XP loss on death suggestions.

It seems like you didn't even bother to read what I wrote ........................

- That "silent majority" that snorkle_uk refered was very likely already composed by mostly casual players.
It is not because it's something that you don't agree with that it is not the majority, seriously.
You don't know what people want.
What we know is that the majority ( unless at the closed beta maybe ? ) is always composed of casual players mostly.

- No, there is no "wall", the grind becomes slower, that's the way it is, that's it. GGG was originally not even meaning for players to reach it unless with a very unreasonable commitment of time if I'm not mistaking.
The first lvl 100 was quite an event in itself already.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

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".

The current penalty is "just".
It's simple, not confusing, everybody understands it.
Change is and confuse everybody, while QQers will still be QQing unless it's pretty much gone. I have no doubt that you'd be in there too.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

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.

Long story short : you want a game that does not reward efficiency .... ( or that does not penalize the lack of it, which is basically the same thing )
I'm sorry, but that would just be stupid, and it would be the opposite of a "fair penalty", it would actually be very unfair for the player that bothers or at least tries to be efficient.

If you are not being efficient (= slow), and die often enough to significantly lower your progression, then get better, or build your character better, or both, but don't blame the game for it, seriously.


Having the possibility to lower the number of portals is also a bad idea, because players watching streamers would feel the need to do like "good players" and would apply to themselves the same limitation ... only to potentially get frustrated.
Plus you would increase the "negative feeling" for many, who would feel that their character would be "inferior" to people who only need one portal ... (would they choose to take more).
On top of it, people that like picking up a lot of rares ( in a very unefficient way usually ) would feel penalized, and people doing the chaos/regal recipe would also feel penalized.
=> This is a poorly thought idea imho.

edit : the post that I was responding to just got removed it seems :>

"

Fruz wrote:

Spoiler

It seems like you didn't even bother to read what I wrote ........................

- That "silent majority" that snorkle_uk refered was very likely already composed by mostly casual players.
It is not because it's something that you don't agree with that it is not the majority, seriously.
You don't know what people want.
What we know is that the majority ( unless at the closed beta maybe ? ) is always composed of casual players mostly.

- No, there is no "wall", the grind becomes slower, that's the way it is, that's it. GGG was originally not even meaning for players to reach it unless with a very unreasonable commitment of time if I'm not mistaking.
The first lvl 100 was quite an event in itself already.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

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".

The current penalty is "just".
It's simple, not confusing, everybody understands it.
Change is and confuse everybody, while QQers will still be QQing unless it's pretty much gone. I have no doubt that you'd be in there too.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

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.

Long story short : you want a game that does not reward efficiency .... ( or that does not penalize the lack of it, which is basically the same thing )
I'm sorry, but that would just be stupid, and it would be the opposite of a "fair penalty", it would actually be very unfair for the player that bothers or at least tries to be efficient.

If you are not being efficient (= slow), and die often enough to significantly lower your progression, then get better, or build your character better, or both, but don't blame the game for it, seriously.


Having the possibility to lower the number of portals is also a bad idea, because players watching streamers would feel the need to do like "good players" and would apply to themselves the same limitation ... only to potentially get frustrated.
Plus you would increase the "negative feeling" for many, who would feel that their character would be "inferior" to people who only need one portal ... (would they choose to take more).
On top of it, people that like picking up a lot of rares ( in a very unefficient way usually ) would feel penalized, and people doing the chaos/regal recipe would also feel penalized.
=> This is a poorly thought idea imho.

Well, only @Snorkle_uk could specifically explain at which "silent majority" he mentioned, but if I'm not mistaken, the adjustment to the death EXP penalty was before 1.0 (I'm here since before 1.3.0 and it was always the 10% static value)...

That grind can be kept as time consuming or even more time consuming without TencentGGG resorting to "cheap mechanics" to "prolong the grind" simply because "reasons" aka "overwhelming feedback for additional EXP gain penalty"...

A linear progression from 1 to 100 would still take a long time for the last few levels IF they were centered either around difficult content OR spending a lot more time versus the mindnumbingly easy content. At the moment they seem to force players to pick the second path EXCLUSIVELY.

Sure, first person reaching level 100 marked a great achievement, but so does reaching level 100 in <48H /played does. It states that the current state of the game is very different from that old state.

If death EXP penalty would be reworked, it should be reworked in a way that will leave no debate and wouldn't lead to further confusion.

If they would employ my method, they could link 16.6% of the map EXP to the portal if 6 were employed, 20% for 5, 25% for 4, 33.3% for 3, 50% for 2 and 100% for one.

