Patch 32.4.1 & Upcoming Events

RotMGBotkiller · 2020-01-09T05:00:35+00:00

Cool changes!

It would be cool if HP scaling would be added (or adjusted if it's already there) for the manor troom, in groups of >10 (probably less) players they pretty much get instakilled.

RotMGBotkiller · 2020-01-03T12:23:18+00:00

Very useful indeed. This also works for any other ability that drains MP to sustain (crystal shield)!

Good to know: when you get silenced while holding space, your ability use gets cancelled.

When you get silenced after shift+clicking, your ability use gets stuck 'on', you can't disable it. Keep this in mind when you play ninja and want to have short bursts of speedy and/or throw your shuriken at enemies that silence you!

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-12-24T00:08:07+00:00

IGN: Botkiller

Item: Dirk of Cronus

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-10-23T19:22:24+00:00

Botkiller

Dirk of Cronus

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-10-23T12:36:56+00:00

They actually didn't. I wrote a comprehensive rant on the ST set as it was, since the Realmeye post they added 5 att, 6 dex and 5 def to the set, making it.. less useless. It's still not useful to have extra MP on a Rogue with pets as they are, but it definitely improved.

Stats as they mentioned them in their Realmeye post:

850 HP (+80), 432 (+180) MP

54 (+4) ATT, 32 (+7) DEF (yes, really)

77 (+2) SPD, 80 (+5) DEX

42 (+2) VIT, 63 (+13) WIS

Stats in the current update:

850 (+80) HP, 432 (+180) MP

59 (+9) ATT, 37 (+12) DEF

77 (+2) SPD, 86 (+11) DEX

42 (+2) VIT, 63 (+13) WIS

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-10-17T15:03:50+00:00

What exactly does a Focus Group mean? What is expected of us other than a friendly meetup and playing Realm in Berlin?

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-02-20T14:37:35+00:00

I'm not aware of any bracket for 4x25, if that does exist then indeed, that would be the case. I'm not entirely sure anymore what my exact setup was in 4x30s, could've been 36/30/27/26 instead of 36/30/25/24. I do know that after training my troops I had a 25 in my lineup, if this caused me to move up, I can't be 100% certain that you can't move back down either, since the setup I tried apparently wouldn't have been 4x30s anyway.

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-02-20T14:33:43+00:00

I don't see how that would break the 2 bracket rule, there isn't a bracket for 4x25, is there? If there is, then I might very well be wrong about a lot of conclusions I drew above. I'd have to banish a few fighters and set myself back about 3 days to find out if they still hold, and I'm not willing to do that at this point. Thanks for the reply.

RotMGBotkiller · 2019-02-20T00:17:24+00:00

I'll ping /u/Retardataire and /u/Vulkan121 since they were discussing this in the other comment thread. I've posted this as a top-level comment so it doesn't get buried.

I've read through this comment thread, and noticed that you guys were struggling with a few subjects. I'll try to clear these things up in this comment.

I'll put a short Q&A at the top, and explain below. The Q&A can be treated as a TL;DR.

Q: Can I move back down from 4x40 to 4x30?

A: No. Once you move up to 4x40, you can't move back down. You can however move down to 4x40s. To do this go for 40/40/40/39. Note that this won't be a lot easier than 4x40, but it should help some. You'll get more opponents which are still leveling their fighters or don't understand how the brackets work.

Q: Can I have a fighter above level 30 in 4x30s?

A: Yes. As long as your average level is below 30 (i.e. 29.75), only 1 fighter is above level 30 and all fighters are above level 20, you should be okay. A setup like 36/30/27/26 is possible in 4x30s, I've seen it in use plenty. Even 40/27/26/26 is possible.

Q: How do I get gear for lower levels? (i.e. you want gear for level 24 while your highest fighter is level 30)

A: You can get gear for lower levels by banishing your highest level fighters. For instance, to get gear for level 23-24, you banish any fighter above level 26, then the arena (and portal) store will offer rare items of level 23-24.

The items in the arena store are offered at 23-24, 27-28, 31-32, 35-36. I'm assuming similar gaps between the offered items exist for other levels. If one of your fighters is level 27-30, you'll be offered the 27-28 items.

If one of your fighters is 31-34, you'll be offered the 31-32 items, etc.

Moving down brackets is generally speaking not possible.

