You can have your cake and eat it too: a different approach to solving socket issues - GGG pls read
|
EDIT: Tnx to Arvesius, I changed this OP with his more readable version of my original post. I am not a native English speaker and I did best I could in first one. Original version is in a spoiler in the end.
Disclaimer:
Spoiler
What I wrote here is not to be taken as is. This is a result of my brainstorming for last few months and my need to finally put it on "paper". The rise in topics about socket system finally made me do it. So please before you take out your flamethrowers please take this into consideration. My main purpose of this topic is to get GGG to read it, I don't really expect them to do what I propose here, but I hope it makes them think this could be a nice idea. I also hope people posting here will try to be constructive instead of destructive. I do like this game and want it to success long term even if currently there are a few things about it I don't like.
About me:
Spoiler
I have been playing video games in one form or another for 27 years, starting with Commodore64. I love RPG games, but mostly I love theorycrafting and creating different characters in them. I started BG2 like 20 times, finished it 2 times. I made 15+ different characters in Diablo 2, finished it on Hell difficulty with only 2. I finished D1 with all available chars. I don't quit games when they get hard, I restarted Ironman Classic in new Xcom 10 times before I got it right. But I do quit them when I feel like they are wasting my time. I been playing Path of Exile since 2011, and been pretty active on these forums the whole time. I even managed to have successful suggestions planted into GGG brains before that got into a patch soon after (or it was just pure coincedence). Since I started playing I probably made close to 30 different characters of different levels trying all kinds of crazy combinations and skills.
Hi all, as you can all see, the topics about how sockets and linking them works (or doesn't) have been on the rise lately. And in each one there is a battle between the ones that want it easier/better and ones that want it to stay as hard/same as it is now. So how is my topic going to help or do anything in this sea of similar complaints/topics? Why am I bothering? Why not post my opinion in another one? Well what if I told you that you can have your cake and eat it too? Yes, that is exactly what I am going to be offering here. So please keep reading. There is a different way to do socket mechanics while still keeping the current loot/crafting/gambling complexity. All it takes is a few months of GGG coding :D, but a result of it will give us all what we want (even if you don't know it yet ;) ). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So what do I propose: 1) Introduce runes which grant passive bonuses. Bonuses are applied while runes are placed in gear sockets, and augmented in linked sockets.
Spoiler
Introduce new items into the game, call them runes (I will call them runes from now on for reference), charms, whatever. Put them into 3 categories: red, green, blue. Their bonuses would be similar to D2 charms, as in give a small bonus to certain stats depending on their color. For example one red rune could give +5 to strenght and another kind of red rune +3% fire resistance or +30 to armor and so on.
Let these runes be put into current equipment sockets in same way gems are: by matching rune color with socket color. Then linking these runes gives additional bonuses, lets say 50% bonus for each additional linked rune (exact number of bonuses can be done by GGG professionals and their balance team and of course Alpha testers). An example:
Spoiler
For example lets say you got a 4L armor with 4 red sockets. If you put 2 strength runes (+5 str each) in you don't get +10 strength but +15 , if you put 4 those runes you get +50 to strength (20 base and 150% bonus). But you can also put two +3% fire resistance and two +5 strenght runes and get +25 strenght and +15% fire resistance.
As you can imagine, this system would still have huge value for 5L and 6L items but not make most players pull their hair out when finding an upgrade to their gear but because of active skill/support setups on currently equipped gear not being able to use it. If you want you can also give these runes level and stat requirements and have more valuable but more rare runes. Runes would be drop only items with different rate of drop chance based on their value. Pro: A wider variety of gear will become viable since any specific desired bonus which did not roll as a mod on gear (ex: + resistances) can be obtained through runes.
Spoiler
A major pro to my rune proposal is the ability for players to further customize their gear with missing stats. Lets people not look at each rare item and throw it away if it has no life/move speed/whatever. Lets GGG introduce another crafting orb that works with these runes.
To balance the above reduce max number mods on rare items by 1.
Spoiler
This would at same time make Magic items more valuable and regal orb more useful. Best part of this suggestion is that no work would need to be done on current items and the whole socket system currently in effect. 5L or 6L could be left to be of same rarity to find/craft.
2) Introduce a new active skill tree with red, green, and blue nodes in which skill/support gems are placed. Gems can no longer be socketed in gear as this is the function of proposed runes. Current Passive Tree remains functional and unchanged.
