Welcome to Crestfall Gaming

Register now to Crestfall Gaming. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Vengyr

Quest item respawns

71 posts in this topic
4 minutes ago, Smirre said:

Yeah let's give full greens on everybody who start playing at launch too. :--D

Well, we could give out 'Progressive Vanilla' Nostalrius T-shirts

 

 

 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, shdw said:

You are not forced to mock people who are discussing these issues either, with a post having literally 0 related content. I guess learning from the Nost/Elysium launch and trying to suggest solutions to provide a better Crestfall launch experience is such a bad thing. Have you seen that they already decided that there will be dynamic spawns? How is dynamic object respawn so different from it? Would it be not so "blizzlike" and ruining your vanilla experience, if you waited only 5 minutes for an item instead of 30 minutes during the first few days of the launch? Honest question.

The difference is that it creates a competitive atmosphere to the game. I also find it quite hilarious when someone's being attacked by a mob and i steal the Q item front of his/her nose, especially when one gets mad about it. 

Like @ilovecats said, survival of the cheekiest. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, shdw said:

Would it be not so "blizzlike" and ruining your vanilla experience, if you waited only 5 minutes for an item instead of 30 minutes during the first few days of the launch?

Good insight here, little brother.

Let's follow a tought example, named here "Complete task X";

  • In 2005:

Server population was N_blizz. Completing task X took T_blizz minutes.

  • In 2017:

Server population is N, which is higher than N_blizz by a factor named P.

N = N_blizz * P

Re-ordering:

P = N / N_blizz

Completing task X will take T_blizz * P * U. Where U is an unknown factor compensating for the non-linearity of this simple example.

The factor P is here because a task completition depends on the spawn rate or monster density, in most cases where it is not a talk-to-someone quest.

Considering the server is saturated, i.e. the population is at least good balanced, More players ( N = P * N_blizz) will have to use the same saturated resources, and for this reason the time to complete task goes up. U is the correction factor, which is not known and not as important.

So, reordering:

The time to complete X will be T_blizz * ( N / N_blizz) * U.

 

You have two (2) choices here if you are advocating for 'blizzlike'. What is 'blizzlike'?

  1.  The resource density (spawn rate of items, mobs, quantity of mobs, quantity and respawn rate of gathering nodes, etc.)? This means the time to complete task will go up, i.e. Not blizzlike time to complete task, in case the server is saturated with a population higher than what the resources allow for.
  2. The time to complete quest ? In this case the resource density HAS to go up in case of a saturated server population, i.e. not blizzlike resource density.

That is the game friends. One of them CANNOT be blizzlike if the population is higher than what the resources were originally designed to supply.

You have to choose what you want blizzlike to be? If pop cap is blizzlike, then all is good. If pop is higher, like I guess MOST of us want, then either resource density or time to complete tasks CAN NOT be blizzlike.

Some servers chose to ajust resource density with the (in)famous dynamic respawns. Others are said to be 'trolly blizzlike', which is false, because the task to complete tasks is forced to be higher than the blizzlike time, in case the population is oversaturated regarding resource density.

 

So, I'd like to make a statement. When verbosing about blizzlike bullshit, please be specific if you mean either blizzlike experience (which means dynaimc respawns in case of pop > pop_blizz) or blizzlike resource densities.

There is a huge difference there, which most people don't seem to realize when they advocate for "mama, I want blizzlike, mama".

If CF says they will offer blizzlike experience with 6k cap. It MATHEMATICALLY means either resource density or time to complete tasks will not be blizzlike

Edited by loeth
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Smirre said:

The difference is that it creates a competitive atmosphere to the game. I also find it quite hilarious when someone's being attacked by a mob and i steal the Q item front of his/her nose, especially when one gets mad about it. 

Like @ilovecats said, survival of the cheekiest. 

fucking clicking the gameobject-spawn-point waiting for it to respawn it's no competition....wait...it's just a shitty competition, where the one with an hack or the lowest ping will win the "competition".

 

That's survival of the shittiest.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, shdw said:

You are not forced to mock people who are discussing these issues either, with a post having literally 0 related content.

True, tho I don't think I was mocking OP. You need to work in order to feel like you really accomplished something. Not everything should be instant.

 

28 minutes ago, shdw said:

Have you seen that they already decided that there will be dynamic spawns? How is dynamic object respawn so different from it?

Yes, and I agree with it. It most likely won't reach the extreme levels here.

28 minutes ago, shdw said:

Would it be not so "blizzlike" and ruining your vanilla experience, if you waited only 5 minutes for an item instead of 30 minutes during the first few days of the launch? Honest question.

I think if some objects are intended to be rare and hard to acquire they should stay that way. Dynamic respawns can help counteract the massive population in the starting zones, but should never reach an extent of 2 seconds. To me what feels right is that if the desired object is missing you leave and check another time. Sadly that is not a thing many people do, people just camp it. I think objects should always keep their value, and reducing their respawn timers to a few seconds certainly violates that aspect. What i was trying to say in my original post also fits here. If you want to play on the first days of launch, and you want to do a quest like that you need to work for it. If everyone just got it right away, imo it would feel like a single player game like retail questing. Hope I was clear.

