|
+1
|
Posted bySpunk212#0192on Jun 4, 2025, 4:44:56 PM
|
"
qQbonmjtAZ#7824 wrote:
"
No. The entire point is that reaching high levels is supposed to require effort and investment. The point is that Jimmy-John and his aunt should not be able to reach level 98 with an undergeared character playing overly aggressive while semi-afk.
That's a scenario that wouldn't happen with reduced XP loss, no XP loss, or recoverable XP. The amount of time and effort it takes to reach 100 without death is already a slog. Jimmy-john and his aunt aren't going to spend 1000 hours in a season to reach 100, but if they do then guess what they put in the time and effort.
It seems the issue you have is just the thought of someone else who hasn't completely obsessed over the perfect build or dedicated their life to learn every little nuance. You just can't stand the idea of someone reaching 100 even though it might take them several hundred more hours because they didn't dedicate all their time to farming divs for God gear.
No dice. As usual, you are exaggerating to absurd degrees. You don't need any kind of highly expensive gear to do T16s and T3s comfortably. If you have trouble staying alive in this environment, the problem is likely you (including playstyle, build and gear choices, etc), not the exp loss mechanic. Stop asking for handouts. What's next? Should we reduce the HP of T4 bosses by 75% so that ultra-casuals can oneshot them with solar orb only at level 68?
Last edited by Skollvaldr#5851 on Jun 4, 2025, 5:52:58 PM
|
Posted bySkollvaldr#5851on Jun 4, 2025, 5:48:14 PM
|
|
I like the idea mentioned previously, where if you die in a map, it reduces the xp reward within that map. Reduction can be done incrementally depending on the number of revives (i.e. 1 revive means death goes to 0% on death, 3 revives, you lose 33% per death, so the final run of a map means 0% xp). This would make maps meaningful still and provide a reward to flawlessly clearing a map. It would also rid the game of the slogfest of making negative progress when you die, especially at high levels. Worst case, you die 3 times in a 3 revives map, and you are on your last life, you still get the rewards from the map, but your progress on xp is paused for that map.
|
Posted byNullPhase#1288on Jun 4, 2025, 9:18:45 PM
|
|
+1
|
Posted byzaige2010#6309on Jun 4, 2025, 9:39:36 PM
|
"
"
qQbonmjtAZ#7824 wrote:
"
No. The entire point is that reaching high levels is supposed to require effort and investment. The point is that Jimmy-John and his aunt should not be able to reach level 98 with an undergeared character playing overly aggressive while semi-afk.
That's a scenario that wouldn't happen with reduced XP loss, no XP loss, or recoverable XP. The amount of time and effort it takes to reach 100 without death is already a slog. Jimmy-john and his aunt aren't going to spend 1000 hours in a season to reach 100, but if they do then guess what they put in the time and effort.
It seems the issue you have is just the thought of someone else who hasn't completely obsessed over the perfect build or dedicated their life to learn every little nuance. You just can't stand the idea of someone reaching 100 even though it might take them several hundred more hours because they didn't dedicate all their time to farming divs for God gear.
No dice. As usual, you are exaggerating to absurd degrees. You don't need any kind of highly expensive gear to do T16s and T3s comfortably. If you have trouble staying alive in this environment, the problem is likely you (including playstyle, build and gear choices, etc), not the exp loss mechanic. Stop asking for handouts. What's next? Should we reduce the HP of T4 bosses by 75% so that ultra-casuals can oneshot them with solar orb only at level 68?
Pot meet kettle. I responded to your post absurdly exaggerating and then you respond again with another exaggeration.
You are doing nothing but arguing on bad faith and painting everyone critical of the current penalty as lazy casuals who want no challenge and want to reach 100 with one eye on Netflix. At least engage with the actual points people are making
|
|
|
+1
|
Posted byKvltLdr#4409on Jun 4, 2025, 10:41:30 PM
|
"
qQbonmjtAZ#7824 wrote:
"
The people who quit over exp loss weren't going to stick around or support the game financially anyway.
Except they already have by purchasing EA on top of numerous stash tabs. You're basically claiming that people's opinion doesn't matter unless they spend a ridiculous amount of additional money.
What a ridiculous take
Spending money on an EA game doesn't entitle you for anything. Not GGGs fault you're spending money on an unfinished game.
|
Posted bybloomhead#3858on Jun 5, 2025, 3:00:23 AM
|
|
+1
|
Posted bydeniskossak#8421on Jun 5, 2025, 3:08:39 AM
|
"
qQbonmjtAZ#7824 wrote:
You are doing nothing but painting everyone critical of the current penalty as lazy casuals who want no challenge and want to reach 100 with one eye on Netflix. At least engage with the actual points people are making
That's what it is though. People have literally asked to be bale to farm maps and level past 95 while "zoned out" in this very thread. I sense you are beginning to understand why exp loss is necessary and will never be removed.
PS: You haven't made any logical points to engage with. "I WANT" is not an argument.
Last edited by Skollvaldr#5851 on Jun 5, 2025, 3:21:45 AM
|
Posted bySkollvaldr#5851on Jun 5, 2025, 3:18:16 AM
|
"
qQbonmjtAZ#7824 wrote:
Pot meet kettle. I responded to your post absurdly exaggerating and then you respond again with another exaggeration.
You are doing nothing but arguing on bad faith and painting everyone critical of the current penalty as lazy casuals who want no challenge and want to reach 100 with one eye on Netflix. At least engage with the actual points people are making
Exactly. This is a common tactic for people who have no other argument than "but I like it, so it must be good". Engaging with actual points would require the ability to think about more than their own enjoyment.
But being that selfish and admitting that all they want is to have something that others don't is not an option, so they have to paint people critical of their point of view as somehow having inferior reasons, so they're able to pretend that all they want is the "right thing".
Now, they can just ignore any valid argument by repeating the same trite points. Engaging in good faith would not allow them to do any of that.
|
Posted bydreamstate42#3955on Jun 5, 2025, 4:15:33 AM
|
