"Map to Maker" changes in Patch 0.11.2

I didn't read the whole topic, maybe this suggestion already was made. How about add to "only normal/magic/rare Maps will be allocated to the creator of the Map" and highest level Maps (regardless what was the colour of Map) in the Map will be allocated to the creator.

"

Madroxmultiply wrote:

"

LBGxValor wrote:

i cant wait for it to go full release so they can do a server wipe

to my knowledge there will be no server wipe.

you really think they wont do a server wipe when going to full release? lol it would be unwise for them to not do a server wipe when introducing new acts, areas, and going full release...idk just saying..

h

"

LBGxValor wrote:

"

Madroxmultiply wrote:

"

LBGxValor wrote:

i cant wait for it to go full release so they can do a server wipe

to my knowledge there will be no server wipe.

you really think they wont do a server wipe when going to full release? lol it would be unwise for them to not do a server wipe when introducing new acts, areas, and going full release...idk just saying..

They had stated after closed beta ended and open beta started that there would never be another server wipe.

Chris confirms no more character wipes here:
http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/34106/page/6

theres no need for wipes anyway, new non permanent leagues will always provide the same function without anyone losing anything.

I love how all the responses to me are "omg 66 maps nobody cares about noob make ur base and run them solo" or some other retarded shit when they can't even read what I said.

When you're too stupid to read what I said as a genuine concern about the inability to play maps in a group you don't have 100% faith in, you're too stupid to be allowed a response.

Good news! :D

Permanent Allocation was a step in the wrong direction.

This is a further step in that wrong direction, and unfortunately an indicator that GGG probably won't be undoing the damage already caused.

Parties should have tension between them. This isn't Happy Sunshine Fun World, this is Wraeclast. Your character should trust your party members' characters as far as (s)he can throw them.

Players often live under the misguided belief that, if things were made easier, then the game would be better and their happiness would be improved. This is not the case. The point of video games is overcoming challenges, and streamlining an optional process, such as multiplayer co-op or trading, only makes sense if there are still things about that process which are significant drawbacks from the default experience.

GGG is doing to party play what Diablo 3 did with trading. It won't end well.

What should have happened is a noticeboard matchmaking system under a single, loot-options-free system; this matchmaking system automatically and invisibly would match players with parties that have similar "ninja" tendencies to their own, without ever forcing them to behave in one manner or another, nor preventing them from manually joining parties with friends on their friends list.

I'm deeply disappointed by GGG here.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Permanent Allocation was a step in the wrong direction.

This is a further step in that wrong direction, and unfortunately an indicator that GGG probably won't be undoing the damage already caused.

Parties should have tension between them. This isn't Happy Sunshine Fun World, this is Wraeclast. Your character should trust your party members' characters as far as (s)he can throw them.

Well, that is your op. man.

I am so glad I can finally concentrate on the game, effects and play more relaxed, than trying to ninja (and I was ninjaing very good). Dont know how anyone can say, perm allco was a wrong decision, when there is still the old system + an ffa option for the ultra ninjas out there. Wtf do you want more?

"

WUlf1337 wrote:

I am so glad I can finally concentrate on the game, effects and play more relaxed, than trying to ninja (and I was ninjaing very good). Dont know how anyone can say, perm allco was a wrong decision, when there is still the old system + an ffa option for the ultra ninjas out there. Wtf do you want more?

Neither. I agree that having huge disparities in loot preferences between players is not a good thing; however, that doesn't mean I support a change that almost totally eliminates loot preferences between players. That's why I mentioned the matchmaking system as an example of an appropriate fix.

The thing people fail to understand is that how you fix a problem is important. There is such a thing as fixing things the wrong way, which hold the potential for disaster because the "improvement" gets a lot of support for being "better" than things used to be. Normally these are changes where a certain practice is almost completely eliminated, like non-permanent allocation in PoE or face-to-face trading in Diablo 3. Permanent allocation didn't fix loot tension, it amputated it. It's something we should have kept and fixed properly.