Failsafe on card drops

[Chaz]

You should add a failsafe on cards, where if you kill X amount of a certain mob you get the card guaranteed from the next time you kill that monster. I just spent half an hour trying to get the Rabby card and killed several hundred of the little bastards. In the end I never got it.

 

[Teddy]

We've actually talked about this recently and decided to add something like that (though not quite so drastic)! Basically the rough idea is a simple scaling increase in drop rate that kicks in after you've reached a point where you "should have" gotten a card by now (in the case of Rabbies which have a 1/300 drop chance this would probably by after killing 150 of them).

We could just give it away at X monster kills but somehow we feel that would upset the Goddess.

 

[XxX_MLG Noob_XxX]

We've actually talked about this recently and decided to add something like that (though not quite so drastic)! Basically the rough idea is a simple scaling increase in drop rate that kicks in after you've reached a point where you "should have" gotten a card by now (in the case of Rabbies which have a 1/300 drop chance this would probably by after killing 150 of them).

We could just give it away at X monster kills but somehow we feel that would upset the Goddess.

You literally gave me life this morning.

 

[Chaz]

We've actually talked about this recently and decided to add something like that (though not quite so drastic)! Basically the rough idea is a simple scaling increase in drop rate that kicks in after you've reached a point where you "should have" gotten a card by now (in the case of Rabbies which have a 1/300 drop chance this would probably by after killing 150 of them).

We could just give it away at X monster kills but somehow we feel that would upset the Goddess.

Yeah that probably would be better. Not gonna lie I was slightly salty when I made this post.

I now have to fight the impulse to murder every Rabby I see whenever one happens to appear.

 

[XxX_MLG Noob_XxX]

I know how you feel Chaz. I'm pretty sure most of the people who have made card posts have been salty (me included). The devs have heard about it a lot. xD

 

[The G-Meister]

As some of you might know I've been working on a distribution to address this problem for a while now. Unfortunately there's been a family trauma recently and I haven't quite got it ready for public showing. While the how is very complicated and the tools to get the point across are still being developed, I can at least mention what it does.

Basically the rough idea is a simple scaling increase in drop rate that kicks in after you've reached a point where you "should have" gotten a card by now

The problem with this design, depending on how much you increase the chance after you pass the "intended number of kills for a card drop", is that you end up shifting the new average drop point such that the card actually becomes overall easier to obtain.

The distribution I have designed (and made fully functional, devs please PM me if you would straight up like the function and code without the article that comes with it) makes sure that not only the point where you "should have" gotten the card is exactly that of the previous system (give or take same random errors), but you can weight said distribution to a point where you can guarantee a number of kills by which everyone will have the card.

If that point is set to be the intended average, everyone gets the card at that number of kills. Simples.

If that point is "large" (an approximation used in physics where a value is big enough to act similarly to infinity), the drop distribution approximates that of the geometric - the same distribution that is currently used.

Ideally that point will be somewhere in the middle, and you can play around with values to suit your needs.

 

[Teddy]

@The G-Meister this won't find its way into the game until the desert comes online, so there's still some time to get that article going! I'm interested to see it regardless out of sheer curiosity in the field

I don't think the math really needs to be precisely on point here, but if it can - why not? (If you want us and/or other people to use the code, don't forget to add an open license for it!)

 

[The G-Meister]

I'm interested to see it regardless out of sheer curiosity in the field

Oh boy, don't worry I've got you covered And thanks for the uh... hint of a date, though I have been neglecting the project for a while and have been meaning to return.

As for on-point-ness, of course, we do approximations all the time in physics, but thankfully (despite the effort that has gone into making the distribution) it should be simple to implement. Add a kill counter and swap out a static number for a formula and you're golden!

And I'll be sure to release the source code along with the compiled program

 

[res7less]

Just gotta love this forum for having multiple bright minds having debates on scientific subjects such as efficient bounty by smashing virtual bunnies with virtual sticks If you don't mind, I'd like me a piece of your solution's explanation, too, although in my case you'd have to do some extra explanation for physics dummies

Also, I'm sorry to hear about whatever happened in your family. If you need someone to talk to, you can always PM me. And that's no virtue signaling, I'm genuinely always willing to listen if it helps.

 

[The G-Meister]

Thanks for the support dude. It was a while ago now so I'm largely back in full swing, but the offer is always appreciated.

And I've got the extra explanation covered too My process is gonna be translating the current system into maths (but explaining the maths with words and graphs), then making a couple changes to that maths and translating that back into game mechanics. I've currently written 1 page of probably about 4 on a Word document, not including images