XP loss on death suggestions.

"

vmt80 wrote:

Many people have other things to do with their lives, so they aren't making goddamn youtube videos on their gameplay or farming 100 exalts. By the way, that's exactly the reason I can't bother myself to playing temporal leagues: it feels like losing all progress, since you can't make use of any items or currency except what you've farmed during the league time-window. So, let's see, what is the solution here? Should we get rid of standard? After all, how else are 'all the good players' going to win there?

Absolutely, one can go the route on punishing those people not being able to put all their leisure time on grinding a shaped underground sea map for a month, since they aren't making their living on playing a video game. But then again, we are not talking about 'being skilled with builds' either, we are talking about bragging on putting endless play hours on a mind-numbing activity. If this was about game balance I could see it, but we aren't even arguing about game balance. We are arguing about entitlement, as others said earlier.

And there it is ....... the bitter "you nolife ! I have a life, not like you, so I should be excused for whatever I do wrong in this game".
Easier saying that than trying to make an effort I see.

If PoE is "putting endless play hours on a mind-numbing activity", then why are you still here ???

"

vmt80 wrote:

Edit: I'm not arguing for removing xp penalty altogether, either. I'm arguing for making it reasonable on levels 95-99. What is reasonable here is, of course, a matter of interpretation. For a lot of casual players I believe it certainly isn't 'let's take away a weeks progress of grinding from me, so that I can grind for another HC two months and quit my actual day job'.

You are not going to like it but ....

Reaching level 100 has never been an intended goal for "casual" players.
So ... deal with it ? you don't have to be lvl 100 to enjoy the game.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

if thats true then theyre the sort of people who shouldnt be playing a game like this

Are they though? Because to me it feels like GGG is catering more and more to these types of players as time goes on...

"

nadakuu wrote:

What kind of maps are you running where a death in the 90s is 5 maps?
often it is a set back of about 7 t12+ at 90 and increasing by 3 per level after.

That's a blatant lie and you know it.

"

without the experience penalty

My impression is that most people don't ask for the XP penalty to be removed, though. The majority seems to wish there was a different kind of penalty.

As a casual player, I call it quits in terms of leveling when I'm around lvl 90-92ish and just focus on other stuff because at that time, level grinding starts to become too cumbersome to me and I have more fun doing other stuff. I'm perfectly fine with never reaching 100, and it's not like other people reaching 100 takes anything away from me, so that's not a problem.

I just don't think that losing 10% of your XP to any stupid death/crash/lag/disconnect is an experience that adds much to the overall thrill and enjoyment of the game, either. I don't feel it contributes much. I live with it (and die with it), I accept it, I don't need to have it removed, but I think I never felt "OMG, this is such a cool mechanic".

To add something constructive, maybe a smaller loss upon your first death, and a bigger one for each additional death in the same map? That might discourage "boss zerging", while the occasional "freak death" wouldn't hit quote so hard.

Just for example, let's toss in some random numbers: Let's say I play map XYZ and die to a boss attack that kills me instantly. I lose 5% XP for my first death. I lose a map portal anyway. Now I need to consider: Will I risk dying another time for 15% XP loss for my 2nd death? Or will I give up on this map and try another time?

If I take on the challenge, I risk losing bunches of XP. If I decide to play it safe, I lose the map and some time, which will slow my progression as well and may also mean I effectively lost some currency because I sank it into the map I now end up not finishing. But - and that's the point - I have only suffered a more tolerable setback so far.

I dunno, something along these lines. *shrugs*

"

Ok. So, since the consensus seems to be that these players are unwanted and/or driven out, maybe a third league, without the experience penalty, should be created? It shouldn't cause any issue, as those players are already lost without it.

What say you?

I'm all for your suggestion as long as the add on to the other end of the spectrum with an actual competitive league where players have a reason/solid need to group up, play FFA loot, HC and maybe some outright PVP/PKing now and then. As it stands HC leagues are bullshit mostly solo only pointless grinds - I WANT to play with strangers and compete, you know like an actual 'GAME'?

I firmly believe we have lost many great players because of this absence as well.

"

smtad wrote:

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

a death in the low 90s is like 5 maps of xp maybe? So if they were in the low 90s then they were running 5 maps a month?
Willing to bet at most they were in the 80s somewhere where a death is like 2 maps worth of xp....
more than 1 months progress...
k

Why did you so underestimate people who are not on your side? In standard, you have much time to level, your progress would not be reset every season.

In fact, they're 95+, they tried to challenge to level to 100 at first. But they gave up because this game is so boring and pathetic map dropping.

so at lvl95 a death costs you maybe 20 maps give or take, which is maybe 2 hours play.

