rofl, ok mate
1 Like
So you back up your claims “lol trust me bro”
So why are you right again?
Im in support of the wipe, but yall gonna be back here crying when shit is still expensive because gold isnt leaving the economy and all the cheap items get bought by the people actively engaging selling tons of items and generating tons of income.
Guess we can blame it on a new undiscovered dupe, the true boogeyman of the community of MG players moving forward rofl.
1 Like
Maybe the dev guys in the forum might come with a plausible explanation as to why.
It’s SemVer. Semantic Versioning, but within the context of games.
Major.Minor.Patch
Major is a version with significant or large changes. In a game, that often means things that change the game at a massive scale. 1.0 was the base game. 2.0 would have to be equivalent in scale. 2.0 in D4 is its expansion, which fundamentally changes how the game works in nearly every way. In PoE, 2.0 was a massive revamp of almost the entire game and the addition of Act 4 of the story. 3.0 did a very similar thing and completed the original story with Acts 5-10.
Minor is a version with smaller or focused changes. A few systems being revamped, a couple of things introduced, but none of it affects a majority of the underlying facets of the game.
Patch is a version that is focused on fixing things.
1 Like
Like prolly atleast 500 other people reading this thread ive played all the other ARPGs from the start.
Know what they all have in common?
A dupe exploit, it ALWAYS happens. What doesnt or I should say never happens is a dev team deciding to FFXIV the season (the original launch when the game was so critically flawed they brought an actual meteor down and blew up the world to start it over).
Im tired of this, im sick of being punished in every game I play for other people cheating.
Its always the same thing, they restrict chat, limit trading, mess with one feature after another instead of dealing with the core issue.
Permaban the cheaters, idc how much mtx they buy, its a better option then me having to play COF every damn cycle because a tier 7 affix (that im not gonna hit the slam on anyways) costs a kidney and 2 firstborn children on the bazar.
2 Likes
Cycle reset will be a good opportunity for me to jump back into the game as I missed out on the start of last cycle.
1 Like
Let us know, if any of these “refreshes” are planned for mm let’s say late Nov - early Dec. And new events along with them.
Because 3 cycle “starts” over major patch 1.1 - 2m length shedule - would be much better (I hate to say it - screw the poll as it is, ask us about delaying), than a boredom in between September and somewhere in Q1 2025
It is disappointing to realise, that new content of 1.2 going to be pushed so far away and nothing is planned to cover this 3 or even 4 length month gap
You’re past 1.0, consistency has not become a choice but a mandatory aspect of your product’s success.
EHG, you can’t treat the game like it is in beta anymore, because… it’s not.
Now stuff has gotten real, you’ve released too early and you’re harvesting the seeds you’ve sown there simply. All of those things going majorly wrong are a result of that.
Campaign unfinished.
Factions not even remotely worked out, mostly on the MG side, which still showcases major issues that are intrinsic to the system. CoF got a ton better, kudos to handling those issues.
The need of a new system since DR for bosses isn’t working out and the new one does neither.
Localization is bad.
The chat filter is horrendous.
No proper cycle timing and consistency.
It’s all based on having been too overzealous with what you want to achieve and now you’re scrambling to pick the pieces back up.
GGG has had a reliable release rate since 1.0, sure, there’s some outliers there… but overall consistent since the beginning.
And they were garage guys as well, so it’s no excuse.
And as you said, proper communication would’ve gone a long loooong way. But it’s not there, the information is missing, hence that’s lead to the current situation.
This, exactly this.
Provide very regular information. If needed go into the coding details even, communicate.
Since 40% less loot drops since the inclusion of the economy the economy is for MG players a necessary factor.
If you transgress from the trodden path that’s generally accepted in the respective landscape then you’ll have to deal with the consequences.
3-4 months is the overall accepted timeframe in the diablo-clone environment, voicing out if you want to do it different is the task to be done, as otherwise the base expectation is at that timeframe.
Which means even the small comment from Mike reinforced that substantially, especially since people asked a lot about about the timeframe and never got a proper official answer. This was a mistake by EHG like much of the left out communication is. Like before this post how long it would take for 1.2 to arrive, or in-game to have quite a lot of proper DPS calculation available.
It probably stems from their low-quality testing environment which shouldn’t miss things like a node that’s off by a zero. EHG needs to step up their game in that regard simply, problem seen… if they recognize it personally and act accordingly then it’s no issue for the future, but for that we need to see them taking respective action.
Exactly, well said.
