Let us use LP uniques in Nemesis Egg (Remove LP and prevent rolling LP)

Feedback and Suggestions
76

You still miss the point, I’m assuming deliberatelly.
Yes, you halve the chances. But you still get more 0LP than 1+LP. That’s is my only point.

So unless you’re now getting more 1+LP red rings than you were before, it’s not very significant.
And even for the most common uniques where you now get slightly less than half the chance for 0LP, you also have a very decent chance for direct 4LP anyway, which MG doesn’t have much via Nemesis.
So again, not very significant for what we’re discussing here.

There is no odd math. You just still get lots of 0LP. In fact, you still get more 0LP uniques than you find eggs. Especially with prophecies involved.

77

But nobody cares if ‘you get more 0 LP uniques then eggs’. People care about ‘I get more of this specific 0 LP unique I need then eggs’. Which by itself generally doesn’t hold true after all.

You won’t get more ‘Shroud of Obscurity’ then eggs, hence when your shroud updates to 1 LP then it’s a hindrance for the usage of the mechanic with CoF specifically there.
Also it’s a hindrance for the usage of the mechanic until you have a 2 LP shroud… and even if you have, until you get a proper exalted item to use on that.

You’re missing the point people are talking about. It’s not about red rings or something like that, it’s a much simpler topic there and not a end-game one. Solely progression and hence usage during progression for this mechanic that specifically targets those fields.

1 Like
78

That may be true, but you also have a much better chance of getting a 2LP drop than a 2LP from Nemesis, since 2LP becomes a 34% chance.

To be clear, I’m not opposed to using LP gear on the egg by making it treat it like a 0LP. But this is only really useful for MG, not CoF.

79

I thought that completing a few-minute dungeon would be the least of the current Legendary Potential system’s problems.

Nemsis are very good, but favor MG. Of course it also help in CoF with very rare items. It’s extremely easy to tweak however the devs want (ex. chacne to adding LP adjust to 10% and give on CoF rank upping bonus to 50%).

The main problem is that the game lacks a predictable way to progress gear to the legendary in CoF. It’s a slot machine, but this is also easily tweakable by adding it in the CoF rank. For example, the ability to select a single affix that will be 100% transferred when using Eternity Cache.

I suspect that balancing two modes will generate more and more problems with each patch. Any buffs to drops could easily trivialize trade, reducing it to 0.01% of items. On the other hand, the lack of buffs in CoF while increasing difficulty would completely disrupt the balance between content difficulty and the availability of items necessary for enjoyable gameplay, which has been built over the years.

That’s why I consider GGG’s approach to be good—they balance the game for trade, while SSF is simply a mode that increases the difficulty level by significantly increasing the time needed to acquire gear. Of course, this doesn’t apply to top players like Ben or tytykiler.

1 Like
80

I personally don’t think that handling MG and CoF itself will be the major issue EHG is facing going forward. Compared to some other things it’s… even feeling trivial (despite it not being so).

We can see it already with LP, Nemesis, general progression there that it’s a bit of a mess to ‘get right’. And that’s one of the really small bits in the game.

EHG needs a clear-cut goal on what they wanted to provide and then make 100% sure that whatever they implement actually does do exactly that.

I’ve seen the same things for year with PoE in the opposite direction, their philosophies were so rigid and them not being flexible enough to try out new ‘drastic’ things. It caused several years of problems with maps before going into a clear-cut method that allows players to progress without stumbling stones in the way. And it also happened with trade and their extreme aversion against asynchronous automated trading. Both which have been eased up on and have brought quite extreme levels of improvement after.

In comparison when I look at Grim Dawn… they never got into those problems at all, it seems like it’s a design-issue, having clear-cut goals and enforcing design only to be allowed within the respective limits and not saying ‘ah, it’s fine’ when it doesn’t. They did it fairly well, implementing new ideas without major fear but also not stumbling over issues.

So it seems to be majorly something underlying, all they need - which is easier said then done - is to stick to what exactly they want to provide and not allow themselves to cutting corners no matter what as soon as they got that handled.

81

Also Kulze:

Hahaha, sorry, couldn’t help myself. :smiling_face_with_three_hearts:

4 Likes
82

Fair :stuck_out_tongue:

But while EHG are a dedicated bunch knowing of the direction of game they wanna make I simply don’t think they know how to handle that in the details properly, because that’s a completely different level for your knowledge-base.

I mean… it’s the same for everywhere else too. Look at other hobbies… for example RC car racing. Some people like it, some are decent or good in it… and then there’s some which actively work on going so far as to not only become masterful in their control but also by tuning their RC cars to a degree they even take air-drag into consideration.

The devil’s always in the detail. And I just thing EHG is still at the ‘they’re great RC car drivers with basic knowledge of tuning’ stage, but given how complex their product is becoming and to make one which provides a smooth progression, decent balance, proper amounts of content fitting to the time it’s out and cohesive mechanics… yeah, they just got a way to go still.

1 Like
83

Or maybe they know the direction they want to take and are sticking to their guns moving in that direction, it’s just not the direction you’d like. It’s also a possibility.

