Sure, but at some time it’s simply not necessary.
If you have basic functionality unlocked rather quickly like we currently do and then a massive high-end farming scale along with it to ensure busy times for 100-200 play-hours at least?
I mean, it’s just a matter of scaling stuff, you can cause miniscule improvements for every rank after reaching the expected swift-to-achieve maximum… but the top-end being far beyond.
The current farming for rank is after all… underwhelming. It would especially make sense if you can gradually improve the auxiliary systems with it this way, not in a ridiculous manner… but slowly until by the end it makes a clearly felt difference, but along the way it was long enough to not provide a felt difference. Min-max territory only at best.
I personally don’t think so.
I always see as the items I have as the rewards I got from what I did… after all that’s what the game is about.
So any time I get deprived of the usage of them - unlike it’s challenge content itself - I deem that inacceptable by base design principles.
Yeah, and that has to be made basically impossible. No meaning behind it.
Sure… potentially someone can speed up the whole progression by 5-10%… as perfectly even won’t be a thing. But is it worth the effort then? For the vast majority not, especially not if you need to switch several times at pre-determined stages to achieve the optimal outcome.
The incentive needs to just be little enough to basically not matter… and for speedrunners any mechanic should be fine, it’s nonsensical to limit yourself with the speedrunner mentality, if you do you’re doing it wrong then
And for others it shouldn’t really apply best-case.
Yep, absolutely true.
That’s why I just mentioned the long-term farming for ranks, with a high end-result but a miniscule improvement, so a grind basically.
And if you really really really wanna avoid it then there’s a simple solution… since trading is deemed the ‘superior’ method commonly when well executed… have progression from auxiliary mechanics be tied to doing mini-events in the echos.
Have it a escort style mission for a caravan related to MG, short distance but still escort… and a wave-defense one for a prophecy ritual for CoF. We both know which will be more liked then, but it wouldn’t be overly annoying, just a slight nudge to avoid the bother of a potential escort mission style thing
60 replies, 2 votes, I didn’t expect the idea of opening up trading to be so contentious! I would have created a separate topic for it, I worry that the other points of the OP are being lost in the arguments.
With the resell ability you will also inevitably have price fixers that buy all of a certain item to induce supply shortage and drive up the prices. Which is exactly the thing EHG wanted to get rid of by not allowing reselling.
Why? The point of a trade market is to be able to get the things you wouldn’t normally be able to. That is the main purpose of it.
If you were to implement that in PoE, PoE would die overnight because now you can’t get any build to work unless you do the content for the items you need. That’s just plain dumb.
That’s like saying that I shouldn’t be allowed to buy food at the supermarket unless I first farm a garden at home.
No, the trade system in LE, just like the trade system anywhere, either in games or real life, is to let you buy something you don’t have, regardless of whether you can get it yourself or not.
In fact, the whole purpose of a trade economy is to allow you to skip doing things and jump directly to the end product. I don’t have to plant a cabbage, I can just buy one from someone else that did it. I don’t have to learn electronics and build my own cell phone, I can just buy the end product from others who did just that.
Likewise, I don’t have to kill Uby, I just have to gather resources to buy the items. Or Uber Maven. Or Uber Diablo. That is the whole point of trading.
What CoF needs is an alternative (very hard and honerous) way to get these locked items.
Firstly, why would you enforce a minimum price? That goes against a free trade economy and you don’t see that in any major game, including PoE. If I drop an original sin and want to sell it for 1c, no one is stopping me, nor is the economy suffering for it.
If there are 0LP Immortal Vises selling for 250k, then that is because there is more supply than demand. Otherwise prices would go up, especially with the inflation LE has.
So if you were to implement a minimum selling price, all that would accomplish is that not a single person would be selling Immortal Vises. Because the community as a whole has decided that they’re not worth 10M. In fact, they’re not worth even 1M.
And second, what would you do with exalteds? Their prices range wildly depending on the affixes it has. Would you set minimum prices for all the possible combinations? And would you change those millions of combinations prices every single season?
So what we need to do, especially as endgame keeps expanding, is provide CoF with ways to get items they can’t get to, not exclude MG from getting them.
Whatever system you put in place will always be power creep. Right now it’s hard to get that specific endgame item you want. You implement mechanics that make it easier, it’s always power creep.
The only way to make target farming not be power creep is by making sure the required time to get your farmed item is the same as now and every other item is way harder to get.
It doesn’t for the premise that if I want to play with a friend I still can.
I can still do carries for my friend, I can still kill bosses for him. And I can do all that while being CoF.
So the fact that group play needs fixing has no bearing on whether or not CoF is SSF. CoF is not SSF. At all. Even with the way it currently is.
So what you’re actually trying to claim is that playing SSF is superior to not being SSF? Knowing full well that you can play as non SSF and still not interact with anyone if you want to?
And knowing that if you play as SSF and your friend needs help with something, you have no way to interact with him at all?
Because that seems to be what you’re trying to say.
You seem to be quite forgetful these days. The whole multiclass idea started on the premise that all ranks would have to be redone. Especially because MG ranks are non-sensical.
Otherwise, the comment I made about the last ranks of CoF being exponentially better wouldn’t make much sense, now would it?
For it to not have any upsides, you can’t use MG gear in CoF. Otherwise it will always have upsides.
Why would you do that? It’s way way way faster to get to 500M in MG. Getting to 500M in CoF would take forever.
That’s like saying that getting to level 100 always using the masochist boots and then removing them so everything is easier is double dipping.
You’re imposing a challenge to yourself by making things way harder. So how is that double dipping?
The only double dipping you can have is simply making money in MG to buy stuff with CoF, like tabs or LA trips.
But since you would buy those tabs with MG anyway and LA is not worth it, there’s no double dipping.
This, though, is something that could happen. But the exalteds that aren’t CoF tagged aren’t the good exalted items anyway. They’re just the base drops that you would still get from MG. So no double dipping there either.
Sure I can. The point we’re trying to make isn’t for mid-game gear. On that we both agree that it’s as easy for MG as for CoF. Both factions can get mid-game gear in no time.
Which means that it’s only when you’re pushing for the limits, where you need very good endgame gear, that the differences will emerge.
Yes, the issue is that no one played long enough in 1.3 to actually get to the top and invest effort. The top wave was around 1.5k. If you compare to the previous season, which was over 5k, with actual great gear, then you can see that there was no real competition this season.
And what we see is that when you just have a token effort and not required to actually invest into endgame gear, MG and CoF are mostly equivalent.
When you need to invest into great endgame gear and actually push the content to its limits, MG was ahead.
The reason is to not force non-traders to trade. Simple as that.
Why would it be similar? I don’t want to play one of the meta builds that can kill Uby. I want to play with my fun little build that pushes to 700c.
Currently I have no way of getting Shattered Worlds if I am CoF. I’m fine with that.
With your system, my fun little build that pushes to 700c and has no chance of killing Uby now has an optimal strategy available to it that will let it have Shattered Worlds. Which is to start trading before going to CoF.
So the effort isn’t similar for both, because my build will never get Shattered Worlds in CoF, no matter how much effort I put into it, whereas it will be able to get it in MG.
Which makes starting MG, getting the item and then switching to CoF the optimal play and one I would feel forced to take if I want to improve my build.
But I wouldn’t even need to switch. After all, the items aren’t restricted anymore. So the most optimal play would be to have an MG character that would sell everything it can and then buy Shattered Worlds for all my other characters.
Either way, non-traders would feel forced to trade. Which would detract from their gameplay experience. Traders wouldn’t lose anything.
This is not reasonable. Just imagine implementing that in PoE. You’d force everyone to go delving to be able to get fractured items. You’d force everyone to beat Shaper/Elder/Maven/Sirus/etc just to be able to get their items.
You’d scrap a whole ton of starter builds simply because they cannot do the content you’d need to do in order to get the gear you need for your actual build.
This requirement is totally unreasonable and no player would accept that.
In fact, I’m willing to bet that if you gave players the choice between being able to resell or being able to buy items without completing the content, most would choose the latter.
No, maybe you forget about it because it’s a non-sensical limitation you see in no other game and would kill trade in any game as well.
If you can already do the content and get the item yourself, then why tf would you be wasting currency buying it?
You’re not deprived of the usage of them. Your other MG characters can still use it. Or you can simply not switch.
The restrictions are there so that you can’t create a character, go MG, buy a dozen red rings, then give it to all your other CoF characters. Which would be double dipping.
As long as you let items achieved by one faction to be used by the other, then you’re always double dipping.
Impossible to price fix with the locked delay.
Price-fixing is a method which happens fast-paced, you cannot price-fix without a very quick turnover rate. You’ll loose money then.
Nope, it’s not.
That holds true in most games but it is mandatory to not in LE with the way the faction setup happened.
I would agree otherwise.
In LE it’s because of the design only allowed to let you acquire things you could’ve already potentially acquired since otherwise a extreme inbalance between CoF and MG happens… and ultimately CoF is always having a massive downside when MG actually would work.
That’s not supposed to happen, that’s a detriment. If you can remove a detriment you do.
Also a possibility. It doesn’t matter which side the change is made from.
I just think the MG side would be easier to implement.
Once again the create a equilibrium between MG and CoF. That’s the important part when you create 2 wildly different factions in style which are supposed to be roughly equivalent.
You gotta go the extra mile or it’ll be a shit-show… as it currently is.
The community dismantles itself by constant ‘the grass is greener’ topics and far fewer people being happy at large. It adds to the myriad of issues the game has otherwise as well and lets people leave swifter.
Well, suddenly it is, because you don’t have a choice.
This aspect is important because it does 2 things, it enforces a minimum amount of effort to acquire items, which is something a entirely free market cannot have.
In a free market you can set your price however you want, hence you can also give items away for free… or nigh free, right? That’s causing a inbalance which CoF cannot make up for ever as well, and also it reduces the progression time for people which leads to earlier quitting.
To ensure game progression is not skipped - which reduces play-time - it’s a necessity to not allow complete free choice. Limitations creating upsides hence.
It would be a different topic if 1) CoF wouldn’t stand in direct competition with MG and 2) the content amount in LE would allow alternative areas to farm long-term with visible steady results in some way.
The current situation sadly is that people playing MG swiftly acquire equipment and then get into a major slump. The base equipment is nigh perfect and quickly handled and the next upgrade on the market suddenly costs 20 times as much… which is still fine. But the one beyond does 20 times as much again, and that’s suddenly not 2-3 hours farming but 40-60 hours of farming, it’s directly visible and hence feels ‘too far away’. Or in the worst-case the item searched doesn’t exist… progression route done, you cannot proceed.
This is why the progression route has to be rather similar to CoF as the faction setup is demanding it on how it’s handled and the content simply runs out too fast for people otherwise, or gets in the ‘unrealistic’ area really really quick.
Once more, the power level of items is a system depending on Affix tier, Affix rarity, total tier-count, FP, base item… and so on and so forth.
That results in a finished outcome which roughly relates to a difficulty of acquisition in a numerical depiction, and the minimum price is related to that.
That’s a one-time setup to make.
This is not universally true.
You can create systems which are a side-step and not a step forward.
Though it’s regularly seen that you implement a portion of power creep to provide a feeling of ‘it’s better’ to the player. Miniscule creep is not problematic, massive liek we have in LE is.
For example MG lacks the ability to reasonably farm champion Affix items. They have the full RNG range on them while someone from MG sidesteps it with the whole community pooling items together.
This is hence a area where target farming for CoF is important to implement as it would even the playground with MG in that regard.
Once more, the ultimate goal is to make both factions nigh identical in effort vs. reward. Throughout the bank.
Yeah, which is fine, it has potential after all, it could be done.
But we’re talking about EHG here. I’m not saying it’s a inherently faulty idea… I’m just saying I have no trust in EHG to get their shit together to not provide a broken-ass mess when given the option to make it such
And if it’s multi-class where you basically have to put all 12 points into the respective side… then that takes away choice again, wouldn’t it? Makes no sense to do anything but ‘the full scale’ and hence you would just piss people off it any respec cost applies.
So the outcome would have to be a system where you have a (or several only applicable for this Rank) choice between picking the upside from MG or CoF for that rank, which would need to be static. Hence no ‘working up the ladder’ but instead mixing around the upsides which provide the biggest upside for you from each faction at each point. (which at least can be perceived different rather then a rising multiplicative system of some sort)
If acquisition rate is nigh the same then there is none.
What you wrote is factually wrong.
And?
Cause you can.
It’s double-dipping, it exists, you cannot simply wave it off.
