Open Letter to Qarl, regarding topics discussed in RMT thread
"
knac84 wrote:
GGG has said several times that what matters is the path, not the end result. They are quite right about that, the problem is the way you have designed the path is so bad that the majority of the people get frustrated or bored and just quit, there is no sense of accomplishment anymore or you don't even care when you get there because you are burnt. But if GGG is entrenched and thinks the current way things are fine and they are happy about current behaviour, there is not much that can be done.
This is a very important paragraph. The word "burnt" is key here.
Two months ago I was excited about trying to 6-link my gear, since I'd gotten every last piece I wanted. Now, after all this wasted time--and pardon my language, but if I'm going to describe this I may as well do it accurately--I just no longer give a fuck. I still have the intention of trying but I just no longer care, as the game has crushed any optimism about results that I may have had. And if I ever eventually get it, I can predict how I'll react: "Meh."
Many people suggest rerolling to keep the game fresh. I tried that and I'm now stuck because I can't even 5L a chest that I need to progress in maps. I'm effectively locked out from content because of RNG. And rerolling the moment you hit 70 like a lot of people do is just ridiculous, you can't even begin to optimize a build by that time! That's not the game I'm interested in playing.
Qarl, if you're still reading, I have a serious suggestion. If you keep the RNG as brutal as it is for linking gear, because you seem to think we enjoy it, at least do NOT punish us. If I try to 5L a chest I should not be going back to 1 or 2 links when I had 4, effectively being forced to keep a 2-exalt unique in my stash for two months like I have, instead of being able to get use out of it. Instead of the basis of the game hinging on RNG, start making a switch towards progression. Easiest solution to start would be to make it possible to not lose links when using a fusing. Otherwise, yeah--I'm gonna be hoarding 200 fusings which is what you're telling us is the "problem" with raising drop rates. We're hoarding them precisely because of the broken underlying systems!!!
5) Main reason for my disagreement with increasing currency drops is that you can get about 2 - 4 chaos on average from every 70+ map in items and orbs (with some magic find of course). I believe this is enough as it is.
Except the majority of the playerbase is not MF. And we don't get anything of value in maps. We also shouldn't be forced into a build just to get currency to craft or trade.
I would like to see claims like this backed up with hard data--a thread where everything earned in a map is posted.
I kept track of 100 map runs I did, listing every item and orb that dropped. In 100 runs I got 7 chaos orbs and about 7 or 8 sellable pieces of gear for maybe 2 chaos tops each. And 26 alchs which didn't even make up for the alch I spent per map to roll it (I'd run whatever mods came out the first time, without rerolling). This is "enough as it is"?
Last edited by Lord_Kamster#4909 on Mar 1, 2014, 7:42:25 AM
5) Main reason for my disagreement with increasing currency drops is that you can get about 2 - 4 chaos on average from every 70+ map in items and orbs (with some magic find of course). I believe this is enough as it is. Increasing drop rates would help at lower levels but it would also flood economy because maps would become super profitable.
Well, the very moment you pay an alch, 4 chisels and x chaos just to enter a map 2-4 chaos don't sound so great anymore, do they? On top of that, you will get all kinds of drops, therefore, you have to find someone who is willing to trade them for alchs, chisels and chaos orbs if you intent to chain higher level maps.
5) Main reason for my disagreement with increasing currency drops is that you can get about 2 - 4 chaos on average from every 70+ map in items and orbs (with some magic find of course). I believe this is enough as it is.
Except the majority of the playerbase is not MF. And we don't get anything of value in maps. We also shouldn't be forced into a build just to get currency to craft or trade.
I would like to see claims like this backed up with hard data--a thread where everything earned in a map is posted.
I kept track of 100 map runs I did, listing every item and orb that dropped. In 100 runs I got 7 chaos orbs and about 7 or 8 sellable pieces of gear for maybe 2 chaos tops each. And 26 alchs which didn't even make up for the alch I spent per map to roll it (I'd run whatever mods came out the first time, without rerolling). This is "enough as it is"?
You'll see the currency used (1 alch) and its economy value in exes.
Then currency drops and their economy value in exes.
While the data shows an alch + a map = several times more than that alch in economy exalt value, it shows the loss in self found value, the limitations being drops, recipes and vendor exchanges/recipes.
1 alch + 1 map = pretty huge profit in wall street.
1 alch + 1 map = loss in civi street.
Just one question for you Scrotie (and that dev, who said that you dont need to trade): which tier of maps have you been able to reach with your self-found orbs? I'm not interested in theory, just your practical experience.
I wasn't playing strictly self-found, but I'd still say 76. This is because I realized that maps are not gated by trading, but by partying; I joined a group, and paid fees when asked (although I think I got a great deal).
The party gating is the Symptom of the problem. The "gated by trading" is the root problem.
....
5) Main reason for my disagreement with increasing currency drops is that you can get about 2 - 4 chaos on average from every 70+ map in items and orbs (with some magic find of course). I believe this is enough as it is. Increasing drop rates would help at lower levels but it would also flood economy because maps would become super profitable.
I hope there is logic somewhere in that and bless you if you read through it all.
Hello mara5a, I read through your indomitable wall of text. And I'm afraid you misinterpreted the OP, although it's likely you were responding to other posters. The OP definitely did not suggest increasing drop rates, although I have no specific problem with that given other adjustments.
