You cannot compare escalations and expeditions to Abyssal Pockets. These are designed as instanced short pve (on demand) content as stated by CCP. Escalations are “sourced” via anomalies and are random chance to receive.
Filaments on the other hand are a loot drop - subject to loot drop rates. CCP stated that the original L1 filaments will be sourced from Data sites, however, filaments from then on will be received (at random - through drop mechanics) within the sites themselves. You may run a site and get 2 or 3 filaments, or none at all. However, in order to the drop rates for any filament (regardless of tier) must by definition be set at minimum change of an average of 1 per site if not more, in order for the progression up the filament chain to occur.
you are not wrong, just partially. So you can get a higher tier filament, or a lower/equal tier filament. But the nature of it as an on demand instanced pocket accessible only via a loot drop item means it will require a greater than equal replacement rate as they have designed filaments not only to be run but also to have value for sale (if you don’t run them). If you only had a 1 - 1 replacement rate then you lose the ability to make a meaningful choice (sale or run) as running locks you into a chain of running and selling prevents you from accessing further pockets and thereby receiving more filaments.
I don’t agree here. If you got filament you don’t want you always can exchange it on market. Selling does not prevent you from … (using your words). It just makes you communicate with other players.
Let’s look at situations when you want to run only one particular level/type of site:
drop rate “>1”:
if you got filament of desired level/type: you just sell other filaments and use this one
if you haven’t got filament of desired level/type you can sell filaments you got and buy the one you want
drop rate “<1”:
if you got filament of desired level/type you just sell other filaments and use this one
if you haven’t got filament of desired level/type you can sell filaments you got and buy the one you want
The difference here is only price of filaments which will be set by market according to players needs.
In case of “>1” filaments will be cheaper and price will be set according to desired levels/types and drop rates.
in case of “<1” filaments will be more expensive and price still will be set according to desired levels/types and drop rates.
The only real difference is in case of “>1” player has higher chance to not ever get distracted from running sites to visit markets. Which is bad for MMO-style game.
Even in case “<1” you can enclose yourself into dark corner of solo play simply by visiting market and buying 100x filaments you want. Then once in a while you will return to civilization and exchange stuff you got to new set of filaments. (This was mostly joke but hey…)
This was written in response to idea of “mastering” which IMO only applies to particular mission and not the whole set of missions belonging to the same level (because each mission is different even inside one level).
My “opinion” is supported by arguments as to why it is rational, which I have gone over time and time again.
You should not end up with more filaments from running pockets, than you started out with. I drew you a fking diagram to explain why, and have explained at length how that would totally destroy a filament market.
Its fking retarded to use a L1 filament, and end up with more filaments as you run the chain, of all Ls. It would mean all you need is a stack of L1s, and never after that have to buy another L1 or any other L filament, as you self-generate more filamebntsnin each pocket, than you put in.
Try to understand this instead of some reflex based on your own interests.
Its clear in the diagram I posted.
AG also agrees you should not end up with more filaments, than you went in with. Ie: Linear model.
One filament = One Trig Pocket chain.
Its up to you how you source them, which ones you wan to run, and which ones you sell.
The filament reward to the next level is only a fraction of the value of that pockets loot.
I think @March_rabbit did a decent job of decoding what Slavos is attempting to argue. To buttress the points already made - I think Slavos is trying to argue that keeping a lower drop rate will keep up demand for the filament drops from data sites, and therefore a valued part of exploration. If the drop rate is too high, those T1 filaments will be worth as much as carbon.
Then having a filament does provide a good and rational choice. Each one would have some value, so selling it is always an option. Having a market completely awash in filaments removes that choice - each filament is essentially worthless due to oversupply. With no real option to sell, it’s a choice of “run this or trash it”.
Again, that is my understanding of his argument so far. I’m not advocating for that, it just seems to be what he’s arguing.
From what others have said, I’m guessing that won’t be the case though. If each filament is not just tiered to a level but also a weather type, that would cut down on the number of preferred filaments each person would have. If you have a dozen T3 filaments but only two are your preferred weather type, you might still be inclined to go to market to exchange them for others of your liking. From what I’ve read so far, it seems Slavos is missing that part.
For what it’s worth, I don’t see a problem for CCP’s current plan. It would be nice to see exploration given a gift of finding filaments and those filaments always having worth (and not having a saturated market), but I respect CCP enough that if something needs adjusted there, they’ll eventually move to do it.
I think it is safe to say we can just ignore Salvos if we want to get anywhere in this thread.
Just ignore the guy, ignore his points, won’t matter if you don’t because he certainly will ignore yours.
Now that’s a good point for a Linear model, here I can see someone who is actually thinking and trying to determine if something is right or wrong.
To respond to that, I think you communicate enough with the selling of mutaplasmid and Trig ships. Those are going to be rare and significant enough that you might actually want to directly contact potential buyers instead of just dumping them on the market.
I agree that the drop rate should be lower for the following reason. Here is my opinion :
I think every filament should have a value, so as to be farmable by lower skilled players
I think an item that produces itself, or an equivalent item, on consumption, AND an additional reward, makes that item lose its value: you need to acquire one, then on average you will keep the value.
I think the filament will have all equivalent value for the same difficulty (all F1 will be around same value)
From the last two, I can deduce that lower filament will have no value, which means this is a bad idea IMO.
Of course, if any of those opinions are invalidated by CCP, then my deduced opinion doesn’t stand. eg :
if CCP doesnt care about the price of filament,s that is the filaments are not worthy by themselves.
if the filament don’t produce more filament than originally consumed, eg you also drop loot that require filament to craft ( wink wink )
if some filaments are much more interesting than other, eg if some mutaplasmids can only be dropped in given type of filaments.
That’s why I said we don’t know what CCP is up to, so we can’t judge yet.
Plus of course all the biases I have that I am not even aware of.
I SPECIFICALLY stated that the filament drop rate on SiSi was probably artificially high, so as to allow for more testing of the NPC characteristics of the pockets.
I never presumed or assumed it would would go live as on SiSi.
I have, however, pointed out, explained and argued why the linear model must be implemented in the live version, rather than the tree one,
why do you keep repeating a statement without justification as though stating your point ‘n+1’ number of times is suddenly going to persuade others (and CCP) to your viewpoint?
Opinions are like arseholes. Everyone has one, doesn’t make your important or any more correct than anyone elses.
As in the diagram and explanations I have made, its not a matter of opinion, its a matter of mathematics.
If people earn more filaments from pockets than they use to enter them, there will be no filament market. You will self-generate more filaments than it cost you multiplied by thousands of players.
Ie: You buy one stack of say 10 L1 filaments, and never have to buy an L1 filament, or any other filament, ever again. You will self-generate the rest, from that seed, as in the tree model.
as Khan explained here, preference will vary. As drop rates are random % chance and not guaranteed 100% drop 1 filament per filament used (as is required in your linear model) it does not follow that L1’s will be valueless in a >1 filament replacement rate.
What you are stating again and again is your opinion that you are justifying based on mathematics. It is not as you say a simple “matter of mathematics”.
a tree model does not necessarily mean this is the case. again as filaments are a % drop chance and not guaranteed in either linear or tree “model”. You may run a filament and receive no other filaments. Also your point of;
proves that there will still be a market as people will want to get their foot in the door.
No, you would receive exactly one filament as a reward, so as to access the next pocket in the L1-L5 progression. You can either do so, or sell it to someone else that wants that next pocket.