PoE 1 PC servers are restarting in: .
They should be back up in approximately .PoE 1 Xbox servers are restarting in: .
They should be back up in approximately .PoE 1 Sony servers are restarting in: .
They should be back up in approximately .What's in 0.9.3?
" Honestly I think you should put it to a vote at the least. Wiping is the better idea, imo. It gets more people testing the "real" code and keeps the economy strong, which still needs testing. Not to mention probably saves you guys a ton of trouble. Legacy actually seems kinda silly to me, except for maybe HC legacy. (make it so if they die, there's no default to move to!) |
|
|
Thank you for the update on 0.9.3
Very exciting news in there. regarding legacy leagues ...If it would make your job easier and may help get the patch out earlier .... why not just wipe the chars since for the purpose of testing the beta, it doesnt serve any purpose really. We are just keeping them for "sentimental reasons" ? Wiping them would force people to actually do what they came into the closed beta to do ... which is to test the current version and give useful feedback. Not losing time playing outdated chars with no real value as to feedback and continuing development of the game. Also with the legacy leagues, every feedback written on the forums will have to be validated as to which league the player was actually playing. A lot of headaches for nothing really keeping the legacy leagues. Last edited by aaricia#2284 on Sep 30, 2011, 12:43:55 AM
|
|
|
What about socket balance between 2H and dual wielding? All players should have similar socket progression in their weapons. It seems like it will be a lot harder for 2h weapon wielders to get as many sockets. Also, I worry it will be impossible to balance 2h weapons with dual wielding if some characters will be dual wielding 2h weapons, unless everyone (even 2h wields) has socketted offhand items.
|
|
" I rejected so many proposed designs that killed off niche weird builds. We've made sure that although class identity is pushed, it's just a marginal improvement. Many people will now care that they're using the correct class for the role, players like you and I that want wacky builds are still able to kill stuff if we put a bit of effort into planning clever synergies. | |
" Two handed weapons in 0.9.3 can get up to six sockets. | |
" But won't it be easier for a weapon&shield to accumulate 6 sockets earlier than a 2-hander? What is the cap on sockets for 1h swords and shields combo? What about the putative 2h dual wielder? |
|
" We've considered this, but bear in mind there are thousands of players who haven't posted in this thread and might be confused/upset if their characters were just deleted. We're not going to request feedback from the Legacy leagues. The thing is, although it might make sense to wipe the realm with this major patch, we'll be pushing characters to legacy leagues pretty often in the future. Doing a wipe now doesn't avoid the future need for legacy leagues, so we may as well set it up properly now. | |
" I would say go ahead and do it. This is a beta, people were warned, it should happen. When something as major as this happens, things need to be wiped. Otherwise you will most likely not get the feedback you want from a large portion of your playerbase. People will continue to play their Legacy characters because all their stuff is there. It makes it more simple for them to twink, when what you need with the scale of changes you are making is people to start completely over. They will complain of course. Then they will get reminded that this is a beta, and you played/joined the Beta with the known expectation you would not keep your character. Development costs should not take a back seat in this circumstance. The costs being the patching/updating to deal with issues for Legacy Characters. As you said, let everyone race to the top again. Edit: I took so long responding you already posted something else! " That is understandable, but they will be informed by the other players in the game. Also, if they are not visiting the forum to read this information (which is major so they should be reading it), then they only have themselves to blame. I know it is easy for me to say that being on the other side of the fence on this one (they won't complain to me), but it shouldn't be a surprise to them. Last edited by Sparhawk#5562 on Sep 30, 2011, 12:56:08 AM
|
|
" I'm capping shields to three sockets right now in response to this message. It will be easier for people using two items to accumulate the sockets earlier. Having additional sockets matters less in 0.9.3 because less support gems are required to have pretty powerful skills. We can balance around this in other ways. That 2h dual wielder gets a whole lot of sockets. Those keystone passives are pretty meaningful. | |
" (sorry, not trying to derail) Could you have 2-handed weapons start at 4 sockets, but not allow more than a maximum of a pairs of 3-socket chains? (ie. even though it is one item, it has sockets as if it were 2 items with 3 slot cap) edit: Personally, I think it will be hard to balance characters with a difference in max sockets. Another option would be to have something like quivers for melee and add sockets to them. My advice is that the dev team should choose a maximum number of slots per character and have that achievable by all characters regardless of weapon combination. Last edited by Britannicus#3214 on Sep 30, 2011, 1:18:50 AM
|
|
