We have the chance to address this issue without trolling, flaming or any other nonsense. We can do so in a civil manner, respecting each persons views. This is not a felucca v trammel thread or some ridiculous Diehard-pvper v I've never seen felucca beyond yew gate argument. This is a serious discussion in which we should address the fact that felucca tmaps are not accepted at the new turn in according to reports from players on origin and test. We can also address the fact that there is no apples to apples comparison for the felucca tmap and trammel tmap due to a large number of unique qualities for each ruleset and account for the ever increasing variety of creatures which exist in some facets but not others.
The goal is to provide a fair and equitable scale to rewards for felucca tmaps.
There have been several proposals. Some believe that somewhere between 100 points and double the reward value is where felucca tmaps should receive.
If we are to properly frame the argument, we must simply address these pre-existing facts which currently can be considered constants or not variable.
1) according to the developers, risks faced in felucca are higher than those in trammel rulesets.(a very well established fact that isn't up for debate in this thread.)
2) The developers have continued to scale rewards found in felucca, in compliance with their precedent of RvR. (Since publish 16, up to and including publish 53, changes have been introduced in which the developers have continued to scale rewards based on a premise of risk vs reward.)
3) Felucca Tmaps are not accepted by the current turn in according to reports from players on origin and test.
And what is the issue at hand?
Tmaps from felucca are not honored at the turn in for publish 53. There has been no word as to whether or not these maps will receive a heightened value for the risks despite the existence of a well established policy by the developers which would favor this end.
The counter argument: Tmaps from monsters in felucca are scaled 1 reward higher than from their exact counterparts in trammel.(see lich to lich comparison for a proper apples to apples)
- Unfortunately with the constantly fluctuating difficulty levels of monsters in the newer facets and the outrageously high loot tables they grant it's not a very balanced situation. Numerous low difficulty creatures exist only in the trammel ruleset that grant high end treasure maps despite being easier to kill than monsters providing the same level tmaps in felucca. This current arrangement destroyed any pre-existing balance that may have been intended.
A boost to the turn in value for rewards to tmaps from felucca would result in a fair scaling that accounts for the fact the weaker monsters with excessive loot tables. It makes the scaled rewards account for the easier alternatives found outside of the felucca ruleset. Thus Apples and Oranges become a bit more like fair alternatives rather than incomparable. It also does nothing to harm and lessen the value of anything from trammel.
Please remember to avoid personal attacks and be mindful that RvR is an established policy deserving of debate only in a thread devoted specifically to that topic. For our purposes we can assume that a 6 year policy by EA will continue regardless of any post that would be framed in this context.
Try to organize your posts to take into account the fact that not everyone knows everything and nothing can simply be assumed unless you first state it and cite it(if necessary).
The goal is to provide a fair and equitable scale to rewards for felucca tmaps.
There have been several proposals. Some believe that somewhere between 100 points and double the reward value is where felucca tmaps should receive.
If we are to properly frame the argument, we must simply address these pre-existing facts which currently can be considered constants or not variable.
1) according to the developers, risks faced in felucca are higher than those in trammel rulesets.(a very well established fact that isn't up for debate in this thread.)
2) The developers have continued to scale rewards found in felucca, in compliance with their precedent of RvR. (Since publish 16, up to and including publish 53, changes have been introduced in which the developers have continued to scale rewards based on a premise of risk vs reward.)
3) Felucca Tmaps are not accepted by the current turn in according to reports from players on origin and test.
And what is the issue at hand?
Tmaps from felucca are not honored at the turn in for publish 53. There has been no word as to whether or not these maps will receive a heightened value for the risks despite the existence of a well established policy by the developers which would favor this end.
The counter argument: Tmaps from monsters in felucca are scaled 1 reward higher than from their exact counterparts in trammel.(see lich to lich comparison for a proper apples to apples)
- Unfortunately with the constantly fluctuating difficulty levels of monsters in the newer facets and the outrageously high loot tables they grant it's not a very balanced situation. Numerous low difficulty creatures exist only in the trammel ruleset that grant high end treasure maps despite being easier to kill than monsters providing the same level tmaps in felucca. This current arrangement destroyed any pre-existing balance that may have been intended.
A boost to the turn in value for rewards to tmaps from felucca would result in a fair scaling that accounts for the fact the weaker monsters with excessive loot tables. It makes the scaled rewards account for the easier alternatives found outside of the felucca ruleset. Thus Apples and Oranges become a bit more like fair alternatives rather than incomparable. It also does nothing to harm and lessen the value of anything from trammel.
Please remember to avoid personal attacks and be mindful that RvR is an established policy deserving of debate only in a thread devoted specifically to that topic. For our purposes we can assume that a 6 year policy by EA will continue regardless of any post that would be framed in this context.
Try to organize your posts to take into account the fact that not everyone knows everything and nothing can simply be assumed unless you first state it and cite it(if necessary).
