Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.

"

Vooodu wrote:

"

Xaxyx wrote:

"

Vooodu wrote:

Well, what about people who want full instant respecs? How about people who complain about drops or the difficulty of the game? These are all apsects of the game people don't enjoy.

False equivalency. FFA loot doesn't affect the difficulty of the game. FFA loot only affects the enjoyment of the game.

FFA loot is about snatching people's stuff.

Well, technically. People who want the other things i mentioned are doing it from a mindset of what they would enjoy.

I mean, full respect doesn't make the game difficult does it? But im pretty sure most of us would be against it.

Don't ignore the point. These are in two completely different realms of discussion. Loot options do not completely trivialize the leveling process. They do not completely invalidate the meaning of all character developmental choices. Loot options do nothing to impact the overall game balance, whereas free full respec options do ALL of these things.

I understand the slippery slope you are trying to make, it is however completely irrelevant due to it being just that. You cannot compare two different suggestions when one is completely game breaking and the other does not impact game balance in any way. This would be like me comparing loot options to guaranteed map drops. Sure people suggest that guaranteed map drops would make the game more fun, and people say that loot options would make the game more fun. You cannot however compare the two as one completely trivializes the entire end-game design and the other has no impact on that or any other major design feature.

"

Seraphyna wrote:

Try to understand, some people enjoy the dash and grab aspect of the game, some don't. Give the players the power to choose what kind of party environment they want to play in. Heck sometimes I enjoy playing in a FFA environment and my friends and I do have sessions where anything and everything is up for grabs. That is our decision though and when we do this we all have a mutual understanding that no drama can come out of.

How about choosing if you want a XP penalty on death in default? A choice about revealing the entire map instead of having to explore it? Plenty have asked for a choice about a players =8 type setting so they can compete with multi-boxers. Why not give us options for everything? Because people would just choose the easiest one every time, and then why even have options? For challenge? Think about why HC is a separate league for a moment.

Who would play HC if it was a choice when you host a game? You could just opt out for tough quests and then go back to HC for the easy content? No, it would be pointless, and this is the same principal.

"

Seraphyna wrote:

If you're trying to assert that FFA adds a level of challenge and excitement to the game, I can understand that. What you have to understand though is that what you enjoy might not be the same as what others would. You might like to zoom around snatching people's stuff and find it fun when your stuff is nabbed but there are alot of players that finds this incredibly annoying and even a turn off for grouping. Hence why parties should be able to identify with what playstyle they will go with, so that those who do not enjoy ninja'ing or being ninja'd from do not have to put up with such things.

I would indeed assert that FFA does add excitement and added challenge, and that is why it’s there now, the devs know it. If only in it’s watered down timer- state… I would also assert that even players they DO like FFA environment wont paly it because it adds extra difficulty, I think it’s more fun but what is an even bigger consideration is my character NOT dying.

So I would ask you, what choice does someone have if every public game is using the longest timer? Further, if you host a game with this FFA loot mode the only people would join are the world’s fastest ninjas? Sounds like BAD and WORSE to me.

Personally, one my favorite aspects of ‘loot tension’ are when you are with strangers and they DON’T try and take your loot – you can do the same for them. It’s a feeling of bonding and a great way to make friends. So tell me, who is going to seek out FFA games in order to NOT compete for loot? nobody. This aspect of the game will be gone forever.

"

Seraphyna wrote:

Finally to sum up about 'Incentives', control over loot-rules would give players much more incentive to group together and play co-op. Which, in my opinion at least, is more important than to give you more opportunities to ninja or to add the illusion of difficulty to the game.

Give me opportunities to ninja other peoples loot? This only shows your short-sightedness and I personally take that as an insult. There are MANY other reasons to prefer the current or pure FFA environment other than what you assume.

If GGG does not add IIQ/IIR incentives to the shorter timers 95% of games will use the longest timer and we will be in a position were D3’s totally instanced loot system would be preferable, as it would solve the loot clutter issues also.

Overall, I think adding options for looting is the worst possible decision GGG could make and I seriously hope they will reconsider. At best it will split the playerbase, and at worse it will be a bad imitation of D3’s system.

