I really like this game, I want to start from this to let you all know that this is not a complaint but maybe a critique that could generate some discussion. I immediately start from the issue in order to be as concise as possible.
Issue: If I play monolith with a friend, and I join his party and his game, my echoes’ net does not progress like his net. This means that if I want to play alone after a session together, I have to start from the first echoe close to the center and I, basically, loose all the progress that I made with my friend (in his echoes’ net).
A streamer that is currently playing empowered monolith told me that it’s the same for the corruption, as in the previous scenario the only corruption that would increase its value would be the corruption of my friend, and not mine.
Are there any idea to change this? I personally think it’s resulting in something very poor under the multiplayer perspective that many of us enjoy.
Additionally, if the game lead to single player style (each of us running our echoes net independently, and increasing our corruption independently) I don’t see in what circumstances we would be able to drop the resonance items. In other words, these items are undroppable in this sense.
Are my considerations correct?
I hope to read some constructive opinion that would allow me to reconsider the multiplayer aspect of this game.
That’s just like PoE. If you play maps with a friend, you’re progressing his maps (or delve, or any other mechanic). Then you have to progress your own (or your friend helps you back).
Allowing shared progress would just open monos to RMT pushers.
Thanks for your opinion DJSamhein.
I have not played PoE. However, if I understand correcly you are flagging that my topic is related to the trade off of protecting the players from boosters and the healthy wish tthat a player could have on playing with a friend.
If this is correct, is the majority’s opinion that this trade off is worth?
It’s funny how I was upset with exactly this in POE which motivated me to back LE at kickstarter… and now LE’s MP is practically the same (in fact, actually worse given the networking infra for LE is poorer than POE’s).
It is a strong deterrent to playing monos with friends, I agree on that.
I co-op with a friend whenever he is on, which is a lot less than I am, so I don’t mind progressing his monos when we play. However, had we been more even in our play time this would indeed be a bit of an (end) game-killer.
That said, I can see why it was implemented that way, as it’s just impossible to design it so we are both progressing our monoliths, since our monos are completely different layout, in a completely different state and with completely different modifiers in play.
Increasing corruption every time for both of us it’s pretty annoying.
Maybe in PoE it did not bother you, but certainly it will greatly bother us in Last Epoch.
Shared progress would be good. I haven’t braved multiplayer yet (been waiting to load solo into Monolith land for 10 minutes) as syncing multiple random load times is not conducive to enjoyable multiplayer gameplay.
It didn’t bother me in PoE for the same reason I suspect it won’t bother me in LE: while it’s true you have to do it twice, playing with your friend means you clear stuff twice as fast, so it balances out.
Yes bro, its a fake multiplayer game, 40min in Connecting char loadscreen, “we working to fix it” ok, It’s been 4 days and nothing has resolved these issues.
You do share Stability, which is enough to get the fundamental progression (moving into the next timeline).
Actually working and developing the echo web should not be shared. Every player wants something different and with how they setup the Host/Guest System the Guest already benefits alot. (Guest has twice the amount of ech orewards to choose rom, which in the long run will give him more/better rewards)
Having the echo web or corruption shared would not make any sense with the Host/Guest System. This system was specifically introduced to reduce exploiting and META strategies that would result in very “not playing together” strategies.
I think the current multiplayer system is genius. It gives all parties benefits, while reducing exploitability
I’m fairly certain the echo web is randomly generated as well. So I’m curious how it sharing would work, exactly… Even if you wanted to share the bossing progress, would that mean your group couldn’t engage the boss, until everyone in your group had the stability? How about players who hadn’t unlocked the same timelines?
Allowing players to group and participate, and just progressing the host’s progress, allows more MP interaction than attempting to share progress, and all the constraints that would have to be put in place.
I disagree, Action rpg for me are games based on optimization, increase efficiency and problem solving. I originally tought Last Epoch could be a game giving me this, plus the fun that I have doing those with a friend.
Now, the strategy to block the “guest” (as you called them) it seems over limiting the basic function of the end game. Additionally, it reduces flexibility in terms of players’ possibility of switching freely between parties gamestyle or solo.
This is supported by the fact that a player would be conscious that he/she is not making any progress in his/her endgame.
The double loot system does not look so worth to justify this “strategy” as you said. Allowing player to choose between two rewards does not look to me so worth to loose the possibility of joining peripheric echoes.
Finally do we really need this extreme strategy against boosters? Ok, they are a plague, but generally a player with this mindset loose interest in the game very quickly. And I don’t see how this can be dangerous for the game. Maybe it is dangerous in relation to amount of players but this is not supposed to be a game company looking for numbers, rather quality of its game.
I wouldn’t call it ‘Fake Multiplayer’ 'cause as far as i saw, you can do both campaign/mainquest as well side-quest together and there you share progress (and if not i’m not someone who consider it fake multiplayer… like as example State of Decay 2 only the host progress, and we never felt that it was fake or bad mp - rather the opposite one of the best Co-op Survival Games for us, for me ‘fake MP’ would be more something like Dark Souls or Elden Ring, which does pretty unneccessary stuff and put stones in the way that you even can play smoothly the game).
But i can see that for some people the concept / approach is a bit wonky, and considering that you progress together through campaign / sidequests maybe a bit inconsitent… so maybe not well thought through… at the other hand it can be intentional and there might be some sort of game-design or technical limits which the devs had to consider.
Yeah that’s one of the ‘Issues’ which i see as well, though for that i’d have a potential idea, which also could lead into some other ‘concept’ as well which people ask for and from what i heard in the interview with Mike they want to implement one day and in a more meaningfull matter.
What about Clan/Guild Monoliths? Like as example throwing a few ideas but obviously the details can be tinkered and worked out, but what about weekly rotating (maybe also random generated) monolith of fate, which are more tinkered and balanced towards guild/clans (maybe consider guild/clan size as well for smaller ones). Than you would have endgame progress together and they go around the game-design issues. And i’m not sure if this should have exclusive rewards, because that would throw offline players for the bus (except they add that you can create a solo clan / guild and tackle them as well), but better droprates or so why not?
And if guilds are for some people build a bit too huge, they could (some mmos does that) - they could add both guilds and clans… single huge guild and clans rather for small friends groups. They won’t weekly rotatet or such, but rather the clan-leader start them like normal monoliths but that progress is shared…
Just like Diablo 4, when you join someone’s invite you are in their world and their quests are not the same as your quests, when the leader exits the party it tells you that you’re going back to your own world.
