I still think map drops are fine - boost drops and good players can do 79++ all day long

"

Char1983 wrote:

The problem is that to the normal player 80+ maps are unaccessible.

I feel obliged to point out that the concepts of "normal player" and "80+ maps" are distantly removed. If you're concerned with 80+ maps, you're not a normal player, you're an elite player, and should probably be doing elite player things.

"

Char1983 wrote:

And I still fail to see why you would gate content behind RNG. I really do not get the point.

There are two main reasons:

1. This is a Diablo-style ARPG. Drops are random. Monsters are random. Randomness is in the lifeblood of a game like this, part of its very soul. I don't really understand how you could love and play a game like this, up to 80+ maps no less, and not have embraced the random for what it is. In a game like PoE, randomized is and should be the default, not the exception; from a game design perspective, you need a darn good reason to make something deterministic, and when in doubt randomize it.

2. Economically, randomness is an essential part of a good currency sink. When you have deterministic systems, currency sinks are generally not effective because they are heavily metagamed/min-maxed for the minimum possible cost to the end user. Randomness, however, introduces a concept of risk aversion. For example, I have no doubt that many maps are ran with well over the average required amount of quantity/packsize/etc for sustainment, because those running them are worried about streaks of bad luck. This causes many players to misplay the map-rolling phase and use more currency than is optimal.

Essentially, randomized sinks are sinks which work, and deterministic sinks are sinks which get exploited every which way by players and turn out not to be effective sinks at all. (Example: Eternal Orb.)

Now if you don't understand the reasons why solid currency sinks are good for PoE's economies, then I can explain that too.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Char1983 wrote:

The problem is that to the normal player 80+ maps are unaccessible.

I feel obliged to point out that the concepts of "normal player" and "80+ maps" are distantly removed. If you're concerned with 80+ maps, you're not a normal player, you're an elite player, and should probably be doing elite player things.

"

Char1983 wrote:

And I still fail to see why you would gate content behind RNG. I really do not get the point.

There are two main reasons:

1. This is a Diablo-style ARPG. Drops are random. Monsters are random. Randomness is in the lifeblood of a game like this, part of its very soul. I don't really understand how you could love and play a game like this, up to 80+ maps no less, and not have embraced the random for what it is. In a game like PoE, randomized is and should be the default, not the exception; from a game design perspective, you need a darn good reason to make something deterministic, and when in doubt randomize it.

2. Economically, randomness is an essential part of a good currency sink. When you have deterministic systems, currency sinks are generally not effective because they are heavily metagamed/min-maxed for the minimum possible cost to the end user. Randomness, however, introduces a concept of risk aversion. For example, I have no doubt that many maps are ran with well over the average required amount of quantity/packsize/etc for sustainment, because those running them are worried about streaks of bad luck. This causes many players to misplay the map-rolling phase and use more currency than is optimal.

Essentially, randomized sinks are sinks which work, and deterministic sinks are sinks which get exploited every which way by players and turn out not to be effective sinks at all. (Example: Eternal Orb.)

Now if you don't understand the reasons why solid currency sinks are good for PoE's economies, then I can explain that too.

I totally understand this post as a response to Char, but just to clarify: RNG is still governed by droprates and probabilities, which GGG has control over. I think what most people are asking for is an adjustment to droprates, rather than moving randomness from the equation entirely (which, of course, is an essential part of PoE).

There's been a LOT of strawman accusations back and forth about map drops - "you want to gate content behind extreme wealth and no-life gameplay;" "you want GGG to HAND you level 82 maps you can chain." Well, maybe some people do want either one of those things, but we should refrain from taking them seriously.

"

PolarisOrbit wrote:

I think there's a communication issue between GGG and the players. It seems that players see the map pool goes up to L80 and expects to farm however high the map pool goes, but GGG's intent with the highest tier was not to increase how far players could farm, but instead something else. This is only an extrapolation from the drop rates, nothing else in the game indicates GGG's intention in such a way.

Maybe if GGG gave these maps some tells that they are different- such as a different icon/text color, inventory size, and different naming scheme- then it would be clearer that players are supposed to think of them differently (specifically, as being less farmable than the lower maps). If players were expecting L81 maps to be a rare activity then the lack of ability to constantly run them at that level would not be a problem. The question is, how does GGG send the signal that something is supposed to be rare, when they do have an activity that they only want players to participate in rarely?

They have stated in the notes that they expected 79+ to be as above.

This is from: https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1304441

"

Chris wrote:

[li]The relative chances of finding maps within maps have been adjusted. There are now three bands of maps that have different difficulties to ascend. The lowest tier maps (68-73) yield higher maps relatively easily. The mid-tier maps (74-78) require more effort to get high maps from. You need to roll high quantity, pack size, and take risks to maximise your map yield. The highest tier maps (79-82) are unforgiving and not designed to be sustained constantly. Substantial skill and planning is required to experience this content.[/li]

There are 2 key lines which I find interesting:

1) You need to roll high quantity, pack size, and take risks to maximise your map yield (74-78 maps)

I interpret this as: if you do difficult stuff over a long period of time, you will get results.