This situation is not allowed to happen and one of the most severe breaks of the limitations possible… and you… wave it off.
Just ‘nah’ for that one.
Imagine you play since a year. You play Legacy. You always play CoF… but you tried out MG swiftly and made it just to Rank 9, so nigh no time or effort invested into it.
Gold is useless for you, Lightless Arbour kinda sucks after all, so it just piles up.
Now you make a new character and you get the idea of ‘I have those 500 mil sitting around from playing so much… can just use it!’ and boom, your new character is decked out immediately in end-game gear.
You didn’t put effort into MG.
You didn’t put time into MG.
You only played CoF for 99% of the time.
You now have a finished character through the rewards of MG by playing CoF.
Is that not double-dipping?
I mean… it’s a rather blatant way to use it.
And that’s without the faction switch method, that’s just ‘making a new character and getting rewards never earned’ because Gold is the currency for MG for some reason.
If that is the premise the example also sucks again
Because if that wasn’t the case the differences wouldn’t crystallize out yet.
So you’re breaking one of the most fundamental gaming concepts in existence at the favor of something which is vastly less important in the ranking?
Retaining acquired effort is the highest value of any long-term game, and this mechanic breaks that.
Cause the premise is for the setup to achieve it.
Which is the goal.
So duh?
Poe doesn’t have a dual-faction system which supposed to stand on even grounds.
Also it has such a depth of progression that you don’t skip the vast majority of it through usage, still a substantial count and miniscule limitations would’ve done the game well over time.
It’s a basic ‘gated’ trading system?
What are you on about. That stuff exists and works absolutely fine.
You can have a progression gating, hence level- or in a form of playtime-based.
You can have a unlock gating, hence content based.
We actually currently have a trading limitation in place, the current one is progression gating, which are the ranks. So it already exists. The point is that progression gating is extremely easy to setup but also only works if the related items are properly handled in terms of their limitations.
We don’t have that in LE as a well designed system.
Heck… it’s also not well designed in PoE, but works better there as the market equilirbium works better. Still allows significant shortcuts which shouldn’t exist and caused issues for several leagues with GGG already.
So the suggestion is a unlock gating system instead of the progression gating.
Reward scaling of factions through progression.
Access scaling of factions through unlock.
It’s not a new concept.
Oh, that’s easy!
Because you don’t wanna run it 50 times and rather want to do something else you enjoy a lot more.
The core task of trading in a game after all is to allow a person to enjoy the content they want while having the ability to acquire things from the content they don’t enjoy, so allowing them to decide on their own gameplay focus.
If you hate bossing and only want to run echos then obviously you’ll buy boss-loot as you don’t enjoy killing em.
If you don’t enjoy echos that much you buy the exalteds and basic uniques since you try to rush bosses non-stop of possible.
If you love running dungeons you try to do those non-stop, hence acquiring the other stuff and not needing the dungeon uniques (well, anyway not anymore with the weaver nodes… but the general notion stands as a example).
I am.
I get severely punished by removing all my favor.
I get severely punished by removing all my prophecies I paid for.
I get severely punished by being unable to equip - hence use - the stuff I acquired as a reward from the other faction.
And that’s all I’ll say to that. Talked about it ad nauseum, it’s a core gaming principle you lack to understand and I’m tired of it. Good that you don’t have it… nice… the vast majority of people is affected by it, it’s extremely rare not to be.
It’s the task of the developers to make it possible for people to beat Uberroth in the first place rather then only having a fraction of the available classes have that realistically.
Secondly, it’s not a novel new concept, access to any sort of usage of content is commonly gated through 2 means.
You either have it not available to be bought via trade, hence enforced to do it personally (that’s what the majority of games does)
Or you have to limit the acquisition possibility through trade via an unlock.
Firts of all, PoE has gating included, though they use primarily progression gating as the majority of mechanics - outside of bosses - are based upon scaling it up.
It would do well with some unlock based gating though. PoE has had segments of their existence when the trading mechanic caused substantial amounts of players to skip content in a rather extreme manner… like during Harvest. A limitation on access would’ve done the system well back then to enforce personal investment further.
It’s always a balance to be had on how much you enforce a person in a market environment to do personally and how much they can just skip by unwanted content of any kind.
I think the optimal solution lies in reduction of repetition, not in skipping unfinished content by getting the rewards from there.
If we take other games we have other gating mechanics.
WoW uses soulbound items, hence you need to acquire them personally.
Then there’s the LE method which makes a item basically soulbound after acquisition, which is not a new method but works far better when there’s fixed items rather then the masisve variability we have.
Then there’s games which enforce preconditions to be met to use stuff. You can buy it but you cannot use it. Which is also feasable as a solution.
Given that barely ever ‘one item will be a duplicate of another’ in a Affix system like LE has the resell option is a big point commonly to have, not hindering it there. PoE’s system showcases the downside of that though with the price fixing issues and market manipulation.
Their solution for it was to first allow asynchronous trading (which LE has as well, it’s the same core system) for consumables, now also moving into equipment for it. The consumables are immediate, which still leaves market manipulation possible, but it’s barely feasable since it recovers vastly quicker because of the sheer turnover rate. Still exists.
Comparatively the item based market manipulation is nigh gone, PoE 2 had it as well and since the last update where the asynchronous system was implemented it poofed nigh out of existence. Still exists a bit as it’s not universally used but has basically vanished overnight nigh completely. That’s because when you list something you’re not able to ignore buyers and you cannot remove the item a few moments after listing it, it becomes locked for… I think 2 hours or so.
I just think that the combination of resell ability and time-gated locking would do the system well.
Also access restrictions to not bypass content, especially since LE has not a boatload of that yet, and the unique content it provides sadly often provides very awkward reward systems which are highly RNG reliant to become valuable in any form.
It would be a different situation if content would primarily give you consumables as rewards, which are then used in the crafting. So this way sealed, champion affixes, experimental affixes and so on can all be forced into a single system and without the overhead of having to look at hundreds of individual items repeatedly.
But we don’t have that, and we also have no option to trade consumables… which would make the economy actually fluid and works heavily against breaking it.
Even with a 24h delay, you still can. Why wouldn’t you?
Someone buys every single Aaron’s Will in the market. Every new Aaron’s Will placed they buy it. Price goes up. A couple days later, when prices are high enough, they resell it all for huge profit.
So unless you want to place a 1 week delay on reselling, which would defeat the purpose, price fixing will happen when you allow reselling. It’s inevitable.
Yes. And that’s an imbalance every CoF player is aware of and accepts. If you want a locked unique, you have to get it yourself. Be it Uby, Julra, or just Abom.
It’s the whole point of the faction. It’s for people that don’t want to trade and want to get things themselves.
If they want Uby uniques without doing the content, then they don’t want to play CoF, they want to play MG.
Doing it on the MG side would defeat the purpose of a trade market. Especially as you get more and more mechanics and more and more uniques locked behind said mechanic.
As for CoF, after thinking about it, it really doesn’t need an alternative to getting those. Not being able to get items without doing content is part of the faction mechanic and one that many CoF players actually want.
If they want the content with a build that can’t do it, they can always ask someone else to kill it for them. It will incentivize people doing boss builds to help others and profit (since they also get the drops).
You don’t need to create a perfect equilibrium between them. No one expects that. Every CoF player is aware that is much more easy to get specific uniques with MG. And they’re fine with it.
The only equilibrium you need is that getting endgame items is roughly similar to both. That both have a chance of getting it. Other than that, it’s fine that one faction is better at one part and not another.
Especially when the early and mid-game progress is piss easy with both.
CoF just needs some way to influence drops towards a specific unique to make it a bit more likely to drop rather than being pure RNG. Other than that it’s fine that MG gets the build defining unique in 10 minutes and CoF needs 5 hours.
They just need to be roughly balanced and equivalent, they don’t need to be the same.
MG and CoF are mostly about how you want to play. The “I want to trade” vs the “I never want to trade”. Each comes with different pros and cons. That’s part of the whole package.
As long as both can reach the same endpoint at roughly the same time, it doesn’t matter if one if faster or slower at a particular point before.
And when it is and you don’t have a choice, then people won’t buy it. They’d rather make a different build. It will turn tier lists away from power and be based on cost. “Build A is very good, but costs a lot, so play build B instead, even though you’d really love to play build A”.
Worse than that, people just won’t put those items for sale (after all, there’s a limit in place now) because they’re not profitable vs others. Which means people wanting to buy those items now have none available.
It’s not relevant. Other than being able to get target farming towards a specific unique from the common pool, both factions gear extremely easy for mid-game. It doesn’t matter if MG gets mid-gear for 0 (or 1000 now), because CoF also gets showered in those items very early on.
The only relevant part for their balance is endgame progression. Early and mid-game progression is an area where neither faction has any issue with, other than the aforementioned specific uniques for CoF. Which only affect the rarer uniques anyway and only for that first drop. After that you have imprinting.
Game progression is already skipped. The first hurdle everyone has is empowered monoliths. And even that is reduced now. So the only relevant progression right now is endgame progression for corruption pushing and eventually killing Uby.
For game progression to be relevant earlier you’d need to nerf massively both MG and CoF.
It is. Everything is piss easy to get (again, outside those specific uniques, which just need some target farming mechanic) until you get to endgame and start your road to min-max.
But the value of the affixes will change wildly depending on which build is on top, though. It doesn’t matter if echo damage affix is rare (and thus is way more expensive) if VKs suck and no one wants them. And what everyone wants is just melee damage and attack speed which are very common affixes.
So you’d be enforcing a higher price on worthless items, which means no one would bother selling them and there would be none available for the few that want to try a VK (assuming VKs are at the bottom, of course, which they’re bound to at some point, but same point applies to any build, really).
You want MG to get exalted gear more easily and CoF to get uniques more easily. This means more endgame gear faster. It’s power creep.
Unless you want to also nerf MG and CoF alongside the buffs, but I’ve never seen that in your proposed solutions.
You mean CoF lacks that ability. But that is not true. Champion drops are an item like any other and are affected by CoF ranks like any other. Just like CoF has an easier time with exalted gear, so too they have the same bonuses for champion affixes.
They can even imprint them and have their bonuses applied to that.
So it’s actually a bit easier to get a T7 champion affix in CoF than in MG.
Why would it remove choice? If you’re a tradelord you put 12 points in MG. If you hate trade you put 12 in CoF. If you want a mix of both you have several combinations until you’re happy with it.
Sure it does. If you just want a bit of trade to help you with 1-2 items you need, then you put just a few points in MG and the rest in CoF. This way you get a big boost in drops (not as much as if you had 12, but still very relevant) and you get to still trade in a limited faction.
Respec is a tricky thing, though. Not sure how to handle that, tbh. I’d prefer not being able to, but we obviously need some way to undo mistakes without allowing for abusing the system.
Maybe if you want to respec you start from 0/0 and have to grind again? It would piss people off, but everything would, so…
As long as you can get an item with one that you can’t get with the other, it always has double dipping.
And for both factions to fulfill their purpose, it’s mandatory that this exists, as discussed above.
MG needs full access to everything. CoF will have access to only what they can farm themselves. This is what MG and CoF players want (the majority anyway). It’s also what EHG intends for each faction.
So yes, CoF can only get Uby items if they do Uby (but when CoF does do Uby, it has a better chance of better items). And MG can buy Uby uniques when they want without doing the content (or Fire Lich, or Mountain or arena bosses, or any other).
That’s how it’s supposed to work and CoF players are fine with that imbalance.
Besides, just like they added the dungeon packs node to the woven tree (and the shade one too), maybe they’ll add one for Aby/Uby drops at some point. Where everyone (including MG, since those items tend to be expensive) will have a small chance of getting them while farming echoes.
It’s not double dipping. That’s like saying that I farm bosses without being aligned with any faction, get their drops, then join MG and selling. And that it would be double dipping.
Double dipping is bringing benefits from one faction to another. Like going MG, buying dozens of red rings/ravenous voids/shattered worlds and then equipping your full CoF characters with them (since you remove the restrictions). That is double dipping.
What it’s not is bringing the downsides of one to another. At most that is double nerfing yourself.
To have double dipping, you need a benefit. What you described has 0 benefits.
The only double dipping possible right now is actually the opposite, like I said. You farm MG, get gold cap, then switch to CoF and can use that gold for whatever. But since the only uses for it are buying stash tabs (which aren’t too hard to get even with CoF), buying shatterings (completely irrelevant) and farming LA (completely irrelevant), this is negligible. And also easily fixable by getting a different MG currency.
