A 3.1.0 Wishlist

"

Char1983 wrote:

"

sirgog wrote:

- Remove the hard link between pack size and effects that directly impact players. Then rebalance all map affix IIQ, IIR and pack size numbers according to how impactful the affix is on players.
For example, 'Players Have Elemental Equilibrium' has only a modest effect on players and so should offer little or no pack size, and a small amount of IIR/IIQ.
On the flip side, 'Players Cannot Regenerate Life or Mana' and 'Monsters move/attack X% faster” make maps considerably more difficult, and so they will now increase pack size, IIR and IIQ considerably.

For my current build, EE significantly reduces my damage output. On the other hand, no regen has absolutely zero effect. How do you want to balance that?

Apart from that, I really like the idea of map implicits.

I wanted to just address this.

There's always going to be a divergence from build to build as to how much a mechanic affects them.

For instance my main this league allocates the EE passive, so EE does absolutely nothing. It even gives me the option (not that I'd bother) to unallocate EE for the map, and allocate a 5% life node with that point.

I think that's fine - we can just see certain mods as better for our builds; much as most players regard Bloodlines as all-upside on a map, and most players regard 'Players have Temporal Chains' as a pain or even an auto-reroll.

I do think that every map mod should be desired by some characters, and dreaded by others, however. That's the intention of my idea here. At the moment, EE is regarded as free packsize by most (not all) players, while elemental reflect is regarded as cancerous by most (not all) players.

EE's worst case scenario is 'Monsters are tankier', which isn't really much added difficulty.

Great post and very thoughtful too. While I don't agree with everything, there are lots of ideas worthy of consideration. 80% of them would improve the game.

I opened this thread expecting to see a bunch of badly laid out and selfish ideas. Instead what I saw were some very good suggestions. I especially like your atlas changes. Zana quests + those atlas changes would really add some interesting change to the endgame.

The map implicits idea is genius, and would be a very good VISIBLE balance tweak for GGG. Visibility of buffs/nerfs is important - if GGG suddenly buff the layout and droprate of torture chamber hardly anybody is going to know since people assume unmentioned = unchanged.

These overly broad suggestions tend to please readers, but game developers smile and nod and say "yep... would be great... but..." They have to deal with the reality of it.

Remaking the game to fit a certain playstyle isn't a good business choice. Better to focus on making a game that keeps your current base happy rather than throw them under the bus for some new potential market. Learn from the Fail that was The Trials of Atlantis in DAoC.

I think the point of such post is not to tell the developers exactly what to do or how to reprogram the game. He was doing something different. He used a variety of well written detailed suggestions that build up to an improved (in his mind) game experience. Rather than just say that the Atlas sucks and you guys at GGG need to get your act together, he offers some very specific ideas (that may or may not be programmable) which if added, would change the player experience. He is pointing towards a direction and added some steps to get there.

What GGG does once they read it is entirely different. If they like bits and pieces and those can be added easily, well, maybe they will add them. Or GG may just say (internally) that those kinds of changes are not close enough to the path they want to take, so eh, this thread can be ignored.

Sirgog's approach to suggesting change is a good one. He has the high level overview to provide direction and enough detail to support it and enough specific examples to show how those changes would look in the game. From this depth it is easier to come to a decision about whether the changes are good or bad at both the player level and the developer level.

Whether or not such efforts are a waste of time as far as getting the game improved, is an entirely different question.

"

g64 wrote:

"

- Partially restore the nodes behind CI, but at lower values than they had in 2.6. Change the 15% more ES node to a 15% increased ES node.
- Reduce the effectiveness of ES nodes on the tree in general. 6% nodes should become 5%, and so on.
- Change ES's scaling with intelligence, so that instead of adding %ES, Int adds flat ES, just as Str adds flat life. (This is intended to strengthen ES at low gear levels and low character levels, and weaken it at higher gear levels or character levels)

That's one pretty naive suggestion. Literally "Let's turn shape's touch guardian with 0 es nodes on the tree into FotM".

I think we don't have to suggest a way to solve a problem, we just need to describe a problem correctly.
Before 3.0:
 15k ES and instant leech was 'too easy'
Now, After 3.0
 8k ES and no leech, no recharge, no defences is 'unplayable'

go reddit. check '1 link shaper kill with CI melee' and report back

CI is alive and kicking. all it need is some thought put into it. and maybe that %more node behind it back.

ES nerfs were needed and seem to be pretty successful. it is not 'removed' like some loudmouths say. it ia just no longer braindead auto pick.

logged in just to say these ideas are garbage, kthx

"

ChanBalam wrote:

I think the point of such post is not to tell the developers exactly what to do or how to reprogram the game. He was doing something different. He used a variety of well written detailed suggestions that build up to an improved (in his mind) game experience. Rather than just say that the Atlas sucks and you guys at GGG need to get your act together, he offers some very specific ideas (that may or may not be programmable) which if added, would change the player experience. He is pointing towards a direction and added some steps to get there.

What GGG does once they read it is entirely different. If they like bits and pieces and those can be added easily, well, maybe they will add them. Or GG may just say (internally) that those kinds of changes are not close enough to the path they want to take, so eh, this thread can be ignored.

Sirgog's approach to suggesting change is a good one. He has the high level overview to provide direction and enough detail to support it and enough specific examples to show how those changes would look in the game. From this depth it is easier to come to a decision about whether the changes are good or bad at both the player level and the developer level.

Whether or not such efforts are a waste of time as far as getting the game improved, is an entirely different question.

Yeah that's the intention.

This was also the product of a three hour internet outage at my house a couple weeks ago, followed by the recent item deletion issues.

I find EE map mod to be tricky. We can extract 3 main builds:

1) those who take the EE node
2) those who mainly deal phys damage
3) those who mainly deal ele damage

With those builds, you mostly draw this kind of conclusion (as I did with each of those builds)

1) free mod
2) depending on the % of ele damage, it slightly can slow down map clear
3) usually means spending another chaos orb

Patch 2.6 Standard characters who had completed Merciless Act 4 were sabotaged by GGG with Patch 3.0. Their mandatory quests in Acts 5-10 are marked as completed, while all "optional" quests are left undone. This deprives them of 8-10 missing skill points, about 95 skill points total. To recover these skill points, each Legacy character must be tediously driven through multiple Acts 5-10 quests. This is boring as hell, since the main quests are defunct and the player grossly overpowers the monster level.

Here's a simple solution appropriate for Standard characters that completed Merciless Act 4. Let's call them "Legacy" characters to distinguish them from Standard characters who did not complete the game before the release of The Fall of Oriath.

For each Legacy character who was granted a Skill Tree reset with Patch 3.0, reset all Act 5-10 quests and waypoints to uncompleted.

In game instances launched by Legacy characters, scale up the Monster Level of each Act by 20 points. This will produce the following Act progression:

Act 1: Monster Level 21
Act 2: Monster Level 35
Act 3: Monster Level 44
Act 4: Monster Level 54
Act 5: Monster Level 61
Act 6: Monster Level 65
Act 7: Monster Level 70
Act 8: Monster Level 76
Act 9: Monster Level 81
Act 10: Monster Level 84

Henceforth, all characters who complete Act 10 will become Legacy characters, regardless of league status.

This simple adjustment will make Part 2 more challenging for Standard Legacy characters, and will also improve the replayability of the game for newly promoted Legacy characters in the future.