Yes, having that on release is a big big problem. With 1.0 EHG basically said ‘We’re ready to enter the competition for good!’.
We see the outcome, they weren’t ready.
It is unbalanced, doesn’t only feel like it.
Yes, and a 100% increase definitely doesn’t fall into the expectation range hence 
It’s a crap situation no matter how you turn it, why are you even defending it? There is nothing to defend there, the argumentation if your counter-side is as solid as a tank while you’re holding a old-school phone book trying to beat that.
Likely 40k or so.
Is my guess.
True, a lot will stay in PoE1.
LE is off the trodden path currently, they had a great chance with 1.0 and got massive publicity through it but didn’t properly make use of it.
To be fair it needs to be as substantial as the 1.0 update in terms of new content, hence the size of a while faction system + new act.
Which we’ll hopefully see given the planned monolith changes which are said to be coming. They can’t be as small-scale as the Nemesis system though, end-game is in a bad state (always was mediocre) and given the game has been released it needs to be handled.
People which are informed aren’t expecting the world and beyond, they’re expecting quality similar to what GGG could provide in 1.0, and EHG sadly is below that despite having better tools nowadays to allow them to expedite the process substantially.
Especially since we were promised the upcoming MG UI patch in the middle of 1.1… and now it’s basically when 1.2 should’ve started off + a little event on top while simply doubling the time to the next patch?
It feels quite crappy simply.
I’m saying that since they implemented 1.0 and it falls in deaf ears overall. MG is fundamentally flawed.
Access restrictions + no taxation is a mess.
Unless those things change it won’t work long-term, can’t even.
Might get the numbers working for a 3 month cycle maybe… but definitely not for legacy, ever like this.
sigh… we have.
We have over a hundred years of real world economic studies, we have decades of in-game economic studies in a variety of games.
Economy is a well studied environment overall, the current world-wide recession was predicted successfully over 20 years ago with minor changes in the outcomes.
Why the heck shouldn’t we be able to predict functionality with something as simplistic as a diablo-clone economy? Which are fairly piss-easy in comparison.
Especially so when you know how a functioning market needs to be set up to work long-term, what the tell-tale signs of a failing economy are, how you can avoid those and how you can adjust systems to be a actual properly set up framework.
It’s always all about supply/demand and market fluidity. Chances happen quicker/slower the more fluid it is and supply/demand gives you the actual outcome direction and if an equilibrium can be achieved.
The market currently can’t achieve a proper equilibrium as gold cap is too low for it to happen with the variance in available items, hence by that alone it’ll crumble by design.
Then we have the issue of access which causes the inherent rift between new competitors and old competitors to widen even more since it’s directly correlated to experience gain. And experience gain is directly correlated to corruption, which is directly correlated to character power… which then once again is directly correlated to access of equipment.
So that means the faster you are at the start the more you scale away from other people with them having no chance in hell to ever catch up anymore.
Then we also have the listing flood problem because of favor and rep being intrinsically tied together by enforcing you to spend favor to gain rep. This means a substantially higher amount of listings since those can cause a potential profit to achieve your goals but through the means of throwing basically everything inside rather then making informed decisions this pushes prices down substantially. Which means the profit for more available items becomes nigh non-existent while high demand items become impossible to acquire, creating a massive chasm between them.
To be clear, a 4 T5 item costs not even 50k gold at times, a rare T6 affix item can costs several 100k without being ‘finished’ which then leads to the ~20 crafts to get the respective outcome, meaning 2 million for that… and with a T7 rare item we can expect 4-5 mil, which leads to 80-100 mil cost for one item alone. Not in regards to actual top-tier base which will cost 20 mil+ per item and not be available on the market and hence raising in price substantially over time until supply/demand is met which should likely be 200+mil per try, which already breaks the gold-cap anyway.
Rare uniques with LP intrinsically break the gold cap since supply is non-existent and demand is through the roof, leading to a breakdown of the market finally and the implementation of a barter system through gifting… which de-values the whole existence of MG to a joke in the end.
This is a infallible direction of the long-term usage of the current economy.
It’s a shitty experiment since the results have been provided in other areas already. Take those and act on those. Find new distinct points in the situation which cause it to divert from the former situation and release them as general knowledge for the future.
What EHG does in regards to economy is the equivalent of a child getting ‘My first chemistry experiment set’ and playing around with it. This is no dev-playground though but a professional environment for game development. Their task is not to play around like a child but to contract a knowledgeable person to design a functioning system and in the future if their product keeps returning profits to hire someone full-time to check on the economy and ensure things stay smooth.
