I wish it made sense to craft before end game

"

Subversus wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

"

Subversus wrote:

I would disagree that the game too strongly promotes trading as it is.

That 120 page thread is filled with the same people making the same flawed arguments in a circle, and is hardly indicative of the greater playerbase's thoughts on the subject.

Most people are busy playing the game.

My First Rule of Gaming Forums is: "Players have absolutely no fucking idea what they want; they only know what they hate." In other words, whenever you see a truly massive QQ movement, you can very easily discount almost every proposal made on how to change the game to its benefit, but the one thing you shouldn't do is just ignore them completely. There is a problem there, somewhere, which is causing mass outcry. The trick is filtering out all the propaganda and properly diagnosing the cause within the game itself which is inciting them.

You make a solid point, but I still say trading or drop rates have nothing to do with these players' predicament.

To be honest, I'm not sure anything is inciting these people besides the fact that not trading is harder than trading, and the whole 120+ pages can be summarized as such. All that comes to mind when I read the elaborate arguments calling for a change to that fact is the classic Picard face palm.

Pretty much. However, something does bother them, so let's work it out.

1. Nerfs are mostly just jealousy, buffs show what you really care about. The SFL is all about nerfing trading (jealousy) and buffing farming (what they really care about). Thus we can deduce that the real problem which bothers them has to do with farming, and not trading.

2. We can simply ignore requests for universal drop rate increases, as that would simply make the game easier. Yes, something that may make the game easier will get some added popularity as a result, because some short-sighted players are willing to get "free upgrades" by browbeating the devs into reducing the challenge. However, it's also true that a larger population of gamers at least have enough self-awareness to know that simply making a game easier doesn't make the game more fun, because the game is in the journey, not the destination. The SFL movement wouldn't be as big as it is if it was predicated entirely on the concept of making the game easier, and this is something they repeatedly decry that they are not about. I believe them on that point. So it's not just "more drop rates plox." You're 2 for 2 so far.

So it's something about the journey (not making the game strictly easier or harder), it's about farming, and it causes players who hate trading to go nuts. Those are our knowns.

So you think about farming, and eventually you settle on what I said earlier on this thread: that it has to do with the ratio of "tradeable" items found as opposed to items which you can use directly. In short, it's not really about self-found, it's about self-use; that's what they really care about, being able to use more of what they find. To which I say: go ahead, give them more orbs, and give them less "tradeable" items which remind them that they could be getting more value by trading. Overall game difficulty is maintained because you're not getting more total loot, you're getting more of one kind and less of another. Problem mitigated.

Of course, they're still going to farm some "tradeables" — and the game is still going to push players to trade, just not as hard. This is something the Self-Use League people are just going to have to accept, because trading requires effort and thus deserves to be rewarded, too. GGG can, and probably should, make the game something they'd like better; what they shouldn't do is warp the game on a fundamental level according to the whims of a vocal minority. It's a matter of moderation, hearing legitimate complaints through all the static and responding in a reasoned, logical manner.

wtf is 'diminishing returns'?


the phrase doesn't make any sense.

Diminishing means disappearing, right? If something is diminishing that means that it is slowly going away..


So your 'returns' are slowly going away?

That would mean that eventually they are zero?



Damn this game and the strange lingo -.-

Diminishing returns is a fundamental principle of economics. For a quick example: producing items of value and the effort that goes into that production: too much effort, and you don't get a result that is proportional with that effort.

You hire a person in your factory to make Item X. Item X sells well. You hire another person in your factory to make Item X. You double the money you make.

As you hire more workers, eventually the factory gets crowded. Workers start standing around, waiting for production space to open up so they can start producing Item X. Productivity drops. If you maintain the level of workers and lowered state of productivity, money made by selling Item X isn't as much as the money spent making Item X. Not as much money made = not as much money being used to make Item X. That feeds upon itself, and you start losing money.

Diminishing returns.

"

brgillespie wrote:

Diminishing returns is a fundamental principle of economics. For a quick example: producing items of value and the effort that goes into that production: too much effort, and you don't get a result that is proportional with that effort.

You hire a person in your factory to make Item X. Item X sells well. You hire another person in your factory to make Item X. You double the money you make.

As you hire more workers, eventually the factory gets crowded. Workers start standing around, waiting for production space to open up so they can start producing Item X. Productivity drops. If you maintain the level of workers and lowered state of productivity, money made by selling Item X isn't as much as the money spent making Item X. Not as much money made = not as much money being used to make Item X. That feeds upon itself, and you start losing money.

Diminishing returns.

I vote that the phrase be re-worded to "Diminished Returns"

idk why, but it makes more sense to me like that.



Anyway, how does the factory analogy work with this game? People use the 'diminishing returns' phrase as some kind of 'event' that takes place in this game... but I suffer from diminishing returns every time I try to solo with a broken character as opposed to party and leech items off people..

but i don't think that's the type of diminishing returns that people are referring to in this game.. Or is it a phrase used widely for different things?

"

Anyway, how does the factory analogy work with this game? People use the 'diminishing returns' phrase as some kind of 'event' that takes place in this game... but I suffer from diminishing returns every time I try to solo with a broken character as opposed to party and leech items off people..

MF is a perfect example.

Let's say you have +100% IIR... great! You are now finding twice as many rares and uniques as before.

Add another 100%, (you are at 200%IIR now) and you're finding only 50% more than when you had 100%IIR... cool, cool.

Add another 100%, (you are at 300%IIR now) and you're now only finding 33% more than the previous tier. Eh, stacking more IIR doesn't seem so appealing now.

I'm sure my math is fucked up completely, and this could be worded better.

Diminishing returns isn't just an economic principle, it can apply to just about anything.

Say you're trying to lose weight and tone up. Initially, it's easy to lose large amounts of water weight with very little effort. You're work vs reward ratio is tipped further toward reward. But as you continue to work out, it becomes more and more difficult to see results.

It's just the idea of your work to reward ratio shifting toward work gradually.

"

Antnee wrote:

"

Anyway, how does the factory analogy work with this game? People use the 'diminishing returns' phrase as some kind of 'event' that takes place in this game... but I suffer from diminishing returns every time I try to solo with a broken character as opposed to party and leech items off people..

MF is a perfect example.

Let's say you have +100% IIR... great! You are now finding twice as many rares and uniques as before.

Add another 100%, (you are at 200%IIR now) and you're finding only 50% more than when you had 100%IIR... cool, cool.

Add another 100%, (you are at 300%IIR now) and you're now only finding 33% more than the previous tier. Eh, stacking more IIR doesn't seem so appealing now.

I'm sure my math is fucked up completely, and this could be worded better.

This is wrong because you have a moving point of reference.

Again... playing HC self-found:

The one currency I can't bear to use is the GCP. They're far too rare for their use. I don't think I should be able to get every skill to 20% on a playthrough, but I should certainly expect to get one skill up to max playing a character through all three difficulties. Right now I'd guess my expectation is 3-5 of them. The drop rates on quality gems is too low to make the vendor recipe for 40% appealing. I simply hoard this orb with no plans to ever use them.



This is all I've found with 9 characters over level 50.

actually like the bind on -League more then self found League,

somehow people resell stuffs they used and this will for sure stop it :)

Depends on what you're after.

In my case, my goal is Fun. I'm having Fun via crafting, seeing what combos of which get me XYZ items from which vendor, and gambling with currency RNG and items.

I do this throughout my entire leveling arc, right from the get go.

It's cool if people don't though, if anything one of PoE's great strengths is playing the game any way you see fit.