Progressively changing penalties for dying in softcore leagues

There are several levels of players, some more casual than others, some more willing to put work into the game than others, some with more time and some looking for a different kind of experience.
I have a proposal that aims to please everyone in the softcore leagues regarding the exp loss;

Separate death penalty by tiers according to number of deaths, the characters in ladder would be marked with each of their respective tiers with a little badge:


Tier 0: cream of the crop, no deaths. This is a prestige marking
Tier 1: 1-10 deaths: 10% death penalty should be applied in this range (what is the normal now)
Tier 2: 11-50 deaths: the death penalty for this tier is 5%
Tier 4: The more casual tier, this tier has no experience penalty

Numbers could be changed ofc, and a character that reaches lvl 100 keeps whatever tier it had when it reached that level, regardless of how many deaths it had afterwards.

Why is it important to have markings in ladder? To avoid abuse and fair competition. Some person could purposely die 50 times after leveling up and then go for the top.
One could also separate how we view ladder by seeing one tier, a group of tiers, or all tiers together.
That way one could ascertain exactly who is the very best. Which matters when prizes are involved.

Maybe this system could not be used for races due to prizes, but I think its good for Core and experimental leagues.

why fixing something not broken ? penalties are fine as they are.

"

Tier 0: cream of the crop, no deaths. This is a prestige marking
Tier 1: 1-10 deaths: 10% death penalty should be applied in this range (what is the normal now)
Tier 2: 11-50 deaths: the death penalty for this tier is 5%
Tier 4: The more casual tier, this tier has no experience penalty

Tier 0 = Hardcore...the whole point of HC actualy
The rest, die 50 times and recieve no penalty...it's SC they'll kill themselves to get that bonus

Removing the exp penalty has been discussed before (fairly recently, at that). It breaks the game. If death has no penalty, then there is no reason to avoid it (although maps have a separate mechanism regarding this to some extent).

Using the argument that some people don't have enough time is a slippery slope. What's next, a special league for "short-timers" where drops and xp are doubled? Sliding scale XP/loot bonus based on how little time is played each day/week/etc?

If you're trying to level and can't due to too many deaths, odds are your build isn't strong enough for the area you're in. It's a signal that you need to grind better gear/level your gems/respec your build/etc.

I actually barely play SC, this is just a submission in hopes we see less whining threads (every once in a while one pops up).

I think the penalty is there for people to learn, but Im pretty sure some never do (or intend to) and this is a way to at least (hopefully) shut them up regarding this whole issue.

It is understandable that at times the exp penalty can be infuriating. Mainly, when you die. But the thing is that it is sometimes good to feel a bit infuriated. It makes you try harder and it makes the game feel more alive.

But it could be improved by affecting exp gain rather than gained exp. Then you would always progress (and not somehow lose what you know) and there would not be those free deaths after a level up.

So let me go ahead and die so I can get into Tier 4 (or whatever place removes the penalty), then get to 100 long, long before anyone else who stays in any of the above tiers. GG.

No, such things never work.

"

Natharias wrote:

So let me go ahead and die so I can get into Tier 4 (or whatever place removes the penalty), then get to 100 long, long before anyone else who stays in any of the above tiers. GG.

No, such things never work.

You might be the first 100 in Tier 4 (which would then probably be called scrubcore), but no bragging rights will come with this. The better Tiers will laugh at you.
And level 100 surely isn't about the last few passive points - it's all about being among the elite.

I like the original proposition.

your argument equates to saying "softcore should be hardcore" in that you posit that people will be permanently penalized by dying.

or people would ignore it and it becomes "softcore has no death penalty".

either way it could go, is bad.

"

Xeledon2132 wrote:

"

Natharias wrote:

So let me go ahead and die so I can get into Tier 4 (or whatever place removes the penalty), then get to 100 long, long before anyone else who stays in any of the above tiers. GG.

No, such things never work.

You might be the first 100 in Tier 4 (which would then probably be called scrubcore), but no bragging rights will come with this. The better Tiers will laugh at you.
And level 100 surely isn't about the last few passive points - it's all about being among the elite.

I like the original proposition.

Lol. You completely missed the point.

If I die at level 60, purposefully, and lose 1,000% experience, I only lose 1,000% of level 60 experience. When I die at level 99, I won't lose any experience, I lose only a portal if I'm in a map.

The "better" tiered players will be bitching on the forums when they finally die to desync, and all characters eventually die to something. All of them. It may not happen within a few months, but don't expect low-life aurastackers to retain 100% physical, elemental, and chaos immunity just because you don't think they won't be nerfed. They'll die sometime. And they'll be losing experience. And they'll be losing 10% of their higher levels, not level 60.

Oh, and this assumes that it only calculates death at the highest difficulty. If I die 100 times in normal, I won't lose any experience. So I'll end up with a net 0% lost while they still have experience to worry about.

Now do you get the point?

Now do you see why using such tiers is bad?