Jump to content

Save a GTN Today !


Myriandore

Recommended Posts

That's where you and I differ: I never do the relog dance...it is simply not worth it to me. The process of going through all six of my characters takes me about 15 minutes:

 

  1. login
  2. collect sales and expired item from mail
  3. post (new and expired) crafted items to GTN
  4. check my listings to see what I am missing
  5. check GTN for deals on materials
  6. start crafting to back fill
  7. send remaining companions on missions
  8. logout
  9. rinse and repeat

And the last thing I want to do is spend another 15 minutes doing the relog dance (for me each logout and back on takes 30 seconds to a minute; 5 year old computer will do that).

 

In addition, because I am actively crafting items in all six crafting skills (one on each character), I rarely need five "good" missions per character. Add to that, that I need all materials anyway and I am never looking for one mission in particular. In fact, on my slicers (I have two at 450) I am more likely to run Credit Drain over Unsliceable, because I want the discovered missions more than TRs (I have 2.5 stacks of TRs sitting because I only use them for myself and friends/guildies [and I don't charge them]).

 

Lastly, when I am calculating my cost to craft, I invariably round up, because I am assuming a worst case scenario: all gathering materials cost 500/unit (running missions), and all blue mission materials cost 250/unit (buying off the GTN). Purple materials vary by skill and I don't use them often for selling anyway.

 

Is this less than ideal? Yes. Am I losing out on credits by not fully optimizing the missions I run? Probably. Do I care? No. Why? Because I would rather spend 15 more minutes actually playing the game than relog dancing. Another example of the interchangeable nature of time and money in MMOs; it is costing me credits to be able to play longer.

 

Indeed, it sounds like the difference is that I'm more focused on optimization. Like I said earlier, this is all fairly new to me; my "business" is fairly small-time, limited mostly to the augment market (kits and the augments themselves), and a few CT items. So the scope and scale of my sales are undoubtedly minor compared to yours. For that reason, I feel the need to maximize the little bit of business have, hence the relog dance to ensure I'm not leaving anything on the table.

 

Is it necessary? Certainly not. And I'm sure if/when I reach a higher sales plateau, this will be less of a concern for me. But for now, it seems like my best path to maximize profitability, which is more important when you don't have a lot of resources to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BW's intention was to present a randomized list of available crafting missions, which changes at each new area. I don't think that's in question. I don't understand why intentionally changing zones in order to reset the list would be considered an exploit, while "unintentionally" resetting said list is entirely kosher. Same exact experience, identical results, motivated by different goals.

 

Seems to me this is more of a semantic issue than anything else. Out of curiosity, can you think of any other comparable exploits in the game? That is, a mechanic working as intended, but leveraged in a way that wasn't intended by the developers. I'm wondering if I would agree with that terminology in those other cases.

 

1) I'm not sure what you mean by a 'semantic' issue. An exploit is an exploit, there's no such thing as "an exploit in name only". Intent is difficult (impossible) to prove 100%, but we can easily infer intent by observing people's actions. If your actions serve only to reset the mission list, you are exploiting.

 

2) Whether or not that exploit is worth BW doing anything about is a different story. In this case, running a single tier one mission barely (if at all) takes longer than logging out and back in or rezoning, so I don't see it really being a problematic exploit. Most people (including myself) would probably get a better ROI by spending the time some people use to log out and back in paying more attention to the market -- I know I could make a lot more money than I do, but I'm lazy and I make enough.

 

3) An example of something WIA that goes beyond what the devs planned, but that they decided to let go, is using Legacy armor/weapons to pass Bound items from one char to another in your legacy. They said BoL was absolutely not designed for that, but that they didn't care that people use it for that. (As an aside, I consider that an exploit that I wish they would fix, as it essentially lets people gear up fresh 55 alts with BiS (78P) gear, which is why I think we see a lot of overgeared chars that don't seem to know their class in FPs).

 

Anyway, I guess you could say that I think that it IS an exploit (as exploit is defined), but (since BW appears to know of it and accept people doing it) that it isn't an "exploit" in the sense of something that is "wrong".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I'm not sure what you mean by a 'semantic' issue. An exploit is an exploit, there's no such thing as "an exploit in name only". Intent is difficult (impossible) to prove 100%, but we can easily infer intent by observing people's actions. If your actions serve only to reset the mission list, you are exploiting.

