jewels discussion: bringing RNG and Economy to the Passive Tree

"

johnKeys wrote:

for a non-trader, "easily" is very relative (RNG), and "cheap price" has no meaning whatsoever, Boem.

fact of the matter is, something which was once 100% likely to happen, will now be subject to RNG.
one more "trade, or suffer the consequences" mechanic, in a giant heap.

I'm well aware of the advantages of Jewels in the Tree, but people who can't quite get into the mindset of a SF player who has to take his chances with RNG, should at least try to do so.
try to understand where I'm coming from and why RNG in the Passive Tree, is such bad news for me.

I ran dominus/maps etc for 2 hours to get roughly 350 alterations to roll a +2 fire skill staff.

Solo-self-found sort of speak.

to craft a jewel, you just do the same thing.

And when you enter 75 and higher maps you start crafting regals from the drops witch allow that third modifier to be put on. ( a third modifier rather then only 2 is still a stat increase)

Then comes the exalt. (currently) However, if they introduce a jeweler master, this would be the time to pay the master to finish your 4/4 jewel craft.

Allowing 3 desired stats and one random regal roll.

And that's a very cheap craft IN COMPARISON to all other crafts available in PoE.

So yeah, very low key and manageable for all players who will put the effort in it.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : and please don't tell me to "try and get in the mindset of a solo self-found player" since i played that style for roughly a year and a half without issue's. Before masters and all of those additions that made it far more easily then when i played it.

And i did not make a single post when i did that trying to ask for favors or decrease SSF play-style difficulty.

If you want something, you grind and farm for it. If your a SSF player, this becomes MORE TRUE, so you either pay that price for the game-play experience or don't play SSF. It is that simple.

And obviously you gotta be smart about orb investments and build planning, but that's obvious since your putting a penalty on yourself on purpose.

edit2 : and all of my chars are self-found until they hit like lvl 75/80 most of the time because i refuse to waste orbs at that point and rather save them for top-tier items when i really wont drop anything myself anymore.

"

miljan wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

It is true, everything is limited from level 1. You can not use skill you want because of RNG on items. Its the most simple example of showing how the system is very different than d2. So nothing wrong with me, you just dont remember how d2 was, and that it didnt have this crappy progression and problems. And this problems are all in the game becuse of balance around trading as curency sink, if you dont understand than dont know what to say than

You can't use 6L from level 1 because that's part of the progression. It's like complaining about the fact that you can't use level 30 skills in D2 from level 1 (aka stupid).

Read again what i wrote.
I didnt say anything about 6 link items. So i guess I need to draw it down to you and spell it so you understand.

In d2 you are limited by level so you can use your skill (and few point in earlier skill, that most of time you will max out for synergies). In Poe you are limited by level (ever skill gems has a minimum level same as in d2) and sockets and color on the item you want to put it in. So yes, unlike in d2, you have aditional limitation (as additional layer of RNG) on character progression. I complaining about the fact you can not use a skill even if you have level for it (like in d2) because the skill is tide to the item and RNG that is there only as currency sink because of the stupid balance around trading.

I talk about bad mechanic in the game that make the game progression bad compared to any other arpg out there, and that are there only for pushing people to trade or as sink. And I already wrote a list of them back several pages ago, so dont want to repeat again.

And I explained that these layers you talk about weren't implemented primarily as a currency sink (it only becomes a sink really late in the game) but as a terms of progession. And no it doesn't make the progression bad, it feels quite natural to me. Just get rid of chroming and it's perfect.

"

Chameleon wrote:

"

Splift wrote:

You are wrong when you say GGG designed the game to require trade because its just not true.

You are so very very wrong there. A multitude of times Chris has said in videos that the game mechanic were designed from the ground up around trading and the economy.

You guys should read more carefully, there is a difference between designed around trading and designed to require trading. As mentioned before, you can do just fine without trading for 95% of the game. GGG made sure of that by rebalancing the game (as in making everything easier and faster to obtain). So the game is also designed around self-found play to a certain point.

