Labyrinth is for NEET.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

There is a thread in general discussion with what the hc players are playing in the top 50k (or something don't remember the number) and most of them are chieftains. What do chieftains have a lot of? Regen. I don't know if it is mostly the lab or not but there clearly is an influence.

People are playing chieftain for either the synergy with Ancestral Warchief or Righteous Fire, not because they are crazy OP lab runners...

"

Docbp87 wrote:

I don't understand the argument that you feel like you have to spec into a build that is designed ONLY for the lab in order to do the lab. How is it possible that people are completing the lab successfully with SO MANY different builds if the only way to do it is by speccing into a build designed ONLY for the lab???

As usual, the difficulty and time-investment required to run the lab is greatly exaggerated. It takes an experienced player 10-15 minutes to run the lab. Less experienced may take 30 minutes. That's not exactly a HUGE investment for the massive return you get.

I don't think anyone said that one had spec into a build that is designed ONLY for the labyrinth in order to do the labyrinth.

Chris Wilson stated that it was expected for a complete labyrinth run would take 45 minutes to an hour. The median time on the ladder for normal is usually around 30 minutes. This means that your 10-15 minute estimate is not accurate. While it is true that the massive return is very good, the feedback to GGG is that labyrinth is not fun for many people. The suggestion to GGG is that their game would be improved if it was fun to earn the ascendancy points.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Docbp87 wrote:

I don't understand the argument that you feel like you have to spec into a build that is designed ONLY for the lab in order to do the lab. How is it possible that people are completing the lab successfully with SO MANY different builds if the only way to do it is by speccing into a build designed ONLY for the lab???

As usual, the difficulty and time-investment required to run the lab is greatly exaggerated. It takes an experienced player 10-15 minutes to run the lab. Less experienced may take 30 minutes. That's not exactly a HUGE investment for the massive return you get.

I don't think anyone said that one had spec into a build that is designed ONLY for the labyrinth in order to do the labyrinth.

Chris Wilson stated that it was expected for a complete labyrinth run would take 45 minutes to an hour. The median time on the ladder for normal is usually around 30 minutes. This means that your 10-15 minute estimate is not accurate. While it is true that the massive return is very good, the feedback to GGG is that labyrinth is not fun for many people. The suggestion to GGG is that their game would be improved if it was fun to earn the ascendancy points.

Except that the median gets lower and lower in cruel,merc,endgame.. End game median time is less; more like 12 mins. So that 10-15 minute estimate is accurate there.

I am willing to bet that the majority people complaining about the lab arent getting stuck in normal lab(they simply outlevel it and complete), its the merc and endgame lab where they hit their skill deficit and complain. Those runs take 10-15 mins (median) with an established character.

The main complaint on these threads is that they want their ascendency points without doing lab because it isnt fun(too hard?). What do you want those ascendency points for? To make the rest of the game more fun because it is TOO HARD FOR THEM.

Every single lab thread, "Game is too hard for me, please make it easier. Hard things are not fun for me and I want my trophy for participation!!!"

"

db183 wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

I don't think anyone said that one had spec into a build that is designed ONLY for the labyrinth in order to do the labyrinth.

Chris Wilson stated that it was expected for a complete labyrinth run would take 45 minutes to an hour. The median time on the ladder for normal is usually around 30 minutes. This means that your 10-15 minute estimate is not accurate. While it is true that the massive return is very good, the feedback to GGG is that labyrinth is not fun for many people. The suggestion to GGG is that their game would be improved if it was fun to earn the ascendancy points.

Except that the median gets lower and lower in cruel,merc,endgame.. End game median time is less; more like 12 mins. So that 10-15 minute estimate is accurate there.

I am willing to bet that the majority people complaining about the lab arent getting stuck in normal lab(they simply outlevel it and complete), its the merc and endgame lab where they hit their skill deficit and complain. Those runs take 10-15 mins (median) with an established character.

The main complaint on these threads is that they want their ascendency points without doing lab because it isnt fun(too hard?). What do you want those ascendency points for? To make the rest of the game more fun because it is TOO HARD FOR THEM.