You're speaking in absolutes, rather than in degrees. Fair enough. But if you insist on using absolutes, it is sloppy logic to "infer" intent. Without a dev comment on the actual intent -- it wouldn't technically be an exploit.

2) Whether or not that exploit is worth BW doing anything about is a different story. In this case, running a single tier one mission barely (if at all) takes longer than logging out and back in or rezoning, so I don't see it really being a problematic exploit. Most people (including myself) would probably get a better ROI by spending the time some people use to log out and back in paying more attention to the market -- I know I could make a lot more money than I do, but I'm lazy and I make enough.

Agreed.

3) An example of something WIA that goes beyond what the devs planned, but that they decided to let go, is using Legacy armor/weapons to pass Bound items from one char to another in your legacy. They said BoL was absolutely not designed for that, but that they didn't care that people use it for that. (As an aside, I consider that an exploit that I wish they would fix, as it essentially lets people gear up fresh 55 alts with BiS (78P) gear, which is why I think we see a lot of overgeared chars that don't seem to know their class in FPs).

I suppose. But doesn't it seem that adding the Gree Lightsaber (hilts being the only item not movable by legacy gear before that point) moved it past "the devs don't care if the exploit is used" to "the devs are actively making it easier to use that exploit"?

 

I'm also not convinced that shlepping mods via legacy is the reason for overgeared characters not knowing their class in FPs. This has been a problem LONG before this practice was widespread.

Anyway, I guess you could say that I think that it IS an exploit (as exploit is defined), but (since BW appears to know of it and accept people doing it) that it isn't an "exploit" in the sense of something that is "wrong".

That's fair to say. But remember that "exploit" is a very charged word in an MMO. It's usage in these types of games can hardly be separated from "wrong".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, it sounds like the difference is that I'm more focused on optimization. Like I said earlier, this is all fairly new to me; my "business" is fairly small-time, limited mostly to the augment market (kits and the augments themselves), and a few CT items. So the scope and scale of my sales are undoubtedly minor compared to yours. For that reason, I feel the need to maximize the little bit of business have, hence the relog dance to ensure I'm not leaving anything on the table.

 

Is it necessary? Certainly not. And I'm sure if/when I reach a higher sales plateau, this will be less of a concern for me. But for now, it seems like my best path to maximize profitability, which is more important when you don't have a lot of resources to work with.

 

I guess I have been working MMO markets for so long that even when I was small time in SWTOR, I have always done things the way I explained; I learned how to work markets in EQ1 and every MMO I have played since, the same strategies work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're speaking in absolutes, rather than in degrees. Fair enough. But if you insist on using absolutes, it is sloppy logic to "infer" intent. Without a dev comment on the actual intent -- it wouldn't technically be an exploit.

 

That's fair to say. But remember that "exploit" is a very charged word in an MMO. It's usage in these types of games can hardly be separated from "wrong".

 

*Shrug* I try not to let myself be limited by other people's limitations :)

(Especially when I didn't capitalize EXPLOIT, misspell 50 adjacent words, say that everybody around you should be banned, and toss in a few dozen exclamation points, which activities I frequently see accompanying more "agitated" uses of the word 'exploit') :) :)

 

Also, it's not *sloppy* to infer intent, it's *necessary* since we have no reliable mind reading devices. And while a developer's claimed intent may be the final word as far as enforcement goes, it is not dispositive in a factual sense.

Edited by eartharioch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

 

Also, it's not *sloppy* to infer intent, it's *necessary* since we have no reliable mind reading devices. And while a developer's claimed intent may be the final word as far as enforcement goes, it is not dispositive in a factual sense.

In other situations (e.g. legacy gear mod moving, reverse engineering other players crafted mods) we didn't have to read minds. The devs commented that it was unintended, making these actions exploits even if they went unpunished / unpatched.

 

In the absence of stated dev intent, you have to weigh your inference of what you think the devs intended against how bad is it for the game. That's why this is a grey area.

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In other situations (e.g. legacy gear mod moving, reverse engineering other players crafted mods) we didn't have to read minds. The devs commented that it was unintended, making these actions exploits even if they went unpunished / unpatched.

 

In the absence of stated dev intent, you have to weigh your inference of what you think the devs intended against how bad is it for the game. That's why this is a grey area.

