Prizes should be different for hardcore and softcore, why would i play hardcore?

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

You can't start tossing around that "Hardcore is more difficult than Softcore" as long as it actually isn't.

If permadeath doesn't make it hardcore, what does?

Sophocles10000 is right about the rabbit hole down which GGG goes if they buy into the OP's way of thinking. When hardcore has to be recognized for its distinct risk / return characteristics in one way, then where to draw the line?

Then we'd also get to argue whether the distinctions are not meaningful enough, and therefore "unfair", appropriately meaningful and therefore "fair", or too meaningful and therefore "unfair", along with other permutations on the "fair or not" continuum. Since people don't generally arrive at a consensus about these kinds of issues, wouldn't that be oh-so-joyful?

You'd need about six electron microscopes lined up together to see the practical difference in people's lives under the current arrangements, whether they play softcore or hardcore. The overwhelming majority of people are probably more than willing to set an issue like this aside and focus on other things.

That should be enough to set this issue aside.

"

LaiTash wrote:

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

You can't start tossing around that "Hardcore is more difficult than Softcore" as long as it actually isn't.

If permadeath doesn't make it hardcore, what does?

Not quitting when faced with "@#%| your pants" moments and finding the solution? Not auto-defaulting to "opie-op metas" that allow exploiting the game via mind numbing facetanking? Going bonkers on the "difficulty slider" and choosing single target namelocking melee and making it work when 99.99% of the player base doesn't know/care/thinks or wants it? Etc. etc.

And "Hardcore" is as "permadeath" as instant log out =|= "chickening out" (and quite really, a voided league is the sole "permadeath" implemented in PoE)...

So wanting some true challenges that would make the game high risk but also high reward, without leaning up to absurd levels solely on RNG upon RNG layers might make PoE a "hardcore" game with "fair difficulty progression"...

"

Not quitting when faced with "@#%| your pants" moments and finding the solution?

Sometimes there is no solution.

"

Not auto-defaulting to "opie-op metas" that allow exploiting the game via mind numbing facetanking?

Since when stacking actual defences instead of just picking VP and s**tons of damage is an exploit? I don't see GGG nerfing fortify/endurace/AA/armor/evasion/whatever in 3.1, obviously they disagree with you.

"

So wanting some true challenges that would make the game high risk but also high reward, without leaning up to absurd levels solely on RNG upon RNG layers might make PoE a "hardcore" game with "fair difficulty progression"...

I think you should just try and play HC and see if you can make it to maps, then you can try "facetanking" uber atziri or whatever, and THEN you can start having an opinion on how hardcore or not HC is.

"

LaiTash wrote:

"

Not quitting when faced with "@#%| your pants" moments and finding the solution?

Sometimes there is no solution.

"

Not auto-defaulting to "opie-op metas" that allow exploiting the game via mind numbing facetanking?

Since when stacking actual defences instead of just picking VP and s**tons of damage is an exploit? I don't see GGG nerfing fortify/endurace/AA/armor/evasion/whatever in 3.1, obviously they disagree with you.

"

So wanting some true challenges that would make the game high risk but also high reward, without leaning up to absurd levels solely on RNG upon RNG layers might make PoE a "hardcore" game with "fair difficulty progression"...

I think you should just try and play HC and see if you can make it to maps, then you can try "facetanking" uber atziri or whatever, and THEN you can start having an opinion on how hardcore or not HC is.

Cool story. /s

If there is no solution sometimes, you should double pedal on that front first, as "Hardcore" should imply that "THE PLAYER ALWAYS DIES DUE TO HIS MISTAKES, AND SOLELY TO THAT".

Since when was I actually thinking about "playing the game as intended via at least using something else beside just VP + sufficient pool + obscene damage" as not "the way is meant to be played"??? I'm actually with GGG on this, no sole mechanic should provide enough protection by itself for unlimited amounts of time...

Kappa you "uber pro", so if I start playing HC and make a few "achievements" as just a "HC" player, you would then stop with the "attitude" towards us "poor Softcore schmucks" - oh, and I did hit maps on several HC chars long time ago, but I tend to respect my time so I migrated them to Standard Softcore, and yes, my opinion is quite "hitting the mark" even if it's different and doesn't suit you...

