Limbo Question for Staff

[Bad]

We have been having a debate about battle resting in Limbo. (Resting on one or more characters while the remainder of the party is still in combat) or mobs are spawned.

Yes I know that the amount of canos dropping can fluctuate, from run to run.

But it seems as if when players rest while there is still fighting on the map (The Demi count fluctuates on the map). We do not get canonic drops other then set drops after that. If we are triggering some anti exploit etc. we would like to know, and will not battle rest.

Could a member of staff plz let us know one way or the other.

Thank you in advance,

Bad

[Deleted]

I don’t think resting would do this. The demi count for an encounter is determined when the mobs are spawned. If you’re adding to that count dramatically after a spawn, you’ll get the trigger of the demi differential.

Think, first spawn in Pazunia if someone misclicks and then others come down late.

We would battle rest often, keep the tanks going and prep cores for the next mass spawn and never encountered this. I think there’s just a dramatic fluctuation in canopics per run.

As mentioned in another thread we were anywhere from 400-650 per P2 Hardmode given how many humans and total toons. Ensuring you get as many random spawns as possible helps a lot.

[FunkySwerve]

Moved. No idea why this was posted in bug/problem report.

Funky

[Bad]

It was posted in bug problem report, because if battle resting is triggering an anti exploit that is stopping canos from dropping, that would mean that there is a bug or problem.

Since battle resting should not be getting punished as that is something that players normally do.

Seemed like the correct place to post that type of question.

Bad

P.S. I would still like to hear from staff on the subject of the original post; if there is anything to this. As we have continued to see a pattern that suggests getting less canos when players battle rest. And due to the fluctuating nature of cano drops this is impossible to test by players. Thus my question to staff, so that we can stop the speculation on the subject.

[FunkySwerve]

Feb 2, 2020 19:00:42 GMT Bad said:

It was posted in bug problem report, because if battle resting is triggering an anti exploit that is stopping canos from dropping, that would mean that there is a bug or problem.

Eh, no. It would mean the system is checking party count at one point or another. A bug is not defined as a consequence you don't like.

This type of thing is close enough to antiex that I'm not going to comment further. If you think you are noticing a difference, you are free to test.

Funky

[Bad]

Actually, a bug or problem; is when a party is not doing anything (Wrong) to trigger an anti exploit (Which means playing normally, resting, fighting etc.) and an anti exploit is still being triggered.

Or is having an anti exploit triggered on a party doing nothing wrong and playing normally the intended result?

[FunkySwerve]

Feb 2, 2020 20:48:11 GMT Bad said:

Actually, a bug or problem; is when a party is not doing anything (Wrong) to trigger an anti exploit (Which means playing normally, resting, fighting etc.) and an anti exploit is still being triggered.

Or is having an anti exploit triggered on a party doing nothing wrong and playing normally the intended result?

I'm not interested in semantic arguments whereby you try to justify yourself by playing with definitions. Scaling loot to party size is not an antiexploit, and that definition of a bug is sorely lacking, though I think you know that. Anyway, bottom line is if you care enough about it, test for yourself, instead of asking us to do it.

Funky

[AuBricker]

[chirality]

i'm baffled as to why this even escalated to this level. it seems like people made up their mind that they're inadvertently triggering an anti-exploit and suffering the consequences as undeserved punishment.

why would limbo's demicount checker function any differently than it does for other zones? it's pretty easy to test, i mean there's text spam on the screen when you lose loot to demicount changing. i think no one cared before cuz random poop was always gems and crap, ppl hardly cared even in deeper runs if you triggered that anti cuz there's so much loot. now though with the cano obsession in limbo, all of a sudden any perceived "potential cano packet loss!" is a huge scientific problem to be analyzed.

it seems like there's a suspicion that there's a secret, hidden mechanic that's unjustly punishing you. in reality, i think occam's razor is prolly the answer...no one is out to get you and there's no secret anti-exploit that funky forgot about or is malfunctioning....cano #s just wildly fluctuate, you might not be weighing enough the factor of shifting # of random spawns across runs, canos hate you, etc. but if you think it's an issue, maybe stop battle resting and see if your cano #s increase?

either way i don't know why the suggestion of "test it" is so offensive or insulting, if the evidence is that once someone "battle rests" then you don't get any more canos (well, that is what OP said--if players rest while there is still fighting on the map We do not get canonic drops after that), then that should be super easy to screenshot/log/etc to show. i mean zerth adlun rn: spawn, enter combat, have gs bot rest ring, clear spawn, for every spawn, do it for entire map or 2, then i should get zero canos, reproducible result. i mean i'm not saying do an entire run for free to test but like ...don't you kinda do limbo runs more than him? HG Code Bible "oh yep right here sub-paragraph 3 on section 235.9, sure enough there's that anti exploit that says if you rest in limbo, while spawns are present, then you forfeit all canos, jeez that's harsh, ok let's delete that"

like what's the difference between runs you don't battle rest and runs you do? 100 canos? 20? 5? 50? how often are you battle resting? every spawn? every 3 spawns? once a map? 3x a map? 10x a map?

