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

My thoughts are as follows, in an ideal mapping system it would work as such:

It should be viable to build up to 73 as rares no chisel, alch and go.

73-75 should be chiselled at the start of the league, rare after building a base and viable for new players to run blue afterwards in a more robust economy.

76-78 should be chiselled and rare, fragments and vaal orbs at the start of the league and drop fragments later, and in a more developed economy 78 should be chiselled and 76-77 rare. Chaosed a couple of times.

79 should require chisel, chaosing on average 5-10 times, and fragments. Vaals required to build.

80 should require chisel, chaosing on average ~10 times high quant and packsize, fragments.

81-2 should requre chisel, chaosing on average 10-20 times for multiple pack size rolls, fragments, Ambush Zana mods and stacks of alts.

A typical high level mapping session should consist of 77-79 maps 80% of the time with 15% 80 and 5% 81-82.

At the moment forcing chisels and fragments down the pipeline is seriously straining the supply and it really shows. More developed and enhanced mapping strategies such as fragments and extensive chaosing for 3+ pack size rolls really needs to be moved down the line when players can actually afford and understand these concepts.

What you describe would require a pretty significant buff in drop rates, though.

Yes precisely but it must be not buffed overly, to be honest I reckon we could see what I laid out with only a 20% increase.

A currency sink is good, but the appropriate sink must be applied at the appropriate mapping stage, I feel the strain is currently far too high on the lower levels.

It is in my opinion completely pointless to make it hard for a "low" 72-73 base to build when that is the stage most players will ragequit at.

Not sure, maybe you need a bit more.

However, does that mean you would want 81/82 to be sustainable with enough currency? Cause I think that 81 and 82 should not be sustainable even with massive currency input.

"

Char1983 wrote:

Not sure, maybe you need a bit more.

However, does that mean you would want 81/82 to be sustainable with enough currency? Cause I think that 81 and 82 should not be sustainable even with massive currency input.

Never. The maps should be rolled as such when they appear to you but a typical high level mapping session should consist of 77-79 maps 80% of the time with 15% 80 and 5% 81-82.

If I could actually feel the concept of 81-82 maps being a treat (being able to have them every 20th map) that would be pretty great.

I also think this is very productive in terms of keeping players interested (I was bored out of my fucking mind running Palace, Courtyard and Shipyard), if we could rotate around 7-8 maps and see y'know Abyss and Colosseum once a day that would be ideal.

Yes, but it feels like that is what is currently happening.

"

MrTremere wrote:

"

Char1983 wrote:

It is really extremely painful to be shut out of the endgame maps because of people levelling to 100 too fast.

There are currently less than 500 characters at that level, permanent leagues included (there are 9 characters at level 100 in temporary leagues, one month after the start of those leagues).

Don't get tricked into thinking that the 10 players that manage to get to level 100 in less than a month are representative of the game's balance. If you base anything on their ability to get through content, you make all achievements require unhealthy amounts of investment for the rest of the community.

Absolutely, as I outlined the requirement for mass currency to sustain really needs to be moved further down the mapping tiers.

It is completely pointless to gate low level maps as all you do there is affect high-level players not at all and cause low level players to ragequit.

"

Char1983 wrote:

Yes, but it feels like that is what is currently happening.

It is what is happening but at a pretty absurd cost.

It's too unhealthy to force vaals and chisels and frags down the mapping system into the low-tiers.

In my opinion there needs to be a clear distinction between "building" and "sustaining".

At the moment it feels like there is a need for "building currency" a.k.a going ham on every source of quantity just to sustain.

"

grepman wrote:

this is what I love about poe- it shoots down your ego. no matter who the fuck you are, a professor, student, whatever. of course that is, if you do not resort to RMT.

funny you mentioned that, because what you call "shoots down your ego", I call a brainless, frustrating, annoying system, which sometimes pretty much goes against the very definition of not an RPG or ARPG, but the definition of "game" as a whole.
you know, the one where a game encourages and rewards you to be good at it.
and please don't tell me "well trade is being good at the game". trade, is being good at a side quest rather than the main one.
this game is still for all intents and purposes an ARPG, not Railroad Tycoon for crying out loud.

and the bold part? well, when you kill players' enthusiasm and run their hopes to the ground as much as the PoE RNG and design around it, is capable of doing - you are making the lives of RMT suppliers that much easier.
basic math, my friend.
so basic, it's actually common practice for Pay-To-Win games: crush your hopes no matter what you do, then offer in-game ways out of it for cash.
to this day, I have no clue why the fuck does Path Of Exile use the same damn tactic, without the P2W silver-lining (thank god). it truly baffles me.

I love this game. play the hell out of it for literally thousands of hours. enjoy many of the concepts, the lore, atmosphere, the utterly brilliant character development system GGG came up with... but all this RNG-and-trade-based design just drives me off the fucking wall. this game could have been so much better than the masterpiece it already is, if GGG weren't so stubborn in their wish to turn it into a fucking Casino.

now I know what you'll say.
you'll say "but... Etup". yes, the guy is amazing. all Streamers are including Anuhart.
but frankly, if I had a following of a million active players, and a dedicated team pushing me forward, or have the insane no-lifing skills Anu has - I'd probably get somewhere as well.
not to underestimate any of them, but they are "the 1%". the Formula One driver elite.
tell me one good reason, why the remaining 99% should get screwed out of their sanity.

P.S: unlike OP and some others in this Forum, I will never embrace the "I'm doing well therefore the game is fine" approach.
not even if a dozen Mirrors drop on my head tomorrow, making me an Economy Baron who can buy anything, anytime, anywhere.
because the game is not "fine".
it can be, if GGG pull the stick out of their you-know-where, and actually listen to Feedback half as much, as they did in Open Beta.