XP penalty and likely 1 portal is NOT going anywhere

"

Sakanabi#6664 wrote:

"

morganbritches#2970 wrote:

I can't help but feel that if people were truly confident that they will never change these things, y'all wouldn't waste time coming on feedback forums to speak on behalf of the devs. Are you concerned they might change it if you don't?

The reason why we do this is hope that people finally stop with threads about removing one portal and exp penalty because it's annoying and often pushes away threads with actual feedback.

Instead of providing constructive feedback of your own, is best to stir the pot plotting on others feedback. So, just being petty because people has different opinions and taste. Got it.

"

morganbritches#2970 wrote:

"

Sakanabi#6664 wrote:

"

morganbritches#2970 wrote:

I can't help but feel that if people were truly confident that they will never change these things, y'all wouldn't waste time coming on feedback forums to speak on behalf of the devs. Are you concerned they might change it if you don't?

The reason why we do this is hope that people finally stop with threads about removing one portal and exp penalty because it's annoying and often pushes away threads with actual feedback.

I'm pretty sure that what is or is not actual feedback is probably a bit wider in scope than what one of us might call it. They added some portals to arbiter based on feedback, so that must have been actual feedback? Ultimately, you are just adding another thread about the same subject. Which is perfectly fine, sounds like it is a popular topic. But I don't think players are qualified to state what devs will or won't do. It might be more constructive to create a post explaining why you don't want the penalties removed.

Why I personaly don't want these penalties removed was stated a thousand times in every thread about removing those penalties. And most of these threads was just rant or rage vent or something but not actual feedback. Sometimes insults or even threats to devs and game.

More portals to Arbiter (and eventually all pinnacle bosses) is good move because getting to those bosses takes alot of time/currency and you did´t met them anywhere in the game so you haven't time to learn their moves. Bosses in maps are all recycled bosses from campaign so you should know how to fight them.

"

PaintMaster#2396 wrote:

Imagine GGG remove xp penalty, and give us 6 portals, what would it mean?

1. Literally 0 reason investing into defense at all.
2. It doesn't matter if you die or not, you still have more portals anyway.
3. This encourage more and more people play exactly same fastest builds.
4. This encourage people play builds that clear screens with half of gear being rarity and 0 defenses.
5. It just delete build diversity.
6. It once again remove any reason investing into defense above bare minimum.

all of that is already happening. no build diversity because we cant even try different builds, you just get stuck somewhere. you need a build with 15k ES and kill everything 2 screens away before it can hit you.
playing a merc/warrior wit no ES? get rekt...
just sain

"

dwqrf#0717 wrote:

"

morganbritches#2970 wrote:

I can't help but feel that if people were truly confident that they will never change these things, y'all wouldn't waste time coming on feedback forums to speak on behalf of the devs. Are you concerned they might change it if you don't?

We are concerned about a whole generation of gamers that can only complain when they fail instead of accepting the game they willingly choose to play has rules and challenges, risk and rewards, and consequences to one's actions.

Changing core game designs accordingly to the vocal minority that will never ever be satisfied will only destroy a game in the sake of quick but quite superficial money making. We have enough proof of that from the past 10-20 years, which was the period where gamers started to be able to interact directly with the dev teams, by either forums or social media, and as it was new for the devs, a lot of them fell into the belief that the vocal minority was representative of the whole community and blindly adjusted content to catter to them, leading to total failures.

Yeah, I've noticed that there is sort of a generational theme in these posts. I'm in my 40s and remember playing games on an Atari 2600 with buddies. Personally, I think 1 portal is not a really good design choice, not in concert with the xp penalty. Not because it hurts my feelings personally, but because I think it further narrows the meta and leads to more skills being there to give the impression of variety in appearance alone. It creates a more streamer-centric loop, based around less builds. I have 2 chatacters in the 90s and one close, but after losing a couple nice drops, I stopped trying with the builds that couldn't reliably clear, because the whole risk/reward decision matrix goes right out the window when the risks are too high. But I feel like we get into these very hyperbolic discussions, where it is all a slippery slope towards an afk mobile game and that's not particularly relevant to fine tuning the game.

