200+ corruption isn’t “content”. Its the exact same Mono as 0 corruption. Same boss. Same abilities. Same everything. Corruption is literally just +% health and +% damage. That’s it. Nothing else.
So, sorry, but your argument doesn’t hold water for LE at all.
Here we come to what I said, it’s commercially stupid. Because for a game they want the player to stay and play their game, except that a guy who has reached their limit will quit the game, in addition to leaving him frustrated because he knows he will not be able to replay a game. that he likes because he no longer has the level for.
So it is absolutely not a good idea for video game developers to create elite games with cream of cream content.
I have to emphasize that i like some aspects of this new crafting system like giving magic and rare items more reason to exist and go away from the literal item editor for T4/T5s we had before.
That being said, to make it feel good the FP range should be adjusted so we can at least get T3s of affixes more consistently that are benefitical for your character, without the well known -12FP after tier one.
Items with 4xT3 are not good by any means but a starting point that gets your character started or in another case allows you to switch from one main stat to another in case you try a new ability and it has different scaling requirements.
So yeah. Look at the FP range for lower tier affixes,Glyph of Hope and maybe add a new Rune like: reduces the max FP by x but reduces the RNG FP range from 1-15 , to 1-8 or something.
All games have the end of content. Everyone leaves every game eventually. If EHG made 500+ corruption possible with Magic gear only, we’d hit the end of the game, and then get bored and quit because there is “no more game left.”
That’s why new content is the key to retention, not character power.
Maybe except that right now it’s the only thing that exists to keep us playing.
And it remains relevant if not in diablo 3 the content is quickly done, you do a level 1 rift and voila you have done all the games … Well no, the goal is to go hit the 150.
200% corruption is +100% health/damage.
500% corruption is +250% health/damage.
What upgrade to a piece of gear is going to give you 150% more health if you already have T20 gear? or 150% more damage mitigation? or 150% more DPS?
At some point, higher corruption in LE is almost exclusively about build and player skill, not gear.
Well thank you, it is exactly his, so who cares that it is easier to obtain a perfect equipment, it is not his which creates the content of the game. We read your sentence also in this direction, Of course, the item hunt is no more content than the +200 corruption.
A new dungeon is new content, a new game mode is new ext content.
So there you have it, I don’t see why we should make the best equipment at the moment inaccessible,
The basis of a good game for me is like that.
Shift = New content = new more powerful stuff and those until the next update in a few weeks.
Seen as it is totally useless to make it impossible to have the best stuff as it is only for a few weeks.
This is the basic model of FF14 whether we like games or MMOs or not, it is not the question. The fact is that this game has a community that never decreases, that it hardly fluctuates like the ARPGs which are based on seasons, because once your season is blown away you leave, and you come back for the next one at best.
FF14 is a hit model in the genre, that’s what I meant, and their system is exactly as I described it, it’s not hard or impossible to get the new stuff of the moment, you just have to farm the new content and you have it. you have a little time to savor your new awesome stuff, a new one just released with 1 or 2 new dungeons, and so you go hunting ext.
Its interesting, not frustrating the players by telling them you see the right stuff? well you’ll never have it asshole.
(PS: again for those who would have a hard time understanding, I’m not saying FF14 is the best game in the world, nor am I saying MMOs are the best style. Just the progression model. , content and work of FF14 developers is a model.)
ARGP isn´t MMORGP and players fluctuates even in MMOs. WoW have always smaller playerbase few months before new expansion.
Again, who said ARPGs are like MMOs?
I’m just talking about a game development model, that’s all.
Yes, the wow community fluctuates, because there is a new content every 15 years, so you are obviously done quickly.
Other games are updated a lot more often, and therefore its simply preventing the people from leaving once everything has been completed.
It is sure that this model is not made for studios which want to make quantity while giving a damn about quality. Her demand for the ext follow-up job, something WOW has been doing for many years before just not caring too much about it.
So don´t try to make MMO from ARPG. Each of them have its players who prefered them. I like both but I have less time so I play ARPG now instead of hard raid progression like in WoW. or mindless grind in Lineage 2. It was realy time consuming to keep gear/consumable/whatsoever on par for progressing new raid content with guild.
I played many more MMOs like Tera, L2, Neverwinter, GW2… and most of them have even less content or longer patch cycle then WoW. Seasons in ARPG are the same as expansions/content patches are for MMOs.
