration and observation XP he has at 600 hours A and B respectively.

If we set the caps at "X" and "Y" (and both A<X and B<Y are true) we accomplish two things:

1. The vet feels less(*) need to "artificially" generate exploration and observation because he knows he's going to hit the caps "naturally" without doing anything special.

(*) There's still some incentive to game obs/exp xp since doing so gives you your edge points earlier, meaning you derive more utility from them over the course of a character's life. There's a way to handle that too, but it might be more complicated to code. Set the caps at X and Y but only "release" the edge points based on hours played, or possibly character level.

2. The newbie continues to have an incentive to explore/observe above his "natural" level because his "natural" behavior isn't going to get him up to X & Y respectively.

In order for this to work, though, the caps need to be set correctly. Set them too high and #2 holds but #1 doesn't, i.e. vets are incentivized to engage in drudgery. Set them too low and #1 holds but #2 doesn't, i.e. newbies aren't really incentivized to explore and observe.

>In theory, characters regularly engaging in commerce is a good
>thing. In practice, it doesn't tend to actually contribute
>much to the rest of the game.

I like bartering as a feature of the game, for realism if nothing else. And because Outlander would be unworkable without it. But I don't see the need to shoe-horn people in to bartering if they would prefer not to, which is what awarding edge points for it does.

It's not like there aren't already rewards (commerce skills) for bartering/selling.

>That's a valid point, but one we have to set aside to some
>degree. Whether its cabals or religions or even class type
>(e.g., a healer versus a more offensive build) there will
>always be choices that yield less opportunity for certain
>things.

True. The class issue can be (partially) solved by making the edges slightly cheaper for classes that can't easily generate points from PK.

>I don't disagree with this in principle, but right now I'm
>also not looking to increase the pool of edge points,
>especially not ones that are virtually free.

Don't have to increase the pool; you could reduce the amount a character gets for hitting "old" and move some of those points over to "middle age". Probably not "mature" for the reasons mentioned elsewhere in this thread. (Namely that a character can get to "mature" immediately by way of a flaw).

Or if you want to increase the importance of longevity (relative to the other things that yield edge points) then leave the reward for "old" the same, create a duplicate reward for "middle age", then slightly reduce the points awarded from other sources.

>>Exploration is one of those behaviors we want to encourage.
>
>I get that. Really, I do. Thing is, once you know an area
>it's literally impossible for you to explore it again.
>You can visit all the rooms and look at stuff, but that's not
>really exploring because the areas is already "known"
>to you.

I would say that there's already more than enough encouragement to explore, without needing to tie edges to it. Exp/obs as alternate source of xp, the resulting secondary skills, item/prep and general area knowledge (ranking mobs? how to move around in there when PKing or being attacked yourself? etc.).

I really don't understand why edges are defined as something that you "must" actively and tediously "earn" by farming obs/exp for with every character (aside from PK and other sources). When they could easily be defined as something that all characters gain naturally to some extent as they progress (level up/age), similar to e.g. how weapon specs/legacies get to be chosen at certain points, a thief accumulating thiefpoints as they level, or any other class based ability tied to level.

The "must grind" aspect of edges is the single most significant flaw with their design, so getting rid of that would go a long way.

I used to get even less of this than I do explore/observe (I get very, very little in the way of observation exp) but it's rocketed up since the gold farming changes and has nothing to do with me buying things. It's because to adapt to not being able to farm chests, I farm barter items for healing. That's about half of it, the other half of it is killing mobs with barterable eq to reduce downtimes. My characters basically never sleep while doing their lowbie dirt kick/bash/trip/disarm spam.

I don't think my characters are very representative though. I'll sometimes hero with less than 3k observation. I don't think that's because I'm not observant as a player, it's just that all my 'chore' energy goes on skill spam and I have nothing left for observation.

>a. Having high caps (like we currently do) creates pressure to
>kill as many people as possible, even when someone might
>otherwise show mercy (in the spirit of sportsmanship). If
>edge points are on the table then maybe I kill the guy in
>re-gear that I just killed 30 minutes ago because hey: edge
>points.

There is a big flaw in the system if multikilling the same guy counts towards edge points (this should be also emphasized in the help file). Other than that I don't mind the caps.

>b. Giving points for getting a certain number of kills by a
>certain level incentivizes level sitting.

I don't mind level sitting, but again this incentivizes multikilling. All in all I'd just remove the "X kills by Y level" and just go by total kills (throughout the character's life).

