Buff More Than Nerf
" Just looked at Google and I get this: " If they would have the same meaning then the bolded phrase would make little sense. Usually "support" is more used in a hard/material context (money, work, ...) and encouragement in a soft/psychological one (nice words). "support" is more general though and can also be used in most (or even all?) situations in which encouragement is used. Although it may sound "clunky". " Far as I know some are designed by players and some are designed by GGG. Not 100% sure though. Anyway whether the individual cards are designed by players or GGG: GGG is responsible for the concept. And GGG also decides which cards can be farmed systematically and which cards can not be farmed systematically. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
|
" I've watched a video and it made some interesting points, but unfortunately it makes little sense for a PvE game. It's perfectly fine when you look at it from PvP perspective. PoE is no PvP game though. A mindset like this is what led to power creep that we got now. Some people may say it's fun to crush content, and it's true, it is fun... but only if you work for it through your ingenuity while building the character. Still, personally I had way more fun when I felt like getting to maps in hc was an achievement. |
|
" Exactly, you have nothing to back it up, and everything else that GGG has stated in the past seems to indicate otherwise until we got an unofficial SSF ladder in Breach / BHC and then the GGG's anouncement. And by the way, "support" can very easily be used ( and it isn't clunky at all ) for non material things. The meaning is slightly different, but in this case it does not matter at all. Fact is, you tried to "avoid" my analogy because it is easier than actually understand and respond to it, "support" or "encourage" in this case does not change a thing. " Oh by the way, this is blatantly wrong. Someone that has been playing since before divination cards were added and that plays the conomy only a little bit would obviously knows that. The prices of some items *cough*6L*cough* has drasticly dropped, as well as many other things, it's just crazy the impact it had. On the other hand, the few players that are playing SSF might not be spending enough time playing the game to actually collect all "chains that bind" or similar cards, where trading for the ones missing because you got lucky and got the other ones already is a very good incentive to trade, and very good way to maximaize what you get from the card, and you cannot do that SSF. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Feb 27, 2017, 10:13:53 PM
| |
|
It is pretty interesting how quickly a topic can get from buffing vs. nerfing to what the fuck encouraging means :P
However the truth is you can never only do one thing, if you want to do it right. If you look at the CI vs. Life issue you cannot buff life to be as good as ES, because this would be stupid and we would have an even worse mess than now. However just nerfing ES would likely get both defenses in trouble. In this case the best thing to do is nerf ES, give some meaningless buffs to life (because life is strong enough in 99% of the cases) and look at those remaining 1% of situations that just destroy reasonable life builds. I pretty confident that this is not what GGG will do, because they have a pretty good history of over or underdoing it and basically never hit a good mark right away, but then again they might have learned from the previous dozens of times they got it wrong :P The baseline is, if you always nerf players get too weak, if you always buff the opposite is true. So just do both. Last edited by Emphasy#0545 on Feb 27, 2017, 9:09:43 PM
|
|
" I do not blindly believe in the "honesty" of their "PR statements". " Maybe you didnt read what I wrote or didnt understand it? Because I clearly implied that. " I dont know what you are talking about. You could try to post a clear context == quote/s. " There is nothing wrong in the statement from me which you quoted. I clearly and deliberately phrased it like that. The 6links you mentioned are some of the cards which have impact on trading players. However even for those: For a trading player the difference between simply changing the odds to drop a 6link vs introduction of the cards would be close to irrelevant. For an SSF player that is not so. The whole concept of Divination cards (in contrast to simply increasing the drop chances of the reward items) is far more beneficial for SSF than for trading players. And getting a 6link(Tabula) as SSF is trivial now. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
|
|
.............
Let's get done with this nonsense quickly.
off-topic nonsense
You literally said "Although it may sound "clunky"." and then when I say that it isn't : "Because I clearly implied that." No you didn't. And if you do not know what I'm talking about, re-read the methaphor, it's right before and you quoted it, but tried to split hair on the meaning of "supporting" and "encouraging" => you ignored the actual content and meaning. " No it is not, it is like night and day, but you might have not been playing enough or at high enough level to know that at this point, you profile is private but it really looks like you are talking out of theory only. Have you ever completed a 6L card set yourself, with 0 trading involved ? Maybe you have no idea how much 6L used to be sold for. And OBVIOUSLY, Tabula are a complete different story -____-, one does not need divination cards to get one, even without trading. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading.
| |
"
Spoiler
" With "Because I clearly implied that." I was referring to the main statement. The part not in braces. Due to the wording you used and the braces you used I ignored that part. It was not perfectly clear. " Right before what? " Disagree. I considered your statement false or misleading and pointed it out. Not sure we are talking about the same thing here though. " You didnt understand what I wrote. New try: a) GGG changes the odds of a 6link dropping from monsters so that it drops more frequently b) GGG makes some cards which give 6link and drop in specific bad map layouts Then for a trading player the difference between a) and b) is very small. But for an SSF player it makes getting a 6link much more reliable. Without paying 1500+ fuse. Another try - just in case: Yes you are right that the introduction of the 6link divination cards changed the economy for the trading player a lot. However if GGG would simply have increased the drop chance for 6links from monsters it would have had a similar effect on the economy. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
|
|
Hopefully no need for much more, I understand a bit more what you meant, it does change almost nothing though :
Spoiler
Fair enough about the brackets thingy.
