[3.3] EHLD All-Round Cold Snapper [Dead]

"

Rupenus wrote:

Ethical pvp is like a good experience for 1-2 weeks, you can do 1-2 builds and then get bored of. There is nothing to do, nothing to discover, nothing that intrigues you and urges you to become better. If you eventually become "better", you'll be nerfed, people will cry and that build will be nerfed. (unless you are melee) I was very pro-nerft the start too but i realize now how bad idea is to nerf everything.

In card games, why do developers put bad(or slightly less powerful) cards to the game? That's in order to create hierarchy of builds, so bad players will ahve the urge to become better and spend money or time for the game. That also gives purpose to peole who are playing T2 or T3 builds to play better and win those "abusive" T1 builds and feel, really really good. There is a ladder to climb and that makes people play.

Why do pvp games tend to mostly buff other builds/chars instead of nerfing? When you nerf, you can't predict what's gonna be OP afterwards. The outcome of buffs are more predictible.

So i realized, these dota, overwatch etc game makers are actually very clever guys. This ethical pvp movement was a good lessn for me to comprehend the logic behind pvp game making devs.

You went from talking about time to learn the meta and see what happens in your earlier post, into saying now there is 1 or 2 builds. You've already contradicted yourself. People have cried about plenty that wasn't nerfed, but you're also exaggerating because we simply changed rules based off feedback and results. Limited results I can admit but it is what we have to work with... so how dare we adapt to the information that is presented to us... how dare.

There are definitely "stronger" builds in our meta, we have been removing abuse mechanics so your comparison is terrible. TheDarkPrinceSlaneesh DD is much better than Dominating Blow, so there still exists a hierarchy and no one is asking for a full normalization. You've now contradicted yourself, and created a straw man, and a point that you want that already exists in the format.

In terms of tending to buff? we've removed "one shot mechanics" for the most part, and we DO NOT HAVE THE TOOLS TO BUFF WEAKER BUILDS. Turns out, we aren't the developers.

What I end up seeing, was just a player who can only play with hyper dominant skills and then gets upset when skill is being introduced into the meta rather than knowing what can evaporate other players

"

You went from talking about time to learn the meta and see what happens in your earlier post, into saying now there is 1 or 2 builds. You've already contradicted yourself

experiencing something new is an ongoing process, your ideas are changin too as you experience more. There is no contradiction there, when we nerfed everything i realized how poe is so far from being a viable pvp game. I've said that too, mentioned that in discord chat too, this was a lesson for me. I have no problem in being someone who can change his ideas very fast according to what he sees right and can stand behind. Cause i'm thinking, i'm not choosing sides or seeking to gain power in what side i choose.

The hierarchy you guys established is like Only middle class - working class economy with no upper class. That's not hierarchy, that's socialism, basically. Pvp is way closer to capitalism as all you guys can agree with me. What you guys do is simply decapitating upper class builds brutally in front of everyone. And pvp isn't even like real life, it's more like a rock paper scissor structure where an upper class build can get wrecked by a lower tier build. That's what makes pvp fun.

You keep directing your ideas who i am and who i'm not. But i don't wanna play that ball sorry.

Appendix: What i mean was, from the very start since i left discord is, kicking out all the abusive stuff isn't the best idea.(What we did was just nerfing everything abusive.) The important thing is to keep the balance between abusive stuff and available counters in the game. This requires very thorough and careful thinking of what should be nerfed and how. And what should be left in the game even though it makes some builds unviable. This is not a one man's job, this is not something a group of competiive players can achieve by debating with each other either. Also i repeat again, to make some builds viable i can't even think of how many other beautiful builds have totally sent to the garbage bin.

"

Rupenus wrote:

Rups, the problem of you ideals is that most of the time in poe trying to counter the op build means just create another one that will one shot it before it can initiate.

The upper class builds all mostly have this in common. The only way that you found in order to counter zerphi for example was to deal so much x-y that it was impossible for them to do shit about it (it s not a critic btw just the state of how in poe one strong build can only be surpassed).

How dominant T1 build were gonna be in ProjectPT is subject to debate but for sure most of them like Aliac s traps or your blast rain, only solution facing them would have been to just hard counter them with more dps and that s all.

