"
Fruz wrote:
"
sofocle10000 wrote:
I was thinking along the lines of what you suggested, that all alive party members should be in the same instance - Aspirant Trial in Lab - to experience the Izaro fight with all the bells and whistles not like now, when carries ask you to stand outside in the safe zone...
Oh, and keeping parties for Labyrinth even when solo focused (call it party focused instead to keep the supports and "throw them a bone") should be possible with one small change - have all the party members have the same number of Ascendancy Points - so that way, the system stays in place, you can have the randomised experience for Ascendancy Points solo or in a party, with the regular ladder layout kept on a daily rotation...
Where would be the harm in that?
That's not a bad idea, but then if you are with a friend, and he rips ( but you don't ), then you would need to hold yourself back from taking the points so that he can run it with you again ?
It's a bit of a limitation that could seem unfair to players imo.
What about just a simple level limitation : if the level difference between the lowest level and highest level of two characters is let's say ... above 20 (?), nobody ascends.
It's kind of a band-aid, I know .....
Anyway, I do think that having everybody in the arena to start the fight would be a good steps, Izaro's AI could be slightly changed to put some danger on all members of the group then maybe, not completely sure how it is working now, I only did Izaro witha friend twice ( I was supporting, I killed him solo at the end tho, friend ripped :( ).
I do think there should be some consequences even for those that try Lab in parties so instead of your 20 level limit let's go instead for same number of Ascendancy Points up to +2 Ascendancy Points, and in the case of +2 have Izaro slightly stronger so to compensate for the advantage that the difference would provide...
PSS: Our almighty TencentGGG overlords are very scrupulous regarding criticizing their abilities to take proper decisions and consider everything "needlessly harsh and condescending"...
Good to know "free speech" doesn't apply in any form or manner on the forums these days...
|
Posted bysofocle10000#6408on Apr 16, 2017, 12:55:58 AM
|
|
Facing an ennemy that already ascended, Izaro deals X% extra damage to such a character ( in case of partying with no ascended characters ) ?
( And like X% more resistant to all kind of damage ? )
I guess it would kind of make sense.
SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
|
Posted byFruz#6137on Apr 16, 2017, 2:03:16 AM
|
"
Fruz wrote:
Facing an ennemy that already ascended, Izaro deals X% extra damage to such a character ( in case of partying with no ascended characters ) ?
( And like X% more resistant to all kind of damage ? )
I guess it would kind of make sense.
Not only it would make perfect sense, it would give "Labyrinth" a meaning as a build/gear/skillplay/partyplay check...
GGG should seriously consider at least these improvements for 3.0...
PSS: Our almighty TencentGGG overlords are very scrupulous regarding criticizing their abilities to take proper decisions and consider everything "needlessly harsh and condescending"...
Good to know "free speech" doesn't apply in any form or manner on the forums these days...
|
Posted bysofocle10000#6408on Apr 16, 2017, 9:40:20 AM
|
"
silumit wrote:
"
Sofunk wrote:
EDIT: Hybrid idea! Spend chaos orbs at the plaque, get your ascendancy points. Lab haters pleased, much needed chaos sink achieved.
Not good enough. I propose following change: Gamble chaos orbs at the plaque, get your ascendancy points. Now this is a proper GGG-style mechanics which they could acknowledge.
I disagree with gambling for the ascendancy itself, but I like the idea of gambling. What I propose is that players get one free enchant at the lab as usual. However, they have the option to gamble chaos for a random enchant while they are there. Proposed gamble stakes are: 1c for normal, 2c for cruel, 3c for merc, 4c for uber.
For people who think that twice enchanted will lose value, it simply means you have another free try at an enchant.
|
Posted bySlicer9875#6180on Apr 17, 2017, 12:43:50 AM
|
"
Distaeri wrote:
"
SisterBlister wrote:
There is a sizable percentage of the players that dislike it intensely. No one knows how sizable, but judging by the amount of lab-hate threads: at least significant.
I disagree. Angry people are always the loudest. I don't think taking into account the number of lab-hate thread is representative of Lab's popularity.
True, but it is representative of Lab's unpopularity.
Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support (thread # 1702621) Thank you all! GGG will implement a different method for ascension in PoE2. Retired!
|
Posted byTurtledove#4014on Apr 18, 2017, 12:22:11 PM
|
"
Turtledove wrote:
"
Distaeri wrote:
"
SisterBlister wrote:
There is a sizable percentage of the players that dislike it intensely. No one knows how sizable, but judging by the amount of lab-hate threads: at least significant.
I disagree. Angry people are always the loudest. I don't think taking into account the number of lab-hate thread is representative of Lab's popularity.
True, but it is representative of Lab's unpopularity.
I think the number of threads is relevant. It just does not make sense to compare the number of threads on a topic to the number of players and say "tiny minority". The number of threads for a topic should be compared to the number of threads for other topics. Then the lab hate threads are a relevant number.
Cheap example: The number of threads complaining about OOS was also only a few per day, but everybody hated OOS, except for a small minoroty of incorrigible white knights who told everybody complaining about it to l2p...
May your maps be bountiful, exile
|
Posted bySisterBlister#7589on Apr 18, 2017, 1:03:39 PM
|