"

EgypZee wrote:

How about choosing if you want a XP penalty on death in default? A choice about revealing the entire map instead of having to explore it? Plenty have asked for a choice about a players =8 type setting so they can compete with multi-boxers. Why not give us options for everything? Because people would just choose the easiest one every time, and then why even have options? For challenge? Think about why HC is a separate league for a moment.

This is, as aforementioned, a false equivalency. The changes you mentioned affect difficulty. Giving loot options does not change game difficulty. The fights are the same. The loot is the same. Heck, even the time it would take to pick up the loot would be the same. All that would change is how the loot is allocated.

"

Who would play HC if it was a choice when you host a game? You could just opt out for tough quests and then go back to HC for the easy content? No, it would be pointless, and this is the same principal.

It is a wholly different principle, as illustrated by two points. One: players can play *right now* in a setting wherein they get all items allocated to them, namely, solo play. Two: players *right now* can make a gentleman's agreement not to snipe each others' items as they've been allocated. All that the change we're petitioning for would do is hard-code that gentleman's agreement. Nothing about the game's difficulty, nothing about the game's challenges, would be affected in the slightest.

"

I would indeed assert that FFA does add excitement and added challenge, and that is why it’s there now, the devs know it.

What the devs know is for them to say, not for you.

"

If only in it’s watered down timer- state… I would also assert that even players they DO like FFA environment wont paly it because it adds extra difficulty, I think it’s more fun but what is an even bigger consideration is my character NOT dying.

One has nothing to do with the other.

"

So I would ask you, what choice does someone have if every public game is using the longest timer? Further, if you host a game with this FFA loot mode the only people would join are the world’s fastest ninjas? Sounds like BAD and WORSE to me.

Of course it's worse for you. You'll have that many less players to steal loot from. I suppose, by your logic, that makes the game even MORE challenging. So why be against it?

"

Personally, one my favorite aspects of ‘loot tension’ are when you are with strangers and they DON’T try and take your loot – you can do the same for them. It’s a feeling of bonding and a great way to make friends. So tell me, who is going to seek out FFA games in order to NOT compete for loot? nobody. This aspect of the game will be gone forever.

What you describe as "loot tension" we experience as "loot aggravation", wherein we invariably discover that one or more persons we encounter in public games turns out to be unscrupulous and snatches up every orb, rare and unique in sight. Far from experiencing feelings of bonding and camaraderie, we instead experience grief, irritation and frustration. So yes, this aspect of the game will be gone forever, for us. That you'll lose out on the joy of stealing loot from newbies doesn't concern me in the slightest, to be blunt.

"

Give me opportunities to ninja other peoples loot? This only shows your short-sightedness and I personally take that as an insult. There are MANY other reasons to prefer the current or pure FFA environment other than what you assume.

Then you should have no problems finding like-minded players to join your FFA loot games, if it's so action-packed and thrilling.

"

Overall, I think adding options for looting is the worst possible decision GGG could make and I seriously hope they will reconsider. At best it will split the playerbase, and at worse it will be a bad imitation of D3’s system.

The player base is already split, insofar as that people who cannot stand the current loot system never, ever play in public games, instead relegated to playing solo or with RL friends. If anything, this change will reunite the player base, allowing us to meet new people and adventure together, facing the real adversaries in this game -- the monsters -- rather than fumbling over one another.

"

EgypZee wrote:

"

Seraphyna wrote:

Try to understand, some people enjoy the dash and grab aspect of the game, some don't. Give the players the power to choose what kind of party environment they want to play in. Heck sometimes I enjoy playing in a FFA environment and my friends and I do have sessions where anything and everything is up for grabs. That is our decision though and when we do this we all have a mutual understanding that no drama can come out of.

How about choosing if you want a XP penalty on death in default? A choice about revealing the entire map instead of having to explore it? Plenty have asked for a choice about a players =8 type setting so they can compete with multi-boxers. Why not give us options for everything? Because people would just choose the easiest one every time, and then why even have options? For challenge? Think about why HC is a separate league for a moment.