Every single lab thread, "Game is too hard for me, please make it easier. Hard things are not fun for me and I want my trophy for participation!!!"

Your argument is flawed because it is not the context under discussion. The topic being discussed is running labyrinth strictly for ascendancy points, not for enchants or anything else. Therefore the normal ladder is the most useful ladder for this purpose because there is a minimum of speed runs where the labyrinth runner has run that layout previously, etc.. Most of the times for cruel, merciless, and endgame are people just running labyrinth for other reasons other than the ascendancy points. Therefore those numbers are not applicable to the topic being discussed.

Labyrinth is generally disliked because it is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun. It is not really difficulty that creates the dislike. Izaro is the difficult part of labyrinth not the traps. It is the trap game play that is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun.

"

Your argument is flawed because it is not the context under discussion. The topic being discussed is running labyrinth strictly for ascendancy points, not for enchants or anything else. Therefore the normal ladder is the most useful ladder for this purpose because there is a minimum of speed runs where the labyrinth runner has run that layout previously, etc.. Most of the times for cruel, merciless, and endgame are people just running labyrinth for other reasons other than the ascendancy points. Therefore those numbers are not applicable to the topic being discussed.

Labyrinth is generally disliked because it is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun. It is not really difficulty that creates the dislike. Izaro is the difficult part of labyrinth not the traps. It is the trap game play that is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun.

Actually it isn't. The Normal Lab mostly tells how long people take on the first run. If you look at Cruel an Merciless you notice that the times get shorter with more experience. And we are not speaking about new people here, but about people having done the lab a few times and disliking it.

For new players the lab will likely take a lot more time. But then again if you want to there are options to avoid this. Also it of course takes more time if you do the normal lab on level, actually you might even want to kill the mobs in there, since they density is good and they are not very dangerous. I usually use the Merc lab to also level a bit, because it still offers decent xp and isn't very dangerous.

If you don't know the naming conventions or look the layout up 25 to 30 minutes is a more reasonable time, although this might again vary due to how fast you can kill Izaro. If you look it up and know how dead ends are named it gets a lot quicker. And then again the layout also determines time. Today you have a total of 9 areas to visit in normal, 8 in cruel, 9 in merciless and 8 in the Uberlab. The longest labs have double gold doors and can be 10 areas big, while the shortest only have 7 (not counting Izaros Zones).

And I'm not sure why it should matter. Half a hour is still a reasonable timeframe exspecially if you can take pauses before and after beating Izaro without being at danger. The only thing I miss, not necessarily because of the lab, but in general is an option to rejoin the instance you dced or crashed in if it is still open right at the point you dced, which often is the entry. That would make DCs less terrible, which aren't common, but frustrating when they appear.

"

db183 wrote:

Except that the median gets lower and lower in cruel,merc,endgame.. End game median time is less; more like 12 mins. So that 10-15 minute estimate is accurate there.

I am willing to bet that the majority people complaining about the lab arent getting stuck in normal lab(they simply outlevel it and complete), its the merc and endgame lab where they hit their skill deficit and complain. Those runs take 10-15 mins (median) with an established character.

In order to get a fair "median" estimate you have to exclude people who do it more than once and people who do it in group with somebody competent - like those who pay for a carry.
Furthermore it would also be fair to include those who dont run endgame labyrinth because it is too hard or too annoying or too time consuming for them. Many of the complaints I have read imply that the people who complain often dont actually do it.

"

Fruz wrote:

Since most players do not actually reach cruel / merc, GGG wants them to be able to enjoy the full labyrinth experience ( the basic lab, not counting uber of course ) and therefore they do not want to reduce it in normal, so thinking of removing it ....

Plus it would remove powerful leveling tool, definitely not a good thing.
And some build enabling points poping randomly at higher level instead of being accessible during the story ? no thank you.

That's an artificial problem created by the three difficulties. If they want the game to be played for longer they need progression that doesn't shit on players. If a player completes the story and finds themselves at the start of it again, they might be thinking 'oooh! I wonder what changed' eventually they find it's the same exact thing with more blue and yellow. After completing that, they are presented with the same story yet again. . . For fucks sake, such blatantly bad design and everyone is complaining about melee, blade vortex, and pathfinder.

