With All Due Respect Jonathan I Completely Disagree With Your 1 Portal Decision

You even contradicted yourself a little during the latest interview with Ghazzy and Darth when you said "You stand behind the decision of having consequence of dying in a map" but then immediately said you would like to see a way to preserve the map reward to the extent you can plug another waystone! so essentially multiple portals only the cost is Waystones and is not limited to 6 as it will be limited to how many Waystones you have!

This is really odd to me, then why not just make it 6 portal, diminishing count the higher tier it is just like what you did with the Arbiter!

Furthermore, doesn't the game already have severely punishing consequences to death, you lose your Waystone, you lose your map, you lose the map rewards, you lose citadels that you spend hours farming, and the cherry on the top you lose exp. Why so many piling up punishment, what is so fun about that? the game is difficult enough.

If you are so keen on that decision then why not just delete Softcore league completely lets all play Hardcore and "git gud"!!

Losing Exp is another none sense design choice that belongs to a bygone era! It has no purpose and serves no measure other than ridicule you after you die! It doesn't skill check, nor inform you that you belong a lower level! dying is enough indicator that you don't belong there, you don't to pile up the exp lose as well!

The game is off to a great start for an early access, you just need to dial down your hammer of punishment a little!

Speak for yourself

You'll provide better feedback and get less people pushing back if you're honest. Instead of trying to imply consensus, assert authority or ad populum fallacy.

Personally I think 1 portal was a smart move. It dramatically incentivizes investment into defenses and even (if they balance the game better) slows players down; which will help keep the game from deforming and distorting into the dumb clown fiesta that POE1 devolved into.

-1

Purely because you used 'we' in the title.

(he did btw, he just edited it)

I'm speaking for myself!

"Instead of trying to imply consensus, assert authority or ad populum fallacy."

What do you even mean by that, or rather do you even know what it means, or just picked up from the dictionary today and was itching to use it in a sentence!!

If you enjoy it so much then go play Hardcore!

The 1 Portal punishment is nothing but an annoyance, and you are in the very slim minority if you agree with it. But then again if you are this slow, calculated, methodical and so invested in defense then go to Hardcore league!

cid951#3156: My bad, was thinking "I" but typed "We"! Corrected!

"

Snake64#5734 wrote:

cid951#3156: My bad, was thinking "I" but typed "We"! Corrected!

I'm just being salty, you say your piece lol

"

Snake64#5734 wrote:

I'm speaking for myself!

"Instead of trying to imply consensus, assert authority or ad populum fallacy."

What do you even mean by that, or rather do you even know what it means, or just picked up from the dictionary today and was itching to use it in a sentence!!

If you enjoy it so much then go play Hardcore!

The 1 Portal punishment is nothing but an annoyance, and you are in the very slim minority if you agree with it. But then again if you are this slow, calculated, methodical and so invested in defense then go to Hardcore league!

An ad populum fallacy is asserting something to be true because lots of people believe it. You can look this up if you wont take my word for it. I can give an example if you'd like: "McDonalds makes better burgers than Gordon Ramsey because they sell more of them".

Implying consensus is what you did before you edited the title and deleted "we". If you had said "some of us" I wouldn't have pushed back even though I disagree personally.

However implying that you have a consensus when you have no data (polling) is just a narrative.

Just because you believe something to be true intuitively doesn't mean it is. Even if its plausible its still a narrative.

Finally "if you like 1 portal go play Hard Core" is a false dichotomy. I'm not sure you're fully aware of the dramatic differences between HC and 1 portal if you're making that assertion. Or you're pretending they're much more similar than they actually are. Either way its not a reasonable take.

A game can and should have multiple gradients of difficulty. Most of the best designed games have this.

Now if you had said:

"I want an easy mode with 6 portals"

FWIW I would have agreed with you.

"

alhazred70#2994 wrote:

"

Snake64#5734 wrote:

I'm speaking for myself!

"Instead of trying to imply consensus, assert authority or ad populum fallacy."

What do you even mean by that, or rather do you even know what it means, or just picked up from the dictionary today and was itching to use it in a sentence!!

If you enjoy it so much then go play Hardcore!

The 1 Portal punishment is nothing but an annoyance, and you are in the very slim minority if you agree with it. But then again if you are this slow, calculated, methodical and so invested in defense then go to Hardcore league!

An ad populum fallacy is asserting something to be true because lots of people believe it. You can look this up if you wont take my word for it. I can give an example if you'd like: "McDonalds makes better burgers than Gordon Ramsey because they sell more of them".

Implying consensus is what you did before you edited the title and deleted "we". If you had said "some of us" I wouldn't have pushed back even though I disagree personally.

However implying that you have a consensus when you have no data (polling) is just a narrative.

Just because you believe something to be true intuitively doesn't mean it is. Even if its plausible its still a narrative.

Finally "if you like 1 portal go play Hard Core" is a false dichotomy. I'm not sure you're fully aware of the dramatic differences between HC and 1 portal if you're making that assertion. Or you're pretending they're much more similar than they actually are. Either way its not a reasonable take.

A game can and should have multiple gradients of difficulty. Most of the best designed games have this.

Now if you had said:

"I want an easy mode with 6 portals"

FWIW I would have agreed with you.

That was my bad! I didn't realize I screwed up typing the title, obviously I know what an ad populum means, just was confused on why it was relevant here!

And I would respectfully disagree with you again with the false dichotomy about the 1 portal, it is to me definitely hardcore lite, I don't think it makes sense as the game already has more severe punishing mechanics even for softcore.

All I'm saying is the 1 portal decision just doesn't fit the game style at all. That's my personal opinion, however, it is shared by a lot not that it matters too much, but I do think it does matter.

Eventually when you stack up so many punishments for dying then my incentive stick around and try to improve is met with substantial resistance that really all it does it takes away from the great experience!

At the end who know how they decide to go forward.

1 portal is the hill they want to die on. I played poe for years and I have zero interest playing anymore. They have ignored poe1 for way to long. To give us this garbage ea. It does not promote playing with friends. You can't even revive in maps. The entire story you can but when you get to end game. It's a huge F you. To many on death effects, lag, horrible crafting, distractions in life in general. To make one portal a thing. Sorry none of you have kids or a job or cell phone. They need to make 1 portal a game mode just like hardcore and ssf so they people that want it can play it.

I like consequences for failure but even Souls games, which I love, let you walk back to your corpse to get your souls (exp) and even then the worst case scenario is just that you lose your souls (exp). Imagine if you failed a dungeon and that part of the map was permanently locked off OR all the enemies and loot from that dungeon just disappears, so you can still progress but you get nothing from it.

Plus, 1 portal has clearly pigeonholed people into builds that vaporise the entire map and bosses instantly so you never even allow the game to do a damage calculation on your character since that is the safest way to proceed. It actually encourages people to only play the most meta hax builds which are extremely boring to play.

If you play an off meta slow and fun builds you're putting yourself at extreme risk of losing progress, because you might make a tiny mistake and get insta-gibbed by a single glowing pixel on the screen (something which happens in all ARPGs with significant character power scaling, no matter how much the devs try to remove it, because of how they still need to threaten hyper defensive builds).

Obviously it's always "better" in terms of economics and progress to run meta builds. But in PoE1 I had a lot of fun just running weird stuff that, sure, was slower, but were builds I made myself that were fun and weren't intentionally RIP-y but just were not hyper meta and relied on having a couple extra chances on some maps occassionaly. If you didn't change a thing about PoE1 but made it 1 portal, all my off-meta slow builds that I found fun to play would instantly become unfun and not viable.