Who would play HC if it was a choice when you host a game? You could just opt out for tough quests and then go back to HC for the easy content? No, it would be pointless, and this is the same principal.

I just want to quote this as one of the stupidest arguments I have ever read. Why not just give the players a bot program or a trainer? Cuz its basically the same thing as loot options!! yeah, makes sense....

HC is an option, and it is obviously not the easiest option, yet people still choose it. Strange, I know. As you say, this is basically the same principal. If you want to play FFA games, choose FFA, if you don't you can opt out of it. Hooray for diversity.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

This is, as aforementioned, a false equivalency. The changes you mentioned affect difficulty. Giving loot options does not change game difficulty. The fights are the same. The loot is the same. Heck, even the time it would take to pick up the loot would be the same. All that would change is how the loot is allocated.

With all due respect, that is your opinion, and I would consider it wrong.

I don’t understand how you could discount the problems of needing to watch what drops while fighting at the same time, and then positioning or competing for loot while being attacked. HOW can that be the same as just standing and fighting until everything is dead?

"

Xaxyx wrote:

It is a wholly different principle, as illustrated by two points. One: players can play *right now* in a setting wherein they get all items allocated to them, namely, solo play. Two: players *right now* can make a gentleman's agreement not to snipe each others' items as they've been allocated. All that the change we're petitioning for would do is hard-code that gentleman's agreement. Nothing about the game's difficulty, nothing about the game's challenges, would be affected in the slightest.

We are not talking about solo games at all. There is obviously no difference between FFA and instanced loot in a solo game.

Yes, gentlemen’s agreements are where it’s at. It is cooperative play by consent! This is the loot options you already have, and exactly WHY we do not need hard coded options. Agreements like this are can be hard to make, take time to cultivate and any member can choose to break the agreement at any time if they are dissatisfied with it. Perfect.

If you are saying we can just “do that” now – then why are you not doing it?

Hard coding that in would not be such a problem if it were not for the fact that it would be actively imposed on everyone if they want to join a public game. Thus your choices, turns into NO choice for others.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

What the devs know is for them to say, not for you.

Chris says the dev team is “all ninja looters” I would think it’s safe to infer that means they know it’s more fun that way, at least for them.

"

If only in it’s watered down timer- state… I would also assert that even players they DO like FFA environment wont paly it because it adds extra difficulty, I think it’s more fun but what is an even bigger consideration is my character NOT dying.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

One has nothing to do with the other.

If I don’t have to worry about looting and can just concentrate on fighting and keeping my character in a safe location instead of moving into danger to loot my survival will increase. I personally will go with long timer if I’m playing HC and I’m going into a dangerous location. By this, I would assume others would as well – on that assumption, I could be wrong, I doubt it, but don’t tell me I’m wrong about what I would choose.

"

So I would ask you, what choice does someone have if every public game is using the longest timer? Further, if you host a game with this FFA loot mode the only people would join are the world’s fastest ninjas? Sounds like BAD and WORSE to me.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

Of course it's worse for you. You'll have that many less players to steal loot from. I suppose, by your logic, that makes the game even MORE challenging. So why be against it?

I like a fast paced game with a system that encourages everyone up front and paying attention. I would only take someone else’s loot if I see them active trying to take mine in a two player game, in a large group I usually dont even attempty to take something unless everyone moved offscreen.

also, I like challenge for sure, but I dont take on challenge for no reason.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

What you describe as "loot tension" we experience as "loot aggravation", wherein we invariably discover that one or more persons we encounter in public games turns out to be unscrupulous and snatches up every orb, rare and unique in sight. Far from experiencing feelings of bonding and camaraderie, we instead experience grief, irritation and frustration. So yes, this aspect of the game will be gone forever, for us. That you'll lose out on the joy of stealing loot from newbies doesn't concern me in the slightest, to be blunt.

Currently the timer is so long that I have played entire acts with full groups and got every single item that dropped for me with little effort. It’s not even remotely as big of an issue as it was before they added the timers.

