XP penalty and likely 1 portal is NOT going anywhere
" "If you have to invest to be above the "bare minimum", then it can't be "at all"." Don't have to take every single word literally. Actual investment into defense is anything above bare minimum. Bare minimum is capped elemental resists to 75%, technically it's investment in defense, but actually calling it investment into defense is weird. "If XP Penalty is removed, and 1 portal stays this statement is false as only 1 portal. If XP Penalty stays, but 5 portals are added this statement is false as every death gives an XP penalty. Only if both the XP Penalty is removed, and 5 portal are added then this statement partially correct on both counts. You can still run out of portals." What the point of saying all this? Want to pretend smart or something? Its like saying 2+1=3, but 2-1=1, and actually 2*1=2. "People don't need to be encouraged to play builds that clear the fastest and with the best chance of loot/currency, XP loss & portal numbers are irrelevant to that. The 2nd half of the sentance is false. Your now using builds with 0 defenses as a rationale. You can't technically have 0 defense as it is inherent on gear." Builds that clear faster with item rarity everywhere do not invest into defense that much if at all. Having no xp penalty and 6 portals make those builds prefered choice as whole point of game is progression, most people will choose build that can do stuff faster and can drop more currency when there's no real downside. 6 Portals are enough to clear t15 maps with 0% resists on spell caster because spell casters can kill mobs in whole screen or even out of screen. Again, you don't have to cl*wn around and take every word literally. Having 1 life is technically having defense, it doesn't mean that every character with 1 or more life is investing into defenses. Running around with 2k life, 75% ele resists and nothing else is not investing into defense, its just baseline of any character. "You cannot "Delete" build diversity.. If you delete build diversity, then there is only 1 playable build in the entire game." Once again, don't have to take every single word literally. When amount of builds played by majority of players goes from 5 to 1, it deletes build diversity. When more people play same build, it deletes build diversity. Which is already happening with rarity FOMO, when same Spark Stormweaver being played by almost half of whole playerbase, because it's strong enough to clear screens while having little to no investment into defense and runs rarity on almost every piece of gear. Last edited by PaintMaster#2396 on Jan 22, 2025, 6:30:41 AM
|
|
" 1. People don't invest in defense if it doesn't make a difference, like it is right now where everything is able to kill you fast no matter your defenses, making defense less prioritized. 2. Just make the other portals work like campaign, you die you lose loot. 3. No, making the game punisher you for dying or making build mistakes(bricking) is what makes people build the same Fucking build every time, look hardcore, high penality(only 1 life) and more than 50% uses the SAME BUILD. 4. Having only one map makes everyone afraid of dying encouraging meta builds that clear all the screen instead of getting more defense. 5. Allowing player to die more without losing a lot makes then experiment more and use new builds, because if the build isn't so good or inconsistent it still will work on map, it only will take x amount of portals more than other builds. 6. People will always do the bare minimum on the defense side. Why? Because EVERYONE like BIG NUMBER GOES BOOM. Doesn't matter how much tries they have, you will never have player putting more defenses than necessary. Resume: You only thought about 2 things that would happen, less build diversity and less defenses build, and on neither you put much thought on before posting, so stop crying and making excuses and go play minecraft, it is a better game for your intellectual age. |
|
" Nah, "people" don't always invest maximum as possible into offense. Not everyone play for big numbers. It's not because you do because some streamers does it that everybody think like you. I like playing a defensive character, be it a tank, a healer, a support, a summoner, a shielded wizard, a dodging monk, whatever. In every toon I invest at least 50% of my build and tree into defense, maybe more. Does it result into a slower farming ? Sure ! Is it fun ? For me yes. Do I complain about dying ? Strangely, no. |
|
" All this would make perfect sense.... if investing in defense was actually prioritized and viable right now. It's not. It's LITERALLY the opposite BECAUSE of the 1-death-maps. Because you get randomly 1-shot in this game no matter your defenses, the only viable alternative is: invest loads into having the biggest AoE and damage possibles. Clear mobs as far as you can as fast as you can. You can't die if things can't even attack you. How I know this is true? That was my literal experience. Upgrading my shitty campaign weapon to a mid/high DPS one and playing dedicated ranged made me go from "struggling in T5s" to "easy clearing juiced T14s/T15s". By the way, I did try investing in HP and resistances. It made no difference when mobs were allowed to stay alive for more than 5 seconds. But wait, don't trust only my experience: why are people not playing Armor? Why is hybrid EVA/ES monk so weak and people are moving to dedicated EVA+Acro or pure ES? Why are people playing 15k+ ES builds with all capped resists, MoM, and they still rely on minion/totem/ranged builds? By the way, GGG already said themselves that what we have is what they intended: PoE 1 mapping. The only thing they changed in PoE 2 is that they removed piano-flasking, which ironically for your argument, was a layer of defense you'd invest in. | |
" 1. Lie, then noone would ever reach high levels in hardcore. 2. Decent option tbh. 3. I know that many people play invoker because its op, its not problem of death penalty or portal limit, its balance problem. 4. You die if you invest everything into offense. You not die if you invest something into defense while keeping clearing at about same level, its possible, just try it. 5. You have enough time to experiment in campaign, you can experiment in maps since map sustain is no issue if you don't play glasscannon. 6. If you like big dps numbers and don't want to invest into defense, don't blame game for your choice. |
