Ideas on how to improve endgame/tower system

I know a lot of people just want towers gone, but I think the system can be revised in a simple way (from a developer-hours standpoint) that also makes it a lot more enjoyable:

- towers don't require a waystone: the tier of the tower will be the same as that of the first map you used to reach the tower.
- towers have no tablets: clearing a tower gives "all maps in range are irradiated" and mobs in the tower drop 1-3 (depending on tier) "Tower Markers"
- Tower Markers: a currency that you can right-click and apply to any map node, the map node becomes "marked"
- tablets are global: the slots appear at the ziggurat refuge node, and instead of "X maps in range", they say "the next X marked maps"
- tower bosses: certain towers have bosses (just random campaign bosses) and if defeated, will unlock an extra global tablet slot depending on tower tier (white maps slot 1, yellow slot 2, red slot 3)

This solves the tedious planning around towers: you don't have to rush to towers and look for overlapping ones. It solves the annoyance of having to waste a random waystone on towers. It solves the unrewarding nature of towers, as you can get guaranteed Tower Markers by clearing them.

It also doesn't break the game balance-wise: full irradiation is not game-breaking, because you still get irradiation for all your juicy maps now, it's just a lot more tedious to do. Also, having to unlock the slots by doing tower bosses and needing Tower Markers will make juicing more gradual because you won't have full slots nor many markers at the start of endgame.

It's also thematically fitting, I think: "You reach the overseeing tower, you kill its guards (mobs) and activate its magic, which shines light in the surroundings (irradiates). From atop the tower, you can see all the corruption around you and mark where to go next (tower markers)."

Thoughts?

"

eligtreal#3630 wrote:

This solves the tedious planning around towers: you don't have to rush to towers and look for overlapping ones.

You already don't have to do that; this problem only exists for people who see anything less than absolutely perfect optimization as a complete waste of time.

"

It solves the annoyance of having to waste a random waystone on towers. It solves the unrewarding nature of towers, as you can get guaranteed Tower Markers by clearing them.

This I don't even understand - can't tower nodes have all the same modifiers as any other map at this point? In what way are you "wasting" Waystones on them?

"

Kerchunk#7797 wrote:

This I don't even understand - can't tower nodes have all the same modifiers as any other map at this point? In what way are you "wasting" Waystones on them?

I could be wrong because I've only been half paying attention, but whenever I do towers it seems like there's a lot less loot than usual even though I'm doing them rare, so I just assumed the monster count in a tower was a lot lower. Hence the "wasting" part I guess.

"

Kerchunk#7797 wrote:

"

eligtreal#3630 wrote:

This solves the tedious planning around towers: you don't have to rush to towers and look for overlapping ones.

You already don't have to do that; this problem only exists for people who see anything less than absolutely perfect optimization as a complete waste of time.

"

It solves the annoyance of having to waste a random waystone on towers. It solves the unrewarding nature of towers, as you can get guaranteed Tower Markers by clearing them.

This I don't even understand - can't tower nodes have all the same modifiers as any other map at this point? In what way are you "wasting" Waystones on them?

"You already don't have to do that; this problem only exists for people who see anything less than absolutely perfect optimization as a complete waste of time."

Ok, buddy, you got 2 options here:

A) Run maps with 0% increased rarity
B) Run maps with 120% increased rarity

What'll it gonna be huh, huh ?

in case you didnt know, running waystones that dont have increased rarity affix IS a waste of time, rarity increases are multiplicative, despite them not saying "more".

"

Kerchunk#7797 wrote:

You already don't have to do that; this problem only exists for people who see anything less than absolutely perfect optimization as a complete waste of time.

If you don't have overlapping towers with rarity you're missing out massively, it's not absolutely perfect, it feels necessary.

"

Kerchunk#7797 wrote:

This I don't even understand - can't tower nodes have all the same modifiers as any other map at this point? In what way are you "wasting" Waystones on them?

Towers are much more sparsely populated, lower density, fewer rares, etc. Having to use a waystone in the early endgame when you have few feels quite bad.

"

eligtreal#3630 wrote:

If you don't have overlapping towers with rarity you're missing out massively, it's not absolutely perfect, it feels necessary.

Yeah, I heard the same thing all throughout 0.1 as well and I didn't do it then and had no trouble at all clearing all content on all difficulties.

And this experience that I'm supposedly missing out on is something you guys have been complaining about endlessly because apparently it's tedious and frustrating and takes up too much of your time so which one of us is really missing out here?

"

Towers are much more sparsely populated, lower density, fewer rares, etc.

That's not a claim I think you can support. Tower maps may have fewer total packs because of their size, but the packs themselves seem to me to follow the same mechanics as any other map. They have a baseline size and density which can be modified by the Waystone.

This is one of those things as a software developer which just seems so obvious at a glance. Why on earth would GGG invest the extra time to develop a separate routine for pack size and density calculations for towers? It so obviously serves no purpose I can't even imagine someone coming up with the idea let alone following through with the work needed to implement it.

