How it should have been. Food for thought.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

The more I think about it, the more GGG missed the boat, fucked up the whole design and are victims of their own stubborn policy. Their insistence that any form of binding is bad, their focus on trade, competition and reroll leagues completely contradicts itself in design.

Every new league players begin fresh, this is what GGG want people to do, they push for league activity and they want economy isolation. But players amass wealth, leagues end and everything goes to parent leagues. For a league ladder player this wealth is of no use, if they obey the rules.

So a league ends and Joe's characters go to HC/Std. All the gear, the exalts, the mirrors, the mirror service crafts, all in HC/Std. Joe either writes it off, or tries to profit. Joe isn't interested in HC/Std. There's a new league ladder.

There's 2 ways Joe can profit. He can accept RMT or he can try to cross league into the new ladder league. FG makes the latter quite easy.

What GGG should have done was have parent leagues be completely bound, from the get go, parent leagues should have been pseudo SFLs, crafting leagues and dump leagues without economy. Leagues where one can play SF or where one can carry on playing characters after ladder leagues. Characters landing in parent leagues with wealth from ladders can craft with the orbs they bring and use items but not trade them. The ladder reset leagues are where the trading happens, from fresh, new economies, every 4 (or 3) months, in fact, under this design, players might even have preferred 6 month leagues as opposed to complaining that 4 month is too long.

I know this isn't what many would want, people like trading in permanent leagues just as I like SF in permanent leagues, and I can't see it happening, now. But had it been the design from the start, it wouldn't have been an issue.

But, like I said opening, GGG's refusal to entertain binding of any sort from day one, meant they started off on a footing that was always doomed to clash with their vision of integrity, economy and fair competition.

Yup, I'm actually convinced, had this been the model GGG started with, so many problems this game has and yet will have, would have never been.

Sure, you'd have people trying to RMT their ex ladder account in parent leagues, but when I think back to closed beta when Chris's response to how were they going to handle RMT was something like 'Oh we have that covered'; had that 'covered' been 'we've largely limited it to ex ladder accounts being sold' I'd have had a lot more faith than what 'covered' turned out to be, as I'm still for the life of me trying to figure out what 'covered' remotely ever even was, because it failed, it had to, the design itself said it always was going to.

"

Xavderion wrote:

This is actually an awesome idea, but now it's too late. So what do? Wiping Standard/HC and making it new parent leagues with your proposed features would be an option, but I don't think GGG would ever do this, they would piss of a lot of people. For that reason they don't even remove legacy items, let alone a whole league :/

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

It totally won't happen, but it is what should have happened. It fits the game as it is and GGG's vision, like a glove (other than, ofc, the zero-binding policy, but as said, that's where their vision went tits up).

"

Nubatron wrote:

It would do more than piss a lot of people off. It would cause a large exodus. I played domination and I won't be doing that again. Hitting the reset button every few months is not for me. I also believe boa has no place in an online multiplayer environment(just my opinion, don't go all batshit sf crazy on me). I don't have the luxury of no-lifing so the permanent leagues let me experience the game at a slower pace (same duration but longer period)

People like these ideas mostly because it effects a community that they are not a part of and gives them what they want.

It would have been good if they did that from the start, because then I would not have tried the game. I hope you are right that I is too late because I truly enjoy the game.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

I agree, it would piss people off, would it do more harm than good? Possibly, possibly not.
But any way, it won't happen now. Stubborn.

However, if it was the original design, I don't for one minute think you wouldn't have tried the game. I think, I'm almost sure, that you and everyone else who tried the game, would have done so all the same under the acceptance that this is how it was. I am pretty sure we would have had far more retention, too.

"

Nubatron wrote:

Can't agree or disagree for others obviously. All subjective. But I can speak for me. I left D3 the day they announced soul bound. I came to poe specifically because their vision sounded very stubborn in this area, like they would not suddenly shift like d3 did. I promise you, I never would have tried it. That's just me though by no means do I have some proxy to say 'we' or speak for anyone else.


I've played boa in the past. I've even played the less restrictive bind on equip. I hated both of them with a passion. I did try to struggle through it for nearly a year in Warhammer Age of Reckoning. Fun game. Eq binding made me eventually give up. Online gaming is appealing to me because of the interaction with family, friends, and to a lesser extent strangers (stranger danger!). The ability to help friends and family is non-negotiable when it comes to gaming for me. Otherwise I would disconnect my modem and enjoy the latency free and performant environment of an offline game.

To each their own.

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Well, of the different play styles that PoE attracts, the one negatively affected by this if it hypothetically occurred (which it won't), those least attracted should it have been the original design and those least likely to be retained are indeed players, such as yourself, that being;

A player who enjoys the pyramid economy system, doesn't like binding or self-found and prefers permanent leagues, does NOT like the reroll leagues.

Every other play style is pretty much catered to in the hypothetical scenario I mentioned.

Now, I'm not one to say fuck your play style, sacrifice you for others and the good of the game. But, it's glaringly obvious to me that this play style actually can't sustain long term in the current model.

The key problem is, it requires a pyramid, but the model has the bottom and middle of the pyramid in the temporary leagues any way and more and more this will be the case.

The hypothetical suggestion suits all play styles bar one, a play style that the current model doesn't suit, any way, long term.

"

morbo wrote:

(I also think GGG doesnt give a crap about dumpster Std, RMT and the whole Std mess, because the focus is on ladder resets, so for them "there is no problem that needs solving")

"

That said, I think GGG will never ever do anything that harms The Economy and their vision of trade-centric ARPG. And removing the economy is quite harmful for the economy :P

"

(I also think GGG doesnt give a crap about dumpster Std, RMT and the whole Std mess, because the focus is on ladder resets, so for them "there is no problem that needs solving")

"

kasub wrote:

If anyone cares to play PoE competitively then they should be playing leagues. Do not expect standard to ever be "balanced" since the whole point of leagues is to deal with the bloated economy and the many legacy items that are left behind.

"

Yet, it is the existence of parent leagues as we know them that cause these competitive leagues to be the sham they are.

"

mark1030 wrote:

So you basically want to force everybody to play self found if they don't play in a challenge league? I don't know about you, but I like to try a lot of builds. If I couldn't trade for items needed for builds, then I just wouldn't be able to play them. Doesn't sound like it would solve anything except make me not want to play this game at all. If I want to play self found and be stuck playing only builds that I find gear for, I'll go play D3.

Or did I misunderstand what you wanted to do?