JemadarofCaerSalis wrote: »Ren_TheRedFox wrote: »@Mathius_Mordred well, technically the portals to the unknown save your progress and make the challenges harder, but I know what you mean ... it would be nice to continue from a certain point in the archive, but the problem would be the visions you collected before that ... I see 2 problems with that
1. if you continue from, say, Arc 4, what visions do you get from before? Will they be the ones you had when you started the run, or some random ones?
Just to address this, they could simply have a script where if you skip to a higher arc (that you reached once before), you just get a series of vision selections that uses the same logic as the vision selection after defeating a boss.
That way, people can choose their visions, and it would be just the same as if they went through (but without the rewards), so no worries about people getting visions they shouldn't be getting due to not having the requirements for them, or whatever.
KaironBlackbard wrote: »BretonMage wrote: »This seems like a bit of and overreaction, just go as far as you can and don't stretch it to the extreme. Just start over next time. A save would change the entire dynamic of the IA.BretonMage wrote: »The entire point of the archive is to start over a fresh run every time.
Sorry, but that's just utterly boring. Most players like the feeling of progressing, which is what ZOS is counting on to keep them playing to later arcs. Some of us, however, are thankfully equipped with a sense of self-preservation, and know that remaining glued to your computer is anything but healthy.
If they think they need to revise fortune rewards for saved progress, I don't really care, but I'm not shortening my irl lifespan to try to get further in IA.
And I would mind if everything buyable for fortunes became more expensive due to a save function. As that would effectively devalue my time in the archive, by me having to spend more time in the IA to get more fortunes for the higher priced items. A save function would only let the elite/strong players farm more fortunes faster, while the players stuck in lower arcs would now have to spend more time in those lower arc to get the same results/buy the same items for a higher fortune price.
Personally I think the way ZOS made the IA without saves is good and fair for everyone. Equal start equal finish.
Edit: What if continuing from a saved point does not only stop any leaderboard submissions, but also stops all fortune drops from that point on? Could be a solution.
I disagree that it's an overreaction. It is widely reported that sedentary lifestyles are associated with serious health problems and an increased risk of premature death.
Being forced to sit for hours at your computer in order to reach the later arcs is actually bad for one's health (sorry, but 4-5 minute breaks are nothing), and starting over from arc 1 on another day would do nothing to improve it.
I also think that a save function would actually benefit the less elite players; after all, the current design ensures ONLY the stronger players can reach higher levels. The rest of us only have a very slim chance of attempting the higher arcs.
As I said before, tweak the fortune drops if necessary, but I think it's a) healthier, and b) more fair for the lower level players if we have a save function. Perhaps you could freeze the fortune drops (and disable leaderboards) at the level you saved at.
Why freeze fortune drops? its only 200 per crate.
Every time ive run it, the highest was 200 per muniment.
Once I get to arc 3, I find it more profitable to reset and go again. It's the same value from muniment at a much slower pace, so reset to gain it fast again.
Save it if you have threads left so you can continue another day, shouldn't hurt the scoring. It's the same playtime either way, just split between multiple days.
I see no reason to alter prices or gains. I see no reason why a save system would hurt.
If you're running for fortunes, I see no reason why you'd torture yourself in higher arcs when you get the same stuff in lower arcs much swifter.
KaironBlackbard wrote: »BretonMage wrote: »This seems like a bit of and overreaction, just go as far as you can and don't stretch it to the extreme. Just start over next time. A save would change the entire dynamic of the IA.BretonMage wrote: »The entire point of the archive is to start over a fresh run every time.
Sorry, but that's just utterly boring. Most players like the feeling of progressing, which is what ZOS is counting on to keep them playing to later arcs. Some of us, however, are thankfully equipped with a sense of self-preservation, and know that remaining glued to your computer is anything but healthy.
If they think they need to revise fortune rewards for saved progress, I don't really care, but I'm not shortening my irl lifespan to try to get further in IA.
And I would mind if everything buyable for fortunes became more expensive due to a save function. As that would effectively devalue my time in the archive, by me having to spend more time in the IA to get more fortunes for the higher priced items. A save function would only let the elite/strong players farm more fortunes faster, while the players stuck in lower arcs would now have to spend more time in those lower arc to get the same results/buy the same items for a higher fortune price.
Personally I think the way ZOS made the IA without saves is good and fair for everyone. Equal start equal finish.
Edit: What if continuing from a saved point does not only stop any leaderboard submissions, but also stops all fortune drops from that point on? Could be a solution.
I disagree that it's an overreaction. It is widely reported that sedentary lifestyles are associated with serious health problems and an increased risk of premature death.
Being forced to sit for hours at your computer in order to reach the later arcs is actually bad for one's health (sorry, but 4-5 minute breaks are nothing), and starting over from arc 1 on another day would do nothing to improve it.
I also think that a save function would actually benefit the less elite players; after all, the current design ensures ONLY the stronger players can reach higher levels. The rest of us only have a very slim chance of attempting the higher arcs.
As I said before, tweak the fortune drops if necessary, but I think it's a) healthier, and b) more fair for the lower level players if we have a save function. Perhaps you could freeze the fortune drops (and disable leaderboards) at the level you saved at.
Why freeze fortune drops? its only 200 per crate.
Every time ive run it, the highest was 200 per muniment.
Once I get to arc 3, I find it more profitable to reset and go again. It's the same value from muniment at a much slower pace, so reset to gain it fast again.
Save it if you have threads left so you can continue another day, shouldn't hurt the scoring. It's the same playtime either way, just split between multiple days.