I do agree that loot tension can result in aggravation for some players and that is a problem, especially for new players. However so can getting one-shot by bosses and unwanted PVP in bandit quests. I just feel that adding loot options to resolve that potential aggravation will result in a massive and unnecessary game-changing element for everyone.
Most/many of us have taken measures to deal with it, some practice looting while fighting, others build characters extra strong so they can go into danger and get their drops others still have made new friends so they can maintain gentlemen’s agreements. All fun and part of the game now, and all wasted effort when a button is added that bypasses it.

"

Give me opportunities to ninja other peoples loot? This only shows your short-sightedness and I personally take that as an insult. There are MANY other reasons to prefer the current or pure FFA environment other than what you assume.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

Then you should have no problems finding like-minded players to join your FFA loot games, if it's so action-packed and thrilling.

When I play with friends we DON’T compete, gentlemen’s agreements remember? Do you play public games now? They most defiantly can be action packed and thrilling, when every game has long timer that will be gone.

"

Overall, I think adding options for looting is the worst possible decision GGG could make and I seriously hope they will reconsider. At best it will split the playerbase, and at worse it will be a bad imitation of D3’s system.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

The player base is already split, insofar as that people who cannot stand the current loot system never, ever play in public games, instead relegated to playing solo or with RL friends. If anything, this change will reunite the player base, allowing us to meet new people and adventure together, facing the real adversaries in this game -- the monsters -- rather than fumbling over one another.

If they never ever play it then how do they know how bad it is? I would argue that if they put effort into it and gave it a good honest attempt, especially after they have mastered other parts of the game and are competent players that they MIGHT like it. or at very least would be able to meet some other player, make friends and have those gentlemen’s agreements.

Lastly, if the options do come and we are right that almost nobody plays the current timer or the FFA mode and most every game is ‘no tension’ – would you not agree that we would be all around better off going with full instanced loot like D3?

"

thepmrc wrote:

I just want to quote this as one of the stupidest arguments I have ever read. Why not just give the players a bot program or a trainer? Cuz its basically the same thing as loot options!! yeah, makes sense....

HC is an option, and it is obviously not the easiest option, yet people still choose it. Strange, I know. As you say, this is basically the same principal. If you want to play FFA games, choose FFA, if you don't you can opt out of it. Hooray for diversity.

My point that you seemed to missed, was that people have actually asked for those options. I did not say they were the same thing at all, just that the whole ‘options are always good’ approach is woefully lacking.

Yes the one great thing about HC players is that they play with others that abide by the same rules and compete equally and you cannot just opt out and back again. Now, if you want to argue that the ‘loot options’ should be in a totally separate league? I’ll agree with you.

"

EgypZee wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

I just want to quote this as one of the stupidest arguments I have ever read. Why not just give the players a bot program or a trainer? Cuz its basically the same thing as loot options!! yeah, makes sense....

HC is an option, and it is obviously not the easiest option, yet people still choose it. Strange, I know. As you say, this is basically the same principal. If you want to play FFA games, choose FFA, if you don't you can opt out of it. Hooray for diversity.

My point that you seemed to missed, was that people have actually asked for those options. I did not say they were the same thing at all, just that the whole ‘options are always good’ approach is woefully lacking.

Yes the one great thing about HC players is that they play with others that abide by the same rules and compete equally and you cannot just opt out and back again. Now, if you want to argue that the ‘loot options’ should be in a totally separate league? I’ll agree with you.

I missed the point because it does not exist. You cannot compare two sets of options that are so wildly different in effect on the game and expect the comparison to be relevant.

Example.

I enjoy killing people, so I think killing people should be legal.
I enjoy smoking marijuana, so I think smoking marijuana should be legal.

In both cases the argument is the same, but you cannot reasonably compare the legality of murder and cannabis. You are essentially arguing that if marijuana is legal then why not just legalize murder. Its pure stupidity.

"

EgypZee wrote:

With all due respect, that is your opinion, and I would consider it wrong.

And you, in turn, are entitled to your opinion. But I back up my opinion with demonstrable evidence. You seem to be relying on gut feelings.

