Allow jeweler orb tier upgrades [Links/Jeweler feedback]
|
With the current system one can play for days without seeing any progress towards a 6 or even 5 link. That's because there is no progress towards a boolean outcome, you either get the orb or you don't and objects of such rarity will always be problematic on small sample sizes. Removing the old jeweller system gave convenience but removed all the fun.
Allowing the n:1 ratio upgrades will ameliorate this, and create a sink for lower orbs. update: Another fun aspect of the old linking system was the chance to get lucky, you could get an easy 5 or even 6L because the orbs were not deterministic, we could also bring that back: -lesser orb: similar odds for 5L/6L to poe1 -greater orb: high%-5L, low%-6L -perfect orb: high%-6L high can be 100, but it would be more fun if it would be 50-90%. And with these ratios one would not have to click ~1500(+) times each time they need a 6L Last edited by AintCare#6513 on Feb 2, 2025, 12:53:09 AM Last bumped on Feb 2, 2025, 12:39:16 AM
|
|
|
This is by design, you don't need everything to be 6 linked. You don't even need a single 6 link (none of my characters have ever had one, nor has it felt like a problem).
5 links are easy to get via vaal if you really need one. 6 links are a min/max thing, not a requirement for progression. |
|
" my request don't make it easier. not sure where you got that from. its simply commenting on sensation of progress, or rather lack of it. they could make the upgrade ratio twice the drop ratio (meaning it would be twice as 'hard' to get it via upgrades) and it would still feel like progress |
|
" Except your request does exactly that, it makes it easier to get by giving you a guaranteed way to do it. Let's try again. It is supposed to be hard and rare to have, and your complaint is that it is hard and rare to get... |
|
" i see what you mean but this isn't how statistic work, what you describing is an illusion of rarity. however I would also prefer a lil gamba in here, hence my mention on 'hitting 6L within 20fus' i just don't see how that can be implemented, hence my very last remark. |
|
|
bump
|
|
" If you are referring to the linking being on the slot not the gem, yes it does make it easier. You said this when you talked about it being easier to swap out other skills. Because that part is correct. Getting 5/6L on your gems slot is the same as getting a Tabula Rasa in PoE, but with the added benefit of your body armor still having more attributes. It means you can swap in a completely different skill with no additional work. By definition that is easier than developing the linkages each time you want to change skills. I would further argue that it devalues the perceived progression you mention. So you got a 5L on gem slot one. Do you need another? Nope. So no reason to pursue getting more. Conversely, needing it on each gem increases the value of the item, which increases the sense of progression when it happens. Overall the binary drop is more satisfying psychologically than a drop (RNG) followed by a chance (more RNG) for it to mean something. This means that the drop is less valuable and has the potential for a sense of wasted time chasing it. Perhaps an analogy might help explain (not sure I did the above well enough). Imagine you're a 100m sprinter. You line up with the others and go for it. You all arrive within a fraction of a second. But to see who wins, the officials randomly draw racer numbers from a hat. Maybe you were technically first across the line, and heck yeah that felt good. but then that is trashed because your number wasn't drawn. Conversely, maybe someone else just jogged to the finish line, and their number was drawn first. So they won with less effort, and your high of winning the actual race was destroyed by the RNG of the hat. But finally, the combination of RNG in drops and RNG is use of the drops increases the load on the game developers because it means trying to balance the two RNGs to produce a consistent result. Given the extra work for a negative gain, I wouldn't be in favor of it. But that part is just my opinion. |
|
" i just added the skill slot itemization suggestion, calm down. nothing is hinted as being easier, you can adjust the odds accordingly if this feature would be even implemented. edit- edit2- moved and reowkred the skill slot itemization suggestion to another thread to address you 'binary drop' theory, this only works if drop rarity is reasonable. 6L drop rate is so low you running into small sample size, and while hitting 6L in 1 fuse in poe1 was nice, you wouldn't feel anything at all but frustration if this would be the only way of getting a 6L- which is what happens with binary drop/outcome of such low rarity. Last edited by AintCare#6513 on Feb 2, 2025, 12:54:16 AM
|
|
|
Honestly in E.A. I don't necessarily think it would be bad to be able to more easily play with various different skill loadouts.
As such I wouldn't mind links being tied to "slots" instead of the gems themselves as that would allow us to do more testing with fewer restrictions. I don't want to die on that hill but I certainly wouldn't mind a little more flexibility. |
|
" my main concern is with the inability to 'de-level' a gem, if that gets solved in some other way, like applying a new cut gem would allow you to choose level up to the cut gem level, i have no issue to commit to a particular skill. HOWEVER i also like the idea from lore/logic/aesthetic POV that skill gems wont be socketed... it just odd, unless we rename skill to something else then 'gems', and reserve that term for supports only- will prob make a new thread about that not to clutter this one |
|