To have a similar effect on the economy, it would have needed to be increased really drastically, really. That would have made 6L probably almost as easy to get for SSF as with divination card, because if you are not aware, reaching Crema and dropping enough of them to actually drop all the cards ( in the case of "the chains that binds" ) does take a significant amount of time, and with such high droprates ( speaking of a case were increase droprates and 6L div cards would have the same effect on the economy ), chances are you would have dropped a 6L by this time already. I am not sure of the droprates in the merc crematorium, I believe it's very low. Anyway, saying that the influence of divination cards on trading players is small is completely and utterly wrong. And that was your quote : " Which is was I was responding to. In short : I don't think that divination cards are advantaging SSF players more than players playing with the economy, I actually think that it's the other way around, divination cards are an obvious incentive to trade them to complete a set, and it also allows GGG to create "challenges" based on it (which gives even more incentive to trading). If you really cannot find the quote ........... here it is : " And you can replace "encourage" with "support" if that pleases you, it changes nothing there. Really, the only sign that GGG would have been encouraging SSF from a while would be the Xbox announcement, but we actually lack too many information to know how trading will be tedious or not there yet. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Feb 28, 2017, 7:12:00 AM
| |
"
Spoiler
" Yes. I am not trying to downplay their role for traders. " Dont know and dont want to guess because that is not the "selling point" for SSF. It is somewhat similar to Vorici 6l. Vorici 6l is almost useless for a trading player. Because buying the 6l is almost always cheaper than using Vorici to do it. But Vorici 6l is useful for SSF. Some players dislike him due to the price. But what he gives is reliability. Crematorium also gives reliability although to a lesser degree. Attempt to explain the relevance of the reliability thing for SSF: In order to complete a build I need all parts of it. Even if every part has a 70% chance to drop on its own: The odds of getting 5 such 70% pieces are only 17%. In this sense a build which relies on 5 such pieces is not viable for SSF. However if those 5 pieces are available as (farmable) Divination card then the build becomes viable for SSF. " Which I didnt, at least I am not aware of it == having done that. " I used "many/most" and not "all". Most cards have a very small (if any) impact on the trading player. But many of those are still useful (even critical for some builds) to the SSF player. " Have you seriously (and recently - new cards make it easier) played SSF? " Disagree. "powercreep is a clear sign that GGG wants to support solo play since group play was already crushing everything" makes sense (to me). And I would not interpret that "support" in a psychological/soft/words manner but in a hard/facts/gameplay manner. Due to that using "encourage" in that sentence is not the same as using "support". IMO they are (to some degree) willing to give players what the players want. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
|
|
Long story short ( its really getting annoying, honestly ) :
- Vorici is a big boost to SSF, but is completely unrelated to div cards : completely irrelevant here. - Yes, I do sometimes play SSF, and even if I trade I prefer getting my stuff myself, and I did farm divination cards for the challenge, most of them I got on my own. I will go ahead and guess that you didn't. You seem to have no idea of how much time it needs to gather those precious sets. - A few cards that give access to cheap stuff normally would help SSF (uniques that drop pretty often usually), a very few of them, that I can give you. But all of the kinda rare ones or utility ones have a much bigger impact on the economy. - And GGG "encouraging" something means that they give the players the tools for it, that's a damn thing that they add to the game in this situation, how obvious do I need to make it ???? And if you really think that the powercreep indicates that GGG wants to encourage ( by "supporting" ) solo play (primarily, that was the point), I guess there is no point discussing anything else (here). Now I will actually ignore you here if you keep going with those posts that do not bring anything and where you keep splitting hairs, all of it in a wonderful off-topic fashion ( where I am too obviously ). You have brought basically nothing interesting (to me) and it has been a page, I might edit that message to close on your next post I guess, but w/e. EDIT : of course, you don't understand and don't know what I am saying, while at the same time still trying to split hairs on simple sentences. There seem to be nothing that you can bring here, and that can make this "discussion" actually go somewhere. It's somewhat nice though, I will waste less time then. SSF is not and will never be a standard for balance, it is not for people entitled to getting more without trading. Last edited by Fruz#6137 on Feb 28, 2017, 11:57:32 AM
|
