Early Access Feedback - Making Combat "Meaningful" in POE2, a 10y POE1 Vet View - Forum

" Kraythax#2592 wrote: OK so how to we make combat meaningful like this in POE2. Its actually quite simple. Step 1: Delete the codebase. Step 2: Make a game in another genre like souls. Step 1 : Stop designing the game around trading and itemization Step 2 : Start designing the game that focused on action and combat If GGG keep being stubborn to enforce PoE 1 ruthless mode in PoE 2 as the standard, the game will just be the same like PoE 1 but slower. It will still be a small and niche game. A tactical, meaningful and challenging combat has to have equal reward. Efforts have to be rewarded. But right now, the game is neither tactical, meaningful and challenging, nor have equivalent reward for it. The design of the fight of pinnacle bosses in PoE 2 is already have good foundation that can be expanded into even more challenging fight by adding new moveset, improving the AI targeting or behavior. But, since the game still tailored around itemization and trading, those bosses will be watered down overtime in terms of their mechanic / moveset, only changing numbers to create the illusion of "harder" content, slow and tedious work to even get access to the pinnacle fight, and lastly they only drop a handful of "valuable" loot in which most of their value is determined by the market. In the end, nothing is being able to be achieved in breaking the shell of PoE 1. The game still just the same like PoE 1 with added dodge roll and prettier graphic.	Posted by bewilder2#0356 on Apr 24, 2025, 11:23:13 AM Quote this Post
double post nvm Last edited by bewilder2#0356 on Apr 24, 2025, 11:23:32 AM	Posted by bewilder2#0356 on Apr 24, 2025, 11:23:14 AM Quote this Post
" bewilder2#0356 wrote: Step 1 : Stop designing the game around trading and itemization Step 2 : Start designing the game that focused on action and combat If GGG keep being stubborn to enforce PoE 1 ruthless mode in PoE 2 as the standard, the game will just be the same like PoE 1 but slower. It will still be a small and niche game. This argument is on target. I would guess that if any of the POE2 only players tried POE1 ruthless they would find it actually easier than POE2 minus gem availability. There isn't that much difference other than the fact that POE1 has a lot more content and depth. POE2 is shallow and designed with the base principle of "the customer is an idiot" and that is where the AAA game industry falls on its face. They have such an arrogant view that the customers that loved certain games were all wrong. Take BG3 for example. Already industry execs are trying to downplay it because if they don't there will be an outcry that they didn't make something of similar quality. With ARPGs, prior to POE2 creation if you asked around, "What is the best ARPG?" The answer would have been something like "Well if you want to play casual I would Guess the Diablo 3 or 4 but that is like baby's first ARPG, the king is Path of Exile." They were referring to POE1 of course. Further exploration would have highlighted the balance, the item system, the gem system and so on. The usual counter this argument from execs as well as uninformed players is, "Well if it is so good then why did Diablo have so many more players?" The answer to that is simple. GGG Spent almost nothing on marketing. The spread was all word of mouth. Frankly they could have put some paint on POE1 with a graphics revamp, spent the rest on marketing, put out a new league with some optimizations to the core game and the outcome would have been epic. However, of course, the game execs came and said "you customers all suck! The new players came, having been given a lousy mass produced candy bar and yelled that high grade refined, hand made chocolate was crap. They are still here. The crowd that says POE1 was too easy and too hard in virtually the same sentence. This is the AAA curse. Will GGG rescue POE from TenCent? I hope so.	Posted by Kraythax#2592 on Apr 24, 2025, 1:23:46 PM Quote this Post
" Kraythax#2592 wrote: There is no reason it should be called Path of Exile 2 then. It needs a different name. Why? It's not like PoE 2 is a racing sim, both games are isometric ARPGs in the same universe.	Posted by Summoner#7705 on Apr 24, 2025, 3:41:21 PM Quote this Post
+1 I agree, Why you guys (GGG) trying to invent the wheel again. You worked 10+ years so hard to fine tune POE1 and now you just mixed everything with everything.	Posted by majkwoo#3783 on Apr 24, 2025, 3:55:21 PM Quote this Post
" Kraythax#2592 wrote: I see lots of posts about making combat meaningful and I see Jonathan talking about it for the last year. Unfortunately they can never define what is meaningful. But let's try to define this and see if we can get it. To make combat meaningful means that every fight should matter. Every fight should have some challenge, mechanics that have to be dodged, patterns that have to be learned, enemy types that have to be understood. You should have to know that sand worms are vulnerable to fire and polar bears are vulnerable to bottle coca-cola. In addition, you should need to combo your skills to empower them so that they actually do full damage in order to make the game mechanically interesting. Do I have that right? If not, stop here and you define it. Still here? OK so how to we make combat meaningful like this in POE2. Its actually quite simple. Step 1: Delete the codebase. Step 2: Make a game in another genre like souls. "Meaningful Combat" is the antithesis of an ARPG outside of boss fights. Boss fights should require that kind of skill and in POE1 of course they do. Go try to face tank Innocence in ACT 5 and tell me you don't need skill to survive that encounter (well skill or WAY over-leveled with Twink gear but I will presuppose you are not trying to solve that one.) Record it on OBS studio. Upload to the streaming platform of your choice. No? OK then you concede the point. I have to confess amusement at people on the forum that claim POE1 is too complex and hard and too easy at the same time. Play SSF, Play HC. Come back and lets talk. Beating Dominus, Innocence, Brine King, Kitava (both times) require considerable skill and if you don't think so, play in SSF hardcore where your death matters. The rest of an ARPG needs to focus on the A. Its OK If I have to know sand worms are vulnerable to cold but I shouldn't have to dodge a one shot from a white river hag with a ball of ice. She should die fast. This isn't "Witcher 3" or "Sekiro". I love those two titles but they don't send 300 enemies at you at once and if you wanted that mode in it, then you made the wrong game. So