By the way, I do tend to play solely the highest difficulty available, whenever I know the game has an OFFLINE mode, but with PoE and it's epic "reliability" regarding it's internet connection, it's asinine to persist in doing that since there is only one certain thing regarding this game - YOU WILL DIE SOONER OR LATER - but what is truly lacklustre is the fact that you will also feel cheated if the death could have been avoided if it's not due to your own fault, and I do know how much they improved PoE and it's mandatory "always online" experience, but until they man up and consider the game "finished" and release an OFFLINE mode, "Hardcore" is a "hit and miss" in my humble opinion...

You cannot afford to die on SC either, to have any remote chance on winning any to prize anyway. So...
scratching my head. The "you can steamroll, not minding defenses" part is really only a hyperbole at best. You cannot afford to die, no matter the coreness.

All in all, we don't need another SC vs. HC thread, as I see it. However, being a SC guy, I don't mind if there are more rewards for the HC flavours. The HC guys deserve a pat on the back. With a disclaimer.

At all times keep in mind that majority of people play SC. No matter the reasons, don't alienate those too much or there will be backlash.

"

aldorus wrote:

You cannot afford to die on SC either, to have any remote chance on winning any to prize anyway. So...
scratching my head. The "you can steamroll, not minding defenses" part is really only a hyperbole at best. You cannot afford to die, no matter the coreness.

I disagree with this one. you can afford to die as many times in sc prior to hitting a certain level(I'd say it's like 85+ish) because that xp loss is meaningless before a certain point unless you zerg.

hc players dont have that luxury. a death in act 8 is game over start over.

I get the point op is trying to make, but I can see both pros and cons of such a change.

"

Show me one person playing "HC in SC" during the race event.

Well actually in those short term races it is usually the other way around. A lot of players are playing HC, which usually stick to SC, because they are short and not meaningless and the rewards are actually easier to get than in SC, due to having less players there. Because while some of the prices are drawn randomly those are the ones that are easy to get in HC and SC, only the 4 lvl90 ones are kinda hard in 10 days, but a lot of them require much lower levels which are easy to optain in both difficulties. Being in the Top100 however is massively more difficult in SC than it is in HC, due to having much more competition.

The thing is 95% of HC population are likely to never see the prices regardless if they are the same or different from SC. And those that do get them are good enough that they get those prices regardless of which league they play in. The basic challange rewards are to some extent easier to get in SC, but then again how many of them to average players actually get and how much less do they get in HC.

This change would basically mean that the good players would again play both leagues to cash in both rewards and for the majority it wouldn't change much because they hardly get any of those prices anyway.

This is basically the same as the Estate tax... despite only very few rich people having to pay it they make poor people believe that they have a theoretical chance of getting rich and having to pay it, something that basically never happens.

"

Anubis2108 wrote:

Hey there GGG.

In the past we had different prices for hardcore and softcore and you felt like they had to be the same.
But at the moment there is no reason for me to play hardcore because i can safely just pick softcore and lvl a bunch of chars to 90 instead.

I prefer to play hardcore, but it is demotivating to know that i have to share prices with softcore.

Well. Uhm. Where to start.

You want prizes what for, exactly? Because you like the prizes? Fine, go ahead, have fun in whatever league you prefer, seems to be HC for you. Get your prizes, be happy.

Why would you want the prizes in Softcore to be different from the ones you acquire in Hardcore? Because you don't want others to have those prizes, too? If so, why?

If I was into Hardcore, I'd be playing Hardcore because I like playing it. If you don't like it, play Softcore.

Or do you think the last round of prizes was shit? I would tend to agree, the Harbinger prizes (24 and 36) were pretty meh. The crown looks super dumb, not into the character effect either.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Kappa you "uber pro"

I don't know why you get so defensive. LaiTash's character screen is impressive. I don't agree with everything but he obviously knows what he's talking about.

Internet connection may be a factor for you. For me it's fortunately not.

"

Char1983 wrote:

Why would you want the prizes in Softcore to be different from the ones you acquire in Hardcore? Because you don't want others to have those prizes, too? If so, why?

I don't care about prices or some achievements but I can understand that thinking. I don't really have an incentive to chace these things in HC. If I wanted those I'd probably play SC instead cause some of them are SO much easier to get there.