Map drop rates are a real problem

"

davidnn5 wrote:

"

MatrixFactor wrote:

Deterministic vs Stochastic progress in gear/maps doesn't matter as long as you accept trade and group play (in order to balance for variance). If you refuse to trade, you shouldn't ask for GGG to make it easier for you at the expense of others who do use everything they can.

IMO one of the few useful things support could do with this forum is to censor suggestions that people stop asking for X/Y/Z.

How can arguing to change the status quo be good, but arguing to keep it be bad.

Your other point, about chasing people not quitting makes sense. But the conclusion to following that line of reasoning is D3.

"

MatrixFactor wrote:

Variance is catalytic to grouping and trade and punishing to solo self-found. If players refuse to take advantage of all the tools and complexities the game has to offer, why should they be able to achieve the same level of anything as those that do?

"

MatrixFactor wrote:

Why are you so obsessed with RMT. Just don't do it and trust that GGG will eventually ban people who do. Problem solved.

Not surprising that such an elitist attitude would be coupled with a see-no-evil denial of the corrupt side of the game's pay2play underworld.

"

Cherd wrote:

"

Sogolon wrote:

About map drops:

A problem is that you need increased item quantity on your gear to sustain it. So GGG balances around people running with iiq. The result is that if you don't run iiq you're stuck at 74-77 maps that are very trivial, even alched.

I know that map drops are affected by iiq, but no, I do not have a shred of iiq on my gear. I've always preferred to focus on the build as opposed to iir-iiq. It kinda sucks that it is inadvertently a requirement for sustaining endgame. Besides, it is very atypical of me to play in Standard. Getting iiq on gear in leagues is pretty jank.

Are you both playing 1st week in PoE? Quantity from gear doesnt affect map drops, only quantity on the map you are running does. Gear's quantity affect more gear drop, doesnt affect currency as well

"

MatrixFactor wrote:

How can arguing to change the status quo be good, but arguing to keep it be bad.

Your other point, about chasing people not quitting makes sense. But the conclusion to following that line of reasoning is D3.

I don't follow your intuitive leap about self found mixed with trading equalling D3. Divination cards do not equal the death of trading.

There's a difference between saying you like the current approach and telling people to flat out quit asking or arguing for something because they're wrong and the devs have said so many times before. The latter is tantamount to saying 'shut up already, stupid'.

And let's be clear - whether implicitly or not, your endorsement of the current approach means you agree that a zero sum game of trade feeding upwards to a minority is preferable to an egalitarian approach (to content) of people at least being able to access all content without barriers. Noting that content is different to gear for many reasons that don't need to be discussed here. To be clear, that approach is basically with all things equal, including character power, still only certain people should ever get to 100 because they could not only clear the content (many can) but also played the trade mini-game.

GGG has to some extent created a circular issue here. As there's a level 100 cap they feel the need to slow progression to 100; they do so via trade which centralises higher level content towards the richer few; they don't achieve their goal because the richer few are always going to be relatively richer and accessing tier 15 maps much more often than the majority and have better and much better tweaked builds than the majority; they nerf xp and access to content because of the few. The many feel disenfranchised.

Problematic. As I and many others have said many, many times before, re-looking at 100 and its value to this game would be a good start. Beyond anything else, encouraging people to stop playing characters at 100 is probably not a good thing, notwithstanding that GGG loved D2 and MTG and struggle sometimes to take their own approach.

"

The_Great_Alex wrote:

"

Cherd wrote:

"

Sogolon wrote:

About map drops:

A problem is that you need increased item quantity on your gear to sustain it. So GGG balances around people running with iiq. The result is that if you don't run iiq you're stuck at 74-77 maps that are very trivial, even alched.

I know that map drops are affected by iiq, but no, I do not have a shred of iiq on my gear. I've always preferred to focus on the build as opposed to iir-iiq. It kinda sucks that it is inadvertently a requirement for sustaining endgame. Besides, it is very atypical of me to play in Standard. Getting iiq on gear in leagues is pretty jank.

