Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

Please, introduce ring decay already

Cast your vote:

  • Yes, introduce decay already

    Votes: 19 19.6%

  • Yes, but finalize without decay

    Votes: 21 21.6%

  • Nope, do nothing / proceed as planned

    Votes: 57 58.8%
  • Total voters
    97
San

San

Elite
Joined
Aug 5, 2007
Posts
3,120
Location
That freaking cold place (in RL)
Society
OldTimers
Avatar Name
Sandal San Tolk
Reason is, people rave about how eco it is to hunt with ring combos because they don't decay, and base resale value on that even though the state is predestined to change. On the day of its announcement, their value will crash and lots of peds will vanish in digital Nirvana.

I find it impossible to consider investing in such an item under these circumstances. You have to trust to be able to recover your investment before the change happens, which might be doable for avatars with a very high throughput. Everybody else is ill-advised to do so. Some will be caught unaware because they didn't do homework. The complaints are foreseeable.

Therefore I find it prudent to do away with the dangling Sword of Damocles and finalize the properties of these rings either way, with or without decay*, but main thing is it happens now. At least in good time before the year-end events start so that the market can adapt.

* Leaving it without decay ofc means that stable investors will remain screwed for good. It's already lasting for too long to make amends, so might as well be considered optional. Yeah, I'd go hunt with pay-once-then-forever-free buffs, too.
 
All rings have 10 PED TT. Even when they introduce decay it will be minimal, unless MA wants us to stop every 5 minutes to repair. Stop worrying about something that will barely affect their price.

Every second you are hunting without rings you are at a disadvantage with the hunters that do use them. Most rings can actually save you ped as you use them, mainly athenic and ares (and all those unique/super expensive ones).

That's just my opinion, of course.
 
Last edited:
Are these so called recreational drugs?

Slima suņa murgi...

So aggressive, so high headed, yet still pointless.

Prices on rings wont change because of decay. Well if something then top notch rings will gain in price as they will decay, but also provide same benefits they already do. Little shitty rings that have nearly no purpose already might drop in price a little but it wont be too major.

Now (!) tell me where MA said that they WILL introduce ring decay?
All i read in item description is that they MIGHT introduce decay (also might not).


Sorry if i am coming alittle aggressive after you but u are leaving a lot of nonsense footprints all over this forum. I dont see the reasons for an aggressive request to MA anounced publicly to do something for ur own satisfaction.
Ask MA dorectly if that is such pain for you, by posting here (in aggressive manner) u are just making the forum readers to revolt for no reason!


Also you have not asked a question but have provided answers in ur poll, since there is no question or statement i am not voting.

Have a lovely day

Soko
 
For those that bought off auction, I think most of us have lost enough in MU on rings already to 'cover' any decay on a 10 ped ring for the next 250 years.
 
Angel O2 Mercer said:
All rings have 10 PED TT. Even when they introduce decay it will be minimal, unless MA wants us to stop every 5 minutes to repair. Stop worrying about something that will barely affect their price.

Every second you are hunting without rings you are at a disadvantage with the hunters that do use them. Most rings can actually save you ped as you use them, mainly athenic and ares (and all those unique/super expensive ones).

That's just my opinion, of course.
Click to expand...

If they introduce decay, I'd expect rings to also get a new TT max (so you keep the 10ped TT on the ring, but now it's repairable to 100, 1000, whatever).

But in response to San, asking for MA to hurry up because you're concerned over an investment, is a bit silly. Everything in Entropia is an investment risk as everything can change so quickly. Hangars were once considered the "final" investment stage in Entropia, now they are glorified apartments with a personal auctioneer.

Make the calculation as such: Current cost of the ring; current cost saving from using the ring per hour. Future cost of the ring, future cost saving using the ring per hour (it's easy to work out what the decay "might" be, when you consider the TT of a Neuro X pill and the buff it gives compared to an Ares ring).

Once you have done that risk calculation, is the perceived depreciation going to be outweighed by the current and future cost savings? I'd say, that for all the Ares rings up to Augmented (10k), that answer will currently be "Yes" if you're a medium+ player (>3 hours per day).
 
Ever tried reminding a drunk guy on a Sunday afternoon that he has to go to work the next day? The reaction is similar. :laugh:

In this case there's no Monday though, MA may well leave the whole thing dangling for years.
 
Everything looks like nonsense from a vantage point and whales have the gravity of black holes in this environment. I don't give a damn, but value information.

