Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

Bob
I think we're starting to get a little too deep into the details of what a backdated XP system might look like. A little detail is good, enough to see that there are promising ways to implement it that most of us could feel comfortable with. Before we spend more time designing it out, we need to see where it might fit as we reconsider the Road Map. Overall though, I think it's clear that there's a lot of interest in such a feature, and that at some point we'll want to take a more serious look at it.
Bob
Well, just tried an experiment myself and it looks like there may very well be something weird going on with the math. Bug filed.
Bob
Giorgio
I want to pay for XP I am missing on my active accounts for this months where I couldn't pay the $15 subscription fee due to financial difficulties.

If GW knows:
_ The day I first activated an account.
_ How much XP I should have accumulated from then until today, if I had paid the monthly fee every month.
- How much XP I actually have spent/accumulated, that I paid for.

Then it can take the max XP - actual XP = XP not accumulated/paid for, and give me an option to pay for that missing XP?

I will not be adding or gaining any additional XP above that what I would have earned if I could have paid my monthly subscription without any interruption.

No respect needed, no extra advantages, just want to pay for XP I couldn't pay for in the past, but now I have the income to do so now. Is this possible?

There's probably a way to figure out for each character what their theoretic maximum XP would be if they'd stayed active ever since they were created, and then to let players add XP up to that maximum. However, it would probably be easier to just make one system that let anyone purchase XP within certain limits, and we would probably want any such general system to let new players who just created accounts catch up. It might not let you catch all the way up to where you could be if you'd stayed active from day 1, but it would probably let you eventually get close enough.
Bob
Giorgio
Flari-Merchant
Edit: You know what though? If all of the objections about Pay-to-win, character power, and being able to use xp with unfair hindsight could be overcome, COULDN"T BACKDATED "xp-catchup" be done on a player by player basis without having to write code and spend GWinvest$$$ to make it happen?

XP catch up on a player by player basis? That's a good question to ask Bob. smile

If this were something that would only come up a few times, then maybe it could be handled player by player. However, I suspect there'd be enough demand for this over time that we'd be better off investing the time in an actual system for it. Assuming we decided to go down this road, I suspect it wouldn't be too hard to implement the kinds of restrictions that would likely be designed into it.
Bob
harneloot
That would be much preferably IMHO. Thanks.

Okay, I'll take a closer look at adding Ability=30 alternatives to all the rank 3 armor proficiencies to match rank 14 armor weight keywords and their ability prerequisites. I don't think it would be too hard to sort out and am pretty sure it won't cause balance problems. It will be a while before I can get to it, so anyone else who has concerns about such a change has a little time to chime in before I implement this.
Bob
Flari-Merchant
Hopefully, GW/Paizo has definitive records of how much XP each account has paid for and can eventually consider offering "Respect/Rebuilds" as a kindly reward for all of us loyal fans that have hung in so long.

Respecs are technically possible, but there are significant balance issues associated with them. Given how interconnected achievements, ability scores and feat pre-requisites are, things would get very complicated quickly unless we treated respecs as simply a choice of "starting over" with all (or maybe just most) of your XP returned. Not saying lesser respecs would be impossible, just that they'd be pretty tricky.
Bob
harneloot
Sure, there are various ways to get Con in the game and some of them are even useful to a Heavy Weapon combat toon and requiring Con 16 is perfectly reasonable. Requiring Con 20 is not. (I do appreciate you looking into it and posting your thoughts, even though I disagree that it is fine left as is).

Well, another possibility would be to just add a Strength=30 alternative to Medium Armor Proficiency 3 (and add similar alternatives to the other armor proficiencies where appropriate. That would mean you'd still need to get Archer 9, Healer 9 or Evangelist 9, which in turn would mean that you'd need Dexterity or Wisdom at 16 and Constitution at 12. Fortunately, I don't think adding Ability=30 alternatives to those armor proficiencies would provide too many untoward advantages, since there's really not much point in picking up an extra proficiency unless you either have the weight keyword from an armor feat at rank 14, or you're picking up higher levels of the associated armor feats that require the original ability scores anyway. It would also help minimize the imbalance where some characters earning weight keywords at rank 14 get to re-use an associated ability score at 20 and others don't. Some would probably still find it easier to get the needed armor feats to rank 9, but getting a less-desired ability score up to 16 doesn't seem like a big ask when a character already has one ability score up to 30.
Bob
HowardWdW
There appears to be a bug on T2 gushers. Every single pull takes about 15 seconds, which means T2 gushers take longer to harvest than any other gusher as you get only 6 pulls between invasions.

Harvesting speed gets divided by the tier of the resource being harvested, which should result in T2 gushers taking twice as long between pulls as a T1 gusher if both of them used the same kit. If you use a tier-appropriate kit for each type of gusher (T1 +X for T1, T2 +X for T2), the math tends to work out so that T2 gushers take just slightly longer between pulls than T1.

As you note, harvesting speed really only speeds things up if the faster pulls result in more pulls between invasion waves. That does make the overall speed calculations a little bit jumpy, since the number of pulls between waves that gets added by each upgrade isn't distributed perfectly evenly. I'll file a bug to see about some solutions for that, but with 6 pulls between invasions, it shouldn't be causing too great a disparity. Worst case, that particular kit is just barely missed getting 7 pulls instead, in which case the overall harvesting process would involve about 15% more invasion waves than it might have otherwise. That's not insignificant, but in such cases, there should be a point where upgrading by +1 or +2 will pull that disparity back in and thus result in a larger than expected reduction in the total number of invasion waves.
Bob
Edam
If you give new players the ability to pay cash and create an optimised "day one" character without all the sidetracking that took place as the game changed (archers that now craft etc) you are going to have to give existing players the ability to totally respec their builds or their will be a riot. This could open quite a can of worms. Its not as if gaining achievements is going to limit anyone that is part of an active group. Not only that the ability to respec would need to become a permanent option in the game.

That is a distinct concern with backdating XP, and part of the reason why it would need so much discussion. Another option is for us to regulate the rate at which players can apply backdated XP, so that new players couldn't just catch up immediately. We could even limit things so that they can't catch all the way up. I'm pretty sure there's a balanced way to include backdated XP, but it will be tricky to get right.
Bob
I think you can probably get to about 16 by going to Recovery 10, Great Fortitude 5 and Encumbrance 7. You should meet the CON requirements for all those, and there's a good chance you meet most of the other requirements, though it's certainly possible you need more of some specific Category Points for some of those. Once you're at 16, you can then pick up Fortitude 10 and Hit Points 20, which would get you a little over another 1/2 point. You'd also get .18 CON by taking the other armor feat to rank 9. There are probably a few other sources of CON that you'd find directly useful, but they probably aren't very efficient, so I'm not sure how much more you could get easily.

I admit that still leaves almost 3 1/2 points to go, and that much probably does require branching out a bit more. Miner would be a great way to go, and could actually get you all the way there, but I know from experience how slow it can be hitting those gathering achievements. The fastest route would probably be to pick up some ranks in Sawyer, Smelter and/or Tanner. Those are all theoretically useful, at least in that you can sell their output, but I also know crafting's not everyone's cup of tea.

And, of course, even if I let Dragoon 14 count for the feat prerequisite, you'd still have to meet those ability requirements unless I threw on something like a Strength=30 alternative as well. That could work, but is admittedly starting to get a bit convoluted. These things get complicated fast.