We know it did, we have the direct data from the in-game environment.
Prices ramped up massively.
What we can’t discern is if it would’ve happened otherwise… directly.
We know that from other economic environments though.
And yes, there needs to be a tax.
And yes, people will also cry again, a ‘told you so’ situation.
The problem with it is that those ‘told you so’ situations have become common and EHG might over time shut down because of it unless they get their shit together.
1 Like
Laughs in Lehman Brothers crisis, credits, and speculative bubbles.
Edit:
Let’s elaborate a little bit on this. First of all, I am not a financial guru and haven’t studied economics, my understanding is limited.
But a bank will give credits that aren’t covered by ‘money’ that they have or that exists in the records. They basically create (dupe) new money, inflating the economy.
To be exact 10 times as much as their actual coverage is.
And banks are from an economic standpoint a modern disaster.
We have no banks though in LE, we only have the auction… a pure stock-market situation without banks. No loans but only direct resource exchange.
Stock-markets co-exist with banks and are inseparably linked via a shared economy.
A bank can give 9 or 10 times their reserve, yeah, not 100% sure how they calculate it. But here is a trick/exploit.
Bank A has $100, so they can give out $900 loans. Let’s say they give Bank B $500.
Bank B now has $500 in their records, so they can theoretically lend up to $4500 to Bank C.
All this money is now in the records. It does not get deleted, it just moves from account to account.
1 Like
Umh… all of that goes beside the point.
The core concept of stocks is a auction house environment, just with fixed products and ‘parts’ of those products (shares). All the stuff you said is of no use information wise for the LE economic aspect.
You go in, you buy based on supply/demand and prices - because of the large amount of engagement commonly - adjusts right away since more of the exact same thing is available.
This is a direct correlation to uniques with or without LP.
For normal items the only difference is the fluidity of the market since you got variance in the supply and need to discern if it is the right thing for you… but otherwise it’s the same.
Or… you can go and take a look at the local market environment of Eve Online for example and have the exact same situation.
Or you go and take a look at Old School RuneScape’s Great Exchange and get the same system.
We only have a singular system, with a few adjusted parameters, which is the auction system, since that is sturdy and functions.
Hence we work with the same parameters here as we do in Eve Online as we do in the real world as we do in OSRS, as we do in… you get the gist.
We know which parameters are needed to make it function, that system is surprisingly simple, the devil’s at best in the details.
If you change the parameters for access and for handling supply/demand then you change the economy around it, depending on what you do positively or negatively.
Restriction generally causes problems.
Price limits inherently cause issues if the value exceeds the allowed range.
Shorting and all other possible exploits caused by re-sales are inherently removed in LE anyway so of no matter for the setup.
It’s ridiculously simple as a end result as to how to set it up and discern what happens if things are changed if you’re knowledgeable about it.
Just do your job and we will respond to it accordingly. I know that did not make any sense at all.
I am just refuting your point (at least it seemed to be your point) that we have the real-world market that was free of exploits like gold dupes and is fully functional.
The fact is, our economy was a rocky road at times, with some very heavy bumps that led to the one or other crisis. We duped more money to fix the holes (giving credits to save banks that were in trouble because they gave credits they never got back). Earnings are privatized, losses socialized. I don’t consider this a fully or well-functioning market. It is threadbare functioning and seems to be always one panic-sell away from the next crisis.
I mean, I do agree that LE’s economy has conceptual flaws, and that we can use a lot of the acquired economic knowledge to improve it. LE would run into big problems even without gold dupes, the dupes are just accelerating the problem so that it becomes a problem in minutes, not weeks or months.
One core issue is that inflation (the amount of gold in the economy) constantly rises and thus the prices, but the monsters don’t drop more gold to counter this (raises in wage). Thus, people who don’t exploit won’t be able to afford stuff. A %-tax to remove gold with every sale would help. So your concrete suggestions aren’t bad, probably even good.
As for EVE online:
EVE Online is constantly monitoring and adjusting their economy to keep it somewhat healthy. It is a hard-fought battle, not a smooth operation. They have a dev team dedicated for this.
I never said free of exploits (because the real world market is full of it, and massive amounts of scamming) but that we instead know how to make a long-term functional market available that stays at least regulated.
And we don’t need to re-invent the wheel, it already got invented. Use the knowledge from that is the point.
That’s the conceptual flaws which you’re talking about after all, and I can only wholeheartedly agree that this needs to be addressed first and foremost after all or we’ll just repeat the same mistakes.
