Power creep isn't an inevitable consequence of trying to balance builds against each other. If the only strategy you use is to release new items that buff blindly, continually playing leapfrog with the old builds, then yes, you get power creep. But it doesn't have to be like that, and a smart combination of both buffs and nerfs leads to a more homeostatic pattern.
However, players rightfully are concerned about incoming nerfs to the current viable builds, because such nerfs threaten to lower those builds below the threshold needed to maintain viability — that is, not just balance against competing builds but also balanced against game difficulty.
The truth is, if the game currently is too difficult relative to builds, a little bit of power creep might be a good thing. Reducing the monsters directly isn't the only way to do it; making the average build more powerful accomplishes the same task.
Right now, the game isn't impossible, it's just that the number of viable builds is more limited. I'd like to see direct, targeted buffs on specific nonviable builds, designed to avoid buffing the currently viable builds. This isn't just true for active gems, where it's easiest, but also the passive tree, making the "bad nodes" more competitive against the current favorites. If this is buff-focused, we might not need to manually adjust game difficulty overall so much as smooth it out in specific problem areas.
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.
I dunno, the bringing everything up to the powerful builds seems like power creep. In fact the entire OB experience so far has felt like the power creep. CB's popular/strong builds were nerfed, builds that were gaining popularity stayed the same and OB added new powerful builds. Ones that weren't powerful were mostly nerfed by the changes to the popular builds and nerfed further by the buffs to monsters.
I'd personally like a step back on damage, player and mob, similar to what was done with life.
They never even addressed the issue with physical damage. The issue with physical damage was rolling semi decent physical damage is basically impossible, making phys dmg builds gimped for a very long time. This is already on top of the fact that dealing with physical reflect is way more dangerous for them than it is for an ele reflect.
So what does GGG do? Just ramp up the amount of damage phys dmg builds do. Yay. Except... they still have to take 85% of life/defense nodes and then have fairly hard to obtain gear to compete.
Hilbert, you use to annoy me but I find myself agreeing with you very much recently.
What I never understood about GGG. There was a massive migration from D3 to POE after 1.03 in the long wait for 1.04 when GGG had it's open weekend. People came over from D3's rigid builds and insane difficulty and fell in love with POE's seemingly endless build options and easier end game. People still died, and POE was tough but you didn't feel like the game was laughing at you like you did with D3.
OB hits, they ramp up the difficulty to inferno type levels. Now all builds are built off the same skeletons. Even if they are unique they have 10-20% different passives than a cookie cutter build, if that.
I fell in love with the diversity the game offers. But whenever I try a really unique build, basically something that doesn't share the same skeleton as all the other's, my progress is why more difficult and the gear required to make it work is tremendous.
The stuff with act 3x makes it look like they are adding in more difficult mobs through their AI and skills but I'm really hoping they lower damage, elemental in particular.
Hilbert annoys me all the time, even when he's right. But I digress. ;)
As I explained above, there are two different solutions to that problem:
1. Reduce difficulty, make more borderline builds viable again because standards aren't as high
2. Increase balance between builds, make more borderline builds viable again by bringing them in line with the current viable builds
#2 is the best in the end, but it's also the hardest on the developers. Now that I think about it, at a certain point it becomes impossible. GGG intends to continually introduce new content, which includes new skill gems, new uniques, all sorts of new stuff. One does not simply balance that stuff to a high degree of precision running right out the gate; the level of balance needed to sustain truly hard difficulty and diversity simultaneously is too big of a job to perform over and over again in such a manner. You need something where you can just release it and have it be somewhat in the right ballpark, based off just a small amount of alpha testing and trusting your gut; it's important to have realistic expectations here of balance upon release.
That said, we probably do need to reduce difficulty in a few places — not all of them or some kind of global reduction, but in a few targeted areas. I think elemental damage is a good area to specify, because if you don't have capped resists, some things hit like a truck. Of course, there is always the "balance" method too, and some things like making Ruby/Topaz/Sapphire flasks more appealing might help to ease these issues without weakening the monsters. But something should be done to address such issues, because if the monsters are utterly unyielding in a certain area, that's an area which is now longer allowed to be a build weakness, and thus certain builds are no longer viable.
I still think the primary focus should be on increasing balance and not on reducing difficulty. However, at a certain point GGG needs to get real about how much time they have and the issues which need fixing, and sometimes choose the easier option (temporarily) instead of the ideal one. Build diversity is the key, more than anything else, to determining the success or failure of an ARPG, as the OP explains; if we truly are forced to choose between diversity and difficulty, we shouldn't be choosing difficulty.
I would not play a perfectly balanced ARPG. In my estimation a perfectly balanced ARPG is a soon-to-be-dead ARPG. In a completely balanced ARPG all skills are cookie-cutter and it has no place for the players' personal experimentation.
