Yes, one you use as a guidance, the other is enforced upon you.
That’s all there is to it.
Do you understand this concept or not? Because that’s what you’re arguing about.
Nobody speaks about limited timeframes in general, they can be good, they can be great… just depends on the setup.
So let’s endorse dicking everyone over! Because why making it more fair if you can just lean right into it, right?
They do, we were told 3-4 months. So people will expect information if it takes longer then that to plan accordingly.
And if it takes less then that they’re on the barricades.
It’s not a huge complex topic, very simple even.
Are you a goldfish?
We’ve already gone over it, 2 months 10 days.
Yes, ~20% time-loss is substantial. And even if not substantial it would still be a negative.
True, they gave a timeframe to work within.
Which was 3-4 months.
Is that upheld? No? There you go, argument closed with that. All it is.
I’m just getting a bit pissed off by some - yes some, not all - majorly nonsensical arguments.
I understand why EHG did it, or at least what their thought process behind it is.
I don’t understand why the discussion needs to be there even to dismantle that it screws over people being transferred over to another type of cycle… because if that wouldn’t matter… why not have a single one, period?
We have more though because there are reasons for it, even if by far less major ones then in other games of the genre.
And nonetheless… now people have to defend themselves to have that upheld which was established for a reason after all? Why? Just so one can say ‘nah, EHGs decision is fine, they can’t fail utterly and entirely at times’?
If you make crap, take responsibility, and don’t defend other from their responsibility. I’ll also take responsibility for my rather… inflammatory argumentation above because I know it is that, doesn’t excuse me for it. As little should be EHG excused for making crap though.
A note for EHG, I hope that with the verification on Steam Deck you actually make the loot filter salvable inside the game, and so if I set a filter on steam via pc, I can have it also when I’m playing on steam deck, otherwise, I don’t know how well you have made the steam deck version, but at now make a filter with the steam deck is a pain in the ass
What are u not getting. About a mid cycle reset. And the issues with this that has not already been said.
Can u not see the problems this causes now and in the future? Communication isnt the problem thag wouldn’t have changed anything
The problem is doing a cycle reset when its mid cycle (2 months in)
They arent releasing a new cycle aka 1.2. If September 19 was 1.2 that would be different.
Except its not now is it.
Reseting due to a cycle event is also a no go. Run the event DONT reset cycle. Which they stated reset will happen either next cycle event they do or next cycle patch.
Ever think there is another side to your coin and us rational people are just as irritated over something trivial? Yes, trivial. Your only response to me was "“waaa but my stash tabs,” how about the thing you are whining over, ya know, your character. Just checked, still right, the character will still exist and you are more than free to continue in legacy.
Welcome to arpgs, if you dont like the cyclical nature coupled with the always unknown of programming, this may not be the genre for you.
This thing isn’t done in other ARPGs, so not a valid argument.
Mid-cycle resets don’t happen.
And it’s a mid-cycle reset, reframing that won’t change it.
So plainly spoken and quite bluntly: I don’t give a shit.
Am I personally affected? Nah, I’m a legacy player, but I know people which are affected by it negatively.
So, should I just stay out of it?
If so, why? If someone sees something going awry I think it’s their responsibility to call it out so it can be fixed.
And well… given that I never saw people getting treated this way and be fine with it in D2, D3, D4, Torchlight Infinite, Path of Exile, Dungeon Siege (1-3), Sacred (1 and 2), Grim Dawn, Chronicon, Titan Quest or any other of the ones I’ve personally seen.
It happened exactly ‘0’ times without a major backlash. And I’ll be happy to keep on providing this backlash as I think something majorly wrong with this treatment. It lacks respect towards the players, and that’s all that is about it.
Seems pretty reasonable to me. I think it would have made more sense to have the event cycle run concurrently with the existing one rather than replace it, however. Not a big deal to me either way.
Especially fans should call out if something isn’t going well.
A fan has not the responsibility of defending what they’re a fan about if it does something bad… quite the contrary, fans should be the first people calling it out, not the last ones.
