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

"

pneuma wrote:

We're literally playing different games.

We're playing the same game, you've just apparently chosen a different way to play it. It was GGG's decision for precisely neither of us.

Also, for what it's worth on a different subject, I could say this exact same thing about 1000+ ES tri-res 6L Vaal Regalias:

"

The interesting numbers which they're not posting is what is their usage rate factoring out their rarity. Or, what would be their usage rate be assuming that everyone had one.

---

"

There is a significant distance to bridge between 'has competitions' and 'is competitive'. I don't think PoE has bridged that distance, nor will it ever. Neither did any Diablo game, by the by.

This is a helpful observation and, I think, accurate. It may also be why I think so differently from some people here. I've NEVER seen PoE as a fundamentally "competitive" game. I've always seen it like I saw Diablo 2 - a game which can be played competitively in some respects, but where competition is ultimately optional.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

There is a significant distance to bridge between 'has competitions' and 'is competitive'. I don't think PoE has bridged that distance, nor will it ever. Neither did any Diablo game, by the by.

I get that Chris is trying to model the game off, presumably, the experiences he had playing Diablo 2 in a 6-man LAN, but some of those experiences were confected by his circumstances, not integral to the game itself.

the point is if you are going to have competition, game needs to be balanced. a properly balanced game also results in more choices available to the player, and more build variations

"

davidnn5 wrote:

Doryani's catalyst can be best in slot depending on how you map your passives because you're unlikely to get a high ele dmg and high phys dmg mace with crit; for belt headhunter by a long shot; for amulets many of those corrupts are on uniques (chayula etc), particularly but not purely in PvP; boots lioneyes with +1 gems for some setups but otherwise yes a rare...

Agree windripper, pretty wow... and I'm not sure it's as out of favour as all that (unless TS takes a hit) - perhaps for those who can afford 450+ dps harbingers. Atziri's disfavour is currently cyclone king along with facebreakers... There's quite a few. Things like, for example, the +2 support gems on disfavour are not repeatable on a rare and it reduces itemisation.

It just wouldn't hurt to be looking at some of these things and trying to find a way to bridge the gaps. With chests most of all though.

See none of what you listed is automatic. Doryani's just isn't BIS weapon for whatever build it uses, it's almost always a bridge to better. Headhunter maybe, but I don't see people hunting that down or as an auto-include like Kaoms use to be. People who can afford windripper can afford a high DPS harbinger, it's just a decision as to which they would like to do. As phys crit bow is more common, harbinger are more dominant atm. 2h builds way down on popularity, that I remember a 6l disfavour was 60-70 ex now they are like 30. Facebreakers are BIS for their build because there's no other way to go unarmed, it's certainly not the best melee option as daggers crush all other melee weapons.

So ya, back towards the beginning of OB, shavs, kaoms and lioneyes are popping out of your mouth instantly. This is a list of either niche builds around powerful uniques or bridge uniques.

"

JohnNamikaze wrote:

To be honest, having played PoE since back in CB, and having seen so much changes throughout the years, there was actually one moment that I felt PoE hit rock bottom. That rock bottom was patch 1.1 (Atziri patch), because nothing much was added in this patch.

Atziri ruined game! Game start to be worse and worse after Atziri patch.

"

Moosifer wrote:

See none of what you listed is automatic.

You're right, and in reality most often itemisation comes down to 'want' rather than 'need'. But simply look at how often uniques are used in builds; if rares were that great they should be used more in non-mirror level builds.

"

tackle70 wrote:

I've NEVER seen PoE as a fundamentally "competitive" game. I've always seen it like I saw Diablo 2 - a game which can be played competitively in some respects, but where competition is ultimately optional.