Edited by Clavus
2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Smirre said:

The difference is that it creates a competitive atmosphere to the game. I also find it quite hilarious when someone's being attacked by a mob and i steal the Q item front of his/her nose, especially when one gets mad about it. 

Like @ilovecats said, survival of the cheekiest. 

Standing in a place with 10 another people and trying to click the fastest every 5 minutes is the definition of competition for me too. It makes the difference between the good and the best. True test of skill, reaction time and left fingers.

6 minutes ago, Clavus said:

I think if some objects are intended to be rare and hard to acquire they should stay that way.

...

If you want to play on the first days of launch, and you want to do a quest like that you need to work for it. If everyone just got it right away, imo it would feel like a single player game like retail questing. Hope I was clear.

Totally agree with these. But I feel like The Emerald Dream Catcher dresser was not intended to be a 30 minutes commitment.

Anyway, it's up to the devs, I trust their decisions either objects are left as they are, or get reduced respawns for launch.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, shdw said:

Standing in a place with 10 another people and trying to click the fastest every 5 minutes is the definition of competition for me too. It makes the difference between the good and the best. True test of skill, reaction time and left fingers.

you forgot your <sarcams> tags there....

 

<sarcasm> here're mine...keep them </sarcasm>

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's not get too out of hand here.  I'll clarify our position on this and a couple other things.

First, yeah, I did an admittedly very rough calculation and determined that, on a broad average, there were around 7k accounts per retail server in late vanilla.  That's accounts in total, not concurrent users.  Concurrent users at peak time would be roughly half of that, or 3500, keeping in mind that many realms would have had significantly more accounts and a lengthy queue, and many realms would have had significantly less and felt empty.  Point is, a typical medium population retail server would have had ~2000-2500 online concurrent.  We'll be quite happy with populations like that, but we are willing to expand the population to roughly double that if that's what the community really wants.

As far as quest items/containers go, we are considering a few methods to reduce the time spent waiting around in the event of starter zone overload.  Dynamic respawn timers are possible, as is just tuning down the timers for specific bottleneck quests.  What we don't want, however, is for players to be able to do quests where you have to collect ten of something by just standing beside one object and looting it ten times in under a minute.  It's going to be a bit of a balancing act and I suspect these kinds of things will be tweaked throughout beta and even after release - as necessary.

Long story short, we are not opposed to reducing respawn timers on these kinds of bottlenecks, and they are extremely simple fixes (requiring only a short SQL query and a reboot), but we're wary of overdoing it.  These kinds of things will need to be reported in open beta and we'll address them then.

6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe most of the people voicing for a reduced spawn-timer are talking about those "unique" quest-gameobject that would otherwise "block" the players in a queue around them (not really a queue...is it?).

 

As you say, "collect 10 sacks" type of quest shouldn't have instant-respawn-times...maybe lower than "blizzlike" (dynamic may be good)...or maybe "more" spawn-points around (just for a short period, at launch?).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mrmr said:

I believe most of the people voicing for a reduced spawn-timer are talking about those "unique" quest-gameobject that would otherwise "block" the players in a queue around them (not really a queue...is it?).

 

As you say, "collect 10 sacks" type of quest shouldn't have instant-respawn-times...maybe lower than "blizzlike" (dynamic may be good)...or maybe "more" spawn-points around (just for a short period, at launch?).

Obviously.

I'd even agree that collecting those sacks with large respawn holds some thoughtput as you try to go to less contested type of spawn spots, or even monitor several of those if possible. That might be not the fun gameplay, but it involves brains so I am all up for it.

Camping one spot and spamclicking is not, noone will persuade me otherwise.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt Mark Kern post something about this question in Discord? who has the screenshot of that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14. Januar 2017 at 2:10 PM, mrmr said:

Understand you can't re-create vanilla with the double-intended population for the game-world.

Infact, Azeroth was aimed at 3.0k/3.5k players, NOT 6k....and seems like "our" realms will have a 6k cap.

 

Most probably those "timers" were fine tuned for such a population....also considering that not everyone would follow a quest-guide.

 

So, yeah, 500 player in a starting zone VS 1000 players makes a HUGE difference...also considering how players now DO NOT wander around looking at the landscape, but quest no-stop.

Maybe, as a short addition to the expected population cap: I remember the team saying, that as soon as the population online reaches around 5000 people and shows the impulse to grow even further (it's mainly the impulse that matters - in economics/math you would talk about the gradient of a curve), they will bring up a new server to counteract the growing population.

So it is kind of problematic to argue with 6000 ppl, because the server team does use the space from 5000 to 6000 to react in time on this growth. Therefore a 6000-player-online-scenario as well as the beginning of queues might not even be reached once. And so, maybe the highest stable online numbers to expect are between 4500 and 5000.