"

Henide#3803 wrote:

Ok, buddy, you got 2 options here:

A) Run maps with 0% increased rarity
B) Run maps with 120% increased rarity

What'll it gonna be huh, huh ?

I mean, you have perfectly illustrated my point because those aren't the only 2 options I have, buddy.

Believe it or not there are a bunch of numbers between 0% and 120%, and if getting to 120% is going to be tedious and boring and frustrating and getting to one of the numbers in between is not, then I'll probably do the in-between one where I still get a significant benefit but without any of the frustration.

"

in case you didnt know, running waystones that dont have increased rarity affix IS a waste of time, rarity increases are multiplicative, despite them not saying "more".

I know how the math works guy. I also know how to do cost-benefit calculations. If the difference between 80% or 100% and the "perfect" value of 120% is me not enjoying the f'ing game anymore then why would I try to go for 120%? In the long run those differences just aren't going to add up to any significant impact to my overall enjoyment of the game.

Why are you so defensive of the status quo?

I mean there's clear widespread dissatisfaction with 0.2, in particular with endgame. Literally all streamears and a lot of players have pointed this out, that it's too tedious to do and not rewarding enough, a lot of them quit the league because of it.

I proposed some ideas on how to possibly address this, and instead of commenting on those ideas and their own merit, your whole contribution is "everything is perfect as-is, no changes needed".

I truly don't understand this type of defensive stance when the data so clearly points to the fact that players are not enjoying the current endgame.

Idk about the applying marks to nodes thing, it seems like another chore and possible intuitive thing to do especially for new players (the game is already filled with those)

My problems with towers are that they're generic and not rewarding enough, imo towers should be exciting to find AND run

My personal list of what i wanted towers to be or have:

- Don't allow towers to overlap with each other, personal opinion here but to me this not only looks bad, it takes away from the excitement i mentioned before, less towers would help with that

- Towers should always have a boss at the end of it, my ideal design would be for towers to have floors, and the floors have bosses on it, and you have to defeat them in order to climb up to reach the end

- Less preparations overall, really don't like the gameplay loop of running a tower, put tablets in it and then run the maps adjacent to it, i want some sort of goals after doing a tower, something that makes me want to find another one

"

Vyend#2601 wrote:

Idk about the applying marks to nodes thing, it seems like another chore and possible intuitive thing to do especially for new players (the game is already filled with those)

My problems with towers are that they're generic and not rewarding enough, imo towers should be exciting to find AND run

My personal list of what i wanted towers to be or have:

- Don't allow towers to overlap with each other, personal opinion here but to me this not only looks bad, it takes away from the excitement i mentioned before, less towers would help with that

- Towers should always have a boss at the end of it, my ideal design would be for towers to have floors, and the floors have bosses on it, and you have to defeat them in order to climb up to reach the end

- Less preparations overall, really don't like the gameplay loop of running a tower, put tablets in it and then run the maps adjacent to it, i want some sort of goals after doing a tower, something that makes me want to find another one

The markers try to address the reward-lacking nature of towers. Mathematically, it's impossible to make towers non-overlapping but also to ensure towers cover most other nodes.

By the way I designed that way exactly because they're like everything else in PoE, "find currency, right click apply to do something".

Mathematically it's kinda of impossible to have non-overlapping towers but then also have tower coverage for most map nodes.

If only certain towers had bosses like I mentioned in my list, that would help with the excitement of seeing towers. It's a bit like how unique map nodes make looking at map nodes more exciting.

The preparation is exactly what I tried to address by removing slots altogether from towers. The gameloop becomes "oh a tower, ohhh maybe boss tower? ok no, let's just press one button, run it and get some guaranteed markers, then all maps in range are irradiated"

It makes towers go with the flow of mapping, instead of halting it. A bit like in PoE 1 when you find a portal at the end of an abyss.

"

eligtreal#3630 wrote:

Mathematically it's kinda of impossible to have non-overlapping towers but then also have tower coverage for most map nodes.

It's not impossible, what are you talking about?

You never played a game where basically an entity can't spawn next to each other even if is randomly generated? It's very much possible to do, even considering the radius of a tower, like, only spawn nodes if in radius

"

eligtreal#3630 wrote:

If only certain towers had bosses like I mentioned in my list, that would help with the excitement of seeing towers. It's a bit like how unique map nodes make looking at map nodes more exciting.

"oh a tower, ohhh maybe boss tower? ok no, let's just press one button, run it and get some guaranteed markers, then all maps in range are irradiated"

To me that would still have the same problem, running a tower without a boss doesn't make me excited about it, also, maybe is just personal preference but like i said before i kinda don't like running the maps around the tower after i have completed the tower itself, it feels like you're walking in a circle without moving forward you know? To me ideally you have to choose a path to a tower, complete the tower, and then you look for the next one