Dare I remind you that the last part already happens in the "Labyrinth", and it also further penalizes you to the current 10% death EXP penalty "no matter what" when you die. And although I loath having only 1 chance at completing content, as long as you make consciously that choice, I find it actually more interesting than the current "limited zerging" opportunity.

Rewarding efficiency is fine, that is why you will have the speed runners speed run, and slow players taking their time. A speed runner will still amass more EXP due to him running more maps. But a slow runner could take his time and don't feel as pressured if something happens. In my view it should lead to people weighting carefully their options regarding both loot and EXP gained from a map.

Getting 1 shot at running content helps you improve, and currently nothing in the game entices you to do so, as you can always get that level 100 status EVERY GODDAMN LEVEL UP.

People that like to pick and identify every single item - by the way I'm such a "slow poke" that plays inefficiently and identifies most rares of every map (that's why I still refer to myself as your "friendly casual n00b hoarder") would just adapt and use those scrolls on item and leave them there if they are not up to the standards of 1 portal, or take them all if they have portals to spare => choice that actually has meaning.

At the current drop rates, the "pros" are all only picking up the currency, so someone that will really be emulating such a "pro" will ALREADY be picking up only adequate drops according to their "uber strict" filter.

So my idea is actually very well thought, IMHO.

Nothing cheap about the death penalty, it is basically the most fair and simple mechanic to give a meaning to dying in softcore.

And you are forced to run difficult content to sustain high level maps to increase your ratio, as running white high level maps will give you ... nothing in the end.
Now, powercreep is kinda over the roof and it "disturbs" that whole thing I guess, however if there was no actual difficulty (as you are pretending) then ... you would be level 100, as an example.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

If death EXP penalty would be reworked, it should be reworked in a way that will leave no debate and wouldn't lead to further confusion.

I am sorry, but this is imho very, very naive, really.

- You missed the point about the first lvl 100 ... : GGG never meant it to be realistically achievable for a drastic majority of the players.



I already explained you how that portal idea was very poor and bad, and I did even forget to mention Zana who pretty much gives you another full map worth of inventory, or abysses, or .... incursions too.
- Lol @"slow players would just id everything and throw it away, no problem", amazing thing, must be very satisfying to do haha.
- getting couple of scraps for loosing a chunk of the map exp ??? you call that a "choice" .... :/
- no, very slow players should not be "rewarded" or "not pressured" for doing so if the game isn't going that way. You can go slow if you enjoy it, but don't complain about your exp gain, especially if you die (which you should not, since you are so slow, taking less risks).

I didn't even consider the fact that really slow players are more likely to be interrupted IRL in the middle of a map, and just portal out to deal with whatever they have to deal with and .... oh wait ... loose xp.


Nop, definitely a terrible idea.
But to be honest, the simple fact that it would directly penalize people for picking up items (if more than one inventory) on the floor is already enough of a reason why such a thing will never ever ( and should imho ) happen.
You also completely forgot the fact that this is a multiplayer game, and if you want to try justifying loosing exp for playing in a party .... good luck with that !

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Getting 1 shot at running content helps you improve, and currently nothing in the game entices you to do so, as you can always get that level 100 status EVERY GODDAMN LEVEL UP.

Ok so I have no clue what you are talking about here ...
And if you are getting one shot in the current game ... open your eyes while playing ?
I don't know, there are pretty much no more "instant one shot" out of the blue, everything is avoidable, telegraphed, as long as your character is built properly and you know its limits.


Labyrinth is completely off-topic here.
But I'm going to give you a super "hint" about it : You can access your stash before Izaro, and if you really want to pick up everything, you can as long as you store it there.

so we would lose xp for having to leave a map to make a trade?

it seems like such a convoluted way to do things and fruz has already made a list as long as ur arm of negatives about it.

changing the xp penalty always comes down to this = I want the down side to dying to be changed to something that I care a lot less about or dont care about at all so that I can keep dying and not try to play better/build a better character.



People playing easy content rather than hard content, that is an issue for the reward systems of the game. Its a different subject, I have many issues with the reward systems in the game, its one of the games biggest problems. If the reward structure does not make the harder content desirable then it has failed.

That doesnt mean we shouldnt care if we die.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

so we would lose xp for having to leave a map to make a trade?

And yet I did forgot one of the most important elements about it lol.

"

Fruz wrote:

Spoiler

Nothing cheap about the death penalty, it is basically the most fair and simple mechanic to give a meaning to dying in softcore.