So your friends lost over a months progress from a death, and in that month they played for 2 hours.

Yeah I totally underestimated them, the idea that they lost over a months progress to that death makes total sense now.

"

vmt80 wrote:

Yes, punishment is a demotivational factor, since it narrows down how people are willing to play or whether they are willing to play at all. We can go to semantics and say, now people are motivated to quit PoE, which to you seems to be a good thing. Well, um, I guess quitting PoE is also a viable solution to a number of issues. As I said, we can go that route, too. In fact, it seems what you are proposing: let's punish people for playing a video game so they quit. That'll teach 'em.

I would be motivated to stop playing if they removed it. They proposed reducing the penalty from 15% to 5% once, and the massive backlash from the silent majority who were up in arms that they made death essentially meaningless was intense. So much so that they scraped the idea and settled for 10%.

Lets punish failure and reward success, yes, this is how you make failure and success meaningful. 5 years, the game has grown and grown and grown, while having a death penalty. Your implication that a significant amount of ppl will quit this game is just left void by that reality, those people already quit, games still here.

"

vmt80 wrote:

Somewhere around the forums I remember seeing a reference to 'kripparrian wannabes', which albeit a bit nasty (no offense, kripp), had a certain ring of truth in it. It can't be denied there are also casuals -such as myself- who play this game. Many people have other things to do with their lives, so they aren't making goddamn youtube videos on their gameplay or farming 100 exalts. By the way, that's exactly the reason I can't bother myself to playing temporal leagues: it feels like losing all progress, since you can't make use of any items or currency except what you've farmed during the league time-window. So, let's see, what is the solution here? Should we get rid of standard? After all, how else are 'all the good players' going to win there?

Absolutely, one can go the route on punishing those people not being able to put all their leisure time on grinding a shaped underground sea map for a month, since they aren't making their living on playing a video game. But then again, we are not talking about 'being skilled with builds' either, we are talking about bragging on putting endless play hours on a mind-numbing activity. If this was about game balance I could see it, but we aren't even arguing about game balance. We are arguing about entitlement, as others said earlier.

what are you even talking about? What does any of that have to do with performing the fairly simple task of working out how to make a build that can survive maps well enough to keep levelling up?

entitlement? Yeah, seems to be some of that going on for sure.

"

vmt80 wrote:

'let's take away a weeks progress of grinding from me, so that I can grind for another two HC months and quit my actual day job'.

a weeks progress? 10% xp is a weeks progress for you? If thats true then itll take you a little over 2 months to simply level up once even if they remove the penalty.

I wouldnt bother quitting ur dayjob mate.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

Spoiler

I would be motivated to stop playing if they removed it. They proposed reducing the penalty from 15% to 5% once, and the massive backlash from the silent majority who were up in arms that they made death essentially meaningless was intense. So much so that they scraped the idea and settled for 10%.

Lets punish failure and reward success, yes, this is how you make failure and success meaningful. 5 years, the game has grown and grown and grown, while having a death penalty. Your implication that a significant amount of ppl will quit this game is just left void by that reality, those people already quit, games still here.

Fun fact, that majority became a minority and I actually think the roles are reversed these days, with a lot more casual players than the "silent majority who were up in arms that they made death essentially meaningless", which would enjoy to be able to actually have the same journey from level 1 to 100 without @#%%&*|$ artificially placed walls post level 95.

You can't argue that the sole reason why the EXP death penalty feels like &*|$ post level 90 is the fact that the additional EXP penalty gain kicks in, and albeit TencentGGG adding more and more "freebies" regarding EXP gain - Beachheads anyone? - not having content closer to the level of the players IS DETRIMENTAL.

Now, increasing the "map tiers" and actually adding difficulty the "right way" seems to never even BLIPPED for a moment on their radar - difficult bosses are simply some overtuned ones starting from white to red tier maps - and all because of them granting LEVEL 100 STATUS EVERY GODDAMN LEVEL UP (so any sane person will argue that level 100 is not necessary at all with success, especially as the last few levels of progression won't make or break a build).

I conceded that playing my slow hitting each enemy in <16 radius from my character will allow me to level to 100 in YEARS as the original vision intended for the game, but when a guildie simply uses KB and reaches that level in less than the time it took me to level from 98 to 99, its way past the time to acknowledge that the right way to go for such a goal is by stacking the deck in your favor, and play PoE the "pew-pew opie-op meta" arcade shooter instead of the PoE with the "hard mode flipped ON" ARPG.

So yes, I would like for the death EXP penalty to have meaning and purpose instead of being a "slap on the wrist" for >90% of the time you spend with a char, and an annoying, even frustrating at times, discouragement for the rest...

