Unpopular Idea: Revive Hardcore Players

While I also agree that deaths like these should be "resurrect-able", there is one giant problem - resources.
Resources GGG lacks. There in no way on earth now that GGG is able to handle all the DC deaths and all sort of other things. When they state that you can get revived, many people with regular HC deaths will start hammering support in hope to get revived.

You still debating this nonsense?...

Yes, nonsense.

At the same time GGG just show some small sign of planning something, rest assured that the entire community Standard raise his voice to a similar measure was adopted also in Standard... According to recently GGG published data, in the course of 1 week we are running nearly 4 million maps. Add to that the normal instances (no maps), and probably we overcome the 7 million weekly instances. Imagine that there is a death in only 0.1% of those instances. That would be 7000 weekly deaths. Now imagine that 1 in every 10 people who died feel that his death was unjust and make the request for review of death...
I doubt that anyone in their right mind would want to do such work. I do not sympathize with GGG but I know they are not crazy...

"

Mivo wrote:

By the way, the problem with a costumizable logout timer (and short logout timers in general) is that it would increase the strain on the server. Instead of checking your character's heartbeat every six seconds, it would have to do it every two seconds, for tens of thousands of simultaneously connected players. That is not trivial and may cause other undesired effects. It's not my area of expertise, I only recall design debates about this type of thing.

Not my area of expertise, but I can hardly believe that this is a technical reason. The server communicates with the client somewhere between tens and hundreds of times per second, and has code to handle (and thus, probably, detect) high latency already. Maybe I am wrong, but I would assume it is mostly changing one constant...

"

Char1983 wrote:

"

Mivo wrote:

By the way, the problem with a costumizable logout timer (and short logout timers in general) is that it would increase the strain on the server. Instead of checking your character's heartbeat every six seconds, it would have to do it every two seconds, for tens of thousands of simultaneously connected players. That is not trivial and may cause other undesired effects. It's not my area of expertise, I only recall design debates about this type of thing.

Not my area of expertise, but I can hardly believe that this is a technical reason. The server communicates with the client somewhere between tens and hundreds of times per second, and has code to handle (and thus, probably, detect) high latency already. Maybe I am wrong, but I would assume it is mostly changing one constant...

Perhaps server strain isn't the biggest issue either. Think about the people who don't have the greatest connection in the first place. Forcing 2 second ping timeouts would be pretty detrimental to the more casual players who don't have the capability of remaining reliably connected for two seconds.

I suppose that's where a customizable ping timeout would come into play. Set the default to six seconds and give players the ability to lower it to a minimum of two.

"

Actkqk wrote:

You still debating this nonsense?...

Yes, nonsense.

At the same time GGG just show some small sign of planning something, rest assured that the entire community Standard raise his voice to a similar measure was adopted also in Standard... According to recently GGG published data, in the course of 1 week we are running nearly 4 million maps. Add to that the normal instances (no maps), and probably we overcome the 7 million weekly instances. Imagine that there is a death in only 0.1% of those instances. That would be 7000 weekly deaths. Now imagine that 1 in every 10 people who died feel that his death was unjust and make the request for review of death...
I doubt that anyone in their right mind would want to do such work. I do not sympathize with GGG but I know they are not crazy...

You also didn't read what had transpired within the thread before responding. I made one post and one suggestion alone regarding player levels that would severely reduce the numbers you've suggested.

Instant, guarenteed, permanent death is not required (opinion), to make death matter.

All you need is a chance of a permanent death. Old school Wizardry did this by giving you an ailment, and that ailment having a cost to try to cure, and the chance of failing and falling into a worse state. So there was always that chance that falling in battle would be your last fight.

Basically, if and when you died there was an ever growing chance that it would be permanent, via any system, then it makes each death matter. You might survive 1 fall. Maybe 2. But don't test your luck, or you'll be sorry... because you might survive zero.

This type of a system allows players to attempt very hard (and potentially quite fun) content. It helps to balance of risk vs reward of something very hard. But it doesn't reward the outright stupid.



This approach is slightly more hardcore MMO, and slightly less rougue-like, though to be honest. And I generally play POE as a hardcore rouge-like.

Then again, I purposefully avoid certain challenging content, and it might be more fun if I didn't.