2) Substantial skill and planning is required to experience this content (79+ maps)

I interpret these lines as: if you want to get here, you will need to think ahead, understand and game the system, think long-term, and insulate yourself against rng.

For me, these further reinforce my satisfaction with the current system (I am not saying I think its perfect).

Each player will interpret this differently (and come up with multiple interpretations), and thus set their own expectation.

I've often thought about setting the 79+ pool differently to further highlight the distinction. If they followed the same map drop rules, but called them something like "rift tiers" (ha!) where 79=tier 1 etc, would expectations be revised?

"

CutlassPair wrote:

I interpret these lines as: if you want to get here, you will need to think ahead, understand and game the system, think long-term, and insulate yourself against rng.

Do I need to wear warm anti-RNG clothes? :p

No seriously, care to elaborate these highly abstract & confusing terms: "think ahead", "game the system" and "insulate yourself against rng"?

Will any of these make me drop more & better quality maps?

"

CutlassPair wrote:

There are 2 key lines which I find interesting:

1) You need to roll high quantity, pack size, and take risks to maximise your map yield (74-78 maps)

I interpret this as: if you do difficult stuff over a long period of time, you will get results.

2) Substantial skill and planning is required to experience this content (79+ maps)

I interpret these lines as: if you want to get here, you will need to think ahead, understand and game the system, think long-term, and insulate yourself against rng.

For me, these further reinforce my satisfaction with the current system (I am not saying I think its perfect).

Each player will interpret this differently (and come up with multiple interpretations), and thus set their own expectation.

I've often thought about setting the 79+ pool differently to further highlight the distinction. If they followed the same map drop rules, but called them something like "rift tiers" (ha!) where 79=tier 1 etc, would expectations be revised?

Ad 1. What is long enough period? 100, 1000, 10000 maps? It is all nice and dandy if drops average at 1000000 repeats but that is too much for an individual player to ever achieve average returns. This means you will have losers even if they do everything right. This is what is wrong with the argument "You do not roll your maps the right way". You can easily roll it right, Vaal it for extra mods, add Zana's mod but you get nothing in return. You have just burned 20+ Chaos on a map but your return in terms of maps can be jack-shit.

You also can not expect that you can run lower level maps infinitely long because there are costs associated with rolling those maps. Lots of people are complaining they are running low on currency just from trying to progress in maps. They are not buying gear or gambling, they try to play the game it is meant to be played.

Ad 2. What are the mysteries that some have mastered, and are sustaining 79+, that the rest of plebs have not clue about? What do I need to know about the system to make me break through the ceiling?

I, personally, am playing very safe when it comes to mapping, which means I'm slow. I only move to next map level when I have already acquired 24 maps of that level. Is that insulated enough?

No matter how safe/insulated you play, the longer it takes to climb up, the further behind you will be behind the league, the less chance to cash up on sales you will be and the more cost you incur by rolling the maps. If you do not luck out on an expensive drop, you will come to a moment where you personal currency will not allow you to continue mapping.

And we are back to cost of running and sustaining maps. This is no longer only function of how difficult maps you roll but more importantly how much currency you can toss at map rolling. Zana's mods, eg. Ambush, are not really difficult, they are just really expensive.

The whole map system is too expensive.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

OH by the way guys something to consider.. as your rolls become better, zana mod means less and less, but it might be worth to consider adding 4 extra strongboxes with ambush mod on 80+ maps that are already GG rolled. Chance for cartos, good amount of monsters as well, other good loot too. Especially worth it on maps where the bosses are too hard on a risky map - like village ruin.

there are no cartos in 80+ maps.

"

morbo wrote:

Do I need to wear warm anti-RNG clothes? :p

Don't forget the tin-foil hat!

I left it vague because these things all mean different things to different people. But to further my own interpretation and how I've done stuff to implement them:

"

morbo wrote:

No seriously, care to elaborate these highly abstract & confusing terms: "think ahead", "game the system" and "insulate yourself against rng"?

Sure:

Think ahead: From my experiences of maps previously, I know that I need to run well-rolled maps, no matter what the mods. This helps save currency. So I have multiple characters to use in different situations. On rare occasions I use one character to clear, and one for the boss.