 

I'm not sure what area you think is grey. I'm pretty clear as to what was intended and what wasn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) I'm not sure what you mean by a 'semantic' issue. An exploit is an exploit, there's no such thing as "an exploit in name only". Intent is difficult (impossible) to prove 100%, but we can easily infer intent by observing people's actions. If your actions serve only to reset the mission list, you are exploiting.

 

'Semantic' because it's apparent that we differ on the meaning of the word 'exploit', or at least when that word should be applied. In principle I believe we basically agree, because:

 

...(since BW appears to know of it and accept people doing it) that it isn't an "exploit" in the sense of something that is "wrong".

 

You may be technically correct, I'm not sure, but when the word 'exploit' is thrown around, people read 'cheat' - which may or may not be part of the definition, depending on who you ask. Using charged terminology only serves to shift the debate off topic (which, obviously, something I am indulging in, lol). I don't believe you aren't aware of this. You can say:

 

*Shrug* I let myself be limited by other people's limitations

(Especially when I didn't capitalize EXPLOIT, misspell 50 adjacent words, say that everybody around you should be banned, and toss in a few dozen exclamation points, which activities I frequently see accompanying more "agitated" uses of the word 'exploit')

 

...but, come on, honestly, do you not know what you're doing here? Are we supposed to infer your intent? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mostly simply forget to send my companions "on tour". It just happens.

Then I suddenly remember. "Oh, that would be nice to get that item, I think I'll send them."

That's the way it goes.

 

However, does anyone know why I don't seem to get any purple level 1 underworld trading material anymore ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'...but, come on, honestly, do you not know what you're doing here? Are we supposed to infer your intent? :D

 

I'm just having a discussion, and (as I've said) if you are concerned about my *intent*, all you can do is infer it. :)

 

I stated my opinion (I think RNG list subsets are better than the full list) unambiguously. I believe that "exploit" is an appropriate term (hole or loophole would be as well, but I find that people don't understand what I mean when I say 'hole', unless they understand it to mean 'loophole', and that they consider 'loophole' to have the same negative connotations as 'exploit'), but I've tried to be clear that I am not using it to indicate action that should be punished. And then we sort of drifted into the topic of intent (which I find to be an interesting topic, and probably went beyond where we strictly needed to be for this conversation).

 

Given that many topics (and people) in the forum are confrontational, I find it relaxing to just sit back and have some friendly banter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that many topics (and people) in the forum are confrontational, I find it relaxing to just sit back and have some friendly banter.

 

I fully agree. The Crew sub-forum is imho the most civilized one I know here. Next to the "New Player" sub-forum, which is even more friendly & civilized.

Edited by AlrikFassbauer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that many topics (and people) in the forum are confrontational, I find it relaxing to just sit back and have some friendly banter.

 

Understood, and agreed. I'm not looking for confrontation either (hence my cheesy smiley above). I do find this particular forum to be a refreshing change of pace from the consistent vitriol on display in the General forum (which is where I've typically spent most of my time).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We do it anyway. Run only the most profitable missions, that is. We do it by selecting missions we don't want, relogging, and one by one cancelling the missions we didn't want and taking those we did.

 

It's not killing the market, unless you think the market is killed.

You could save yourself some time and not start the mission at all. To change the missions available, you just have to log out then back in. No need to start missions, log out, log back in, cancel missions, then hope to get better ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could save yourself some time and not start the mission at all. To change the missions available, you just have to log out then back in. No need to start missions, log out, log back in, cancel missions, then hope to get better ones.

The reason for selecting missions before relogging is to increase the chance of getting the good missions.

 

If you're trying to run Unsliceable and Watching the Watchdogs, and neither of them show up in missions list, and you relog, there is a chance they STILL won't show up in the list, and your relog was in vain.

 

By starting missions you don't want to run, THEN relogging, the list that reloads is much more likely to have the ones you actually want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is how would you react if BW was able to close the re-login exploit (which, no matter victimless it may appear, it is) and didn't change the mission RNG?

 

FYI, I don't think it's a big deal, but it is an exploit. I don't think whatever damage being done by the current exploiters justifies spending any effort to address it, but if effort does get spent, I would rather it be to keep the system and close the loop hole, not make the loop hole unnecessary by changing the system for what IMO would be the worse.

 

Easy, go for more slicer alts (level it with boxes only mean you are on + at end) ... and logon dance continue just not on same but different toons :)

It will take some time but will pay later when you have much more mats to play with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real question is how would you react if BW was able to close the re-login exploit (which, no matter victimless it may appear, it is) and didn't change the mission RNG?

