LIFE VS ES

"

Bars wrote:

"

Cataca wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

but I don't understand why players who are not interested in it want no one else to be able to do it in endgame content.

So, basically, to get a challange those players would have to artificially limit themselves in some fashion?

Play one-handed, play without potions, play inefficient builds?


Yeah, i cant see anything wrong with that at all.

The challenge is getting there. If the road is too short or too easy, this might be a problem. If there's no road at all, as a lot of players want, it's IMO a bigger problem.

Statistically speaking, a small fraction of PoE players get to this point. Very small, even. When everyone and their mother start prancing around in well-geared, powerful and high-leveled HC chars, then we'll have an issue... but I think we're safe for now, aren't we? Actually, almost no one in HC is doing Uber Atziri and Shaper even at this well-developed point of the league, and there are only 9 lvl 100 chars. It could be argued the game right now is too harsh - and yet, people on the forum are complaining because someone (almost exclusively in SC, no less!) is facetanking an endgame boss?! Mind-boggling.

"

Cataca wrote:

To reiterate your point:

You relish the RNG gating that is keeping the majority of the playerbase outside of the top end hardest content of the game. But once you get there, it should be auto-pilot able, given the gear?

The fuck.

Please tell me i just misunderstood you.

"

Bars wrote:

"

Cataca wrote:

To reiterate your point:

You relish the RNG gating that is keeping the majority of the playerbase outside of the top end hardest content of the game. But once you get there, it should be auto-pilot able, given the gear?

The fuck.

Please tell me i just misunderstood you.

You did misunderstand but I'm not in the mood to explain myself endlessly to someone with your attitude. You are aggressive and confrontational and you're putting words in my mouth. Angry and pointless forum arguments aren't exactly my thing.

"

Nephalim wrote:

It's GGG that relishes that. Their absolutely goal is to keep the majority of players from reaching end game or above level 95 so they can keep chasing their hollow carrot for as long as possible.

"

Head_Less wrote:

Till people discover how op MOM+zerphi+bloodmagic gem is...

"

kamil1210 wrote:

Life is better because you can use flask for instant heal... xD

"

Nephalim wrote:

"

kamil1210 wrote:

Life is better because you can use flask for instant heal... xD

Kintsugi is a good end game armor.




















LOL no I cant, I just can't.

"

Bars wrote:

"

torturo wrote:

"

Bars wrote:

Why the fuck does most of the forum think no one should be able to do endgame content reliably under any circumstances is beyond me.

Because facetanking under any circumstances means balance is off. As it effectively results in immortal character, as long as player got the RMB pressed.
It denies one of the basic principles of the genre - to never be able to acquire build/gear allowing you to achieve immortality.

Of course perfect balance is impossible, and some types of builds/damage types/defenses will inevitably be superior to others, but that's different.
We are talking about a scenario, where developers are trying to balance the whole game with a broken mechanic in mind, which drastically affects all who don't exploit it.

See, here's the snag. You are, of course, one hundred percent right - by your definition of what good balance should look like. But this is all a matter of perspective. You think players should never be able to facetank. I think well-geared, optimized endgame builds should be able to facetank. So, from my perspective, ES is fine and other mechanics should be buffed to bring them in line with ES. I think the player who has invested time, effort and ingenuity in their build should be able to eventually feel powerful. To be a god walking among mortals. Not to worry about dodging puny attacks. To have essentially won the game. You are apparently of a different opinion.

Knowing we are approaching balance discussions from two completely different standpoints, any further discussion is ultimately meaningless. No one will convince the other of their point of view when we're working with different definitions and fundamental assumptions about the game. I don't think there's a rational course of action besides noting we are in disagreement and leaving it at that.