Item Development - Information

I love the idea of Oskills in PoE and hope to see more come out.

I'm curious if Brother Laz was involved in the development of this staff. Oskills were prolific in MedianXL and a lot of fun.

"

Maxwells wrote:

"

rockmassif wrote:

"

Maxwells wrote:

Would you really refer to 3 weeks from now or next month as ''Later this year''?

Why wouldn't you?

Keep in mind that he is in no position to reveal the release date, at least not yet. So there is nothing wrong about it.

So you're honestly telling me that if you where to travel somewhere within the next few weeks, you would say to people wondering ''When?'' ''eeeeh, some time later this year''
I object to that reality.
:D

I'm just a single person who's not obligated to anything. I can say whatever I want. Nick is an employee, probably under some sort of NDA. How hard it is to understand?

"

Darkfyre wrote:

ice storm + faster casting + increased duration + cold penetration + spell echo + added cold damage

Why only 5 support gems when you an use 6?

"

eleMENTAL2013 wrote:

"

Darkfyre wrote:

ice storm + faster casting + increased duration + cold penetration + spell echo + added cold damage

Why only 5 support gems when you an use 6?

6th is probably Empower, if it works.

Very interesting. could this new unique be an example of what act4 will be able to do? Where we will be able to apply skills permanently to an item? or maybe not any item, maybe just uniques?
Very interesting future. Cant wait. Buying my first supporter pack this Friday, cant wait for that either :)

give it a rest charan, ggg do what they want to do. Loot filters are great, adding health bars over mobs was great, many things u have cried doom over are great. GGG are not bound by anything, they have ideas, if a new idea goes against an old idea but they like it, and feel theres room to have it, then theyre free to do so. That is what has made foran interesting game, taking specific circomstances as they occur and evaluating them, not sticking to some decision made 5 years ago based on a different game and different ideas. Being held back by sticking blindly to a generalised principal you had 5 years ago is just as bad as having no principals, doing what u think is right at the time is what its all about. To never change their mind on a thing basically means they were perfect game developers with absolutely ntohing to elarn right from the start, thats obviously not true. The game has evolved, ggg has evolved, we as players have evolved.

As nice guys as charan and pneuma etc are ive learnt long ago to basically disregard a lot of you twos opinions on this game and i wouldnt blame ggg if they have come to the same conclusion, the pair of you have some rather strange takes on things and I cant say most of us would like this game very much or it would be as good a game as it is with either of you in charge tbh.

"

rockmassif wrote:

"

eleMENTAL2013 wrote:

"

Darkfyre wrote:

ice storm + faster casting + increased duration + cold penetration + spell echo + added cold damage

Why only 5 support gems when you an use 6?

6th is probably Empower, if it works.

It has been said, over and over and OVER, in this thread that the triple E gems will not work, because they support skill GEMS, not skills.

If the skill is part of the item and the supports simply have to be in sockets to support that skill does this not have to have links at all? would a 6S be the same as a 6L for this item? That seems broken?

"

rockmassif wrote:

"

Maxwells wrote:

So you're honestly telling me that if you where to travel somewhere within the next few weeks, you would say to people wondering ''When?'' ''eeeeh, some time later this year''
I object to that reality.
:D

I'm just a single person who's not obligated to anything. I can say whatever I want. Nick is an employee, probably under some sort of NDA. How hard it is to understand?

If the expansion still would be due in a few weeks he would've said ''the upcoming act4''

''later this year'' is not a soon to become time frame. Unless it would be late winter atm.

Now, how hard is That to understand?

"

SaIigia wrote:

If the skill is part of the item and the supports simply have to be in sockets to support that skill does this not have to have links at all? would a 6S be the same as a 6L for this item? That seems broken?

No, you won't need links at all.
Broken? Ehh... we'll have to wait and see.

It'll certainly murder the fuck out of level 33 enemies with negligible investment (both on the tree and in (lack of) fusings), but without Empower and with how meh the base stats on the staff are, its end-game-ability is questionable right now.

Then again, A4 may change damage scaling at large, so who knows.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

As nice guys as charan and pneuma etc are ive learnt long ago to basically disregard a lot of you twos opinions on this game and i wouldnt blame ggg if they have come to the same conclusion, the pair of you have some rather strange takes on things and I cant say most of us would like this game very much or it would be as good a game as it is with either of you in charge tbh.

What is my terrible opinion here? I would like to know specifically what you disagree with and hope that you're judging my posts on their actual merit and not my history. Separately, feel free to leave speculation at the door. I don't run the game at all, and the way I criticize and suggest as an outsider is likely different to how I would implement as an insider, so it implies nothing about how the game "would be" if I or Charan had any real say in the matter.

I have issues with oskill development because it's content that doesn't cross with lots of existing content. It's much, much more limited in nature. If the only way to introduce a new skill or new mechanic is to hamstring it so much that it can only be used in "the one way", then that draws into question why anyone would spend valuable devtime on it in the first place. "The one way" is entirely counter to a game about "breadth of choice"; the juxtaposition of the two topics in the same post is shocking.

Separately, the UI for it is an absolute mess (as the OP was intended to talk about). There is a concept of "minimum complexity" that can't be escaped short of telling people, in game, to go google for their answers. People expect to see skill gem stats on skills, and if the gem is taken away, those stats have got to be present somewhere.

They really are trying to come up with some way to avoid doing that, but I feel like the effort of trying to dodge away from the minimum complexity is going to lead to heartache.

This isn't a new topic either, as the OP brought up. There's always a push and pull between the powergamers that want all the information available all the time and the newcomers that don't want to be drowned in information. I still vaguely remember bothering Mark_GGG about putting in an actual number in for Mon'tregul's Grasp's zombie explosion and being met with the stone wall. This is far more egregious information omission than a single int.

... Past those things, I've tried to be entirely fair to the skill, and have enjoyed understanding some of its quirks ITT. (And also made a mockup which fell off of page 21 into the abyss, but one I thought was the best of both worlds.)