Game the system: This is using every conceivable advantage to get maximum results. This is what I see getting 79+ with some regularity requires. This includes:
- playing in groups to save currency
- running as many mods as possible without re-rolls
- tweaking currency strategy to suit the map/tier - I've had to tune my strategy over time, and its cost me a lot of currency
- trading for currency/maps
- rolling strongboxes
- zana mods where appropriate
These just came off the top of my head. There are probably lots more tweaks/small advantages you can think of. I do not do all of these. I'm just listing them as examples as where I know I can get an advantage if so required.

Insulate yourself against rng: This has a couple of means. The first being the usual "have a large currency and map pool", "be prepared to roll lower maps" etc. The second being the mental side. I've build a map pool from scratch several times. I know its a brutal, soul-consuming, angry process until you make it. It took me over 1000 maps in open beta to reach 77 maps. These experiences have helped take the hit when a 150%+ 79 map drops nothing. I just say "I've done everything I think I can do within reason. Time to try again". Each person takes these hits in different ways, and expresses their frustrations differently.

Again, these are my interpretations. YMMV.

"

Baron01 wrote:

Ad 1. What is long enough period? 100, 1000, 10000 maps? It is all nice and dandy if drops average at 1000000 repeats but that is too much for an individual player to ever achieve average returns. This means you will have losers even if they do everything right. This is what is wrong with the argument "You do not roll your maps the right way". You can easily roll it right, Vaal it for extra mods, add Zana's mod but you get nothing in return. You have just burned 20+ Chaos on a map but your return in terms of maps can be jack-shit.

I can only speak from my own experience. My current stats read something like this:

- 330+ maps run from 75+
- Of this, ~40+ were 78, ~12 were 79, 1 was 80
- I've received 2 x 81 + 1 x 82 map

Only you can decide if you think 3 x 80+ maps is worthwhile given the effort/cost.

To keep this pace, I use about ~2 chaos orbs per map, though recently I believe I have broken even. Note: this is ~2 orbs on average for all runs. I do not use much currency on lower level maps, and much more on higher level. My "base" map pool is ~50 x 75 maps.

"

Baron01 wrote:

Ad 2. What are the mysteries that some have mastered, and are sustaining 79+, that the rest of plebs have not clue about? What do I need to know about the system to make me break through the ceiling?

I, personally, am playing very safe when it comes to mapping, which means I'm slow. I only move to next map level when I have already acquired 24 maps of that level. Is that insulated enough?

No matter how safe/insulated you play, the longer it takes to climb up, the further behind you will be behind the league, the less chance to cash up on sales you will be and the more cost you incur by rolling the maps. If you do not luck out on an expensive drop, you will come to a moment where you personal currency will not allow you to continue mapping.

And we are back to cost of running and sustaining maps. This is no longer only function of how difficult maps you roll but more importantly how much currency you can toss at map rolling. Zana's mods, eg. Ambush, are not really difficult, they are just really expensive.

The whole map system is too expensive.

Regarding 79+ see my previous post. IMO my gut-feel is that 79+ is not sustainable. But there are probably ways a small group who playing individually (mapping lower level to get a 79), and as a group (joining in for their 79s) could do well.

I don't play in a group, but I am sure that there are those that do, who share resources, detailed strategies, help each other out with rng, and split profits. These guys can and will push the limits of what is consistently possible.

24 maps is very conservative. That is not a criticism. Everyone runs maps differently. I respect your diligence.

If you've got 24 x 75 maps, and cannot sustain 75+, I would say something is not right. My expectation is to sustain above 75 (with a small currency loss on average, that can be made up with trades).

Make believe number time. (Actually, I'll use real numbers too.)

Level 82 map has a .003 chance to drop.
150% quantity = .0075 chance to drop.

We don't know the actual chance at level 82 maps. We do know that the rarer the map becomes, the less you are rewarded for your risk.

The bolded section is part of the reason I hate maps as an end game content. High level maps are hard coded to prevent you from sustaining them. There is nothing you can do about it. The risk will out weigh the reward every time.

Alch and go is the best way to map. The orbs you will save with this method will allow you to buy your way into high level maps. Buying is the only way to sustain high level maps.

"

CutlassPair wrote:

Stuff...

Ok, so nothing new or special, I've been doing all that things since Domination. (solo chaining 76 - 78 in every SC league, from PoE 1.02 to PoE 1.3)

I will just comment on the "insulation" one. This was always my preffered strategy of building a map pool, go slow from the bottom up, build a strong base of tier X before moving to that tier. It's purely a psychological prefference.

2.0 made me completely change that strategy. Since mapping is so expensive now, I go from top bottom, throwing currency on the highest map available, insted on some lower ones. If I'm spending a ton, I might as well spend it on the highest map I have.

---

Another thing that 2.0 made a no-brainer (dumbed down), is that now you have to roll +3 magic mobs on EVERY box, with the only exception being carto box. Only "fully linked" affix might take precedence, and even then I'd think about it twice or thrice. +3 magic mobs or GTFO. So strategy, much planning.