"

I don’t understand how you could discount the problems of needing to watch what drops while fighting at the same time, and then positioning or competing for loot while being attacked. HOW can that be the same as just standing and fighting until everything is dead?

I just explained, very carefully, how it can be discounted. And now, I'll explain again how it can be discounted, and continue to explain it all over again, as many times as it takes:

(1) We can play RIGHT NOW, in solo play, guaranteed to get every single loot drop, before, during, or after combat. We can pick the loot up right away. We can alternate between killing monsters and gathering loot. Or we can kill all of the monsters in the zone, go out for a beer, come back, and the loot will still be lying on the ground for us. There is ZERO CORRELATION between the challenge of defeating the monster and the mechanic of picking up the loot.

(2) We can play RIGHT NOW, in multi-player, under a "gentleman's agreement" not to snag one another's items, thus again guaranteed to get every single loot drop, before, during, or after combat. We can pick up our allocated loot right away. We can alternate between killing monsters and gathering loot. Or we can kill all of the monsters in the zone, get together and go out for beers, come back, and the loot will still be lying on the ground for all of us. There is again ZERO CORRELATION between the challenge of all of us defeating the monsters and the mechanic of us picking up our loot.

"

We are not talking about solo games at all. There is obviously no difference between FFA and instanced loot in a solo game.

We're halfway home!

"

Yes, gentlemen’s agreements are where it’s at. It is cooperative play by consent! This is the loot options you already have, and exactly WHY we do not need hard coded options. Agreements like this are can be hard to make, take time to cultivate and any member can choose to break the agreement at any time if they are dissatisfied with it. Perfect.

If you're satisfied with play in this manner, then why object to allowing us to have it hard-coded? What difference does it make to you? How is your game play experience changed in the slightest?

"

If you are saying we can just “do that” now – then why are you not doing it?

Because, obviously, random morons in public games often prove themselves as untrustworthy to obey this edict. Thus, the entire principle collapses. THAT'S WHY WE WANT IT HARD-CODED. So we don't have to deal with the selfish griefers.

"

Hard coding that in would not be such a problem if it were not for the fact that it would be actively imposed on everyone if they want to join a public game. Thus your choices, turns into NO choice for others.

Again, (and AGAIN and AGAIN and AGAIN) we do NOT want this imposed on everyone. No one wants this rule set imposed on everyone. EVEN THE DEVS have *explicitly stated* that they are not going to impose this rule set on everyone. I, for one, can quote them on that.

"

Chris says the dev team is “all ninja looters” I would think it’s safe to infer that means they know it’s more fun that way, at least for them.

That is, indeed, safe to infer. But that isn't what you inferred previously.

"

If I don’t have to worry about looting and can just concentrate on fighting and keeping my character in a safe location instead of moving into danger to loot my survival will increase.

And under a gentleman's agreement, this is the case. Thus, the entire supposed "challenge" of fumbling for loot is wholly mitigated. RIGHT NOW. Hard-coding the gentleman's agreement has *absolutely no effect whatsoever* on game challenge as of this exact moment in time. Nothing is altered. Nothing is made easier. Nothing.

"

I personally will go with long timer if I’m playing HC and I’m going into a dangerous location. By this, I would assume others would as well – on that assumption, I could be wrong, I doubt it, but don’t tell me I’m wrong about what I would choose.

Knock yourself out. Conversely, we choose to avoid entirely having to choose between character survival and loot by never, ever entering a circumstance in which we're forced to make that choice. Such as solo play. Or play with RL friends.

Since we're already doing that anyway; since we're ALREADY PLAYING without having the dark, ominous cloud of loot idiocy hovering over our heads, EVER; what the hell do you care if we do it in public?

"

I like a fast paced game with a system that encourages everyone up front and paying attention. I would only take someone else’s loot if I see them active trying to take mine in a two player game, in a large group I usually dont even attempty to take something unless everyone moved offscreen.

There's nothing challenging about the FFA loot system. Not even remotely. It doesn't involve skill, it doesn't involve competence, it doesn't involve understanding of game mechanics. All it involves is hoping desperately that the random ding-dong that joined your public game isn't going to snatch your orb before you can get to it. That doesn't speak AT ALL toward my capability, skill or efficiency at playing this game. Nor his, for that matter. All it does is speak toward his personality. And I for one I want to play Path of Exile, not Spin the Personality Wheel.

