Why I'm quitting PoE and no longer recommending it to friends

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

clinx1337 wrote:

1) I love gambling and want to risk it for the biscut!
2) I hate gambling and want a systematic way of attaining my goals.

For me it isn't even so much that. It is about the time consumption. A lot of people will eventually get to the point where they have enough currency where it is all but guaranteed they will get a 6L item. Possibly even enough for 2 and 3 for the ones who put a lot of time into the game.

For these people, having to sit there and re-roll hundreds of fusing orbs would just be a formality. All that rolling is just a waste of their time. many of these folks will decide that it is better for them to just go for a recipe to automatically get the 6L they are going for. They may spend more than they would have to rolling over and over, but it is possible that the time saved is more valuable to them.

As someone who doesn't mind the time rolling for an item, it doesn't directly impact me, but I see the reasoning for it. It has been pointed out A LOT that it doesn't make 6L items more common, or easier to get.

The people who like to gamble would be fine because they will likely have to spend less currency to get their 6L item. It would come at the cost of time for them though. For those who don't like wading through re-rolls, they can just save up enough for the recipe. It seems to me both sides should be satisfied. I don't see much downside for either camp.

I can see how GGG might shy away from this, because a guaranteed formula for a top level item would mean that a lot of people would be working on way to exploit this and end up with top tier items as fast and cheaply as possible. Later on in the life of the game the formula may have to be re-worked. For now though I see no real problem with this formula despite the fact I may never use it.

How would it not be a better system then to combine say 50 orbs into a new type of orbs that has a much higher probability to roll then 50 individual rolls. the trade off is that in those 50 rolls, you could get a 6L item (gamblers approach) or this way, you save up 50 and get the new orb and its more of a "guarantee". This way it almost removed the outliers and is a more "systematic" way to play the law of averages.

According to a recent post. (If these are correct)
"Various figures:
100th Fusing = 27.76197 chance success
300th Fusing = 62.30379 chance success
500th Fusing = 80.32886 """"
700th Fusing = 89.73494 """""

So maybe 2 "new" orbs (it takes 100 fusing orbs to get) have a ~30% chance. This way you roll 2x and its more systematic. The upside? Higher chance you get one after saving. Downside? You could have gotten it with only 1 roll prior and saved 99 orbs...

If you get say 10 orbs maybe you have a 90% chance to get a 6L in there... meaning saving up 500 is a much safer way and isnt the same "gamble" it was before...

The new orbs just weight the higher slots a little more but take all the "chances" out of it... Less of a gamble, more of a "saving" issue...

this would seem to alleviate the pain of the "gamble" and also not only keep or arguably reduce the amount of 6Ls on the market but not take away at all the gamblers desire for the 6L via regular orbs...

"

clinx1337 wrote:

So it seems that players fall into 2 camps.

1) I love gambling and want to risk it for the biscut!
2) I hate gambling and want a systematic way of attaining my goals.

I for one don't mind gambling. What I mind is being *forced* to gamble, at absurdly slim odds, just in order to obtain an important, significant upgrade to my character, without any other available means of achieving that goal on my own. This is no different than being punished for experiencing a streak of bad luck.

I asked pages and pages ago for someone to explain the distinction between the current 6L scenario, and the Orb of Leveling, an item that would theoretically be required to advance past level 70, with similar drop odds to 6L. Why is it that those who are so vociferous in defense of the current 6L schema are not similarly inclined to implement an artificial barrier on leveling? The scenarios are identical in every fashion:

- They artificially impose a LIMIT on the character's potential
- They do not at all prevent a character from otherwise playing and defeating every single aspect of the game's content
- They are wholly RANDOM in their reward structure, that reward being ALL OR NOTHING

Yet the voices who call against increasing the accessibility to 6L are silent when it comes to implementing an Orb of Leveling. Why is that? Can someone from the pro-6L-rarity camp please elaborate on that? I find the contrast absolutely fascinating.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

"

clinx1337 wrote:

So it seems that players fall into 2 camps.

1) I love gambling and want to risk it for the biscut!
2) I hate gambling and want a systematic way of attaining my goals.

I for one don't mind gambling. What I mind is being *forced* to gamble, at absurdly slim odds, just in order to obtain an important, significant upgrade to my character, without any other available means of achieving that goal on my own. This is no different than being punished for experiencing a streak of bad luck.

