Risk versus Reward in PoE: Bosses

No wonder they've stopped listening to feedback. Good job everyone.

A guaranteed map of the same tier would be nice(but cant be the same)

"

shaunika90 wrote:

A guaranteed map of the same tier would be nice(but cant be the same)

Oh my...*facepalm*

Boss loot is fine, I don't want anything guaranteed, it bores me. Map drop rate even in red maps seems pretty good imo.

"

Rupenus wrote:

at poe autism is rewarded highly:

get biscos farm the same map over and over again, forget the meaning of fun after 8 hours of farming:

holy moly uber duper 10ex+ profit.

+

Map bosses should absolutely be more rewarding - the only time they are ever worth the time and effort to kill is if your build is so overpowering that they take no time or effort to kill.

That said, I'd still generally kill MOST bosses even if the reward is not worth it because I like killing bosses.... but that got tossed out the window with War for the Atlas. Now a lot of maps have imported part 2 bosses into maps, and it's freakn' pants on head retarded. I dont mind a lot of phases and transisitions and the like when it's an act boss, but as a map boss, it's beyond assinine to make us go through all that for no reason. Seriously, GGG needs to take Game design 101 if they think plopping something like that damn skorpion boss or Kitava into a map with ever so slightly better rewards then any run of the mill yellow mob is a good design choice.

Kitava works as a super end-boss after a long storyline, he works less well as an opponent you have to face every time you want to figuratively cross the street. Only, you dont really have to face him, you have the option to just ignore him, which is 100% of the time always the correct option, which means his map effectively just doesn't have a boss. A lot of maps just don't really have bosses anymore because they are utterly ridiculous to fight for how non-rewarding they are - even if you have the dps to instagib them, they still have stupid mandatory phase transitions and invulnerability times that make them not worth the effort for such non-existant rewards.

People who design successful games know that if they give players everything they want they end up with no players. We used to call Dungeon Masters in D&D campaigns "Monty Haul" after the game show host Monty Hall who gave away stuff in his show. Those campaigns didn't even last a summer. The ones that lasted years were the ones where DMs understood moderation.

Skilled players should be able to profit off running a map... but not expect rich rewards every single time... and even get skunked some times. It should be frustrating. It should encourage you to do better. Games that just give out rewards willy nilly lose that.

For a semi-new player like me, story boss was fine since they are part of progression.

Map boss can be made better, most of them were not worth the effort after unlocking the map.
For suggestion, instead of a loot reward, give something that will help towards progression in maps.
If guaranteed map is too much of a reward, maybe a Horizon/Harbinger "Shard" or similar & after collecting certain amount turns to a "Orb". (Note, the "Orb" can only be obtain thru the "Shard" by killing bosses).

"

Shagsbeard wrote:

People who design successful games know that if they give players everything they want they end up with no players. We used to call Dungeon Masters in D&D campaigns "Monty Haul" after the game show host Monty Hall who gave away stuff in his show. Those campaigns didn't even last a summer. The ones that lasted years were the ones where DMs understood moderation.

Yes, the key word being "moderation" not "drought", While Mounty haul DMs tend to be bad DMs that are so scared of giving the party a single magic magic item and think a masterwork longsword is a fitting reward for a 17th level party killing a major campaign antagonist kill games far harder.

Giving players NOTHING is far worse than giving them too much, all this is irrelevant because you can actually reward players without being Monty haul, but Map bosses currently don't reward players at all!

Skilled players should be able to profit off running a map... but not expect rich rewards every single time... and even get skunked some times. It should be frustrating. It should encourage you to do better. Games that just give out rewards willy nilly lose that.

Bosses don't need to give guaranteed +1 maps, but they sure as hell need to give *something*

Right now Bosses give virtually the same rewards as any random rare mob (basically nothing) while taking 10 times as long to kill, even if you have a build that can instagib them lava lake Kitava has so much mandatory phasing and invulnerability time that it's NEVER worth it to kill him.



Right now any random blue pack that is instagibbed before it's even onscreen is more valuable to kill than Kitava with his mandatory minute long transitions, if you run hundreds of lavalakes in a league (ignoring all the other bosses with mandatory transitions like the scorpion) you'll end up spending multiple hours just waiting for the boss to let you damage it over the course of the league, while not getting ANY reward from it.

The worst part is Time=Money every hour you spend watching Kitava fall over and get back up is an hour you are spending NOT exploding white/blue packs and making exalts.


Vualt's golem is the only Map boss that's even worth running more than once because of the Div cards on the map + the treasure piles making up for the time spent to kill him.

"

MangoBaron wrote:

Vualt's golem is the only Map boss that's even worth running more than once because of the Div cards on the map + the treasure piles making up for the time spent to kill him.

This is interesting. What if bosses give some kind of extra loot after you kill them. Similar to Vault. Would maybe be enough to make them worthwhile to kill again.