[FunkySwerve]

As I shared with another of Bad's guildmates, I frankly have no idea what the answer is. However, I'm not prepared to spend any time trying to figure it out merely to solve a guild dispute about appropriate protocol for combat rests, let alone the several hours it would likely take to figure it out. This kind of thing has always been up to the players to figure out - we merely lay out the code.

If, after playtest, there appears to be a legitimate malfunction of some kind, then sure, go ahead and post a bug report. But don't try to pidgeonhole a request for information as a bug report, or expect us to do the digging for you. And, by the way, you should always post in the forums instead of pm'ing me, as there's a decent chance someone has tested, and an even better chance other people want to know.

I did not mean this thread to come across quite as crabby as it likely did, but it was a very weird place to post such a question.

I also recognize that we are way behind on documentation updates for the last few years, and it's fair game to just ask. I'll tell you if I know, and if I think it's appropriate. If not, I'll just tell you to playtest. Getting the documentation updates is on my radar, but stuff like this has never been documented, as we don't want to give away certain details of items that touch on potential exploits, and because documenting to this level of detail would likely take nearly as long as implementing.

Funky

[AuBricker]

Feb 3, 2020 16:03:05 GMT chirality said:

i'm baffled as to why this even escalated to this level. it seems like people made up their mind that they're inadvertently triggering an anti-exploit and suffering the consequences as undeserved punishment.

why would limbo's demicount checker function any differently than it does for other zones? it's pretty easy to test, i mean there's text spam on the screen when you lose loot to demicount changing. i think no one cared before cuz random poop was always gems and crap, ppl hardly cared even in deeper runs if you triggered that anti cuz there's so much loot. now though with the cano obsession in limbo, all of a sudden any perceived "potential cano packet loss!" is a huge scientific problem to be analyzed.

it seems like there's a suspicion that there's a secret, hidden mechanic that's unjustly punishing you. in reality, i think occam's razor is prolly the answer...no one is out to get you and there's no secret anti-exploit that funky forgot about or is malfunctioning....cano #s just wildly fluctuate, you might not be weighing enough the factor of shifting # of random spawns across runs, canos hate you, etc. but if you think it's an issue, maybe stop battle resting and see if your cano #s increase?

either way i don't know why the suggestion of "test it" is so offensive or insulting, if the evidence is that once someone "battle rests" then you don't get any more canos (well, that is what OP said--if players rest while there is still fighting on the map We do not get canonic drops after that), then that should be super easy to screenshot/log/etc to show. i mean zerth adlun rn: spawn, enter combat, have gs bot rest ring, clear spawn, for every spawn, do it for entire map or 2, then i should get zero canos, reproducible result. i mean i'm not saying do an entire run for free to test but like ...don't you kinda do limbo runs more than him? HG Code Bible "oh yep right here sub-paragraph 3 on section 235.9, sure enough there's that anti exploit that says if you rest in limbo, while spawns are present, then you forfeit all canos, jeez that's harsh, ok let's delete that"

like what's the difference between runs you don't battle rest and runs you do? 100 canos? 20? 5? 50? how often are you battle resting? every spawn? every 3 spawns? once a map? 3x a map? 10x a map?

Your experiences in Limbo might well differ from ours, Bale, but as a rule, we try and rest once per map, and once again before engaging the Guardian of the Stone and the endgame bosses.

In hard mode runs, however, we frequently find that should we encounter a difficult random or double spawn, we expend our spells and need to refresh. We have discussed this in game as the answer might dictate we use bios rather than rest.

As you know, even on Limbo runs in which all variables seem otherwise similar, the canopic count can vary greatly. Just while it might seem that resting in battle might reduce the drop rate, any evidence is might not indicate causation. I have no idea how to reach a conclusion here other than recording canopic drops over a long period of time and compare.

Unless your Limbo runs are very, very different from mine, canopics are precious things and they accumulate slowly. If you have any input on this question, Bale, I would be grateful for it.

[Bad]

The response to this thread is an embarrassment to the server.

All this over a question about game mechanics?

Please lock this thread and move.

[FunkySwerve]

Feb 4, 2020 0:07:45 GMT Bad said:

The response to this thread is an embarrassment to the server.

All this over a question about game mechanics?

Please lock this thread and move.

Ah, no. The response was not the problem, as I think is sufficiently covered above. You ought to reread to avoid future embarassments.

Funky

[Deleted]

The real embarrassment is how people act in regards to cano greed.

[desocupado]

I think bad expected something like either:

1 XXX is the expected behavior.
2 I don't remember the expected behavior and it would take a lot of work to look into it.
3 The expected behavior is a secret. Have fun.

I'm assuming it's 2 and 3.

In a side note: is rest battling (and reducing mob demi count if an enemy spawns while someone is resting) considered an exploit?

In hindsight lowering mob difficulty via having people in rest zone could be considered an exploit to spawn less and weaker mobs, thus this is an intended antiexploit. In such case 1 would be the answer.