 

...

I was thinking a bit more about this today.

 

If this were implemented (the RNG seed for a mission list remain unchanged when moving to another area or relogging) I would really hope they'd allow the Abundant and Moderate missions to crit.

 

For example, if you're trying to get Thermal Regulators, only Unsliceable and Watching the Watchdogs return them. If you run Defenseless, The Insider or the other one (don't remember name) you'll only get Bio-Mechanical Interface Chips.

 

Similarly for Underworld Trading. Only the top 3 missions will return Beryllius, the others won't.

 

So if you had an unrefreshable list of missions, it would be best to have the other missions also have a crit chance. But instead of returning 2-4 purple items on a crit, perhaps just 1-2 on a crit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking a bit more about this today.

 

If this were implemented (the RNG seed for a mission list remain unchanged when moving to another area or relogging) I would really hope they'd allow the Abundant and Moderate missions to crit.

.

 

Why? The whole point of not showing the whole list is so that people don't only just always run the same (perceived best) missions. The whole point of storing the mission list seed would be to reduce the supply of these items, so increasing their yield (or adding the chance of getting them to other missions) would defeat the purpose of storing the seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? The whole point of not showing the whole list is so that people don't only just always run the same (perceived best) missions. The whole point of storing the mission list seed would be to reduce the supply of these items, so increasing their yield (or adding the chance of getting them to other missions) would defeat the purpose of storing the seed.

The only real why would be to still have a point to running the missions.

 

If the low-grade mission never return the mats you want, but you are forced to run them as the only way of resetting the mission list, it seems to move the action of crafting further away from something fun to do.

 

Edit: Doesn't mean it would need to return the same amount of materials as the higher grade missions, or even that it would have the same crit rate. But for there to be no chance whatsoever to get the materials you're looking for, but you have to run them anyways ...

 

Edit Edit: I just re-read your post and realized I overlooked this:

... The whole point of storing the mission list seed would be to reduce the supply of these items ...

Is that the reason why you're suggesting to keep the seed the same? To reduce the supply of items?

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that the reason why you're suggesting to keep the seed the same? To reduce the supply of items?

 

Technically, I'm not suggesting anything -- I think the system is working fine at the moment, even if some people are gaming it a bit (and I'm not saying I never do a reload if I'm in a hurry and the mission selection is super crappy). Other people have asked for BW to just make all missions always available, and my opinion is that *if and only if* BW decides to make a change, that it be to enforce the RNG aspect more strongly, not remove it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Technically, I'm not suggesting anything -- I think the system is working fine at the moment, even if some people are gaming it a bit (and I'm not saying I never do a reload if I'm in a hurry and the mission selection is super crappy). Other people have asked for BW to just make all missions always available, and my opinion is that *if and only if* BW decides to make a change, that it be to enforce the RNG aspect more strongly, not remove it.

Fair enough.

 

IMHO, the RNG nature of crafting is one of the least appealing parts of it. Don't get me wrong, I deal with it. It's just not what keeps me coming back. I would have wished that it were designed at the start to require more personal interation and less randomness.

 

By way of an example, imagine a "lockpick door" mechanic. 15% chance of success. Right click on door -- fail. Right click on door -- fail. Right click on door -- fail. Right click on door -- SUCCESS. Now let's have a mechanic whereby you manipulate the cursor to pick the locks (think Splinter Cell). Suddenly, user ability and skill comes into play.

 

I think it would have been super cool to have "player ability" factor into the crafting attempt. The better job you did in the crafting minigame, the better the stats of the final product. Using more rare materials would make it easier to get high stats. The better crafter is one who has more skill, not someone luckier with dice rolls.

 

Of course, that ship has sailed as far as TOR's crafting. We got what we got.

 

------------------------

 

Anyway, back to the refreshing mission list. If you did want "enforced RNG" and were concerned about increased supply, the simple solution would be to reduce either the crit chance or the materials reduced.

 

Compare these two approaches:

 

1. The mission list is limited, "unrefreshable" and will sometimes be full of missions that will never return the materials you are looking for, but you are forced to run them anyway to get a new list.

 

2. The mission list is limited, "unrefreshable" and will sometimes have missions with a low chance of returning the materials you are looking for, but you have to run them to get a new list with better missions.

 

What could possibly be better about the first choice?

Edited by Khevar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...