Remove xp loss on death, replace with xp bonuses for surviving

Actually the road to 100 is long and most stop before ever reaching it. For example you can see in D2, most people probably did not have a 99 even though it was not because of death penalty.

Also myself for example in poe i stopped because it just wasn't satisfying, i stopped at 97 on a beastly build that could easily take 100 if i added a couple of weeks playing time to it as i was pretty much almost never dying with super high clearspeed.

Do not expect these bads/casuals to just pull it off like nothing. And to be honest they deserve it if they put in the time to fight against lowered XP gain all the way to 100. Then they deserve it.

Actually what is broken is the death penalty so you fix it by addressing it. It is not hard to get really, it creates bad experiences, rage quits, demotivates further play, causes players to give up their most wanted characters "just because", before they are ready to move on to another, severely cripples the amount of builds considered "viable".

It is a remnant of the wannabe hardcore days. I does not do anything except give a small circle of people satisfaction because baddies rage over it. If you want to feel you are at constant risk - do play hardcore and leave softcore to those of us who prefer just playing whatever characters we like.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

I think its just open to being 'gamed' too in unfun ways. So how are we doing this? Map tiers? So I go boss rush how many white tier 7 maps to get my xp booster back up before I feel like I can go back to playing red tier maps again with the full xp rate? go on actual xp instead? So Id full clear lower content? any way around Im not wasting high maps when I dont have my full bonus right? Id go and suffer some really unfun kind of trivial nonsense to get my booster back before using my good maps surely?

Ok, now this here is the best argument against the proposal that I've seen.

Clearly a number of things need to change. Volatiles are overtuned, corpses detonated by monsters you can't see (or don't have time to react to) are ridiculous, and the xp penalty or xp gains in maps could use tuning to make unexpected deaths, at the very least in Standard, much more bearable. Right now you can farm high level bosses with a powerful character and profit from either good drops or carries, other people get their kicks from trading or crafting, but grinding for xp, another way to enjoy the endgame, is rarely, well, enjoyable. People hit a wall around 90 then are expected to "get good" (plenty of us already treat SC characters like HC ones) or reroll. It's not very satisfying.

It's missing the point, whatever way you do go about red maps will always be the only best way for you because you will still get proportionally more just as in any normal case so you would always want to be farming red maps, even when you just want to finish your XP penalty. Maybe keep your t14-15 for when bonus is full if you absolutely must but its not going to be very much you can optimize it like that since sitting on red maps is pretty easy in the first place.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

Actually the road to 100 is long and most stop before ever reaching it. For example you can see in D2, most people probably did not have a 99 even though it was not because of death penalty.

Also myself for example in poe i stopped because it just wasn't satisfying, i stopped at 97 on a beastly build that could easily take 100 if i added a couple of weeks playing time to it as i was pretty much almost never dying with super high clearspeed.

Do not expect these bads/casuals to just pull it off like nothing. And to be honest they deserve it if they put in the time to fight against lowered XP gain all the way to 100. Then they deserve it.

Actually what is broken is the death penalty so you fix it by addressing it. It is not hard to get really, it creates bad experiences, rage quits, demotivates further play, causes players to give up their most wanted characters "just because", before they are ready to move on to another, severely cripples the amount of builds considered "viable".

It is a remnant of the wannabe hardcore days. I does not do anything except give a small circle of people satisfaction because baddies rage over it. If you want to feel you are at constant risk - do play hardcore and leave softcore to those of us who prefer just playing whatever characters we like.

I agree with everything you say regarding the annoying and frustrating nature of the death penalty. It is all true. GGG can't remove the death penalty, I believe, for non-SSF play because of the bot problem mentioned earlier in the thread. Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy. Perhaps now that PoE has official SSF play they will remove the death penalty for SSF play?

I agree with remove this death's penalty.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Perhaps now that PoE has official SSF play they will remove the death penalty for SSF play?

And all player will play in SSF.....not nice idea.

"

Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy.

Lol poe economy is broken by stupid fake sellers. Bot or not never change this fact.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

Actually the road to 100 is long and most stop before ever reaching it. For example you can see in D2, most people probably did not have a 99 even though it was not because of death penalty.

Also myself for example in poe i stopped because it just wasn't satisfying, i stopped at 97 on a beastly build that could easily take 100 if i added a couple of weeks playing time to it as i was pretty much almost never dying with super high clearspeed.

Do not expect these bads/casuals to just pull it off like nothing. And to be honest they deserve it if they put in the time to fight against lowered XP gain all the way to 100. Then they deserve it.

Actually what is broken is the death penalty so you fix it by addressing it. It is not hard to get really, it creates bad experiences, rage quits, demotivates further play, causes players to give up their most wanted characters "just because", before they are ready to move on to another, severely cripples the amount of builds considered "viable".

