The -15% exp penalty is obnoxiously bad outdated design.

"

tackle70 wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT GAME DESIGN SO STOP SAYING IT IS TERRIBLE DESIGN.

My arguments ...

You often resort to posts that don't make relevant arguments to what you're responding to, as here. When you resort to making statements like "you don't know what you're talking about" which is just a fancy form of saying "you're an idiot", you are no longer actually making an argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I hate to break it to you, but your preferences don't rule the world, and not everyone is going to think the same way you do. Perhaps instead of insulting them, you could try to explain why it would be better if they saw things your way.

Im not insulting him. There was literally nothing of substance in his posts. He has nothing to back up claims of this being bad design, yet keeps saying it. If you want to make statements like that you need to be able to back it up or be prepared to accept the ridicule. I have pointed out the necessary balances and design goals related to death penalty, and the rebuttle is 'its terrible design', sorry I don't accept that kind of foolishness. You need facts to back up an argument, I brought them, he brought unfounded opinion and nothing more.

"

Many people have backed up their arguments (including myself)

I have not seen this. State specifically what the design goal around a death penalty should be. State why this implementation of the death penalty fails to achieve this goal. You could even follow this up with a proposed solution and state how the proposed solution would achieve the desired design goal. Then maybe you will be taken seriously, however, simply stating that you don't like it or that it is terrible design is not backing up your arguments.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

tackle70 wrote:

"

thepmrc wrote:

YOU DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT GAME DESIGN SO STOP SAYING IT IS TERRIBLE DESIGN.

My arguments ...

You often resort to posts that don't make relevant arguments to what you're responding to, as here. When you resort to making statements like "you don't know what you're talking about" which is just a fancy form of saying "you're an idiot", you are no longer actually making an argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

I hate to break it to you, but your preferences don't rule the world, and not everyone is going to think the same way you do. Perhaps instead of insulting them, you could try to explain why it would be better if they saw things your way.

Im not insulting him. There was literally nothing of substance in his posts. He has nothing to back up claims of this being bad design, yet keeps saying it. If you want to make statements like that you need to be able to back it up or be prepared to accept the ridicule. I have pointed out the necessary balances and design goals related to death penalty, and the rebuttle is 'its terrible design', sorry I don't accept that kind of foolishness. You need facts to back up an argument, I brought them, he brought unfounded opinion and nothing more.

Many people have backed up their arguments (including myself)

"

deteego wrote:

Many people have backed up their arguments (including myself)

Would you mind linking to some (rational) arguments supporting the OP, please? I really don't want to wade through 35 pages of mud to find the decent posts...

For what it's worth, I think the 0% -> 7.5% -> 15% penalty progression is sufficiently balanced to avoid being too harsh on players who are really new, and the penalties at higher difficulties offset the faster XP gain of DPS builds. You can look at the latter as risk (less defence means more chance of dying and thus losing progress) and reward (faster XP gain if you don't die), which is a fundamental element of most forms of game design.

It also makes dying less desirable, which I think is a good thing both in terms of GGGs stated aims (choices -> consequences) and in terms of gameplay tension. If dying didn't really matter at all, playing default would be so dull. The time it may take to return to the area you died in is a result of being revived in town, and also contributes to dying being an undesirable event.

"

thepmrc wrote:

Sounds like somebody dies a bunch, and you also come across as maybe 12-13 years old. I for one could care less what you think. You do not know better than the developers, or an inanimate object for that matter, what is good for the game.

Newer games do tend to be watered down pieces of trash like you said and I personally hate it. Luckily this isn't one of them! This game doesn't treat you like a small child who cannot think for themselves. This game gives you options and balances those options with consequences. This is not your typical 2013 trash AAA title that garbage developers like Activision put out. You want garbage go play mainstream MMOs, don't expect one of the last vestige's of hope in the gaming industry to conform to the crap that is modern gaming.

Again you are missing any kind of real point other then talking trash and somehow i come across as maybe 12-13 ?

Afaik this is a game. Its ment for ppl to have fun. If you dont have it hard enough in your real life then maybe you should get out of your room and try working harder my dear fellow. Again as i said this game is special yes but is the goal of the game to just have the hardcore fans alike in it? That wont get you far above in the population ladder.


Also i do die a bunch. I never did try to hide that hell i even said it in my original first post and had you bothered to try and read that you would know.

No i never said i know more then the developers and yet again had you bothered to read my posts instead of just trash talking without any real point or anything meaningfull in your posts you would notice that. I am a NEWBIE (maybe you want bigger letters?) and i am stating its stupid to have such "big" exp loss per death at this point in the game development, and also that this is quite newbie unfriendly.

I am open for any kind of discussion but try and have something real in your posts instead of just talking junk and being a keyboard warrior lol.

"

Anomandaris wrote:

"

deteego wrote:

Many people have backed up their arguments (including myself)

Would you mind linking to some (rational) arguments supporting the OP, please? I really don't want to wade through 35 pages of mud to find the decent posts...

For what it's worth, I think the 0% -> 7.5% -> 15% penalty progression is sufficiently balanced to avoid being too harsh on players who are really new, and the penalties at higher difficulties offset the faster XP gain of DPS builds. You can look at the latter as risk (less defence means more chance of dying and thus losing progress) and reward (faster XP gain if you don't die), which is a fundamental element of most forms of game design.