I haven’t played much yet, but things go in your direction. One item with 29 FP, all the others between 30 and 49.
I laid out some prospective solutions much earlier to ease the crafting for us min/maxers without affecting the people who love the new chaos lottery wheel.
So, #1: Removal already has RNG involved in the affix removed is completely at random 1/4, plus after removing one, you’ll need to level a new one anyway, so why double charge the FP?
#2 I’m fed up with not being able to do anything with rubbish T5’s. If there’s a chaos for 1-4, why not something for T5? Even if it’s mad expensive, don’t care.
#3 I can see some people not liking this, fair enough. However, the more crafting I do, the more I notice that I get nowhere near as far as the old system. Why should the penalty for T1-3 be so potentially high? T1-3 is complete junk as soon as you hit monos anyway.
#4 THIS is the most important change for me. WHY should we be heavily penalised for adding a T1 of our choice to an item, rather than a free lottery wheel that can add up to 3 random T1’s? If there’s one empty slot, and you can fill it with random crap for 0, why not make adding a CHOSEN T1 cost 1-2? Take that empty slot: 1-10 T1, 1-10 T2, then T3,T4,T5 etc. I can accept the rng gamble cost from T2-5, but it pi£"£"s me off no end feeling like I am being forced into taking a random instead of having a choice. That’s not crafting, that’s forced gambling.
Anyway, I repeated these suggestions for you @vapourfire
As you can see, nothing apart from maybe #3 affects existing rng gamblers in the slightest. However, it does allow us to once again CHOOSE what we add to an item.
Rune of Removal has an additional function in the new crafting system. If you want to argue that the functions should be in separate runes then I might be interested, but no FP on something that can give 5 super rare affixes guaranteed if you hit the right removal needs some way of making it so you can’t always hit the right removal with no risk or additional investment.
No. There needs to be an end state to taking a shot at changing an affix. Without it, the power on exalted crafting would be immense. It’s already arguably OP as is.
What kind of rebalance do you want? It’s already in a state that great items give great forging potential. How could it be better balanced than that?
I 100% believe the opposite. Choosing your own affix is a very powerful choice for a player. If it’s too easy to do so, drops in the world lose their value since the player would prefer an open affix where they have more opportunity to customize and get the perfect item. Having the right affix already on an item should be a substantial boon to the item, and currently it is. What you’re proposing would shift towards the opposite. Even in the current system you have a very good chance to get a new affix placed for free with the glyph of hope and crit success, plus a good chance it will roll low.
This has to be confirmation bias, because it’s objectively true that the new system gives more average craft chances on an item than the previous system. The only other option is you haven’t shifted strategies to the new system and are still crafting on stuff with several open affix slots and low FP. Even in that case you’re gonna get lucky a lot.
I respect your opinion, but you’re obviously at a complete polar opposite to me on everything. That’s your right, but with respect I also think you’re completely wrong.
I thought that was a different rune, the one for sealing attempts I believe you are referring to, as you mention 5 affixes. They’re different runes. I am referring to the one that removes 1 out of 4 affixes at random. It’s the same as it’s always been, remove any affix at random.
I disagree. If you exalted craft, and end up with an unwanted Affix that crits to T5, why shouldn’t there be a last chance chaos roll. Even if it’s a new rune, and the FP chances are 20-40? Your opinion & mine are opposite, I am afraid. However., this was very much a “wish list” item for me, and I’m not overly bothered on this one. It’s not something that is going to affect me going forward.
Subjective opinion. I disagree, from the perspective of deterministic crafting for end game, which is and has been my perspective in all of my posts in this thread. I personally believe that the starting FP levels are a little low. When you can zap 25% of your total FP on a T1-T2, that just doesn’t make sense to me. I understand a higher cost from T3-T4, and T4-T5, but the costs for the low tiers just seem too high considering the starting average item FP. I would advocate either raising the starting FP’s, or seriously reducing the T1, T1-T2, T2-T3 “costs”. How many people play monos with 4 x T3’s in a gear item? I would bet a very small percentage. So, why have such a large penalty on largely unused Tiers? They’re nothing more than stepping stone Tiers.