There is a lot more aggression against the devs around, much of it more than a little cringeworthy. No wonder they are building a wall. On the other hand, history does not inspire confidence that any change won't pull the trap door under your ped pile. I understand risk and volatility, but heck, you either play RCE or you play a game. Not going to dump the equivalent of a mortgage into the latter. Although it is entertaining.

All good if this is not one of these occasions. I am not deterred in finding it reasonable to ask for removal of insecurities, anyhow. I am glad they did say it from the start.

@Aio, I did exactly that calculation and it lead to the breakpoint. I'll take it from the fingers of those that get burned, or if nothing bad happens I won't have lost a thing. I don't compete.

mg Joda VVV said:
4. NO , leave as it is?
Click to expand...
That's choice 2 if you want it finalized as it is, 3 if you're happy with it remaining open/unknown.
 
Rings decay when you equip them, in the same way as clothes.


I think that's the only decay you will ever see with them.
 
Yes. It should never been introduced without decay or at least not with the uncertainty stated on their item info, albeit the rings are not the first ones to have a buff with no decay.
Vampire cloak was the first, correct me if I'm wrong.

Although that one for certain won't get decay over time debuff, as it doesn't state that in its item info.

The balance will come, mark my words, all rings will have a "debuff" over time.

Mayhap it will be something like draining your ped card balance by X amount (unlikely) most likely something similar like fuel consumption in vehicles.

You'd be able to "fuel" the rings with <insertname> and it'll get a "fuel consumption" status or similar.

This is kinda the only I can imagine they'd implement it, in order to keep a balance.

So whilst you have the item equipped:
Ares rings: Each shot you fire - it will take some of that "fuel".
Athenic/Aeglic: Each hit you take - it will take some of that "fuel".
Hermetic, fuel/km you run, artemic, each taming attempt.

This is the most logical way of implementing this, to preserve in-game balance, at least that I can think of.

It could be they are afraid of diminishing the "demand" of strongboxes, that's why they have taken so long to implement it.

But this isn't gonna be any worse than when they introduced foot guards I guess. People will always either adapt or not.
 
Last edited:
Sub-Zero said:
Yes. It should never been introduced without decay or at least not with the uncertainty stated on their item info, albeit the rings are not the first ones to have a buff with no decay.
Vampire cloak was the first, correct me if I'm wrong.

Although that one for certain won't get decay over time debuff, as it doesn't state that in its item info.

The balance will come, mark my words, all rings will have a "debuff" over time.

Mayhap it will be something like draining your ped card balance by X amount (unlikely) most likely something similar like fuel consumption in vehicles.

You'd be able to "fuel" the rings with <insertname> and it'll get a "fuel consumption" status or similar.

This is kinda the only I can imagine they'd implement it, in order to keep a balance.

So whilst you have the item equipped:
Ares rings: Each shot you fire - it will take some of that "fuel".
Athenic/Aeglic: Each hit you take - it will take some of that "fuel".
Hermetic, fuel/km you run, artemic, each taming attempt.

This is the most logical way of implementing this, to preserve in-game balance, at least that I can think of.

It could be they are afraid of diminishing the "demand" of strongboxes, that's why they have taken so long to implement it.

But this isn't gonna be any worse than when they introduced foot guards I guess. People will always either adapt or not.
Click to expand...

They can add decay/h (like nutrio consumpton on pets) with small decay happening every 10sec for example. But i highly doubt the cost will be higher than 10ped/h on the most usefull rings (and this will not change usefulness of those rings on high level of play). The less usefull will have probably 0.50-1.00ped decay/h. Reason is: they have only 10ped max TT so higher decay would make no sense. (Of course they could increase max TT like someone sugested to solve this).

In my opinion though - i think this will not happen anytime soon: my personal guess at least 1 year from now.

Voted: leave it as it is (or remove the info from description completly and leave them no decay forever).

Falagor
:bandit:
 
Just add a warning to all items ul that says similar to the rings warning as MA can and will change anything at any time without warning .. just waiting til all UL items go L someday.... P.s. they DO already decay at same rate as clothes. MA removed armor decay. They should remove clothing decay too.
 
Last edited:
Sub-Zero said:
So whilst you have the item equipped:
Ares rings: Each shot you fire - it will take some of that "fuel".
Athenic/Aeglic: Each hit you take - it will take some of that "fuel".
Hermetic, fuel/km you run, artemic, each taming attempt.
Click to expand...