It also makes dying less desirable, which I think is a good thing both in terms of GGGs stated aims (choices -> consequences) and in terms of gameplay tension. If dying didn't really matter at all, playing default would be so dull. The time it may take to return to the area you died in is a result of being revived in town, and also contributes to dying being an undesirable event.

Pages 25-28, I think I made posts earlier than that

I think I have made it about as far as I can go in the game. I got up to level 50 and had some fun in the game but I hate the death penalty.

At this point even 5% is not something I want to deal with. I can not imagine what it would be like if I managed to get to the 15% one.

Having to start all over in fights and reclear is enough of a penalty to me then add in the loss of experience and it becomes a pain.

I must say I had some fun in the game. However this penalty plus the huge difficulty in respecing makes it very hard to play the game.

I am sure the game does work for the core group who want the game as hard as possible.

I do wish the developers all the best and I will keep my eyes out for changes in case the things I dislike change in the beta.

"

Anomandaris wrote:

"

deteego wrote:

Many people have backed up their arguments (including myself)

Would you mind linking to some (rational) arguments supporting the OP, please? I really don't want to wade through 35 pages of mud to find the decent posts...

For what it's worth, I think the 0% -> 7.5% -> 15% penalty progression is sufficiently balanced to avoid being too harsh on players who are really new, and the penalties at higher difficulties offset the faster XP gain of DPS builds. You can look at the latter as risk (less defence means more chance of dying and thus losing progress) and reward (faster XP gain if you don't die), which is a fundamental element of most forms of game design.

It also makes dying less desirable, which I think is a good thing both in terms of GGGs stated aims (choices -> consequences) and in terms of gameplay tension. If dying didn't really matter at all, playing default would be so dull. The time it may take to return to the area you died in is a result of being revived in town, and also contributes to dying being an undesirable event.

Well i made some ok arguments but they all ended up in walls'o'texts so let me shorten it up.

I dont think this system is good as it turns away newbie players. As someone who just started i dont have a chance to know the game enough so this 7.5% i lose atm are a lot specialy considering this is a very bugy beta phase. It should be different and made a bit more newbie friendy (not deleted) but going from normal and 0% to 7.5% and 15% is a lot.

Dying should matter and there should be a penalty but not like this. This system cant work on the long run if left unchanged. If they cant rework the system that would make some classes more fun as well as death undesirable and defence that would matter it should be made closer to having 2.5% loss after first 3 chapters, then for every next chapter 2.5% more until reaching the final 15%.

Again i made a wall'o'text ... sorry xD !

"

ljubisa24 wrote:

I am open for any kind of discussion but try and have something real in your posts instead of just talking junk and being a keyboard warrior lol.

I make posts that explain the design goals and how the implemented penalty achieves those goals. My posts are very real and have substantive arguments based on facts. When people just say 'design is terrible' or 'design is outdated' this is useless. There is no reasoning, no foundation simply misguided opinions of people who have not done their homework. Sometimes this causes me to ad hominem a bit, this is my shortcoming, but my arguments for the penalty are based on design goals and balance issues.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

ljubisa24 wrote:

I am open for any kind of discussion but try and have something real in your posts instead of just talking junk and being a keyboard warrior lol.

I make posts that explain the design goals and how the implemented penalty achieves those goals. My posts are very real and have substantive arguments based on facts. When people just say 'design is terrible' or 'design is outdated' this is useless. There is no reasoning, no foundation simply misguided opinions of people who have not done their homework. Sometimes this causes me to ad hominem a bit, this is my shortcoming, but my arguments for the penalty are based on design goals and balance issues.

From the walls of text I've seen you respond to, it's not just that you ad hominem, but that you only single out very specific points from an argument and ignore the rest. I think the discussion we had earlier about the curve and builds illustrates that. Regardless of homework being done or whatnot, I'd advise you either ignore a post if you feel it ignorant (honestly, this is far more effective than being rather unpleasant) or offer a similar amount of effort in responding to the person who made the post.

I have little problem with your opinions, but your communication skills are a big turn-off. To be fair, it's an issue with a lot of people in the feedback forums on both sides, which causes this place to be damn near unbearable.

Being generous to people on a feedback forum sets a very good precedent and perhaps would get others who simply cry "outdated" to ask themselves and expound upon why they consider it outdated instead of simply getting mad.

"

thepmrc wrote:

"

ljubisa24 wrote:

I am open for any kind of discussion but try and have something real in your posts instead of just talking junk and being a keyboard warrior lol.

I make posts that explain the design goals and how the implemented penalty achieves those goals. My posts are very real and have substantive arguments based on facts. When people just say 'design is terrible' or 'design is outdated' this is useless. There is no reasoning, no foundation simply misguided opinions of people who have not done their homework. Sometimes this causes me to ad hominem a bit, this is my shortcoming, but my arguments for the penalty are based on design goals and balance issues.

I guess if the design goals are exclude a segment of players who do not like death panlties I guess it works.

I just wonder why they can not create a baddy league for those of us who hate death penalties or who want to respec more often.

It is not like anyone who disliked it would have to play in it.

Just like I would never touch a hardcore league since i dislike that style of game play. I have never asked for that type of play to be removed for those who like it. I feel they should have that option to play the way they like.

Why not have an option or league for other types of play?