Path of Exile: Ascendancy (News Coverage)

I'll make one final argument why not having access to all ascendance class is may not be such a big deal. Just take a look passive tree and think about it. How can one class access certain Keystones that are more than 30 points away, without wasting so many points? The answer is "items". Should it be equipment, jewels, or gems, everyone has access to these. Not as convenient, or efficient as certain ascendance nodes - sure, but it doesn't change the fact that you have access to those tools and that you'll be able to create that specific build, that you want even without that specific ascendance class. And if you don't care about minmaxing this should be sufficient for you.
Sure we can now debate whether there will be more items with such abilities, but based on the past I don't see why this could not happen. We already have some stuff that covers certain areas of ascendance classes.

"

laminarija wrote:

I'll make one final argument why not having access to all ascendance class is may not be such a big deal. Just take a look passive tree and think about it. How can one class access certain Keystones that are more than 30 points away, without wasting so many points? The answer is "items". Should it be equipment, jewels, or gems, everyone has access to these. Not as convenient, or efficient as certain ascendance nodes - sure, but it doesn't change the fact that you have access to those tools and that you'll be able to create that specific build, that you want even without that specific ascendance class. And if you don't care about minmaxing this should be sufficient for you.
Sure we can now debate whether there will be more items with such abilities, but based on the past I don't see why this could not happen. We already have some stuff that covers certain areas of ascendance classes.

everything you wrote there will also be true if you'll have 133 classes. 133 limits nothing of what you said in there.

in the end what you're doing here is agree with/on another layer of limiting factors on top of the talent tree, the skills, the uniques, the gems, the jewels and so on, for no reason at all.

"

kreca73 wrote:

everything you wrote there will also be true if you'll have 133 classes. 133 limits nothing of what you said in there.

in the end what you're doing here is agree with/on another layer of limiting factors on top of the talent tree, the skills, the uniques, the gems, the jewels and so on, for no reason at all.

If that's your conclusion I'm not going to argue with you anymore. It's going to be just a waste of my time, and yours.

"

StrongWitchCraft wrote:

"

Wispo wrote:

Traps on the ground... wow -.- Just another cheap method for making players lose exp ("fantastic" that half life pool gone for a single ground spike around the middle of the video) -.-

a lot of melee gonna die in that labyrinth.

hey ggg are you gonna change Juggernaut class? its so bad... so bad really. and what about melee? did you see how OP and good crit node and how weak non crit and melee are? wheres new or buffed defense for melee to play that new labyrinth?

Melee will die you are absolutely right, but moreover will be a pain to move in those strict "corridors" filled with traps and mobs

I would like to play Poe, not Blood omen legacy of kain!!!!

BTW, i appreciate the templar skill "crit ignores elem. defenses", and the duelist "100% of block applied to spells". Time to rebuff Bringer of rain!!!!!

"

laminarija wrote:

"

kreca73 wrote:

everything you wrote there will also be true if you'll have 133 classes. 133 limits nothing of what you said in there.

in the end what you're doing here is agree with/on another layer of limiting factors on top of the talent tree, the skills, the uniques, the gems, the jewels and so on, for no reason at all.

If that's your conclusion I'm not going to argue with you anymore. It's going to be just a waste of my time, and yours.

i'd agree if this would be an he said she said kind of deal but it isn't.
to stick with your example, i'll give you an analogy - GGG presents you with the Leap Slam skill and then tells you they'll limit it to axe, mace, sword and staff. you then jump for joy and approve while i say that removing the weapon limit would increase the usage options of that skill.
i am objectively right and you're not.

if you want to talk about why GGG had to put in that limit in the first place or why it needs to be there, fine, but that's a different argument.
if you look at PoE evolution you'll notice that with time, it became more and more restrictive; the classes became more and more limited in their options. a semi-arbitrarily line in the sand needs to be drawn sometime before PoE becomes full on D3 - 1 best build - 1 best skill - 1 best class kind of game and players need to start drawing that line with their whining and bitching because GGG won't.

Edit: future prediction - after the implementation of class restrictions, GGG will start creating skills for ascensions alone. a skill will have the tag Assassination and that'll be all, the end; 99% restricted. GG and then another G.