But we had it already in the previous system, so what you are saying makes very little sense. We played for ages with exactly this already in the game, PLUS the fracture chances of adding a chosen T1 were almost zero so it was even easier to choose your affixes. A lot of times the % success chance on adding T1 was 100%, and even when adding it to a T15 item it wasn’t much below 75%.
That’s not what I have found at all, not even remotely. Almost every time I’m consistently hitting a loss of FP of between 8-10, which to add a T1 seems quite insane, considering an average starting FP of only about 30-35 on average. I also have quite a large sample size, because I always start by doing this whenever I have an empty affix on any drop.
Even if the “cost” of adding a chosen T1 was reduced to 1-2, it makes no change on the remaining attempts needed. T1 is not an effective tier to actually use, so therefore you still have the costs/chances of taking it from T1-T2, T2-T3, T3-T4, then T4-T5. That’s 4 extra crafts, and if you read what I posted all along, I have no interest in changing the upgrading costs at all. I just want a fair starting point that isn’t based on “pick a card from the deck, any card”.
I have tried to be open minded from the day the patch dropped. I’ve tested it as much as I can. I’ve tried different crafting methods. I even tried the dreaded chaos lottery wheel of fortune technique many times. For the most part I find it a workable system, even if it’s new and I preferred the old one, but the penalty for adding a T1 Chosen is the single most thing that’s driving me mad. It also seems as though the “Hopes” proc on upgrading tiers way, way more often than they ever do on adding a chosen Affix. That doesn’t seem right to me either.
“objectively true”? No, my experience, and that of others who have posted disagree. I find less average chances, and it’s not confirmation bias because I would love to be demonstrated incorrect. I’m calling it how I have found it, in game.
I HAVE tried shifting strategies, I don’t try crafting (unless testing) on items with less than 30FP, at most they have 1 open affix, I don’t pick up magics (unless testing), so no, it’s not “the only other option”. It’s your opinion that it is the only other option. It’s not, I am posting what I have found so far.
Again, I respect your opinion, but by the same token I would also appreciate that same courtesy in return. I’m not brand new here, I’m not clinically insane (I think), I’m a bit of a geek when it comes to systems & mathematics, and I also do try to be objective as much as possible. We agree to disagree on this whole topic I think, doesn’t make either of us definitively correct, only time can do that.
Happy Xmas 
The Rune of Removal now grants you the affix shards from the affix it removes, so if you remove a t5 affix, you get 5 of it’s shards back, which was what McFluffin was referring to.
As Llama correctly answered, the Rune of Removal is what I meant. It seems maybe you didn’t realize the additional functionality, as well as the amount of power it provides.
On last weekend’s SSF tourney most of us were running around in Tier 16+. I think my lowest was Tier 18. I put a total of about 20-25 hours into the character with no shared stash. This did not happen with the old crafting system. The new system is so much more powerful for endgame crafting it’s ridiculous. I don’t know how to make it much more powerful for the player without making it actually full deterministic, which you seem to imply is what you want, and if that’s the case then I’m sorry to say but you’re always going to be disappointed by LE’s crafting system. If this discussion is just going to boil down to “the crafting system isn’t fully deterministic”, then I’m not sure what feedback you’ll be able to provide the devs that will be useful for their vision of how the crafting system should operate.
Yes, we did, and for all of those reasons it was too powerful and weakened gearing priorities so much that people were comfortable just taking a white or blue item and not caring about the more rare items because the downside of having a less than ideal affix was greater than having no affix at all. That’s exactly the sort of problem the new crafting system is meant to solve, and has. I understand you want it to be like the old way where you didn’t have to care about the loot because you could slam enough weak items until you got lucky, but doing so always has gone against the core concept of how looting is supposed to operate in an ARPG. The fact that it doesn’t work like it used to is a solution, not a problem.
I’m sorry, but no you’re not. We don’t need to debate this, or go by experience, we can just work it out mathematically. Adding a 3rd or 4th affix adds 1-18 potential. The average of that is 9. If you use glyph of hope every time (which you should) then 25% of those crafts would be 0. Now we’re at an average of 6.75. But we also know that crafting skews to the lower number, meaning 9 isn’t the true average for a base craft, but something lower. Let’s be conservative and say it’s 7. Now with glyph of hope you have and average of 5.25. Now factor in the times where you crit success and that’s your actual average for slamming a new affix on at the highest possible cost.