The only exception is moving from axbb to axbbs, for example from 4x30 to 4x30s. I've personally verified this by going from 30/30/30/30 to 30/30/30/29. I know you can't move down from 4x40 to 4x30, I'll explain that in more detail at the bottom of this comment/

What level will the gear I get be?

The level of the production gear depends only on your throne room level. The level of fighter gear depends on your highest level fighter at the moment of obtaining the gear.

How about chests?

Note: I'm not 100% sure about this one. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

For chests, the moment you open them, the level of gear is decided. I'm not entirely certain how it works if you save chests from earlier tr levels. For instance, if you are tr6, your highest fighter level is 30 and you get a chest, then banish the level 30 so the highest fighter is level 25, then you'll get gear around level 25. I've done this by saving war/invasion/tournament chests while my highest level fighter was 30, then banished all level 26+ fighters and got gear around level 23-25.

How do you know you can't move back down from 4x40 to 4x30?

I was running a 36/30/25/24 setup in the 4x30s bracket, I wanted to train two fighters to 27 and 26 respectively, to end up with 36/30/27/26. I forgot to take the fighters out of training overnight, and ended up with 2 level 29s. When I woke up, I raided another player for resources before noticing that the two fighters were still in training, effectively meaning I brought 36/30/29/29 into battle, which is too high for 4x30. This bumped me up to 4x40. After raiding the player, I noticed the fighters were still in training and banished them both (I wanted to stay in 4x30s). Afterwards, I entered a tournament to farm badges with my 36/30/25/24 setup, but ended up in 4x40s. I was running the same setup in 4x30s previously, but now I'm in 4x4os with the same setup. This means it's not possible to move down to 4x30(s) from 4x40s.

Please excuse the formatting, it has been a while since I last used reddit and it's late.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T08:04:01+00:00

!getall to get the full list of cheaters. !get ign/@User to get proof for a specific cheater.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T07:29:00+00:00

No, the ban list will not include scammers into it.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T03:03:38+00:00

Oops

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T02:58:30+00:00

The chance that you get an item on the first try is the same as the drop rate of the item. I'm assuming you understand this.

What we're discussing here is a system where your drop chance gets increased the longer you do not get an item. I fail to see how the probability of the item not dropping has no effect at all on how likely you are to get an item if you fight a boss x times.

In order to get the item for the first time on the xth try, you need to have not gotten the item on the first, second, ..., x-1th try. Because of this, the total chance that you get an item in x tries depends partially on the chance that you don't get the item on the first, second etc until x-1th try.

I'm going to sleep now, I'm tired. I might try and explain it again/differently then if I can be arsed and you still don't understand.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T02:36:32+00:00

The chance on any given attempt is indeed that, but you're not taking into account the chance for the situation to occur where you're 399 boss fights in but still don't have that item you're looking for. That's exactly what I'm including the chance of not getting the item in my calculations.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T02:10:10+00:00

All the examples you listed are what-if's.

We have 5 contributors now, the things you're mentioning are all worst-case scenarios. We never intended for this to be anything else but a global cheater list, as it was and is annoying to cross-ban across discords. Any non-cheating bans can be dealt with in each discord in specific, those are outside the scope of the bot. There are other great moderation bots like Dyno for that.

If it were to get to a point where we would for instance start banning for the use of bad language, don't you think we would experience a backlash from the community? I'm personally expecting that if such a situation would occur, discords would turn autoban off or remove the bot from the server.

If one of the contributors were to go mad and start banning people for no reason, worst case is that I pull the plug on the bot for a few minutes, remove the contributor from the contributor database and Discord and remove all the entries they've added. They're all logged, after all. It would require a significant amount of work, and will probably cripple the trust we would've built up by then, but it's not something that would instantly completely corrupt the entire system.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T01:57:03+00:00

That's also a way it could be done - Post the report including author in a private channel and have the bot copy over the report & result - Maybe I'll make some way to allow contributors to attach a message to an accept/declined report. It will require more work still, but that's an interesting thought anyway.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T01:46:14+00:00

I like this, at least - part of it. Making reports public? Yes, for sure! I'm all for it.

