TOPIC: Build Diversity

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

Just trying to see if I understand this...

New tokens might reduce build diversity.
See, this is a token that would result in loss of build diversity.
New tokens are worse than reprints.

Is that what was just proposed?

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

So would a token that auto solved every puzzle in the dungeon. Neither of those absurdities would ever be made.

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

So would a token that auto solved every puzzle in the dungeon. Neither of those absurdities would ever be made.

So are your saying that a new token would never be made that would reduce diversity?

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

So would a token that auto solved every puzzle in the dungeon. Neither of those absurdities would ever be made.

So are your saying that a new token would never be made that would reduce diversity?

Actually you were saying that first.

Brad Mortensen wrote: There are a lot of countervailing forces at play.

There’s a strong lobby for build diversity.
There’s another strong lobby to reprint older BIS tokens. There are a few who want it both ways, but I think it’s not possible to do both.

The bad news is, they are at odds. People demand reprints of older tokens instead of alternatives, no matter how good they are. When Jeff acquiesces, that BIS token is more firmly locked in, and the cheaper price makes it more so. Worse, it takes up a spot in that year’s release that could have been used for a diversity token.

If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

I don’t think you can make them both happy in the current environment. We have to pick one. For now, the de facto consensus appears to be that diversity is just not that important. It’s a shame, really.

If you really want build diversity...

I mean, you REALLY want build diversity...

Like, if build diversity is the number one issue that deserves fixing...

Then you need to implement rules on what is allowed to be equipped and what is not, and put expiration dates on tokens.

The problem is every token ever printed for the past sixteen years with few exceptions is entirely allowed to be used in the dungeon, which is what is making the whole reprint issue such a hot contention on the secondary market.

If you wanted to see immediate build diversity, then change the rules to say that only tokens released within the last three years are allowed to be equipped, including legendaries. Sort of like how Magic has Standard format. In fact, just flat out have three dungeons that are "Standard" format, where only tokens released within the past three years are allowed to be equipped. Run those dungeons at any/all cons.

Then offer one dungeon that is formatted to allow all tokens ever made. Call it "Classic" or "Legacy" format, and only run it at GenCon.

Collectors don't have to throw out their entire collection, and build diversity becomes based around what is allowed. Reprints become more meaningful for the current format, and more predictable overall as there wouldn't be any point in reprinting something until at least five years or more after its most recent printing.

But good luck floating that massive change through the congregation...

That would not create build diversity (unless you mean year to year). People would just have BiS of whatever year restrictions you place. And thus have the same builds as everyone else.

macXdmg wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Harlax wrote:

Endgame wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: I’m sorry, but I don’t understand how a new token reduces diversity. I do understand that you believe it. So that’s all I have on the subject.

imagine new gloves: +10 spell damage, + 10 str and +10 dex.

It’s a new token. It will reduce build diversity because It’s better than most (all?) other gloves.

Heads would explode if that was proposed. Brad's not least.

Certainly - but it made the point that a new token could reduce build diversity.

Just trying to see if I understand this...

New tokens might reduce build diversity.
See, this is a token that would result in loss of build diversity.
New tokens are worse than reprints.

Is that what was just proposed?

No.

tl;dr version:
Build diversity options exist in the token set. However, due to low quantities produced, you rarely see old tokens. New tokens don't help diversity wise - if you can't buy any of the older tokens, your only option is to get the new stuff, so everyone who started in, say, 2018 will have the same tokens in that slot.

the long version:

I'm going to stick with the gloves example.

Reference how these options can be used for different builds here:
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&defaultmenu=141&catid=615&id=250024&start=24#347938
and here:
truedungeon.com/forum?view=topic&defaultmenu=141&catid=615&id=250024&start=72#348593

When it comes to printed quantities vs diversity, if we had:

100 mithral gauntlets produced
500 gloves of weapon finesse
1000 gloves of the brute
1000 gloves of linked fury (500 turned in to build death cleavers)

we have a limited supply of 2,100 combat gloves. Checking the top players list, it looks like there are over 140,000 registered players. Lets say 1% already has UR combat gloves and they aren't going to give them up (1,400), and 5% of that number want UR melee combat gloves but they don't have them - we need 7000 gloves, only 700 gloves are available, so probably 6300 players will continue using their rare gloves (gauntlets of ogre power / midgard serpent most likely).

Now lets say for 2021, we make a new UR glove (+3 str, +2 dex). All 6,300 players that want UR gloves but can't get them buy the new gloves. We get... 6,300 players all using the same new token, and no change diversity.

Now, to be fair, this is going to happen if we reprint Mithral gauntlets as well, in that 6,300 players that want UR gloves are going to jump on those. On the plus side, we don't creep power at all. And, if in 2022, we reprint Gloves of linked fury, some people with swap / upgrade their mithral gauntlets for linked fury, and we still don't power creep. In 2023, reprint weapon finesse, and some more trades in builds will happen, and there is still no creep.

In the reprint case we start getting diversity again over time and we don't creep at all, which makes balancing for UR token levels a sustained affair for 4 years in a row.

Hawk Fingle wrote:

Brad Mortensen wrote: There are a lot of countervailing forces at play.

There’s a strong lobby for build diversity.
There’s another strong lobby to reprint older BIS tokens. There are a few who want it both ways, but I think it’s not possible to do both.