I see no reason to alter prices or gains. I see no reason why a save system would hurt.
If you're running for fortunes, I see no reason why you'd torture yourself in higher arcs when you get the same stuff in lower arcs much swifter.
It does go up the further you go.
Elvenheart wrote: »In my opinion, not allowing threads for 24 hours is not the best solution. I think that, simply at the loss of your third thread, your leader board progress should be stopped at that point, but you should be allowed to keep going for as long as you like (or restart with new threads if you prefer), this would give you an opportunity to at least learn and practice the harder Arcs. I suspect though that the main reason we cannot do this is that people may get tired of the IA more quickly than they otherwise would so it would lose some replayability factor.
Dragonnord wrote: »For the ones that say "but lock you out of leaderboards". Who cares about leaderboars? Leadearboards are nothing. Mean nothing. Even get deleted after some tme.
So locking a player out of leaderboards would be no punishing.
Yes, do it, lock me out of leaderbords, who cares about something that is wiped out after a few days?
Imaging removing all records from the Olympics after a few weeks or months?
Bad system.
alpha_synuclein wrote: »alpha_synuclein wrote: »I don't understand the argument about leaderboards just because of saves. If everyone has the same option to save what difference does it make
I agree. I've referred to it because one of the previous posters argumented against save because it's somehow unfair. The only potential unfairness I could think of was comparing scores between saved and unsaved runs. But since we would all have the same choices...
That’s a fair argument and there is a precedent for this with Maelstrom Arena: If you save your progress and return later, it disqualifies you from leaderboards and the Perfect Run achievement. I see no problem with applying the same logic to IA.
Maelstrom arena takes half an hour.
Tbh I don't really care about what they do with scores and leaderboards. Just give me some time saving solution.
Edit after giving it more thought:
The leaderboard thing is a bit complicated. It's hard to disagree that doing something like 16 arcs at one sitting is insanely more difficult than doing it with a save in between. If we want to compare these runs, score should somehow reflect the difference.
On the other hand though, with those long runs it feels like irl factors are contributing to the score a bit too much. If I'd wanted my physical endurance to be scored, I would play sports instead of a video game.
In general I think that the specifics about whether and how skip/saved runs should be scored need to be discussed mostly between devs and those players that actually scorepush IA. I have a feeling that most of the players here asking for a save do not fall into this category.
Frostee_rucker wrote: »Elvenheart wrote: »In my opinion, not allowing threads for 24 hours is not the best solution. I think that, simply at the loss of your third thread, your leader board progress should be stopped at that point, but you should be allowed to keep going for as long as you like (or restart with new threads if you prefer), this would give you an opportunity to at least learn and practice the harder Arcs. I suspect though that the main reason we cannot do this is that people may get tired of the IA more quickly than they otherwise would so it would lose some replayability factor.
No. The current system has the element of the risk involved. Having the risk of your archive run ending because of death is what's so valuable. It adds adrenalin games are looking for because of the intense moments in the deeper rounds.
.
BananaBender wrote: »But yeah, some sort of a save system would be good since the biggest threat in pushing into the late arcs (especially as solo) is the servers. If you get disconnected your run is most likely over and there is nothing you can do. And when the current record took 72h the chances of crashing are very high.
Mathius_Mordred wrote: »Many have said, the solution is simple, if you use the save option it removes you from the leaderboard. When you restart it resets everything to how it was, no need to lose threads at all. Until they make this change I will continue to avoid this time sink as I spend most of my evenings running events with the guild and clearly IA is not a guild friendly addition to the game.
I also agree that the entire premise is potentially harmful to some people who just will not stop, I mean 72 hours, for real? This is dangerous unless there was a team of them in the same house taking turns. I'm sure ZOS will make changes when the game finally kills someone, I know it sounds like hyperbole but it is possible, gamers have died before making extended runs.
So, as it stands now, I, along with many of our guild members, just don't bother playing it. I have about 20K fortunes since it started and I've never spent them, that total hasn't changed for at least a month. Nice idea but a very flawed concept, adding the save function would massively increase the IA's appeal for many.
Dragonnord wrote: »For the ones that say "but lock you out of leaderboards". Who cares about leaderboars? Leadearboards are nothing. Mean nothing. Even get deleted after some tme.
So locking a player out of leaderboards would be no punishing.
Yes, do it, lock me out of leaderbords, who cares about something that is wiped out after a few days?
Imaging removing all records from the Olympics after a few weeks or months?
Bad system.
Elvenheart wrote: »In my opinion, not allowing threads for 24 hours is not the best solution. I think that, simply at the loss of your third thread, your leader board progress should be stopped at that point, but you should be allowed to keep going for as long as you like (or restart with new threads if you prefer), this would give you an opportunity to at least learn and practice the harder Arcs. I suspect though that the main reason we cannot do this is that people may get tired of the IA more quickly than they otherwise would so it would lose some replayability factor.
Elvenheart wrote: »In my opinion, not allowing threads for 24 hours is not the best solution. I think that, simply at the loss of your third thread, your leader board progress should be stopped at that point, but you should be allowed to keep going for as long as you like (or restart with new threads if you prefer), this would give you an opportunity to at least learn and practice the harder Arcs. I suspect though that the main reason we cannot do this is that people may get tired of the IA more quickly than they otherwise would so it would lose some replayability factor.
Would devalue the currency massively if you could keep going regardless of leaderboard. Right now things like aetherial dust still hold some value despite being more common drops from sack of provisions, but if you could go infinite you'd get way too much of these floating in economy.