ALSO, edge points should also be rewarded for PK losses. This would serve as a nice little incentive to participate in PK, as even if you lose there would be some edge points as consolation. Why couldn't you learn from your losses as well as victories? Not only that, there's also the "rich get richer" aspect to only rewarding winner (more often than not the already good PKer).

> Eliminate points for commerce xp altogether.

Disagree, commerce is a good "normal" way to (slowly) accrue edge points over a character's life.

>a. Having high caps on observe/explore xp (especially the
>"gain a certain amount by a certain level") strongly
>incentivize "gaming" the system. That's why you see people
>hanging out on the Hamsah Docks for hours on end at low
>levels. The caps should be set such that an "average"
>long-lived character will hit them without ever "gaming" the
>system. A character whose exploration/observation is below
>average will suffer relative to a "normal" character, but the
>guy who "artificially" accrues as much explore/observe xp as
>possible won't gain an advantage over the guy who's just
>trucking along doing his thing.

It baffles me why the staff think that "forcing" players to go through the same areas with each and every character for obs/exp xp is good game design. The "gain certain amount by X level" even encourages this.

I've said it before, but I'd just remove the obs/exp for edges relation altogether, and replace it by rewarding edge points pretty much linearly based separately on character level and character hours (maybe somewhat tapering off towards old age). Besides the basic linear accumulation bonus edge points would be rewarded for certain "milestones", such as heroing and reaching old age.

This would incentivize longevity, and everyone would be on an equal footing on "basic" edge points and free to just do their thing and actually play the game (as opposed to artificial repetitive farming).

Additional edge point sources would be PK, Imm xp, commerce, raiding, and such.

>incentivizing. So are retrievals, but giving edge points for
>them screws characters that aren't in a cabal. I feel like
>not being in a cabal shouldn't screw you out of many edge
>points. Cabal'd characters already have enough advantages.

Although caballed characters have the raid/retrieve thing going for them, I don't think that screws the uncaballed that much. Caballed chars also have lots of responsibilities.

IMHO the edge system is a wonderful addition to the game in theory, but suffers from poor implementation. I'm also in favor of more edge points in general for characters, I think they are too scarce now (I've actually never had a character with more than about four low to moderate priced edges).

I agree with the above statements... I really think it would be beneficial to the everyone if we'd remove OBS/EXP XP from many of the "look at description x", "find hidden chest y" sorta thing.

After you've looked/found these things with one character, looking with subsequent characters is just tedium.

I would still encourage xp to be provided for looking at/fighting tough mob z, however - especially if it encourages groups (Dragon Lairs, etc) as I think that this does spur some sense of community and allows for player interaction... but the repetitive search of the same old areas is just blah IMO.

I think obs/exp xp is fine as an alternate source of xp (instead of killing mobs), and as requirement for the various secondary skills (legendary awareness etc.), just not as an edge point source.

Though getting separate edge bonus points for fighting/killing some of the unique tough mobs would be ok.

>I don't mind level sitting...

Neither do I, per se. But its not good when a player is motivated to stay at a level only because he knows there are edge points to be had that will vanish forever if he gains ranks.

>ALSO, edge points should also be rewarded for PK losses.

That would be too easily abused. It would allow me to trade 5 points of CON for a bunch of edge points by intentionally dying to other player characters.

>Not only that, there's also the "rich get
>richer" aspect to only rewarding winner (more often than not
>the already good PKer).

That's why I proposed a fairly low cap on the amount of points that can be earned from PK wins. We want to incentivize participation in PK, which involves rewarding people, but having a low cap minimizes the gap between how many edge points an average person and someone who's really skilled at PK can get out of PK wins. Plenty of people end up solo-killing 20 unique characters over the course of their own character's life.

>Disagree, commerce is a good "normal" way to (slowly) accrue
>edge points over a character's life.

Yes, it is a good way to slowly accrue edge points over a character's life. That doesn't mean it's a good thing.

Edges are meant to incentivize behavior we think are especially good for the game (like "participating in PK" or "role-playing"); not random behaviors that are more-or-less neutral. When you award edge points for doing a thing, you create an incentive for me to do that thing (in order to get edge points) even when doing so makes the game slightly more annoying and slightly less fun.

Does it enhance your CF experience in any way if a bunch of players are picking up items and bartering them for "heal heal" and "heal refresh" instead of using gold (when they might prefer to just use gold)?