I asked pages and pages ago for someone to explain the distinction between the current 6L scenario, and the Orb of Leveling, an item that would theoretically be required to advance past level 70, with similar drop odds to 6L. Why is it that those who are so vociferous in defense of the current 6L schema are not similarly inclined to implement an artificial barrier on leveling? The scenarios are identical in every fashion:

- They artificially impose a LIMIT on the character's potential
- They do not at all prevent a character from otherwise playing and defeating every single aspect of the game's content
- They are wholly RANDOM in their reward structure, that reward being ALL OR NOTHING

Yet the voices who call against increasing the accessibility to 6L are silent when it comes to implementing an Orb of Leveling. Why is that? Can someone from the pro-6L-rarity camp please elaborate on that? I find the contrast absolutely fascinating.

I back this argument 100% and dont see how you can rationalize against it. Imposing a RNG limit on a character progression is in no way shape or form going to keep people playing past "end game"...

You HAVE to have something to work towards when logging in. And by work I mean WORK, not just "on your way to work, stumbling across the winning lotto ticket" or while at work, a client walks in and hands you a winning lotto ticket. Work = slow progress over time.

Work = what keeps players coming back. Why do you think people flocked back to D3 after the paragon system? cause there was actually something to gain via progression!!! That is what gamers strive for, not the random loot end game, that is what killed D3 (along with MANY other factors...) But there was nothing to do and no point in logging in because you could potentially waste hours and be in the EXACT same spot you were 3 hours ago. This makes people QUIT!

EVEN CASUAL GAMERS WANT BIS gear! Casual gamers will strive for the best gear they can, and if that is all based on RNG, guess what? they either will try to get it and fail, thus quitting, OR not try to get it and see no point in playing because its too much RnG for them and quit. Either way, people WILL quit.

Create a system that lets you accumulate small "progression" over time and it becomes something people WILL do... Its simple...

"

clinx1337 wrote:

Solution 2:
Change the current system so that the statistics/probability of getting a 6L start increasing after a certain lvl. I would NOT have this be based upon character level but item level as this would alleviate the "inflows" of 6L onto the market. Lower levels would not be able to use the gear, and this allows players who couldnt get one through RNG have a higher probability by leveling their character, which gives a more "systematic" way of doing it.

I have thought about this and realized it is potentially bad news. a person could level a character, reach higher level content (you are basing this on item level, but could be as easily done with item level) then open shop and start crafting for people, charging some price for it.

"

clinx1337 wrote:

Work = what keeps players coming back. Why do you think people flocked back to D3 after the paragon system? cause there was actually something to gain via progression!!! That is what gamers strive for, not the random loot end game, that is what killed D3 (along with MANY other factors...) But there was nothing to do and no point in logging in because you could potentially waste hours and be in the EXACT same spot you were 3 hours ago. This makes people QUIT!

this is the correct answer to all the criticism that i, among others, got on this issue.

you may think you want an easier 6l, we all want an easier 6l, but you don't want an easier 6l.

you say you want an easier 6l, but you really don't.

Dao,

No I do NOT want an easier 6ling, I just want less of a gamble in trying to obtain it and one thing that makes me quit games is spending hours and hours towards a goal, and being in the exact same place when I start... I just cant seem to muster up the drive to keep playing when that happens. IE: why I quit D3...

"a person could level a character, reach higher level content (you are basing this on item level, but could be as easily done with item level) then open shop and start crafting for people, charging some price for it."

How would this happen if the 6slots were only more prevailent among say item lvl 70+ meaning the required lvl is lvl 70 or higher. Currently only "Saintly Chainmail (lvl 70)" and "Carnal Armor (lvl 71)" would fit this description. I could see the odds scaling so whenever lvl 80+ gear comes out, it would have an even higher % to roll 6L then 70 gear etc. This does not allow players to hit the high lvl and open up a cash shop since only players lvl 70 or higher would buy this to use it and why if they can go farm their own lvl 70 item? Its not as if a lvl 80 person could roll 6L with a higher chance on a lvl 50 "Commander's Brigandine" Its that the gear at that lvl has a higher chance. So its actually all gear based NOT character based... but it creates the "drive" to lvl up and get the higher tier gear seeing as that is the "higher chances" of getting the end game 6 slot!

Maxthelimit,

I see where your coming from here "I can see some complaints coming through. People will complain that there is even MORE currency items. People already complain about the number of currency items and how complicated valuation is."

