The real reason why end game is NOT fun and everyone is leaving

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

Without accuracy, there is no evasion.

Well... No. You can perfectly well set up a mechanic where evasion is a fixed percentage linked to some classes / specs / gear whatever. For example, TQ has "X % to dodge attacks" and "X% to dodge ranged attacks" properties.
If necessary, you can reduce that chance by a fixed percentage depending on level difference or special powers.

Sure you can go the "Accuracy Vs Dodge" mechanic, but why is it more "hardcore" ? And what exactly makes one mechanic "harcore" and another "not hardcore", other that one's personal persuasion, peeves or pet ideas ?

And the "cheating on.. the simulation" part somewhat pisses me off. As Jiussa says, an ARPG is nowhere a simulation. And further, most of these compromises are just there to accomodate technical realities, IE latency and how the netcode works.

Resolving a melee attack on a mob that's moving away on the server (which is probably what's chris is refferring to) while it's displayed as static on the client may seem cheesy, but is the reverse solution any better ?

The first means you accept some distorsion in favor of the player. The other that you're distorting things in favor of the mobs. That's what GGG is doing. But face it, there will ALWAYS be a distorsion.

They probably deem that choice "hardcore" because it's almost always detrimental to the player. And causes frustration.
And, in the same vein, they probably consider the other option (used by MANY games out there) as "cheating" because the player has made a hit on THEIR mobs that he shouldn't have.

Thr fact that GGG describes what other devs are choosing as "cheating" is also interesting. "Cheating" is nowhere neutral. It's an emotionally loaded word. You could describe the solutions chosen by other games as "not optimal", "not appropriate to our mechanics" or other ways.

No;, It's "cheating". Which sound much more like a player's rant than a description of design by a professional...