If you're worried about people's total edge points being reduced by the elimination of commerce XP as a source of points, we could always up the awards for other more-or-less automatic things like aging and/or level gains.

>It baffles me why the staff think that "forcing" players to go
>through the same areas with each and every character
>for obs/exp xp is good game design. The "gain certain amount
>by X level" even encourages this.

Yes.

>I've said it before, but I'd just remove the obs/exp for edges
>relation altogether, and replace it by rewarding edge points
>pretty much linearly based separately on character level and
>character hours

This would be a decent replacement. I'm leery of awarding too many points "for free" though. The point of the edge system was to prod people in the right direction and reward behaviors that make the game more fun for everyone involved. Harder to accomplish that when people get most of their edges for doing stuff they were already going to do anyway.

>Although caballed characters have the raid/retrieve thing
>going for them, I don't think that screws the uncaballed that
>much. Caballed chars also have lots of responsibilities.

True. But the staff believed cabals were "balanced" prior to the advent of the edge system. The responsibilities (and risk exposure) balanced out the powers. If it was balanced prior to edges then we probably don't need to create an advantage for cabaled characters when it comes to earning edge points.

>>ALSO, edge points should also be rewarded for PK losses.
>
>That would be too easily abused. It would allow me to trade 5
>points of CON for a bunch of edge points by intentionally
>dying to other player characters.

I'm not sure where the abuse is if you trade 5 CON in exchange for some edge points. Besides, the amount of edge points for PK losses could be tweaked to be in accordance with this possible "abuse", i.e. maybe losses don't grant as much as wins. But still a non-insignificant amount.

Of course some edges are just too good, but that's another discussion on re-balancing or even removing them.

>Does it enhance your CF experience in any way if a bunch of
>players are picking up items and bartering them for "heal
>heal" and "heal refresh" instead of using gold (when they
>might prefer to just use gold)?

No, it doesn't enhance my CF experience to grab all sort of crap lying around and then selling them to merchants (other than getting some coins and now commerce xp), but I was mostly concerned about people's total edge points and having alternate ways to garner some.

>>I've said it before, but I'd just remove the obs/exp for
>edges
>>relation altogether, and replace it by rewarding edge points
>>pretty much linearly based separately on character level and
>>character hours
>
>This would be a decent replacement. I'm leery of awarding too
>many points "for free" though. The point of the edge system
>was to prod people in the right direction and reward behaviors
>that make the game more fun for everyone involved. Harder to
>accomplish that when people get most of their edges for doing
>stuff they were already going to do anyway.

I don't think getting points "for free" as a character progresses is somehow bad. You pick up stuff in life as you gain experience and age. Character customization possibilities are a big part of the fun in the game (and again, edges shouldn't be game-changing, those that are need tweaking).

The bonus points you can get from PK, good roleplay (Imm xp), cabal stuff etc. I view more as the prodding-in-the-right-direction kind.

>So I just noticed the "edge point specifics" help file
>exists. Seeing all the details for the first time, I have
>some thoughts. Hopefully constructive ones. My main pet
>peeve is that the current system in many ways creates perverse
>incentives. So...
>
>1. PK: Award edge points for a solo kill, at any level, but
>cap them at a fairly low number. Say 20. No edge points for
>assists or non-solo kills and no points for having X kills by
>level Y. Also, you only get points the first time you kill a
>particular character. Subsequent kills of the same character
>get you nothing.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>a. Having high caps (like we currently do) creates pressure to
>kill as many people as possible, even when someone might
>otherwise show mercy (in the spirit of sportsmanship). If
>edge points are on the table then maybe I kill the guy in
>re-gear that I just killed 30 minutes ago because hey: edge
>points.
>

Just make it like ap charges. Having ranges avoids the rush to hero and then boredom deletion.

>b. Giving points for getting a certain number of kills by a
>certain level incentivizes level sitting.
>
>2. XP: Significantly lower the caps on explore and
>observation. Especially observation. Also, don't give points
>for having a certain amount of observe/explore by a certain
>level. Eliminate points for commerce xp altogether.
>
>Reasoning:
>
>a. Having high caps on observe/explore xp (especially the
>"gain a certain amount by a certain level") strongly
>incentivize "gaming" the system. That's why you see people
>hanging out on the Hamsah Docks for hours on end at low
>levels. The caps should be set such that an "average"
>long-lived character will hit them without ever "gaming" the
>system. A character whose exploration/observation is below
>average will suffer relative to a "normal" character, but the
>guy who "artificially" accrues as much explore/observe xp as
>possible won't gain an advantage over the guy who's just
>trucking along doing his thing.
>

I'd just make it so you are in pk range before docks.
Then there's risk.