This is the problem. You keep alluding to your experiences, but we know that humans are far more likely to remember negative outcomes than positive ones. Above, I demonstrated just how far off you are in figuring out the average for your crafts when you slam on a new affix. You estimated 9, but the real number is much lower than that.
Chances are, your estimations for your other crafts are off by just about as much. The system is relatively transparent. We can work out mathematically about how likely we are to fail or succeed at a craft. Even using conservative estimates on the things we don’t have exact numbers on, we still come up with a system that is objectively far more forgiving then the numbers you’re claiming. This isn’t opinion, the data is right there for anyone to use. I’m not using “objectively” flippantly. I’m using it because what the crafting system does is factual and can be determined through means other than experiential perception.
I think what really needs to be done is simply removal of critical failure on the first craft. if your item takes on average 5-6 FP per craft when you have 20, then you can easily make decent make shift items. I think whats leading to such bad optics on failure is they didnt solve the “Fracture on first craft” mechanic. You can still lose 18 FP on a random first craft leaving you with 1 craft left or even bricking a magic item.
I sorta disagree with the whole logic of items mattering on the ground, they already did in the old system, now magic items are just unaturally punished even if they are closer to what you want then rares.
lets say I want a double t5 suffix item, I find a magic one with t4 and t4, but it has 19 FP, I can easily “critically fail” on this t8 item and now I am left with not even a simple t10 I wanted.
But if I find a t1 prefix, and the t2 suffixes I want on a rare item, suddenly I have 35 fp and the item is mega easy to win with? This makes 0 sense to me.
Also just to say, I do actually prefer the new system to the old because its more flexible by a huge margin compared to the old system, more items are useful then before. I just feel that there is lots of items im looking at that are almost perfect despite being magic, and just them being magic alone means they are worthless. I should frankly just filter out magic items entirely.
On the Removal, I didn’t know about the side effect of getting back the shards. As far as “power” goes, I just don’t see it. After playing for a few characters, unless you go SSF every time you already have hundreds, if not thousands of shards. Getting up to 5 back, is like meh at best. I’d hardly call a refund of 5 shards when I have 2k in the “bank” a power issue. To be honest I haven’t even noticed getting them back, nor would I care if I didn’t. It’s a tiny drop in an already large ocean. It certainly isn’t anything so drastic as to justify the cost of using those runes imho. Thanks for pointing it out though guys.
To clarify, I don’t want fully deterministic crafting, I am happy with a minimal level of RNG, but we seem to have gone full bananas towards RNG rather than in the opposite direction with the new system. It obviously promotes rolls of chance (chaos) as opposed to choice (pick an affix), and that is the very definition of RNG.
Huh? I fail to see this as a “problem”. So, to clarify, you are saying that it’s a problem when people would rather have a loot filter identify a rare with 3 chosen & 1 empty with higher priority than 3 chosen & 1 junk affix. To me of course that is how I would want my filter to work. I would rather be able to choose my 4th affix and have 4 I want than 3 I want and a junk one. If that is a “problem”, then what you are implying is that a perfect system would be one where you are nudged to taking any item with 4 random affixes, none of which you actually want. In other words picking up any old item as long as it has the highest overall Tier number, regardless of it’s content. That in turn goes against the whole concept of making builds, part of which is “ideal gear”.
No, you are deliberately misinterpreting what I was saying and presenting it in a biased fashion to make it look worse that it was. That is not cool at all. You could in fact say you are interpreting my thoughts with “confirmation bias” (as you accused me of earlier) in order to make your own argument.
First, that argument doesn’t hold water and it’s skewed insanely to promote your opinion. If all we did in the old system was slam whites to make T20’s, then we wouldn’t have had loot filters in the first place, eh? We wouldn’t have had things like “sum of tiers” or “min level of tiers” in those filters? If that was the way we made gear, we wouldn’t have used the gambler so much to get good bases, eh?
Fact remains, in the old system is was almost impossible, not completely, but practically so, to take a white item and slam it so many times as to get T18-20’s. It would fracture long before then.
Instead we set up our filters from top down with “ideal 4/4” down to progressively worse levels of wanted tiers, in order to go from high chance of crafting to low chance of crafting.