"

also, I like challenge for sure, but I dont take on challenge for no reason.

Which in turn is why many of us refuse to play public games until the loot system options are in place.

"

Currently the timer is so long that I have played entire acts with full groups and got every single item that dropped for me with little effort. It’s not even remotely as big of an issue as it was before they added the timers.

Then why would you object to making the timer "ninety thousand seconds"? What difference would that make to your game experience?

"

I do agree that loot tension can result in aggravation for some players and that is a problem, especially for new players. However so can getting one-shot by bosses and unwanted PVP in bandit quests. I just feel that adding loot options to resolve that potential aggravation will result in a massive and unnecessary game-changing element for everyone.

A) You just got through explaining how the loot timer as it stands now is practically the same as allocated loot. How then would this be a "massive" game-changing element for everyone?

B) Getting one-shot by a boss speaks toward game difficulty. That can be mitigated by learning the fights, re-gearing your character, getting experience. There is no mitigating factor for dealing with morons stealing your loot. It's just going to happen, and there's nothing that can be done about it -- except for avoiding the scenario entirely, which is what we do now.

C) PvP in bandit quests is just as asinine as FFA loot, perhaps more so. But that's a topic for another thread.

"

Most/many of us have taken measures to deal with it, some practice looting while fighting, others build characters extra strong so they can go into danger and get their drops others still have made new friends so they can maintain gentlemen’s agreements. All fun and part of the game now, and all wasted effort when a button is added that bypasses it.

The rest of us have taken the measure to avoid it entirely, so we can focus on actually playing the goddamn game. That's what's fun for us. Getting the loot that we earned stolen from us by random morons is the very antithesis of fun.

I'll reiterate that, because it's extremely important that you accept this fundamental truth: WE DO NOT PLAY IN PUBLIC GAMES. EVER. A vast slew of players -- players like me -- only ever play either in solo games, or in closed multi-player games with trusted friends. You will never, ever, EVER see us in a public game. Thus we will never, ever, EVER have any of our loot stolen. That entire element of the game -- the element that you seem to find so challenging, so fun, so integral to the game experience -- is one that we will NEVER encounter again throughout our PoE careers. Never.

Given this FACT -- given the fact that we will NEVER deal with the idiocy of free-for-all loot -- why, therefore, do you object to allowing us to play TOGETHER, in the same game, in an environment wherein we still will continue to not deal with loot idiocy? Why can't we play together? Hmm? Is it all right if we have YOUR permission to play OUR WAY, together, in the same game, with our play style? Is it all right if, rather than playing privately in an environment in which we're guaranteed our own loot, we play publicly in an environment in which we're guaranteed our own loot? Would that be all right? Or would that somehow magically ruin YOUR game experience?

"

When I play with friends we DON’T compete, gentlemen’s agreements remember? Do you play public games now? They most defiantly can be action packed and thrilling, when every game has long timer that will be gone.

I find nothing action-packed or thrilling about being constantly paranoid that the ding-dong who just joined a public game might turn out to be a loot ninja. If you're masochistic enough to enjoy that experience, then I have great news: FFA loot isn't going away. You'll still be able to merrily create FFA games, fight monsters, and watch random unknown players camp your items until the timer expires. Enjoy.

"

If they never ever play it then how do they know how bad it is?

I should think that is self-evident: they tried it once, got some items jacked, said "screw that" and swore off public games forever. Or quit PoE entirely -- but hopefully will return when the new loot modes are finally in place.

"

I would argue that if they put effort into it and gave it a good honest attempt, especially after they have mastered other parts of the game and are competent players that they MIGHT like it. or at very least would be able to meet some other player, make friends and have those gentlemen’s agreements.

And I would argue that we have given it a good honest attempt, got griefed, and decided to stop being victimized by bullies in a computer game that's supposed to be about fun.