>b. Awarding points for bartering creates an incentive for me
>to barter even when I have plenty of gold and would rather
>spend it instead. That's silly.
>

It's partly to promote use of the command and diversify the economy. Also selling stuff to get gold gives points.

>3. Cabal related: Continue giving points when someone makes
>leader, but remove the points for retrievals.
>

Points for retrievals is good as even with them people avoid risk. But I'd make retrievals where no one is on to defend worthless.


>Reasoning:
>
>Making leader is essentially a role-play thing. That's worth
>incentivizing. So are retrievals, but giving edge points for
>them screws characters that aren't in a cabal. I feel like
>not being in a cabal shouldn't screw you out of many edge
>points. Cabal'd characters already have enough advantages.
>
>4. Level/Age: Don't just give points for reaching old age;
>give them for reaching "mature" and "middle-aged" as well.
>Lots of characters don't even make it that far; we could stand
>to start the incentives a little earlier.

Firstly you can take a flaw to start as mature.

My concern is that your changes would just result in an imm dependent gaming of the system. I still remember a player who contrived a reason to talk to each imm so that they could farm imm exp. Ahem!

General feedback is that people want more edges for all, not fewer.

Also it feels to me that obs exp is quite achievable for all. The farming of the docks by lowbies is down to them going for the target early.

>Just make it like ap charges. Having ranges avoids the rush to
>hero and then boredom deletion.

For many classes, rushing to hero is counterproductive to the goal of collecting PK wins.

It should never be the case that a player feels the need to stop ranking so he can collect some arbitrary # of PKs in order to get edge points because he knows that if he ranks one more level he'll "lose" those points forever.

>I'd just make it so you are in pk range before docks.
>Then there's risk.

Doesn't matter. It's still rote farming. Creating a situation where players can create game-play-significant benefits for themselves by standing around for a couple hours waiting for area echos then running over to look at a bunch of stuff they've already looked at ten times before is a bad thing.

>It's partly to promote use of the command and diversify the
>economy. Also selling stuff to get gold gives points.

What's the rationale for promoting the use of the barter command?

>Points for retrievals is good as even with them people avoid
>risk. But I'd make retrievals where no one is on to defend
>worthless.

I'd ideally like to keep the incentive to retrieve, but it sucks for people not in a cabal.

>Firstly you can take a flaw to start as mature.

Good point. Maybe only award points for hitting middle-aged and old.

>My concern is that your changes would just result in an imm
>dependent gaming of the system.

That's the thing: the current system allows this as well as all the other forms of "gaming". At least with "imm gaming" the character has to actually behave in such a way that an imm actually deems him worthy of imm xp. Generally speaking I suspect the staff is capable of recognizing imm xp whores.

If you're concerned about that, though, then one idea is to create a "staff policy" of not awarding xp for imm/player interaction that was instigated by the player. Or, possibly, only award imm xp for things a character does when he doesn't know he's being watched.

This would cut out a lot of edge points, so see below:

>General feedback is that people want more edges for all, not
>fewer.

Can achieve this by just adjusting the number of points awarded for things. If we eliminate half the ways to get edge points then make the sources that remain more "productive".

>Also it feels to me that obs exp is quite achievable for all.

Achievable? Yes. Achievable without specifically looking at things you have no reason to look at purely because you want to earn observation xp? Probably not. Especially the "10k by level 30" trigger. To me, that seems fairly difficult to achieve without artificial "gaming".

>4. Level/Age: Don't just give points for reaching old age;
>give them for reaching "mature" and "middle-aged" as well.
>Lots of characters don't even make it that far; we could stand
>to start the incentives a little earlier.
>
>>Firstly you can take a flaw to start as mature.
>
>Good point. Maybe only award points for hitting middle-aged
>and old.

The mature flaw issue could simply be handled so that taking the flaw doesn't grant the edge points that reaching mature normally would (or the flaw grants mature's worth of negative points).

It really bums me out that people actually "explore" all these areas with EVERY char they make to min/max the edge point gains.