XP loss on death, why?

i lost 25% xp at lvl 97...feels bad man, but I was running rippy mods and at times got surprised with shotgun damage. All is good, I JUST NEED TO BE LESS NUB.

"

ThePesmergia wrote:

D2 was a joke to hit 100.

no it wasnt.
in classic d2 without abusing cheats, glitches, xp leech and grush introduced in LoD with act 5, it took ages to level properly to 99. going from 96 to 97 in classic d2 required over 12k CS runs, double that from 95 to 96 (which was roughly 6k I believe)

yeah it wasnt harder. but it was much slower than the speed that people are reaching 100 in poe nowadays

"

Nephalim wrote:

It's purely monetary. GGG only makes money if you keep laying and donating and you are less likely to donate once you zerg rushed all your chars to 100.

Grinding to 100 with 2 3 chars even without XP penalty will keep you more in the game than lvling 2 3 chars to 90 and then quit the league.

Also, grinding to 100 and in the same time doing some risky yolo stuff to escape the grind monotony a little bit, wwould be much more fun than grinding to 100 running the same shaped and safe map for days and days. More fun = more time in the game.

"

grepman wrote:

"

ThePesmergia wrote:

D2 was a joke to hit 100.

no it wasnt.
in classic d2 without abusing cheats, glitches, xp leech and grush introduced in LoD with act 5, it took ages to level properly to 99. going from 96 to 97 in classic d2 required over 12k CS runs, double that from 95 to 96 (which was roughly 6k I believe)

yeah it wasnt harder. but it was much slower than the speed that people are reaching 100 in poe nowadays

Grats only responding to what you wanted to respond to. The point is you can avoid deaths in D2 a lot easier with higher max res with elemental absorb protection.

Also parties who do Baal runs stack protections, auras, regens, etc. So no, D2 is a joke to 100 in the sense of safety net. You do not even have to participate in running to baal. You can do pubbie games and leech your way to 100 in Diablo 2 waiting on bots to TP you to baal.

Did you even play Diablo 2? LOL! JOKE to level to 100 as far as safety is concerned. Any game you can rely on a bot to leech levels, and literally exp off screen while overgeared bots do all the work.

D2 is oh so hard bro. LOL! That's freaking rich.

You do know that Path Of Exile is meant to be hard. It can be annoying to lose xp dying, but I like it. People get to 100 playing hardcore without dying, so we can't really complain. gotta get good. PS: I die sometimes too.

By the way diablo 2 was a joke to get to 100.

"

ThePesmergia wrote:

"

grepman wrote:

"

ThePesmergia wrote:

D2 was a joke to hit 100.

no it wasnt.
in classic d2 without abusing cheats, glitches, xp leech and grush introduced in LoD with act 5, it took ages to level properly to 99. going from 96 to 97 in classic d2 required over 12k CS runs, double that from 95 to 96 (which was roughly 6k I believe)

yeah it wasnt harder. but it was much slower than the speed that people are reaching 100 in poe nowadays

"

Grats only responding to what you wanted to respond to.

"

Also parties who do Baal runs

"

Did you even play Diablo 2?

hint: there is NO FUCKING BAAL (and no act 5) in vanilla d2 without cheats

oh and there is no level 100 in d2

someone here didnt play classic d2 and it sure as hell wasnt me.

seriously dude, get some reading comprehension. you're talking about xp leech (essentially a cheat) in LoD. go install classic d2 without LoD and try to get 99 on a fresh ladder. theres a reason I talk about cs runs there. and guess what was in cs ? iron fucking maidens that were very safe for phys damage...right ? lol

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

"

KiadawP wrote:

NO ONE is asking for NO penalty on death. Why do people INSIST on answering a question ON ONE asked!

There is no point in a discussion if people don't even know the dicussion!

The question is NOT if death penety should be removed (obviously it shouldn't & I don't know anyone that say otherwise), the question to be answered is if XP losss is well design, & if there are better altenatives. For instance, rewarding people who can do tougher content without dying, vs punishing people for failing, the latter encourage taking on LESSER contents.

You're wrong. The question is "XP loss on death, why?" it's not "10% XP loss on death, why not <10%?"

No, he's most certainly not wrong. This thread and indeed the OP is questioning the XP loss ONLY. And there are already other penalties in place such as depletion of map portals as well as time lost due to being respawned elsewhere. You also lose momentum and stored buffs.

I don't know why GGG has decided to have the XP penalty because to me it makes the game worse and just pisses me off, and if I judge my reactions to it, It doesn't make them any more money, it's the opposite as I have quit this game half a dozen times ALL due this this idiotic mechanic, and players not playing the game aren't buying anything from it.

"

Serleth wrote:

"

Vresiberba wrote:

I really do not understand this mechanic, I didn't in Diablo 2 and I don't in Path of Exile. Why is the game you're playing for fun punishing you for, not facerolling content, but actually giving a shit and trying? Why should a game, one that's played for fun, entice you to try, even if it's out of your league, to try and beat it, when failing to beat it punishes you, telling you to not do it again.

This. Makes. No. Sense!

Yeah, you're right, this opinion makes no sense.

a) In HC, you die, you're done. SC needs some form of punishment to correlate.
b) It incentivizes you to give a shit, rather than just throwing yourself into a pack of mobs and shrugging if you die.
c) You'd probably get super bored if there was no risk at all.

a) You don't actually die, you get sent to non-HC which makes the XP loss nonsensical. HC needs more of a death penalty, non-HC less.

b) I don't "shrug" if I die, dying in a computer game for me is an indication of failure, it pisses me off just as much even if the XP penalty were there or not.

c) For some, obviously, for others, obviously not. I belong to the latter as I have about 3000 hours played in Diablo 3. But then again I'm not arguing that there should be no penalty at all, and indeed in Diablo 3 there are penalties for dying, just like there are in PoE other than the XP loss.

"

Draegnarrr wrote:

the games pretty rippy now but I still think the entire HC ladder kinda proves why theres an XP penalty, because if you can do it without dying at all you can surely do it where you can die but you lose 10% xp.

Like others have said its there to ensure people don't get 100 naturally, I probably don't care personally if they let everyone get 100 or not I always call a char done at 92/93 and leave them there. this isn't because I can't hit 100 though its because mind numbing numbers of insert shaped map here is just not interesting to me, i'd rather play something new.

Well, then I have to completely ridicule that mechanic since I can't see any reason to prevent players from reaching 100. Is it supposed to instil bragging rights; "I'm no ScRuB, I beat 100!!!1q"? If so, then... no, just no. This is not something that this game needs. This is perhaps something a 12 year old can find enjoyment in, but I'm in my fifties and I don't brag on the interweb.