Max filter 4/4 meant all you had to do was upgrade each affix - wonderful. I had that set since day 1 as “red items” and have had none of those drop for any of my characters in all the hours I have played. To be clear, since day one of playing I have had ZERO Red Items drop for any character with any of my filters. That’s not a big deal, a “Red Item” is like the Nirvana of drops. I had it in my filter as an “Oh Wow” moment, not something I realistically expected. It was “Oh Wow” for a reason though, as it required the minimum of crafting efforts, merely upgrading.
You are considerably understating this “fact” to your own benefit.
This only applies to Arpg’s where there is NO crafting. In Arpg’s WITHOUT crafting, then sure, you would go with whatever gear had the highest net Tier level, to a large extent regardless of what those tiers were. This is RNG gearing. It appears to me that you seem to like RNG from your replies, so this would be the “solution” for you.
However, in any Arpg where there is crafting, you look for bases to craft on, as opposed to finished items unless they are full of the affixes you want. In an Arpg with crafting you would always take an item with an open affix over one with one junk affix, the logic being that a tiny bit of what you want is better than a large amount of something that does you no good whatsoever.
That is your opinion, and by no means at all a FACT or an absolute, as you have stated it.
Seriously? Do you have a camera behind me? Are you recording my gameplay?
I thought you a more reasonable poster than this. To make that statement I find absolutely mind boggling. So either you have recordings proving me incorrect, or you are stating me a total liar. I’m not even going to get further into this one, I find that little sentence highly insulting.
You are taking assumptions in every step of your “mathematics”, and using variables where you assume the arithmetic mean every time. That would be fine if the mean was the predominant result.
I understand you are using the equations & suppositions that we have been supplied with thus far by the devs (I read those too elsewhere). I also appreciate that according to arithmetic mean, and what we have been told by the devs of the formulae, that my expected average cost SHOULD BE lower than 5.25. What I posted is what I have experienced (which you think is a lie). I may have made a mistake and it might be slightly lower than 8-10 but I didn’t keep exact records. However, it is by no means coming in at an average of lower than 5.25, taking into account the rare times it crits IN MY GAMEPLAYING EXPERIENCE SO FAR. Whether you believe that or not is up to you, I’m still too annoyed by your earlier “no, you’re not” to get into that.
No, this is not an absolute fact as you state it, once again. We also know that humans with a fixed perspective on an argument will skew their opinion and state it as “fact”. I do agree, and I might have indeed over estimated that 9, it might have well been a 6-7. However, the fact that you are using that as evidence against something entirely unrelated that I posted shows your own “confirmation bias”. The fact that I probably made an error in that number does not negate that I am seeing less average chances for crafting with the new system as opposed to the old. I stated what I see, but again that might fall under your “no, you’re not” assumption.
No, it is opinion. The “data” is not right there for anyone to use. We have no access to the exact formulae or algorithms used in the game. The devs somewhere else even said they would not publish those, and I respect that. So, unless you have special dev access to the game engine itself and the algorithms, then you are using supposition & guesswork for your science. You even alluded to that earlier in your reply when you say “But we also know that crafting skews to the lower number”. You have no algorithm that is used in game to calculate that, you are estimating based on a text statement from a dev, not a formula pulled from the game engine.
I don’t disagree that modelling can be done by the developers as to exactly what a sample pool of crating should do using other means than experimental perception, as THEY have the actual formulae and algorithms used in the game engine. However, THEY aren’t the ones telling me factually that I am delusional, you are. Once again, you are skewing the real life version of things by implying that YOU are capable of factually determining things, you can’t you do not have the access to the tools.
So, to state as objective fact, that the new system is far more forgiving is simply misleading. Again, it is your opinion, not a fact.
So again, I state, we agree to disagree. We are polars apart on our OPINIONS and all we can do is relate what we have experienced in game.
Only one thing is clear from this discussion of ours. I do not dispute what you state as your experiences last weekend in SSF, because I would never presume to, whereas you completely dispute what I have stated as my experiences. THAT tells its own story, I am afraid in my opinion, so I bid you good day (and yes I am still annoyed by the “no, you’re not”).
This is fruitless. The numbers are there, and you’re welcome to ask the devs yourself if I’m right about them. If you don’t like the crafting system, that’s your prerogative, but I’ve made it clear what the crafting probabilities actually are, and at this point I don’t see any reason to further the point. If you want to dislike the system, you are welcome to do so. Anyone who cares to know the actual power comparison to the old system are welcome to read through my posts in this discussion.