I use set items. There are viable builds you can do with set items. They might not be OMEGA PWNAGE KILLER BUILDS, but they work. More is always better, it adds diversity.
1 Like
But Daaaaaaaad, I donât wanna wait that loooooongâŚ
How far can they get? I usually get to monos with my lvl 1-10 starter gearâŚ
I wonder if itâs possible to reach the end of time, then enter the monoliths even at a very low level, and slowly, death by death, level up enough to be able to do them effectively.
You can do this at level 25ish with twink gear. Before that you wonât deal enough damage to kill something without dying. Some builds might be an exception and be able to do this sooner. But I donât think itâs possible to do this at, say, level 5.
~300 corruption, I havenât bothered to go any further because the amount of time Iâm spending doesnât feel rewarded while playing CoF.
Well yeah, you can get to monos the moment you reach the end of time, completing them in a timely manner is another thing.
Yeah, I meant that I donât tend to change gear much before getting all the passives & idol slots before hitting monos.
Letâs not.
2 Likes
Well, thatâs why âSigmaâ exists.
Sigma 3 to declare a âeffectâ (0,15% deviation chance)
And Sigma 5 for a âdiscoveryâ (0,00003% deviation chance)
I think we can work with a spectrum here as long as the respective spectrum is properly proclaimed. Otherwise itâs fairly willy nilly and senseless, in both directions.
Their job is literally to market their product and provide it.
If they canât communicate with the playerbase and hence market it then they actually deserve for it to do badly. We can always and repeatedly see that proper communication with the community as well as proper moderation automatically âadjustsâ the community accordingly.
Just look at the times when Starbound came out. âDecentâ game, by far worse then Terraria⌠but nonetheless well received as the communication was there. Factorio for example has even more communication and on top is a fantastic game.
Constant communication and updates means that the feedback of the community can also be more instant, meaning for possibilities to affect the direction of the devs before they waste time into something nobody cares about. Itâs a win-win.
Also negativity is hard to handle⌠but the people sorting through those posts and in charge of making a list as properly as possible for the specific parts of the dev team to put into their âidea listâ so to speak actively has the job to ignore the tone of any feedback and solely extract the underlying issues and suggestions to make the best possible solutions regarding those.
So yeah, as hard as it sounds⌠but this is literally their job to do. A sucky part of it but nonetheless a part.
Let me fix that for you:
âthere will be new bugsâ 
Yeah, true, I agree there.
The current state of it needs a âgrand swipeâ over it though, a one-pass focus adjustment to get them into a rather similar state to then gradually ruin with adjustments before theyâre so out of whack that that repeats itself once more.
Itâs overdue.
Agreed, it would be very very bad for everyone, both devs and players.
That notion towards development is nonsensically strict and detrimental to a vast degree.
Very close, and would throw a few things out of whack.
But overall agreed, it needs to be an aspect of the whole system, currently scaling favor with cost isnât a thing when itâs actually a mandatory aspect of it to function well. Higher value demands a higher time investment to align with rarity and hence supply/demand.
I wrote about it in a thread detailing it, suggesting a tertiary resource besides favor and reputation which is faction specific for MG, removing the usage of gold completely. Itâs under the point âCore Setup: MG suggested changesâ and in more detail under âComplex Issues: Resource Sinksâ if I remember right.
This shouldnât happen actually. The other way around. Power level of item causing a baseline minimum investment, with a far bigger variance then we currently have. So common, rare and very rare uniques being priced very differently, as would be T6, T7, double exalted T6 and further to a large amount. The same going for the difference between bases and their rarity in drop-chance as well as boss-uniques.
It is. If you know how a economy works and see the issues itâs surprisingly âeasyâ to handle them right. There will be follow-up issues but those generally are far more minor in scale then the existing ones we currently have.
It would be better if they showcased that you get the third lens slot at Rank 9. Alas not the case⌠still a bit lackluster for such a late Rank though, especially with what a third lens slot provides⌠which is solely targeting things a bit faster and hence reduction of favor costs.
You can, the downsides are extreme though and not worth it. Minimal RMT is fine, if it takes over it becomes a problem.
Nah, no players means nobody bitches
I agree, the existence of âsetsâ on their own have always been a problem and it was very ballsy for EHG to try and implement them. Theyâre either too weak or too strong, getting them âjust rightâ is a masterpiece to do, I would say not worth the effort even⌠use the resources for something more important instead of making a flimsy system prone to failure ânot failâ. Because saying it functions well would be going to far in the best of cases.
Doubling the roll-chance for boss-tables. Hence it rolls twice per applicable table to double boss item drops overall and hence reducing time investment to 50% for acquisition of boss uniques.
3-4, yes, agreed. It need to be the same timespan, the same day of the week with the same time of the day each time. Exceptions applying by providing the info at least 2 months ahead of time.
Why?
Thereâs a chunk of people actively taking time off in preparation for a new cycle, itâs a detriment to deprive such invested people of experiencing the gameâs new economy theyâre seeking out when it happens and leads to less income. Obviously the scale and goals for the respective cycles need to be properly handled accordingly.
PoE is a prime counter to this argument. I remember full well when GGG had a bit less experience with âgrandâ league mechanics yet and they literally broke the game in major ways with tons of crashes for both clients or the servers being affected completely. Since they went ahead to acquire the experience and postpone releases that hasnât happened anymore.
