Stringing on the Kickstarter customer, or Why this game needs to die

I feel "max Chaos resist" should be kind of like max block is treated with the new passive tree. I'm against it getting a -60 penalty in Merc (imagine a block penalty), although numerically this doesnt matter too much. I'm not against it being a rare affix but I'm against that affix having high values or being available in too many slots. I'm for small amounts available on the passive tree, spread out in a way to make maximization difficult. Getting a max chaos res character should be possible but require amazing commitment.

I don't really buy the "no chaos res" argument. I feel there should be a legit, non-unique method for low-life to pursue. I just don't feel it should feel required for your typical character to invest in.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I feel "max Chaos resist" should be kind of like max block is treated with the new passive tree. I'm against it getting a -60 penalty in Merc (imagine a block penalty). I'm not against it being a rare affix but I'm against that affix having high values or being available in too many slots. I'm for small amounts available on the passive tree, spread out in a way to make maximization difficult. Getting a max chaos res character should be possible but require amazing commitment.

It already is a serious commitment if your going the low-life no shavs/lorica route.

hp management

es management

mana management

and chaos resistance requirement

Seriously it's nothing to sneeze at on a medium budget. Shavs and lorica simply eliminate the hp management and chaos resistance management from the equation which allows a lot of buffs in other area's, to much buffs.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I don't really buy the "no chaos res" argument. I feel there should be a legit, non-unique method for low-life to pursue. I just don't feel it should feel required for your typical character to invest in.

In a world with 0% chaos resist, there was an option: Life.

Low life didn't mean that you were able to ignore life altogether. You got enough life to survive a typical chaos hit after reservation, then you were able to pump ES. It was a thing and it worked, not a fairy tale.

---

Re: MoonYu, they definitely spammed more chaos enemies than they should've. As part of being "special", chaos damage should have been "special" during enemy design as well (unlike fire/cold/light/phys which all had obvious and strong mitigation forms).

Walking into a room in A2 and getting shot from chaos shooters from all directions was just nonsense. At the very least, they should have had a charge-up period (like the Soulless Watchers). More realistically, chaos was GGG's "life/gear check" lever, and it was to be used sparingly. An act boss could shoot chaos, or in a pack of enemies, only the rare enemy could've be able to do chaos damage.

Note the parallel to spells here too. Spells used to be special in the same way because there was no spell block nor spell dodge and they "always hit". Then they got lazy, started using spells to kill people predominantly, players balked that there was no way to mitigate them, and now we've got spell block and spell dodge.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I'm for small amounts available on the passive tree, spread out in a way to make maximization difficult.

It would be the same as now, you would need 75% in small increments as opposed to 135% in larger increments. Damage would be balanced to same levels as now, not much would change except for a slew of new legacy items.

Chaos was introduced as an ES counter, so if perfectly balanced it would come in amounts dangerous to casters having some 2k life under their ES and limited ways to get it back. As it is, casters are either life-based (much easier now), immune to chaos or redirect it to ES so we have chaos dealing amounts of damage that are potentially dangerous even to full life tanks (at least in raw amount).

So, chaos probably isn't doing what it was designed to because it can't anymore, we got too many counters for that particular issue so it became just another element. Turning it into a full element meant that original design for chaos damage failed, and it was in the same basket as ES so all this was to be expected, I suppose.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

tackle70 wrote:

About the only thing I see CB people agreeing on is that uniques presently don't fit the original design intent of uniques, and typically this is really all about Shavs (though other build-enablers like Mjolner qualify as well).

I think there is a general consensus among us older types that ES in general has been mismanaged as a game mechanic, made to feel like "blue Life" rather than a distinct defense. Shavronne's gets a lot of attention because it represents the intersection of ES complaints (valid ones, by my reckoning) and unique item complaints. There is some truth to your statement: you might find a CBer who is okay with how ES has changed, or how uniques have changed, but seldom both.

Heck, even Slurms, formerly famed CB GGG fanman, has a passionate hatred for Ghost Reaver, last I checked.

I agree that ES has been mismanaged from its original concept and is basically just another (better?) version of life. I don't think there is any simple fix available with the game in its current state. The current mechanics of chaos damage would be subsumed under this as well.

I'm not convinced it's a huge problem; it's a bit of a squandered potential mechanic to just have two different variants of life, but hardly a vision/game-breaking problem with PoE.

I think that the current state of uniques (by which I mean the existence of things like Shavs/Mjolner/Acuity/etc), given the design of rares, is actually good. If there were no super OP uniques to build around, the endgame itemization in this game would start to look a lot like Diablo 3 - stack resists and 1-2 other stats on every item and GG.

I did not play CB, but as far as I have heard, there has never been a time when rares had unique affixes which would change this progression of itemization. So, IMO the shift in vision here is actually an improvement: GGG has successfully avoided a scenario where 100% of builds have a predetermined endgame item setup with 9 or 10 mirrored items (which have the highest resists and desired 1-2 stats) known in advance.

The itemization structure for rares would have to become far more interesting/complex for it to be a hindrance to have GG uniques. And based on what I know, this would actually be the more significant shift away from the games original vision (it would certainly be a HUGE shift from OB - present). The concept of Vaal orbs went this direction slightly, but the implementation IMO was horrid and only enhanced the value of uniques (since you only get 1 shot at corrupting a rare but can have many tries corrupting a unique)

After a long read i can say that:

"Supporters have way better knowledge about current PoE and what PoE should have end up with, than the team developing the game..."

It's that most programming projects fail due lack of client understanding. It's pretty big % of them all, and it seems over all for many that don't enjoy current project status, PoE is in the failed project section :S

Can't feel the dissapointment of some (wasn't here to help with founding) but after long ride, other game provided me with injection i've needed.

Would be awsome if someone gathered all the ideas and solutions in thread called "How some of Us think, it all should have been executed"

"

eragon1111 wrote:

"Supporters have way better knowledge about current PoE and what PoE should have end up with, than the team developing the game..."

I don't agree with this at all. The developers have VASTLY more data and knowledge than any supporter about what is healthy for the game and what is not.

Supporters might *think* they know what PoE "should have ended up with" but that's all it is - their thoughts. And without direct interaction with GGG on any specific matter, it's only ever one side of the story.

The fact that GGG doesn't do everything perfectly does not necessarily mean that they have an inferior vision for the game and where it's going compared to the supporters who are armchair critics of GGG's mistakes.

"

tackle70 wrote:

"

eragon1111 wrote:

"Supporters have way better knowledge about current PoE and what PoE should have end up with, than the team developing the game..."

I don't agree with this at all. The developers have VASTLY more data and knowledge than any supporter about what is healthy for the game and what is not.

Supporters might *think* they know what PoE "should have ended up with" but that's all it is - their thoughts. And without direct interaction with GGG on any specific matter, it's only ever one side of the story.

The fact that GGG doesn't do everything perfectly does not necessarily mean that they have an inferior vision for the game and where it's going than the supporters who are armchair critics of GGG's mistakes.

So you are sayin that developer building rollercaster when client wanted skateboard is a good understanding of the client ? (In matter of supporters that don't like the outcome).

Nowa days finding good analitics who understand the needs of clients is like searching needle in a haystack. Few that were opting to create epic game were silanced by screams of tens of (not so smart beings). But it's flaw of democracy so let's talk about it other time.
Point is GGG decisions were mostly made to please the crowd. Give people wine and bread and they stop rioting... Never heard of it? Same happened here. The changes are too deep now, sinple refactoring wont do shit. Rails don't fit now and then. Too wide or too thin.

Some just don't care they are taking the bus.