6 Linking

Making it just a little easier doesn't remove anything from it. That's the same exaggeration that Goetz uses. I'd like to see a real reason that it's actually a bad thing.

"

aura0000 wrote:

"

goetzjam wrote:

GGG did visit the 6 link issue with master crafting.

Yes, they did. However!

In my opinion, it fixed nothing for crafters. 1500 fusings is even more expensive than the 1200 or the 600/2400 armor scraps. AND IT'S NOT CRAFTING!

It's 1500 fusings with GUARANTEE!

Back in Ambush we don't even have a guarantee with ~2k fusings. Many poor soul was butchered by RNGJesus those days.

"

goetzjam wrote:

Your point is you want a free 6 link when someone does this or that. Whether its atziri, uber atziri, some other map boss or simply reaching XX level, that is both unacceptable and a terrible idea. I personally think 6 linking is working as intended, it no longer HAS to be purely RNG. You can save up and get one, eventually. It shouldn't and doesn't matter the method of acquiring one.

Yet now, we have an "endgame item" that can be accessed purely through RNG and repetition.

When someone shows a 6L, no one bats an eye because getting that 6L isn't hard in the slightest. What does it show? Nothing.
Someone manages to be the first to beat über atziri in a league, it's an awesome feat. Someone manages to get the first 6L of a league? who cares.

"

goetzjam wrote:

6 links should be optional for 99.99% of the builds in the game, with around an estimated ~30% dps increase from having a 6th link that should be rewarding to those that get it, but make no mistake if your build requires a 6 link to work you will have to shell out or grind out for it.

Nothing in this statement holds any argument as to why the current bullshit RNG/repetition system for linking is better over a system that measures the skill of the player and is actually hard.

I never make a build that requires more than a 4L to reach endgame. I don't even care for a 6L, when I got the 6L CoD, I didn't even feel like using it because it was too valuable to lose if I died, and I was clearing 78 maps with a 4L already.

If there was some content that was hard and the only way to obtain a 6L, I would build to accomplish that feat and then enjoy my 6L. But as it is now, a 6L is just a show of all the boring aspects of PoE.

"

goetzjam wrote:

Your essentially complaining about RNG and you were blessed with it by finding a soul taker. I probably have 2 or 3 times the total playtime that you have and have YET to find a single item worth more then 8ex, yet I still have a 6 link shavs. Hard to obtain through repeatedly grinding is still technically hard as it takes patience.

And if I had complained about not getting a 6L because of bad luck, you'd have made the following argument:

"

goetzjam wrote:

Your essentially complaining about RNG because you're not lucky, you're not entitled to anything. I probably have 2 or 3 times the total playtime that you have and have YET to find a single item worth more then 8ex, yet I still have a 6 link shavs. Hard to obtain through repeatedly grinding is still technically hard as it takes patience.

I complain about RNG because RNG at its current state sucks in PoE. A little bit of RNG can spice things up, but too much of it makes things unpalatable.

"

Yet now, we have an "endgame item" that can be accessed purely through RNG and repetition.

When someone shows a 6L, no one bats an eye because getting that 6L isn't hard in the slightest. What does it show? Nothing.
Someone manages to be the first to beat über atziri in a league, it's an awesome feat. Someone manages to get the first 6L of a league? who cares.

Depends on what item, first 6 link shavs, you'll get a congrats or a "fuck you". Uber atziri is a challenge one must prepare for, spamming or saving up currency is not technically a challenge as anyone can do it.

Poe's endgame has always been RNG based and repetition, now we have the option to guarantee a 6 link and you are complaining about 6 linking items?

"

Nothing in this statement holds any argument as to why the current bullshit RNG/repetition system for linking is better over a system that measures the skill of the player and is actually hard.

I never make a build that requires more than a 4L to reach endgame. I don't even care for a 6L, when I got the 6L CoD, I didn't even feel like using it because it was too valuable to lose if I died, and I was clearing 78 maps with a 4L already.

If there was some content that was hard and the only way to obtain a 6L, I would build to accomplish that feat and then enjoy my 6L. But as it is now, a 6L is just a show of all the boring aspects of PoE.