1 Like
84

Then stuff wouldn’t be handled contradictory, so it can’t be the case.

There’s hitches and issues and imbalance, wrongly positioned mechanics and also not fleshed out mechanics in the game.

So nah, I’ll rule that out, the alternative is that the game’s a guaranteed failure moving forward as those will only accumulate over time and changing the direction is far harder both to actually do as well as keep up internal morale in the company. So it’s not something I would enjoy to think about, could be the case though, I just deem it unlikely.

1 Like
85

I don’t see such lines in the sand. I am perfectly fine with eggs adding both LP and Affixes for Uniques, set items and Exaltds items.

The way I see it. It’s a personal choice. If you place an item here are the outcomes

LP: upgraded to a legendary or increased LP potential, or more forge potential. None of these scenarios guarantee a good item. I risk either bricking the item with a bad roll, wasting a nemesis upgrade (going from 3Lp to 4Lp is only a +1) or still fighting the sealed affixes or affix coverstion, or loosing millions for not selling item on MG. In either case the situation is a choice.

Bringing the 0LP unique to 4LP in the above scenario is so low I would not even worry about it. As you can manually set the probabilities but still allow it to be done.

As I think that allows more room for BiS items. Yes I want a 4LP ominis. But if I have a 0.000000005% chance to get it….who cares.

Devs need to stop killing the fun by hyper analyzing situations and just let us do what we want. This means removing all restrictions. I meantioned this before also in the why can’t we have each affix available on all slots.

Answer: devs decided it. So undecide it and let’s move on with our life

1 Like
86

This wasn’t discussed.

The discussion was to use a 1 LP item for example in the Nemesis mechanic, treating it differently from a 0 LP item was never asked for.

That’s a whole other topic on top.

Balance.
It would be fairly crap to say it mildly if that was the case.
Complexity is important, a specific range of complexity enforces decision-making, and decision making is a part of a challenge for a game. Your direction goes the reductionist route, a minimalist aspect. The extreme is to have a singular item which has all the variety theoretically in it since neither weapon/armor/ring or anything of that sort matters as all’s the same.

That’s a big reason why they’re different instead. Not only for the amount of slots available but also to enforce you as the player to pick those bits and bobs you want/need for each of those slots individually.
Optimally also with individual ranges, but that’s something LE still lacks in depth with their item system.

1 Like
87

I just want to add some clarifications:

  1. For CoF players the number of 0LP drops is significantly lower than 1LP drops, in relative terms (% of unique drops). In fact, 1LP drops form the (relative, if not absolute) majority of unique drops. As others confirmed above (or in another topic similar to this), their experience (as well as mine) is that 0LP is closer to 2LP (of course, 2LP drop % is still significantly under 0LP) than 1LP in terms of % of drops, at least for 250+ corruption (which coincides with the stated end-game, incidentally). A rough estimate, as I did not collect data so it’s only based on my “feeling” (though for the purpose of this thread and to dispel some misconceptions, I might just start collecting some statistics…) the % of drops is roughly:
    20% 0LP
    65% 1LP
    10% 2LP
    4.99% 3LP + 0.01% 4LP (never got a 4LP, have several 3LP drops :slight_smile: )

Regardless of those percentages being true or just a perception of mine, the fact is that CoF has a perk that reduces the 0LP unique drops and increases 1LP, 2LP, 3LP and 4LP drops. However, given the base chance of 2LP, 3LP and 4LP, this translates into a significant increase in 1LP drops and slightly increased 2LP drop. This perk does not add more unique drops, the increase in 1LP and 2LP drops is offset by a decrease in 0LP drops. This is a fact.

Another fact is that this is supposed to be a “perk”, meaning that overall, from a progression PoV, it is supposed to be an improvement for a CoF player. Statements like “but CoF still has enough 0LP drops” are missing the point when taking into consideration that this is supposed to be a “perk”.

  1. I personally do not question (at least not yet) the mechanics of Nemesis, the chances of 2LP upgrades, the chances of getting the egg etc. (personally, so far it feels like a 2LP upgrade has the same chance as a 1LP upgrade or added affixes, so roughly 33% for each. This is my personal experience, on a non-trivial base of 20 or so Nemesis eggs).

What I am complaining about is that the interaction between the CoF “perk” and Nemesis is detrimental to CoF, in relative terms, when compared to MG.

We have the following situation:

  • CoF will get more 1LP uniques (implicitly less 0LP uniques) than MG relative to the unique drops of each (so % wise).
  • Assume Xmg the base (non-Nemesis) % of 2LP drop for MG and Xcof the base (non-Nemesis) % of 2LP drop for CoF
  • Assume Ymg the Nemesis “enhanced” (overall) % of 2LP drop for MG and Xcof the Nemesis “enhanced” (overall) % of 2LP drop for CoF

Whatever the Nemesis % of 2LP upgrades, CoF has lower overall relative chances of 2LP upgrade compared to MG when compared to the non-Nemesis 2LP chances of CoF vs MG, because such 2LP upgrade outcomes requires a 0LP base with CoF having a reduced % of drops consisting of 0LP.

