Remove xp penalty's from death

^ I agree with the general point, but it doesn't apply to Moo's post. His point had nothing to do with "they have it harder" (which is where your point would be right), and everything to do with "this displays that these people have died exactly zero times to desync," since desync is desync no matter what league.

"

CanHasPants wrote:

^ I agree with the general point, but it doesn't apply to Moo's post. His point had nothing to do with "they have it harder" (which is where your point would be right), and everything to do with "this displays that these people have died exactly zero times to desync," since desync is desync no matter what league.

Why does it feel like these forums haven't changed, like almost at all. Random people suggesting the same changes that never come, with a few people who fight very aggressively for them only to disappear after a while and literally the same people defending the same causes. It could be CB for you and I right now. Are there any new "good guys" at least?

"

CanHasPants wrote:

^ I agree with the general point, but it doesn't apply to Moo's post. His point had nothing to do with "they have it harder" (which is where your point would be right), and everything to do with "this displays that these people have died exactly zero times to desync," since desync is desync no matter what league.

OK, so your take on the subject is that if its possible in one league then we can generalize that its possible in any league. That through the use of generalization, we take it from an HC statement to a game-wide statement. Thus the statement has bearing on the part of the game where the generalization did not start from. Correct?

That is a deductive generalization. My point was about inductive generalization. In deductive, you have two things where the conclusion is the same. In inductive you have two things where the premise is the same.

An HC players experience cannot be inductively generalized to an SC players death penalty because the premise has changed. An SC player didn't join SC to find out how far it is possible to go on one life. It doesn't matter how far HC player can get on one life, even from a theoretical perspective! When the premise changes, inductive reasoning does not apply.

Now you made a deductive counterpoint to my inductive one. Here is my response to that: deduction can tell you what's important but it can't tell you why. Induction tells you why. When it comes to death penalty, is the more relevant concern
-what the death penalty is, or
-why the death penalty is?
My answer is the why is more important. We study that by looking at SC players who experience the death penalty, not by studying HC players who avoid the penalty. This is why I say it doesn't matter what HC players do-- because we are talking about the SC death penalty.

The entire point I was making was desync isn't unavoidable deaths as an entire league exists dealing with this same issue that's much more unforgiving.

If you want to argue on the merits of death penalty removing the desync argument well that's a change in gears. As the OP is citing desync as his main reason for removing the death penalty.

Really if we're talking purely on a "why does it exist" it's clearly the devs intention for people to care about staying alive. If no one is asking for it to be removed then it's too light of a penalty, it should hurt. We should take this things into consideration when designing a toon.

Even looking at D3, no idea what it's like now but when I started the penalty was a joke. The objective of the game was to just complete it (pre-1.3) so having the achievement of killing diablo in inferno was a big deal that many people didn't get. Until everyone just said fuck it and death zerged their way to him then just did this to build up gear, death zerging rares to hopefully find some gold or upgrades. Then they bumped up the cost of repairing gear and it made this much more taxing of a playstyle.

POE, most people just want to test how high they can get their DPS, how fast they can clear. But they have to consider reflect when doing this. If they say fuck it, I won't run into reflect 6 times, I can clear this map without losing all my portals, what would be the drawback? It's not even a time issue like it was when we used the lab, going from town, lab, portal, go. Now you revive feet from your vendor, stash and portal.

So if we don't have a good death deterrent what's the point of survivability outside of HC leagues at all? The devs clearly want us to care about staying alive, and stopping progress is one of the best ways of doing it. Like I said, the fact that people complain, but it isn't an uprising probably means it's balanced correctly.

"

Moosifer wrote:

POE, most people just want to test how high they can get their DPS, how fast they can clear. But they have to consider reflect when doing this. If they say fuck it, I won't run into reflect 6 times, I can clear this map without losing all my portals, what would be the drawback? It's not even a time issue like it was when we used the lab, going from town, lab, portal, go. Now you revive feet from your vendor, stash and portal.

So if we don't have a good death deterrent what's the point of survivability outside of HC leagues at all? The devs clearly want us to care about staying alive, and stopping progress is one of the best ways of doing it. Like I said, the fact that people complain, but it isn't an uprising probably means it's balanced correctly.

To be fair, if someone has "settled on their current level" (e.g. accepted that going higher than their current level is just a bonus), the current death penalty doesn't really do much to deter this kind of mindset either. Hell, there's even a "cast on death zerg rush" build that kills the boss by dying with Cast on Death linked up.


Really, the current death penalty only punishes players that have not yet realized just how big a task leveling to 100 is.

I agree that penalties should help to discourage completely glass cannon shenanigans, but dying to desync and losing exp just feels cheap. A middle ground suggestion:

Give players the option to revive without exp penalty if they carry and pay some amount of currency. I would suggest 10 alts (roughly 1/2c) as that would be high enough to discourage abusing of it, but low enough that people could rely on it if they don't die too much. It's also another way to keep currency inflation in check a little bit.

What do you guys think?

I would prefer experience lost be replaced with an experience tax. 10% less experience gained until experience_not_gained = 10% of the next level. Additional deaths would add on to this (but always such that the flat amount "taxed" is equal to 10% of current level and players cannot choke out experience gain altogether, %less capped at ~50%); however death penalty does not prevent gaining a level, and the penalty carries over to future levels until "paid off".

GGG is opposed to this idea though, as they feel this would discourage people from playing their characters.

Makes it harder in some ways, but wouldn't totally choke out experience gain like can happen now.

That idea has its merits, but I think the exp debt total should be hard capped at 50% of your next level's needed exp if they were going to do that.

On the other hand, it does become extremely discouraging if you feel you are at a gear/level wall, and then you are essentially perma-taxed. I could see GGG not wanting this to occur.

removed.

"

goetzjam wrote:

Take your complaint to HC players and see if they think its "fair" they lose a character when they die.

HvC just reached level 100 in bloodlines, arguably the hardest HC league yet. You are here complaining about desync instead of building a better character. Yes deaths out of your control will happen, but you have to learn that using certain skills is asking for desync and you should play around it.

If you think the XP penalty is bad now, it was worst in closed beta.

I always love the rebuttal that "so and so just reached level 100 in HC". It is a completely nonsensical response to desync and the impediments to advancing a build (leveling) it causes. Ok, so and so just reached level 100. So how many fricken hours did it take? Is he a no-lifer that plays PoE 12+ hours a day? Just because a handful of players can reach 100 in the 3 month hardcore league does not prove that desync isn't a serious problem. That is same as our Texas senator stating that if a few children are adversely affected by the Measles vaccine that it must bad for the 99.999% rest of us so we shouldn't be required to get the vaccine. So because a few players do grind to level 100 in spite of much desync then GGG doesn't need to change their server/client models to significantly reduce it. Complete nonsense.

Edit: I definitely do not agree that the XP penalty should be removed and I know GGG won't do that. There has to be a risk factor to make playing PoE a challenge. GGG just needs to get their act together and brainstorm/code their way out of this problem. No, seriously GGG, after act 4 is pushed out you will be at the proverbial crossroads and can't ignore this any longer.