The bad news is, they are at odds. People demand reprints of older tokens instead of alternatives, no matter how good they are. When Jeff acquiesces, that BIS token is more firmly locked in, and the cheaper price makes it more so. Worse, it takes up a spot in that year’s release that could have been used for a diversity token.

If we truly want diversity, then we should stop reprinting old stuff. If we want cheap reprints, then we should concede we’re not going to have diversity.

I don’t think you can make them both happy in the current environment. We have to pick one. For now, the de facto consensus appears to be that diversity is just not that important. It’s a shame, really.

If you really want build diversity...

I mean, you REALLY want build diversity...

Like, if build diversity is the number one issue that deserves fixing...

Then you need to implement rules on what is allowed to be equipped and what is not, and put expiration dates on tokens.

The problem is every token ever printed for the past sixteen years with few exceptions is entirely allowed to be used in the dungeon, which is what is making the whole reprint issue such a hot contention on the secondary market.

If you wanted to see immediate build diversity, then change the rules to say that only tokens released within the last three years are allowed to be equipped, including legendaries. Sort of like how Magic has Standard format. In fact, just flat out have three dungeons that are "Standard" format, where only tokens released within the past three years are allowed to be equipped. Run those dungeons at any/all cons.

Then offer one dungeon that is formatted to allow all tokens ever made. Call it "Classic" or "Legacy" format, and only run it at GenCon.

Collectors don't have to throw out their entire collection, and build diversity becomes based around what is allowed. Reprints become more meaningful for the current format, and more predictable overall as there wouldn't be any point in reprinting something until at least five years or more after its most recent printing.

But good luck floating that massive change through the congregation...

I don't think that would create diversity - it would just create a much smaller token pool, which makes it easier to identify and create BiS builds.

If you want true diversity, go Living Card Game style. Any UR token or lower in token DB is available for purchase. All transmute recipes live forever.

I’ve seen it said before that four gloves that boost strength is not build diversity.

Also 6k people with a new different UR (I think that is what you’re implying would happen) would by the same logic be build diversity If reprints would be build diversity.

Build diversity relies on people playing a class different ways with equally viable and reasonable builds. Say a melee build and a ranged build and an other build (for EVERY class) that if not equal in all respects are legitimately viable.

If build diversity is just people playing with different tokens at any given level, then I would say normal is likely there, hardcore might need some work, and legitimately only the highest tiers needs to worry about it. And they play with URs only if there isn’t a legendary or relic for the slot. Best way to fix that is start having Relics every year (5 to 10) and half don’t work with the other half. To keep it in the gloves wheel house, make a supreme ultra magical ranges powerhouse (one dps better than the UR level now) and make a gloves slot that does the same for melee single hand weapons, and a third for two handed attacking (which may include both ranged and melee or something).

It may also provoke collectors to make three relics for options (sorry Trent for suggesting more tokens a year) and soak some garbage mats also. There might be real diversity then in build discussions about dps, defense, and a none retribution build setup. Probably not, I think DPS is still preferred if ac, saves and attack can get high enough. Get real greedy make a to hit gloves the same year, throw hit vs dps into the diversity conversation.

macXdmg wrote: I’ve seen it said before that four gloves that boost strength is not build diversity.

Build diversity relies on people playing a class different ways with equally viable and reasonable builds. Say a melee build and a ranged build and an other build (for EVERY class) that if not equal in all respects are legitimately viable.

This is really beyond the scope of tokens though - that requires character card redesigns that allow for different build options.. Even THEN, we can go meta and ask, is it really that different to boost + damage for melee weapons vs + damage for ranged?

macXdmg wrote: Also 6k people with a new different UR (I think that is what you’re implying would happen) would by the same logic be build diversity If reprints would be build diversity.

Yes, I did mention that. In this case, however, at least with the reprints we don't creep anything that isn't already available to some small percentage of TD players.

Here is a crazy thought - just do 1 year that is 20+ UR reprints and cover the slots that have lots of viable options with minimal market access. That should get some diversity out there with minimal RnD cost.

macXdmg wrote: If build diversity is just people playing with different tokens at any given level, then I would say normal is likely there, hardcore might need some work, and legitimately only the highest tiers needs to worry about it.

Generally agree - at UR and lower token levels there is quite a bit of variety in token DB. Availability is a different question, but the possibility to have runs where there are minimal duplicate tokens on each build exist.

macXdmg wrote: And they play with URs only if there isn’t a legendary or relic for the slot. Best way to fix that is start having Relics every year (5 to 10) and half don’t work with the other half. To keep it in the gloves wheel house, make a supreme ultra magical ranges powerhouse (one dps better than the UR level now) and make a gloves slot that does the same for melee single hand weapons, and a third for two handed attacking (which may include both ranged and melee or something).

It may also provoke collectors to make three relics for options (sorry Trent for suggesting more tokens a year) and soak some garbage mats also. There might be real diversity then in build discussions about dps, defense, and a none retribution build setup. Probably not, I think DPS is still preferred if ac, saves and attack can get high enough. Get real greedy make a to hit gloves the same year, throw hit vs dps into the diversity conversation.

I agree that at relic and legendary levels, there isn't a whole lot of variety because there just aren't that many tokens at this level.