With so many permanent seasonal mechanics, should we create a rotation pool?

"

Belegur85#5784 wrote:

They sort of had this to a lesser extent already, with what was incentivized on the map device. With that being removed, I don't think what you are suggesting is a terrible idea, but there is probably not enough quality leagues to do it with currently in my opinion. The league are there, but they would have to develop it further for a rotation to work, and probably would be a lot of work, at least at first.

If they used all the league, and had them upto a quality of the ones they are currently using, perhaps they would be able to have something like they do with the map pool rotation, and it could be interesting with the combinations, rather than having access to everything, but the same ones every league. They could possibly even have them in less nerfed versions if they did that, than what they currently do. I think most things would need to be always available as well, even if not readily available. Eg. Catalysts. Having them less easy to get in a certain league would be fine, but removing them from a league rotation entirely, might be a sep too far.

Some players would find it interesting, but many would not. See the response to the boss changes in Phrecia event. Poor communication by GGG, but even that aside, many players don't like constraints. I think it is good for keeping the game interesting, but a large amount of players don't even think xp penalties are necessary, or want full respect on everything available all the time, or access to everything immediately. The new scion ascendance will be interesting to see how people interact with a rotating pool of options. Though that is an extra option added that players can ignore. Often the community doesn't see removing something quite as favorably. I agree though, the constraint can make it more interesting, having a challenge to overcome, that isn't the same every league. I've found myself playing basically all content the past few leagues, which does become a bit repetitive. I think this has been partly because the incoming leagues have lacked some depth, to be completely focused and immersed in.

I don't really think they have enough polish on the old league mechanics though. Even some of the ones they are using need some work. Some of the ones that were phased out were sill potentially useable, but I think they are having trouble enough just making the current league good with the spilt resources at the moment. The last few leagues have been good and had interesting aspects to them, but they seem to be coming out late or in settlers case, skipped over completely for a year, and most of them have lacked a certain level of depth that some of the older leagues had. Even if they were still good league. Mercs for example, was an interesting league, but needed something extra in the endgame to interact with to beyond the mercs themselves. Similar for settlers and keepers I would say. T17 maps were there, but that was largely separate from the leagues themselves, other than gearing. A lot of the changes to the endgame have been reworking things, like the atlas reworks and the scarab changes, rather than adding. Atlas passive tree was an exception that was added and was largely well received. T17 by their own admission, was an interesting thing to try, but didn't exactly work out. It provided a level of difficulty for players to interact with, but didn't seem to fit well in the structure of the game.

Some of the older league mechanics like alva and jun are still the more interesting ones to interact with after all this times, even though the are quite simple on the surface.

I think there is a lot of potential in the old leagues to do what you are saying, but I don't think they are completely on top of nailing all the incoming leagues currently to even attempt that. Phrecia shows how interesting some of the old and even unused idea's can be though, so there is certainly potential there for them to do it if they wanted to.