widescreen resolution removed from the game.

"

AdRonZh3Ro wrote:

Spoiler

Sure.

Screen:
Disclaimer: Calculations within 1% margin of error.
A)U.Wide. 1132 x 1.27 = 1437.64 pixels. 13,5% wider for each side. 305 pixels wider than standard.
B)16:9. 1132 pixels wide.

Wide Range Reference:
16:9(Top).
Stacked: U.Wide > 16:9 > 4:3 (Middle).
U.Wide (Bottom).
Strong Box Reference (Middle Left).
All images stacked adequately to assure quality.


Skill in Question:
Tornado Shot
Lightning Strike
Bladestorm

Empirical Tests:
The baseline used was un-juiced T16 with 90%+ quant.

Tree used:


Map Sample used:


Videos:
Tests for U.Wide vs 16:9 agro distance.
U.Wide x 16:9 Top Left against mildly active enemies:https://puu.sh/K8z8S/125159ac5a.mp4.
Enemies do not agro.

Wide x 16.9 Approach against fairly active enemies:https://puu.sh/K8zaw/ea95ea59e7.mp4.
16:9 enemies agro.

Direct horizontal Sight wide:https://puu.sh/K8zc4/b4955c3af5.mp4.
10 seconds to agro.

Direct horizontal Sight 16:9:https://puu.sh/K8zc7/199e978cbc.mp4.
Instant agro.

This proves an advantage exists. But you might as well say that it's impractical to use it on a regular play.

Extra paper 0% exp TS Build:
Build proof:


Essence Monster 1 x 0% exp TS build:
https://puu.sh/K8zj6/c7e5856e6a.mp4.
@24 seconds, meteor does 3/4 of my life. Unsafe at 16:9. Pretty safe at U.Wide.

Essence Monster 2 x 0% exp TS build:
Wide x essence:https://puu.sh/K8zto/4729d40dee.mp4
I can reliably keep track of him. Blood corruption rarely spawns near me. Yes, i smooth brained near the end with 16:9.
16:9 x essence:https://puu.sh/K8zty/920fc8e23c.mp4
I can't keep track of him in the same way. Blood corruption spawns near me constantly. I could attack from offscreen, but that diminishes damage substantially.

The survivability aspect i'm putting in question pertains to the distance one has from the monsters when you are playing an absolute paper build.

The damage aspect i'm putting in questions pertains to the damage output sustainability and increased damage from Far Shot.

But you are probably right, MB is not budget friendly. You know what is? Headhunter. https://poe.ninja/economy/necropolis/unique-accessories?name=Headhunter
Which also makes able to do relatively juiced maps with mirror of delirium. I made a video with the same character but it was too large and i don't have a way to cut it atm.

Oneshot BS build:
Build proof. Forgot about life: 5693 mana:851 ES:0.


Essence Monster 3 x Paper(?) BS build x 4:3:
https://puu.sh/K8zyc/6dcbc00b24.mp4

Then we convert that same BS build to the same stats as the TS build:


Essence Monster 4 x Paper BS Build:
https://puu.sh/K8zFX/2f6a915de8.mp4
Yeah.

So, should you get U.Wide or keep 16:9?
Tornado Shot: U.Wide gives QoL and damage increase for TS and similar builds.
Lightning Strike: similar performance, but has tradeoff as projectiles do less damage.
Bladestorm: literal waste of money.

"

Echothesis wrote:

- Conclusion 6: Fastest way of achieving desirable goal for majority of PoE players has no correlation with access to ways of negating mobs attack capabilities, including one known as "Ultrawide aspect ratio attack range".

Let's see what you concluded and apply it to a few simple questions:
U.Wide doesn't affect tanky builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL.
U.Wide doesn't affect oneshot builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL.
U.Wide doesn't affect melee builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL. LS is not melee. /s.
U.Wide doesn't affect ranged builds? Partially correct. It will increase Tornado Shot and Toxic Rain damage and survivability(builds that need to click on the enemy location precisely), but Kinetic Bolt, Split Arrow and other projectile based builds are unaffected.
U.Wide doesn't affect paper builds? You would be incorrect. U.Wide is large enough so that it can and will affect mapping survivability and visibility.


Which makes me wonder. You yourself said that U.Wide "has no correlation with access to ways of negating mobs attack capabilities", yet i've proved the advantage exists and i've proved that it does affect survivability in projectile paper builds, and let me stress this again, does fuck all for melee, so i'll ask again, why try to force GGG do address something that beyond U.Wide is at best useless, by your own words, and at worst gives an advantage to mostly ranged builds, also being a QoL that GGG doesn't benefit one cent off of?

1)It has a player based economy, making it competitive by default. Most of the best delve players literally keep their accounts hidden as to not disclose information to others.
2)Which is bannable.
3)It is. It's like saying water isn't wet and refusing to elaborate. Your opinion doesn't change a fact.

0 year, 6 days that proof was given that further extending vision is abusable. No "fix" needed.

"

How does 32:9 make you more currency than other players? Like no streamer uses 32:9 and they get mageblood etc every league.

Why are people even bothered about 32:9? Baffles me how people have to be haters, cost me £350 my 2nd ultrawide, which is not unreasonable money for a monitor these days.

