Adventure Reward Distribution

This was just an idea that came through several discussions on various in-game channels, and is not meant to be an indicator of any known game change. I am only presenting this to get opinions on how it would change game play and how people would react to the idea.

The current system of distributing treasure, or loot, at the end of a multi-person adventure is based on all participants receiving a fixed distribution based on a probability-based table. Each player has the same potential loot, regardless of the amount of effort made for the adventure. Although many of the two or three person adventures can be done by a single person, this has created what are commonly known as "loot spots", where people join the adventure and do a minimal amount of work, for the purpose of getting the full treasure reward. These spots are traded between players, technically outside the normal in-game trading mechanism as there is no current way to directly trade an invitation for something else. The value of the loot spot is loosely determined by the value of the potential reward that the non-completing player will receive. Of course, since the treasure tables are based on random generation, the actual gain by the loot spot player can vary.

One potential change in the system could be as follows. Currently, the game already tracks the amount of damage done by each player, providing experience points to each participating player based on their kills. Since this information is already collected, potentially a similar system could be used to distribute treasure rewards. Rather than each person getting their own complete treasure table reward, the reward would also be based on the proportion of enemies killed in the adventure. Obviously, to maintain balance, the total award possible should be multiplied at least by the number of player for which the adventure is rated.

There are several obvious issues with this, that I will bring up now. This would eliminate the sale of loot spots, as there would no longer be any benefit in someone joining an adventure and not participating fully. Conversely, there is no reason to sell the spot, as there is no "wasted" loot that would have gone to someone else if they had been invited. It should not penalize the person who would sell under the current system, as they would receive at least twice the previous reward, and under a fair market, the value of the additional reward should be greater than the value received through selling the spot. As a secondary effect, it could anticipated that it would increase the total volume traded through the trade office, as the people who were selling loot spots for gold previously would then be selling the resources obtained in the adventure. It would greatly reduce the ability of people to falsely sell the invitations to adventures, as outside of completing an outstanding quest, there is no reason to join someone else's adventure except to share in the fighting. However, there is no change in the ability to work together to complete an adventure.

I would invite thoughtful comments on this idea. I have attached a poll for those who just wish to weigh in.

It's a great idea and everything. But I don't like splitting the loot and it will change the game to much.

Terrible idea, loot spots are an important micro-niche of the game mechanic and add a layer of depth for efficient resource farming.
Encourages people to further silo and not interract with others as well.
New Co Op adventures will be a go to for people that want to do things like that.

As much as I hate to disagree with a guildie I like loot spots as they are. I do agree we should have a way to trade lootspots rather then the one fish for coin deal but as a whole they are too much an important part of the game

Good idea in principle - the problem is premium. Non-premium players will receive less for their advs. Premium players will no longer be able to piggyback on quite profitable lootspots. The non-premium would abandon fairytales completely.

A second issue is this also would largely kill a social aspect of the game.

i do not like it, this would kill lootspot values

lol I love your signature Draconus2004. That deserves an award itself!!

I don't like that loot spots are sold. It creates an imbalance in the value of resources by placing a price point on resources that are not actually being sold on an open market and are not yet in the game. A type of futures market.

The proper way to sell a loot spot is to list the potential estimated rewards.

You need a lot of coin and fast generals to get in the LS circle. The potential rewards are not typically stated in trade tab because there is a presumption of understanding amongst those who are in the circle.


It's not fair the way it is and I don't know how to fix it.

(umm, last time i checked lootspots were just an additive. They were not it's original usage for the game, but it has come that it is a part of it now, and has been for a while. Just be glad, the BBs kept lootspots in the first place.)

I don't agree with aurboth. This is because adventures such as roaring bull and the high up adventures, would essentially become co-op adventures.

Also, you just basically said to remove lootspots from the game, or at least it's uses for it. Aren't there already enough things becoming obsolete as it is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrueHead

i do not like it, this would kill lootspot values

---

would kill the LS completely.

My number 1 worry is the friends that would quit with less to do in game and currently thrive on the LS market. The LS market requires coin, and little else to break into. It is based roughly on prices of items in the LS (at a discount) and has a marked delay in regards to price shifts.

