Maps, Affixes, Risk:Reward and You

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

However, we've done it with the minimum of artificial systems; elegance.

This is a good point. I do agree that my proposed system can and would be very cluttered (remember complexity vs depth?) - hence the post. Different perspectives help shape a better proposed system that can be both elegant and accessible and that was my intent to start with. Thank you for bringing that up.

It was meant to get everyone thinking anyway ;)

I understand the simplicity/elegance argument but I actually like the sound of tailor-made bonuses for specific combinations more. Gives things a more hand-crafted feel with the sense of there being more "novelty" in rolling maps. If it's simply not feasible that's one thing, but I would prefer it if possible.

Another thing I wanted to touch on was the idea of nerfing/removing existing map mods: I don't think this is a good idea. That would be a direct nerf to end-game progression. I think buffing the underused mods (or mod combos) is quite enough. The end-result wouldn't be a direct buff to end-game progression because those mods would continue to be just as risky as they were before, it would just make them worth doing for those that want to take on higher risk/reward ratios.

I suspect many people on HC would still avoid them and I think that is fine, too. The best part about maps is the choices it gives players in how they want to progress, we don't want to start taking away choices.

"

Jihoko wrote:

Another thing I wanted to touch on was the idea of nerfing/removing existing map mods: I don't think this is a good idea. That would be a direct nerf to end-game progression. I think buffing the underused mods (or mod combos) is quite enough.

Um... no. Labyrinthine is extremely overpowered, to the extent that it is impossible to buff the other affixes to its level without destroying the game. It needs to be nerfed.

Overall endgame progression would still be okay thanks to the buff to other affixes; the trick is to make the expected final IIQ the same or better. For example, right now the ultimate rare map might be Labyrinthine + Villainous + (actually difficult prefix) + Champions + Hordes + (actually difficult suffix). If the total subtracted the easy affixes is equal to the total added to the difficult suffixes, the end result isn't nerfed... and that's only considering the "perfect" maps. You could have a net nerf to a great map roll like this by giving the average map a net buff.

Just in case you didn't know: The life node nerf? I wrote it.

While the change seems nice and all i feel like it does not touch the real problem with the map system...Seems to me like this is just another way to "force" players to sink even more currency at maps


Yes it will be fun to run the maps with these mods combos , the problem is to obtain these maps at the first place

What i am trying to say is that you should focus more on the drop rate on maps instead of the options these maps can have. thats the real problem and not that people dont want to run -resis mod


Solution? Decrease XP gain from maps and greatly increase the map drop rate , even if the xp decrease is so great that it will still take me the same amount of time to level up ill be a happy player that feels that his char is progressing and doing content of his level

giving a mod with x% higher chance to drop a map on boss just makes things worse , you will now need to waste even more currency to roll that mod hoping that rng wont screw you and give you a 66 map , it also makes even harder for solo players to sustain and roll maps


I am happy you are trying to improve the map system however i feel like you are not looking at the right direction



-Level 87 witch that still havent done a single 77 map

There is nothing wrong with the drop rates of maps and it is quite irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

"

EmperorGR wrote:

While the change seems nice and all i feel like it does not touch the real problem with the map system...Seems to me like this is just another way to "force" players to sink even more currency at maps

Um, yes. It is.

From a economic design perspective, maps are a pretty blatant item sink. The whole idea is to have players dump lots of resources into something, helping to keep overall currency levels down and thus combat inflation that leads to eventual economic stagnation. Additionally, the affixes on maps are what makes the endgame varied and interesting; otherwise it's just running the same zones over and over. Thus, the idea isn't to remove this behavior from the map system; the idea is to condition players to accept the behavior to the point that it seems perfectly reasonable to them. We need players to enjoy dumping currency on maps.

In order for the system to work as a currency sink, two things need to happen:

• Investing currency in maps needs to provide a reasonable expectation of success (continued progression)
• Failure to invest currency in maps needs to provide a reasonable expectation of failure (halted progression)

I'm not saying GGG is necessarily succeeding on the first point, but you need to appreciate the need for the second; if players could progress simply by running white maps, they would, and that's something that we just can't allow.

We don't need an increase in map drop rate; what we might need is a net buff to the bonuses provided by map affixes.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

We don't need an increase in map drop rate; what we might need is an across-the-board buff to the bonuses provided by map affixes.

