Pointless argument about chance and randomness

Please refer to this thread for the relisted post.

http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/147342

Thanks!

Peoples must understand that every game need things that are good and bad, hard and easy, fast and slow.

"

How good would you feel rolling a good item if you never failed a roll?

My suggestion for Jewlers/fusings/chromatics is to make the new roll optional. Say you have a 5l armor and want to 6l it. Right now, you need to stockpile hundreds of these orbs to have a fairly safe chance of not screwing yourself over. But what if instead you could accept/decline the new roll. The orb would be consumed regardless of your choice, but you wouldn't be shooting yourself in the foot just by trying to improve your gear. It would still take the same number of orbs on average, but the player would have more incentive to use their orbs, even if they just had a few. Thoughts?

It's an interesting proposal, for sure, and one I like the idea of...to a degree.

Thing is, were they to implement this change, the random jorb/fuse giving you 5-6S/L from 1S/L in one use would be gone (bad), but the odds of improving the number of socks or links on the low end could be substantially increased such that going from 1 to 2 would be guaranteed, 2 to 3 would have a very high chance (with some potential for reverting to the previous number) on a curve as such that the odds of getting 4+ socks or links would pretty much match what we currently have. Otherwise, the ease of obtaining jorbs via vendor and current recipe would need changing as this would immediately derail the current economy.

In all, I've never been too lucky OR unlucky with jorbs or fuses, but having seen their impact on other players' experiences (and having had a few annoying bouts with them myself), I'd welcome such a change as it would definitely make for more 'predictable' results on the player's end and would be less frustrating overall IMO. By far, the most damning experience in this game can be blasting through literally hundreds of jorbs and fuses on that super awesome drop/roll, only to end up with an unusable item that's worse off than when you started. It's why linked white items are still so valuable, and this idea, if properly done, would leave their value in tact while leaving folks with results that could still be useful during their upgrade attempts.

"

kamil1210 wrote:

Peoples must understand that every game need things that are good and bad, hard and easy, fast and slow.

"

How good would you feel rolling a good item if you never failed a roll?

Wow, it's like you didn't read my post at all!

I know what you wrote. You want fusing and jewelry to be more players friendly.

It is hard to obtain 6 link armour and this is good.

"

kamil1210 wrote:

I know what you wrote. You want fusing and jewelry to be more players friendly.

It is hard to obtain 6 link armour and this is good.

It still can be hard, but less frustrating, I think the current state is simply too random.
Just because something can be made easier, doesn't instantly make it a ROFLSTOMP lolzgag gmae for people who find Angry Birds taxing.

There is a happy medium.

I for one think the current system is fine.

Be prepared to fail, and ecstatic if you get it. These orbs are no different than any other if you've crafted from a base white before. Don't get what you want? Scour and start over.

Same principle. Chaos can make things worse. Divines, blessed can too.

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

I for one think the current system is fine.

Be prepared to fail, and ecstatic if you get it. These orbs are no different than any other if you've crafted from a base white before. Don't get what you want? Scour and start over.

Same principle. Chaos can make things worse. Divines, blessed can too.

You realise the current system means to get 6L may take in excess of 1,000 fusings

ONE THOUSAND

Is this expected, desirable, wanted, or just needlessly frustrating, time consuming, and pointless?

How rare do 6L's need to be?

Why do they have to be something you can only get by being stupidly lucky, or ridiculous amounts of grinding.

I mean, really 1,000???!!

"

Yxalitis wrote:

Every other modifier orb has a chance to modify some random aspect of an item for another, what Player A wants is indeterminate, so the randomness works to create different items with the opportunity to work with one build or another.
But, the jewelers and fusings work as much against as for EVERY player, and every build.
Is there ever anyone ever in the history of POE who wanted to reduce the number of sockets an item has, or remove a link instead of adding one?
Now I realise we can't change these orbs so they ALWAYS add a socket/link, that would end up creating a player base with max linked sockets on every item.
But, can we at least modify the behaviour, so that each use can only modify the number of links/sockets by a range from -1 to +1.

This still leaves the process of getting a 6L item fraught with many backward steps, but removes the silly 4S, 2S 1S 5S 1S 2S, nonsense currently in the game.

This obviously is a buff to jewelers and fusings, and one which will increase their value, and ultimately result in less orbs being used to create max linked items.
BUT, it won't eliminate the risk, or ruin the gamthoughts?

I like the idea but it would most definitly NOT increase the value of them. It would decrease thier value by a significant margin simple because there is less range involved. But like I said, I like it. Hell it takes me almost a stack of fusing to even make a 3link. I tried earlier today and used 10 fusings going from 1 link to 0 link and back before I closed the game raging.