So you want a 6 link handed to you for completing a challenge, sorry I disagree with that notion. Certain challenges already hand out valuable items, but not free currency, BIG difference.

Getting a 6 link is rewarding to most people, simply because it isn't to you because it isn't behind some boss or challenge is fine.



I've only ever 6 linked one item, and it was purely accidental (it dropped 6 socketed) I wanted to use it to cull MF with IIQ gem as well.

RNG is fine, as matter of fact it is in the best state its ever been in PoE as you can pay a flat rate to get what you want.

The 2 things I would like to see with linking is a fuses used counter (even if mtx, but it has to be cheap) and the ability to transfer links from one RARE item to ANOTHER RARE item. I specifically said rare items because chest in particular struggle to compete with unqiues for most builds.

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

Another thing that pervades these "tone it down a touch" threads, is the sense of scale gets way out of whack. If you use a standard 1-10 rating for things, the difficulty of getting a 6L is at 10 right now. People asking for it to be brought down to 8 or 9 isn't going to crash the economy or ruin anything about the game overall. It just makes them a little more accessible. That would probably be more healthy for the game. However, some people (like Goetzjam) freak out any time someone wants things to be even the slightest bit easier, and exaggerate the outcome, claiming people want the difficulty to be 0 or 1 when that isn't the case at all. If someone is opposed to bringing it down just a notch or two, that's fine, but at least provide an honest explanation that isn't just knee-jerk overreaction.

I have the exact same feeling about leveling to 100, but we saw the ridiculous conversation that turned into... I guess I don't understand certain people's holy grails, and I have a feeling a lot of this comes from a position of privilege - having played the game for a long time, it's easy to forget how huge of a wall new players face. Or how un-fun it was to scale the damn thing. Chopping off a few feet at the top of a mile-high wall is definitely not going to break the game; this is, indeed, all a disagreement about specific magnitudes rather than some kind of epic battle between those on opposite ideological spectrums. Not to single Goetz out (Goetz, why do you get such a bad rap? :)), but I share his desire to preserve a difficult game that only rewards the best, most devoted players - we just have different opinions on the specific positions of milestones, that's all.

"

demon9675 wrote:

"

AlbinosaurusRex wrote:

Another thing that pervades these "tone it down a touch" threads, is the sense of scale gets way out of whack. If you use a standard 1-10 rating for things, the difficulty of getting a 6L is at 10 right now. People asking for it to be brought down to 8 or 9 isn't going to crash the economy or ruin anything about the game overall. It just makes them a little more accessible. That would probably be more healthy for the game. However, some people (like Goetzjam) freak out any time someone wants things to be even the slightest bit easier, and exaggerate the outcome, claiming people want the difficulty to be 0 or 1 when that isn't the case at all. If someone is opposed to bringing it down just a notch or two, that's fine, but at least provide an honest explanation that isn't just knee-jerk overreaction.

I have the exact same feeling about leveling to 100, but we saw the ridiculous conversation that turned into... I guess I don't understand certain people's holy grails, and I have a feeling a lot of this comes from a position of privilege - having played the game for a long time, it's easy to forget how huge of a wall new players face. Or how un-fun it was to scale the damn thing. Chopping off a few feet at the top of a mile-high wall is definitely not going to break the game; this is, indeed, all a disagreement about specific magnitudes rather than some kind of epic battle between those on opposite ideological spectrums. Not to single Goetz out (Goetz, why do you get such a bad rap? :)), but I share his desire to preserve a difficult game that only rewards the best, most devoted players - we just have different opinions on the specific positions of milestones, that's all.

6 linking was already brought down by adding in the guaranteed masters recipe. So it already is a 8-9 if you want it to be. However because it was brought down the new 10 is now lower then the old 10, see how this pattern never ends?