I would be fine with it becoming a lot more harsh, as long as the game will be "balanced" to keep things fair, on both sides (spike damage should not be the only way to kill players in this game, if diversity was a "core aspect"), or simply link the amount of EXP gained from every map to the amount of portals opened to the map, and move the death EXP penalty to the content runned instead of having it a flat %...

Death EXP penalty should be "revamped" in such a way, that players would be enticed to IMPROVE and ADAPT instead of "chicken out" and always use log outs, fleeing and taking the path of least resistance and level versus the "easy content"...

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Fun fact, that majority became a minority and I actually think the roles are reversed these days, with a lot more casual players than the "silent majority who were up in arms that they made death essentially meaningless", which would enjoy to be able to actually have the same journey from level 1 to 100 without @#%%&*|$ artificially placed walls post level 95.

There is no "artificially placed wall" anywhere, really.
It's the same rule that is also there 10 levels before, and it scales with levels as it is supposed to be 'harder' to progress to the last levels ( and YES, this is a kind of difficulty, this is not even debatable ).

And (pretty sure) another 'fun' fact : he was not implying that this "silent majority" was not composed of casual players.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

I would be fine with it becoming a lot more harsh, as long as the game will be "balanced" to keep things fair

I'm sorry, but I don't believe it a single second.
People that are QQing about the death penalty at the moment will (imho) always find 'excuses' to blame something else than themselves anyway ... unless the game becomes ridiculously easy and there are close to no more threats at higher level.

" link the amount of EXP gained from every map to the amount of portals opened to the map"
....
Fast runners are already using pretty much one portal per map and not more.

"

Fruz wrote:

Spoiler

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Fun fact, that majority became a minority and I actually think the roles are reversed these days, with a lot more casual players than the "silent majority who were up in arms that they made death essentially meaningless", which would enjoy to be able to actually have the same journey from level 1 to 100 without @#%%&*|$ artificially placed walls post level 95.

There is no "artificially placed wall" anywhere, really.
It's the same rule that is also there 10 levels before, and it scales with levels as it is supposed to be 'harder' to progress to the last levels ( and YES, this is a kind of difficulty, this is not even debatable ).

And (pretty sure) another 'fun' fact : he was not implying that this "silent majority" was not composed of casual players.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

I would be fine with it becoming a lot more harsh, as long as the game will be "balanced" to keep things fair

I'm sorry, but I don't believe it a single second.
People that are QQing about the death penalty at the moment will (imho) always find 'excuses' to blame something else than themselves anyway ... unless the game becomes ridiculously easy and there are close to no more threats at higher level.

" link the amount of EXP gained from every map to the amount of portals opened to the map"
....
Fast runners are already using pretty much one portal per map and not more.

There is an artificial wall, don't be "coy" about it.

Show me that content level 90-95 that I can fight at not EXP gain penalty at level 99. Not to mention that TencentGGG thought that the "high/end game" content provided "too much" EXP and required an additional EXP gain penalty, instead of, you know, increasing the difficulty...

Pretty "fun fact": that silent majority which complained that 5% death EXP penalty would be the same as having no penalty (and they were right, by the way), is a MINORITY these days, as since the 2.0, the casual gates become wide open. And when those casuals reach 90, they tend to at least be "annoyed" by the static 10% penalty.

I'm also sorry, but I believe that those players that want PoE to be more balanced in a "fair" way on both sides, content and player alike, would actually enjoy a death EXP penalty that feels a lot more "just".

Fast runners aside from using 1 portal per map, they also die from time to time, and if they die less they should enjoy the same benefit that a slow runner would, a more fair penalty.

If we could link the map EXP gain to the number of portals, and if we could let players choose the amount of portals they feel they need to finish said content, you would still see speed runners that want and use a single portal - just like for Zanas "one shot" missions - and either leave with the full EXP from the map, or 0. If you leave yourself some room for error, and die once and you had 3 portals, you could get up to 66% of the map EXP, presuming you fully clear it. Sure, TencentGGG could further adjust the EXP gain penalty if they feel such a change would be "too much", but these days they seem to provide more and more ways to bypass that aspect...

Players that die often will still be "stuck" at not advancing, while others could "shrug off" an "out of line" death and don't feel "shafted" and PLAY MORE. Players that play more tend to also spend more. Not to mention that moving the death EXP penalty this way would actually encourage players to attempt "end game" content any time, instead of when they're at 0% on the EXP bar...

So even if you're not agreeing with my point of view, you should provided some counter-arguments that stand by their own, and if they are important, they should highlight the flaws in a way that will help us propose an even better and "improved" system.