what does "Meaningful Combat" do to an ARPG. It means that the ONLY skills that are viable are skills that clear screens. Of course since you want meaningful combat those skills that clear screens have to go. So they get nerfed. Then you are left with a game with formulaic builds dictated by the devs, with no flexibility because you need to rigidly control the builds in order to make combat meaningful. If a warrior can run contagion and perfect strike he might be able to clear a screen in a single hit. Can't have that right? So the game must be RIGIDLY controlled. As a POE1 vet and a long time ARPG player POE2 isn't even an ARPG. Its what happens when From Software said, what if Malenia has 50 bodyguards? Its insane. What do I want out of an ARPG? One button kill all? Well maybe ... if I have put 700 divines into a build I should be entitled to one button kill a god. Its a game after all, not a Masters Degree in IT. I am allowed to have some god complex. Short of that kind of investment and with the AVERAGE player experience I expect to slaughter white enemies like cannon fodder, I expect the blues make me go "woah "... back up and take another swipe and dead. I expect the yellows to make me go ... "WOOOT Yellow!!!", because I know this will be a harder mob (like a WHITE river hag, not a blue one, lets not get nuts) and I know that when I drop the enemy they will drop something juicy I can use, deconstruct or sell to another player. I expect to be able to craft +5 skill and +200% damage on a scepter if I have busted my buns for the currency and I expect that means that same river hag will shriek and run away from me (metaphorically). Again ITS A GAME, NOT A PROFESSIONAL CAREER. I expect when I get to the boss, I will have to be prepared, my resists have to be fixed, i have to understand the boss attacks but it will be fair with me. (As an Aside, Lost Ark had some amazing bosses even though the game is overrun with bots). I expect innocence to one shot me with his great balls of fire to the point where I reflexively find a stone post to hide behind if someone yells out "I am your GOD" on the street. I expect that defeating innocence on hardcore will make me leap out of my seat in joy, knowing I am not going to be thrown down on the stairs and violated by a white mob after I exit the arena. Meaningful combat at all encounters is incompatible with the A in ARPG. Its unachievable and will merely result in an endless cycle of find the blaster build, nerf and iterate. It will never work. And all it will do is eventually kill the game. If you are looking for every fight, every enemy to mean something, go beat Sekiro. What is the right balance? POE1 with some better boss designs and some fine tuning. it took 10y to get right and they have thrown it all in the trash to start over. Foolish. Biggest +1 i can give .	Posted by keroysho#6433 on Apr 24, 2025, 4:10:42 PM Quote this Post
" Kraythax#2592 wrote: So what does "Meaningful Combat" do to an ARPG. It means that the ONLY skills that are viable are skills that clear screens. Of course since you want meaningful combat those skills that clear screens have to go. So they get nerfed. Then you are left with a game with formulaic builds dictated by the devs, with no flexibility because you need to rigidly control the builds in order to make combat meaningful. If a warrior can run contagion and perfect strike he might be able to clear a screen in a single hit. Can't have that right? So the game must be RIGIDLY controlled. As a POE1 vet and a long time ARPG player POE2 isn't even an ARPG. Its what happens when From Software said, what if Malenia has 50 bodyguards? Its insane. Meaningful combat at all encounters is incompatible with the A in ARPG. Its unachievable and will merely result in an endless cycle of find the blaster build, nerf and iterate. It will never work. And all it will do is eventually kill the game. If you are looking for every fight, every enemy to mean something, go beat Sekiro. What is the right balance? POE1 with some better boss designs and some fine tuning. it took 10y to get right and they have thrown it all in the trash to start over. Foolish. Let me try to put things into perspective: In PoE 1 every efficient build are the ones that spam 1-2 skill at max. This results in almost every build playing exactly the same. So, it is a pitfall that creates Illusion of choice Meaningful combat doesn't mean that EVERY fight has to be tooth and nail or that you won't be able to overpower enemies at some point. It means that there will be much more fights in the game where you actually have enemies that can fight back. It means that you'll actually have to fight the enemies in a game about fighting enemies. Pretty common sense, but it seems part of the community thinks this is blasphemous. To add some criticism: The way GGG is handling the groups of mobs is not really good atm. Fighting white mobs is boring, we need more special packs of enemies(blue/rare). The enemy packs need more "spice" if we are going to interact with them more... And yes, this is only possible by restricting the game. The problem is that the way GGG did that hurts hybrid builds(attack+spell or bow+spells for example) too much. But the fact they are restricting things is not wrong. Many games restrict things by implementing diminishing returns, and no one complains, but PoE players got too used to breaking the game. Also, yes. Skills that clear screens in one or 2 casts shouldn't and can't exist in a game like this. You can make a point of being able to reach that level of power IF you invest enormous ammounts of currency in your build. I don't think GGG would be against that, but certainly not clear screens on a budget. So, meaningful combat means: Slow enought to allow for builds that use 4-6 active skills to be possible and perfectly viable. And no, easy clear screen skills can't exist in this environment and aren't healthy for the game. Problem is that many players got used to "breaking the game" and don't really care about build diversity. These guys will complain a lot because now they have to actually play the game instead of letting their build/gear play for them. So yes, in theory, GGG should restrict player power in healthy ways in order to maintain true build diversity and "meaningful combat". I'm not saying that they are doing a good job with the balance, but that at least their "guidelines" are kinda on point. We can just wait and hope they will nail it. It's certainly a very hard task to develop this kind of mixed combat. Last edited by Gordyne#2944 on Apr 24, 2025, 4:59:29 PM	Posted by Gordyne#2944 on Apr 24, 2025, 4:57:11 PM Quote this Post