I figured I'd use numbers to argue how dumb Debating is in it's current state.

Tests are between myself and Elryn. We both had 18 charisma, and we are both trans influence.

Elryn attacking, winning every time against me:

Ego damage to me (defender):
1 win 830
2 wins 951
3 wins 1093
4 wins 1322
5 wins 1458
6 wins 1606
7 wins 1619
8 wins 1910
9 wins 1964
10 wins 2092
11 wins 2180
12 wins 2329
13 wins 2464
14 wins 2625
15 wins 2774
16 wins 2970
17 wins 3078
18 wins 3173
19 wins 3395
20 wins 3409
21 wins 3625
22 wins 3781
23 wins 3875
24 wins 4009
25 wins 4172
26 wins 4219
27 wins 4348


Elryn attacking, losing every time against me:

Ego damage to Elryn (attacker):
1 win 1724
2 wins 2426
3 wins 3197
4 wins 4126
5 wins 4767


Then we tested ties. Ties do not increase the damage of wins or losses, but they do increase the damage to the defender slightly. The first few ties did 130 damage to me (defender), and after 40 ties, they were doing 170. This increase is completely negligable and can be ignored.


So... in an equal debate, how are you supposed to win on attack? Can someone please tell me?

Did you try alternating win/loss, see what it does?

Did you try alternating win/tie, or loss/tie, see what it does?

The latter we did test. After 20 ties, a win and loss had approximately the same effect as if the debate had just started. After 40, they were both equivalent to the second hits in the original tests.

As for the former, I don't see why the results would be much different.

Because you can't assume it will have NO effect. Normal debating doesn't look anything like your test exchange and so you should establish that normal debating also looks like your exchange. Try logging a few real debates between the two of you and see what the deltas are when you win/lose/draw; see if they resemble the straight "always hit win" and "always hit loss" tests.

Loss damage:
1 loss 1622
2 losses 2465
3 losses 3268
4 losses 3970
5 losses 4781

Almost identical to the results Shorlen posted. There's no difference.

Good-o. Ok, thats pretty nasty.

Dont we know from months that agressive debating isnt good tactic??

And you have muhc higher chances of winning just changing mindsets?

Aye, but this proves that the problem exists, and is not being exaggerated.

3504h, 5004m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in his argument,
bringing up esoteric minutiae to support his radical theories. The logic of this
argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn DEBATING WITH PETTIFOGGERY (vs Analytical) BAD, CAU neu, PED best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3504h, 5049m, 4362e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
3504h, 5049m, 4627e, 10p, 14830en, 21837w exk-
Elryn passionately presents his case, fervently arguing his points with
emotional appeals. With absolutely no readily available facts upon which to
analyze the argument, you can only frown and shake your head in frustration,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PASSION (vs Analytical) neutral, PED worst, CAU best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
conceding this emotional outburst to Elryn.
3504h, 5049m, 4472e, 10p, 14830en, 21843w exk-
3504h, 5049m, 4472e, 10p, 14830en, 21825w exk-drink bromide

You take a drink from a sapphire vial.
Ah, the soothing bromides help strengthen your ego.
3504h, 5049m, 5241e, 10p, 14830en, 21837w exk-
Elryn unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in his argument,
bringing up esoteric minutiae to support his radical theories. The logic of this
argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn DEBATING WITH PETTIFOGGERY (vs Analytical) BAD, CAU neu, PED best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3504h, 5049m, 4233e, 10p, 14830en, 21843w exk-
You may drink another health, mana, or bromide potion.
3504h, 5049m, 4233e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
Elryn stares at you with a burning intensity.
3504h, 5049m, 4233e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-drink bromide

