Im pretty sure inflation in 8 years where going from two digit numbers to numbers in the millions would be pretty unhealthy for any economy. And you can pretty easily deal with a currency where you pay lets say 20.000€ for a middle class car, that's not such a huge number, unlike with other currencys like Greece used to have where you payed billions for the same car because their money was worth shit (so is their economy btw) see where i'm going to?However, inflation in economics is a semi-natural process. It is deflation which is ruinous and avoided like plague. But people, who don't like big numbers, are usually not good in economics either. I wonder how such people are dealing with currency even on most basic level, or are they trashing away everything which exceeds 999,99 $? If so, just send all exceeds to me, I am not "afraid" of big numbers
And yeah ppl that support exponential inflation are surely market brokers because exponential inflation is the best thing to have in an economy /sarcasm
||i5 3570k @ 4.4GHz||H100 push/pull||AsRock Z77 Extreme4||16Gb G.Skill Ripjaws 1600MHz||Gigabyte Windforce GTX 970|| Coolermaster Storm Trooper||Corsair TX850 Enthusiast Series||Samsung 840 Pro 128gb(boot drive)||1TB WD HDD, 2x 3TB WD HDD, 2TB WD HDD||
Bdk Nagrand / Astae Nagrand
Pokemon X FC: 4656-7679-2545/Trainer Name: Keno
The problem is not to avoid it, the problem is that avoiding it costs memory and processing power. I assume that in WoW every fight goes through their servers, so having them compute a LOT of operations with large numbers instead of low numbers matters
What i ment was that by exceeding the limit they would have to use other data types and probably change some of the programming or have overflowing structures, a long int can handle 2,147,483,647 which is pretty close to where we would be 1 to 2 expansions from now. I don't know where you got the unsigned int from but as far as i know that's not the type they use, i could be wrong on this point though.This is what you said, there is nothing about getting close to the number limit of an unsigned int, which is 18446744073709551616. We are far far away from it.
And that is if they use integer for HP.
Computers gets faster and faster every year and numbers gets bigger naturally and they will be able to keep up with the DPS numbers players will be doing. A squish in stats is just wrong and for it to work you need a new game. People will adjust to the new number scales and adding prefixes will help a lot to like the commas they added in MoP. I cant really care about if I am doing 1.4 tera DPS or 1.7 Giga DPS all i care about is if I can be doing 23 mega dps and I am doing 19 mega damage I am doing bad.
The only problem with is how do you display numbers on the screen. A easy option would be just have a option to simplify your damage like instead of 1000000000 make it 1000M or 1G or color code it or simply have a option to divide all numbers by 1000 or something similar. Already I can see this problem on like recount if I disabled simplify numbers because reading a 6 digit number is really hard without commas or anything but recount already have a option to simplify it to K, M and same deal again with mob healths
Giving candy to a child only to take it away later is unethical and immoral. It should be punishable in the same way that treason is.
A true Patriot fights for their country, not for their government.
@op: nice for you to have an oppinion but wheres your PROVE? everybody can speculate...
I have not the slightest clue what servers they use now what servers they used 8 years ago and what upgrades they have made in between so i just assume the worst case scenario. Since this was their main reason for bringing up the item squish in the first place i'm pretty sure they must have had some reason behind it2.147.483.647 is 32 bits. Do you honestly think that a server with thousands of connections will be 32 bits?
The problem is that the exponential nature of current scaling means that sooner or later we will end up with absolutely ridiculous numbers on everything. We're already looking at over 1000 of a primary stat on some items - just take a moment to realise how crazy that is, when only 30 levels ago, in the best gear possible you had around 300 of a primary stat on your entire character.
I think people have lost sight of what itemlevel is all about - it used to be almost directly related to character level. A level 60 would be finding level 60 item level drops, and that was level appropriate gear. However, in order to allow progression at the level cap, the item level rose above the player level, to allow an increase of stats. Given multiple tiers, this rose fairly quickly.
The problem was now that the level of the character was no longer proportionate to the gear - in TBC if they had just made all of the items the same item level and stat budget as the vanilla items, Naxx and AQ40 gear would be so powerful (still) that it would not have been replaced by any of the levelling items, and probably not even by anything in the first tier, so while an exponential model made sense at this stage, once we got to end game in TBC, and once again multiple tiers, the item level just got higher and higher and higher, and further aware from our character level.
The only way this could have been prevented is if the level cap had been increased by 60 at the start of each expansion, or there was only one tier of gear at end game, both not very good solutions. However we are now at the point where the scaling has gotten out of hand, and the gap between tiers and expansions is too big. While I do want to return to vanilla/TBC number values, there's no elegant solution, and there's nothing especially broken with it now from what I can tell.
TL-DR version: There's no objective reason to do an item squish and there are a huge number of pitfalls to rebalancing a game the size of WoW, so a squish is a huge risk for minor (if any) payoff.
So remind me why the game needs an item squish when addons can do it for you?
Well assuming you want to reduce the numbers.
The iLevel chart spoke pretty clearly that we would lose relative power to older content.
Thanks, but I'd rather see high numbers than get nerfed just so people with dyscalculia will have less of an issue.
Computing power? puh-lease, there's no noticeable difference between computing time between small and large numbers. As long it's not crossing any integer limits there's zero issue.
There's always Hamster.