Well let's just say I refuse to accept further pain, when there's no obvious advantage to using the ring. Especially when events are on and MA turn off returns on mobs outside events.

I'm down to running one whip an evening now (that's) 210 peds turnover, running with Aug taming ring and 20% skill gain pet and it still knocks out 19% losses (38 - 40 ped loss a run).

Plus at least 3 uber soc mates refuse to log in during event time.

So let's just admit it, rings are just smoke and mirrors.

I still don't get the ares ring anyhow. What's it got to offer? It just allows you to burn more ped quicker, where's the advantage in that, when there's more rings than "real/actual" competitors? Sure a small crit increase....WOW!!!

Well ok. If you've got a drug habit, and can't stop swallowing pills night and day, maybe you can get more skill over "time". We all know that skill targets trigger returns, if there's not a hold back on item "balance" drops.

But all that does is force you to keep buying boxes to fuel that drug habit, and burn the unlimited uni ammo. Maybe the rings do the job for MA already, forcing those drug/box purchases, so decay is secondary.

Rick

ps: if they decay a running ring, then you might as well just jump in your VTOL, makes it pointless.
 
Last edited:
RickEngland said:
I still don't get the ares ring anyhow. What's it got to offer?
Click to expand...
You save defense cost by killing more quickly. By any means which increase your dps.
 
Last edited:
I vote to add decay cuz I love decay and MA said they will so why wouldn't they?

Also its good so we see the new price-drops. Gotta love that, really.

It will drop no matter what you guys say, prices will drop some. I think each ring will decay differently from the other and wont be equally decayed.
 
San said:
You save defense cost by killing more quickly. By any means which increase your dps.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with using a slightly more powerful weapon, that would do the same job?

Or amp
Or enhancer

The point is it's got nothing to do with defence costs, and more about max max max max max...your ped input.

Now lets say that there's a timer between good loots "the waves" as some like to put it, what wearers are doing is increasing their input cost between those waves, so they need even bigger bank roll.....smiles.

Nope...you've still not sold me on it.

Rick

ps: What's to say the mob you're attacking 'knows' you're wearing a ring so hits you 8% harder to compensate?
 
Last edited:
It was a bad idea to introduce an item that may change. They should have decided if they would decay or not before we got them. What's next, new guns that come with a warning that the eco may decrease?
 
It's not a matter of if but when. They said they will add it in their initial announcement. It depends if decay is time based like a pill or shot based but both have an effect on eco. They also said they would add superior rings made from L rings and other items like amulets. But we know how long mindark is in implementing things. I would have thought they would have been quicker since it is money in their pocket.
 
Last edited:
atomicstorm said:
It's not a matter of if but when. I would have thought they would have been quicker since it is money in their pocket.
Click to expand...

Agreed. But they are not being quick about it, probably because anything that diminishes usefulness = less demand. They probably are cooking up something else in store for strongboxes, to negate the loss of demand.
 
The uncertainty of the future is a major part of the game we play. 90% of my losses in the game were due to devaluation of the gear. Even though there is still no decay, my imp ares has lost 90% of its value in less than a year. Yet we keep being faced with new opportunities and the necessity to decide, whether we should embrace them at the risk of loss, or ignore them and certainly lose the competitive edge.

You want to make a decision without a risk. If MA would say the decay do come, you would buy the rings for nothing, and if they would promise there won't be decay, no matter what that announcement would do to the prices, you wouldn't lose a pec. Nope, won't happen.
 
People say that prices won't be affected/decay will be minimal, but how do you know this for sure?

Theoretically, Mindark could increase the maximum TT of the rings and set the decay to whatever they want. Unlikely, but possible. More decay would give them significantly more revenue.
 
RickEngland said:
What's wrong with using a slightly more powerful weapon, that would do the same job?

Or amp
Or enhancer

The point is it's got nothing to do with defence costs, and more about max max max max max...your ped input.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong. You can use any of these measures, or all together. There are two different goals. You can maximize economy, i.e. with Ares reduce your defence cost (mob hits you less often before you're done with it), or maximize your damage. For events or other competitive game ofc only the latter counts and you don't get anywhere if you're not stuffed full with everything available, because everybody else has it and you'd be at a disadvantage.
 
Svarog said:
You want to make a decision without a risk.
Click to expand...

There are different sources of risk, and it is only prudent to try and manage them. Market behaviour, what the community does and wants and how this reflects on prices is one source of risk. The "authority" liable for making market-relevant decisions is another one. Not speaking for anyone else, but personally I have different amounts of tolerance towards them.
 