You take a drink from a sapphire vial.
Ah, the soothing bromides help strengthen your ego.
3504h, 5049m, 5020e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
3504h, 5049m, 5020e, 10p, 14830en, 21829w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5020e, 10p, 14830en, 21827w exk-
You may drink another health, mana, or bromide potion.
3504h, 5049m, 5285e, 10p, 14830en, 21827w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5285e, 10p, 14830en, 21833w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5285e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
Elryn unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in his argument,
bringing up esoteric minutiae to support his radical theories. The logic of this
argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn DEBATING WITH PETTIFOGGERY (vs Analytical) BAD, CAU neu, PED best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3504h, 5049m, 4138e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
3504h, 5049m, 4138e, 10p, 14830en, 21826w exk-drink bromide

You take a drink from a sapphire vial.
Ah, the soothing bromides help strengthen your ego.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21826w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21832w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21817w exk-
You may drink another health, mana, or bromide potion.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21802w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21814w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21826w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21838w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21824w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21836w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21842w exk-
Elryn passionately presents his case, fervently arguing his points with
emotional appeals. With absolutely no readily available facts upon which to
analyze the argument, you can only frown and shake your head in frustration,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PASSION (vs Analytical) neutral, PED worst, CAU best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
conceding this emotional outburst to Elryn.
3504h, 5049m, 5122e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5122e, 10p, 14830en, 21826w exk-
Elryn stares at you with a burning intensity.
3504h, 5049m, 5122e, 10p, 14830en, 21838w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
3504h, 5049m, 5122e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21834w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21846w exk-discern urazial
discern Elryn

3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
You stare deep into Elryn's soul and discern that:
Elryn's health stands at 3058/2780.
Elryn's mana stands at 4181/4220.
Elryn's ego stands at 2079/4940.
Elryn's power stands at 10/10.
3504h, 4824m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21840w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 4824m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21840w exk-sway

You sway back and forth.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn tells you, "Down to 159."
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn takes a drink from a ruby vial.
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn tells you, "I won't be able to match the log."
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-elryn Ew, you lose next time you lose

You tell Empath of Avaerin, Elryn Greythane, the Aether Ghost, "Ew, you lose
next time you lose."
3504h, 5049m, 5306e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
Elryn unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in his argument,
bringing up esoteric minutiae to support his radical theories. The logic of this
argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn DEBATING WITH PETTIFOGGERY (vs Analytical) BAD, CAU neu, PED best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3504h, 5049m, 3950e, 10p, 14830en, 21850w exk-
3504h, 5049m, 3950e, 10p, 14830en, 21825w exk-drink bromide

You take a drink from a sapphire vial.
Ah, the soothing bromides help strengthen your ego.
3504h, 5049m, 5083e, 10p, 14830en, 21837w exk-
Elryn unscrupulously quibbles about the smallest points in his argument,
bringing up esoteric minutiae to support his radical theories. The logic of this
argument is sound and you find yourself conceding to all the points raised.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn DEBATING WITH PETTIFOGGERY (vs Analytical) BAD, CAU neu, PED best
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3504h, 5049m, 3625e, 10p, 14830en, 21837w exk-
You may drink another health, mana, or bromide potion.

You take a drink from a sapphire vial.
Ah, the soothing bromides help strengthen your ego.
3504h, 5049m, 4349e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
YOU DO NOT HAVE ELIXIR BALANCE

(The Mes'ard Dynasty): Sarin says, "Is Ialie's contest still running?"
3504h, 5049m, 4349e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-
Elryn argues with sweeping authority, buttressing his broad claims with dogmatic
assumptions and justifications. With great glee, you rip apart his arguments
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elryn debating with PONTIFICATION (vs Analytical) Good! CAU worst, PED neu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
with brilliant logic, transforming the entire discourse into an example of
absurdity.
Face burning red, Elryn throws up his hands in exasperation and curses loudly,
obviously too discombobulated to engage in further debate.
After a long pause in you and your interlocutor's dialectic, you lose interest
-----------
DEBATE OVER
-----------
in the debate and let your mind drift to other things.
3504h, 5049m, 4349e, 10p, 14830en, 21839w exk-

The above log:
1 win 944
2 wins 1008
3 wins 1147
4 wins 1356
5 wins 1458

The test data:
1 win 830
2 wins 951
3 wins 1093
4 wins 1322
5 wins 1458


Proof: The test data is consistant (within the realm of randomness) with an actual debate situation.

