Labyrinth is for NEET.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The link you point to has a median of about 30 minutes. A median means the middle. By the middle I mean that the number of runs faster is the same as the number of runs that were longer. The 30 minutes means 30 minutes not 10-15 minutes.

You apparently didn't read my post properly. You say, "people are complaining because they are having trouble completing the lab to get their points. If it was so easy for them to navigate traps it wouldn't be a thread about the lab, it would be a thread about "IZARO OP PLZ NERF"." This is false. This is not what I said. What I said was that the exact opposite.

If you don't enjoy leveling your character then I sympathize with you. However, if you want to make that suggestion to GGG to start off at level 80 then start a new thread to discuss that. You are right that this is the correct forum but, this thread is about labyrinth not starting off at level 80. Please try to remain on topic. Thank you.

The link to ladders is apparently screwed up, you need to refresh the page to get the listing correct. On 9/2/16 There was 2164 solo runs , and #1082 has a time of 20 minutes 1 second. Which includes an economic gear deficit which reliably allows us to project the median time even lower.

The opposite? People are happy because they are having trouble completing the lab? People are complaining because the lab is too easy? People are happy because the lab is easy? Buff Izaro?

If you couldn't tell, the last part of the post was a jab at the general logic of those that wish to remove the lab. Sorry for confusing you.

"

Zrevnur wrote:

Yes it hurts build variety and the "special trap rule system" makes no sense (thematically) and is inconsistent with the rest of the game. That however does not lead to all "lab viable" builds being similar.

Alright, last try. I am not talking about the lab viable builds.

Imagine all builds in a graph and let's say that it follows normal distribution and that it's a bell curve. X axis would be offense on the one end and defense on the other while Y being popularity. By offense we state how many offensive nodes you have on the tree and by defense the opposite.

Judging by the "meta" the top of the curve, which is what most people play, therefore homogenised, would be more on the offensive side than the defensive side.

Now, on both ends of the X axis you have the most defensive and most offensive builds. They are not good but you want them to be played in your game as you want to have a variety of players and not make the game stale by having every build seem similar to any other. You also want your players to have freedom of choice and to not dictate how they play, since that's how arpgs are. They are about meaningful choices and character developement.

I am talking about builds in close proximity of both ends of the curve. Your miner example is a very bad one. If you are talking about a build that you saw performing well against single target bosses and being viable in the lab, then it's already homogenised and on the top of the curve. The "miner" build i would be talking about would not be a miner since mines require preperation and that build would die from a random smack of a labyrinth skeleton on the way to izaro. He would probably get tired of dying/restarting the lab and would start getting more defences bringing him closer and closer to the top of the curve.

On the other end we have the "I wanna tank everything" guys. They went into PoE thinking it's an MMO where tanks and healers exist (or they are weird like me and want long and satisfying fights). But then they stumbled onto the lab and thought: "Hey my armor/evastion/block/dodge/mind over matter/ 1 billion hp doesn't help me here! I should just get damage instead!" Then they join the others on the top of the bell curve and every build feels the same.

Homogenisation.

"

Zrevnur wrote:

"

db183 wrote:

Take an early league ladder for example then on normal: http://www.pathofexile.com/labyrinth/Essence/1/1472860800

Look at that, first days into league people are putting up a median of 20 minutes on normal lab. This still has yet another data flaw, being the start of the league people dont have easy access to strong low level uniques/rares. These times are still skewed high because of that fact. This time would easily drop even more if this amount of players had access to gear to steamroll it. Easily justifying a 10-15 minute run time for an average player.

There are at least two major flaws in your argumentation/presentation:

First you take a specific day. Lab difficutly/time varies very much between days. For example the median on the following day is close to 30 minutes.

Second you look at the start of the league. Whether the later median times are higher or lower I do not know but: There is a heavy weighting towards ambitious "no life" players at the start of the league. So you cannot get a fair "average player" median there.

Its all not very accurate data wise, you take it from a later date and then you get the casual heavy times skewing it the other way. Furthermore, a ton of people do the lab in groups and those runs on the ladder are solo only.

Definitely not an accurate metric, agreed.

What is NEET?

"

Jgizle wrote:

What is NEET?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=NEET

I conceptually disagree with trying to put this (build variety) into a single dimension. But it may not matter for the argumentation here.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

I am talking about builds in close proximity of both ends of the curve. Your miner example is a very bad one. If you are talking about a build that you saw performing well against single target bosses and being viable in the lab, then it's already homogenised and on the top of the curve. The "miner" build i would be talking about would not be a miner since mines require preperation and that build would die from a random smack of a labyrinth skeleton on the way to izaro.

The miner build is IMO a very good example. There is no need to go 100% offensive. It is quite possible to get very high offensive power while having enough defenses to survive against lab monsters. Putting up temp chains + enfeeble on blasphemy you might not even get hit at all by monsters. Rephrased: Any build which is viable in maps can survive against the monsters in the lab. Its lvl 75 and there are no map mods. Furthermore the point of being in there is to do the boss not to kill monsters. Temp chains incidentally aligns also with doing the boss as it increases poison damage and makes it easier to dodge him.
And I have no idea what you mean with "it's already homogenised".

"

Pyrokar wrote:

On the other end we have the "I wanna tank everything" guys. They went into PoE thinking it's an MMO where tanks and healers exist (or they are weird like me and want long and satisfying fights). But then they stumbled onto the lab and thought: "Hey my armor/evastion/block/dodge/mind over matter/ 1 billion hp doesn't help me here! I should just get damage instead!"

That is an argument against specific types of defensive builds. Tanky non-hybrid/non-ll builds which include sufficient regen/charges are obviously "lab viable". I do not want to argue popularity - especially because I have no numbers to back up anything I say about it. So I would replace "popularity" with "viability" in your graph.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Then they join the others on the top of the bell curve and every build feels the same.

Homogenisation.

Guess this (the lab being cause for homogenization or not) is where we disagree.

--

"

db183 wrote:

those runs on the ladder are solo only.

Didnt know that...

Title makes no sense. There are no players who are young and meet the requirements of NEET. Everyone under 18 goes to school, or has a job, or both. Any that dont are not capable of even playing a game as they would have to be babies. Any 1 over 19 also has a job unless they are intentionally unemployed and unwilling to make any contribution to society or their wellbeing.

As such who exactly is labyrinth for. Seems like its for every one with time to me.

"

Jgizle wrote:

Any 1 over 19 also has a job unless they are intentionally unemployed and unwilling to make any contribution to society or their wellbeing.

That's basically who the label is for. I've already made my point that the lab is actually the best thing to do to get wealth in the game for people with little time though.

"

Jgizle wrote:

What is NEET?

I cannot believe that you asked this here without even spending 30 sec to look for that answer on the internet honestly ....

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Jgizle wrote:

What is NEET?

I cannot believe that you asked this here without even spending 30 sec to look for that answer on the internet honestly ....

Yup and i did. And it specifically relates to young people 16 - 24.

The more appropriate term is NLFET not NEET. NEET can apply to those above 24 but is generalized only in Japan as Japan has many other social related issues that cause people to stay inside their house and not want to leave. One such example are Otaku's (people who avoid social interaction in favor of interaction with anything anime related, their entire life revolves around it) or Hikikomori (People who simply avoid social interaction entirely, removing themselves from any form of a social life). These can exist in other areas of the world but is far less common. Japanese culture is very different than our culture, it is a much larger issue there than any where else.

As such NEET makes no sense and does not apply in our culture. You cant generalize a phenomenon from one culture to another.