Defending things which shouldn’t be defended is the downside of a fandom, not the upside.
I mean, since I was wrong about the assumed 3+ months (I was on holiday when this cycle started, already feels ages ago, think I am ripe for another one), I have to agree that I am not a fan of this early transfer.
I think the minimum duration of what they announced should be upheld.
Pretty sure @Kulze is well aware of what it fixes.
Reset the economy then not the entire cycle… yes its 100% possible to jist reset trade economy.
Fixing this one thing causes far more problems tham it actually does good for the game short term (cycles) and long term ( future cycles). Iv explained this in a post here. Feel free to find it and read it.
Not repeating myself of what iv said are the problems short and long term by doing this
Yeah, I think that would definitely be what I would prefer. Unfortunately that’s not the way the devs have decided to go. I guess that’s my White Knight credentials ruined (again)?
I don’t even mind having monthly long events run every month during the league with or without a “reset”.
Because the end of a league is optional? Unless you’re playing in standard, obviously.
I do, I just think it’s a riduculous distinction to make.
Yeah, I can get that.
But taht’s not the only example.
You & me both.
Because not everyone wants to play league & have their progress reset every X months, kinda like you’re pitching a fit about having an arbitrary date that was never given moved.
Beacuase mai gai, what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Yeah, that would be a lot better, as I’ve said before.
If I go into a time-limited event of any sort I agree to ‘this thing lasts ‘x’ time’.
We were given a timeframe, this timeframe was ‘3-4 months’. So we got our ‘x’ there. xmin= 3 months, xmax = 4 months.
EHG now goes for below xmin. That means people complain, it’s not upholding what the promise was.
And hence they’re pissed of rightfully, it’s not for us to decide what exactly the reasonings are why people chose to work inside that timeframe, and for example I personally don’t play extraction shooters despite absolutely loving the setup of them because they regularly wipe progress. Not my thing. I also make a informed decision to not play ‘Once Human’ despite loving the premise of that game because the short reset timer for progress is against my liking.
That’s called a informed decision.
If you change the framework of your established situation so it causes you to have less time available then that means you’re actively trampling on those informed decisions, they can’t be informed anymore if you can’t be sure of them being upheld.
Hence why I said ‘either do it right away and re-start it’ which is already bad enough to do… or… leave it alone, 1.2 is another try, the good thing about those limited timeframes after all! New economy, new situation.
Taking that initial promise made to your players and throwing it overboard though is a general bad decision. You’re creating a precedence. It’s a trust issue. If EHG goes through with it what does it mean?
Are we getting more of those in the future?
How would you know if not?
Why should you trust it not to happen at any second?
It undermines the essential aspects of time-based events, that you work within a fairly fixed amount of time and are guaranteed to have a specific amount of it.
Yeah, and how does this differ from the current situation?
Not everyone does want a economy reset.
Not everyone is MG.
Not everyone wants to play in a permanent cycle.
You’re affecting those people as well though… but since the ‘it’s only a fraction of players’ argument came up for… why have a permanent cycle in the first place? There’s just a few people in there anyway! Abolish it. There’s also only a minority still playing… so they don’t matter… do whatever! Month 2-3 hence has no meaning for the game anyway.
It’s a slippery slope to go down when you go to the more extreme with it. A nuisance at the start… but why even start with it? It makes no sense anyway.
The logical choice would’ve been removal of everything on the market, removal of all gold and hence a MG reset this way.
Another logical thing would be to limit events inside a event cycle and not give it to everyone at the same time, because who says some people want a time-based upside of progress rather then doing it the ‘normal and hence hard’ way?
It’s all in all simply a mess of choices there which are hard to follow how those got reasoned out as being ‘the most optimal choice’.
I’m also wondering quite a bit about that. It confuses me at times.
If you think something is not good… why defend it?
I mean I get it if it gives you personally upsides… but you can still say ‘nice for me, but it’s still bad to do’.
You’re multitasking lanes currently, not switching em