So yes, what you described is 100% not double dipping. It’s just a random challenge you impose on yourself, like wearing the boots.
You won’t get 500M playing CoF for a year. At most you’ll get 50M unless you’re grinding really hard. Like sweatlord hard. For a regular player, you won’t even get 50M.
You might get it in 5+ years. At which point it’s not really double dipping, is it?
To get double dipping you need to have a benefit. And what you’re describing isn’t a benefit. It’s a consolation prize.
Which is why I used the 1.2 leaderboards as an example and not the 1.3. And what it shows (and what the 1.3 one shows as well) is that for a moderate effort, both factions are kinda equivalent. But for pushing to the absolute limit, MG is better.
What ranking?
You still retain the acquired effort. Just not for that character. You items aren’t deleted. You just can’t use them with that character. You can use them with other MG characters.
Because what you’re proposing is the opposite. It’s the having no effort to get a full set of gear for your new character that has a full gear from MG and the full bonuses for CoF.
When you want to respec skills you pay a cost in reduced skill levels. You have to farm XP. This is also acquired effort that you lose.
When you want to respec your tree or, now, your mastery, you pay a cost in gold. Which is also acquired effort that you lose.
When you want to respec a faction, you lose favour (which is idiotic and you shouldn’t, especially when it’s global to your account) and you have to pay by not being able to use the same gear. Which is also acquired effort.
Any respec system in most games will require loss of acquired effort. Some more punishing that others. But they all require it.
Even TQ2, that lets you respec on the fly whenever you want, has a gold cost. That is also acquired effort that you’re losing.
Respeccing in PoE requires orbs of regrets. It’s also acquired effort that you’re losing.
More important choices lead to a higher loss of acquired effort.
Because if you don’t have any loss, then choices become meaningless and the game becomes a respec simulator instead.
It’s not. They never once said they want MG and CoF to be roughly balanced. They never once said they want them to be similar.
They actually even said that they will never be really balanced. Which is obvious when both factions are totally opposite. You will never be able to fully balance them.
But as long as getting to the endgame gear is roughly equivalent, then it’s all good.
You already do, it’s item level. You can buy a shattered worlds with your level 1 character. You won’t be able to use it until whatever level it is. 80 something?
Trade doesn’t need more limitations than that, otherwise trade becomes useless and most people won’t interact with it.
What you’re proposing, with minimal costs and not being able to buy stuff without doing the content will simply kill MG much faster than anything EHG did so far.
Yes, and it’s a total and utter nonsense that they exist in the first place. You yourself have said so in the past.
And now you want to place even more gates in place on top of that? Sorry, that’s just dumb.
The only way trade works in any game is if you have a free trade market where players dictate the prices and availability as a community.
With the restrictions you want to put into place, might as well get rid of the AH entirely and just replace it with a NPC vendor that will buy and sell stuff.
Even if you were to put that into place, it still wouldn’t fix anything. You get a single character that did Uby once. Now you can have Shattered worlds for all your future characters. It only gates the first character. Which means it will force (even more than now) players to start with a meta build, even if they don’t enjoy it, just so they can unlock the stuff and from then on they’re golden and can just buy everything for their alts.
Which your limitation completely invalidates. After all, you’re forcing people to do content they don’t want to do. Even to the point of forcing them to run a build they don’t like on a mechanic they don’t like, just so they can unlock the ability to skip it. It’s non-sensical.
This limitation alone would drive more people away from MG (and possibly LE altogether) than anything EHG has done so far.
I know that if I were ever forced to do delve in PoE I would immediately quit it. It’s bad enough being forced to do labs.
It’s also why I haven’t returned to PoE2 for 0.2 and 0.3. Just the thought of being forced to run sanctum and the other one (forgot which one it was, Ultimatum??, but it’s equally terrible) makes me simply not want to boot the game at all.
And what you want if to force people to run content they hate as a solution? Makes no sense and will kill MG/the game even harder than now.
Which is dumb, as said before, and should go away.
Which is your cost to respec. As said above, respecs have costs based on the importance of the choice. This is both a steep cost and a way to prevent double-dipping.
Not soulbound. Account bound. There’s a difference. Soulbound is when the item becomes available only to that character. You can’t give it to an alt. Account bound is when you can’t give it to another account.
LE uses account bound.
You mean like item levels, which is what LE has?
Not really. And that’s because GGG decided to have both systems in place simultaneously. So it only works if most people used the async trading and if that item is available via async.
But it still leaves the door open to price fixing by someone buying all the items that come thorugh the async trade and placing them later at a higher cost in either of them.
Price fixing isn’t simply placing an item at a low price and sniping stuff. It’s also creating artificial demand by hoarding items to sell later. You know, like scalpers do by buying hundreds or thousands of tickets at once and then selling them later for extremely inflated prices? Which has always been one (among many) of the toxic practices PoE had going on.
I’ve re-read this, you’re definitely using the past tense rather than the future tense (ie, that you think it should be changed to require beating a boss to be able to buy it’s drops) & that’s definitely not how it works (I’ve just bought a Seed of Ekkidrasil & I would have bought a Shattered Worlds if I’d had 33m).
Perhaps, but PoE also doesn’t prohibit you from buying boss-specific drops if you haven’t done the boss (I’ve just bought a Doppelganger’s Guise), which was what I was saying, so as nice as this is, it’s not a relevant reply (though as something you wish were the case that’s fine).
You may wish to be a bit clearer when you’re discussing how you think things should be versus how things are at the moment.
You got 2 options to price-fix.
The first is to list a item lower so others do the same. So you buy up the available stock which is similar and put a few ones underpriced onto the market. Other people list at similar prices and you snatch em up to re-sell them at normal price after.
This one doesn’t work because you cannot stop your item simply being sold right away, hence you cannot fix the price, it goes towards the equilibrium again… which causes you to loose money.
The second option is the other way around, you buy out everything on the market at a specific price and then sell everything for a higher one, buying up anything which gets listed below your price. This mandates that the influx rate is relatively low, otherwise you’ll have to permanently play catch-up and have to buy items for far more then the profit will create. This one works specifically by gradually lowering the price to ensure your margin is beyond the buying prices, up until it gets close to the normal price-range again.
Since you cannot gradually lower the price the risk is extreme, hence it’s extremely hard - but rarely still possible - to pull it off.
It’s just not providing the same value as it does in a synchronous trading environment. Fluidity of the market is simply too high when it’s asynchronous.
With your Aaron’s Will example this showcases especially well. Unique prices fall, they don’t rise, unless it’s high LP (as the demand rises as time passes, up to a equilibrium again which happens later since less influx/outflux happens simply) and high LP is not a viable market-fixing method since the investment is too hefty.
So after a few days the price for the unique normalized again already, hence you bought everything at normal price and above… and now you can only sell at normal price.
The factions are created with the premise of being a pure flavor choice, not a choice of different outcomes.
Hence while people accept it it’s still not the targeted way to work.
You have it nearly right.
It’s for people which don’t mind repeating any type of content no matter what and rather want to acquire items on their own.
MG is not inherently the premise of content skipping, that’s nonsensical. It’s about not having to do the repetition. Most economies in games are just set up to allow the content skipping in some form on top of that, but it’s not a demanded aspect.
Yes, true. It only needs to be near perfect, not absolutely perfect.
Just as close as possible.
Nope, also the progression. That’s after all taken as a core argument for why MG is in ‘such a good state for some players’ right? So obviously there is a clear-cut disaprity happening, and that isn’t supposed to exist in the first place.
Yeah, decent enough.
We’re not even remotely there though, far far away from that baseline.
Which is the core argumentation of this topic whenever it comes up.
Oh come on… acquisition difficulty already is a factor. It changes nothing. And that’s by the way a balance aspect which the devs have to do, to position items with respective power relatively around the same progression rate. That’s not well upheld, but at least it functions for the moment.
Which seems that way at the first look, I agree! But that’s when the beauty of a market happens.
Demand stays roughly the same (we ignore the situations where it changes for extrinsic factors like streamer build showcases and so on), hence we got supply/demand ratio. That’s how the price is decided.
If the price goes below the minimum price which can be set then the market acrues items on that minimum price. So instead of 1 person which has ‘the lowest listing’ and hence is bought up it has 5… 10… 100 there. So the percentile chance for the item to be sold lowers. if you’re 1 in 100 then you’ll after all sell your item with a 1% chance as 99 others also fill the exact same spot.
When it’s above the minimum price then the pricing equilibrium happens. So demand outpaces the supply there.
Now if results from the oversupplied part is too high to make profit people move into the ones which are above market limit, hence supply rises and the value drops. This causes over time to create a equilibrium between each individual unique. You always get a rough ratio of people supplying ‘A’ versus ‘B’ and they are rather close in return together then.
And one has a substantial upside there. Magnitudes of speed for it.
Take a wraithlord build as example simply… that’s a non-common unique helmet, that can take hours for a player to farm up in CoF. For MG it takes mere moments without LP. It’s hours saved hence.
Have several instances of this and it’s a substantial difference. And a very high percentile of people never go past this stage anyway, hence a large percentile of people are affected heavily related to their total amount of play-time.
It’s always important to have rather even progression when different systems are available because of that, through all stages of the game.
Even if it’s ‘piss easy to get’ one is still ‘piss easier to get then the other’. It has relevance when it’s magnitudes apart.
The system is only supposed to work related to acquisition difficulty, not player power depending on balance of builds.
If you get a item 1 in 50000 times it’s more expensive then one you get 1 in 1000 times as a baseline.
That suffices for a vast majority of cases, which means it’s a overall improvement of balance.
Which once again rises the price for them which means they become viable to supply.
Supply/demand is a very beautiful thing when you have your system support it to actually have some form of traction instead of being utterly irrelevant in many cases.
You can also make it so CoF doesn’t get exalted as easily and MG doesn’t get uniques as easily.
Which is a nerf, but makes it nonetheless even.
So ‘nah’ there, not inherently. People just react better to buffs rather then nerfs, but I think here a nerf might be the right way to go for long-term stability.
They count of champion items is not increased. Only the chance for them to be upgraded.
You’re right that this increases the potential chance comparatively to MG at a baseline.
The issue with those items is that they’re very specific in use-case. Hence they need to be ‘just right’. And that is such a variance in RNG that it’s unfeasable to happen through CoF. Via the community pooling it can happen though with MG in a realistic manner because of the sheer amount of items you drop and which don’t apply to you.
Because that’s the most likely outcome which EHG will create, because they have a track record of implementing things in such a way already as we can see with the imprint system, the faction setups and the weaver tree and how it interacts with other stuff, shifting the situation massively and not really in a good direction in several cases.
So it’s simply more likely that you would get a mandated combination-form of the points instead of a ‘pure’ build. Because for example the chance to upgrade Affixes on a item or the doubling of LP is such a massive boost comparatively to anything else that even a 50% price reduction of items in MG wouldn’t counteract that.
Also it would mandate to get resources from both at once at simply a different pace when multi-classing into both, and since MG already has a severe issue with usage of the resources (outside Gold, hence the currency and not the resource of favor) it would allow the leeway without downsides unless everything works perfectly together.
I simply don’t trust EHG to manage balance, they showed no signs of being able to do that to date, hence I would prefer a surefire method.
It’s possible, I just think they lack the capability for it.
Yep, and that’s one of my major gripes there, it’s extremely tricky and hard to set up.
Could work… bigger chance to go absolutely awry though.
That’s not the optimal premise which is the basis though, is it? Quite the contrary.
The task is to remove as many instances of this situation to happen to allow opening up.
The more are removed the less need of severe downsides… they can be piece by piece eased up on, which is a overall improvement as it raises simply the amount of choice without creating necessity.
All is about more choice without necessity. Player agency rather then player urgency.
EHG is a lot of ‘maybe’ sadly That’s a big issue with em.
Maybe they fix up MG.
Maybe they add the missing stuff which hinders CoF.
Maybe they balance the classes.
Ya know… if too many ‘maybes’ happen you stop believing in em, you want ways which can hardly be screwed up instead as they don’t rely on a ‘maybe’.
So you’re saying being able to buy out equipment to outfit a character to the top end through MG without working a single second beyond Rank 9 in a moment’s notice is not ‘double dipping’?
Then you could also say everyone can simply trade all the time, as it’s the same!
Either you define it tightly or you loose all definition here sadly.
Gold is a benefit primarily for MG.
You create Gold in CoF.
After using up all one-time avenues (hence tabs) the need for Gold vanishes entirely, corruption is more powerful then Lightless Arbour, Prophecies are more powerful then Lightless Arbour too. At that time you get rewards for MG solely by playing CoF.
