Death Penalties

"

Rhydberg wrote:

Death penalties are difficult in a game like this. In most games, dying is annoying because it kicks you back an arbitrary length of gameplay and you have to do stuff over again. However, ARPGs are designed in such a way as to throw you straight back into the action right where you were very quickly, so this doesn't work.

Currently, I think the experience penalty does it's job - it makes death undesirable, meaning people have a motivation to build something other than all-out damage and throw their infinitely spawning self at every challenge until it eventually runs out of hitpoints as bodies stack up around it.

The only problem with an experience loss is...well, it's dull. It's functional, but uninteresting.

Perhaps the answer lies in adding incentive to staying alive, rather than incentive to not die. The difference is subtle, yet meaningful.

An interesting way to handle it that keeps with the game's current design philosophy would be to give, for example, a stacking buff of potentially infinite duration that stacks with every monster killed, and gives an almost infinitesimal boost to experience gained/item drop rate/both/whatever, capped at a value that seems sensible. If you die, you lose the buff and have to regain your stacks.

This still imposes a pseudo-experience-penalty (The potential experience you could have gained if you still had your stackable buff) without taking away what a player has "earned", which usually only serves to upset a player. It would also make death irritating, and undesirable.

It is possible that if the buff gave an experience bonus, some tweaking of current experience rates would be required in order to give a progression speed that is similar to the current rate for an "average" player. I'm not sure how much information GGG has on how often players die, and at which levels. Sounds like something that needs an Excel spreadsheet.

"

Laellu wrote:

"

Xeriel wrote:

I don't die too often but when I do it's really obnoxious to be set back in experience, if a player is dying because his x or y is too weak, the game shouldn't further punish the player by making his leveling slower so he can't reach the next skill without going back a few zones and grinding it out.

Ok, so, what you are saying is.....no matter how weak your character or strategy is, the game should not give you feedback to indicate such shortcomings. Instead, any character of any quality should progress as fast as any other character?

Being unprepared brings undesired results. This is quite essential to any game of value.

"

eckart wrote:

to me default death penalties are fine and fair, coming from a dw duelist @endgame with 2k hp. this game does not make a lot of sense without a death penalty that hurts at least a bit. only thing stupid is when it happens because of desyncs/high ping/fps spikes, but who am i to cry about this when people play hc with the same problem.

"

Xeriel wrote:

Seriously, what is the point of punishing people for dying in default league? Diablo 2 is fair

"

Xeriel wrote:

dark souls is fair

"

25six wrote:

"

mibuwolf wrote:

Dying needs to have a penalty that hurts.

Why?

Why does dying in default league need to have a penalty that hurts?

I'm one of the people that can't stand the death penalty in default league. I literally do not understand why people want a penalty to dying when playing the game on the basic level, and by that I mean default league.

If players want a penalty system isn't that what hardcore is all about?