Leveling to 100 was already made easier by a number of things:

A) They made all maps larger, which means more mobs
B) Added strong boxes, again added more mobs
1) They also added cartos, while not 100% reliable they have lowered the cost of high level mapping.
C) Beyond, while not always done, it again, adds more mobs.
D) Zana, paired with quite a few of her mods the maps can give great XP\returns
E) If i'm not mistaken they increased the highest level map from 77>78 (yes I know vaal maps are a thing, plus uber atziri)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no boundry to how much easier people want this game to be. No matter what GGG does you'll have your hands out asking for it to be easier after 6 months again, which is why handing out free 6 links like someone mentioned in this thread or reducing the xp penalty won't actually do anything but shut a few people up for a few months, which isn't worth it.


Also I don't mind you implying myself, but really if you have to make a point to specifically try and call me out I don't know why you bother posting.

Goetz, read my edited post! You responded before I could finish my edits (wow these threads move insanely fast).

Anyway, as to your points about difficulty creep, I haven't been playing nearly as long as you. It makes sense to me that, from your perspective, there's a longer trend you're worried about. I disagree, but I get it.

"

demon9675 wrote:

Goetz, read my edited post! You responded before I could finish my edits (wow these threads move insanely fast).

Anyway, as to your points about difficulty creep, I haven't been playing nearly as long as you. It makes sense to me that, from your perspective, there's a longer trend you're worried about. I disagree, but I get it.

I updated the new quote.

He specifically calls me out on pretty much any forum thread I post on, really doesn't matter which one. I get people PMing me thanking me for spending time to reply to threads (so they don't have to) and i've had a few tell me to stop arguing with people that can't end a conversation. To me I just want what is best for the game, as you can guess I enjoy it very much (and my wallet says the same thing)

I don't mind people disagreeing with me as long as they can (and have) read my perspective and understand it. Essentially what this comes down to is difficult is at the top, even if you cut the top down its still technically difficult and the process repeats over and over again.

"

morbo wrote:

math, etc.. ^_^

I've done all that in Torment SF (self found) and got my 6L vorici in two months. Yes, with steady daily play, but nothing too exaggerated.

1500 is high because in PoE you are supposed to trade

Other points:

* getting masters to lvl 6 is now a breeze
* you need 64 jews per day to get 20 fus from vorici, how you got them is not important (drops, Elro', vendor...)
* if you are smart, your first SF 5L in league is a white chest == easy to link (if you are smarter, you trade, ofc)
* 2 months is an estimate which takes drops into account, if you are just doing the vorici deal it takes more.

E:
* you dont need (legacy) IIQ gear

Trading =/= being an orb tycoon, which is what it takes to get 1500 fusings in any sane amount of time.

took me 4 months to get 150 (not accounting for incidental and daily use) for a 5 link which I needed.
I play fairly consistantly. I've got over 1200 hours logged. I don't think I have 1000 fusings in all my standard tabs if I tallied them all up after 2 years of play.

"

goetzjam wrote:

"

demon9675 wrote:

Goetz, read my edited post! You responded before I could finish my edits (wow these threads move insanely fast).

Anyway, as to your points about difficulty creep, I haven't been playing nearly as long as you. It makes sense to me that, from your perspective, there's a longer trend you're worried about. I disagree, but I get it.

I updated the new quote.

He specifically calls me out on pretty much any forum thread I post on, really doesn't matter which one. I get people PMing me thanking me for spending time to reply to threads (so they don't have to) and i've had a few tell me to stop arguing with people that can't end a conversation. To me I just want what is best for the game, as you can guess I enjoy it very much (and my wallet says the same thing)

I don't mind people disagreeing with me as long as they can (and have) read my perspective and understand it. Essentially what this comes down to is difficult is at the top, even if you cut the top down its still technically difficult and the process repeats over and over again.

I don't always disagree with you, despite how my posts may come across. But, especially because we do sometimes disagree, I DO make a concerted effort to understand your position and I always find it well-reasoned. I just want to make that totally clear.

But the only issue I have with your logic in this case is that fear of a slippery slope can put a stop to ANY much-needed tweaks if they affect difficulty somehow. And they always will.

Ironically, I'm in agreement with you about 6 linking being pretty much fine as-is, so I'm not even sure how we wound up having this conversation here haha.