There is no point in time where you get rewards for CoF solely by playing MG.
If ‘I can make a character without putting effort into MG but using the mechanics of MG fully’ is not a benefit I don’t know how to even argue about the topic.
It’s a bit baffling that this is not a given thing but has to be explained plainly spoken to me. It’s obvious, it has been pointed out several times by several people… so it clearly is a very potential existing situation which can be used.
Annoying to set up but absolutely doable.
You absolutely can? What hinders you? Every unique is several thousand Gold. Every map - with shrine usage - is around 5-7k Gold.
That means 100 echos are 700k without any investment into it. 3-4 minutes per echo when rushing is feasable.
A long-term player easily does 10000 echos a year.
If you also do the shrine map you get 50-75k per map solely from shrines.
If you pick up all uniques and just throw away the trash ones you get 15k per echo easily.
Heck… there were quite a few people having reached the technical limit of the 2,5 bil before 1.0 even hit.
I made 10 mil Gold in CoF in a week even, and I’m not a hardcore sweaty player, I have a ton of downtime between echos, we got 53 weeks per year, so someone being a heavy player can absolutely get 500 mil in a year, I imagine 20-30 mil per week is absolutely doable.
And you don’t need 500 mil either, you have a end-game build with 50 mil in many cases already, top end-game (hence uberroth items) with 100 mil, with a few exceptions. Shattered World with 0 LP is 33,5 mil in Legacy for example. The only exception would be a red ring, but that one is a RoA and then imprint task anyway, by that time you’ll likely have non-tagged ones with 0 LP from CoF, the chances are rather high.
500 mil is just a uber-build in many cases, something 99,5% of people don’t ever have.
The ranking of importance for game pholosophies.
One of the biggest core principles in game design is to not take away achievements from people. That goes extremely badly. It goes so badly that people rather stop engaging with your product entirely then to accept even small parts of that happening.
It’s the reason why the korean gambling upgrade system games only work for a few years before barely surviving rather then thriving. Black Desert Online for example is a prime example. Had top tier combat, the upgrade mechanic pushed a vast amount of players away after a while (together with lack of meaningful updates upholding older systems, leaving many deprecated).
It’s a universally seen concept which has nigh no exceptions anywhere on the gaming market happening.
Take away stuff you acquired, no matter the reason, and it turns out badly for you.
If I can only look at it and not use it it’s not retained.
Which is the premise.
Item is usable for my character… but it’s not allowed, hence it’s not available.
They’re now ‘showcase items’ unless you get back to the other faction, hence being forced into a playstyle you wanted to get away from.
This takes away choice, you’re ‘locked’ in your playstyle or you loose all effort invested. You start basically over.
That’s top-tier garbage design, one of the worst in all of gaming history, and it’s a miracle LE survived that without even realizing what a massive blunder they’ve made.
They are not rewards.
They are progress.
And the more severe they are they less players interact with the game.
Hence why it’s commonly tied to using resources you acquired but haven’t turned into rewards yet, to not get into the dangerous area of removing already gathered power as much as possible.
Umh… they did.
They just mentioned they don’t think they’ll be able to, with MG likely causing to be superior overall.
It was literally the basis for the design.
I dunno why that’s somehow poofed away from existence when it was one of the core points for selling the dual-system.
Yeah, because that’s such a stringent one in LE, right? Level 80 and you’re done And by then it’s purely drop-only area and not anything related to crafting either, unless you expect to wear a exalted item with very high total tier, which is vastly beyond that stage anyway.
We could have a argument for it if that system were more stringent, but it isn’t.
It’s extremely lenient, and that comes with the respective downsides for any system hinging on it.
Yes, this type of gating is nonsense.
The existence of gating at all is not.
It need the proper type of gating.
PoE’s gating is also not optimal but it at least suffices. GGG personally stated that they have severe troubles with trade related topics. A big reasoning for that is the methodology of gating they use. Why? Because since it’s not stringent with the limitations it needs extreme amounts of balancing to happen.
And GGG actually does that… surprisingly decent actually. Not optimal… more then enough things to complain about… but it suffices to at least reach a ‘decent’ state, which is far more then we can say about LE.
Important difference.
Or for EHG to get their asses up and provide a basic expected amount of balance.
Ya know… that what a player should demand as a baseline anyway, which would remove those issues anyway.
Don’t let broken systems act as a excuse. You cannot solve problems by hinging it on statements which rely on stuff being broken.
I write that so often by now and seemingly nobody gets the notion behind it.
If shit’s broken… it needs to be fixed. Period.
If broken shit stands in the way then that needs to be tackled. Period.
If then the problems are solved then they weren’t inherent problems, they were designed ones. Shortcomings.
Nope, I have to do specific content once and not repeatedly.
People can easily stomach doing stuff once.
People can’t being forced into it endlessly over and over again when it’s not fun.
That’s a major major difference.
Because getting beyond it is the core gameplay of the genre. You beat the bosses to progress. You unlock stuff once to have access.
That’s the core premise of the whole genre.
Otherwise you can as well play a bullet-heaven game with itemization. Dwarven Realms for example is a prime example, strips away all those aspects.
That’s a different sub-genre though.
The cost of respec would allow me to use it at least after putting effort in again. I just get pushed back in terms of the progression bar.
But my equipment will never be usable again by that character, forever.
Nope hence, absolutely not the same, not even remotely.
Yes, to be specific it’s ‘Character-bound’ and ‘Account-bound’ if you wanna nitpick. Both cannot be traded, so the relevance of terminology for the topic is non-existent.
No, conditional usage.
Like ‘have this quest finished’ or ‘beat this boss’.
Level gating is a progression based gating which is irrelevant related to content. What I talk about is distinct content gating.
First of: It already shows a significant difference. Which showcases the basic principle behind of it working.
Secondly it’s a new system and as you state, you can use the other as well. Over time people will move over to the asynchronous method, hence the magnitude of effect is bound to increase.
If it’s the only existing one we can already see what the outcome would be hence as the differences are rather easily visible.
It doesn’t fall, though. You’re choosing a rare item that is sought after (so ok, not Aaron’s Will ) so there won’t be that many coming into the market all the time. If you choose one where you only need to buy 2-3 per day, then you can hoard it all yourself, create even more scarcity so the prices soar and then you sell for however much you want.
You obviously don’t do it with a Kestrel.
And the main thing is, you don’t even have to do it in the first days of a season. You can create that scarcity later.
They are not. They were created with the premise of being a gameplay style choice. Completely different things.
So with one gameplay style you accept that you have limitations because those are part of the gameplay style. Not to mention the option later on of having some small chance to have it drop if they do something like they did with the dungeon pack spawns.
Yes it is. I can’t get that item I want. I’ll instead farm currency and buy it.
Every single economy has been like this, back to the days of barter trade. You buy a barrel from someone so you can skip having to make it yourself. The barrel maker buys wood from a woodcutter so he can skip having to cut them himself.
That is the whole basis of trade. You have something I want and which I don’t want to make myself.
Saying that I can’t buy vegetables because I didn’t grow a garden at any point in my life is just dumb.
No, it doesn’t even have to be near perfect. Just roughly equivalent.
Because non-traders don’t even care if MG is a little ahead. It’s still a refreshing change from them being miles ahead like in every other game.
Which is why most CoF players (the ones from early access, at least) don’t mind not being able to get Uby items unless they do it themselves. Because to them the fun is the item chase.
The progression is already roughly equivalent, in that it’s piss easy for both.
It changes everything. Because your idea will simply increase acquisition difficulty across the board.
Builds that were accessible until now, become unaccessible.
All it does is remove builds from being playable. Or, at least, from being playable until you farm currency with some other character instead. Because your idea is actually just artificial inflation, which is something the game actually doesn’t need more of.
None of that changes the fact that no one wants to pay 10M for item X. No players feel that that item is worth that much. So they’d rather just farm it themselves and not even bother selling them.
Which is why I said “Other than being able to get target farming towards a specific unique from the common pool”.
So if you get some sort of ability to target farm for those uniques in CoF, then the only progression that matters is endgame progression, because everything else is piss easy.
CoF players won’t mind having to farm for 2h vs 5 minutes for MG. Because that’s part of the playstyle.
As long as it isn’t 10h vs 5 minutes. Because they just need to be roughly equivalent. And because in those 2h they’re farming for the wraith helmet they will also be getting upgrades for other stuff at the same time vs having to farm one at a time for MG.
So again, roughly equivalent.
But that totally ignores the supply/demand aspect of trade, which is a vital aspect. Which means that there will be plenty of underplayed builds that will suddenly have an even harder time than before.
It wouldn’t. Because that would happen 2 weeks into the season. Which means no one would even do a VK in the first place.
This measure is simply a build killer.
Again, which is why I said that you’d need big nerfs along with the big buffs, but that none of your suggestions thus far included.
No it’s not. You get a champion affix you want and imprint it. Then you improve the dropped imprint and imprint that one. And you keep moving up. Each dropped imprint will be affected by CoF, so you can actually scale it pretty decently.
You even have an imprint that will add a prefix as sealed, so you can potentially work towards a 6 affix item.
That can be said of any system, including the ones you suggested. But we’re not talking about how EHG might or might not implement our suggestions, are we? We’re talking about how we would implement them. That is, after all, the point of this forum category.
Otherwise your solution is simply for EHG to add nothing new to the game ever again. Because it might be botched.
And, might I point out, that EHG implemented the woven tree and there isn’t a clear “This is the best strategy” there, so that goes against your statement.
So you place those at the very top of CoF ranks, obviously. If you want them, you can’t trade or can only trade in a very very limited fashion.
Tbf, respec is a tricky thing to implement in any system. If you’re too forgiving it becomes meaningless, if it’s too punishing players cry out.
The problem is that the whole CoF gameplay premise is getting your own gear. So if you don’t do the content you don’t get it. It comes with the territory.
CoF is, at heart, just SSF with bonuses that lets you play with your friends.
EHG could have made simply made SSF/offline have those bonuses instead, but they made the factions so that you could still party with other people.
It’s not. Gold is a currency that drops in the game, even if you don’t join either faction. It’s a resource. The benefit from MG is getting an item you didn’t have to drop yourself. The benefit from CoF is getting an item in less time than you would normally need.
Gold is not a benefit of either. So no double dipping.
It’s not. What you’re saying is this:
-You can work for 10h and buy a TV. Or you can work for 100h and buy a TV.
The second one is not a benefit. It’s a consolation prize.
It’s baffling to me that you seriously think this is double dipping.
No they’re not. Primordial uniques (which you likely won’t be selling, or you won’t be acquiring at enough speed to matter anyway) are 5k. Every other unique is below 3k. With the vast majority being below 500 gold.
That is, at 4 minutes per echo, a total of 1666 hours per year. Are you telling me anyone outside a sweatlord (which I did point out could possibly make it) will be playing that long in a year in echoes alone, not counting time to do other things like crafting, running dungeons, etc?
And even then, since we just reached the conclusion unique selling isn’t worth the wasted time, that would be 70M. 100M if you add variance of shrine echoes.
Yes, over how many hours, though? And how many years?
And let’s not forget the price changes EHG did, like arena keys no longer being worth so much gold, which was a good way to accumulate it.
You’ll have to let me know how you did that, then. Because after 100h playing I have 2M, after having bought a bunch of stash tabs, which I need.
You need more than 700 unique rings to get a red ring via RoA. You’ll get one much faster by doing ring prophecies. With the added benefit that it has a higher chance for LP that way.
It doesn’t take away any achievement. You wanted to grind until you bought item X. You achieved item X. Much like you wanted to grind until you accumulated 1B gold. You achieved that. If you spend it, it doesn’t take away from your achievement because you’re getting something else in return.
To switch from MG to CoF, you have to pay the price of not using the items you used before. In return you get to benefit from CoF bonuses.
Do you think mastery respec (or any respec) should be free? Everything you spend is accumulated effort.
Would you feel better if switching factions instead cost 1B? Would that not be acquired effort?
Bought items aren’t rewards either.
You start with no faction. If you join MG your reward is being able to trade with other players. If you join CoF your reward is more/better drops and prophecies. Those are your rewards. Everything else is simply a consequence of playing the game.
If you were to say that unlocking rank 10 in a faction would give you an item, then that would be a reward. And even then it could very well be limited to that faction.
So no, bought items aren’t rewards. The reward is simply being able to trade with other players or having better drops.
You’ve tried pushing that notion before and it doesn’t hold up. It just comes across as an entitled Karen.