Most games support 32:9 just FYI, multiplayer and singleplayer. This is why it is frustrating when one is not supported. I can understand GGG need to do more work on this and its not a priority but arguing that it needs to not exist is just backwards. If you enjoy 1080p that is fine, let people enjoy 32:9.

"

How does 32:9 make you more currency than other players? Like no streamer uses 32:9 and they get mageblood etc every league.

"

Why are people even bothered about 32:9? Baffles me how people have to be haters, cost me £350 my 2nd ultrawide, which is not unreasonable money for a monitor these days.

"

Most games support 32:9 just FYI, multiplayer and singleplayer. This is why it is frustrating when one is not supported. I can understand GGG need to do more work on this and its not a priority but arguing that it needs to not exist is just backwards.

"

If you enjoy 1080p that is fine, let people enjoy 32:9.

"

tackle70 wrote:

Lol...

Black bar crew on life support. Ad hominem and quoting their own debunked posts is all they have left

"

tackle70 wrote:

While this is an interesting piece of sophistry, it is, as with so many of these pro-black bar arguments, entirely spurious.

"

tackle70 wrote:

Trade is fundamentally cooperative in nature, not competitive.

"

A market is, in its general sense, the group of suppliers and buyers who are in sufficiently close contact for market transactions to take place and for those transactions to effect the terms of trade (the price). The structure of the markets indicates the relative number of buyers and sellers in the market and therefore the nature of competition that will take place. Market conditions can vary from the perfectly competitive to the monopolistic, and the consequences of these can be seen in market conduct and performance outcomes.

"

In economics, competition is a scenario where different economic firms are in contention to obtain goods that are limited by varying the elements of the marketing mix: price, product, promotion and place. In classical economic thought, competition causes commercial firms to develop new products, services and technologies, which would give consumers greater selection and better products. The greater the selection of a good is in the market, the lower prices for the products typically are, compared to what the price would be if there was no competition (monopoly) or little competition (oligopoly).

Competitiveness[1] pertains to the ability and performance of a firm, sub-sector or country to sell and supply goods and services in a given market, in relation to the ability and performance of other firms, sub-sectors or countries in the same market. It involves one company trying to figure out how to take away market share from another company. Competitiveness is derived from the Latin word "competere", which refers to the rivalry that is found between entities in markets and industries. It is used extensively in management discourse concerning national and international economic performance comparisons.

Perfect competition
Neoclassical economic theory places importance in a theoretical market state, in which the firms and market are considered to be in perfect competition. Perfect competition is said to exist when all criteria are met, which is rarely (if ever) observed in the real world. These criteria include; all firms contribute insignificantly to the market, all firms sell an identical product, all firms are price takers, market share has no influence on price, both buyers and sellers have complete or "perfect" information, resources are perfectly mobile and firms can enter or exit the market without cost. Under idealized perfect competition, there are many buyers and sellers within the market and prices reflect the overall supply and demand. Another key feature of a perfectly competitive market is the variation in products being sold by firms. The firms within a perfectly competitive market are small, with no larger firms controlling a significant proportion of market share. These firms sell almost identical products with minimal differences or in-cases perfect substitutes to another firm's product.

The idea of perfectly competitive markets draws in other neoclassical theories of the buyer and seller. The buyer in a perfectly competitive market have identical tastes and preferences with respect to desired product features and characteristics (homogeneous within industries) and also have perfect information on the goods such as price, quality and production. In this type of market, buyers are utility maximizers, in which they are purchasing a product that maximizes their own individual utility that they measure through their preferences. The firm, on the other hand, is aiming to maximize profits acting under the assumption of the criteria for perfect competition.

The firm in a perfectly competitive market will operate in two economic time horizons; the short-run and long-run. In the short-run the firm adjusts its quantity produced according to prices and costs. While in the long run the firm is adjusting its methods of production to ensure they produce at a level where marginal cost equals marginal revenue. In a perfectly competitive market, firms/producers earn zero economic profit in the long run.

"

trades occur are pretty similar to market economics and Perfect Competition is a very accurate description of PoE

"

Perfect competition is said to exist when all criteria are met, which is rarely (if ever) observed in the real world. These criteria include; all firms contribute insignificantly to the market, all firms sell an identical product, all firms are price takers, market share has no influence on price, both buyers and sellers have complete or "perfect" information, resources are perfectly mobile and firms can enter or exit the market without cost. Under idealized perfect competition, there are many buyers and sellers within the market and prices reflect the overall supply and demand. Another key feature of a perfectly competitive market is the variation in products being sold by firms. The firms within a perfectly competitive market are small, with no larger firms controlling a significant proportion of market share. These firms sell almost identical products with minimal differences or in-cases perfect substitutes to another firm's product.

"

Echothesis wrote:

1) all firms contribute insignificantly to the market

TFT mirror shops and people who had paid real money to have 100+ public tabs for trade, vs my 4 public tabs of non-crafted trash no one buys?

"

Can I refund real money spent on premium tabs? Won't be able to compete with nolifers unless become a nolifer myself.

"

Yep, variations are limited, but this cannot possibly be compared to real life, as "firms" do not design "products" themselves. It is GGG who chose builds using synergy A,B, and C, as the most broken OP, thus every "firm" prices those building bricks higher than others.