I guess I would respond and say which is better, to stack 500 orbs of fusing and take up that inventory space, or to reduce that 500 to 10 and it takes less inventory. The currency is complicated but where talking about a direct exchange system here viable via vendor. So the ratio is fixed thus the currency in relation to orbs currently offered is fixed on what that orb is already worth. It makes no changes to currency since it is a fixed ratio offered equally to all players. Or heck, this would bring up Dao's problem but make it only available in Act 3 Merciless or something, Thus there is a "driving force" to get to the end game to be able to swap for these new orbs....

"

clinx1337 wrote:

"

MaxTheLimit wrote:

"

clinx1337 wrote:

1) I love gambling and want to risk it for the biscut!
2) I hate gambling and want a systematic way of attaining my goals.

For me it isn't even so much that. It is about the time consumption. A lot of people will eventually get to the point where they have enough currency where it is all but guaranteed they will get a 6L item. Possibly even enough for 2 and 3 for the ones who put a lot of time into the game.

For these people, having to sit there and re-roll hundreds of fusing orbs would just be a formality. All that rolling is just a waste of their time. many of these folks will decide that it is better for them to just go for a recipe to automatically get the 6L they are going for. They may spend more than they would have to rolling over and over, but it is possible that the time saved is more valuable to them.

As someone who doesn't mind the time rolling for an item, it doesn't directly impact me, but I see the reasoning for it. It has been pointed out A LOT that it doesn't make 6L items more common, or easier to get.

The people who like to gamble would be fine because they will likely have to spend less currency to get their 6L item. It would come at the cost of time for them though. For those who don't like wading through re-rolls, they can just save up enough for the recipe. It seems to me both sides should be satisfied. I don't see much downside for either camp.

I can see how GGG might shy away from this, because a guaranteed formula for a top level item would mean that a lot of people would be working on way to exploit this and end up with top tier items as fast and cheaply as possible. Later on in the life of the game the formula may have to be re-worked. For now though I see no real problem with this formula despite the fact I may never use it.

How would it not be a better system then to combine say 50 orbs into a new type of orbs that has a much higher probability to roll then 50 individual rolls. the trade off is that in those 50 rolls, you could get a 6L item (gamblers approach) or this way, you save up 50 and get the new orb and its more of a "guarantee". This way it almost removed the outliers and is a more "systematic" way to play the law of averages.

According to a recent post. (If these are correct)
"Various figures:
100th Fusing = 27.76197 chance success
300th Fusing = 62.30379 chance success
500th Fusing = 80.32886 """"
700th Fusing = 89.73494 """""

So maybe 2 "new" orbs (it takes 100 fusing orbs to get) have a ~30% chance. This way you roll 2x and its more systematic. The upside? Higher chance you get one after saving. Downside? You could have gotten it with only 1 roll prior and saved 99 orbs...

If you get say 10 orbs maybe you have a 90% chance to get a 6L in there... meaning saving up 500 is a much safer way and isnt the same "gamble" it was before...

The new orbs just weight the higher slots a little more but take all the "chances" out of it... Less of a gamble, more of a "saving" issue...

this would seem to alleviate the pain of the "gamble" and also not only keep or arguably reduce the amount of 6Ls on the market but not take away at all the gamblers desire for the 6L via regular orbs...

This is probably the best solution I have seen for the current system and something most people can accept. Having to use several hundred orbs by: Repeat (click currency, drag and click item) untill (item contains 6 linked sockets), just does not compute. ;)

clinx1337

i was actually quoting you because i agreed with you!

work = players stay.

"

Xaxyx wrote:

Yet the voices who call against increasing the accessibility to 6L are silent when it comes to implementing an Orb of Leveling. Why is that? Can someone from the pro-6L-rarity camp please elaborate on that? I find the contrast absolutely fascinating.

Because you are comparing apples and oranges.

Acquiring high end gear and attaining max level are COMPLETELY different. I feel stupider for having read your post, thank you.

"

I back this argument 100% and dont see how you can rationalize against it. Imposing a RNG limit on a character progression is in no way shape or form going to keep people playing past "end game"...

IT IS NOT A LIMIT ON YOUR CHARACTER PROGRESSION, SIMPLY ON YOUR GEAR. GEAR =/= PROGRESSION. THIS IS NOT D3