Why is GGG so against people getting level 100?

I emailed GGG about a year ago in this issue and Chris Wilson was kind enough to email me directly . I still think the best solution would be to simply remove the level cap. In my original email I pointed out how Poe is essentially Diablo 3 done the right way and one of the integral parts of Diablo 2 was leveling and the ladder. Unfortunately in diablo 2, the passive tree was very limited in terms of how points would affect you. After lvl 96 a lightning sorc simply had no useful things to invest passive points in, thus severely limiting the options and need for increasing the maximum level. Path of Exiles passive system however is almost the opposite. The more passives you get in Poe the more possibilities open up in terms of character design and goals. I feel no lvl cap would also help to balance out leveling amongst top players. Currently players going for the number 1 spot can just no life grind for 3 weeks like Etup. Hit lvl 100, then stop totally. With leveling being unlimited, it becomes more of a game of pacing yourself. Then they can adjust lvl however they want because there would be no ceiling for a characters potential. When I emailed him Chris responded kindly and said they might consider it. For the sake of the game I hope they find a solution such as this.

"

groelle wrote:

etup is almost 99.

2 weeks = 14 days, which is a few. from ob to first level 100 it was like what? half a year? a year?

Those who have the time to do so will still achieve 100.

All it really did was block out another section of people really.

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

All this arguing over some arbitrary numbers called "levels". Who cares if a map with "level" 80 is balanced around a character being level "95". They're just stupid numbers.

Yeah! What is a "level," anyway, but an abstract quantification of our addiction? What is the character, but an avatar of our alter-ego? Or is it our id? What's in a number? Or a name? Where have all the flowers gone?

But back to serious discussion: Level 100 should be extremely hard - for sane human beings who "only" play thousands of hours. I'm totally happy with players choosing a soft cap somewhere around 90. What I'm not happy with is GGG balancing obsessively around streamers and no-lifers, who will accomplish whatever near-impossible goal set for them regardless.

It would be OK if leveling 90-100 were slightly easier - either through more map drops (high level maps are a challenge anyway, so perhaps the reward should be faster leveling) or less EXP penalty or whatever. It really wouldn't matter if some small additional % of the population achieved level 100, and perhaps it would lead to less frustration on the part of everyone else.

But level 100 isn't so much the issue as access to content. If players are only meant to get to a soft cap somewhere in the high 80s or low 90s, then those players should have access to at least 78-79 maps so they can actually make use of these builds against challenging enemies!

Ill never understand it.

100 is just a number. You dont need to reach it, you dont get praise nor any rewards. Yet threads like this keep popping up again and again.

Just play the game as long as you have fun, and then stop. Whats the point to force yourself into something that - as you have noticed yourself - is not going to work without horrible grinding?

"

demon9675 wrote:

Yeah! What is a "level," anyway, but an abstract quantification of our addiction? What is the character, but an avatar of our alter-ego? Or is it our id? What's in a number? Or a name? Where have all the flowers gone?

Yay. That's the post of the day for sure. I tip my hat for you, good sir. :D

"

Charanjaydemyr wrote:

"

bhavv wrote:

My issue regarding this is how higher level maps (77-82) are balanced around being content for level 95+ characters to play in terms of difficulty, as opposed to being suitable for a character of the same level as the map.

This is an unfair mechanic for sure.

Agreed, if that is truly what is happening.

Sadly it is.

When you have monsters hitting you for 5k minimum of life in 73 maps, that is not balanced for level 73 players.

Oh look, same old people that don't have high level characters are being ignorant, as always.

"

bhavv wrote:

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

All this arguing over some arbitrary numbers called "levels". Who cares if a map with "level" 80 is balanced around a character being level "95". They're just stupid numbers.

All the players with lvl 85+ characters trying to play such maps care.

As do those of us who haven't had the chance to see the new maps. I want to see the new shiny stuff :(

Ran a Volcano, it was a bit 'meh'.

All the philosophy aside, as entertaining as it is, there are some that would like a couple more points to complete their build or try an experiment, or what have you. It is not about reaching an arbitrary number. At least not for me.

The entire reason people love Diablo2 and it lasted so long was that they rushed through the boring 'content' often boosting and getting carried - to hit level cap ASAP. Then you have fun farming and turning your character into the most rediculously strong character you can. THAT is the entire concept of an ARPG that is beloved. What we get is a bastardized MMOishARPG which uses terrible RNG absolutely everywhere to PREVENT you from reaching the pinacle.

Now if they wanted true progression they would remove iLevel cap for maps (not for items) and have map level be based on iLevel. Then you would have one of the best ARPGs that ever existed. Testing your build in a level 175 map with white mobs that hit as hard as Vaal with 1 million HP would keep people playing literally FOREVER. (map drops would have to not suck of course) Why wont they? because it breaks the illusion of viabilty. People would quickly realize that 90% of the skills and builds are junk. We already see it how many builds get murdered in Act 4 Merciless.

tldr; PoE is not a Hardcore ARPG. Its a slot-machine parading as an MMO.