Those builds have such AOE or initiative that there is no way to counter them unless let s say you make them both duel each others.

I understand what you mean, if we nerf all the op things little by little and only 2 skills are left, it will always be the AOE one that will dominate if the other one is single target.

But in ProjectPT version of pvp the effort is to give some competitive and entertaining game to viewers as well. Watching few matches ending in 4-0 can be ok but if all the games are 4-0 in 2 sec its neither interesting or entertaining for the average viewer.

This is why unified rules with good builds having powers not too much far from each others is necessary in my opinion.


Taking my build in the first pvp event as an example, it sucked hard. Facing markusz 4 tiem I was only able to kill him after he killed me first. I was reflect killed by some minion guy and could not do shit against him. The build sucked but I had fun.

Fun in pvp is not winning condition and this is why Banning all the good build is stupid. However at some point even bad build still need to get at least the possibility to participate.

PT format permit average or bad build to still survive few sec or score a kill. In the end they still loose so there is no favor in mediocrity in his format.

The goal is just to avoid 1 shots so this is not useless to participate unless you copy the 2-3 best builds and I think for now PT rules made it so.

-------------
As for Aliac build, It was a discussion and not an attack on it. The build is strong for abusing cold snap and for using very expensive items. It does not deserve a ban per se, maybe just one item if we want to get hardcore in the rules.

But I think discussing something even if the claims are over the top is healthy. PT not a fool if few of us were to ask for a total ban on projectile skills he would not follow that for sure. I feel most of the ban were deserved for logistical reasons or pure power level.

I doubt Aliac cold snap build deserve a ban but there are things in there we can at least critic and complain about haha.

"

Rupenus wrote:

pvp is based on competition and 100ex isn't a huge deal

There are very few people whom this can apply to, even fewer than our already small group of pvpers, so improving in pvp by min-maxing one build through making your budget unlimited is the least viable way of growing pvp, and the exact opposite of what we are aiming for.

"

Rupenus wrote:

Ethical pvp is like a good experience for 1-2 weeks, you can do 1-2 builds and then get bored of. There is nothing to do, nothing to discover, nothing that intrigues you and urges you to become better.

Your statement only shows your own personal point of view and experience, for most people unregulated pvp got very stale. Ethical pvp gave a chance to try builds which were previously oppressed by broken builds, it created the highest activity since official pvp seasons.

can delete if requested(cause he asked through PM), PT asked me why i have left the group, so i just used this opportunity to share my opinions. That's why i share my "personal" ideas here.

As i said, if you are enjoying that format i wish more power and glory to you.

"

But in ProjectPT version of pvp the effort is to give some competitive and entertaining game to viewers as well.

that's what formula 1 did, they focused on making it more accessible to low budget teams too, they focused on more what viewers may like, enjoy than technological development and what race cars can do. They lost huge audience aftr 2004, youtube is full of videos where people masturbate how good F1 car sound was back in 2004. They gained some of the audience back lately after they made some changes. I'm not going to extremes and say, lib's pvp matches were any interesting at all. Or try to fit this analogy to ethical pvp, what i wanted to say is, viewers are not that important. Anyway, I think i've explained things well enough from my perspective

I kind of agree with rup on a few of his points, but at the same time pretty much everything he's said is opinionated. I mean, rup even agreed with me regarding my first post in this thread. In a way, it is somewhat toxic that people's first reaction to something is to ban or nerf it, but at the same time I can see why people are like that. A lot of people want to win, plain and simple. I absolutely wouldn't say that the community is toxic because of a few less than sportsmanlike things a few people do.

However, pretty much everything else said is entirely subjective. Just because something isn't enjoyable to you doesn't necessarily make it bad. And I know that you agree. There aren't only one or two viable builds, even if that's how you see it. Not everyone plays for the benefits or rewards, even if that might be your primary incentive. I can see where you're coming from, considering you by far prefer the overpowered clusterfuck meta where everything is either one-shot or be one-shot, or who can sustain Zerphi's the longest. I really do because I can see the appeal there. But I cannot agree with you in thinking that it's a more enjoyable meta-game.