And you are forced to run difficult content to sustain high level maps to increase your ratio, as running white high level maps will give you ... nothing in the end.
Now, powercreep is kinda over the roof and it "disturbs" that whole thing I guess, however if there was no actual difficulty (as you are pretending) then ... you would be level 100, as an example.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

If death EXP penalty would be reworked, it should be reworked in a way that will leave no debate and wouldn't lead to further confusion.

I am sorry, but this is imho very, very naive, really.

- You missed the point about the first lvl 100 ... : GGG never meant it to be realistically achievable for a drastic majority of the players.



I already explained you how that portal idea was very poor and bad, and I did even forget to mention Zana who pretty much gives you another full map worth of inventory, or abysses, or .... incursions too.
- Lol @"slow players would just id everything and throw it away, no problem", amazing thing, must be very satisfying to do haha.
- getting couple of scraps for loosing a chunk of the map exp ??? you call that a "choice" .... :/
- no, very slow players should not be "rewarded" or "not pressured" for doing so if the game isn't going that way. You can go slow if you enjoy it, but don't complain about your exp gain, especially if you die (which you should not, since you are so slow, taking less risks).

I didn't even consider the fact that really slow players are more likely to be interrupted IRL in the middle of a map, and just portal out to deal with whatever they have to deal with and .... oh wait ... loose xp.


Nop, definitely a terrible idea.
But to be honest, the simple fact that it would directly penalize people for picking up items (if more than one inventory) on the floor is already enough of a reason why such a thing will never ever ( and should imho ) happen.
You also completely forgot the fact that this is a multiplayer game, and if you want to try justifying loosing exp for playing in a party .... good luck with that !

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

Getting 1 shot at running content helps you improve, and currently nothing in the game entices you to do so, as you can always get that level 100 status EVERY GODDAMN LEVEL UP.

Ok so I have no clue what you are talking about here ...
And if you are getting one shot in the current game ... open your eyes while playing ?
I don't know, there are pretty much no more "instant one shot" out of the blue, everything is avoidable, telegraphed, as long as your character is built properly and you know its limits.


Labyrinth is completely off-topic here.
But I'm going to give you a super "hint" about it : You can access your stash before Izaro, and if you really want to pick up everything, you can as long as you store it there.

There is no actual difficulty, I just wanted to take a break from the boring process and level a few other characters - besides I was thinking about leveling via Chayula Breachstones and/or T15 Beachheads and with harbinger out of the Zana mod rotation I still have time until September to amass those couple hundred needed so I can reach 100 in a "timely" fashion.

And you would be surprised to see that even the highest tier maps are still rewarding when run normal or magic, it's just that they get more rewarding for being rare and/or corrupted rare.

I think for the first level 100 they didn't expect for it to be reached in such a "timely manner" and that actually messed up all their plans, as becoming conscious that people will pursue that target no matter what.

And it would have been simple to make 100 unreachable, even more so in 3 month period. They just needed to ask that each level require DOUBLE/TRIPLE/QUADRUPLE EXP than the last post 95 so 96 = 2 x 95 at minimum, 97 = 2 x 96, and so on, until 100 = 2 x 99 at minimum (and also a minimum of 32 x 95 level characters for each 100 would have sufficed to deter 100 as an "original goal").

LOL on fast players simply picking currency and buying their items on the "market" afterwards, but of course, I forgot, that makes you a "pro"... Not to even mention that most dropped rares are useless to begin with so, even those "casual n00b hoarders" are better served with that practice on only high/end game content...

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, but that loss of EXP is tied to the deaths, so not dying = simply losing a portal just like now, it would simply link the death EXP penalty to the number of available chances at completing content.

Playing in a party would follow same rules, and already people playing in a party of 6 lose the chance of completing the content, if they die, besides the death EXP penalty, so they will be hit the least - it would also encourage people playing in larger parties as soon as they are sure that their character is sufficiently capable of dealing with everything as a death would mean they would lose all map progress and stagnate, and that already happens for parties...

So that suggestion is actually well thought, albeit different.

"1 shot at running content" = 1 chance at completion. Do not mistake it for the "instant killed" scenarios, @Fruz.

"Labyrinth" is a lot less off-topic than you think. Dare I remind you that "Labyrinth" is a succession of map zoness, so having free access to the stash every couple of areas still would make those "hoarders" to waste a lot more time than on any other map in the game? In a map, and in "Labyrinth" alike you're also better served to pick everything and decide what to keep, not to mention that the best method is to pick "pure" currency and buy your items so there are not that many differences already.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

Spoiler

so we would lose xp for having to leave a map to make a trade?

it seems like such a convoluted way to do things and fruz has already made a list as long as ur arm of negatives about it.

changing the xp penalty always comes down to this = I want the down side to dying to be changed to something that I care a lot less about or dont care about at all so that I can keep dying and not try to play better/build a better character.



