Remove xp penalty's from death
" Don't know if it needs to be locked, but aimlessly bumped just because he doesn't want the thread to die (one he isn't even the OP of) for whatever motives he has isn't good either. I think this topic can be revisited at a later time (such as after act 4), however until then GGG just did say they think the penalty is fine. https://youtu.be/T9kygXtkh10?t=285
FeelsBadMan Remove MF from POE, make juiced map the new MF. |
|
|
Well, sorry, I could have started a pointless argument when moos say "thread is deaD". But instead, just bumped it, so the thread still gets exposure, and no pointless opinions added.
Standard League
Lokailith - Level 100 Max Block Static Strike Marauder. Ranked #87 In World Helped 7 Players Grind To 100 PRE Awakening & 3 Players Post Awakening ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Streaming @ twitch.tv/levy42088 |
|
|
It was just a bit of a forum faux pas, is all ^-^ That the alternative is "pointless opinions" would suggest the thread is dead, and it already has 65 pages of exposure.. thus the bump was senseless spam.
Devolving Wilds
Land “T, Sacrifice Devolving Wilds: Search your library for a basic land card and reveal it. Then shuffle your library.” |
|
" Ahah. Oh god No wonder so many non-offensive or something posts got deleted if people like this makes them do it with reports If I dont reply to you - I dont give a flying duck about your opinion If you dont reply to me - I dont care either because I dont come back to see who replied to me Last edited by The_Great_Alex#2863 on Feb 28, 2015, 2:34:27 AM
|
|
|
I don't think there's anything wrong with reporting an unconstructive bump for spam.
If unconstructive bumps are never removed, then you end up like in the suggestions forum some time ago, where multiple threads demanding useless stuff kept being shamelessly bumped regularly for months. There's also the issue of ad hominem that needs to be addressed just as well if you see it as it breaks constructive discussion. |
|
|
My problem with xp penalty:
Because it's so harsh, it's "not worth" trying hard content. Will we do that boss? nope, not worth the possible xp loss. Cool, a new map, let's try it? nope, not worth the possible xp loss. I've seen that pattern so many times... I don't have any problem with a death penalty (whatever it is, not necessary xp), it is needed to avoid going full glass canon. However the current one, at 10% xp loss with the current xp model, one shot mechanic and map system is way too harsh. As a result, it encourages very defensive and eventually boring gameplay, and lack of initiative. Currently, my best way to xp is to just do dailies, they are easy enough and mini 76 maps provide a fair amount of xp. Also Zana's missions are generally not hard. /!\ WARNING /!\ *** D3 comparison *** /!\ WARNING /!\ I remember when I was playing D3, I decided to do most of my parangon 100 in act 4 P10. It was damn hard, I died a few times, but it was also damn epic. I have yet to have such a gamer experience in PoE. The game doesn't encourage such initiatives because of the issue above.
Beware! D3 epic battle screenhots
    Also, when I played D3 (before the extension), I remember that I thought the game lacked a more harsh death penalty than durability loss. Because of that so many players were going glass canon, and couldn't face the "end game" (like diying in loop to übers). END OF WARNING Actually, I don't know what could be done to get a better experience in end game. But I believe there is a problem when at least 50% of map bosses are skipped (if not more), and not even 50% of rolled maps are playable for your average character, because the risk to die is too high, which is equal, for some people, to "hours" of play time. End of rant. Ranger builds list: /917964
When two witches watch two watches, which witch watches which watch? If the witches watching watches watch the same watch while you watch which witch watches which watch, they switch watches; then, the watch switching witches watch which watch you watch. Watching witches watch watches is not for the faint of heart... |
|
|
^ yeah, basically.
The issue with the way the penalty is implemented (or the low amount of experience earned at high levels, depending on where one thinks changes could best be made) is that there is a risk/reward imbalance with tough content. It's unlikely that players will attempt difficult content while trying to level - one needs to wait until they level or give up on making level progress in order to run risky bosses. Add this to the fact that risky content rarely yields any good drops (totally different topic - and I'm not even saying this should be changed, just noting it) and my highest level toon just sticks with easy packsize map mods and dailies for a slow, boring, headache-inducing play experience. Also, yesterday she got killed nearly instantly (5700 combined life/es) on an easy level 74 map with no discernible cause. I'm sure it was my fault somehow, but it wasn't clear what happened - I contend deaths like this happen all the time and can cost high level characters many ex in maps. I'm not here to whine about a death, but to point out why posts like "don't die" and "you suck" don't actually add to the conversation, nor do they effectively invalidate arguments towards a reformed death penalty or exp earned system. Sometimes crazy shit happens in a game as frantic as this one, so let's hold off on the insults and accusations, OK? We're all in this leaky boat together, people. Last edited by demon9675#2961 on Mar 1, 2015, 2:14:06 PM
|
|
|
GGG made a statement, that they are fine with current situation.
So basiclyy GGG are fine that people prefer time-saving boring grind low-level\easy mods maps over fun play. Is that coorect? |
|
" Yes, your strawman has been thoroughly burned. A comprehensive, easy on the eyes loot filter:
http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1245785 Need a chill group exiles to hang with? Join us: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1251403 |
|
" Yes it is. But at least, we now know not to hope for a better situation, which was the point of that question. |
|