"

Lastly, if the options do come and we are right that almost nobody plays the current timer or the FFA mode and most every game is ‘no tension’ – would you not agree that we would be all around better off going with full instanced loot like D3?

No I would not. Absolutely not. No, I would want FFA loot mode to always be readily available, to sit there, unused and forlorn, as a constant, blaring reminder that it always was and always will be a terrible idea, and that every player who claimed that they were devoted to FFA loot play because of its supposedly intrinsic super-awesomeness was a liar -- either to others, or to himself; take your pick.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

I would want FFA loot mode to always be readily available, to sit there, unused and forlorn, as a constant, blaring reminder that it always was and always will be a terrible idea, and that every player who claimed that they were devoted to FFA loot play because of its supposedly intrinsic super-awesomeness was a liar -- either to others, or to himself; take your pick.

Well, I just want you to know, that won't happen. I'm FFA only except when I play with my guild, but that's their choice and I go along with it.

Even if I'm the only one using FFA, I will stay FFA. Just so you and others like you can't have what you appear to want.

Also, and more importantly, why the hell are people still talking in this thread? I'm simply replying to your insanity (or what I deem insanity). What else is there to really talk about that hasn't been covered in 900+ pages?



Thanks for proving the second line of my signature right. :| At least to me.

Edit: Oh, and this,

"

Xaxyx wrote:

If anything, this change will reunite the player base, allowing us to meet new people and adventure together, facing the real adversaries in this game -- the monsters -- rather than fumbling over one another.

Incorrect. Wraeclast is meant to be a place where the enemies aren't just monsters, but your fellow players as well. Not just in PVP but in other ways as well (FFA loot for example). Say it's not all you want, but Chris himself said this in an interview with Kripp although I slightly paraphrased it.

We are supposed to be able to make friends, but we are also supposed to have players as (potential) enemies as well.

It's not the game you want to play, go play WoW or D3. You'll enjoy it more.

"

TremorAcePV wrote:

"

Xaxyx wrote:

I would want FFA loot mode to always be readily available, to sit there, unused and forlorn, as a constant, blaring reminder that it always was and always will be a terrible idea, and that every player who claimed that they were devoted to FFA loot play because of its supposedly intrinsic super-awesomeness was a liar -- either to others, or to himself; take your pick.

Well, I just want you to know, that won't happen. I'm FFA only except when I play with my guild, but that's their choice and I go along with it.

Even if I'm the only one using FFA, I will stay FFA. Just so you and others like you can't have what you appear to want.

Also, and more importantly, why the hell are people still talking in this thread? I'm simply replying to your insanity (or what I deem insanity). What else is there to really talk about that hasn't been covered in 900+ pages?

Thanks for proving the second line of my signature right. :| At least to me.

Edit: Oh, and this,

"

Xaxyx wrote:

If anything, this change will reunite the player base, allowing us to meet new people and adventure together, facing the real adversaries in this game -- the monsters -- rather than fumbling over one another.

Incorrect. Wraeclast is meant to be a place where the enemies aren't just monsters, but your fellow players as well. Not just in PVP but in other ways as well (FFA loot for example). Say it's not all you want, but Chris himself said this in an interview with Kripp although I slightly paraphrased it.

We are supposed to be able to make friends, but we are also supposed to have player-type enemies as well.

It's not the game you want to play, go play WoW or D3. You'll enjoy it more.

Alright, how often do you host maps for a public party? How often are you even playing in a group that is not your 'guild'? Oh wait, you like guilds? Go play WoW, PoE is not the game for you. FFA loot rocks when you're alone.

Even if you would be the only one playing in a particular league, you'd play it? You truly are hardcore. Congrats.

People are still talking in this thread because this is the place to voice opinions about a game that is currently in beta.

---

Wraeclast can be whatever the developers (and make no mistake, players too) make of it. If a hardcore crowd wants a certain set of rules, or lack there of, have it. If casuals want certain things, have that too.

There is no cut throat feel to being a loot hoarder and if it truly were a hard core PvP environment, players would be able to kill and loot each other. "That guy picked up a unique on my board, he's dead meat". That's cut throat.