Hilbert, you use to annoy me but I find myself agreeing with you very much recently.
What I never understood about GGG. There was a massive migration from D3 to POE after 1.03 in the long wait for 1.04 when GGG had it's open weekend. People came over from D3's rigid builds and insane difficulty and fell in love with POE's seemingly endless build options and easier end game. People still died, and POE was tough but you didn't feel like the game was laughing at you like you did with D3.
OB hits, they ramp up the difficulty to inferno type levels. Now all builds are built off the same skeletons. Even if they are unique they have 10-20% different passives than a cookie cutter build, if that.
I fell in love with the diversity the game offers. But whenever I try a really unique build, basically something that doesn't share the same skeleton as all the other's, my progress is why more difficult and the gear required to make it work is tremendous.
The stuff with act 3x makes it look like they are adding in more difficult mobs through their AI and skills but I'm really hoping they lower damage, elemental in particular.
Hilbert annoys me all the time, even when he's right. But I digress. ;)
As I explained above, there are two different solutions to that problem:
1. Reduce difficulty, make more borderline builds viable again because standards aren't as high
2. Increase balance between builds, make more borderline builds viable again by bringing them in line with the current viable builds
#2 is the best in the end, but it's also the hardest on the developers. Now that I think about it, at a certain point it becomes impossible. GGG intends to continually introduce new content, which includes new skill gems, new uniques, all sorts of new stuff. One does not simply balance that stuff to a high degree of precision running right out the gate; the level of balance needed to sustain truly hard difficulty and diversity simultaneously is too big of a job to perform over and over again in such a manner. You need something where you can just release it and have it be somewhat in the right ballpark, based off just a small amount of alpha testing and trusting your gut; it's important to have realistic expectations here of balance upon release.
That said, we probably do need to reduce difficulty in a few places — not all of them or some kind of global reduction, but in a few targeted areas. I think elemental damage is a good area to specify, because if you don't have capped resists, some things hit like a truck. Of course, there is always the "balance" method too, and some things like making Ruby/Topaz/Sapphire flasks more appealing might help to ease these issues without weakening the monsters. But something should be done to address such issues, because if the monsters are utterly unyielding in a certain area, that's an area which is now longer allowed to be a build weakness, and thus certain builds are no longer viable.
I still think the primary focus should be on increasing balance and not on reducing difficulty. However, at a certain point GGG needs to get real about how much time they have and the issues which need fixing, and sometimes choose the easier option (temporarily) instead of the ideal one. Build diversity is the key, more than anything else, to determining the success or failure of an ARPG, as the OP explains; if we truly are forced to choose between diversity and difficulty, we shouldn't be choosing difficulty.
I would not play a perfectly balanced ARPG. In my estimation a perfectly balanced ARPG is a soon-to-be-dead ARPG. In a completely balanced ARPG all skills are cookie-cutter and it has no place for the players' personal experimentation.
I guess then you're lucky that a perfectly balanced ARPG is impossible.
Still, I get your point: when there are no wrong choices, choices cease to have meaning. However, you're being paranoid, because that doesn't mean that there need to be any choices which are always wrong. Using a binary system, you can have 101 and 010 both be correct answers... but have 011 fail. If you do that, none of the decisions is ever flat-out wrong, but can be wrong given the context of previous (or future) choices. Those are the sorts of situations which good balance tries to achieve.
Just look at Starcraft: each unit you can build has a purpose, a situation where it is the right decision, but because each one has a specific role, it's definitely possible to make wrong choices regarding which one you need to build now. Ideally, passive nodes and skill gems all work the same way: each has a time where it is the right choice, and also times where it is the wrong one. And when it comes to the "how often" question, whether something that's the absolute best 90% of the time is balanced against something that's the absolute best 5% of the time, is that good enough? Um, yeah. Damn right that's balanced enough, because you only need to be the absolute best once to actually get used.
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 18, 2013, 8:41:33 AM
Ideally, passive nodes and skill gems all work the same way: each has a time where it is the right choice, and also times where it is the wrong one. And when it comes to the "how often" question, whether something that's the absolute best 90% of the time is balanced against something that's the absolute best 5% of the time, is that good enough? Um, yeah. Damn right that's balanced enough, because you only need to be the absolute best once to actually get used.
I agree with the gist of what you're saying, but I do think the Starcraft comparison doesn't add up at this point. In Starcraft (and many other RTS'es) difficulty is dynamic (especially if we're talking multiplayer). Situations and the demands they make of the player change very fast, and the player is provided tools to adapt to them. MOBA games possess this flexibility too, to a lesser degree
This isn't the case for ARPGs, including PoE. ARPGs are essentially games of premeditation: You plan, you execute, and it either works or it does not (the notion of a character build). If a build is deemed overall non-viable, then there is hardly any situation where it can be viable later. I should add that PoE itself is particularly brutal, as it doesn't really support radical player respecialization on-demand.