I know, it's not that big of a thing, but i sometimes get the feeling, that we for the sake of simplicity overlook this aspect when discussing :).

 

Greetings

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Polyphem said:

 maybe the highest stable online numbers to expect are between 4500 and 5000.

Doesn't change the fact that a number like that would represent kinda the double of the "average populated" blizzard server.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mrmr said:

Doesn't change the fact that a number like that would represent kinda the double of the "average populated" blizzard server.

It slightly alterates it. But from a general point of view it doesn't turn your statement upside down, yes :). But that was, as stated by me, not even my intention.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This main issue will be in the game for the first 2-3 days, then the population will spread out so there won't be delays anymore.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14. 1. 2017 at 4:23 PM, loeth said:

When verbosing about blizzlike bullshit, please be specific if you mean either blizzlike experience (which means dynaimc respawns in case of pop > pop_blizz) or blizzlike resource densities.

I mean 1x XP rates and no custom NPCs.

... that's what it used to mean back in my day and I'm sticking to it!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Xaverius said:

I mean 1x XP rates and no custom NPCs.

... that's what it used to mean back in my day and I'm sticking to it!

"Now get off my lawn you gnome !"

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to necro but this was one of the big posts that came up searching for dynamic respawn.

Without a very very strong dynamic respawn for quest mobs especially the 0/1 named ones, you will have hundreds of people standing on top of each other tab spamming an instant cast. The best way to level will be to do no actual quests and just grind. That isn't blizzlike. That isn't fun.

There is no point talking about classic server max population because that population was spread out and top heavy at 60. The first 3 days of cf will have that entire population doing the same 15 quests, it isn't even comparable.

For orc horde sarkoth, the burning blade dude, the human captain dude, the island troll dude, bristleboar guys.. you are just tab spamming hoping to get a tag instead of actually enjoying the leveling process. The centaur quest and troll skulls quest in the first 7 levels are difficult normally, but with 3000 people they will be the best quests because you can walk up, take the item, and leave, because every single mob within 2 zones will be instantly slaughtered.

It would be nice if questing was the fastest way to 60, but without crazy dynamic respawn for the first 30 levels.. it isn't. It shouldn't come down to " no big deal I'll just take 3 days off work grind 20 hours sleep 5 grind 20 then I will be ahead of the curve!"

Don't even get me started on mining and herbalism.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 minutes ago, Ssaya said:

Sorry to necro but this was one of the big posts that came up searching for dynamic respawn.

Without a very very strong dynamic respawn for quest mobs especially the 0/1 named ones, you will have hundreds of people standing on top of each other tab spamming an instant cast. The best way to level will be to do no actual quests and just grind. That isn't blizzlike. That isn't fun.

There is no point talking about classic server max population because that population was spread out and top heavy at 60. The first 3 days of cf will have that entire population doing the same 15 quests, it isn't even comparable.

For orc horde sarkoth, the burning blade dude, the human captain dude, the island troll dude, bristleboar guys.. you are just tab spamming hoping to get a tag instead of actually enjoying the leveling process. The centaur quest and troll skulls quest in the first 7 levels are difficult normally, but with 3000 people they will be the best quests because you can walk up, take the item, and leave, because every single mob within 2 zones will be instantly slaughtered.

It would be nice if questing was the fastest way to 60, but without crazy dynamic respawn for the first 30 levels.. it isn't. It shouldn't come down to " no big deal I'll just take 3 days off work grind 20 hours sleep 5 grind 20 then I will be ahead of the curve!"

Don't even get me started on mining and herbalism.

dont ask me why but id actually prefer having to wait for respawns, even for sarkoth

also you can just wait a week after release and itll be alot easier if you really care that much

Edited by Aquane
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 1/14/2017 at 6:10 AM, mrmr said:

Understand you can't re-create vanilla with the double-intended population for the game-world.

Infact, Azeroth was aimed at 3.0k/3.5k players, NOT 6k....and seems like "our" realms will have a 6k cap.

 

Most probably those "timers" were fine tuned for such a population....also considering that not everyone would follow a quest-guide.

 

So, yeah, 500 player in a starting zone VS 1000 players makes a HUGE difference...also considering how players now DO NOT wander around looking at the landscape, but quest no-stop.

you gotta dig even deeper then this..... when they intended on 3-3.5k people on a server, they always  assumed those people would stagger in a few at a time 15 or so an hour spread out over 6 starting zones..... not  "SERVER IS LIVE 1000 spawn into mulgor"

Edited by Xaywynn
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oh, I remember doing A Refugee's Quandary quest in Dun Morog with like 20 people per item spot. We all stood in a circle and waited to show one another who's the fastest gun in the West mouse-cliker in Dun Morogh. If your ping is less than ideal - you're out of luck pal, prepare to stand there and stare at the ground for an hour at least. These little moments can be fun too... but they aren't, really.

Edited by Shady_Lizard
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0