It doesn’t. The only gating you need is the one every market already has: if an item is hard to get and very sought after, it’s expensive and you need to farm a lot of currency for it. That’s all the gating it needs.
I honestly don’t understand why you’re trying to make MG better while making it absolutely atrocious at the same time.
Wouldn’t change anything. If I want to play a fast mapper I will never kill Uby. This is true in LE as much as in PoE. If I’m running a contagion build in PoE, I won’t ever kill Uber Maven, because that’s not what my build focuses on. Not to mention that I would likely not even be able to run my build at all if it requires anything from any content I can’t do.
Like I said, if my build required a delve item and I was forced to play delve until I hit a boss before I could buy that boss unique, I would immediately uninstall PoE.
Forcing players to run content they don’t like is a recipe for disaster, which I’m sure you’re aware of, so I’m not sure why you keep insisting on this.
That’s not even to mention players with disabilities as well, that have a harder time killing bosses. You’re immediately excluding them from ever getting it.
I don’t want to do delve even once. I hate it with a passion. I don’t want to do Ultimatum even once. I hate it with a passion. I don’t want to do Sanctum even once. I hate it with a passion. It’s because I’m forced to run that content even once that I am yet to return to PoE2.
It’s not. It was in the D2/D3 times. PoE changed that formula. Now the premise of the whole genre is “Here’s a bunch of very different mechanics for you to play with. You only have to play the ones you like”. And you’re trying to go back on that? After all your speeches about how we “should learn from what’s already been done that’s better”?
So I guess PoE is a bullet hell with itemization, then.
Why would it? If you pay 1M to respec your mastery, do you get it back after putting effort again? After farming 1M, do you end up with 2M?
That’s also lost progress.
Do you get back the skill XP you lose when you respec skills?
That’s also lost progress.
It can if you respec again. It can also be used on another character of the same faction.
If it means that much to you that you can’t bear the thought of not being able to wear it, then don’t respec. Just like, if it means that much to lose 1M for mastery, don’t respec.
Which you don’t see in ARPGs, only on regular SP RPGs, mostly because the items are in a fixed spot requiring that.
LE would be the first ARPG to require that and would be rightly flamed for it.
Of course the basic principle is working. It’s obvious to everyone it would work. Which is why it’s so baffling they didn’t immediately made everything async instead, but decided to still leave the door open for the toxicity.
There isn’t a single benefit to be had from keeping the old system around. Unless GGG is catering to the (not insignificant) portion of their playerbase that makes their living every season by abusing these toxic strategies.
I brought up that I thought everyone should be able to use the auction house as a baseline but MG is just much better at it and was told it was the worst idea ever.
No one’s argument’s against it convinced me otherwise in the least. The auction house should be for all and have MG get big bonuses pertaining to it.
There is only one argument for that: people that don’t want to trade would be forced to trade simply because it’s much more optimal to do so and not trading would be putting yourself at a disadvantage, which is what happens in PoE.
The whole point of creating CoF was to make it so that people that don’t want to trade would never be forced (in this case by not being able to at all) to trade.
Which is a potential possibility, absolutely sure! But even those items - at a normal playercount of 10k+ players actively playing - do have a turnover rate of several per day.
If we take shattered worlds for example it would mean a investment of 33,5 mil per item. You need to buy them up until they become substantially more then 33,5 mil, otherwise the effort would be easier handled by simply running a few tombs and selling the results, the time investment wouldn’t be worth it.
So for example you need to buy up 10 - as a arbitrary number - right away, which means 335 mil investment. Then you need to buy them up until your expected value you wanna profit from… let’s say 40 mil here, so a 6,5 mil profit per item.
We say until then we need another 5 items, and the middle amount of price is 36 mil for each (some lower, 1-2 higher ruining the average.
So that means 33% of your total capacity is beyond the base price set by the market. Which means to even get even you need to make up at least the difference, so we invested already 515 mil as a beginning, and need at least 34,2 mil per item.
Doable.
Then we take tax into consideration. We sell at 115% value to the return.
At 40 mil we actually actually 34,78mil per item.
So we make in reality: 0,58 million per sale.
That’s already a huge issue. Which is why taxation for a healthy system is so mandatory. It removed a portion of the resources (and 15% tax is uselessly low, we needed 75%) and it counteracts those methods. PoE for example has no taxation, making this possible as no loss is incurred ever.
Now we need to buy let’s say 2 items per day to keep this up. The new listing won’t be at 33,5 mil though… they’ll each cost 39 mil at least, reducing the profit per item with every you need to buy. And the moment you stop buying the price drops down towards 33,5 mil again gradually over a few days.
So this means every single day we loose 2 times 4,22 mil, hence 8,44 mil.
This means we need to sell our full stock in a ridiculously short timeframe, vastly below the timeframe the usual market turnover rate happens.
We could raise it to 50 mil… or 60 mil… but then the amount of people buying lowers substantially, near 0 even as the funds needed suddenly rise significantly, which means the majority of buyers wouldn’t have access and need more time to raise the funds.
This is in a system setup as recommended not a viable option in 99,9% of cases. As mentioned… some fringe-cases with high turnover rates exist for sure, but it’s really really hard to pull off.
Which is… flavor?
Umh… I dunno what else a ‘style’ is.
A ‘style’ is not including a difference in outcome, it’s flavor.
The follow-up is not a inherent aspect of a style, so ‘no’.
Not going further into it, I explained why not, use that premise.
And your follow-up argument is factually wrong. There have been game economies which are set up around that premise and they function. Hence it doesn’t uphold.
Game economies have options real-life economies have not. And they have limitations needed which real-life economies don’t need.
A very interesting topics for economic studies actually because of that exact reason. Because the fundamental laws are the same but the framework differs significantly, allowing to find new ways to create economies.
What you’re talking about would be a ‘price floor’.
You would be surprised how high that is set. Gold has no intrinsic value, hence it means when everything has a relative minimum price that items still retain the value enough to be bought. And since it’s supposed to stand in relevance to acquisition difficulty it’s generally easier to acquire the Gold in the respective timeframe.
It’s a so called ‘price floor’.
That’s a common functionality of several markets.
Agricultural markets for example have in several countries price-floor.
Books in my country have a price floor based on page count, unrelated to content.
Some raw material markets also have price floors which are mandated.
It’s not a new concept, it’s a core principle of enforcing reliability in core areas which would otherwise cause severe ripple-effects primarily.
In a game it’s meant to ensure that value is upheld and profit can be made. Since you cannot sell below a minimum price the influx of items reduces as your chance to sell reduces… but it also allows a guaranteed amount of value to be fluid at any time.
The current situation is that per sale we have a guaranteed currency fluidity of 2000 Gold, if you set the value higher it means the gold shifts in higher amounts simply, which allows fewer people to accumulate extreme value while more people on the lower end have a higher end-result comparatively to before.
Those are existing markety strategies to ensure a market isn’t growing ‘stale’, or to enforce a higher count of people to get a relevant remuneration. In our case it would be players not at the top of the market race to still retain profit options and hence proceed through the system when it would’ve otherwise grown stale (like a unique going to 2000 Gold despite being magnitudes stronger then a leveling unique at the same price).
What the heck are you even talking about?
Nobody would do the most powerful class besides Primalist? Suuuure
Absolute nonsense plainly spoken. Builds are chosen related to power, and secondary to enjoyment in general. Even if we would love for that to be switched.
And this would affect all classes evenly, so why the heck would it affect for example VK?
Fair point, forgot about that part.
It’s lizards with champions.
That’s the best strategy by magnitudes.
Leftover towards tomb improvements.
Potentially - if needed - Orobyss spawn and taking away a few points from the scaling of tombs.
True!
Which you use… where exactly after having your tabs?
Gambling for items?
Shatterings?
Lightless Arbour?
Gambling provides less during the rolling then simply running content with Porphecies.
Shatterings are plenty as soon as you are beyond the start, absolutely non-issue with a second character already.
Lightless Arbour is outscaled nowadays because of the lizards and tombs. Already at 300c.
Nope.
What I’m saying is:
‘You have 2 options to buy your TV’
‘Each option roughly takes you 50 hours per TV’
‘One option lets you get a full bonus TV every 500 hours from the other option’
That’s the state.
Oh right, forgot this was changed a looong while ago. Ages old info. My bad.
Long-term players invest around 3-4000 hours per year.
Non-casual ones but invested people.
Which rises it up to 10 minutes per echo.
At a 50% downtime we hence have a 5 minute echo, which is realistic, because tombs provide significantly higher Gold ratio as well actually and increase gold shrine chance since they have guaranteed shrines as much as I know (or at least never seen a single one without one in there).
I’ve only taken into consideration the absolute basis of gameplay, no major scaling which gives you much more Gold.
Dunno, but given we had not a single person several month into release of the tabs to reach the limit it was after that hence.
Which means at most 2 years if I remember right.
The premise was after finishing the stash tab grind.
In Legacy you only need to do it once after all.
And a large portion of long-term players actually plays Legacy and not Cycle currently as Cycle has no upsides of any kind besides a fresh economy… which is irrelavent unless you’re MG.
And now you can’t use item ‘X’ suddenly.
Taken away hence, you cannot use it.
You cannot make it usable either without changing the core premise of your gameplay.
That’s the mechanic.
A reward is a result, not the journey.
Every market has different types of gating, so that’s a nothing-burger argument.
Also absolutely not upholding if you look around at the different types of market restrictions existing. Both in real-life and in games.
And some people don’t want to run the campaign even once.
Should we allow them to skip it entirely?
Or should they have to do it once?
It’s not better, it’s different.
And LE doesn’t even remotely uphold any of the premises for player agency which PoE does. We’re years away from that at best, if it will even happen.
And loads of extra mechanics which aren’t! And bullet-heaven, not bullet-hell. Different genres.
Depends on the system.
Does changing mastery stop you from using your items? They might not provide the relevant bonuses but you can absolutey wear em and use em.
Do your items still retain value? You can still sell them after changing mastery, your value is not lost.
Can you do that with a faction change?
If you change to CoF there is no trade.
If you change to MG your items are non-trade anyway.
You lost the relevant value hence, they’re now worthless. Paper weight.
As much as I know LE is the only game which does reduce your level when respeccing as well. Which is something I talked about being a problematic thing. But EHG wanted to give you the allowance to change skills during content… for whatever reason as you can portal out to a town simply… instead of just enforcing switching in a town area only.
Never said that was a good thing either, did I? It’s a bad thing after all.
OSRS has a significant amount of content gating for example. Which is a prime example of one of the best RPG system on the market.
With their setup it’s problematic simply.
If the tabs would be freely able to be switched between being a merchant tab and a storage tab then fine… but it can’t.
A half-assed implementation, you’re absolutely right there!
It’s not flavor. Flavor is running the game with old graphics or new ones (like in D2R or the Monkey Island remakes). They have exactly zero effect on your gameplay.
Flavor is having pets or changing your portal skins. They have exactly zero effect on your gameplay.
Choosing trade over better drops isn’t flavor. It’s a gameplay style. It affects your game experience and the stuff you get from it.
Choosing to run a fast mapper over a slow bosser isn’t flavor. It’s a gameplay style. It affects your game experience and the stuff you get from it.
Choosing SSF, same thing.
Flavor is anything that is there just for the mood and that doesn’t affect how you play the game at all. It just makes shallow changes to make you enjoy it more.
A strawberry flavoured bubblegum and a melon flavoured bubblegum have the same calories on it. You pick the Flavor you enjoy the most. It doesn’t change anything else about the bubblegum.
A strawberry flavoured bubblegum or a strawberry flavoured lollipop are different styles of candy, though.
You did not. You came up with a notion that you see nowhere else in real life or in another video game.
I gave you plenty of examples in both real life and in games.
You have yet to provide me a single example in either that will support your statements.
I’ll even go further and say that if you implemented that even at a fraction in PoE, PoE would die because most players would leave. Because no one wants to have to work around that making hobbled builds that can’t use half the items until they do the content.
Name them. I’m not aware of a single one.
What you do have are games where some items aren’t tradable. There are none that I know of that require you to do the content before you can buy it. Certainly no major games did it. Maybe some games with half a dozen players.
And you didn’t even address the issue that this is only a gate for your first character. So all I need to do is finish Uby once, buy 20 Shattered worlds and my next 20 characters can have it without doing Uby.
It’s idiotic and only serves to push players even more into only playing specific builds they don’t want to play.
And don’t say that they just need to balance it. Even with the balance PoE achieved, plenty of builds will never be able to Uber Maven in the hands of a random player.
