jewels discussion: bringing RNG and Economy to the Passive Tree

"

grepman wrote:

you cannot have a competitive game with unrestricted trade, balanced not around trade.
just like you cannot have a competitive not-online-only game in 2015

you still fail to understand that this shit is strictly binary

either you have an economy and trading and competitiveness, or you have no trading/no economy and no balance around trading. or no competitiveness.

not balancing the game around economy simply means no economy. so again, you want it to be one way when the game is another way- its plainly stated by devs that economy is one of the features THEY feel is important to the game.

Dude, you can no have competitive arpg with trading, what the hack are you eve talking about? The really competitive thing in poe are short races. Leagues where you can trade, rmt is not one of them, so drop that way of thinking as you shoot your self in foot.


And as I gave you a example, that you can have trading in a game without balanced economy

"

Faendris wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

"

Faendris wrote:

Easy: if you do not balance around trading and allow trading then someone who does trade will be done (i.e. have optimal gear / max level) with the game quite fast. I appreciate it that it takes almost forever to have perfect gear in PoE even if you DO trade.

Not correct. If you do not balance the game around trading, and leave high tear of items to be rare like d2 for people like you, than no people will not have max out characters easy, as I sai din my post.

Well then it IS balanced around trading, isn't it?

Actually its not, its balanced around highest tier items, for people like you. All other part of the game are balanced around player him self. There is a reason why d2 is best arpg ever made, they hit that balance very good (normally including a lot of other stuf).

"

miljan wrote:

"

grepman wrote:

you cannot have a competitive game with unrestricted trade, balanced not around trade.
just like you cannot have a competitive not-online-only game in 2015

you still fail to understand that this shit is strictly binary

either you have an economy and trading and competitiveness, or you have no trading/no economy and no balance around trading. or no competitiveness.

not balancing the game around economy simply means no economy. so again, you want it to be one way when the game is another way- its plainly stated by devs that economy is one of the features THEY feel is important to the game.

Dude, you can no have competitive arpg with trading, what the hack are you eve talking about? The really competitive thing in poe are short races. Leagues where you can trade, rmt is not one of them, so drop that way of thinking as you shoot your self in foot.


And as I gave you a example, that you can have trading in a game without balanced economy

lol you are still pretending you dont understand my point.

why is PoE online-only ? its to make sure you dont cheat shit offline. its because it was designed as a competitive arpg with mmo elements. you may not see it as such all you want, but thats the premise.

why is PoE balanced around trading ? its because trading is the fast way to progress, and in a game where its all about ladders, you want to control how top players are doing.

what is your example of an arpg with a good economy? certainly not d2 I hope, which had millions of dupes floating around.

"

miljan wrote:

Actually its not, its balanced around highest tier items, for people like you. All other part of the game are balanced around player him self. There is a reason why d2 is best arpg ever made, they hit that balance very good (normally including a lot of other stuf).

That is exactly how it is done in PoE. Most stuff is easy to get. It is no problem to level to 80+ self-found. Only the highest tier of items (shavs, mirrors, eternals, 6*T1 items, etc.) are hard to get and require serious trading. So, all is good.

"

johnKeys wrote:

we had this discussion a million times before: "hardcore", "competitive"...

but answer me one question, which pretty much sums up this thread.
both you and Xav:

why must the one thing which wasn't yet balanced around RNG and Trade, and is a huge part of what draws most players into the game - SF, and traders alike - get RNG injected into it?
don't we have enough of that crap in every. single. damn. part of the game already?

sure, the game is balanced around trade. but where do you draw the line? where do you say "I have to keep this an ARPG"?
can Chris/Jonathan/Qarl answer this question?

Jewels - as a concept of "dynamically changing builds" - are a great idea.
Jewels - as an actual implementation - may very likely be the last straw of overwhelming trade-simulator, real-RNG-everywhere design, which could make me quit.
2.5 years of being completely addicted to this game... takes one hell of a screw-up to make me quit - and littering the Passive Tree with RNG, taking away what little deterministic control I have over my own character, is exactly that.

because why not ? it adds dynamics and more builds based on randomness. I see it as a good thing, and especially good in context of the game 'classes' getting more and more specialized lately as opposed to CB/OB when you had at least the illusion that you can be 'anything'

I find it funny that out of the possible things, this minor thing about jewels is being the proverbial straw that breaks your back.

jewels are optional. there will be trees that dont take any jewels, Im sure. having some people who trade all day and do RNG having gear better than yours is already a par for the course, so I dont understand why this bothers you.

is it because you thought there was a skill in designing a tree that somehow equaled the playing field or something ? I genuinely don't get your point. since you play SSF, if you dont look at others, jewels will only widen your arsenal of builds and possibilities.

Hmmmm Johny im beginning to understand your frustration, basically your upset because the all mighty RNGesus has found his way into the last RNG/trade free area of the game.