Now, that really depends on your outlook, even if you try not to compete and play your own game it can bite you in the ass. For instance, let's assume you want to make a classic melee/spell hybrid, which is kinda stupid thing to do but hey, you're playing your own game and doing it for the kicks. The obvious item for such a build would be crown of eyes, right, and there we hit the troublesome part - the chance of it dropping for you in next month, two or even three is unrealistically low. Drops are tailored so you have to buy it from others which is also fine in a game like this, but then we hit another snag - it's kinda hard to earn money if you haven't started with the temporary leagues in time and farmed sellable loot while the demand was high. You get your window of opportunity which entirely depends on devs and rest of the community and if you miss it you get only crumbs.

Haven't really said anything new, yes, but I think that's the difference between D2 and PoE, D2 wasn't really designed from the ground up to be a multiplayer game, while PoE wasn't really designed to be a singleplayer game. Either can be played in a way it wasn't optimized for, but experience will be suboptimal in both cases.

"

grepman wrote:

"

davidnn5 wrote:

There is a significant distance to bridge between 'has competitions' and 'is competitive'. I don't think PoE has bridged that distance, nor will it ever. Neither did any Diablo game, by the by.

I get that Chris is trying to model the game off, presumably, the experiences he had playing Diablo 2 in a 6-man LAN, but some of those experiences were confected by his circumstances, not integral to the game itself.

the point is if you are going to have competition, game needs to be balanced. a properly balanced game also results in more choices available to the player, and more build variations

When they change skills during a season , then the integrity of the competition is compromised. If this is indeed first and foremost a competitive game, then integrity should mean everything.

the people who use competition as an arguing point should also be outraged that the sponsors of the race can, and do change parameters mid race.

"

Xtorma wrote:

"

grepman wrote:

"

davidnn5 wrote:

There is a significant distance to bridge between 'has competitions' and 'is competitive'. I don't think PoE has bridged that distance, nor will it ever. Neither did any Diablo game, by the by.

I get that Chris is trying to model the game off, presumably, the experiences he had playing Diablo 2 in a 6-man LAN, but some of those experiences were confected by his circumstances, not integral to the game itself.

the point is if you are going to have competition, game needs to be balanced. a properly balanced game also results in more choices available to the player, and more build variations

When they change skills during a season , then the integrity of the competition is compromised. If this is indeed first and foremost a competitive game, then integrity should mean everything.

the people who use competition as an arguing point should also be outraged that the sponsors of the race can, and do change parameters mid race.

Quick questions for you:
If a skill gem is horrendously over or under tuned balance wise, is it COMPROMISING the integrity of the game to fix that? Or is it actually putting things where they were supposed to be in the first place, aka FIXING the integrity of the game?

If two skill gems are both over or under tuned and ggg fixes one and not the other, which many would I'm sure take issue with, is it really ggg's fault they fixed one? Or is it the player's fault for expecting the two gems to remain broken throughout the duration of the league?

You need to consider how you define "integrity" in a league with grossly imbalanced mechanics. Justified changes are most certainly not breaking the integrity of anything. Your point basically stands at saying that when someone finds an exploit using IC for immortality to everything that the gem shouldn't be fixed because it would compromise league integrity. So we let everyone be immortal for three months and fix it between leagues.

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

If a skill gem is horrendously over or under tuned balance wise, is it COMPROMISING the integrity of the game to fix that? Or is it actually putting things where they were supposed to be in the first place, aka FIXING the integrity of the game?

You're compromising the integrity of the competition at hand for the sake of the long term integrity of the game. The temp league's integrity has been wholly fuckered. Shit should be handled between leagues. Of course, the 'integrity of competition' in this game has a storied history of being fuckered... so I guess that fuckering competition is the true 'integrity of the game'.

Regarding balance changes mid-league, I have two main thoughts:
1. I'm not really sure what should be done about it. There are compelling arguments to both sides, imho.
2. This is precisely the type of important decision which GGG has made carelessly in the past. Choosing the right way to deal with it is of tremendous importance, so the problem demands serious respect.

I'd have to think about this one before really commenting. I can say that HvC got 100 in Bloodlines in 41 calendar days, so there's that.