"

kreca73 wrote:

i'd agree if this would be an he said she said kind of deal but it isn't.
to stick with your example, i'll give you an analogy - GGG presents you with the Leap Slam skill and then tells you they'll limit it to axe, mace, sword and staff. you then jump for joy and approve while i say that removing the weapon limit would increase the usage options of that skill.
i am objectively right and you're not.

if you want to talk about why GGG had to put in that limit in the first place or why it needs to be there, fine, but that's a different argument.
if you look at PoE evolution you'll notice that with time, it became more and more restrictive; the classes became more and more limited in their options. a semi-arbitrarily line in the sand needs to be drawn sometime before PoE becomes full on D3 - 1 best build - 1 best skill - 1 best class kind of game and players need to start drawing that line with their whining and bitching because GGG won't.

Removing certain limitations from the game doesn't make it necessarily better. That's the whole point. You cannot create a game with limitless possibilities without any consequences, can you? You cannot imagine how difficult it would to balance such thing.
I'm a developer my self, just not a game developer, and I know how complicated some things tend to be. That's why you have things like permanent Fortify for Duelist only, and everyone else get to use the gem if they need it.
You will always need some sort of compromise, and I'm quite sure someone at GGG has already suggested that idea and it was discarded for whatever reasons.
I do not know about you, but I was here since closed beta and some restrictions was always here, other appeared with balancing.

Omg Cool,
SOO HYPEEE !!

"

laminarija wrote:

"

kreca73 wrote:

i'd agree if this would be an he said she said kind of deal but it isn't.
to stick with your example, i'll give you an analogy - GGG presents you with the Leap Slam skill and then tells you they'll limit it to axe, mace, sword and staff. you then jump for joy and approve while i say that removing the weapon limit would increase the usage options of that skill.
i am objectively right and you're not.

if you want to talk about why GGG had to put in that limit in the first place or why it needs to be there, fine, but that's a different argument.
if you look at PoE evolution you'll notice that with time, it became more and more restrictive; the classes became more and more limited in their options. a semi-arbitrarily line in the sand needs to be drawn sometime before PoE becomes full on D3 - 1 best build - 1 best skill - 1 best class kind of game and players need to start drawing that line with their whining and bitching because GGG won't.

Removing certain limitations from the game doesn't make it necessarily better. That's the whole point. You cannot create a game with limitless possibilities without any consequences, can you? You cannot imagine how difficult it would to balance such thing.
I'm a developer my self, just not a game developer, and I know how complicated some things tend to be. That's why you have things like permanent Fortify for Duelist only, and everyone else get to use the gem if they need it.
You will always need some sort of compromise, and I'm quite sure someone at GGG has already suggested that idea and it was discarded for whatever reasons.
I do not know about you, but I was here since closed beta and some restrictions was always here, other appeared with balancing.

yes, those are all valid arguments each with its own merits; now there's a dialogue here!.
the thing is, we can not know most of those things because we don't(well at least i don't) work for GGG.

still, i think it's GGGs role to fill in those missing links, to let their player base know about some of their limitations. if they would've came out and said - We tried to give ascensions to all classes(within reason/with some penalties) but we couldn't because, let's say balance issues, then that will be all. case closed.
thing is, that wouldn't sell the game(micro-transactions and what not), would it?. admitting you failed(more or less) is bad for business. the need for GGG to sell/market the game, needs to be balanced by the players voicing their opinion about the game, about the(bad) direction the game is heading.
when you factor in evolution there, GGG will always try to sell the game better, to more people, using more marketing schemes while the approving fan-boys will just keep on approving. that will create a bubble of positive fake feedback which will lead to game failing and GGG going bankrupt.

people need to balance GGGs money grab because GGG will not balance itself.

Is there a thread where people just theorize what the unrevealed ascendancies could be instead of arguing back and forth about the amount of rules that should exist in the game?

"

kreca73 wrote:

yes, those are all valid arguments each with its own merits; now there's a dialogue here!.
the thing is, we can not know most of those things because we don't(well at least i don't) work for GGG.

still, i think it's GGGs role to fill in those missing links, to let their player base know about some of their limitations. if they would've came out and said - We tried to give ascensions to all classes(within reason/with some penalties) but we couldn't because, let's say balance issues, then that will be all. case closed.
thing is, that wouldn't sell the game(micro-transactions and what not), would it?. admitting you failed(more or less) is bad for business. the need for GGG to sell/market the game, needs to be balanced by the players voicing their opinion about the game, about the(bad) direction the game is heading.
when you factor in evolution there, GGG will always try to sell the game better, to more people, using more marketing schemes while the approving fan-boys will just keep on approving. that will create a bubble of positive fake feedback which will lead to game failing and GGG going bankrupt.

people need to balance GGGs money grab because GGG will not balance itself.

You've just lost any credibility you had. "The game is doomed if it doesn't follow my way of thinking.". Yet another doomsayer calling someone else a fanboy.