Spoiler
<Insert cool photoshopped passive skill tree image changed so it shows what I am writing about> Too bad my photoshop skills suck :(
- Move active skill gems and supports to a new active skill tree. Imagine something similar to current passive tree (but smaller) that has 6 starting positions for 6 classes and it is set up as a circle. Each class starts with two slots of their color next to their portrait (witches 2 blue, shadows 1 blue 1 green and so on) - similar in design to 2 passive tree starting positions you get currently. - These slots would then be connected to other neighbouring slots of different colors and this would continue and expand and all together create a active skill tree of their own (not all slots would be connected to all other neighbouring slots so this tree could also have pathways and highways). - Some of the slots on this tree would give additional bonuses to skill gems or support gems that would be put into them on certain parts of this tree. - Some could even work like keystones, as in give a bigger bonus and some penalty (like fire skill put into it gets +50% bonus damage but receives no bonus from cold or lightning supports or equipment bonuses from other two elements). All inserted skill/support gems would receive xp no matter if you use them or not just like they do now. 3) Character level determines the maximum number of skill/support gems which may be placed into appropriately colored nodes on the new Active Tree. At level 85 the maximum number of gems which may be placed reaches the limit of 24. This is so to keep balance similar to the current system.
Spoiler
1. Players can only put a skill/support gem into a slot if at least one slot that is linked to it has a skill/support gem inserted. Also one of the starting two slots must always have 1 skill/support gem.
2. At certain character levels players can only put a certain number of skill/support gems into this tree. They can put one skill/support gem into it at lvl 1 and an additional one at levels 2,4,6,8,10,13,16,19,22,25,29,33,37,41,45,50,55,60,65,70,75,80, 85 for a total of 24 max skill/support combinations (like now when you got max sockets on all your equipment) 4) A given skill gem will be supported only by any chain of support gems which are linked directly to the skill gem, with no other skill gems inbetween. To keep balance similar to current system, the maximum number of support gems which may support a given skill gem will be restricted by character level: one support at level 10, two supports at level 25, three supports at level 45, four supports at level 70, and five supports at level 85. So how would this work?
Spoiler
Well skills only get a bonus from supports that are linked uninterrupted by other skill gems. So if you got skill1-support-support-skill2 both skills get access to bonuses from both supports IF you are lvl 25 or above, if you are lvl 10 to 24 each skill only gets a bonus to support closer to him and if you are lvl 9 or less those supports don't work with connected skills.
- Another example: skill1-support-skill2-skill3-support-support, in this case skill1 and skill2 get one support and skill3 bonus from 2 supports. - Now you would say, "but this will be too strong". No it will not, you cannot choose color of sockets in your class part of tree, tree also branches here and there and not all slots are connected with links. The trick would be to find optimal combinations of socket paths and bonuses gained by putting skills/supports into certain sockets in this tree. You would need to put less useful skills into some slots so get access to paths and slot combinations you want for your skill setup. Now I am not sure how to limit inserting/removing skills/supports from this tree and if it should be limited. Probably not so to not prevent new players from experimenting freely. Pro: An active skill tree encourages experimentation and does away with the artificial skill gem limitations of the current socket system.
Spoiler
New players follow starting paths for active skills and at start use skills most suited for their class. People like some limitations and some guidance at start. They also like to be able to experiment with active skills without artificial limitation that current socket system provides (this in mid or lategame).
Why is all this good? Well in addition to obvious advantages or what I already mentioned, for one it removes RNG from skill/support gem system and makes it character level based. At same time lets players have almost same freedom to combine skills/support as they do now. At the same time it promotes class diversity beyond starting points on passive skill tree (something that was also asked on occasion). At the same time with introduction of runes lets the hardcore loot RNG stay almost as hardcore for end game players looking for that perfect gear but lets us less hardcore (or with less time) or us that like to create many characters and not just take one or two to end game have equal amount of fun without current frustrations. I hope I didn't bore you too much with all this text and I hope for a useful discussion about pros and cons of all what I have written here. Oh and I will be shamelessly bumping this topic at least until I know someone from GGG read it. I am sorry but if Moos can do it, I who has been playing this game for more then 2x longer then him can as well :) Original version before ease of read improvements:
Spoiler
So what do I propose:
1.
Spoiler
Introduce new items into the game, call them runes (I will call them runes from now on for reference), charms, whatever. Put them into 3 categories: red, green, blue. Their bonuses would be similar to D2 charms, as in give a small bonus to certain stats depending on their color. For example one red rune could give +5 to strenght and another kind of red rune +3% fire resistance or +30 to armor and so on.
2.
Spoiler
Let these runes be put into current equipment sockets in same way gems are: by matching rune color with socket color.
3.
Spoiler
Then linking these runes gives additional bonuses, lets say 50% bonus for each additional linked rune (exact number of bonuses can be done by GGG professionals and their balance team and of course Alpha testers).