Test this now:

Have the OTHER person debate you and Lose, then YOU debate them and Win.

Then repeat.

If what I've seen is correct, the Loss on THEIR side makes YOU much more powerful in your wins.

27 straight wins ~= 4 straight losses

==============================================

The prosecution calls our expert witness, Roark Libertas, to the stand!

Has anyone considered a rather simple way to fix it so that aggressive 2-way debating becomes viable?

Reverse the damage matrix so that 4 straigth agressive wins ~= 27 defensive wins

This would make offensive debating as a counter-attack stronger than just sitting and changing mindset.
the reversed escalation of ego damage would also obviate most the lateatia (?spelling?) complaints.

Absolutely terrible idea. The attacker has the advantage of controlling the flow and speed of the debate - this really is a nice advantage. Attack strength SHOULD be less than defence, but 1/5th is ridiculous. Should be more like 1/2.

Hence why there's a problem?

I think somebody with the hard date needs to BUG this ingame.

From the numerous posts Roark has posted on the subject, its SUPPOSE to be a virtual 1 for 1 or 1 for 2 ration, not a 5 for 1 ratio.

Make your bug report as complete as possible, because we can't grantee that Roark will see this thread.. however, Elryn or Shorlen should try to PM him or Lisarea or Estarra.

Thats just messed up!

I don't see why its such a terrible idea, could you explain more, or maybe I wasn't clear enough with my idea.

I would like it to be possible for the defender to retaliate not just with a mindset but with their own attack while the original atacker is regaining equilibrium - sort of like a riposte.

The only way I can think of the ensure defenders counter-attack is to make just sitting there changing mindsets a sure way of losing.

You wouldn't really try to win a duel just by maintaining an aura of rebounding
I don't see debates as being different.

If you are attacked (physically) and want to kill your attacker - you need to actively retaliate, I think debates should be the same.

I think to take into account, is the fact that you use up ego when attacking, so you have to imagine its like you use up health by attacking in combat.

However, thats why it should be something around 2 to 1 but 5 to 1 just seems too strong.

Well, hmm... thinking more about it, that would make debating a lot more volatile than it is now. To shatter someone who is influencing and unable to attack, you'd have to succeed four-five times for an instakill, or twice in a row. This isn't hard, especially when running for them will make the denizen so much harder to influence. This makes it entirely contingent on luck. As it stands, if you attack and lose, you can wait until you have the ego to attack and lose again without being shattered. Switching the situation around, you have no control of the speed of the debate while you are being horribly shattered, and this is bad. Losing 3,000+ ego per hit and being unable to sit out and recover is absurd. It's like a two knights fighting each other naked - there's just nothing you can do but run if you get hit first, since the second hit will kill you if you don't have time to heal to full.

Attacking should be viable, but to make it five times as strong as it is now is just absurd in my eyes. Debates need to happen faster, so I wouldn't say that defence needs to be toned down, but rather offense should gain in strength two or three times faster than it does now, so three hits in a row kill someone without a chanter, instead of two (which is just too low) or the current nine.




No you don't, only when attacking denizens You only lose ego on a loss, not on a win or tie.

Generally arn't you influencing a denizen when someone is trying to stop you?

I plan to bring it up at the Envoy summit (if permitted), so it should be heard.

I'd also question why attack should be less than defence. It is similar to wishing to stop someone who is killing a denizen loyal to your organization. They are being hit by the loyal, and yourself, yet they do not have many mechanisms to passively hurt you for attacking. Also keep in mind that I would hope debate strategy eventually requires two active participants to make an equal battle. If defensive losses are as heavy or more than attacks, then the strategy of waiting for a loss before hitting remains the most effective. Again placing the advantage firmly in the defender's court.

My suggestion in the envoy report was as follows:


The numbers in the first point are a bit arbitrary, I'm hoping that the admin can determine appropriate weighting when made aware of the problems.