You should stop too, you contribute nothing but thinly veiled insults
I couldnt care less what anyone else does here. but I care what I want and I want the ability to respec a character who is a bricked character I have no intention of playing anymore.
Im playing Expedition in PoE and I hit 100 on the weekend, the character was -
Life based phys trapper Saboteur
Lowlife CoC Mjolnir Trickster
Lowlife CoC Mjolner Assassin
Self cast Eye of Winter Assassin
Self cast Shocknova Assassin
LL CoC Assassin
thats 6 respecs in a few weeks, which cost me currency every single time. I didnt even find a build I liked until 98, people here expect others to roll new characters soon as they want to try a new end game build? I dont have time for that nor do I want to. Most people wouldnt even get to lvl 98 in PoE
Lol, what the hell is this statement. this thread is ganging up on someone telling them their opinion is wrong about wanting to respec a character
Nope. I did never state that this opinion is wrong. Just that there is a contrary opinion that also isnât wrong, either. The only thing I do is to explain my point. And my whole point in the thread is that there is now âwrongâ about this topic even if people try to give objectively âproofâ that I am wrong.
Also youâre simplifying this very much. Nobody in here is gate keeping a system with no respecs. Because itâs not there. Weâre discussing if a mastery should be respec-able or not.
You can still respec a lot within your mastery. So what are you arguing about?
Since weâre all tossing in views and such, can this discussion/argument/whatever you choose to call it end already? Everyone agrees that everyone has different views, large or small. What Iâm tired of is loading the forums, seeing new msgs in topics I had vested interest in, and has this garbage banter about-
Just kidding. This type of human social interaction usually brightens my day. Please, continue!
Can we slowly stop this - it leads to nowhere.
If you dont like the system - okay. Everyone knows that now.
I think even the devs stated more than once that masteries are final as a designe choice so the chances this will change are very slim.
I dont think there is anything fundamentally wrong with wanting to be able to respect masteries - as long as there is an appropriate cost to it.
For those who are arguing about giving weight to character building/identity, my view is that the relative ease of respeccing skills is a bigger detriment to character identity, than any hardline against mastery respec.
And I personally preferred the old respecc system, where even respeccing skills had some serious impact until you reached a similar power level again.
Even that was still a good system that let people experiment and test things relatively easily, but you certainly felt a weight of respeccing, since it threw your character back a little bit for a while.
Now with the respeccing itâs literally a matter of minutes to regain 90% of the power and the last few level are maybe another 10-20 minutes, depending on how high level your character is.
But I can see that this current respecc system addressed a lot of the feedback about respecting feeling too punishing.
I would have preferred to keep the old respeccing system, but I can see why the devs did it.
My only fear from the very start with changes like this, where the devs try to find a middle ground is people demanding more and more changes from the original implementation.
Where do you draw the line?
Hypothetical, if the devs would allow Mastery Respec, the next discussion will be how much should the opportunity cost of respecting mastery should be.
After that discussion the next person wants to change their base class without creating a new character and so on.
Literally every single point brought up here was already discussed countless of times before. So I donât see this going anywhere.
I hope people could at least appreciate the effort of the devs trying to find solutions, that make both sides decently happy.
I would prefer the old Respec System, the next person likes that itâs easier now. We have a decent middle ground, where both parties are decently happy.
I am one of these filthy casuals some people seem to hate so much.
Iâm perfectly fine with rerolling if I want to make large changes to a char.
Choices should matter.
I hope they make an alternate system for lvling though, as running through the story over and over can get a bit tedious (coughPOEcough). At least at some point, doesnât have to be at release.
I understand the OPâs argument and while I do agree that respecâing mastery would be a nice addition to the game, their approach was a bit haphazard and ultimately started to become confrontational.
Know what else would be nice additions to the game? And before someone says it I understand some of these might already be planned, already implemented, or may never see the light of day. Itâs to illustrate the point behind âoptionsâ.
Alternative levelling paths for subsequent characters
A fully functional player-to-player trading system or auction house
Mod support
Transmog system
Personal Housing
Better controller support
Native ultrawide support
etc.
Insert whatever feature set you want but this ultimately comes down to providing options. Having options doesnât mean you need to take advantage of them and wanting for more options in a game is often never a bad thing. Where things get a bit dicey is when those âwantsâ conflict with developer vision/design, current mechanics, or technical limitations of the game. There are obviously reasons, whether theyâve been communicated or not, as to why the developers have chosen not to allow mastery respec. Put your concerns out there but keep it civil as weâre all passionate (to some degree) for this game else we wouldnât be here discussing it.
Just one way to look at your list (there are many): Does it shorten the game?
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
Why look at it like that? Because respeccing has no effect on the game other than to shorten it. When players say âIts a pain to relevelâ the pain is time. And I do think that a game company has the right to determine how slow or fast their game can be played until players feel stale and leave for something new. This is inevitable anyway.
âBecause respeccing has no effect on the game other than to shorten it.â
Thatâs not entirely true, it is one effect but there may also be technical impacts weâre not privvy to. Also, it only shortens the game for those that use it correct?
Yes, I mean to say any feature which has the potential to shorten the game if used. The presumption is that any feature worth coding is worth using, therefore, all features are presumed to be âusedâ.
But there are no other effects of Respeccing to a character. There should be no difference between a freshly leveled Lich or a newly Respecced Lich, assuming you build them the same. I suppose EHG could invent some sort of permanent âpenaltyâ to respeccing, like, you get 10 less Passive Points, or something like that, but Iâm assuming the term âRespecâ to mean just re-choosing that which you would have chosen from the beginning, and thus, no technical differences.
Agreed and while I wonât begin to pretend that I know what goes into game development, logic stands to reason there shouldnât be any technical limitation to it. Again though, if thatâs their direction then so be it. There are other games you can play if ârespecâingâ what is essentially your class is a large consideration/concern. My point was that adding options to a game is often viewed as a positive experience and just because theyâre implemented doesnât mean you have to take advantage of them but I also agree that if itâs worth coding, you would want your players to take advantage of it.
Youâre making an assumption that it would be as equally long/short as the campaign/monoliths. Also, should the âstandardâ length be defined as playing through the campaign & arena or campaign & monolith given the arena is quicker to level up in compared to the monolith.
What about implementing a system that allows your to test out each mastery for a period of time before committing to one? I do understand that it doesnât directly address the OPâs comment about gear.
This already has been suggested in countless of other threads and posts.
I myself did a similar suggestion multiple times.
And while i really donât want to shut down any interesting discussion that might occur from this , I am extremely confident, that there are virtually no more points that hasnât been brought up yet.
For reference:
I could come up with these posts within 1 minute of searching through my history.
I am sure I myself did even suggest more and other possiblities and other people suggested very similar things.
Agreed and itâs not uncommon for repeated topics to emerge on a community forum so I do appreciate you citing the sources. Repeating the mantra that conversation shouldnât be stifled but everything thatâs been said has been said has got to be frustrating so I do hear you. Not everyone leverages contextual search prior to posting, especially when replying to posters ad hoc.
