We don’t have a site like poe.ninja that can break it down for LE, but I highly doubt your number. Never in the history of PoE, that I’m aware of (I haven’t followed the later years) has there been a build that everyone (or 95% of people) in that class played.
In fact, it’s hard to even get to 75%, because there are always a lot of people that don’t care about meta and just want to have fun playing with whatever.
So I highly doubt that you have 95% of rogue players doing ballista.
In fact, I even doubt this more in LE, since the playerbase that sticks around tends to be players that try out builds for fun and don’t care about meta, doing 1k, reaching wave 1k or even doing Aby.
And it is.
Because meta players like you only care about the skill that does the most damage. It doesn’t matter if the skill is fun, only that it can reach 1k corruption. So if you have a skill that can reach wave 1000 in arena and one that can reach wave 1100, the latter one is the meta and competitive players will use that.
And since you can never make the skills do the exact same damage, you’ll always have meta.
As for the rest of the players, almost all builds are viable. Reaching 300c is already good enough. And many players (myself included) don’t even mind if a build can’t do that much, as long as it’s fun to play and can at least reach empowered.
So what you mean isn’t that LE doesn’t have enough viable builds, because it has a lot, you mean that it doesn’t have enough competitive builds.
Maybe you are right with wrongly used terms by me viable/competetive yes. If viable means getting to empowered monos yes, than probably ANY skill & build is capaple of that, sure.
And yes, sure it is more fun to min max sth to get to corr 1000 and not corr 100.
Just getting a build to empowered and not possible to get higher is for me not the core of an arpg and i dont think most players would enjoy such “low” standard gaming. This is like you would just play poe builds who only can reach white maps and.
Most players don’t even finish the campaign, though. The amount of players that regularly farms high endgame content is a minority, even for the players that return regularly.
Like many do every league.
That depends. If all you want is to drive a few blocks to buy groceries, the investment required to get a porsche isn’t worth it and a fiat is preferable. Or if you’re in the country and only have bad roads.
Everything is down to preference. If I became a millionaire I wouldn’t buy a lambo or a porsche because I don’t really care about them. I’d rather have a mid-range car.
It’s like saying that having a mansion is better than having an apartment.
I know what my driving is like, I’d likely end up wrapping a high end car round something immovable or expensive (buildings, other cars, the wrong people, etc)…
I consider a build viable or successful if I had fun with it - regardless of what corruption it can reach.
Having a blast with your friends on a road trip in a Fiat while singing songs you love is more fun than the backache after squeezing in and out of a Porsche. I am not 20 any more.
“I have fun with a build, also if I cant complete campaign with it because it sucks” yeah sure…
Such white knight flower power players who have 0 requirement to games just destroy any game because they cant give practical and positive critics for devs to really improve a game.
And your fiat happy singing example is just so hypocritical. First of all porsche/luxury cars doesnt have only 2 seats and are “small”. And you said yourself: “a build just needs to make fun”
A porsche (or whatever high class car) with same space as a shitty fiat is always more fun. Thats why there is a difference of 150k. So you are allowed to say you also prefer a porsche, dont worry you are not a bad person if you do so.
It’s not hypocritical. Not all people like the same things. If you gave me a porsche for free I’d sell it and buy a VW (not a Fiat though), because I don’t care about high performance cars. At all. Not even a little bit.
Am I a white knight flower power driver that destroys the auto industry?
I have requirements for games - the fun I have while playing them is by far the most important one.
This is no defence for the game being in the state it is or any design choice, it has nothing to do with LE in fact.
It’s purely about player-mentality. Optimizing everything and rating it based on performance often detracts from all the fun one can casually have. Some people take video games too serious, they don’t really play the game.
Example:
One player starts a character and tries different skills and different combinations and enjoys the journey of discovery. That’s me.
Another player studies guides, asks for the most powerful build in chat, checks leaderboards, etc. They rate the content and deem everything unfun if it does not show peak performance - and never touch builds that aren’t in the top-lists.
Tell me, what are the objective metrics that make a Porsche more fun than a Fiat?
Nope, you are not. Can fully understand that you would sell the porsche for a equal comfortable car which doesnt have 500 hp.
But this kind of VW is also expensive amd doesnt fit to my good char - shitty car analogy.
Yes there are also people who thought farming 100 statues in d4 for every char is a great feature and fun. Which is ok. But should such people be the scale of modern & innovative gameplay? No, never.
So for you it is “fun enough” to just play builds which cant even progress any corruption.
And the objective metrics which make a porsche panamera more fun than a fiat punto? I d say 150k difference?
Why I should pick a fiat punto over a porsche panamera? Tell me one reason if you can. Choose between the two and blind out any “reputation issues” you might have with posh cars. Just by it s technical/manufactured side?
Not expensive. I don’t like big cars. A Polo or Golf are more comfortable for me. But this metaphor is losing its relevance.
