Radical Suggestion. Put Endgame after Act 3 and scatter the rest of the Campaign in Endgame.

Instead of one big massive story that takes place over 6 acts, x number of interludes and so on. Have the story be broken up by endgame. After about act 3 you need to track to find the weapon. Right now this is done in act 4 with plans for 5 and 6, etc. The problem is this leads to a long boring campaign that causes people to lose interest and not make it to end game (I doubt I will this league).

Instead once act 3 is done open up endgame. Instead of endgame being able to travel in random directions have it have a directional aspect to it like Delve in POE1. At "depth" X and / or level Y you come across a clue to the weapon's whereabouts and now you do an act 4 map. Then you proceed further, perhaps following clues in the the gamee as to what direction to go in the endgame getting gear and then you encounter another map with a part.

This would progress almost infinitely, the campaign being spread out like short stories among the endgame maps. You could even have to fight a pinacle at the end and he would grant you permanent bonuses. You could even add more "Acts" by scattering it randomly in the atlas. For example you release a Blight league and end up in a mini campaign for blight.

This would cut the tedium of the campaign and weld together the endgame and campaign.

Great suggestion! +1

You are relentless! But that makes you predictable!

But really - hell no. I enjoyed act 4 and can't wait for two other acts.

i have a hard time understanding this. you suggest they cut campaign short and change the endgame to be more linear? campaign is already more linear than endgame, while still having some 'non-linearity' with how the act2/4 progresses.

are you after rng areas/biomes/mobs? or just less NPC interactions? or is it something diff entirely?

-1

The last thing we need is for them to add more unnecessary work to their plate.

the idea of having the map device earlier would be nice though.

"

AintCare#6513 wrote:

i have a hard time understanding this. you suggest they cut campaign short and change the endgame to be more linear? campaign is already more linear than endgame, while still having some 'non-linearity' with how the act2/4 progresses.

are you after rng areas/biomes/mobs? or just less NPC interactions? or is it something diff entirely?

Yes you missed it entirely.

"

Kraythax#2592 wrote:

"

AintCare#6513 wrote:

i have a hard time understanding this. you suggest they cut campaign short and change the endgame to be more linear? campaign is already more linear than endgame, while still having some 'non-linearity' with how the act2/4 progresses.

are you after rng areas/biomes/mobs? or just less NPC interactions? or is it something diff entirely?

Yes you missed it entirely.

and you didn't answer my question.

The campaign would continue but not immediately. It would be discovered while mapping. While mappying you discover a part of the weapon or meet a principal figure. You are mapping along, enter a new map and pow, its a piece of the campaign. It makes it less lineaar, less tiresome and better.

actually, get to endgame even sooner. It would be great to progress campaign not through static area-layouts, but through atlas maps (doing quests on them, finding campaign maps with bosses to progress the quest)

For every person I encounter who sees endgame as the real game and the campaign as an obstacle to get past in order to start mapping, I meet an average of somewhere between 1-3 people who see the campaign as the real game, find mapping less enjoyable, and generally don't engage much at all with the endgame.

I expect the portion of players who would be fans of this being done would not be a majority.