For example lets say you got a 4L armor with 4 red sockets. If you put 2 strength runes (+5 str each) in you don't get +10 strength but +15 , if you put 4 those runes you get +50 to strength (20 base and 150% bonus). But you can also put two +3% fire resistance and two +5 strenght runes and get +25 strenght and +15% fire resistance. As you can imagine, this system would still have huge value for 5L and 6L items but not make most players pull their hair out when finding an upgrade to their gear but because of active skill/support setups on currently equipped gear not being able to use it. 3a.
Spoiler
If you want you can also give these runes level and stat requirements and have more valuable but more rare runes.
3b.
Spoiler
Runes would be drop only items with different rate of drop chance based on their value.
4.
Spoiler
To balance above points 1 to 3 reduce max number mods on rare items by 1. This would at same time make Magic items more valuable and regal orb more useful
4a. Best part of this suggestion is that no work would need to be done on current items and the whole socket system currently in effect. 5L or 6L could be left to be of same rarity to find/craft. Additional pros for 1-4:
Spoiler
Ability for players to further customize their gear with missing stats. Lets people not look at each rare item and throw it away if it has no life/move speed/whatever. Lets GGG introduce another crafting orb that works with these runes.
You still here? Good! Now we get to the main dish of this delicious suggestion: 5.
Spoiler
<Insert cool photoshopped passive skill tree image changed so it shows what I am writing about> Too bad my photoshop skills suck :(
- Move active skill gems and supports to a new active skill tree. Imagine something similar to current passive tree (but smaller) that has 6 starting positions for 6 classes and it is set up as a circle. Each class starts with two slots of their color next to their portrait (witches 2 blue, shadows 1 blue 1 green and so on) - similar in design to 2 passive tree starting positions you get currently. - These slots would then be connected to other neighbouring slots of different colors and this would continue and expand and all together create a active skill tree of their own (not all slots would be connected to all other neighbouring slots so this tree could also have pathways and highways). - Some of the slots on this tree would give additional bonuses to skill gems or support gems that would be put into them on certain parts of this tree. - Some could even work like keystones, as in give a bigger bonus and some penalty (like fire skill put into it gets +50% bonus damage but receives no bonus from cold or lightning supports or equipment bonuses from other two elements). All inserted skill/support gems would receive xp no matter if you use them or not just like they do now. 6.
Spoiler
Now to keep skill/support balance similar to current one there would need to be 3 limitations:
1. Players can only put a skill/support gem into a slot if at least one slot that is linked to it has a skill/support gem inserted. Also one of the starting two slots must always have 1 skill/support gem. 2. At certain character levels players can only put a certain number of skill/support gems into this tree. They can put one skill/support gem into it at lvl 1 and an additional one at levels 2,4,6,8,10,13,16,19,22,25,29,33,37,41,45,50,55,60,65,70,75,80, 85 for a total of 24 max skill/support combinations (like now when you got max sockets on all your equipment) 3. Limit the number of support skills that can give bonus to connected active skill gems. At lvl 10 you can have one connected support gem to a skill gem give its bonus, at lvl 25 you can have two connected give bonus, at lvl 45 three, at lvl 70 four and at lvl 85 five. So at lvl 10 it works like having multiple 2L, at lvl 25 like having multiple 3L, at lvl 45 like having multiple 4L, at lvl 70 like having multiple 5L and at lvl 85 like having multiple 6L. Yes, you can have more then one 6L this way, but don't forget you are still limited by 24 gem slots and you still need to use some of them to get to slots with colors and bonuses you want. So how would this work?
Spoiler
- Well skills only get a bonus from supports that are linked uninterruptedly by other skills. So if you got skill1-support-support-skill2 both skills get access to bonuses from both supports IF you are lvl 25 or above, if you are lvl 10 to 24 each skill only gets a bonus to support closer to him and if you are lvl 9 or less those supports don't work with connected skills.
- Another example: skill1-support-skill2-skill3-support-support, in this case skill1 and skill2 get one support and skill3 bonus from 2 supports. - Now you would say, "but this will be too strong". No it will not, you cannot choose color of sockets in your class part of tree, tree also branches here and there and not all slots are connected with links. The trick would be to find optimal combinations of socket paths and bonuses gained by putting skills/supports into certain sockets in this tree. You would need to put less useful skills into some slots so get access to paths and slot combinations you want for your skill setup. 7.
Spoiler
Now I am not sure how to limit inserting/removing skills/supports from this tree and if it should be limited. Probably not so to not prevent new players from experimenting freely.