Are you both playing 1st week in PoE? Quantity from gear doesnt affect map drops, only quantity on the map you are running does. Gear's quantity affect more gear drop, doesnt affect currency as well

Quantity on gear affects the overall number of items dropped by monsters, including currency and divination cards, but not maps.

The quantity and rarity modifiers from player's gear do not affect strongboxes and chests, only the AREA MODIFIERS (like map IIQ and IIR bonuses) affect these.

If i recall correctly, IIQ mmodifiers do not affect in any way map drops.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

"

MatrixFactor wrote:

How can arguing to change the status quo be good, but arguing to keep it be bad.

Your other point, about chasing people not quitting makes sense. But the conclusion to following that line of reasoning is D3.

I don't follow your intuitive leap about self found mixed with trading equalling D3. Divination cards do not equal the death of trading.

This thread calls for higher map drops so those who don't trade can progress further. The extreme of that is balance for no trade and increase drops to accommodate. This is D3.

"

And let's be clear - whether implicitly or not, your endorsement of the current approach means you agree that a zero sum game of trade feeding upwards to a minority is preferable to an egalitarian approach (to content) of people at least being able to access all content without barriers. Noting that content is different to gear for many reasons that don't need to be discussed here. To be clear, that approach is basically with all things equal, including character power, still only certain people should ever get to 100 because they could not only clear the content (many can) but also played the trade mini-game.

L100 is just one goal, but yeah you basically understand exactly how I feel about this. If you don't know the entire game as well as I do (trade + builds + gameplay), then you don't deserve L100+ability to kill uber+ability to kill all maps bosses. Otherwise I feel like a fool for learning a part of the game that the developer then says "neh, actually forget about that." If PoE was a solo game I wouldn't care, nor would I play it, but it's a game whose entire point of differentiation and existence is multiplayer trade. If you take the importance of trade away you make it more similar to games like Skyrim, Torchlight, or Diablo 3. All great games, and you can go play them. Whereas what other options do I have for great ARPGs that are also trade-centered?

And items and maps are fundamentally the same because both can be traded, and both can be used to help attain goals (my reference goal is getting L100).

"

kendoka wrote:

Quantity on gear affects the overall number of items dropped by monsters, including currency and divination cards

Including currency? Are you kidding me?

"

Cherd wrote:

I feel that the map drop rates are a serious problem.

No they are not, and feeling something doesn't make it true.

If you alch or transmute white maps in general they will net you 1-3 maps in return with usually a +1 map. Map drops have been buffed already and maintaining a map stash is not a problem, at least not unless you play crappy in white maps only. I find so many maps that i usually only play the types i like and vendor the rest for +1 maps, and that is on my normal non-MF characters.

"

Kasparov13 wrote:

No they are not, and feeling something doesn't make it true.

But stating something as blatant fact does make it true?

Constantly buying and then running out of maps, running maps with zero drops, killing bosses that drop maps of meaningless level, it is extremely frustrating. It is frustrating to the point that people have stopped playing the game. These are people that have played for years, have shown up on the first page of league ladders, have made meaningful contributions in these forums, and most importantly, have periodically purchased supporter packs (without this, there would be no game!). If I know people that have left the game over these frustrations, then there have to be many many more that have done the same. How is this not a problem?

In the new map system, the top level maps are like a carrot that is dangled in front of us. Every time we get close to getting a bite, our faces are beat back with a big stick. Every great once in a while we actually might manage to get a bite, but soon that bite is consumed and we are right back to getting beat in the face again. Even a stupid donkey will only take this type of treatment for so long before sneaking off in the night. That is what is happening.

"

Kasparov13 wrote:

If you alch or transmute white maps in general they will net you 1-3 maps in return with usually a +1 map. Map drops have been buffed already and maintaining a map stash is not a problem, at least not unless you play crappy in white maps only. I find so many maps that i usually only play the types i like and vendor the rest for +1 maps, and that is on my normal non-MF characters.

What you say is true of lower maps. You could probably run every map white and maintain 75-76s. We are talking about 81-82.

looks like map drops rate got buffed a lot, or im very lucky?
precint map has been reworked a bit