It is a remnant of the wannabe hardcore days. I does not do anything except give a small circle of people satisfaction because baddies rage over it. If you want to feel you are at constant risk - do play hardcore and leave softcore to those of us who prefer just playing whatever characters we like.

I agree with everything you say regarding the annoying and frustrating nature of the death penalty. It is all true. GGG can't remove the death penalty, I believe, for non-SSF play because of the bot problem mentioned earlier in the thread. Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy. Perhaps now that PoE has official SSF play they will remove the death penalty for SSF play?

They don't need to remove it, they need to improve the progression that you experience when playing the high/end game content, either by encouraging tackling that content to level, and redo the EXP penalty on those bases, either by removing the added EXP penalty, and providing more closer to your level content post level 85...

Further balancing to mitigate the "non-telegraphed one shot" scenarios is mandatory no matter the option...

I always stated that they have to keep the same feeling of progression during the ride from 1-100, but the right way to do that is with a more tactical approach towards content, that results in memorable fights while playing the game as they could innovate instead of just use certified mechanics in a boring and expectable way (I actually like Izaro fights and want more content to reach that level regarding the involvement of the players - not discussing the skewed carry situation)...

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

Actually the road to 100 is long and most stop before ever reaching it. For example you can see in D2, most people probably did not have a 99 even though it was not because of death penalty.

Also myself for example in poe i stopped because it just wasn't satisfying, i stopped at 97 on a beastly build that could easily take 100 if i added a couple of weeks playing time to it as i was pretty much almost never dying with super high clearspeed.

Do not expect these bads/casuals to just pull it off like nothing. And to be honest they deserve it if they put in the time to fight against lowered XP gain all the way to 100. Then they deserve it.

Actually what is broken is the death penalty so you fix it by addressing it. It is not hard to get really, it creates bad experiences, rage quits, demotivates further play, causes players to give up their most wanted characters "just because", before they are ready to move on to another, severely cripples the amount of builds considered "viable".

It is a remnant of the wannabe hardcore days. I does not do anything except give a small circle of people satisfaction because baddies rage over it. If you want to feel you are at constant risk - do play hardcore and leave softcore to those of us who prefer just playing whatever characters we like.

I agree with everything you say regarding the annoying and frustrating nature of the death penalty. It is all true. GGG can't remove the death penalty, I believe, for non-SSF play because of the bot problem mentioned earlier in the thread. Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy. Perhaps now that PoE has official SSF play they will remove the death penalty for SSF play?

They don't need to remove it, they need to improve the progression that you experience when playing the high/end game content, either by encouraging tackling that content to level, and redo the EXP penalty on those bases, either by removing the added EXP penalty, and providing more closer to your level content post level 85...

Further balancing to mitigate the "non-telegraphed one shot" scenarios is mandatory no matter the option...

I always stated that they have to keep the same feeling of progression during the ride from 1-100, but the right way to do that is with a more tactical approach towards content, that results in memorable fights while playing the game as they could innovate instead of just use certified mechanics in a boring and expectable way (I actually like Izaro fights and want more content to reach that level regarding the involvement of the players - not discussing the skewed carry situation)...

I agree that would be a good solution. Of course, more easily said than done. (I agree that the Izaro fight is very fun. It is just gated behind the horrible labyrinth game play to get to him. No thank you.)

"

Turtledove wrote:

Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy.

What can a level 100 bot accomplish that a level 90 bot cannot? This argument makes no sense to me.

Besides, if the actual problem is in fact bots, how about combating that problem instead of punishing everyone? The latter is what I expect from Blizzard, not GGG.

its not rly anything to do with bots, its about having a game with integrity and meaningful decisions.

"

Ceri wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Level 100 bots would crash the PoE economy.

What can a level 100 bot accomplish that a level 90 bot cannot? This argument makes no sense to me.

Besides, if the actual problem is in fact bots, how about combating that problem instead of punishing everyone? The latter is what I expect from Blizzard, not GGG.

A level 100 bot should be able to clear higher level maps more efficiently. That's 20 passive points more offense/defense than a level 80. If there was no death penalty then the bots could quickly advance all the way to level 100 each league because they can play 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The way I imagine a bot farm working is that they kick off all the bots but still would have to have someone monitoring. When a bot toon dies, I assume that it might require some human intervention. I have little clue what the ratio of humans to bots might be but if they die significantly less often then that ratio should get much better for the bot farmers.

I can't think of another method to combat the bots? I do know that GGG takes it seriously. I remember people complaining on the forums that they went through a whole map and only got a few wisdom and portal scrolls. It turns out that their account had been tagged for using a bot. If this theory as to the purpose of the death penalty is correct, I wouldn't say that GGG is punishing everyone. I would say that GGG is helping everyone by protecting the PoE economy. I agree that the death penalty is annoying and frustrating. I agree that it is not good for the game, IMHO. The problem is that a destroyed economy would probably be worse. What I would do is just stop trying to level my characters past the point where it becomes annoying and frustrating.