@GGG Game Balance For Casual Vs. Hardcore Players

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Char1983 wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Spoiler

Regarding droprates: increasing them doesn't mean you find any more upgrades. More drops mean better items, but better items also mean higher standards for what's good and what's junk; these cancel each other out when droprates increase, solving nothing.

Feeling like drops are shit is instead indicative of another problem: boring itemization. Deep itemization will have you consider two items with different mods and make you wonder: which is better for your build? Shallow itemization doesn't do this, so as soon as you see an item you immediately know whether it's trade/vendor fodder or a new equip.

1. Higher drop rates actually do do something: They make theorycrafting more fun / easier / more rewarding. Why? Because with higher drop rates, it is easier to equip a new character. In a new league, it might take quite a while until I can actually test whether my theorycrafted build works, especially if it requires certain build-enabling uniques that might be several exalt in price. Also, the amount of trash that drops in this game (i.e. items that do not have any use in an end-game scenario, regardless of whether you are well equipped yet or not) is pretty astonishing, and on top of that influencing game performance.

2. The second effect better drops have is to narrow the gap between "no-lifers" and the more average player. This results in less of a power differential and thus makes it possible to better balance a game, especially in a situation where clearspeed is very important and actively encouraged through on-kill effects.

Spoiler

Now, don't get me wrong, I don't want the game to be easy. I want it to be challenging. And what you say about farming being a skill-free, mindless activity is unfortunately very true, and better solved in other games. It is way too easy to clear the entire screen with the press of a single button. That does not mean, however, that I would mind having less, but better drops. Also I would not mind better and less RNG-gated access to end-game content (high-tier maps, Shaper, Uber Atziri).

Numbers mine.

1. The key phrase here is "build-enabling uniques."

Imagine if Shav's didn't exist, and instead "Chaos Damage doesn't bypass Energy Shield" was a prefix which only spawned on Scholar's Robes.

If this were true, droprates wouldn't need to be very high to get a basic low-life-enabling chest; even self-found could do it reliably, before even reaching Cruel, with just a handful of Alterations. However, perfecting that chest, getting it to the same power level of Shav's, that would border on a Mirror-worthy item. (Technically, Mirror Scholar's Robes would be like Shav's with better resists.)

The way I see it, unique items are bad design. They put build-enablers into a terrible binary: not enabled, or best-in-slot. There's no room for gear progression in that gear slot under such itemization.

2. This is only true once the no-lifers hit a lack-of-new-content wall (itemization is content). Until then, the gap follows the same rule as upgrade frequency; higher standards cancels out better items. Also, hitting that content wall is kind of a nightmare scenario from a dev standpoint.

Trade does the same function better. The more players there are ahead of you, the greater the supply of hand-me-down upgrades, therefore the cheaper they are to buy.

Higher drop rates encourages people to reroll different characters because it becomes easier to gear characters to the point they are usable in the early endgame. Artificially inflating the life span of a single character is just a sign that the developers aren't very confident that there is actual true diversity in their game.

Also, people play ARPGs to kill monsters to get loot to become more efficient and kill more mobs to get even better loot. Not to kill monsters for random currency to buy from another player. That's exactly where Chris Wilson and GGG have gone wrong.

I have to give Blizzard credit for one thing, they went back to the basics for ARPGs when it came to fundamentally redesigning Diablo 3. They realized that people didn't want to trade, and that it was dumb to enforce an economy centric game onto people. Their implementation of their solution isn't very good, but it's better than what we have currently in PoE.

Nothing wrong with economy if it's done right (D2).

I think higher deop rates is proven successful with D3. It removes the need for a trading system, or an in game trading system. It makes gameplay in a single session feel rewarding, whether you play 30 minutes or several hours. It increases a players retention and increases the games replayability by providing items you can use for different builds. It makes buffing or nerfing things in the game easier.

Magic Find gear currently is the reason drop rates are trash, and most gear sucks. Because it exists drop rates and the rarity of t1 and 2 stat rolls are based off of the assumption you are using said gear. (Because MFers have access to more deops of higher rarity, which could be pure currency, which can be used to craft better gear with higher tier rolls at a higher rate than others) Item Quantity and Item Rarity support gems perpetuate this issue, even if Item Quantity support is legacy, it exists in standard, which has an even worse economy (granted leagues are a major contributing factor).

Removing MF stats and support gems entirely from the game, and item rarity / quantity as a stat at all, and then compensating with increased drop rates, would significantly improve the game in ways you can not even imagine. It balances the game for every one without penalizing the builds you can actually play. It also inherently increases the chances of getting the affixes you want on certain pieces of gear by removing these affixes (IR) as possible rolls.

All uniques related to IR or IQ can have that stat changed to sonething else. Maybe flat life or increased max resists. That would certainly make say Ventors Gamble significantly better especially of you have a really good one like I do.

"

Jgizle wrote:

I think higher deop rates is proven successful with D3. It removes the need for a trading system, or an in game trading system.

Which means that it won't fit Path of Exile.
Chris said himself that the most important thing to him was the economy.

I thought being hardcore was s'pose to be about sucking it up and taking what's given you, or die trying.. lol

"

TwoHits wrote:

I thought being hardcore was s'pose to be about sucking it up and taking what's given you, or die trying.. lol

That's also my definition of "hardcore gaming/games": Games where you can fuck up and get stuck if you made bad choices. A game that punishes you for your mistakes, sometimes overly harsh.

OPs definition of hardcore players is what I'd call nolifers.

"

Jgizle wrote:

Would balancing this game for more casual players be so bad when its been proven successful with other games in the rpg genre?

It's proven to be financially successful but all those casualized AAA RPGs nowadays are (with a few exceptions) shit.

I guess somehow in this case the hc opinion outweighs the casual opinion. Lack of information and knowledge is pretty much what seperates a hc player from a casual player. Improvements could be made to better teach players in game mechanics without forcing players to seek that knowledge elsewhere.

I agree with you in most of ur points, but disagree about removing IIQ and IIR gems and MF overall. I think there is a need for that to divide poors from rich, i think it right to do so. Rich become more Richer.