Self-Found (League) [Thread outdated!]
" Maybe. But they make it a bit harder for soloplayers with the upcoming changes of auras, costing lot more mana. Parties will be able to run all manas with "hugh buff effects". Soloing will in many cases only have 1-2 auras. IGN: Hydralin
|
|
" Pure nonsense. Rebalancing loot & crafting would not require months of work to "completely rewrite XY", because else we wouldn’t have several leagues, with different parameters, like Descent which in fact contained higher drop rates. GGG has all the mechanics to tweak & control drop-rates & crafting already in place because their system of leagues & balancing demands such flexibility. Creating a Self-found league would not require more work than creating Anarchy or Onslaught. All that is missing is the political will to do so. I'm still of the opinion that GGG is afraid that a bunch of nerds playing solo self-found and generally just minding their own business, would generate less revenue for them, than a system where you are required to spam chat, spam forums, advertize, create begging threads, create scamming lotteries, spend more time on the internetz than in the game... and generally """socialize""" (cant put enough quotes around that, lol!) to be able to progress in the game... As a philosophy, SFL would not fit in this forced silly bartering system that is in place right now and could even ruin it - having people just playing the ARPG game, without caring about stock prices, market crashes, chinese farmers, botters, RMT, streamer fusing lotteries... outrageous, I say! :P When night falls She cloaks the world In impenetrable darkness Last edited by morbo#1824 on Oct 21, 2013, 4:43:57 AM
|
|
" Just jumped on to say this. You guys were a small loud group. Same as this "movement". Don't let ongZ get your hopes up. "Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you're right!" Henry Ford
|
|
"While I actually agree with the "Anarchy" part of that, I disagree with the "Onslaught." Creating several Rogue Exiles and testing against them to ensure that they were neither too weak nor too strong (for the most part) wasn't something that happened instantly; it required some behind-the-scenes, honest-to-god playtesting, not just in particular areas but in all areas where Rogues could spawn, across all difficulties. And playtesting takes time. (Onslaught, on the other hand, was a watered-down version of a common race mod, a throw-away option.) Any sort of "increased drop rate" rebalance would almost definitely require effort similar to Anarchy's testing. The problem is not that you equate this type of change to Anarchy, but that you brush it off as easy and costless, as if getting a small group of testers to run through content for days isn't something that costs a game studio money. Creating Anarchy costed money. Creating Domination and Nemesis costed money. Creating Leagues that actually have significant balance changes costs money. Is it possible to create new leagues? Of course it is. But it has a price tag. And most importantly, SFL wouldn't solve the real problem anyway. Do you really believe that increasing drop rates is somehow going to magically fix low-level crafting, or that it's going to make it so gear progression isn't as much of a grind? Did you learn nothing when Jay Wilson famously said "double it" (referring to unique drop rates)... and absolutely no good came of it? You guys are barking up the wrong tree when it comes to a solution for your ills. Want to read a serious suggestion on how to fix low-level crafting? Read this. Want to read a serious discussion on how to make progression feel like less of a grind? Read this. And while you're at it, check out the second link for specifically why increasing drop rates doesn't solve the problems of a grindy progression. I'm not saying I'm perfect; maybe my ideas are wrong. But at least I'm not walking into obvious traps which anyone familiar with D3's history knows will not work. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Oct 21, 2013, 5:00:09 AM
|
|
" Not that it detracts from the point, but the original, famous "we doubled it" referred to the pre-nerf Inferno difficulty :) Have you made a cool build using The Coming Calamity? Let me know!
|
|
" I know you hate with a passion the idea of an SFL, but you mention D3 and the last news from D3 is that they have realised that their model of buying gear through trading and auction house is not what an ARGP is about and that they are going back to the original concept of finding items by killing mobs and looting what drops. Not by spending ages trading. One of their reasons was they have noticed that players spent more time trading than they did actually playing the game and that is not what they want to see in their ARGP. I'm not saying D3 is suddenly perfect, but at least they have the sense to realise that an ARGP is a hack n' slash to get loot, not a buy low, sell high trading economic simulator. I know you will never agree and will fight the idea of having a SFL constantly. Last edited by Jaknet#1426 on Oct 21, 2013, 5:21:45 AM
|
|
|
I think Scrotie is more against using the SLF to try and fix other problems.
He wants those problems fixed, and is worried that an SFL would be used as a fake fix for those problems. IGN
|
|
|
Many issues will never completely go away when the game is balanced around trading. They can make improvements but it will always be there.
Standard Forever
|
|
"I've got a question for you. Let's say you're looking at two ugly people; I'm not going to be gender specific, just whatever you're normally sexually attracted to, except not as much as usual in this case, because they're ugly. Then, you take the slightly prettier one away. Does this make the other one any less ugly? No, it doesn't. Removing the Auction Houses from Diablo 3 isn't going to change all that much on its own. Yes, searchable buyouts are a detestable thing, and to that I joyfully say good riddance. But the only thing that made playing the Auction Houses so appealing to so many, so much of a solid preference, was the fact that Diablo 3 is a truly shitty ARPG. Its itemization is horrible, its attempts at build diversity are pathetic, and it doesn't really have an endgame because, just like a typical Activision title, may have had nice graphics (sort of) and bells and whistles, but its worn out all its novelty long before you get a chance to finish Inferno. But more than anything, its itemization is truly horrible. When confronted with the choice between continuing to actually play Diablo 3 the ARPG or take their spoils thus far and use them to play Diablo 3 the Market Simulator instead, thousands upon thousands chose, voluntarily, wilfully, to play the Market Simulator. That does not say good things about the quality of the actual ARPG. Getting rid of the Auction Houses isn't the magic fix for all of Diablo 3's ills. Essentially, it will feel a hell of a lot like playing Diablo 3 used to feel, if for some reason you had imposed the masochistic restriction upon yourself to never use the Auction House and instead rely solely on self-found progression to grind your way through the game. If not properly planned for, it actually could make the game even worse. If the Market Simulator was in fact the better, more enjoyable game, you could make the argument that Blizzard is removing the So if what concerns you is how many people play the markets in Path of Exile, and how people voluntarily, wilfully choose the market game over the ARPG game, you shouldn't be looking at it as some monopolistic tycoon would, simply trying to eliminate all the competition for the ARPG's attention. Instead, you should be looking at what that kind of behavior says about the ARPG part of the game itself, because apparently the taste test results are back, and it's the market game which has the people's approval. If you think it's the end consumer who benefits from having the best-tasting result eliminated from the market, while the losing result remains unchanged and just as fucked-up as it used to be... then you really don't have your priorities straight. The right course from here isn't nerfing trading. It's buffing the non-trading elements of the game. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Oct 21, 2013, 6:23:33 AM
|
|
" Um, no, it doesn't cost money. Creating a new league is as simple as creating a new table in a database. For a self-found league, the only thing they'd have to do is create a new league and disable trading. Really not that difficult. If you're reading this, I'm probably on another year-long ban.
Thanks GGG. |
|
