Which is RNG and has not to do with the topic, there’s albeit also systems to demand things to stay inside a range, but as you said… besides the issue.
It’s solely about the ‘50% chance’ comment. Is your distribution line there? Yes? Then you got it.
Is it not? Then you don’t got it.
It’s a really simple problem if you reduce it. Most problems are really really simple… but it’s always a big deal to talk about for some reason.
The problem is that it is not that simple. That was exactly my point.
If we talk about static bosses with static difficulty and static drop tables and static/fixed amount of work for another boss fight. Yes it is simple.
But its not.
Shade of Orobyss is a boss which has 3 major factors:
Those are the factors for one singular kill.
Multiple kills over a timeframe has even more factors, because reestablishing a new echo web takes some time and based on your build and strategy, this varies a lot as well.
One of the major factors is the player skill to determine which web has a good chance for a higher shade or not. (Sometimes you get unlucky with all the Shade blocking the way early and its not worth it trying to uncover a +12 Shade and just do the +10 Shade and do another Echo Web).
We can’t condense all these factors into one singular “Does a player should get item X within playtime Y”. Too many external factors.
Yes, so it’s all a multiplier, isn’t it? And that multiplier comes from somewhere, hopefully a informed decision as to why it’s the number it is and not done willy-nilly.
So if EHG balances things for 300 corruption with a 10 corruption value Shade with 50% extra inc rarity of any nodes affecting it… then that’s what we can go from at least. That’s the ‘basis’.
Does something like this exist? Has EHG told us? I don’t know.
Should it exist? Absolutely! Because you can balance around that. All your curves, all your linear lines… all of that can hinge on 1 single point in time and you can make it work.
So while the specific values are a point for discussion to get it right… the core starting point is not. That’s an easy thing.
Do you have it or not?
And then you discern the next thing. Which curve needs which number to then provide the best feeling. Loads of research being done around those things… that’s where you get your next stuff from.
Or… you move blindly and flail about! Your choice, always.
Split your ‘huge issue’ into ‘small parts’ and things turn from ‘insurmountable’ to ‘a difficult thing’ or even ‘easy’ suddenly.
Knowledge is power.
I’ll argument we can get closer and closer to this:
And with that we can get a range to work in finally. As much should be possible nowadays, harsh? Sure… doable? Yes.
I don’t disagree with anything you said here.
But with all of this my answers to the question remains the same:
There is no answer to that question.
And we as players should not know about the exact balancing decisions EHG did.
And EHG should not tell us anyway.
Things like drop chances are still very much a “feeling” thing and EHG needs to properly takes all the reports into account and what they want the game to be.
And there is no right or wrong way to do this. Even if 90% of the playerbase feel like getting Item X in Timeframe Y is impossible or not statisfying, that might be exactly where EHG wants it to be.
Do you have a source for that info? Just curious here.
And as a side joke: 6k+ hours in PoE, never touched a HH 
You are the embodyment of a causual!
Why not?
Even if it’s a ‘feeling’ thing and they don’t have the answers.
Why not? Maybe a player gives you the ‘eureka’ moment with an argument about it and then ‘you got it’.
EHG provides a product. I’m a customer.
They can do whatever they want. And as a customer I’ll answer every change with whatever I think about that.
If they don’t provide me with a product where I agree with where they want it to be I’ll leave. Simple as that.
Keep enough people to have your product prosper, make compromises with everything where it leads to not prospering anymore.
Tough luck if it goes against your choices as a provider of a product. Either stop doing it completely if it goes against what you wanna provide or you’ll simply do it without money.
Welcome to the world 
Ooofff…
There were several talks about balance overall, it mostly comes up in interviews with Chris Wilson.
The topics I remember were ‘Valdo’s Puzzle Box’ for example had initially a balance related to be a 1 to 1 drop-rate to the rarity of the items inside. They had to change that since everyone wanted a Mageblood, and hence decided to move this multiplier for quantity over to instead decide on which map is rolled, so you get more boxes but the chance for the mageblood is instead miniscule.
Also there was a talk about Headhunter and Mageblood a good… year or more ago where it was mentioned that all uniques are balanced around one category to each other.
And for overall balance for items it was mentioned that they adjust numbers so ‘a few of mirror-tier items per league’ happen. Which then was said happens based on general time needed for a player to reach specific content and farm specific content.
So overall it’s all hinged together, obviously so or their methods wouldn’t work for so long-term.
It’s always snippets like they happen in Mike’s streams only, so finding a specific one is a nightmare since they’re not tagged either 
Yes and no. While yes we as a community are customers. As a developer you also make and create a game you like. Even if that does not bring the most amounts of new people in.
Software development and especially games are very different from physical products as well.
Yes that is why we are here in a feedback forum.
Yes and that is your right. But this is also something the devs need to balance, because not every aspect of the game (or software) needs changing just because one person, or a portion of the consumer (customer) want it to be that way. Especially in a video game where the goals and aspirations are set to certain intention it might be that is simply doesn’t fit certain customers.
Also there migth be customers that don’t like specific aspects of the product, but the overall package is still good enough that they keep using it.
They never did this to the maximum extend and I am very happy with that. there is something such as too much. It is entirely possible to stray away from your original design, vision and philisophy that it makes it a worse product (in some aspects), even though it might be commercially more successful.
That is very black & white and does not really reflect reality in many cases.
You can not appeal to a large portion of potential customers, while still making enough money to sustain the project.
I am glad the world isn’t the same everywhere 
Are they?
Only by law.
Is that law for now good?
No, it’s shit.
I decide as a customer if I use a product first and foremost, and since we’re in a ‘live-service game’ I’ll also go ahead and verbally kick their door in the second any change happens which removes the product from my initial informed buying decision I made.
But this is about the content of the game here, not about the current ongoing ‘Stop killing games’ initiative or similar things.
I got a lot to say about customer rights related to digital goods and all the ways it goes utterly wrong ever since a License only had one single aspect in it stating ‘This is a copyable good, every right beside distributing and keeping a personal copy is to be upheld. Distribution is only allowed in a pack with every copy created’.
That’s it for that topic from my side.
It’s a problem with the live-service model.
What if I bought into 1.0? I hate the new balance in 1.1 now.
Am I entitled to get my money back because it’s not a state anymore I enjoy? I after all bought into a perpetual license at another time when my informed buying decision is based on the state of the game at that time. Or the promises of what I’ll be delivered before release.
But as said, different topic.
If it goes by me every live-service game which is no rental has to provide every version playable at any moment to me from the second I buy the product. Because I paid for ‘the product’ and not a transformed something.
Oh! I disagree!
If you wanna do something as the dev and not enough people stand behind it or actively leave you got no money
You either work without money or you stop working on it.
Supply/demand.
There is no other outcome.
Oh… but it is! In some places it’s worse then the described things, it’s just that many think they actually have more then they even do.
We all solely work on the hopes and dreams that LE doesn’t tomorrow say ‘yeah, we messed something up, goodbye, we’re shutting down!’ and loosing access to what we paid for.
That’s literally all we do. Thinking it’s anything more is a pipe-dream in the current state of the world of software.
You own nothing and you’re even happy to have paid for it!
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.