Those shouldn’t have happened in 1.0… did though… but they shouldn’t have survived until 1.1… and now we need to see if they survive this mid-cycle reset (I think it’ll come to that) and if it does then if it survives 1.2.
And plainly spoken? That’s too long for such a fundamental issue that necessitates top-priority focus.
No, you don’t counter inflation by creating more of it, that’s counter-productive.
Taxation as you mentioned is the only viable option in a game… since money gets constantly ‘created’ and hence need to be ‘removed’ again.
In the real world inflation is artificially created by producing more money so the value of the existing one is getting less, this is intentional to keep people circulating value through the economy. Deflation causes people to hold on to it after all and hence goods aren’t bought.
In a game though this situation is not needed as it’s actually counter-productive. The circulation of value is inherent to the need to upgrade a character, which is one of the major downsides of the real world economy, it’s artificially upkept by perception and not by necessity.
To be specific they have 1 guy for it. That person is a economic expert which has studied and he probably has several pacemakers stacked on top of each other by now to keep him going with all the suggestions they’re coming up with regularly 
Thats why i chose other and said
All apply for not doing a mid cycle refresh imo expect the no detractor option. Why have cycle mode if ur exuses is content is the same really the logic in ur excuse is flawed
I agree, for a game environment, removal of resources a far superior way, but not the only theoretical way.
In the real world, a tax removes nothing, it just shifts the account money from your account to the government’s and then into someone else’s account.
I read an interview about this a long long time ago where they said they have a studied economist working for them because of the complex economy. That doesn’t mean this one economist is the only one working on the whole economy.
1. The Ecosystem Segment
The Ecosystem segment was formed during the re-organization of EVE Development in Q4 2019 and given the responsibility of monitoring and aligning all balance, progression, economy and other health-related features from a macro-economic perspective.
To be fair, the segment could be one guy and still a segment on the company organigram.
Yeah, you’re right that a dev-team is behind it for the economic aspects still, they all refer towards the counselling of the 1 guy though, which is nicely set up, good system. ‘Hey, is this actually alright?’ Economist falls over with a heart-attack again ‘Ok, we’ll adjust it’
As for the taxation… no, there really is not.
If you create something you need to get rid of it again or you have inflation. Since Gold is created constantly you need to remove it constantly. That means either removing it through the market or providing a strong enough incentive to use it otherwise.
Since prices on the market are extremely high because of the supply/demand situation Lightless Arbor is basically useless, you have to pay millions in gold which would be a viable way to remove gold… but the return is not as valuable as what you can directly use it for on the market. Hence it’s not done.
To avoid taxation EHG would need to reduce the prices of the dungeon from 100k+ or even millions to something like 20k for the highest extra roll… which would cause massive amounts of higher quality items to flood the market though, removing even more space to actually profit in any way to acquire the really rare and sought after items.
So this can’t be done.
This also goes for any other alternative option which creates something already existing, it’ll directly interfere with the current supply/demand situation and make it vastly worse… which means they would need to create a whole new system which necessitates to be used by the player and costs gold regularly and repeatedly in high amounts to take it out of the economy, valuable enough to be better then saving up towards gold-cap to actually buy a single upgrade and do it all over again.
Hence, the easier option is simply taxation, that’s quite quick to be done and does the job it should do.
Also the game needs a way to destroy items permanently if the influx through favor → reputation in MG is kept, to allow exchanging them into some other form of potential value but reducing the flood that’s currently ongoing.
Or alternatively don’t do the current favor/rep system in MG at all. Same situation there.
Well, you’re close, but not quite there. It’s not that the reset “doesn’t benefit” CoF players it’s that it actively “harms” them (because as we’ve seen in previous threads, there are many people who actively refuse to play standard, those characters don’t exist for them) without providing any benefit (since their CoF characters don’t partake in the MG economy).
You can label them as a grumpy group of curmudgeonly or malign people if you wish, but I don’t think that’s true.
There are MG players who are pissed off about the reset & they do get a tangible benefit (an economy that, hopefully, remains functional for the duration).
New/late starting players are never going to be able to compete.
Quite possibly not. Though weren’t they adding a gold tax at some point?
Great news. Always excited when EHG posts updates. The two most important additions I would like to see is online/offline MTX and servers to improve latency for South African players.
1 Like
It is unfortunate news that 1.2 is later than I expected. 
Rival games are not only ARPG games, but also other games are.
So I think avoiding rival ARPG games and delaying the cycle does not make much sense. 
Well, in fact, there are probably more complicated reasons.