Death Penalty Changes in 0.11.3

"
jamesl wrote:
"
Sodomee wrote:
The death penalty change is a huge mistake. 90% of the players who complain about the penalty are dying in places like ledge, catacombs, and docks at level 80. Please listen to the people who actually build defensively and do endgame maps. If you are going to lower the penalty, please do something to benefit the players who play without dying.



90% ?

please show us your source for that statistic


and they already have something to benefit who build defensively and do endgame maps

it's called hardcore league and a better economy with more valuable items




The source is the beta feedback and general discussion section.

Go do some reading on the complaints, which I'm referring to.
IGN: ThrobbinRobin
Last edited by Sodomee#2062 on Jul 25, 2013, 4:51:14 PM
"
Jddogg wrote:
i vote for 5% 10% as well.... 8% is too low. i know it's only 2% difference but it really adds up. Now level 90 is going to be the new lvl 80.


Here here Jddogg! Im currently playing anarchy from scratch starting a few days ago in anticipation and preperation for this change so I can make the full day leveling to 82 with my LS duelist with less risk than 15% but ye.. 5%/10% ftw!
Make Things For Smile!
Last edited by AdzPoE#5624 on Jul 25, 2013, 4:20:13 PM
This is one of the few changes you've made that I don't like at all. I have a feeling I'll be seeing a lot more glass cannon builds now.


Last edited by Nycro#4007 on Jul 25, 2013, 4:23:05 PM
"
Nycro wrote:
This is one of the few changes you've made that I don't like at all. I have a feeling I'll be seeing a lot more glass cannon builds now.


More builds, more possibilities = awesome!
Danskere: PM mig, hvis I har brug for en guild.
I dont like the idea of allocated 6 sockets , also i love the xp penalty as the way it is. If you want to put a finger on it then nerf it to 12%-13% , 8% is a joke...
"
heyyous wrote:
I think that exp penalty should be relative to player level and content level, Not difficulty level. The reason why is simple, High quality maps have a much greater risk then any area in merciless. I think that if the system was designed around how difficult said map was it would be a lot easier for people to tell how well their build was.

For example: Say I am level 80 and I am farming a yellow 66 map with 100% quality on it, It has increased monster damage,Vulnerability,Increased rare monsters etc. You know the whole nine yards. So even though this is a 66 map it could still be challenging right? It doesn't make sense to lose a ton of experience for trying something hard does it?

It would take a complex system of establishing base difficulty versus player level and then figuring out an averaged monster level for maps rolled with those mods but lets face it, You can make a 66 map way harder then a white 70 map and not only will you gain less exp but if you die you will lose a ton of exp in relationship to how much you would have gained by doing a higher level map.

Therefore I feel the best solution would be an experience penalty that is based on how experienced you actually are. If you died at level 80 in a white 66 map you should lose a ton of exp lol. but if you die in a level 77 map and you are level 75 you shouldn't lose very much at all.


Honestly this idea makes the very MOST sense to me but untill a system like this is implented.. 5% & 10%!
Make Things For Smile!
Lol, All this time I thought the penalty in merciless was %10. Oh well, this will help :)
And, isn't sanity really just a one-trick pony anyway? I mean all you get is one trick, rational thinking, but when you're good and crazy, oooh, oooh, oooh, the sky is the limit - The Tick
"
magree wrote:
Lol, All this time I thought the penalty in merciless was %10. Oh well, this will help :)


I thought for a long time the penalty was 30% XD.
This message was delivered by GGG defence force.
I certainly like that the penalty is reduced but I can see where some of these comments are coming from and the Devs as well. Any debt system would be horrendous. It'd be easy for some players to stack up debt as it's not immediately seen. Eventually that debt will pile up and dissuade the gamer from playing.

I'm assuming one of likely several reasons the drop was considered is when a player levels, if they die with 15% or less xp they are back to zero. Hugely negative impact from a player perspective that may cause them to turn off the game seeing it all drop to nothing.

What I had once proposed and think it could still be relevant here is to provide a penalty based on earned experience. If you set it as say 17% penalty of experience earned I do believe it'd be a compromise. It wouldn't deter those who just leveled as much who die and it would still be a serious penalty when you do get closer to leveling. At mid level you'd get the 8.5% exp loss (basically what this patch will bring) and at 90% earned you'd have a 15% penalty which is what it is now. You never go back to zero but you still need to be careful especially when close to leveling. win win.
Pacific (GMT -8) Time
What if there were an item that dropped at about the same rate as Divine orbs (maybe even rarer) that cut the experience penalty in half? If one of these items were in your inventory upon death, it could be used up and reduce your penalty. I once played a game that had these and they negated ALL experience loss, but had about a 25% chance to fail; however, you could equip up to three. All three would be consumed every time, but if the first one failed, it would check the others. It was possible to fail all three. Also, that game deleveled you if you went below the experience for your current level. There wasn't any of the zeroing out at 0 xp, but deleveling would need to be in the game from the ground up, probably. I think something like this would be more suitable for another league type, since barely changing anything in standard league (6S allocation is a big deal? really?) riles up the masses.

This type of solution goes along with the dungeon crawler and bartering type system, as it is an item-based solution to a problem as opposed to a sweeping solution that affects everyone.

For the record, I support the 8% change.
IGN Cymric
Last edited by Cymric#6752 on Jul 25, 2013, 4:42:57 PM

Report Forum Post

Report Account:

Report Type

Additional Info