Ill try to answer your questions but I dont think you will like my answers

why must the one thing which wasn't yet balanced around RNG and Trade, and is a huge part of what draws most players into the game - SF, and traders alike - get RNG injected into it?

why must it be injected with RNG we really there is no reason it has to happen, the reason it is going to happen is because GGG thought it would be a good idea. Is it? I dont know for sure ill have to wait for act four and find out myself.
Also RNGesus was upset because he had no power over the tree lol

don't we have enough of that crap in every. single. damn. part of the game already?

thats a matter of opinion I guess but we can all agree that there really is a lot in the game

like a real lot

oh and forgive me for the whole calling you I troll thing I can see now that the tree was kinda your safe haven from RNGesus and your upset that GGG is robing you of it.

sometimes im silly....and drunk usually both

"

miljan wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

No you dont need to balance around trading if you have trading in the game.

I snipped this sentence because your entire argument is based on this utterly false premise and thus falls flat. Even Blizzard realized this and removed trading completely when they decided to balance around self-found play. You can't have trade without a balance around trade, period.

You can, look at any arpg ever made, including games like d2 as pure proof. You still didnt answer what positive things a game balance around economy brings to this type of games.

I don't see it. D2 and PoE are pretty similar regarding drop balance. If you're implying D2 isn't balanced around trading, you are wrong. Besides, it's nonsense to compare offline ARPGs (most ARPGs are offline) to online-only ones. And I did answer your question, I can paraphrase if you want: a balance around economy allows a game to actually have an economy. The positives around the existance of an economy have been mentioned (and acknowledged by you) before.

"

johnKeys wrote:

why must the one thing which wasn't yet balanced around RNG and Trade, and is a huge part of what draws most players into the game - SF, and traders alike - get RNG injected into it?
don't we have enough of that crap in every. single. damn. part of the game already?

sure, the game is balanced around trade. but where do you draw the line? where do you say "I have to keep this an ARPG"?
can Chris/Jonathan/Qarl answer this question?

I'll answer your question and show the biggest flaw in your reasoning that ultimately lead to all the QQ threads you've made over the past months. The tree got RNG injected into it because it simply makes sense. By introducing jewels not only did GGG add further complexity to the game, but they also introduced a whole new branch of valuable items. This leads me to the flaw: you somehow believe trade and ARPG are seperate entities. This shows that you have no clue why trade/economy is a great thing for an ARPG, namely the fact that by making items tradeable, you give them value. The whole point of ARPGs is to kill monsters and get some value for it. That's exactly what a trade system accomplishes, even trash items have value in PoE because of this (I really believe alt orbs are totally underrated by many people, I had to trade 20 or so chaos for alts because I needed them so much in the 1mhc league). Without trade 99,99% of items would be trash, see D3.

"

Xavderion wrote:

That is exactly how it is done in PoE. Most stuff is easy to get. It is no problem to level to 80+ self-found. Only the highest tier of items (shavs, mirrors, eternals, 6*T1 items, etc.) are hard to get and require serious trading. So, all is good.

Its actually not. I suggest you to go play d2 again from beginning to end, and compare it to PoE. Hack, just compare how many unques and set items you get in one act. Or how much high level items you get from 1h of farming bosses. And compare it to POE. You will see huge difference. Even that character customization in POE is limited because of economy and crappy sockets. Thank god dont have that shit in d2.

There is a reason people that left poe (and some that didnt) call it path of trading, and the most unrewarding arpg ever made.

"

Xavderion wrote:

I don't see it. D2 and PoE are pretty similar regarding drop balance. If you're implying D2 isn't balanced around trading, you are wrong. Besides, it's nonsense to compare offline ARPGs (most ARPGs are offline) to online-only ones. And I did answer your question, I can paraphrase if you want: a balance around economy allows a game to actually have an economy. The positives around the existance of an economy have been mentioned (and acknowledged by you) before.

They are similar like night and day. I mean its very ignorant saying that for d2, that was never build around economy, and where "economy" was made by a small part of community that used high end runes to trade (as the game was never designed around it). Compare to PoE, where everything is build and limited because of economy (even using skills).

D2 is not balanced around trading, as you can get the high top end items just from farming bosses for few hours (not even weeks). And from always online arpg like d3 or marvel heroes, none of them also did this bulshit with economy, because one learned that it doesnt work and hurts the game more, the other didnt even try it.

No, you didnt answer my question, you are just repeating economy is good economy is good without saying what it brings to the arpg games.

"

miljan wrote:

D2 is not balanced around trading, as you can get the high top end items just from farming bosses for few hours

Sorry you are just plain wrong.

In d2 you could easily go a very long time without seeing any uniques, the drop rate is similar.

anyone who even remotely touches end game, trades in d2.

Just look at all the trading sites for d2, argueing that trade is a fringe minority thing in d2 just shows you know nothing about it or are wearing huge rose colored glasses.