And even if it did, it would still force me to spec into boss killing when all I want is to play fast maps.
The whole idea is ludicrous and it baffles me how you continue to try to defend it.
Try suggesting that in the PoE forums and tell me how that goes.
Except that rarity and difficulty of getting it rarely has a direct correlation to the actual value. Meta builds will very often make an item extremely valuable while making a rare item totally worthless because no one plays that build.
For example, Stealth boots are very rare. Do you think people will be willing to pay 20 or 30 or 50M simply because they’re rare? No. They’d rather buy some boots that are much cheaper and do the job.
Do you know how many builds in LETools even use those boots? I’ll tell you: exactly 0.
So if I decide to want to have fun with a build around them I’m screwed because they’re more expensive just because of their rarity.
It doesn’t make sense, no one but you would be happy with this.
I really don’t understand how you can be so concerned with trying to save MG while at the same time defending changes that would effectively harm it in a huge way. Some even harming the game as a whole.
All of those examples are policies put into place to ensure that big conglomerates don’t sell below cost. Because big conglomerates often ran at a loss for some time in order to undercut their competition.
And even then, you don’t have an actual fixed value. You just have the stipulation that you can’t sell at a loss, nothing more.
This isn’t something that you will see in LE. Or in PoE.
What you’re proposing, in fact, is that potatoes cannot be sold for less than 1000 euros, even if the community values potatoes at 10 euros. Which leads to no one buying potatoes.
So no, it’s not a new concept. It’s just applied in an awfully wrong and unnecessary way here.
But for that you raise the minimum global cap only.
You can even set separate caps per rarity (like 10k for rares, 100k for uniques/exalteds, 1M for legendaries/LP uniques/double exalteds.
But you don’t decide what the value for items are. That’s the community’s job.
Did you lose the thread already? This all started with the premise that changes were made and VK now isn’t good anymore (which will happen). But if that’s too complicated for you, we can simply shift to Spellblades.
So, given the new change in the mastery for the same premise, and so you won’t get confused anymore, no one would play a spellblade in the first place because they would need to farm millions for an item that no one else uses but them.
Which means that no one would even place one on the market because it’s not worth spending one of your limited slots for an item no one will buy.
Lizards with champions is a good strategy if you have a fast enough build that can both deal with the champions and then chase the lizards. Otherwise you choose a different one.
Tombs is only if you like the content. If you don’t, you don’t use it.
And, more to my point, if you see woven tree suggestions by build creators, they all tend to be different, which was my point.
What difference does it make?
Maybe you’ll understand this way:
I can play a character without joining either faction until I have 500M gold. Then I join MG and immediately have uber gear. OH NOOOO!!! I’m double dipping factionless!!!
That’s how silly you’re sounding right now.
Wow, this is so wrong that I can’t even process it properly. So you’re saying that if you play CoF for a long time you’re making more gold than in MG, to the point where you get a bonus TV? Is that what you’re saying?
Because if you don’t play CoF, then you end up with way more TVs. You will make 500M multiple multiple times in the time it takes you to get that in CoF.
So sweatlords, like I said.
99.9% of players don’t even have more than 1k hours, 2k at most. Total. Over the years. Not just in a single year.
And if you’re a sweatlord you’re certainly not going to be wasting time on a very very very sub-optimal strategy.
That would imply that the persons that reached the gold cap actually had tab cap, which isn’t necessarily true. It’s quite possible the ones that reached gold cap skipped buying more tabs after however many they were happy with.
Not many people actually bother buying all 200 stash tabs, even if it were cheaper.
And, let’s not forget that earlier on there were a lot of things you could sell for a much higher gold cost.
You can, just not on that character. God you’re stubborn.
Will this make more sense to you?:
What you’re saying is the exact same thing as saying “I achieved level 20 in my runic invocation. I respecced to sorcerer and now I can’t use my level 20 runic invocation anymore”.
If you want to use runic invocation, don’t respec.
If you want to use your MG item, don’t respec.
The journey is the journey all the way to act 9. The reward is you choosing between MG and CoF.
It’s no different from many games requiring a quest before you can craft. Or even use the in-game traders. You finish the quest, your reward is being able to craft. Or being able to use the traders.
A mechanic can also be a reward. Which, in this case, it is. An exclusive reward of which you can choose only one.
If you have several equivalent alternatives? Yes, you should allow them to skip it entirely. You know, like GD did with crucible? You can play crubible from level 1 to level 100 and not once interact with the campaign. Even on your very first character ever.
So you want to create a completely new system, wasting months of development, only to scrap it altogether in a few years and replace it with something else?
Wasting more than a year of development combined? Which could be used instead to try to fix other things or work towards simply being there?
Seems like a good business strategy.
So, the same as LE, except LE doesn’t have as many mechanics yet (though it does have them)? Same concept, only differing in scale?
It stops you from using that gold.
Items are the exact same thing as gold. There is no fundamental difference between them. You can use gold to get an item and you can use an item to get gold. They’re a resource you acquired.
Paying 1M gold or paying an item are not conceptually different. They’re just a matter of scale.
So you mean that if I pay 1M I don’t lose the relevant value of 1M?
With the item you can actually get some value back. Not only can you still vendor it, BUT YOU CAN STILL USE THE F*ITEM ON ANOTHER CHARACTER. Where it will, presumably, still have the exact same value.
Or, you know, IF THE COST IS TOO F***NG HIGH, YOU CAN SIMPLY NOT RESPEC"!!
Same as a mastery respec. Don’t want to pay 1M and lose the relevant value of 1M? Don’t respec and make a new character instead.
There is absolutely zero difference between those 2 except in scale.
OSRS has content gating on their market similar to what MG ranks do. You need 20h, you need level 100, etc.
Nowhere in OSRS are you required to complete the content to get the item for that content.
They didn’t even have to do that. They could just do async trade already use the premium tabs as they do now and get rid of the sync. It’s not even that hard and barely anything would change at all.
It’s not. Like I said above, EHG could have simply made it so that everyone gets to trade and SSF gets full CoF bonuses. Would you be crying out that you want SSF bonuses in regular league as well?
The only reason they did factions was so that people that want to play CoF can still play with their friends instead of being forced to play alone. CoF bonuses only exist because some people don’t want to trade (50/50 when the poll was made). If there weren’t enough people that didn’t want to trade, CoF wouldn’t exist at all. You’d just get trade.
Yes, and the choice of which to pick is based on… flavor.
Because what you describe is not flavor but using different mechanics in the same framework.
The difference with the factions in LE is that they’re - once more - set up to be equivalent, hence to provide a choice without ups or downs related to them. In a utopian setting.
That this is not 100% achievable is and always was obvious, so we take those differences despite of it rather then because of it.
And when you try to make the exact same example but with ice cream you realize the calories are different.
And nonetheless the choice comes down to flavor… you don’t eat ice-cream to get nutrients, you eat it because it tastes great.
Your statement is: ‘Trading automatically leads to skipping content, it’s mandatory and infallible’
My statement is: ‘Trading is not automatically leading to skipping content.’
Now let’s prove your argument wrong:
You got 2 trading systems:
The first one is a classic trading setup without any major regulations related to content. For example you farm up some material which can be acquired at a low level area, do it a boatload and sell it. With that currency acquired you buy a item which drops from the highest content existing.
The second is a trading system with content gating. Every step along the way you unlock stuff. At the start when you can only access low level area stuff you can only buy low level area stuff. The second you progress to the next part in the progression line you achieve access to the available things there… and so on.
For example: You got a life-skill in a game like woodcutting. You can sell and buy oak logs at the start. Only when you reach the next step of your progression which would give you access to pine logs you can buy/sell pine logs. But you have to reach that stage first. YOu cannot interact or acquite the material before you reach the stage in progression where you would have access to it in some way.
Is this a possible setup? Yes/No
Since the answer is ‘yes’ it means it’s not inherent, hence you’re factually wrong.
Just because something is not generally done doesn’t mean the possibility and option doesn’t exist.
Your argumentation line is ‘because we only know steam power it means there cannot be electrical power as it’s not commonly used’ which is absolute bollocks.
As for real-life examples for such a system: There exist so called ‘premium systems’ which allow someone which has invested a lot of money/effort/time/and so on to acquire things they wouldn’t otherwise be able to acquire in this system. Be it access to more expensive books to lend in a library potentially, be it premium functions you can buy for a product as a customer or whatever else.
Those systems are gated systems in reality, based on a progression through said system. They lock ‘content’ behind a progression wall, you cannot get the respective thing you want before you don’t invest into it in some form.
The reasoning for those systems can be aplenty. From being hard to acquire things. Stuff which is not econimically viable in large numbers but provide a incentive, trust-based situations where you have to proof first to be able to handle whatever you get. Those are all exchanges, hence ‘trade’ in some form.
Just cause you don’t see it in the supermarket - because it wouldn’t make sense - doesn’t mean things don’t exist.
None which goes the market route, as general this is handled differently in most cases.
The common way to enforce that is by enforcing the inability to buy/sell items which can only be achieved by beating specific content. Hence enforcing the personal acquisition route entirely.
World of Warcraft.
Final Fantasy 14.
OSRS.
And so on.
The list of this type of limitation is aplenty.
What I recommend is reduced restriction simply. Hence easing up on a already existing gating system to make it better accessible for the genre.
This is instead of full scale inability to buy/sell those items to add the ability to sell those after beating said content once.
So don’t give me ‘no game does this’ because no game implemented that system… the core premise is widespread after all and it’s actually surprising that not a single game implemented it into their player-to-player trade mechanics yet, instead commonly going with the character- or account-bound method instead.
Can be for the first… or can be a per-character basis.
I mean… that’s really not hard to set up and is more related to EHG’s decisions then being a ‘this is the right way’ one.
Albeit I would argue that per League type and per account it should be done once only. Otherwise it enforces a ‘one character does all’ thing once again which extremely limits the directions of growth for the game in the future.
Welcome to the already existing situation!
You fail to realize what this actually means.
Items from a meta-build are hence simply above the minimum price, because it doesn’t affect supply/demand after all… it affects minimum price. If you can make with a item more then the minimum related to acquisition difficulty it’s a direct showcase of it being a highly sought-after item. So those are not affected.
Contrary on more rarely used items which would otherwise be at… for example 5k gold since barely anyone needs em… this enforces that dropping a relatively rare item will still provide you with a decent amount of return in value. The downside is you have a very slow turnover rate, hence it sits for a long time in the bazaar.
First of all… if nobody uses em then they are shit items. That means either the respective mechanics or the respective item need to be reworked, or changed in drop-rarity.
That’s first and foremost.
Secondly. A 2 LP STealth costs 500 mil. So we can say it has value definitely as nothing is substantially below that price (lowest 470 mil in Legacy). So it has value.
0 LP and 1 LP are worthless because the supply is so high that the market value crashes to less then 10k though.
Which is the exact thing such a system is supposed to counteract, to enforce acquisition to either happen personally or with respective viable investment for acquisition difficulty.
That’s all.
Would argue you gotta wonder why they are that rare then You know… balance!
You don’t drop utter garbage for the top-tier content in the game as that pisses people off… and you don’t drop the best item at the beginning of the game as that throws the whole progression overboard and hence the majority of engagement.
That’s a area of balancing, has nothing to do with the core premise of the market that acquisition difficulty should enforce a minimal price.
All of my examples for the game are balancing scenarios whcih ensure that people flooding the market don’t ruin the potential profit abilities of players following after.
Because long-term players with endless space on the market ignore not making profit as they have no use for favor anyway, hence undercutting their competition for the respective item.
Which is factually wrong.
The binding prices are a minimum price not allowed to be undercut, no matter what. For example a specific book in Austria has to be sold at a specific price, no matter how many are available or who sells it (excluding private sales).
So the stipulation states ‘You are not allowed to sell this below 14.99€’ for example. Sure, any shop can sell it for 15.99€ or 149.99€ even. But it’s not allowed to sell under.
This takes away a part of the free market competition based on supply/demand.
What exactly it does is to reduce supply of overabdundant items since less people list it as it won’t be getting sold, which brings the price closer to the actual acquisition difficulty.
That’s all. If demand is beyond acquisitin difficulty price nothing changes at all.
All it does is to enforce the ability for latecomers to still be able to make profit and work themselves up the ladder of the market progression, because you cannot realistically ever achieve buying a 1,5 bil item when all you are able to sell ever is friggin 5k items.
Book sales in Austria seem to be doing just fine despite of it
So if you don’t do outrageous prices which are utterly nonsense it upholds.