The biggest need to get into the LS market and be a profitable player? Premium. Non-premium makes a profit on non-fairytale LS but the profit is much smaller

In my guild we give loot spots to players who need help developing their island. I would hate to see this eliminated. We do not sell loot spots to guild members.

Agreed Wimpy. The loot rewards help out the lower levels, and changing to the proposed system would kill that ability to help them while showing them how to do adventures. It would also kill any incentive to share an adventure at all..."why should i, when i'd get less?" The way the system is now works. What's being proposed is allowing one person to get the loot of 3 people if they *don't share.

I agree that the loot rewards help lower levels. However, is there a significant difference between giving them a loot spot in an adventure or giving them the same resources outright? There is a minimal amount of effort involved in the former versus none in the later, but not really enough for them to actually earn the loot. In addition, lower level members could still be invited to join in on multi-player adventures and could still observe; they just would not get rewarded for sacrificing a few military units. Perhaps we are more willing to give the loot spots, as we don't actually own the resources that the lower level person receives.

The primary objection otherwise seems to be that people would no longer be selling loot spots, and there is a significant unregulated market for it. Under the current system, what is actually happening is that players are essentially selling the potential loot from the adventure they are doing. Under the proposed change, the same person who is doing the adventure alone, as the loot spot people cannot truly be said to be assisting in the adventure, would be able to sell the loot themselves. Under either system, one person is getting the value of the rewards for all the adventure slots, either in gold or in trade goods.

The changes inherent in the premium may create a difference when comparing the gain from the two systems, as by saving gold in advance one could do more loot spots under the current system than they would be able to do complete adventures under a participation based system. In effect, using premium, they are buying the adventure loot at a 2/3 discount.

As another option, there are the new "cooperative" adventures now running on the test server. One could easily make the argument that they are necessary because the current system of adventures is fundamentally flawed so as not to encourage cooperation. Would a participation-based reward system be a better fit for those adventures, rather than a requirement for each person to do a fixed portion of the damage?

I believe there is a significant difference. Giving a lower level player a loot spot helps teach them about adventures and fires them up about doing them. Just giving them resources only encourages dependency.

Loot spots have become an important aspect of the game, from a social aspect as well as economic. While it may not have been what the developers intended, as they wanted to see 2 or 3 people sharing the cost/xp to get the loot, changing it so one person gets ALL the loot from these big adventures is even further from the intentions of the game. Loot spots *ARE a form of cooperation, if u look at it from that viewpoint.

RE the co op advs, they do excactly what you're aiming for, each player has to contribute their share of the cost to get both the xp and the loot. And the way they have it set up requires participation. You change that to participation based reward, and you'll likely find people doing almost all of it themselves to get all the loot, then asking a friend or even paying a small fee for someone to tag to get the number of required people. So you're back to square one.

There is also the matter of how is the loot split? is it split as a percentage of xp gained or a percentage of total xp in the adv? if the latter, then partial clearers of RB and DB would be in trouble.

Looks like "The proposed change would not be beneficial to the game" Wins the Vote!

i like it a set big loot package divided up like XP sweet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RomanGodCamper

Looks like "The proposed change would not be beneficial to the game" Wins the Vote!

---

Remember, nearly half the people also did not vote for the zombie buff in a poll that was expanded to all players. This poll is a small, unrepresentative sample of players compared to the wider settlers community. Decision making of players whom did not vote in this poll i think probably needs described with adjectives that would get this post deleted.

In light of the other posts regarding the scamming of loot spots, I am giving myself a bump.

In our Guild we also trade lootspots in addition to helping the lower levels who will later do the same.

First of all, the wording of the poll is misleading.

There has been noofficial proposal by BB to change the way loot spots/adventures are used that I have seen.

Your disclaimer will not help much since most people will not know that you are the source of the 'proposed' changes.

Secondly, we are not robots and why would we want every aspect of the game determined for us?

Finally, every bit of loot I get on lootspots is pumped right back into the economy in one way or the other.


Instead of trying to get rid of the system, let's refine it and make it more impervious to scamming.