|
" What logic is this about "why invest into defense if its 1 portal anyway". Isn't that whole point that if its 1 portal, you want to invest into defense so you not die to mosquito sneeze? I have Titan build with ~6k life, 70% block, capped res, enough armor (~8k + flat 8% phys damage reduction) to ignore phys hits from map mobs, against big phys hits i just stack more life because its more effective. If i would be more careful, i'd have like 10 deaths instead of 30 in 3 days of in-game playtime, most of which was in campaign. So far this character is level 91, died like 4-5 times in maps, single death was unexpected, rest was my own fault. I avoid 25% ele pen mod on waystone because effectively going from 75% to 50% res, which simply makes me half as tanky against ele damage, which does hit hard sometimes. I don't expect to be immortal, i expect to die sometimes, that's normal you know? I not complain that "why i die when i invested into defense", because it's expected that i would die. I don't get why people that invest nothing into defense complain that they get oneshotted. I have 0 issues with map sustain, because i invest into defense and not play glasscannon, so i not die at the start of map. On range builds having good aoe clear is also layer of defense since you not letting melee mobs come close. Don't you think that if range build can kill everything screenwide, there should be something that can hit you back from range? Or you want range builds to just have screen aoe clear and never die? Defense types is different topic. I know that armor is in bad place, and it should be changed. And here's why its bad, which you might already undestand: 1.Armor is not relevant in maps because very and very few mobs (not bosses), hit hard enough that require you to invest a lot into armor. Mobs that hit hard are slow and easy to avoid. So armor is not really needed in maps. 2. As result of point 1, Evasion is a lot better because if you have 80% evasion, its 80% evasion that doesn't change if hit is bigger or smaller. Evasion currently is too good. 3. Some bosses have hard hitting phys damage skills (that are easy to avoid anyway), that no realistic amount of armor can mitigate efficiently, meaning that you can instead invest into more life with less armor and be more tanky than lower life character with higher armor. 4. As result of point 3, ES builds are more tanky because they can stack bigger ES pool, and its more effective to stack your "life" pool regardless if its life or es against big phys hits. 5. As result of all 4 points above, Evasion/ES builds are far superior than Life/Armor. You still can make life/armor build tanky enough to just not die. But if you chose not to, not blame game for it. |
|
" You wrote all this to prove to me that: 1) Having invested all this in defenses and you still have to avoid some maps because your chances of dying, despite all your investments, are not low in them 2) You just showed me how bad investing in defenses really is You've probably spent considerable time searching for good gear, having to juggle mods around to max out all your resistances and having invested considerable resources into your character. And you still can't run all the content without worrying of dying. All of this running a tankier character class. Me? I bought a mid level weapon for 5 exalts and I can run maps faster and more easily than you. I probably clear faster, I have lower chances of dying and I have no mod restrictions on my waystones. I was playing braindead zoom zoom zoom PoE 1 style, by the way, so the game was nowhere near something I'd consider challenging. Your mistake is thinking my stance on this is because I think PoE is hard, but I don't. My stance comes from the fact that I am fully aware of how this game feels for casual people that just want to have a good time wanting to play a videogame. | |
" At first I was so concerned with the defences that the game looked harder than really is. After I said "F it" and went full blow DPS and MF the game became much more fluidy and easy. Investing in defences I struggled to clear T10-11 waystones Going pure DPS + MF forsaken resistances I'm zooming T16-17 (Irradiated + Corrupted) The place of defences in PoE 2 is laughable. GGG needs to made serious rebalances on Mob damage, because right now the best defence is a overhelming offence. |
|
" "Objectively subjective" is a sophism, i alredy told you to stop relying on that because "Anything objective sticks to the facts, but anything subjective has feelings. Objective and subjective are opposites. Objective: It is raining. Subjective: I love the rain!". https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/commonly-confused-words/objective-subjective/ Also: Good: Being positive or desirable in nature; not bad or poor. Right: Conforming with or conformable to justice, law, or morality. There's no law against making a game as grindy as possible, but making it too grindy is not desirable in human nature. No one wants to feel their time is being wasted, example being the "minority", or so you people claim, of people that don't want to waste too much time into grinding, simply because they don't want or don't have the time to. You can objectively measure the time it takes to achieve something, clear the campaign for example, but even that is exclusively subjective to the skill of the player and their experiences in the genre or with the game (subsequent play throughs). It's literally why speedruns can exist. Objectively, you can optmize an speedrun, but that's beside the point. There's not really an objective way to measure if a game design is right or wrong because it's entire feedback relies on moral subjectivity. It's entirely upon the devs feeling if they want to make the game more grindy or not and it's entirely upon the players feeling if they want to endure it or not, and that is the fact we are discussing. Is the game design good or bad in nature. It's my opinion that it's bad game design because it needlessly prolongs the grind by removing resources in a Hardcore like manner. It's your opinion that it's good game design because it implies that players need to learn from it. So let's drop the sophisms and agree to disagree. |
|
" Or just add more enemies like Eternal Knights... |
|
