Remove xp penalty's from death

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Moosifer wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

@Moosifer: what I'm trying to figure out is map sustainably. Of the 20-30 78s you were running per day, about how many bought, how many found?

Because 78s were 15c (which sold quickly) to 20c, I just didn't want to be spending that much buying maps. I also didn't want to go below 76 (ended the league with almost a page of 75s and sold probably a full page or more) so I'd buy 76s for 5c and 77s for 7-10c. I'd say I had to have bought in the ballpark of 50-100, maybe 20 total 78s. It's hard to recall exactly but I remember 2-3 times buying 20+ 77s and one guy who was doing ubers sold me at least 40-50 76s.

Also I'd say around 96 or so, I was only regaling 77/78s and I was only chiseling 78s. The time it took me to replenish my 78 pile was usually enough time to find enough hammers to qual them up. Also had some friends doing lower maps feeding me chisels for free/deep discount.

So I think it is safe to say that 95-100 mapping is a net loss endeavour as far as stash wealth goes; you invest more than you get out, ignoring nontradeables such as XP and time. This is what I expected.

However, as long as players are still trying for level 100, the untradeable quantity XP must have value - specifically, enough to satisfy the inequality

trade value (map + rolling currency) + time < trade value (map loots) + XP

which approximately simplifies to

trade (map + rolling - loots) + time < XP

Thus, if mapping is ran at a defecit, then there exists some monetization of XP, some number where even if time is worth nothing, some amount of currency is worth some amount of XP.

Based on Moosifer's numbers, that amount seems to be about 5-10c per 1% lvl99 XP.

So if there were some way I could lower the XP component for death penalty to 2%, then add a penalty which hits lvl99 players for somewhere in the neighborhood of 10 chaos, that's what I'd do. For high mappers, the main difference would be time - it would have cost at least 10c to earn back 3% XP, so I just took the chaos & fast-forwarded to now.

I honestly think GGG should have gone with the genre standard and included some form of durability system. Whether the durability is repairable (talk to some NPC when you die) or not (die too often, replace your gear), it sets a small economic cost on death which a player who doesn't die often could potentially just ignore.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

goetzjam wrote:

@ScrotieMcB

I like how you neglecting to reply to my post.

At level 99 the difference between running a low 70 map and a 78 map is very small. If you have the time watch HvC's video on min-mapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1yUzXoPvdE

1. This is part of why I included time as a variable. 5-8M XP/hr is faster than 2-4M XP/hr. HvC is basically saying his time isn't worth that much currency. Also consider his death penalty (HC) - he risks losing a lot less currency and time with low maps.

2. Does it strike you as fair that low maps have comprable performance to high maps? Things like this are part of an overall endgame balance, and should be setting off alarm bells at GGG that, especially in HC, highlevel players aren't sufficiently incentivized to attempt the appropriate content.

"

goetzjam wrote:

@ScrotieMcB

I like how you neglecting to reply to my post.

At level 99 the difference between running a low 70 map and a 78 map is very small. If you have the time watch HvC's video on min-mapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1yUzXoPvdE

Again what it cost in game shouldn't have any weight on the matter of how "unfair" the penalty is.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

goetzjam wrote:

@ScrotieMcB

I like how you neglecting to reply to my post.

At level 99 the difference between running a low 70 map and a 78 map is very small. If you have the time watch HvC's video on min-mapping:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1yUzXoPvdE

1. This is part of why I included time as a variable. 5-8M XP/hr is faster than 2-4M XP/hr. HvC is basically saying his time isn't worth that much currency. Also consider his death penalty (HC) - he risks losing a lot less currency and time with low maps.

2. Does it strike you as fair that low maps have comprable performance to high maps? Things like this are part of an overall endgame balance, and should be setting off alarm bells at GGG that, especially in HC, highlevel players aren't sufficiently incentivized to attempt the appropriate content.

"

"And this is an example of why most people's interpretations of the bible are so fucked. They make assumptions about the context the writer was in and put modern assumptions on writings from the past. "

"

Moosifer wrote:

This thread has been shifting more towards hatred for the exp penalty than death one. Most of these complaints are revolving around the trip to 100 at this point.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Moosifer wrote:

This thread has been shifting more towards hatred for the exp penalty than death one. Most of these complaints are revolving around the trip to 100 at this point.

My position from the start.

To be honest, I care precisely zero about making 100. My style is much more to care exclusively about loot, especially in SC. I tend to wear MF uniques into maps, and I die pretty often with most of my characters.

What I noticed was, until I wiped all six portals, I didn't give a shit. XP wasn't something my build needed; loot was (and not just that build but others). And the game-design half of my brain got bothered by this. Why wasn't the game penalizing me for dying in maps?

That's why I think about the lvl100 case a lot. It is the polar opposite situation. All I am arguing for here is a more balanced death penalty, not without an XP component (changed my mind there), but reduced to make room for an item penalty.