It doesn’t
Which shouldn’t need to happen in the first place.
Which also shouldn’t happen
It’s not, which is a major issue.
The point removed is based on an algorithm in the background which differs for every setup and causes another to be removed. It’s not the same always hence.
Also the display for which one was removed still doesn’t work after ages now. So that’s another issue, properly highlighting it for the appropriate timeframe in the approriate visibility would counter a good chunk of the issues already, but not all.
Which you only do to reduce the requirements. There is no situation in LE which demands that.
In PoE it’s a specific functionality to counter a downside of the system, and very properly on top.
This is non-existent in LE and a completely different use-case. Don’t conflate them together.
Also false. While you need to level each gem respectively all experience on those gems stay forever. There is no place where it gets lost.
As you follow up… you cannot switch back to a former setup with full experience. This is hence a distinct different situation and needs to be treated accordingly.
Yes, which it does, in a non-optimal way though. So solutions for a more optimal way are wanted, not discussions about the premise itself, which are inane.
So, following solution as an example:
Skill-point posiiton saving.
You go from 25 points down to 24. The last ‘minor’ node which was applied and is applicable to be removed is removed.
You put a item on which brings it back to 25. Now that specific node is automatically re-applied.
This ensures no major nodes (which have upsides and downsides that change the functionality of a skill) get removed, forcing you to stay inside the way it is skills and it removes the necessity for a experience penalty, which sucks in every way.
Everyone knows why it’s there. Still doesn’t change that the way it’s done sucks, is convoluted and unnecessary as alternatives exist which do the job as well or even better.
There were a myriad of conversations about it and the non-brain argument of ‘but it fulfills that function!’ always comes back while proposals are entirely ignored.
Manually re-assigning skill-points in this situations shouldn’t ever even be possible in the first place, this is the faulty part.
Which is a true statement.
Your argument was just absolutely nonsensical.
The reason this doesn’t happen is because clear is no issue, bossing damage is. Nothing supports major changes into single-target properly without being extremely tedious, which is far enough of a downside that it’s not done.
If you’d followed PoE 1 in development instead of ignoring that it passed further on since the last 10 years then it was back then you would know that this is also 99% solved in PoE 1 by now. Only very very highly specialized builds even think about ever changing supports nowadays, and only before doing major bosses as well… at which point it’s ignorable anyway since the cadence is so low that it fails to bring the detriment about burning the player mentally out for having to adjust steadily on the fly.
You’re quick to point out hyperbole but you’re using it in the most atrocious methods possible.
It’s abhorrent to read your argumentation-line here in this case.
And when did PoE 2 have that specific issue? It is a singular specialized build likely, so neglectible. That’s simply to be fixed and that’s that.
Universally reducing intuitive design in favor of upholding a frince-case is a general detriment, it’s not to be praised.
Yes, still the principle applies.
That alone is a big problem.
GGG did that friction method with trade and it hurt their game substantially. Ever since they moved away from frustration-based friction systems the game is talked about in a vastly better light rather then the mixed perception between either being ‘amazing’ or ‘absolute ass’ depending on how much people were affected directly.
If the according framework around it is upheld then it absolutely does.
Since only in-town you could adjust your build for gold and hence have to return and interrupt your gameplay it absolutely makes sense to allow it.
LE literally is the only game punishing you in this way. The town is not without reason a ‘gameplay reset’ point. Switching equipment to tackle specialized content is a viable option which doesn’t burn people out.
Switching mid-content though is, and that’s the only thing which has to be avoided, which it is when skillpoints auto-apply up to your maximum again without your doing, hence avoiding the pre-boss switch to single-target for example.
Preparation to fight a single-target boss and hence adjusting is a viable and non-problematic situation though, the bigger issue there is how LE handles their bossing by limiting successive attempts at a very low rate.
Allow stability to acrue endlessly and hence do bosses back to back to back and it’s fine. The switch-up is vastly more detrimental to long-term engagement then what you describe being the issue.
And as @Donzpie already mentioned… LE has no content in the current state which would even significantly allow someone to profit from a respec of that type. So there is no necessity to hinder such a method in the first place.
They are, it is a significant detriment to have such a miniscule skill-choice. Reduces build-variety significantly and forces builds to be primarily ‘the same’.
It’s one of the biggest downfalls of LE.
Then go tell why you would de-level a gem for any other reason then the need for it to be de-leveled?
Is the player agency a part there in LE? No?
Then it’s a moot point.
Because it is not as explained above.
Conflating that together is a nonsensical argumentation line, and building it on that basis makes the points beyond moot as they simply don’t uphold.
The premise is a different one, and the reasoning for the existence as well. Hence the situations differ. If you try to say ‘they are the same’ it’s a factually false statement hence.
You can compare aspects, but then at least compare the proper aspects which fit together, this is not one of those.
So?
Go tell then what exactly is the reason why this would matter in a MP game.
I can tell you one exact reason: The market.
First off… the market is utterly screwed anyway, so it makes no difference, and the effect is miniscule on top of that, which is the more important part. So it has no magnitute of effect which would warrant it in the first place.
Beyond that there is no sizeable enough reasoning to differentiate it, especially so since the vast majority of LE is solo-play.
And both have the same core reason to be screwed, which is the respec-issue EHG sees for clear to single-target switching.
A reason which is barely applicable.
And a reason which can be circumvented in different ways.
That’s why enforcing the auto-allocation is a better solution.
This avoids this exact issue and mandates a stop in town.
But that stop in town is not done in-content after all, and hence the need for a punishment to avoid exploiting the system is not applicable in the first place.
This way you can entirely remove the level reduction as it’s not needed anymore.
Also it wouldn’t fulfill the purpose it is supposed to fulfill, so it’s not a possible variant in the first place.
Nonetheless the same genre though 
Much like Dark Souls also is a ARPG.
A RPG would be for example Baldur’s Gate. To be specific a ‘CRPG’ as it’s a pen&paper implementation into a computergame. Final Fantasy (the SP games, not 14) are J-RPGs. And Dark Souls is the sub-genre of ‘Souls-like’ as the gameplay feeling is substantially different to warrant a sub-category.
But also many MMO’s are also ARPGs, which is only real-time instead of tactical movement, nothing else. Otherwise you get a TRPG.
For a start of a deep-dive into genre-specification.
Nah, it’s one absolute shit-tier mechanic. It was ‘ok’ to exist years ago, but by now and with so many solutions being presented over time and the overall game changing it has no viable enough reason for existence anymore.