=> Xcof/Xmg >> Ycof/Ymg

From my perspective this cannot be by design, since the faction that relies on the “luck of the draw” (with the Nemesis system clearly being at least partially non-deterministic) is CoF. I highly doubt that the intention was to have the Nemesis - CoF interaction actually lead to a reduction of 2LP % “drops” for CoF.

Taking into consideration the experience of players ~100 corruption (@DJSamhein), for which seemingly this does not apply (because 0LP drops still form a majority of the overall unique drops) it is even worse, with CoF players having this interaction between the CoF unique LP upgrade “perk” and Nemesis becoming more and more punishing (with fewer and fewer 0LP drops the Nemesis becomes less and less useful) the more they progress - and in my opinion this is probably the most important takeaway (for me at least), that we have currently a system that not only does not encourage progression for CoF but is actually making it less attractive.

88

That will depend on the uniques. Common uniques have a higher chance to get LP, rarer uniques have a higher chance of getting affixes.
Meaning that if you place a bunch of Quicksilver coils you’ll see a bunch get LP, if you place a bunch of red rings you’ll see them get affixes.

As for the rest, CoF only has less 0LP drops for the common uniques. But for those they also have high odds of dropping 2+LP. Like mentioned before, a Shroud of Obscurity has a 34% chance of rolling 2LP, which is actually better odds than you get with the egg. And you have 6.4% chance to get 3LP which isn’t likely to get with the egg.
Which means that, as CoF, you actually have a better chance to get 2+LP even for common uniques where you’re getting less 0LP ones, because it’s much more likely they will drop, whereas MG might just buy 0LP ones but it is very unlikely to get a 3+LP.

The vast majority of uniques with Nemesis rolls 1LP. A few roll 2LP. I know it’s technically possible, but I haven’t seen any 3+LP, even for common uniques.

Lastly, it should be noted that corruption has no effect on nemesis results.

89

Of course, depending on the unique, one might accept the risk of “bricking” it via the Nemesis or going Jurla. But as others mentioned, for some people that is not an option. For higher tier uniques, even if one would prefer going TS, they’d need to beat T4 Julra which is not possible.

Your next statement “CoF only has less 0LP drops for the common uniques” is objectively false. The CoF perk increases the chance for X LP across the board, regardless of the base chance of 0LP or XLP for each item. So, objectively, it reduces the 0LP drop chances for ALL uniques.

Your Shroud of Obscurity example is, honestly, irrelevant. What you are in effect arguing is that hey, CoF has a better chance of getting 2LP or higher drop for some items which makes it OK to not benefit from the Nemesis system which also has a chance of providing 2LP items.

As I said, you’re missing the point. The point is that CoF is supposed to have better chances of getting better items via drops (and here I include the Nemesis non-deterministic mechanics) than MG. Why? MG can “simply” buy what it needs.

1 Like
90

I was answering the statement that CoF has more 1LP drops than 0LP drops. In absolute terms, not relative. And this only happens to common uniques. Even with CoF rank, you will still get way more 0LP red rings or ravenous voids or other rare uniques than you will get 1+LP.
So it’s not objectively false. You just took it out of context.

However, for common uniques, this is true. You do get 1LP uniques more than 0LP ones. But you also get 2LP very often.

No, I never said that. You’re just trying to infer something that isn’t there.
In fact, my whole argument started with saying that placing 1+LP items in nemesis benefits MG more than it does CoF. And I’ve also said elsewhere that CoF ranks should apply to nemesis. But that’s not what’s being discussed here.

What I’m in effect arguing is that you will naturally drop a 2LP common unique more often than the nemesis will give you one. So you getting less 0LP items to naturally drop is more than offset by the fact that you will get plenty of 2LP drops and especially that you’re way more likely to get a 3 or 4LP drop than you ever will with nemesis.
And for rarer uniques, you still get more 0LP items than 1+LP ones, so it’s not an issue.

Yes, I never disagreed with that.

91

On this - if “confusion” is a concern, at least this type of confusion, that it’s a false problem.

Even right now, you can put a 0LP item, empower, get a 1LP item, empower, end up with a 1LP item. So basically, the second empower acts as if it rolled a 1LP.

92

I don’t know why you’re mentioning that. Like I said: “I don’t fully agree, but I do understand.”

93

Totally anecdotal of mine, but I’m under the impression that even for adding affixes, Nemesis follows the same kind of rule, where lower level and more common uniques have a higher chance of getting more and better affixes compared to the rarer ones.

I remember I got a Thorn Slinger with 3 affixes on a Nemesis egg on my first character during campaign day 1 this cycle, and the only other unique with 3 affixes I got from Nemesis came 3/4 weeks later.

94

It was actually Mike’s answer in discord. And I mixed it up. What he said was:
“Lower LPL items are more likely to get LP and higher LPL items are more likely to get affixes.”
So common uniques have a higher chance to roll legendary, rare uniques have a higher chance of getting LP.

1 Like
95

Yes, I’m agreeing.
Just added that even in the event the egg rolls for adding affixes, I have the impression it follow the same rule, where more common uniques have a higher chance of getting more and better affixes added to it.