Btw guys I broke my personal record today in deadlifts 160 kg/ 352 lbs 3 reps come at me xd

"

Xavderion wrote:

You guys should read more carefully, there is a difference between designed around trading and designed to require trading. As mentioned before, you can do just fine without trading for 95% of the game. GGG made sure of that by rebalancing the game (as in making everything easier and faster to obtain). So the game is also designed around self-found play to a certain point.

Well, i was the one that brought up that one specific line of yours and i responded to you in a way where i talk about that difference.

I just got the feeling in this whole conversation that you wanted to tell people that game balance and design is not affected through the trading philosophy by GGG and just wanted to correct you on this one to be more specific.

The % you gave is meaningless and bland.

The game is balanced and made with trading in mind from the very beginning, now and in the future. End of line.

The tweaks and changes they made are to please a vocal mass that has brought up their reasons since cb/ob about itemization, drops and RNG.

When it´s about you guys side - we wouldn´t even have masters till now and would live in the same old stone age CB.

"

Spysong192 wrote:

I just got the feeling in this whole conversation that you wanted to tell people that game balance and design is not affected through the trading philosophy by GGG and just wanted to correct you on this one to be more specific.

No, I never claimed that. You must've misunderstood or I wasn't able to state my point clear enough.

"

Spysong192 wrote:

The % you gave is meaningless and bland.

No, everything except Uber Atziri and sustaining 75+ maps is doable self-found without a problem. What % would you use?

"

Spysong192 wrote:

The game is balanced and made with trading in mind from the very beginning, now and in the future. End of line.

Sure. This doesn't mean it's not viable to play self-found, because it definitely is. So no, it's not balanced around a trading requirement as some have said, at least not until the end of the game.

"

Spysong192 wrote:

The tweaks and changes they made are to please a vocal mass that has brought up their reasons since cb/ob about itemization, drops and RNG.

When it´s about you guys side - we wouldn´t even have masters till now and would live in the same old stone age CB.

CB gives me good feels of nostalgia. Would play :3

"

Xavderion wrote:

And I explained that these layers you talk about weren't implemented primarily as a currency sink (it only becomes a sink really late in the game) but as a terms of progession. And no it doesn't make the progression bad, it feels quite natural to me. Just get rid of chroming and it's perfect.

Just get rid of chroming , and fuse also. And few other things, and than it will be perfect hahah. And yes it makes the game progression bad, very bad compared to d2 or any other arpg.

"

miljan wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

And I explained that these layers you talk about weren't implemented primarily as a currency sink (it only becomes a sink really late in the game) but as a terms of progession. And no it doesn't make the progression bad, it feels quite natural to me. Just get rid of chroming and it's perfect.

Just get rid of chroming , and fuse also. And few other things, and than it will be perfect hahah. And yes it makes the game progression bad, very bad compared to d2 or any other arpg.

No, only chroming. It could even work with chroming if they get rid of the weighted RNG. Other than that progression feels very good and I've played almost every ARPG so I have games to compare to PoE.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

miljan wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

And I explained that these layers you talk about weren't implemented primarily as a currency sink (it only becomes a sink really late in the game) but as a terms of progession. And no it doesn't make the progression bad, it feels quite natural to me. Just get rid of chroming and it's perfect.

Just get rid of chroming , and fuse also. And few other things, and than it will be perfect hahah. And yes it makes the game progression bad, very bad compared to d2 or any other arpg.

No, only chroming. It could even work with chroming if they get rid of the weighted RNG. Other than that progression feels very good and I've played almost every ARPG so I have games to compare to PoE.

Apparently you didn't played any other arpg recently. If this game had only problems with chromes it would be great, unfortunately it's not even close to that, as the game is full of limitations and bad mechanics.

"

miljan wrote:

Apparently you didn't played any other arpg recently. If this game had only problems with chromes it would be great, unfortunately it's not even close to that, as the game is full of limitations and bad mechanics.

I did, they were all way worse than PoE :)