Legacy items are bullshit
These are only the self-found ones, I have a bunch I traded for. Anyway it seems to me that GGG dont want to disappoint their long term supporters and at the same time use the legacy items as an excuse when someone tries to criticize the heavy handed way they deal with balance. See, we dont change EVERYTHING in the game XD |
|
"They've never said anything like that, but they don't need to, people in this thread will say that for them. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
" It's still not Hypocrisy. It's still a trade-off. | |
@Sickness: If it's a trade-off, what's the trade?
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
" If your main concern is logical consistency they could get around that by just changing the name of the new versions. "Kaom's Heart" is the +1000 life chest and "Kaom's Blazing Heart" is the +500 life chest with fire damage. The legacy version goes the way of IIQ gem and stops dropping. They don't have to update legacy items to attain consistency. |
|
" this is only a problem in standard league. it's just a game anyway. what is the big issue with legacy items in a permanent league with items overflowing there left and right and never going away. play in the temp leagues if you don't like it. standard is what it is :) Last edited by kompaniet on May 25, 2015, 12:59:07 PM
| |
(Note: This has been sitting in my draft bin for a while. I don't know why I never got back around to posting it, but here it is, albeit a little late in the discussion)
I feel that a strict no-legacy policy for the sake of balance is really grasping at straws. The reasons are two: Least of all, there exist far greater imbalances in our itemization scheme, that any affect to legacy items would have little to know impact on balance (as a concept). More-over, most re-balance is little more than a stepping stone for the "moving target"--which is, if nothing else, by its own nature the conceptual embodiment of imbalance. This is an observable pattern, repeated each patch iteration, whereby the "moving target" seeks the greatest common denominator for the sake of generating a new brand of imbalance to fuel the next iteration. Otherwise, balance as a concept only exists in PoE's extremes, where things would cease to function, or function far too well. Legacy items do not exist in those extremes (or, far enough into). Devolving Wilds
Land “T, Sacrifice Devolving Wilds: Search your library for a basic land card and reveal it. Then shuffle your library.” |
|
I'm not the one arguing for balance in Standard League. GGG does with one Janus face, while the other says old items should remain unchanged. When I mention balance, I do so from the point of view of GGG's double-talk perspective, in the ironic spirit of proof by contradiction.
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on May 25, 2015, 3:45:39 PM
|
|
I meant balance as a concept; an intangible thing around which there can be ponderances of double-talk, contradictions, or even steadfast adherence to.
Except there cannot be, because it does not exist in the realm of PoE--a game where the principle philosophy has thus far been to maintain functional imbalance. Devolving Wilds Land “T, Sacrifice Devolving Wilds: Search your library for a basic land card and reveal it. Then shuffle your library.” Last edited by CanHasPants on May 25, 2015, 4:03:00 PM
|
|
"The hell does this even mean? The standards by which a "moving target" metagame is judged are: 1. Continually shifting top dogs 2. As close as possible to zero power creep The standard by which balance is judged is: 1. Diverse metagame of top options with roughly equal viability A moving target metagame and balance are irrelevant to each other. Even if you fall into a common moving-target pitfall and create a lot of power creep, if you release enough new stuff the power creep can be balanced against each other (despite trumping the old stuff). When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB on May 25, 2015, 4:24:16 PM
|
|