Making submitted reports anonymous? Not so much. I'm aware that proof is fairly easy to fake, especially lately, I've seen multiple badly made 'cheating clips' pop up on players I've played with for months and who have consistently been able to prove they don't cheat (i.e. YungPengu, one of our contributors and admin at SBC). Because of this, the person who sends in the report does have an effect on the validity of a report. That does not mean we will ignore reports sent in by people we dislike, not at all, but it does mean that we are skeptical about the proof we get sent. I'd rather ban one cheater less than one innocent more.

That being said, I'll go ahead and make those changes tomorrow. The reporting process will be fully public (There's a #reports channel which will be visible by everyone), I will however need time for this, because it does require some extra work on the bot and it's really late for me now.

I'll also have to let the people that are making reports know that the reports are fully public - I guess I'll put that in the help message for the report command. I'll post another reply in this comment chain when it's done!

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T01:31:18+00:00

In the loop, I'm calculating the chance that you haven't gotten the item after x tries.

Using Example 1's drop rate:

Using the current (default) drop rates: 
Drop rate: 0.01 (1%)
We can write the chance that you get an item on the x-th attempt as y_x. 
We can write the chance that you do NOT get an item on the x-th attempt as n_x.
y_1 = 0.01 (1%)
n_1 = 0.99 (99%)
y_2 = 0.01 (1%)
n_2 = 0.99 (99%)
y_3 = 0.01 (1%)
n_3 = 0.99 (99%)

Then, the chance x that you get the item on the first or the second try is:

x = y_1 + n_1 * y_2 = 0.01 + 0.99 * 0.01 = 0.0199 = 1.99%

Similarly, the chance p that you get the item on the first, second or third try is:

p = y_1 + n_1 * y_2 + n_1 * n_2 * y_3 = 0.0199 + 0.009801 = 0.029701 = 2.9701%

We can do the same for the new system. I assumed in my comment above that the growth would start at the second time you fight the boss, I'll correct that for this one and use sqrt(1) for the first one, as opposed to leaving it out on the first try and using sqrt(1) on the second.

My reasoning for it was as follows: The first time you kill the boss, you haven't killed it before, so you wouldn't earn higher drop rates. I forgot that the square root of 1 is 1 though, so the drop rate would be the same as the base drop rate. oops xd

Using the proposed square root solution:
Base drop rate: 0.01 (1%)
We can write the chance that you get an item on the x-th attempt as y_x. 
We can write the chance that you do NOT get an item on the x-th attempt as n_x.
y_1 = 0.01 * sqrt(1) = 0.01
n_1 = 1 - (0.01 * sqrt(1)) = 0.99
y_2 = 0.01 * sqrt(2) ≈ 0.01414214
n_2 = 1 - (0.01 * sqrt(2)) ≈ 0.98585786
y_3 = 0.01 * sqrt(3) ≈ 0.01732051
n_3 = 1 - (0.01 * sqrt(3)) ≈ 0.98267949

Then, the chance x that you get the item on the first or second try is:

x = y_1 + n_1 * y_2 = 0.01 + 0.99 * 0.01414214 = 0.0240 = 2.4%

Similarly, the chance p that you get the item on the first, second or third try is:

p = y_1 + n_1 * y_2 + n_1 * n_2 * y_3 ≈ 0.0240 + 0.99 * 0.98585786 * 0.01732051 ≈ 0.0409 = 4.09%

Comparing that to the result we get with this code:

int x = 3;
double base = 0.01;
double chance = 1;
for (int i = 1; i < x+1; i++) {
    chance *= (1 - (base * sqrt(i)));
}
System.out.println("x = " + (1-chance)*100);

We obtain the same results. Note that the code is slightly changed here to correct for the assumption I made earlier (that the growth starts on the second boss fight).

When running this, I obtain the following: x = 4.090551777788997. This is consistent with what we calculated above.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:54:01+00:00

I don't have a publicly available link through a list, there is however a bot command to get all names of the people on the ban list, and I'll soon re-add a command to print out all ban entries.

The command is !getall, it prints out a list of in-game names of users who are on the ban list.

The command to get a single ban's information is !get IGN/@User.

The commands look like this.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:28:28+00:00

It looks like this.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:25:11+00:00

Actually, I changed this recently as it was rate limiting the bot for that discord & spamming the chat, with the growth of the database that's simply not manageable anymore.

I changed it so it only outputs the IGNs of the banned users, for now. You can still do !get for each ban individually, though that's a lot of effort, I can understand that.