San said:
Nothing wrong. You can use any of these measures, or all together. There are two different goals. You can maximize economy, i.e. with Ares reduce your defence cost (mob hits you less often before you're done with it), or maximize your damage. For events or other competitive game ofc only the latter counts and you don't get anywhere if you're not stuffed full with everything available, because everybody else has it and you'd be at a disadvantage.
Click to expand...


But the issue is where does your viewpoint stop. Do you have quickness? Let's assume you have every toy in the game that "supposed" to help you, and God like skills it still means little.

The whole purpose of "value" in Ares was events where max damage mattered. Now it's about looting points, because the Terminator attempted to own all competitions. It's not really a defence ring, although I see what you're suggesting if you can take a mob down quicker. But that suggest you're hunting outside of your skills.

I try not to be a sheep.

I'd like to argue the best ring in the game is taming ring. Not only is it possible to take down a mob quicker because you can tame it at sometimes under 50% of it's HP, but you loot many more mobs for the ped input. Since people argue this point about number of kills over time will drop a balancer, that suggest taming ring is the ultimate ring.

A taming ring is the only real option for getting skills using pets that only offer taming skill bonus. We've not got a pet that gives 20% on Longblade skill for example. Again that suggests taming ring is the best.

Now if you was running the best pet in game with 20% skill gain and best taming ring, it would suggest to me that you couldn't lose unless the system compensates for your extra toys. Since I know running such toys still doesn't do the said toys justice.....then that suggests to me, the whole system is smoke and mirrors.

We're all deluded.

Big smile

Rick
 
Last edited:
You know what I hate the most about these discussions about the rings' decay? They turn the possible into probable.

A year ago, when I was buying my first ring, I of course did see the disclaimer but didn't take it seriously, been confident that MA won't try to pull that off, to not cause an outrage not seen since the times of armor equipment fee. And I never gave it another thought until recently, when the discussions like this started to occur more and more often, with people anticipating this change each VU. It demonstrates MA that the players don't regard such a change as unthinkable, they in fact expect it. So what might initially have been a barely considered option in a corner of a whiteboard, now starts to assume a form.

Sure MA is the power and mostly can do as they please, but still they have to thread carefully and weigh their actions vs a possible reaction. In this state of silent psychological struggle, nothing can be more destructive than when players lube themselves up and bend over even before they were asked to.
 
Last edited:
I hope your investment sinks
 
Svarog said:
You know what I hate the most about these discussions about the rings' decay? They turn the possible into probable.

A year ago, when I was buying my first ring, I of course did see the disclaimer but didn't take it seriously, been confident that MA won't try to pull that off, to not cause an outrage not seen since the times of armor equipment fee. And I never gave it another thought until recently, when the discussions like this started to occur more and more often, with people anticipating this change each VU. It demonstrates MA that the players don't regard such a change as unthinkable, they in fact expect it. So what might initially have been a barely considered option in a corner of a whiteboard, now starts to assume a form.

Sure MA is the power and mostly can do as they please, but still they have to thread carefully and weigh their actions vs a possible reaction. In this state of silent psychological struggle, nothing can be more destructive than when players lube themselves up and bend over even before they were asked to.
Click to expand...

Exactly. +rep

Cause and effect, action reaction.

Well what ever happens, it certain won't happen until MA have reached their plan of ring drops.
The whole hoard of Adj Ares has not come yet (like the other rings), and I'm sure it will once MA have maxed the opportunity from Imp.

There're much more damaging effects currently going on in EU than this though. I continue to tread on egg shells, and wait to see what comes.

Multi spawn pet ring that would be nice, even if only allowed one passive buff to be active.

Rick
 
I look at rings two different ways.

1. Not much different from an amp though I just look at amps as giving me a gun with different stats.
2. A wasted opportunity to improve the economy.

In regards to 2:

If MA is going to include decay of some kind. I'd suggest that instead the buff from the ring is fueled by say, mind Essence I a similar way vehicles are fueled by oil.

This example I think would help improve the economy on a few levels.

Better than just straight up decay in rings than anything else.
 
MA is trying for some time to make the game cheaper to play, for the average player, and they succeed at it.
Author of OP asks MA to stop "this nonsense" and make it more expensive to play because he wants a ring but the risk is too high? Can you please help me understand? wth is this crap?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top