Only in a free market.
Nobody said a free market is a net positive for a computer game. It demands the respective rules to be followed to make it work to the dot… which is not the case though and would need a fundamental complete recreation of the market system with all auxiliary mechanics supporting it entirely.
Hence it needs to be not a free market.
Simple as that.
So? The cost for VK would then be solely based on the minimum market cap. Which would make it easier to acquire compared to the meta build of the time which would see demand outpace the minimum cap, hence you can progress faster comparatively nonetheless.
We already got one, namely 2k.
It’s just not enforced to have a cap at different acquisition rated items.
Is the 2k cap itself a positive or negative? It enforces a items to have ‘some value’ at least, despite being pitifully low, which is generally good. If it were 20 mil per item it would be bad.
Also not rocket science.
If you’re unable to do that by moving 50-100c down to your normal corruption then your build isn’t really viable.
They provide several hundred percent more overall loot return after all, there is not a single strat which stands in direct competition as it’s just that powerful.
Tombs provide the biggest amount of rare loot available in the base game content. Not only provide they waver idols and idol enchanting but also nigh always (I still think actually guaranteed 1) a champion, which scales directly with the lizard strat again, while also providing the highest return in rare runes from any content hence.
Which is even worse of a state that you describe. Because you get rewarded for not even aligning at all with anything You always dip into MG, you don’t always dip into CoF.
Comparatively to the time investment made into both factions at the time? Yes.
If you would only play MG you would get the results based on MG aspects, hence selling/buying items. Which is focused on Gold.
If you play only CoF then you get the results based on CoF, which is multiplication of drops in quantity and rarity. But you also get Gold on the side, which is primarily used in MG after all one-time investments are handled.
The point is you don’t need to invest, it just happens.
That’s the issue. Hence you don’t need to ‘waste time’ as you already use the time and it provides it by default as a result.
It’s just a bonus, which is a problem.
Sure, because that’s so smart!
At the time you had no use for Gold at all, hence the only use-case was for tabs anyway. Could at least buy 2-3 every time you get close to cap, which is sensible.
You’re saying that those people universally went with not acting, hence being lazy related to it.
Welcome to the shit-show which mastery respec introduced!
Which is why it was a mistake as one of the reasons, breaking one of the fundamental rules of games.
Yes, that’s the reward of reaching the end of the journey.
Now you pick and another journey begins to get another reward.
A mechanic is something you use, a tool.
What you create is the reward of using the tool.
If a tool costs something you need to have the journey to achieve the reward of buying the tool.
There can be more then 1 thing which is a journey and more then 1 thing which is a reward.
Crucible provides no boss-related drops and no dungeon-only drops.
Hence you do need to.
You’re enforced to do it at least once to get those results.
Same as with bosses in LE in that case.
I mean… you don’t need to play the campaign, the game offers everything in Act 1 anyway… you can go to level 100 there too!
I get what you mean but it’s not set up as a universal way, it’s not feasable for a majority of characters even in GD to get top-tier equipment.
No need to scrap it, changes are majorly not necessary.
And yes, welcome to game development, that’s how it goes. Different situation cause different actions to be taken. If you screwed your basis and players aren’t there then you need to bandaid the stuff until you can remove the bandaids.
Making bandaids takes time and effort, atrociously much even.
Should’ve planned properly beforehand hence!
Welcome to life!
Exchange it quite a bit there:
It doesn’t have the stuff yet to make it happen.
So you need to act like it doesn’t happen yet.
Right?
I mean… we can also start designing for stuff based on top of mechanics which don’t even exist and implement them. Wouln’t be a nice experience though if you can’t use it since the stuff it hinges on doesn’t exist, wouldn’t you say so too?
First of all: No, it doesn’t stop you from using your Gold, what?
Secondly: They’re also not the same thing.
Money is not the same thing as food.
You get food by spending money, but you cannot do the same stuff with money.
If you’re hungry you eat food, not money
One’s the resource you gained from investing effort, the other is the reward gained by using those resources you gained through investing effort.
You can remove money entirely and barter after all… hard to remove the food when you’re hungry though.
And what exactly is the value of 1 mil gold?
For example I know when I want a Cheeseburger from McDonalds in my country I need to pay 2,5€ for one.
So 100€ are 40 cheesburger.
But if it costs 5€ then my 100€ are 20 cheesburger.
So… does 100€ now have a value of 40 or 20 cheeseburger?
Value of a currency is relative to the usage possibility of said currency.
That’s why people burned money in venezuela to keep warm when the hyperinflation happened. Because it had no value.
Gold’s the same. No intrinsic value.
Items are not, intrinsic value. Unless EHG changes the content, then they’re relative too, which is the equivalent of changing how much calories someone needs to eat to survive. We can go down the whole line this way, that’s the basis.
Really? So there is not a single item which you cannot buy? All can be bought from the GE?
Hrmm… as much as I saw it last time there were actually! They’re account- or character-bound, you cannot give em away.
The last I checked for example a ‘Dwarven Multicannon’ can neither be bought, sold or exchanged in any way with other players. Which makes it a limited good, it’s 100% excempt from the market.
My suggestion is solely to have a similar system in LE based on personal achievement enforcement, to enforce usage of the content rather then dimpling in 100c… or heck… even level 90 areas forever.
So instead of a 100% exclusion from the market entirely I suggest a eased up method of that by allowing them to exist on the market but only after unlocking it by beating the content.
WoW has bound equipment.
Lost Ark has.
GW 2 has.
Heck… even in LE and PoE we have it with quest items. They are bound. You cannot for example sell your skill book you receive in PoE, for obvious reasons, but that enforces a limitation after all.
Those limitations are more severe then those I recommend.
It’s a less stringent system.
No it’s not. A strawberry ice cream has different calories than a melon ice cream. But a strawberry flavoured ice cream has the same calories as the melon flavoured ice cream. Because neither of those actually has any strawberry or melon in it. They have artificial flavour.
Flavour doesn’t affect mechanics or how you play the game. Gameplay styles/choices do.
No it’s not. That’s you shifting goal posts once again. My statement is “The purpose of trade if to allow skipping content”. Entirely different things.
I trade because I don’t want to do something. Forcing me to first do that thing is moronic.
That is not a player driven economy. That is a SP economy progression enforced by the game.
None of those require you to beat the content to be able to buy the content items in the market.
They have a time/level/whatever requirement, after that you’re free to buy what you want even if you never did that content.
The exception is WoW that doesn’t let you trade raid items. But they don’t require you to beat a raid to be able to buy raid items. They just don’t allow it at all for everyone.
So no, the list of this type of limitation is actually non-existent in player driven economies.
It’s not that surprising. Companies know that if they implemented this, players would simply leave the game.
Much like they would if you were to put this in PoE.
So, a meaningless gate that only serves to add unnecessary attrition that will irritate the players and cause them to leave? Gotcha.
No, you’re the one who fails to realize what this actually means. What you’re saying is that items that equally hard to get are equally valuable.
So let’s simply look at Lycia drops in PoE. She has an equal chance to drop any unique relic, which means that getting a Winds of Fate is just as hard to get as an Original Sin.
So, since Original Sin is a hard item to get, you place the minimum price at 20 divs (it costs 2k, so we’re setting it at 1% of expected value.
Winds of Fate costs 10 divs. If I want to make a Winds of Fate build, I’m already at a loss because it now costs double. So I simply don’t make a winds of fate build because I don’t think it’s worth it.
And since no one makes a winds of fate build because they don’t think it’s worth it, no one tries to sell it because it’s not worth taking up the limited slots.
This “solution” will simply kill meme fun builds. Only strong/meta builds will stay around or ones that don’t use rare uniques that have fringe uses.
There are literally hundreds of uniques in LE and PoE. The latter is likely in the thousands already. Are you trying to tell me that all boss uniques are widely used? Or are many (most?) of them fringe case uses?
Is anyone buying, though? That’s the question. When you consider the fact that there exist no build guides anywhere that use them, I’d argue that all of them are simply put up for sale to stay there forever.
No one is going to pay 500M to try a meme build.
No, 0LP and 1LP are worthless because no uses it. They have fringe case uses. Someone wants to have fun experimenting and making a meme build.
Those players won’t buy them if the price is high because they’re just trying stuff out for fun.
All it takes is for them to be a boss drop for them to be harder to get.
That is the case in every single game. A manastorm shield is much more common in PoE than a Light of Lunaris (both from the common pool) and yet a manastorm is worth 275c whereas a manastorm is worth 40c.
This is because you can’t balance every single item properly, especially when it’s players that decide what is actually valuable or not.
Because that is the whole point. The devs place a new unique, they’re all giggly excited about it, but the community doesn’t care about it. And yet, with your system, the item is now super expensive, even though it has no value. So no one sells it, no one buys it.
Your suggestion is the same as saying that all smartphones now have a 1000€ bottom price. Even if most smartphones aren’t worth as much.
If the market is flooded to such an extent that the item is basically worthless, then this does nothing to help the person that comes after. If there are already 1000 items for sale (although in reality it would be more like 10k, as we see in PoE), getting a 0.1% chance to sell isn’t worth it.
In fact, let’s look at PoE as an example. We have a common dirt unique. They’re being sold by the thousands for 1alch or less. Barely any is sold even then.
If you place the minimum price at 10c, no one will want to buy it. It’s not worth that much. They’d rather spend those 10c in something that is actually worth something.
You can’t combat market flooding. The only thing you can do is trying to prevent the flooding in the first place. So if there are already 500 other identical items for sale, you don’t let people put more up for sale.
Which would also fix nothing at all.
But that price doesn’t come from the regulation. The regulation just states you can’t sell for a loss. Which means that when the publishing company prints a new book, they assess the costs and decide on the price.
They’re not selling for 14.99€ because the law told them that that book has to cost 14.99€. They’re selling for 14.99€ becase the law told them that they can’t sell at a loss.
The laws are put in place to prevent conglomerates from underselling the competiion at a loss to drive them out of business.
So obviously the law can’t have a fixed value in there. Otherwise you’d have to update the law several times a year.
Which is not what you’re doing. You’re making blank statements about the minimum price of items based solely on difficulty of acquisition. But their value isn’t tied to difficulty of acquisition. It’s tied to the value the community decides.
So you either have the devs update all the prices on the fly several times per season, or you’ll have outrageous prices which are utterly nonsense.
As demonstrated by the winds of change/original sin example above.
Unless your build is a totally viable slow ST build which has a hard time chasing lizards.
Or a reflect build before the new chest, which couldn’t hurt the lizards at all, despite clearing 500c without a sweat.
What does that have to do with what I said? I hate tombs, I don’t want to run tombs, I won’t use it. Who cares if it’s the most efficient strategy? I don’t like it, so I won’t run it.
Also, tombs don’t have a guaranteed champion. Cemeteries have a higher chance, but even then you might not get a champion either.
You have weird ideas of what double dipping is. I guess that’s why all your suggestions have it.
Probably did. But they did reach the cap before buying stash tab limit.
After all, there really isn’t much difference between having a bunch of gold that you have no use for, or having a bunch of empty stash tabs that you have no use for.
At least if you saved the money and EHG added something where you could use that money, then you’d already have it. Which seems like a more sensible thing to do, especially when you consider that many people don’t want 200 tabs because they don’t like to have too much clutter in their stash.
No, that has nothing to do with why mastery respec was a mistake. That is a simple side-effect of respec that all players know about because every single game does the same thing. You respec, you can’t use the thing you had specced before.
Like in warhammer 40k inquisition. You can join one of the factions and you can put points into that faction’s rewards. If you respec into the other faction, you lose access to those rewards and you get new ones.
No. Now you got your reward, you use it to start progressing. The trade/drops is the reward. Using them doesn’t give you rewards, it gives you progression.
Otherwise everything is a reward and spending any resources is lost progression. Gold drops are your reward for killing a monster. That means passive tree respec is a loss of an acquired reward. We have to immediately change it.
You actually don’t. You can play the whole game as crucible. You just don’t get the other items and you build around what you have.
If you play for 1k years, sure. If you mean you can get to level 100 in any meaningful time before you die, then you can’t. Because act 1 doesn’t offer you enough XP for you to do that. Whereas crucible does.
Except your bandaids will all simply cause more players to leave. I guess the 3 people left will be happy with it, though.
Sure it does. In PoE you can finish the campaign and then only do maps forever and ever and ever and you can get the items from any other mechanic without ever interacting with them.
So it’s a bullet heaven which has heist+sanctum+ultimatum+a bunch.