You know what a powerful leveling tool is? . . . Maps.
At the completion of normal, have all zones scale with player level to a max cap.
Introduce maps by the end of normal.
Introduce intrigue early in mapping through atziri, council, izaro, etc.
Introduce more lower level unique 'endgame' content (around level 50-75).
Introduce further endgame content that is novel (singular), farmable, and accessed through elements of intrigue in progression (fragments).

Their design philosophy right now is to keep watering down the stew, while adding a little seasoning. I want them to stop watering the shit down. Then they can start adding the meat and potatoes. Or maybe a better analogy would be architecture... they built a flimsy structure and keep trying to layer in support beams, but these support beams would be completely unnecessary if the building was restructured properly.

It's been suggested that they want three difficulties so that when the story is complete it will fill out a similar amount of time, but what about novelty? I'd say novelty is all a story is worth (potential insights aside). So why not experience the novetly of the story ONCE per character. We can still do that with a dead zone of mapping from 40-65, which would be more fun than grinding the story two more times. I wouldn't mind the story getting longer, as long as I don't have to repeat the damn thing three times per character.

Which brings me back to the labyrinth again. Would it not be more exciting and novel if we had to work our way to Izaro and face him once? Instead we do that 3 times per labyrinth and 3 times per difficulty with an additional time in mapping. He's watered down (ubiquitous) and has a lot of seasoning (stats) by the last.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Your argument is flawed because it is not the context under discussion. The topic being discussed is running labyrinth strictly for ascendancy points, not for enchants or anything else. Therefore the normal ladder is the most useful ladder for this purpose because there is a minimum of speed runs where the labyrinth runner has run that layout previously, etc.. Most of the times for cruel, merciless, and endgame are people just running labyrinth for other reasons other than the ascendancy points. Therefore those numbers are not applicable to the topic being discussed.

Labyrinth is generally disliked because it is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun. It is not really difficulty that creates the dislike. Izaro is the difficult part of labyrinth not the traps. It is the trap game play that is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun.

It is absolutely in context because the data you are relying on is just as skewed as what I used. Try to have an open mind about it.

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.

As for your second point, 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".

Claiming the traps are so easy that they should just be removed is just asking for even EASIER (so even MORE boring and tedious for you) content that would just be running through a map to get to a boss. If you can master the traps you can master killing izaro (hint: try running around him in a circle).

Are you sure you like ARPG genre? How can you find doing the act1-4 content 3x acceptable but have some issue with the lab a few times? Should we remove that too? Maybe we should just have everyone start at level 80 with 8 ascendency points? You know, to cut out the boring, tedious, irritating and not fun parts of the game.

"

db183 wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Your argument is flawed because it is not the context under discussion. The topic being discussed is running labyrinth strictly for ascendancy points, not for enchants or anything else. Therefore the normal ladder is the most useful ladder for this purpose because there is a minimum of speed runs where the labyrinth runner has run that layout previously, etc.. Most of the times for cruel, merciless, and endgame are people just running labyrinth for other reasons other than the ascendancy points. Therefore those numbers are not applicable to the topic being discussed.

Labyrinth is generally disliked because it is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun. It is not really difficulty that creates the dislike. Izaro is the difficult part of labyrinth not the traps. It is the trap game play that is boring, tedious, irritating and not fun.

It is absolutely in context because the data you are relying on is just as skewed as what I used. Try to have an open mind about it.

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.

As for your second point, 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".

Claiming the traps are so easy that they should just be removed is just asking for even EASIER (so even MORE boring and tedious for you) content that would just be running through a map to get to a boss. If you can master the traps you can master killing izaro (hint: try running around him in a circle).

Are you sure you like ARPG genre? How can you find doing the act1-4 content 3x acceptable but have some issue with the lab a few times? Should we remove that too? Maybe we should just have everyone start at level 80 with 8 ascendency points? You know, to cut out the boring, tedious, irritating and not fun parts of the game.

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 the exact opposite. edit: There's a list of over 270 threads here suggesting improvements to labyrinth. I did NOT include threads that complain just about Izaro in that list. Over 270 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 640 posters in support

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.

"

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.