"

Fhrek#4437 wrote:

"

Sakanabi#6664 wrote:

"

morganbritches#2970 wrote:

I can't help but feel that if people were truly confident that they will never change these things, y'all wouldn't waste time coming on feedback forums to speak on behalf of the devs. Are you concerned they might change it if you don't?

The reason why we do this is hope that people finally stop with threads about removing one portal and exp penalty because it's annoying and often pushes away threads with actual feedback.

Instead of providing constructive feedback of your own, is best to stir the pot plotting on others feedback. So, just being petty because people has different opinions and taste. Got it.

The problem is that those people want to ruin the game for us who have opinions and taste matching with current state of the game. They are often rude, calling the game "trash", "shit" or "failure" and dismiss opinions of anyone who defends xp penalty and one portal rule.

At the current state of the game, every single axis of punishment for failing is needed and must not be removed.

XP penalty: If removed it would completely invalidate reaching level 100. It would no longer be an "achievement" or goal one can set. It just happens passively even when failing. It would just be a failing upward award.

One portal: The idea behind it was to promote tankier builds. In PoE 1 glass cannon builds were the go to builds because you could clear faster and still had the 6 portal defense. When you clear 2 screens away you hardly die. Because there is nothing alive. Only bosses sometimes had maybe a second to attack you. In this case you would just go through the portal and continue looting. 0% chance of failing.
If one portal is reverted, we are back at glass cannon > all.

Loosing extra content: If extra content would stay you would open up the game for exploits to constantly farm the same map over and over again with all 6 additional content options.

Before we can even talk about removing any of the punishment systems, GGG has to implement other solutions for the issues the penalty system currently resolves.

"

Sakanabi#6664 wrote:

The problem is that those people want to ruin the game for us who have opinions and taste matching with current state of the game. They are often rude, calling the game "trash", "shit" or "failure" and dismiss opinions of anyone who defends xp penalty and one portal rule.

Do explain how removing just the 1 portal ruins your game experience? Absolutely nothing stops you from continuing to do so after the fact, other than your unwillingness to continue it. And thus demonstrates you also didn't like it in the first place, only had a willingness to accept it cuz it was forced.

"

MSMagu#0469 wrote:

"

PaintMaster#2396 wrote:

"

mrfox123#7595 wrote:

People are ALREADY playing glass cannon builds since defences aren't reliable enough.

Removing the exp penalty won't change this, all it would do is increase the build variety for those seeking the lvl 100 mark.

Do you have any idea how long it will take for casual player to reach 100? Weeks if not months, literally. So i don't get it why they complain about xp penalty when they will never reach high level even without xp penalty.

Defences are reliable, for some reason my characters have zero issues with survivability, one of them is melee mace build that costed me like ~10 Divs.

You can make any regular build tanky, you just don't want to invest into defenses at all.

how many builds can do simulacrom or ritual comfortable? or are you saying ES is the 'only' option knowing that life and armour and res is stupid and doesn't give enough sustainability?

a lot of these 10 divine builds cannot do ritual, or simulacrom, just the meta hyper strong build, and these builds revolve around ES as defense and kill as fast as you can.

I'm not here to play POE1 with better graphics.

Should there be no content that require more than 10 div budget?

"

AintCare#6513 wrote:

giving 6-portals will allow them to buff map bosses. currently they are stripped versions of campaign + your char has vastly superior stats so they are not even a challenge making the incredibly boring.

Leaving 1 portal and rebalancing skills will make same thing, which will likely happen next big patch.

"

Why I personaly don't want these penalties removed was stated a thousand times in every thread about removing those penalties. And most of these threads was just rant or rage vent or something but not actual feedback. Sometimes insults or even threats to devs and game.

More portals to Arbiter (and eventually all pinnacle bosses) is good move because getting to those bosses takes alot of time/currency and you did´t met them anywhere in the game so you haven't time to learn their moves. Bosses in maps are all recycled bosses from campaign so you should know jiw to fight them.

Insulting the devs is disreapectful. So is attempting to speak on their behalf when they haven't made unequivocal statements about what their plans are. As for threatening? Do you mean threatening not to play the game or actually threatening them in the existential sense? Saying that you won't play the game if "x" is not changed probably won't cause them to do it, but it does give them an idea of what friction points exist. Unless they have extremely thin skin, I would assume they might find the feedback useful, at least for the sake of trending.