That said, you should send a memo to GGG with the last two lines: Maybe they'll rethink stuff like the Life Regeneration and Thorns as item mods, which Chris himself describes as more-or-less dilutive properties (delaying the conclusion of the item hunt), rather than provoking actual player choice.
Have you made a cool build using The Coming Calamity? Let me know!
Last edited by ephetat#3689 on Oct 18, 2013, 9:06:09 AM
D2 really did have a lot more types of items which made it harder to determine what was best.
I was always thinking to myself are these set items worth their set bonus or would I be better off just using a rare or unique instead.
And then you had ethereal items which would destroy permanently but had way higher implicit mods so you were poised with the trade off of OP item that will eventually be destroyed or keep a basic item until you find another basic item to upgrade it with.
Back to the original point (as to be honest I only checked the thread because I enjoy reading hilbert rants)
I think to make loot more rewarding we need mid-tier type affixes. Stuff like procs or unique affixes that people will seek as well as other stats. Loot right right now is an all or nothing situation. If the weapon doesn't have +100% IPD, mid/high flat physical it will be trash, and probably isn't even sellable without those 2 mods along with the IPD/acc hybrid and/or IAS.
I also think we need to drop 2-3 affix levels making the use of divines more appealing. As they are the rarest orb in the game (or are eternals now?) yet they are worth less than exalts, trading wise, due to their comparable benefits. Exalts can make a giant improvement, especially when combined with eternals. Divines at best will give you a 10% improvement which is generous because improving one stat will probably lead to the other(s) going lower. Many divines end up resulting in a push or a decline.
Maybe leave high level affixes alone to give incentive to farm high maps but drop out the 3rd highest roll and a mid level roll and rebalance the ranges.
Finished 17th in Rampage - Peaked at 11th
Finished 18th in Torment/Bloodline 1mo Race - peaked at 9th
Null's Inclination Build 2.1.0 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1559063
Summon Skeleton 1.3 - https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1219856
Really amazed by the average quality of replies thus far. :)
"
ephetat wrote:
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
Spoiler
Ideally, passive nodes and skill gems all work the same way: each has a time where it is the right choice, and also times where it is the wrong one. And when it comes to the "how often" question, whether something that's the absolute best 90% of the time is balanced against something that's the absolute best 5% of the time, is that good enough? Um, yeah. Damn right that's balanced enough, because you only need to be the absolute best once to actually get used.
I agree with the gist of what you're saying, but I do think the Starcraft comparison doesn't add up at this point. In Starcraft (and many other RTS'es) difficulty is dynamic (especially if we're talking multiplayer). Situations and the demands they make of the player change very fast, and the player is provided tools to adapt to them. MOBA games possess this flexibility too, to a lesser degree
This isn't the case for ARPGs, including PoE. ARPGs are essentially games of premeditation: You plan, you execute, and it either works or it does not (the notion of a character build). If a build is deemed overall non-viable, then there is hardly any situation where it can be viable later. I should add that PoE itself is particularly brutal, as it doesn't really support radical player respecialization on-demand.
I get what you're saying, but I didn't mean it in the specific sense of reacting to what your opponents are doing, but in the more general sense of reacting to a situation. In this case, that situation has to do with which passives you have (and can have) and what gear you are using (and can use).
"
ephetat wrote:
That said, you should send a memo to GGG with the last two lines: Maybe they'll rethink stuff like the Life Regeneration and Thorns as item mods, which Chris himself describes as more-or-less dilutive properties (delaying the conclusion of the item hunt), rather than provoking actual player choice.
The funny thing about this is that life regeneration — the trait, not the affix — is actually desired by builds using self-DoT skills like Righteous Fire, and I imagine even thorns — the trait, not the affix — could find a niche after release in some sort of Cast of Damage Taken build which tries to fuel its spellcasting with masochism. It's not that these abilities are devoid of utility, it's that they've been tuned with low numbers that make them insufficient.
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.
Life regen is also utilized by most builds that use blood magic gem for their main attack. With decent life regen you can essentially spam any skill you want without the need for a leech gem, only swapping in the leech on reflect or extremely heavy hitting mobs. You are correct that the problem with them is the amount of regen they offer vs the trait itself. It's interesting because things like Coral Amulet are extremely good in the beginning of the game, and absolutely worthless near the end.
Anarchy/Onslaught T shirt
Domination/Nemesis T shirt
Tempest/War Bands T shirt