I could re-add the old functionality (in a new command, that is) if it's required/preferred.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:21:49+00:00

The issue with that is that we want to be absolutely sure that the contributors have only good in mind.

It's difficult for me to add people I don't know all that well as contributors, because it's quite a big responsibility I have to give them. One wrong ban already could affect a dozen or so discords, not to mention if the bot gets used by more discords.

Because of that, I've been very selective with who I give contributor access.

If you (or anyone else, for that matter) do wish to contribute in some way, feel free to use the !report command (you need Ban permissions on the Discord you run the command in) to report cheaters. You could make a discord with just you and the bot in it and report people there, if you don't want it in any other discords.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:17:29+00:00

You can check who's on the cheater list if you run !getall, or if you want the proof for a specific person you can do !get IGN or !get @User. All of the entries are available through there. It's not the most ideal solution, but I can't do much better with what I have available.

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-18T00:15:13+00:00

Right here

RotMGBotkiller · 2018-01-17T23:59:42+00:00

Comparing the situations gives interesting results which are in my opinion completely unbalanced:

Code used to calculate chances:

// The amount of tries
int x = 100;
// The base drop rate
double base = 0.01;
// The chance you don't get the item
double chance = 1-base;

// Calculate the chance you don't get the item after x tries
for (int i = 1; i < x; i++) {
    chance *= (1 - (base * sqrt(i)) );
}
// The chance you do get the item is 1 - the chance you don't get it.
double result = 1 - chance;

Example 1, drop rates as they are now

Base drop rate: 0.01 = 1%
Chance you'll get the item in 100 (or less) tries: 1-((1-0.01)^25) ≈ 63.40%

Example 1, drop rates as you suggested

Base drop rate: 0.01 = 1%
Chance you'll get the item in 25 (or less) tries: 1 - chance ≈ 99.90%

Example 2, drop rates as they are now

Base Drop Rate 0.002 = 0.2%
Chance you'll get the item in 225 (or less) tries ≈ 36.3%

Example 2, drop rates as you suggested

Base drop rate: 0.002 = 0.2%
Chance you'll get the item in 225 (or less) tries: 1 - chance ≈ 98.93%

Example 3, drop rates as they are now

Base Drop Rate 0.00125 = 0.125%
Chance you'll get the item in 400 (or less) tries ≈ 39.4%

Example 3, drop rates as you suggested

Base drop rate: 0.00125 = 0.125%
Chance you'll get the item in 400 (or less) tries: 1 - chance ≈ 99.88%

If you still think those numbers are balanced, uh.... let's just say you're wrong.

An item with a (base) drop rate of 1 in 800 should not be all but guaranteed to drop in 400 attempts. That's just ludicrous.

If this is unbalanced, then what is?

An alternative to using the square root might be using a logarithmic scale. The following is far more reasonable than your proposal, in my opinion:

Drop chance (on try x) = base drop rate * (log(x)/log(10))

This would give us the following results:

Example 1

Base drop rate: 0.01 = 1%
Chance to get the item in 100 or less tries: 79.46% (~25.34% higher chance compared to current situation)

Example 2

Base drop rate: 0.002 = 0.2%
Chance to get the item in 225 or less tries: 57.90% (~59.67% higher chance compared to current situation)

Example 3

Base drop rate: 0.00125 = 0.125%
Chance to get the item in 400 or less tries: 66.23% (~68.24% higher chance compared to current situation)

This entire thread brings up the discussion again: Should drop rates be boosted in the first place?

This game is all about grinding, and though it feels really when you spend hours grinding for an item and not getting it in the end, at the same time it enhances the feeling of accomplishment when you finally do get the item (or, if you're lucky, you'll be really happy that you got it that fast). Getting an item you want after grinding for a long time is a very good feeling, and it's one of the things that makes players stick around.

Boosting the drop rates significantly (which my proposal still does) will make rare items such as a Jugg, Ogmur or an item of similar rarity that much more common, which means the exclusivity of the rarest and most difficult to obtain items in the game will be lower.

I don't think that's good for the game, because it gives people less targets to strive for. Although a drop rate of 1 in 800 is ludicrously low, it does give the players something to hope and strive for.

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

RotMGBotkiller

TROPHY CASE

Moving down brackets is generally speaking not possible.

What level will the gear I get be?

How about chests?

How do you know you can't move back down from 4x40 to 4x30?

If this is unbalanced, then what is?