Additional pros for 5-7:
Spoiler
New players follow starting paths for active skills and at start use skills most suited for their class. People like some limitations and some guidance at start. They also like to be able to experiment with active skills without artificial limitation that current socket system provides (this in mid or lategame).
Why is all this good?
Spoiler
Well in addition to obvious advantages or what I already mentioned, for one it removes RNG from skill/support gem system and makes it character level based. At same time lets players have almost same freedom to combine skills/support as they do now. At the same time it promotes class diversity beyond starting points on passive skill tree (something that was also asked on occasion). At the same time with introduction of runes lets the hardcore loot RNG stay almost as hardcore for end game players looking for that perfect gear but lets us less hardcore (or with less time) or us that like to create many characters and not just take one or two to end game have equal amount of fun without current frustrations.
Last edited by Torin on Apr 8, 2013, 12:05:22 AM
This thread has been automatically archived. Replies are disabled.
| |
|
So, 51 views and zero comments. Not sure what that means :D
| |
|
We looked at the list of 'spoiler' tags and couldn't be bothered to open them all to find out your crazy idea?
Personally I don't have a problem with the system they already have and have no interest in yours. Sorry dude. |
|
|
All-in-all, I think they are pretty great suggestions. I wish I had more feedback than that, but I think you have very good ideas.
The only thing I'd say is GGG is stretched pretty thin ... implementing runes / passive changes on this magnitude would require a ton of time and resources. I don't think it will get considered very much in the near term. Oh and ... " [Edited by Staff. Please do not abuse other players] I used to be conceited, but now I'm perfect Last edited by Bex_GGG on Apr 6, 2013, 4:43:57 AM
| |
" What I got out of it was: Let's put passive skills in gems (called runes) and socket them in our gear; then let's take active skills and put them on the "passive" tree. My gut reaction to that idea: hell no. Lot of details and exceptions and bureaucracy... soooo many spoiler tags. My gut reaction to that idea, initially, was to avoid posting in the thread, just in case what I got out of it was somehow an improper reading due to Subrule 12 Subsection K. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on Apr 6, 2013, 5:23:48 AM
|
|
" Current item mods are also passive skills by this logic. No, runes would just give more options , not turn one thing into another And active skills would still be same, just on a different kind of base socket system. As for spoiler tags, well if I left them out people would complain about wall of text. And if I didn't go into detail this would be just another whine topic or not worth its own topic. Last edited by Torin on Apr 6, 2013, 5:57:46 AM
| |
" That is fair but you don't lose anything with this system but people that hate so much rng in active skills would gain much Unless you feel the game would become to complex or too hard to balance ? Last edited by Torin on Apr 6, 2013, 6:07:53 AM
| |
" Well as I said in my disclaimer I don't expect much. Also PoE is a 10 year project, plenty of time to implement something similar if they like my suggestions. | |
" If you add any complexity to a game nowadays you can be sure that unless it's to the taste of the gamers in question, the other players without those tastes will go "QQ dis gaem suxx why iz so complicated, why is so hard QQ' over and over again until it gets dumbed down to their level. These are the same people who QQ that chess is too hard when they get faced with somebody who knows more about a game than they do. I do not regret one word of the above. Every generation is somehow lesser than the last, because of "gaming" houses releasing "games" which have a thin veneer over a largely same old, and designing games for maximum profitability only, to wit, a 3 year old could play some of them and do very well for themselves. TL;DR - once they started making gaming idiot proof, this is how stuff happened. I'm a strictly old school type of gamer. Some of my favorite genres of games are Roguelikes, those old bullet hell shmups, games like original Ghosts 'n' Goblins, and what not. So the aRPG model of games isn't something new to me, because I can be a stubborn player. I'm capable of buckling down and farming to afford my gear or do whatever needs doing, but I'm not most of the gamer base. Nor are people like me a majority in any way or form. That said though. Interesting list of suggestions, the only thing that would be a barrier to seeing it in action, as previously mentioned, is the size of the dev team and the ground realities of implementation. I'll post more detailed feedback later. 1337 21gn17ur3 Last edited by ExiledToWraeclast on Apr 6, 2013, 6:49:25 AM
|
|
" RPGs are supposed to be complex. There's nothing wrong with complexity in the RPG genre. There are lots of simplistic games where all you have to do is go from A to B, kill all enemies. If people are "QQ"-ing because of complexity, then they have issues with patience and intellect, and they probably wouldn't fit in RPG games anyway. I'd even add complexity just to keep these guys away, to be honest, although some might learn to like RPGs in the end :) placeholder for creative sig
|
