The new mapping system worked.

I dont see how you can use a streamer like etup as a guide for anything.


Thats like saying you need some weight loss go out and run 50 miles every other day like the top Kenyan marathon runner trains. And calories dont matter he eats 25,000 a day.

Map drops are terrible because avg player will end up playing content to easy for them 90% of the time. This leads to frustration and boredom.

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

I dont see how you can use a streamer like etup as a guide for anything.

GGG can gauge his achievement of reaching lvl 100 and see how they did it.

And i say "they" because Etup is not doing it alone.

So they can conclude if his achievement is more in line with there intended goal of reaching level 100.

Their intended goal might not align with your personal desires and that's fine, i am not discussing that, simply making a statement that they seem to have hit there goal of increasing the difficulty towards lvl 100.

Peace,

-Boem-

I think Boem is correct. The changes to the mapping system addressed what GGG considered to be problems with 1.3. The result, when looked at in that context, is likely considered a success by those who designed the new 2.0 framework. Etup is one example, however, any number of the other well-known players have echoed the same things (map sustain is harder, mapping requires more risk, 2.0 generally is a riskier/more difficult/less "yolo" friendly game than 1.3).

HOWEVER.


What it seems like everyone WANTS to discuss are completely separate questions, namely whether:

1.) The majority of the community considered the 1.3 situation to be problematic.
2.) The new system will be seen as challenging or merely frustrating to the more 'average' player. (Not in terms of skill, but perhaps in terms of commitment [time, willingness to grind, etc.])
3.) The new system suits what people want from end-game. (In fact, what does end-game even mean? Is it Atziri? Uber? 83 maps? level 100? Is end-game build crafting? Theory crafting? Getting Pimpin' Loot?)
4.) Maps and XP go hand in hand, so nerfs to map drops and higher tier map drops are tacitly nerfs to XP and levels. So, what level are users "Entitled" to get without a super grind. What levels should the casual player be expected to achieve and with what ease/effort?

This... has been a fairly pointless thread.

But I'm reminded of something I read last night, from a successful developer:
"Sometimes, I think we forget that once the game is released, it's the community's game. Sometimes ego really can get in the way of games like these (online multiplayer) progressing as they should."

If GGG consider that Etup rolled harder maps to achieve his reward, one wonders if they consider the goal could be achieved any other way - like for example making maps more available but basing the exp reward on the map difficulty. Something to consider (and discard?), GGG.

PS Phaeded ... Keep up the good work. An intensive remedial class in apostrophes is also warranted, I feel.

working as intended? yes, people quit their chars from boredom when they get to maps. working as intended. great job

I'm not sure I'd call it a success when I haven't even bothered doing any of my 69 maps yet and I'm level 77 and nearly 78.

They could at least throw me a bone and make The Harvest easier to path through to clear for exp in a 70 zone.

"

Boem wrote:

Except that, i am right and I_NO not liking the implication of that fact is not the same as bringing a relevant argument to the table.

But of course you know that, you have a similar approach to a discussion. As was apparent from your participation in the whole "AA is rekt and doomed" thing.

Stating something is not the same as saying you agree with something.

GGG's approach had the out-come they where aiming for. Now is that out-come desired? Many don't think so.

Is that somehow relevant to this thread, not really, but feel free to disagree and voice your opinion.

Except you are not right. You looked at a very special case (a no life streamer) and then made many assumptions about the investment he and his viewer community made to get him to lvl 100 without actually knowing one way or the other and then made conclusions based on the special case padded with assumptions as if it was remotely relevant to anything.

Of course this has already been fully explained to you by others, but you were incapable of understanding, the same way you are incapable of ever being right, about anything.

Sweet, all I need to do is quit my job and play PoE 16 hours a day and I can progress the same speed I did before while also maintaining a life outside of PoE? Sounds good to me!

"

CliveHowlitzer wrote:

Sweet, all I need to do is quit my job and play PoE 16 hours a day and I can progress the same speed I did before while also maintaining a life outside of PoE? Sounds good to me!

You are alive!!!!! <3

You guys still assume that gutting content accessibility (most noticeable for average players) was done with the intention to slow down levelling to 100?!?

Slowing down levelling could be done simply by tweaking the XP curve and leaving content access alone (and thus alienating a lot less players).

It's obvious map nerfs (=raising cost of mapping) were done with other intents, most likely to force players more into trade/partying.