I don't necessarily like the idea of direct improvement to bonuses provided by affixes because these are tied to gear progression (particularly for 76 and 77 maps where crafting material (whites) are very valuable). That's something we need to keep in mind which is why I proposed alternatives to quantity and rarity.

This does not necessarily translate to increased currency expenditure, it merely allows you to customize your experience to cater your needs and perhaps lets you settle for alternatives. It isn't the first time my group has passed up on a 145% quantity map because it had no Labyrinthine. Shame ain't it?

If synergetic combinations provided a completely different experience (and reward) when compared to our old Maze/Area benefits, people will think twice about what they want out of the map.

Sorry, I used "across the board" when I should have said "net." And your suggestion is a net buff to the bonuses provided by map affixes.

Thats exactly my point ,sure i agree there has to be a mechanism to sink the currency on , maps are already where the most currency is sinked on , however the reward for that is what? hoping for a higher level map which usually not happens , you see the problem now ?



Map drop SHOULD NOT be the reward. It has to be something normal that gives you a shot for the rewards

"

We don't need an increase in map drop rate; what we need is an across-the-board increase to the bonuses provided by map affixes.

Isnt exactly the same since people pretty much dont care about anything else except the precious higher/same level map drop ? an increase on white items that drop ? the "valuable" white craft material that i can find for like 2 chaos in trade chat? No people will hunt these mods for one reason only , more map drops..


You said it was irrelevant to the topic , but the issue is exactly that , people dont care for the bonus quantity on map for any other reason but to find maps , its not a coincidence almost everyone trying to sell the unique maps with the in theory highest reward low risk mods , if it doesnt improve their chances to find higher maps and progress people just dont care

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Jihoko wrote:

Another thing I wanted to touch on was the idea of nerfing/removing existing map mods: I don't think this is a good idea. That would be a direct nerf to end-game progression. I think buffing the underused mods (or mod combos) is quite enough.

Um... no.

Oh... I hadn't thought of it that way. "No." Brilliant. I bow to the strength of your superior arguments. Wait a minute, I thought of a rebuttal, what was it again...

YES! (also I'm rubber and you're glue)

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Labyrinthine is extremely overpowered, to the extent that it is impossible to buff the other affixes to its level without destroying the game. It needs to be nerfed.

Can you explain? I might agree if you backed up what you're saying with arguments. Instead you're just making broad, unsubstantiated statements.

My view is it's fine for it to be more powerful than other affixes. It's the best prefix right now for most indoor maps, but we're not limited to just one. Having some prefixes be much better than others is not necessarily a bad thing (for the same reasons having some item mods be much better than others is not necessarily a bad thing). I'm not going to get into a long discussion on this, you're such an accomplished game dev you probably already know what I'm talking about.

Affixes don't need to be perfectly balanced because players can't always have the best combination of affixes, or even the best prefix/suffix without spending insane amounts of currency. Eventually, the opportunity cost is higher than the reward of getting it when you factor in currency spent i.e. it's cheaper to just buy the maps you're hoping that affix would add to your pool. It's probably already the case that, in some cases, players are expending more currency than they should aiming for prefixes like labyrinthine due to not considering opportunity cost, though I admittedly don't have any data to back that up.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Overall endgame progression would still be okay thanks to the buff to other affixes; the trick is to make the expected final IIQ the same or better. For example, right now the ultimate rare map might be Labyrinthine + Villainous + (actually difficult prefix) + Champions + Hordes + (actually difficult suffix). If the total subtracted the easy affixes is equal to the total added to the difficult suffixes, the end result isn't nerfed... and that's only considering the "perfect" maps. You could have a net nerf to a great map roll like this by giving the average map a net buff.

Just in case you didn't know: The life node nerf? I wrote it.

I suppose I didn't know about you working on the development team behind the upcoming changes. My mistake, it was hard to tell though because you don't have a special nametag like the other devs. I can only assume you're a dev because the alternative is the implication that your post, not the collective outcry of thousands of players or simple reality of imbalance, was the inspiration for the upcoming changes. That would be pretty silly.

In seriousness, I don't think the changes need to be as drastic as you're saying, here's why: We only need to make other affix combinations desirable enough that players will be faced with a meaningful decision to reroll due to increased opportunity costs. They don't need to equal because you don't get to choose another affix for free. I'm sorry if I'm overstepping my bounds in disagreeing with someone who clearly has so much more authority on the subject than me, but I would prefer our discussion rest on our respective points rather than our identities, despite how temping making an http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority might be.