I also agree that buffs are strictly better than nerfs in every possible way. Coming from a fighting game background I wholeheartedly support buffs over nerfs, but you have to understand that isn't practical here. We can't buff anything without nerfing something else, since this entire format is community driven. It's literally impossible for us. And I would say adapting is by far the better option, since the most competitive game I've played has been out for 17 years and hasn't had a single balance patch, but it's still not a legitimate option. The only thing we can actually do in regards to balancing is nerfing. Even though I'm strongly against nerfs, I feel like it's all we can really do.

I like the direction we're going in at the moment, albeit having more activity would make things a lot more enjoyable. Not everyone will enjoy what we're doing, just like how we don't enjoy what others do. I mean, you can even see the two sides of the pvp community here just by having a look at the feedback threads. I highly doubt both sides will ever fully agree with each other on anything.

And regarding why you left the discord. I feel like you don't really need to explain yourself. If you have your reasons and want to leave it at that, others should respect you for it. I was surprised you even joined it in the first place, honestly. Don't take part in something you don't want to just because others do.

Edit: also, pvp in this game is not a spectator sport and it absolutely shouldn't be treated like one. Viewers are significantly less important that the game itself. I'm glad PT streams and I want others to as well, but it should take a backseat to everything else. If you think this pvp format is going to bring in a huge wave of new players, you're wrong. It might make a few people interested, but that's really it.

"

However, pretty much everything else said is entirely subjective. Just because something isn't enjoyable to you doesn't necessarily make it bad. And I know that you agree. There aren't only one or two viable builds, even if that's how you see it. Not everyone plays for the benefits or rewards, even if that might be your primary incentive. I can see where you're coming from, considering you by far prefer the overpowered clusterfuck meta where everything is either one-shot or be one-shot, or who can sustain Zerphi's the longest. I really do because I can see the appeal there. But I cannot agree with you in thinking that it's a more enjoyable meta-game.

maybe, i thought of that too. i agree with you. The background i'm coming from affects me.

In non ethical HLD there always been a tyrannical build which slays all the other builds out there until someone comes up with a solution. Or you have to sit and think how you can min max your existing build to counter that. This was my motivation to play since long time. This is what i enjoy most, sitting and thinking how to counter which seems uncounterable. Seeking new synergies, trying different combinations. HLD tyrant builds were EA / Zerphi / HoT / Bear Trap / GC miner, i'm sure most of us aware what was broken in the past. When KB became the tyrant of HLD, i lost the reason to play poe and pvp anymore. Enough with my background though.

Ethical pvp does not want to reward a sort of build making which is about finding perfect combination / synergies of items and negating win conditions of other builds with just good decision making. When there is something that limits win condition of other build or may do, you rush to ban that. Still in non ethical PvP there are possible OP builds that people haven't tried yet, it takes time for people to figure things out, it takes time for people to fit themselves in to what is going on. You don't let that process to happen. There are lots of items tha you can utilize to create such synergies, chemistries but eventually they'll get banned. Cause some melee guy wants to whirling blade all around the map and have long rounds with hit and runs and finish the opponent off because he has better timing than his/her opponent. I enjoy that too but what you sacrificed to achieve that matters too. Don't stretch the meaning of what i'm saying though, I do not want a fuck fest going on either. I completely agree to ban KB, Magma Orb, Bear Trap etc. CAUSE THEY HAVE FUCKING NO COUNTERS. However, instead of banning flameblast all you have to do was to allow Qotf again, or buff/allow more movement speed in general and moreover why the hell is qotf banned? We dont play CTF at all and what about deadeye's tailwind then. To counter blade vortex maybe allowing bear trap as utility skill was enough? Did we try? No. Everyone was happy how the blade flurry was one shotting things though. THe way you balance things just relies on brute force instead of delicate decision making. That's the problem. I just think you sacrificed too much to achieve what you set as a goal and you have't even reached there. And you don't even know, you guys can reach there either. The final product is a poor man's dota or poor man's street fighter cause you guys missed the essence of what poe is best at. (personal)

If the pvp you are imagining and want to establish is all about micromanageent and long rounds, all good. Poe does not provide much for this aspect of pvp.(I hope you'll prove me wrong)

BTW Rip Cold Snap