It correlates well seemingly, if itâs the causation isnât obvious⌠but it seems to be for now.
It sounds better then saying âyeah, gameâs not done yet, sorry guys!â. Itâs a bad marketing strategy what seems to have become a main point for companies to do nowadays⌠singular examples where it actually happens is fine⌠but excusing postponing a release with that and then delivering something unstable is a big âoofâ definitely. Makes it turn into a negative rather then a positive.
Theyâre âsales 101â stuff.
Also in the same aspect⌠when people start to see something repeatedly they get tired of it. So as soon as a ânew way to handle thingsâ comes out and companies adopt this way it becomes commonplace and hence looses value. The value of a specific action comes from being unique and actually truthful.
If you hear one time âWeâre taking a bit more time to make it the best possible thingâ you think âOh nice! Thatâs great! really cool!â
If you hear it 15 times the thought changes to âYeah yeah, leave the BS at home and tell me something which is actually true.â
Just the way it goes.
This whole paragraph, absolutely this, 100% agreed.
Itâs a disaster to ignore those things.
If itâs known then fix it.
If itâs not known then well, itâs not known.
Itâs acceptable to have errors in your game.
Itâs not acceptable to leave them in.
It was a good and valid one though, very well voiced. Kudos.
Replacing devs is a dangerous thing.
A good developer crew pulls at the same string, together. A overall vision which is shared and gets diluted the more people work on a project.
Simply pulling in devs not aligned with your vision will cause major problems. This is a HR-issue which is well known and often ignored even by major companies, which is why we see major failing games like âFallout 76â where a single-player studio tries to suddenly jump on a bandwagon for âlive service gamesâ and that doesnât align with what the devs originally wanted to make game-wise.
Their recipe worked, they switched the recipe, they failed⌠then devs quit, they tried to return to the known recipe but suddenly the new devs on their team arenât aligned fully with it anymore. Welcome âStarfieldâ⌠we know how that turned out.
Elder Scrolls 6 will likely also be lackluster if no major changes are made internally, the same can happen to smaller dev-studios too, never push a company into those directions, itâs a guarantee to fail if your workers arenât aligned with your visions.
PoE 2 will be a good diablo-clone, with nigh guarantee. Not only has GGG shown that theyâre behind improving QoL since the last years after handling the issues of making 2 projects in parallel and starting to handle it after the initial quality drop for PoE 1⌠but they have their ârecipeâ down by now. It would be hard for them to fail majorly there. Itâll have issues for sure but their devs are aligned with the vision and actively working on a clear-cut goal.
Tomfuckery can always happen though, so never 100% trust in it. The chance is just higher.
No, thatâs actually not true.
Choice paralysis is one major point to take in, more isnât better by design, it has a tipping point.
Also âserial contentâ versus âparallel contentâ is a big thing to take into consideration.
Thatâs one big topic there I could write half an essay about and did a while back, Iâll spare people unless someone wants to go into more detail there.
Without having heard about those topics thought it seems ânaturalâ to do âmore is betterâ, in reality it turns out to be the contrary sadly.
Or easily said: Quality before quantity. More mechanics arenât boding well, good mechanics make a game life forever.
The answer is: Yes, it is possible.
And actually more enjoyable even⌠but you miss out on the needed idol slots, passive points and attribute points, the only reason for the campaign with a secondary character.
1 Like
This is how programming looks like, all the time:
3 Likes
This is ment for gaining fafour not for pricing of items. If you have a pal who takes your level 1 toon into 300C monos you shouldnât get a large amount of favour to buy stuff but some very very little favour gains like .1 favour per enemie killed or something like that.
I donât know I could be completely wrong ^^.
Thatâs a very good point actually, I didnât take that into consideration.
Hrmm⌠or well, rather I would say itâs a design-choice option? Right now rather an oversight then a active design-choice, but with the possibility of it being there.
Allowing to get âcarriedâ is a thing after all, always needs a second person though, which makes it a bit of an unfair advantage and can be abused as a âserviceâ when it shouldnât be the case. So Iâm also leaning more towards that not being supposed to be a thing at all.
So I would enjoy some level based favor gain as well, would make sense. A multiplier regarding your level towards the area level, staying in the same range within 5 level above for the area and reducing the amount down to what you would gather in a area fitting for your level + 5 at best.
This is already kinda how it works.
Favor Gained is tied to exp gained.
And Exp gained has some rules and restrictions to it.
EHG has the ability to dial exp and favor gain simultanously by simply adjusting exp gains.
Right now you get only increased exp up to 10 area level above your character. (E.g. if you kill lvl 80 monsters as a Level 50 character you only gain exp worth for lvl 60 monsters)
Currently, you wonât, your lvl 1 character will gain xp (& favour) as though they were in a lvl 5 (or 6?) zone. Woo. Hoo.
Did they change it for 1.0? It used to only be 5 levels before.
0.9.0
3 Likes
So if youâre being power levelled by a character 8 or more levels higher then you would get xp as if you were in a zone only 2 levels higher than your character level.
Thatâs fine. He will obliterate the content much faster and youâll get plenty of xp that way. And this prevents the D2 silliness of getting carried to Hell Chaos Sanctuary and getting from level 1 to level 40ish in a single run.
And itâs also more fair than PoEâs (and less cumbersome) with the level scaling and the way thatâs implemented.
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.