People playing easy content rather than hard content, that is an issue for the reward systems of the game. Its a different subject, I have many issues with the reward systems in the game, its one of the games biggest problems. If the reward structure does not make the harder content desirable then it has failed.

That doesnt mean we shouldnt care if we die.

No one would lose map EXP if they didn't die, just a portal like with the regular system. There is a reason why I specifically said interlinking total map EXP with death EXP penalty.

It's a bit more complicated than the current death EXP penalty, but it would still simply place the death EXP penalty upfront and link it to the run content better than now.

And all those "negatives" that @Fruz mentioned can be addressed, not to mention some are already in effect on the current system (which makes them null from the start).

And my entire point is not about changing the amount of death EXP penalty, but a change regarding the way it's applied. My proposed system would still penalize death, would place more focus on the run content and would instantly place the most difficult content in the game on a "play the most difficult content whenever you want, when your character is "gud enuf" you will actually progress by running it".

As long as you lose progress upon death you're still penalized and you won't advance at all.

And better interlinking of danger & rewards is needed in PoE since a very long time, and should be implemented even regarding the death EXP penalty.

I was thinking the other day how about a way to pay orbs to recover XP loss for that play session or something like that?

That way the consequence for dying is still there but you can still progress.

"

iamstryker wrote:

I was thinking the other day how about a way to pay orbs to recover XP loss for that play session or something like that?

That way the consequence for dying is still there but you can still progress.

A new currency, useful only in softcore? Not totally against it, should be really rare to keep the death penalty meaningful, but still don't like the idea much... just my opinion.

Personally I think the xp loss is ok but could be improved, with a system kinda like DS where you'd recover PART of your lost xp if you kill whatever monster killed you... would have to be better thought out to cover all different cases/exceptions (killed by barrels, last map portal, party play,etc.) but it could be a nice thing, and maybe "force" GGG to finally add a death log ;-)

"

Wazz72 wrote:

"

iamstryker wrote:

I was thinking the other day how about a way to pay orbs to recover XP loss for that play session or something like that?

That way the consequence for dying is still there but you can still progress.

A new currency, useful only in softcore? Not totally against it, should be really rare to keep the death penalty meaningful, but still don't like the idea much... just my opinion.

Personally I think the xp loss is ok but could be improved, with a system kinda like DS where you'd recover PART of your lost xp if you kill whatever monster killed you... would have to be better thought out to cover all different cases/exceptions (killed by barrels, last map portal, party play,etc.) but it could be a nice thing, and maybe "force" GGG to finally add a death log ;-)

I like the idea of being able to recuperate some (Or all) of the experience loss if you kill whatever killed you in the first place - I've been thinking of this myself.

However there is also another way... (Warning wall incoming)

My thinking is that a combat timer and a death counter should be running in the background, that triggers on first attack and finishes after x amount of time has passed since active combat event (Only damaging events keep the timer alive). If a player dies during the combat session, the combat timer is suspended by y amount of time (A visible timer - Respawn timer), that will allow the player a chance to return to the fight and reset the combat timer before it runs out.

Once the timer runs out the combat sessions is considered complete. At this time experience penalties for dying is applied based on the number of deaths the player had during the combat session. For each death, the player would suffer an experience loss equal to z% of the experience value of the combat session multiplied by the number of deaths.

So lets say that z = 25%, then dying 4 times in a single combat session would mean that no experience is gained during that fight, even if the player manages to defeat all monsters. Dying more then that and the player not only doesn't earn any experience for the fight, but actually losses preexisting experience.

Now my thinking is that the experience value of the fight should equal the total experience value of all creatures involved in the combat session - Whether or not they were actually killed, thus if a player pulls a huge number of monsters, the potential experience loss becomes far greater.

In case of maps this can become devastating if a player had pulled a huge pack of monsters and then died without making a single kill and without being able to get back in time to finish the fight before the respawn timer runs out (Maybe the last portal closed or the death occurred so far from the entrance it wasn't possible to get back in time), as the player hasn't earned enough experience to offset the #*z% experience penalty, so they loose experience from the preexisting experience (Just as if they had completed the combat session successfully but with several deaths).

The end result would be a slower gain in experience, but won't set a player back any where near as much if they learn from their mistakes quickly, since the experience penalty is based on encounter experience - Not current accumulated experience.