So back to the builds: the amount of players that only care about the top performing builds and doing 1k waves in arena or topping the leaderboards is, by definition, a minority. Most only care about being able to do all content. And all classes have at least 2-3 different builds that can kill Aberroth.
And many don’t even care about Aberroth. So 300c is endgame for them, since nothing in the game requires more than that. And every class has a lot of builds that can do 300c.
So LE has a lot of viable builds. Although only half a dozen builds that can do 1k+ (which none should be doing anyway, but it’s already better than in 1.0).
Oh, I have no reputation issues with Porsche, I don’t dislike them.
You see, it was a trick question to ask for objective metrics what more fun is - since fun is a subjective feeling, dependent on many things. Mood. Weather. Company. Mentality. Preferences. There is no right answer to that.
You seem to link your potential fun with the ‘success’ a build can have. I can have fun with builds on any level of play as long as I enjoy the gameplay loop of this build, as I don’t rate or compare it against other builds and what corruption they potentially can achieve.
If I had a lot of fun playing a build up to corruption 150, and it was a rather smooth gameplay experience up to that - but then the damage falls off, and the gameplay bogs down - I still had fun until then. Then I can switch into the experimentation phase - how can I make this build stronger and better? I can squeeze more fun out of this, too. But then I might end with a build that is strong and can push to 1k corruption, and it is not fun for me any longer.
Offscreening enemies is usually a very strong tactic in ARPGs that can push you high into corruption. It’s fast, it’s safe, it’s comfortable - all metrics you named for the Porsche - but utterly boring for me. Oneshotting a boss? Fun the first time it happens, for the laugh. Utterly boring thereafter. But as established, fun is subjective, so if this is fun for you, good for you.
Yet, I can have fun at 1k corruption, as long as the gameplay loops stays interesting. I am not limited to builds or tiers of play because I feel that everything that does not reach a certain level is shit and therefore not fun.
Would it be better if builds in general were more balanced against each other? 100% yes. Can I only have fun with the most potent builds? 100% no.
Since my goal is fun for the sake of having fun - not reaching 1k corruption.
Yes, lets quit this porsche analogy, lets agree to disagree. It s like you would say you prefer an ugly girlfriend than a beautiful girlfriend (whatever that is in someone s eyes)
My summarize:
Are green set item lizards a laugh? Yes
Would the game be better if all this +1000 - 3000 corr builds would be nerfed to 300? Yes
Would this game be better if many more other builds would be playable +1000? Yes
And i am not playing a single meta build, off screen clearing, 100000000 dps while having 1 ehp is also not fun for me.
I always play non meta build, or at least try. Theory crafting a flame reave build, spending time, spending 2 bil. gold for min maxing it and then see that it cant do properly corr 400, yes then i loose the fun of playing it.
And still, no casual player looks up for a build and chooses a D tier build or so…
Arpgs are within its core competetive and progressive. Thats the sense of it, getting stronger items, min maxing it to clear more content, higher corr, T17 maps, killing pinnacle bossees better and faster. I mean there are ladders…
If you dont care about these things in such a game you are the minority or not that targeted group fir such games
Why? Because you have the feeling you have to compare it to other builds?
Why not enjoying the flame reave for what it is? You had fun up to c400, had you?
You seem to invalidate the fun you had because you can’t reach some arbitrary competitive goal that was set up by someone playing a meta-build.
I don’t know if you have seen the movie Dead Poets Society or have watched the scene I linked - but rating every build based on a metric like competitiveness and linking your appreciation for it to that metric is the same excrement as this fictional method of ‘understanding poetry’.
No, a typical diablo-clones isn’t competitive at its core. At its core, it’s a PvE game, designed around the single-player experience with optional multiplayer.
Just like Zelda games aren’t competitive - but you will find speed runners who compete for the fastest times and best exploit of glitches.
To lure in and hook competitive players, leaderboards and race events were introduced (ladder race in D2), so people could compare e-peens. But looking at the leaderboard is not required to play the game and to beat all content.
The vast majority of players are casuals. The higher echelons of leaderboards are always filled with meta-build players - therefore, anyone who has the goal of playing at a comparable level will turn to one of those builds.
I am a casual returning PoE player with thousands of hours. Can’t give an exact number, because I played most before migrating to the steam version in 2018. I’ve spent several hundred €. I am undoubtedly GGG’s target audience - returning, paying customer.
Progressive, yes. I would say, if you can run 400 corruption and kill Abberoth, you have reached the LE equivalent of T16 maps and the most difficult pinnacle boss. Running 1k corruption is like asking for T40 maps.
Lil bit off topic now but yes, i m for sure not that person who doesnt care about competetivness, neither in rl or vl.
I dont do trial runs/mountain runs to be then last position and have “fun” just because i participated. Sure I dont get 1st place, but i want to be better than average.
Fun and being competetive doesnt exclude each other
I think a world where we all are rayguns like at the olympic games isnt a good world either and we would be still in dark mediavel times. Competetivness = innovation = progress
