I’m gonna compare this Battleborn ‘Hunt’ event to the Borderlands ‘The Hunt’ event.
Do we need to use the same name, ‘The Hunt’ or can we call it ‘Gear Up’ or ‘Armageardon’ ?
With Borderlands you can do a clean start, so you don’t have any items/money/etc. With Battleborn that isn’t possible. So i think we need to work around that. Because you could stack up money or gear packs prior to the event. Borderlands does allow there gear from ‘Any’ loot source. If you are required to get a specific legendary gear from the general loot source (gear packs) this could become a painful grind. So if all players start with less then 2500 credits (price of a core loot pack) we could add any general legendary item as bonus points. Players with access to Story Operations are able to grind for Commander Faction Packs. These do have an increased chance of dropping legendaries. So these players could have an advantage.
Farming in Borderlands is a bit easier, because you can load in from various check points to shorten your travel time and speed up the farming process.
Borderlands has more unique drops. various enemies or certain quests give out specific items. With Battleborn only mid-bosses and end-bosses drop unique legendary gear.
Prizes: GBX is providing some prizes for battleborn tournaments. unique shift codes for loot & skins.
I think it would make it easier to compare it to the Borderlands version by giving it a similar name. If you give it a custom one, you then have to explain it to someone who doesn’t understand that we are super puntastic around here. Alternatively those other names could be slogans and catch phrases (pictures a banner with “The Hunt 2017: Battleborn Edition” and then underneath Oscar Mike would be saying, “Holy crap! It’s the Armageardon!” and/or “Oscar Mike is telling you to Gear Up!”, etc).
Making it a requirement that people participating have to be streaming could alleviate this somewhat. You could also take stock of what they have on them at the start and at the end if they have less credits than what they started with then you can assume they have spent some of their credits from prior. You’d also have your inventory sorted by most recently obtained so they can’t include items obtained before the event started.
The UI I’d build for it would also create a timestamp for when they get something so you could theoretically do a couple of quality checks to prevent cheating.
This is a super radical idea, but Gearbox could create a Title that while worn disables gear obtained outside the date range of the event (which we know are being timestamped since you can sort them by date). Combining that with the stocktake of your credits, that should actually cut down on a lot of holes with running it off an account with hours played on it already. While I don’t yet have access, the devs should also be able to check your account to confirm all the gear you said you obtained during the event are legit without having to check each person’s stream for confirmation. @Jythri would any of this be possible at all??
Score legendary gear on whether it can be dropped on Advanced or Normal only.[/quote]
It’s also important to try and normalize the value of story missions that have different sized loot tables: Algorithm has 10 possible drops (5 on Norm; all 10 on Adv); Sentinel and Saboteur have 8; Void and Experiment have 6; and Renegade, Heliophage, and Archive only have 4. As such, the loot from the “stingier” missions should be worth more to encourage people to do the missions more.
If we assume that all legendaries within a given drop pool have the same drop rate (not that I believe this, but there hasn’t been any statement of the contrary from the devs), my recommendation would then be to figure out a score for each story mission based upon relative difficulty and distribute the score across all drops from that mission equally (if we learn that they’re not all equal, we distribute the scores across the items based upon their relative rarity).
If we had access to the full trove of dev information, we could get some pretty good info on fail/success rates (ignore failures that occur before the first quest advancement because those are the suicide credit ones, though I’m curious if there are enough of those to actually make a significant impact) and completion times to actually create a difficulty grade ((100 / median completion time) / (total successes / total non-suicide attempts)) for that specific mission and difficulty.
Since we don’t have access to that information, and, while I could throw up numbers that make sense for me, I’m not sure how well they grok with the experiences of the rest of the community. As such, it might just be best to make all missions equal and just assume that competitors will do the easy missions first before moving on to the harder/more time consuming/less efficient fare (like Heliophage Advanced).
Of course, we could just abandon all pretense of trying to make all of the different missions equally appealing and instead focus on simplicity. If we do this, we just give every legendary the same score and acknowledge that people are going to farm Algorithm, Sentinel, and Saboteur way in excess of Archive or Heliophage.
On the other hand, I think this might be a good way to, as a community, encourage people (especially newbies) to get gear that makes for good loadouts. We could more heavily weigh the most useful legendaries (i.e. make a more comprehensive version of what I did here) and even include the most useful of the non-legendary pieces.
Really, I’m curious what the actual goals of the Loot Hunt should be, other than just giving people stuff to do:
Are we trying to encourage people to run all of the different story missions? If so, we need to normalize the score that you can get from each.
Are we trying to just get people to go out and expand their collection of legendaries? If so, we just need to have people scored on how many different legendaries they collect.
Are we trying to get people to collect specific legendaries? If so, we need to assign scores to the different legendaries based on whatever criteria are decided upon.
If we can actually answer what kind of behavior we want to encourage, it can go a long way towards figuring out what our scoring methodology should be.
I’d probably just make it a binary “Max or Junk roll”. Junk (i.e. non-max) rolls give half points. Max rolls already have something like a 50% chance of happening (based on my experiences) so it’s already weighed in the player’s favor and just having to know a single value (the max roll) will make it easier to decide to farm it again or not.
I wouldn’t count them at all, honestly. I also wouldn’t count Loot Pack legs because that gives people with substantial existing wealth a major advantage (not to mention that people can get them via PvPing, which I don’t think is intended; also, they’re insanely RNG dependent; I’ve been trying to the single legendary that I’ve been missing for nearly a month now and it’s incredibly exasperating).
Not sure I agree with this. There are only 2 ops legendaries at the moment so it won’t really skew the results much. I can see the reasoning but I’m not sure it’s necessary (and would also encourage people to try out the ops).
Of course, if we apply score based upon difficulty and completion time, the ops legs are going to be low scoring anyways (since the ops take 20 minutes and don’t really have mandated failure points like the worst of the story missions).
As someone who doesn’t like stream and recognizes the difficulty in regularly finding a spectator, I have what’s probably an “easier” solution:
A screenshot (or screenshots) of your entire gear bank before entering (in the “most recent” sorting method, which I don’t believe many people use for regular storage) and one at completion (the order of gear at the end should be the same as the first set of screen shots, allowing us to ensure that anything afterwards is new gear). Just require people turn in their “end of hunt” screenshots before the time limit runs out and it should curtail cheating.
I was actually thinking of the screenshot idea in my head when I was thinking about ways to lock down potential holes for cheating, but then I thought about what would be involved with uploading and storing said images. Though if I think about it, having a “Event Drops” thread on the forums and on Discord running alongside the event would be a relatively easy way for people to log their progress. You could also set up a community on PSN (I assume there is an equivalent on Xbox?) for logging there too since its a pain to upload screenshots from a console to anywhere that’s not a chat for social media.
Lots of great points to think about here which is exactly why I called you away from your Legendary grind
Are we talking a discussion channel or one for tracking drops? I’d wait for the latter until we have figured out all the details first. The Borderlands Hunt event was apparently in the planning stages for about a month, I made this post like 3 hours ago.
I would suggest it be 2 forum threads. People will post their entry screenshot(s) in one thread and then post their “final tally” screenshot(s) in another (I could see allowing people to post multiple times in the final tally thread but disallow any edited posts to prevent cheating by editing in something after the fact).
Also, I should be able to pull in both Twitter and Discord into a single media feed to go with the stats page idea. I might be able to pull in screenshots posted from other sources but I won’t know until I’ve had a look (ie I could probably page scrape a forum thread). It gets more tricky when you start dealing with private access stuff.