In LE you can finish the campaign and then stay doing monos forever and ever and ever. And you can buy items from every other mechanic without interacting with them.
So it’s a bullet heaven which has dungeons+arena.
It has less, but it still has them. It’s the exact same situation other than scale.
It stops you from using the gold you spent, obviously. You can’t spend it on anything else.
You seem to have missed that metaphor.
If you make money you can buy food. If you make food you can sell for money.
It’s not a reward. It’s changing one resource for another. Everything you get in the game is progress.
1M obviously. Just like that item you bought for 1M has the value of 1M.
Items only have the value we atribute to them. They’re no different than currency. Which is why several products have failed miserably in the market because people didn’t give them value.
But let’s engage in a thought experiment then. You say that the problem is that you are giving up your rewards (they aren’t, but lets move past that). And that gold isn’t the same as an item.
So having to pay a cost of not using your items is unacceptable.
Now, for the purposes of this experiment, I’m going to do you a favour and say that the devs listened to you and fixed MG and CoF and now each has a separate currency.
Now let’s change the respec cost. Instead of paying with not being able to use your items, let’s change it to 1B gold.
With that gold you could buy 5 times your whole gear. However, this is an acceptable price now, because it’s just gold, right? You can still use your items.
Items that aren’t available at all for trade are a completely different thing than items where you have to complete the content before buying.
Items are either available freely or aren’t at all. This players accept. Gating their sale behind having to do the content isn’t something players will accept.
Especially because this will immensively benefit the top 1% players. They will be able to finish all content much faster, thus they have early pickings of the best stuff, before any other player is even able to buy them, if they even can at all.
Players won’t accept that. Players accept that you can buy everything from the outset if you want (MG/PoE). Players accept that you have to do the content every single time if you want to get the item you want (CoF, those examples you mentioned).
They won’t accept having to do it once before they can buy freely.
You either can buy or you can’t. Gating it behind skill/knowledge (which is what you’re effectively doing) will only exclude non-grinders.
A player has slower reflexes and can’t kill a boss? Shut out of the best items forever.
A player just wants to have fun with a weak build? Sucks cause they can’t even get the items they need for it to function in the first place.
You solution just creates more inequality in favour of the 1%. They have no restrictions. It’s everyone else that has them.
The purpose of trade is to exchange value in some way.
Not more not less.
Just because it’s common doesn’t mean it becomes true.
One person sees more value in doing ‘xyz’ and another sees more value in ‘zyx’. Hence they exchange the respectively needed results to be able to do whatever they see as more valuable related to their time more, hence deriving more value from their invested time.
So?
What’s the point there? Nobody ever talked about it having to be a full one. It can solely be a partial one, and that’s often better then having a full-on player driven economy, especially since a full-scale one demands high amounts of knowledge and finetuning to work properly, which is usually only of major importance when the trading aspect is the primary thriving factor of a game.
Albion Online for example is a good example there since everything is created and removed by player interaction, hence supply/demand play a rather extreme role comparatively.
Eve Online is as well.
On the other side OSRS is a vastly less player-driven experience in total, which doesn’t make it worse… I would argue the trading experience itself is vastly superior to LE.
When quoting you generally include the context instead of ‘conveniently’ leaving out the sentence pre-ambling it.
Is to be taken in conjunction with it, otherwise it’s senseless.
Actually they do. If you’re simply a part of the raid (being a useless leech or the one saving the whole raid several times doesn’t matter) then you can trade rewarded gear during that for several hours with the ones which were in the group.
So it’s a partial system to be exact. Which is easing on the maximum limitation possible (not existing at all) quite a bit already, it also eases from ‘nobody’ towards ‘your group’.
Expand it further and voila… you got the suggestion I made.
Floor-price. That’s a important term.
Not equally valuable.
Value can exceed floor-price.
Value cannot fall below floor-price.
It is above 1000, yes, around 1400 if I remember right.
Many, yes.
So?
Those drop to basically no price, hence they’re ‘filler’ material for empty tabs, that’s how people use such items. Or they’re corruption fodder since with corruptions they can become quite valuable suddenly.
Also some of those items are intentionally designed to be garbage, to increase the overall variety in loot pool simply. Much like ‘light radius’ is one of those garbage affixes which is solely intended to buffer the total amount of affix count available for rolls. GGG follows the methodology of ‘if there’s big wins you gotta have big losses as a possibility too, evening out somwhere in the middle’ with every individual system separately not being too massive in RNG seen by itself.
Exceptions apply.
Obviously yes, otherwise the available count of items would be higher and the price hence lower.
But since only a few are listed and the acquisition rate is not utterly atrocious (1 in 117) this means that indeed there is a turnover rate existing. It’s quite low I imagine though.
Yes, and that causes supply to become higher then demand.
The obvious outcome.
Which crashes the price.
Which makes the acquisition rate compared to the supply/demand position nonsensical.
Which is a net negative in the way LE’s system is set up.
Were it set up differently then it would be a different argument there and yours likely holding true even, the chance would be very high even.
But EHG designed the game as they designed it… so since trading is above the drop-system we gotta work with the drop-system in mind… not that the drop-system is in a great state either, but at least that one works.
Exactly! You’re 100% right!
First of all… that doesn’t stand in the way of a minimum price. The usage-case would simply drop a bit, but there’s always ‘someone’ who does try stuff out, no matter the price.
Secondly, it’s a great feedback mechanic, if the turnover rate is miniscule, acquisition rate is high but the listing case is also very low and still demand doesn’t catch up… then something is awry in that regard and balancing is to be applied.
And for everything else if the floor-price is set accordingly there is no effect in the first place. Set it to 10% of the expected price - as you mentioned above - and suddenly Stealth would be instead of a floor price of 10 mil at a floor price of 1 mil in our example. And 1 mil is acceptable indeed while it’s definitely a boatload higher then ‘5k’ anyway, allowing a single sale happening to provide the respective owner with 200 times the revenue otherwise possible for them. So we need only 1/200th of the listing to happen anyway as this would keep the fluidity at total the same.
In reality usually the amount of currency in motion this way is increased though rather then reduced.
Yes, that’s called a price-floor.
And it’s a unreasonable one.
Now imagine instead it’s set at 100€, and no company is allowed to sell smartphones for 0€ together with their contracts, a new one always costs 100€ minimum. And that’s a very reasonable price-range for a mobile phone to exist.
It does since a large majority of people stop listing when they have no chance to sell a item. Or they exchange it with something as time passes (and the item isn’t sold) which does have a higher chance to be sold.
This methodology is used already as a artificial limitation of supply.
Yes, filler items. Got nothing for 1c? Throw in stuff for 1 alch. Got nothing for 1 alch? Throw in something for 1 jeweller. Below usually nobody goes. Jewellers usually also don’t happen anymore since the ceiling rose.
Since the limitation in market space is relatively free (you can buy as many tabs as you want) there’s a good chunk of people which have 100+ tabs available which they fill up completely with chunk and solely play hideout warrior.
If you fix the amount of listable items accordingly low (for example 100) this methodology doesn’t work, you have to exchange the items which are worth nothing or simply don’t sell with those providing a better chance to do so.
This is actively combating market flooding as you don’t even get the opportunity to flood that much.
I mean… I alone am currently above 65 times the from me suggested market limit, slowly sinking as random overpriced stuff is bought for some nonsensical reason.
Not directly, the regulation doesn’t state the cost itself, obviously so. The publisher does.
The price itself in this case is one the publisher sets, which is substantially above the loss-rate anyway, decent revenue.
The shops then are enforced to follow that, which means the regulation enforces the initially set price to be upheld.
Yes, it can be.
But it’s not guaranteed.
For example the mass amount of sales for books in Austria happens nowadays through Amazon and some larger storefronts.
Specialized libraries actually sell books often at a steeper price without providing any extra service or upsides. Custom ordering is also possible in the large-scale stores by now. Amazon always has stuff available in general. E-Books are also enforced to be sold at the same price by now, so not even those are any different.
But still many people buy from the libraries themselves as the environment is simply a more enjoyable one for enjoying calm reading, allowed to sit down and have a calm area you can enjoy reading in. Which makes it possible to even go with a premium there despite not needing it, it’s often only 1€ more after all.
It’s used as well to remove the option of scalping, hence buying up in bulk as bulk-prices don’t get lower. Buy 1 book? Same price as buying 1000 books. Wholesale prices simply don’t exist, that removes the ability for the large conglomerates to even reduce the prices if they wanted to undervalue them, it would provide a permanent ongoing loss in that case as costs stay roughly the same for them.
Yes, and that one doesn’t have to be a nonsensical range either
If we go with that argumentation line then any downsides which are limitations - like the inability to use items from the other faction - would also be senseless.
You based your argument on the premise that different varieties of weaver setups exist because none is clearly superior.
Now argue that you instead wouldn’t like it, hence even with higher rewards you wouldn’t do it.
You can’t have it both ways.
Either your argument upholds that weaver setups are based upon results and they don’t have any superior one which allows the variety.
Or you gotta accept that there are superior methods simply but people don’t pick it anyway because of fun.
The second would open a can of worms though. Because if we need to limit the factions because people would choose the way against their enjoyment commonly then we would also need to ensure different weaver setups to be rather even as otherwise people would align with the superior method primarily and ruin their fun this way. And the existence of exceptions is because of the few which aren’t falling prey to this issue.
Ok, in that case… if you don’t wanna kill the bosses in my suggestion then you just don’t do it and play without the items they provide
Same thing.
Sorry, the ‘3 people left’ situation has already started after the release of 1.0. It’s been a singular large spike and has gone downhill substantially from there.
Keeping the course is scraping along a iceberg, you either steer away quickly enough or you accept the full-on collision which poses less danger then ripping apart the whole side of your ship and sinking.
Yes, because it has been enabled to be able to trade content. Since then it upholds mostly (with a few exceptions still). This was not always the case. And actually one of the strongest times of GGG was before it was included to exist (though to be fair here it’s not the root cause as to why fluctuations happened).
You spent the gold already though? You used it hence? I mean… making a new character also doesn’t mean you have lost all the gold you invested, your character is still there and all the stuff still available.
The only situation where your character still exists but you cannot keep using it is mastery respec. And even then it’s a distinct choice of ‘I will give up my build’ entirely. Which comes with the expectation of needing different stuff.
In a faction change you keep your build… you just cannot use your items anymore
Yes, because money is a representation of value. It has no value, but it represents it.
Your item has value as it directly enables you to do stuff. No item no killing mobs.
If you’re broke you can still kill mobs, no matter your balance you can do the exact same.
Same with food. You can eat food, it has inherent value from use.
Money has not.
You can exchange actual value into perceived value, but that doesn’t guarantee the recovery of the actual value at any time.
This is and always has been a base premise of money, and it’s a reason as to why the richer you are the less perceived value you own and the more is put into actual value things percent wise (assets and goods).
And that value is a direct result of the amount of Gold we can get in a specific timeframe versus how useful and how common that specific item is.
A useless item will always be worth basically ‘nothing’. No matter if we get a lot or little Gold.
A useful item has a value attached relative to it’s acquisition rate and the acquisition rate of Gold. The more useful the higher the related value.
Actually yes, because it present a position where you can actively have a reasonable position to not have a downside.
If you’ve played up items which are in cummulation worth of 1B or more then the 1B cost does sustain your already achieved rewards. It’s a opportunity cost hence. While senselessly high it’s still a feasable method at that point. For anyone below it is not.
And that’s where the situation for us is entirely different.
A item is a item. The ability of what you can do with said item is increased or reduced. If you got no trade system at all you can only have personal interaction, if you have trade you can exchange other value for the value it represents.
The limitations underlying that trade system are of no matter, it’s already better then ‘it isn’t possible at all’ for the player.
To uphold the possibility of having value attached to beating any content - which not anyone will be able to after all - you need to have some form of boasting power for it. This is why so many things cannot be freely exchanged, it would invalidate the achievement of doing it and hence the sense of progression in a major way.
In this case I gotta ask: So?
Effort and dedication are to be rewarded. Do you want the 1% to dimple around at the same playing fields as the ones which can barely get a build together or don’t care about game knowledge at all?
It’s like saying a professional athlete has to compete at the same level as some random person… otherwise it would be unfair to the random person.
Effort is to be rewarded. The scale of the reward is solely up for discussion.
) so there won’t be that many coming into the market all the time. If you choose one where you only need to buy 2-3 per day, then you can hoard it all yourself, create even more scarcity so the prices soar and then you sell for however much you want.
You know… balance!