The crux of this OP is this: the early game, "before level 65" as you describe it affords players less choice in optimal strategy. You are discouraged from using currency (crafting or trading), limited in skill experimentation and passive layout. All that appears to combine to give players the impression you seem to have, that the game "starts after 65" or at least much later than level 1. And that's really unfortunate because the game is brilliant, and doesn't need to put barriers up to accessibility or alienate players who can't stomach the ascetic optimal strategy. The optimal strategy should be fun.
But I digress, if you want a better understanding of why the OP was written read this post by ScrotieMcB:
Spoiler
"
ScrotieMcB wrote:
"
Qarl wrote:
Hoarding is only a concern for us when a player holds onto currency orbs when this is not their best course of action.
Specifically, when their progress is markedly slow and their orbs could be used to speed their progression.
I feel I should take a moment to explain why I'm concerned with how players hoard orbs.
I feel rather strongly that good game design is about offering depth in decision-making. By "depth" here, I specifically mean that choices are both meaningful and difficult, with a variety of factors; no choice should be meaningless, and no choice should be easy.
And this is the primary concern I have when I see players hoarding orbs. My concern doesn't lie so much in their hoarding itself; it's their choice. What does bother me, however, is how I can easily see how their choice is probably correct. There isn't nearly enough doubt about what the proper choice is. This is a problem, because the key to giving players strong decision-making opportunities is to add so much science to decision-making that it becomes an art.
A fantastic example of this is hold-em poker; although the choices themselves are very elegant, there is a large amount of depth — there are a large number of factors which can go into a particular decision, not all of which must be deemed relevant. The amount of calculation and uncertainty of calculation completion leads it to feel more like art than science. As a result of this "artness," it's very hard to definitively agree or disagree with a particular action when watching another competent poker player — at the very least, there is a lot of room for debate.
The current decision-making process behind whether to use orbs, or not, is very far from this ideal at present. Determinations regarding orb use are simplistic to the point of no longer feeling like gameplay, but more like an automatic decision. Optimal strategies can be paraphrased with 95% accuracy into a single sentence.
This is why all of the factors mentioned in the OP are important. It's not that hoarding orbs is inherently a bad thing, that GGG should be fighting to make sure every orb gets used. Emphatically, this is not the case; if it was simplicity itself to know you use every orb as you get it, and never stash it, then that would essentially be swinging the pendulum to the opposite extreme of the same problem. It's that knowing to hoard orbs is a inherently a bad thing; there should be doubt, and for engaging gameplay involving orb use, there must be doubt.
As a final note, there are some things about orb use which do have depth. These are normally the cause of the various "do I exalt this?" threads. However, pay careful attention to the things which are never considered in these discussions; in general, low itemlevels, and especially low base item types... essentially, anything before low maps. It's also interesting to look at the things which are most debatable in such threads, and which are the most agreed upon.
I hope that clears things up and I would encourage you to read the rest of the thread, or at least the parts where Qarl responds and everyone else replies.
Want to Fix the Economy, Bad Loot, Trade and Legacy PvP? pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/548056
Open Letter to Qarl on Crafting Value pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/805434
Biggest Problem with Mapping: Inconsistent Risk to Reward pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/612507
Qarl, if you're still reading, I have a serious suggestion. If you keep the RNG as brutal as it is for linking gear, because you seem to think we enjoy it, at least do NOT punish us. If I try to 5L a chest I should not be going back to 1 or 2 links when I had 4, effectively being forced to keep a 2-exalt unique in my stash for two months like I have, instead of being able to get use out of it. Instead of the basis of the game hinging on RNG, start making a switch towards progression. Easiest solution to start would be to make it possible to not lose links when using a fusing. Otherwise, yeah--I'm gonna be hoarding 200 fusings which is what you're telling us is the "problem" with raising drop rates. We're hoarding them precisely because of the broken underlying systems!!!
So, I'm not Qarl but I felt the need to respond to this. This was the stated and conceptual purpose of the Eternal Orb. The Eternal Orb imprints the properties of your gear and then you can spend tons of fusings or what have you, and if no acceptable outcome is met, you can reprint the old item properties, including links/sockets/colors. Of course, as we know, this is not how Eternal Orbs are used. In practice users have valued the property modification utility of Eternals i.e. Eternal-Exalting, much over any utility in item accommodation crafting, i.e. linking, socketing, or coloring.
So in practice very few players use Eternals for their conceptually intended purpose, which is to avoid exactly what you described (although it's possible GGG had a different intention than the original suggestion). I should note, if you spent such a significant amount of fusings trying to link your item, maybe it would have been a good idea to imprint it with an Eternal Orb.
Want to Fix the Economy, Bad Loot, Trade and Legacy PvP? pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/548056
Open Letter to Qarl on Crafting Value pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/805434
Biggest Problem with Mapping: Inconsistent Risk to Reward pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/612507
Last edited by Veta321#3815 on Mar 1, 2014, 9:24:57 AM
Just one question for you Scrotie (and that dev, who said that you dont need to trade): which tier of maps have you been able to reach with your self-found orbs? I'm not interested in theory, just your practical experience.
I wasn't playing strictly self-found, but I'd still say 76. This is because I realized that maps are not gated by trading, but by partying; I joined a group, and paid fees when asked (although I think I got a great deal).
The party gating is the Symptom of the problem. The "gated by trading" is the root problem.
That's actually quite clever, and true.
It's brilliant, considering how Scrotie often, rightly, uses syptom/problem logic.
