[Feedback] On map modifiers and build diversity.

Firstly, an example

It has been roughly two years ago since i made a regeneration based character, i sometimes use it as a secondary layer of defense with partial investment in it due to passive tree routing and dual node pathing(like life/%regen at duelist bottom)

The reasoning is quite simple, i like maps and i like to drop maps.

In practice this imply's that you want to run as many pack size modifiers as possible in higher tiers of the content available. It so happens that regen based characters are penalized roughly four times more then leech based characters.(and preferably instant leech characters)

This means, if you have somewhat of a brain and are able to connect the dot's that you simply rule out regeneration in any character design process you attempt.

If you don't =>

1) you get penalized on maps drops
2) you get penalized on economic value (chaos sink for rerolling maps)

This is a logical approach to the current end-game system put in place.

Proposition

What i would like to see instead is a 5% pack size modifier for every attribute on a map. With a maximum value of 40% on eight attribute vaaled maps.

This ensures build diversity and equality in punishment across the board. I would also like to see either the reduction of regen modifiers penalty's or the increase of leech penalty modifiers.(that also function on instant leech characters, something like a leech % is halved, rather then targeting effectiveness of the leech rate)

Now, one could argue

"But Boem, some map modifiers aren't even a threat, why should they provide a pack size increase?"

And my counter-argument would be

"that's an issue with the modifiers available, not with the implementation or necessity of rolling pack size"

From my personal experience map modifiers are extremely one dimensional. You build your character, incorporating counter measures for the vast amount of possible modifiers. Which in return, makes them "free modifiers without any downside"

Simply put, they are binary in most cases you can either cope with them or you can not.

An example of a non binary map modifier is

"area contains additional totems" or "area has increased monster variety"

These modifiers are beautiful, since they are not one dimensional or binary (yes/no), they interact with the content and provide random encounters that cannot be predicted upfront and as a result are capable by the player to be judged far less accurately in therms of danger.

I would like to see GGG expand on modifiers like this in general and get rid of some of the static modifiers, which pose very little thread to builds in general because they can be countered beforehand. While simultaneously limiting build diversity severely.

tl;dr we need more random map modifiers and less static pre-counter ones, while also providing incentive to run as many mods as possible in the form of a pack size increase per individual modifier.
Followed by a redesign of map modifiers in general.

Resulting in a broader variety of content viable builds in general.

Peace,

-Boem-

Should have been done ages ago but I assume GGG wants us to waste chaos orbs rerolling.

+1

"

Raudram wrote:

Should have been done ages ago but I assume GGG wants us to waste chaos orbs rerolling.

I figured AoW release was a good point in time to make this post, since a lot of post's negatively portraying the release all seem aimed at the lack of fundamental reshaping of the system.

Which is what i am addressing in this post.

Basically AoW provided a framework for the old system, without fundamentally addressing the flaws presented in the old system.

I honestly thought this would see some more attention or discussion.

Peace,

-Boem-

Bump and forever in the abyss you go.

Peace,

-Boem-