Map Changes in 2.0.4
|
Through all three difficulty levels, it's a decent assumption that a well-built, well-played character of level equal to the monster level of the area can succeed. Good, fast racer types can take more risks and do things above their character level. Bad slow players like me can still make progress with a character level higher than the monster level.
Why does this change with maps? You're taking everything the player has learned about expected difficulty and throwing it out the window. We don't need Tiers 1-15, we need maps that continue the expected progression from 68-99 (or whatever the high end is determined to be). Coloring the maps to help differentiate which map mods can appear is a good change, but creating more systems that break the expectation that level X content is suitable for level X characters is not. (I'd vote for iLvl to go from 1-100 too, but I think that's a lower priority because by the time you care about iLvl you are pretty experienced. It's never been relevant for me.) |
|
|
Oh God GGG, why the hell with the Tiers.
Leave the level in, with the tier. Level 75 Tier 8 (or whatever). |
|
" Warbands & Tempest are about to end and there's less than 90 players collectively who've reached level 100. That's too quickly? Shouldn't it be achievable for a greater proportion of the playerbase to cap before the next reset/ temp league? And why does a change to extend league racing and race watching need to affect standard? There's under 400 level 100's in standard, a league that is many years old. While this change may (or may not) be desirable for your top 20 players and the few hundred people who watch their streams, it's arguably less fun for everyone else. If net fun could be measured I suspect it would decrease after 2.0.4. I'd much prefer to see leveling to 100 made more fun and accessible for a greater % of the community, rather than more competitive for the tiniest fraction of the community. Leveling a single character to 100 should be a goal with a much greater participation rate. Part of the problem involves the death penalty: because a death at the highest levels eliminates hours of mapping, the only efficient builds to level to 100 with are very boring/safe builds. The process is currently too build restrictive, and I dread the thought of spending twice as long grinding from 99 to 100 on a boring build. Never underestimate what the mod community can do for PoE if you sell an offline client. Last edited by Vhlad on Sep 24, 2015, 1:00:36 AM
| |
" No, its April fools bonded with Halloween, called 2.0.4 And as for the Level 100's getting therer too quickly, thats the streamers, who pool currency with other high level players to get there fast. The casual player who may play a few hours a day, FORGET Level 100 all together. Last edited by iamnotspock on Sep 24, 2015, 1:01:31 AM
|
|
|
These sound like a reasonable start, perhaps with more tweaking needed (Zana back to 77!).
I can understand where people are coming from about the tiers. You could have simply put in: Level: XX Effective level (for xp penalty only): XX.X | |
|
Also can we get a jewel master that can exchange chaos for exalts? Please! Just saying!
|
|
|
It's really quite interesting how the changes are pretty much listed in a good-to-WTF order...
" "More fun" for which part of the community, exactly? People who want to watch streamers going for level 100, I guess? Personally, I don't watch streams because I prefer to actually play the game myself. Realistically, I'll probably never have the will or the map pool to get to level 100 anyway, but knowing that you made something I already viewed as damn near impossible just that much harder does not encourage me to find a really fun build and play Path of Exile long enough to get my favorite character to 100. Even if the upper echelon of your player base and maybe a few random people praise the killing of top level maps, I honestly can't see how the average player will take kindly to a change that makes the one high level map they'll find this year far less useful. And as for the tier system, some people have already said it, more will say it here after me, and if you test it in the one-month event I'll bet a stack of exalts that you'll be flooded with even more feedback like it, but it really is an awful idea. By the time a player gets to maps, they will be familiar with area/monster level and how the difficulty of monsters can increase significantly with each level once they've played a bit in merciless difficulty. And then you'd have a new player have to guess approximately what character level and extent of build completion is appropriate for a "tier 1" map. Should an ambitious level 50 character try out this map thingy in this map device they just got access to? Aside from likely being more confusing to truly new players than the current system is, the tier system will also be more confusing to experienced players, at least initially. Say I want to run a map with monster level 75+ because I want vendor recipe ingredients for a regal orb. What map do I run? A tier 10+ maybe? Red maps, green maps... a significant part of itemization in this game depends on item level, which depends on monster level, so I'd like to know what a map can give me without learning to associate map levels with new arbitrary "tier" numbers. The tier system won't solve anything and will only introduce issues... please just admit it was a bad idea and toss it out before you do more damage by actually implementing it on live servers. " I was hoping there was a carbon monoxide leak in my house or something, and I legitimately did check the date when I read the OP. Not a CO leak, unfortunately... Drawn by a haunting voice, you come to the PoE forums. It is an odd place, filled with a motley assortment of feedback... and shameless trolling. There, the whining posts are all around you, and the gamers are silent, as the grind takes ahold of them. One by one, their lives seem lost to its call.
| |
" GGG logic = GGG balance = nonexistent... That explains perfectly all. Bethesda is known for having good ideas and terrible realization of them. GGG is a Bethesda subsidiary or what?
| |
|
Here's an idea: don't call them "Tiers," instead give them colors: Red Map, Blue Map, Green Map, Ochre Map...
I'm playing a maplevel: 79, mapcolor: red, with Ambush mod and some 15% extra items.... For ease, the community can create PoE.Mapness and we can enter these into the site and it will compute how many hours of our lives we must waste to get an Orb of Augmentation to drop from the super unique end boss that kills you during a lag-out. I'll pay for 1500 fusings for that! |
|
|
/rant
What category of players matters most to GGG? Two changes I dislike target 0.01% top players and 10% new players respactively. But they are also mandatory to 89,99% players. /endofrant At least make map tiers a graphical option, on by default. Or if you don't want to introduce another option, make it configurable through item filters. " Well, confusing system just got more confusing. On items, mods depend on itemlevel, not droplevel. This way you can roll top mods on, say, gnarled branch ilvl=100. Now if I understand it correctly, map mods depend on droplevel (now called tier), not itemlevel. This leads to the question: why even display itemlevel on maps along with droplevel (current behavior)? Does itemlevel has any effect on maps at all? |
