for everyone who wants a challange

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

Slaanesh69 wrote:

There is a reason why it is around level 88 or so that the deaths start feeling frustrating regarding exp loss.

LOL. Try 93 and/or above. 88 is a joke to go through.

If anything, death penalty should be stricter on lower levels, as it's already too easy to go through them. Let's say 40% at levels 70-79, 25% at levels 80-89 and the current 10% from 90 upwards.

The fact that you can pretty much zerg through deaths and still get to high 80's pampers you babies too much and causes all this whining after you reach the point where, you know, STAYING ALIVE starts to matter in terms of leveling.

lol i had a 93 last league ... but incursion was just boring :D
so you cant blame me for playing bad dude ...

death penalty is just a bad gamemechanic

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

Slaanesh69 wrote:

There is a reason why it is around level 88 or so that the deaths start feeling frustrating regarding exp loss.

LOL. Try 93 and/or above. 88 is a joke to go through.

If anything, death penalty should be stricter on lower levels, as it's already too easy to go through them. Let's say 40% at levels 70-79, 25% at levels 80-89 and the current 10% from 90 upwards.

The fact that you can pretty much zerg through deaths and still get to high 80's pampers you babies too much and causes all this whining after you reach the point where, you know, STAYING ALIVE starts to matter in terms of leveling.

I think if you do that , it will be harder to lure newcomers into the game or keep them into it , most of them just quit before reaching lvl 70 if they arent coached by an experienced PoE player most the time.

Imo, a scaling with level death penalty could be a good solution for everyone involved including myself. It's a compromise that would still keep the idea of "building around balance of offense and defense", but at the same time, deaths on levels 93+ wouldn't be so frustrating.

Maybe balancing it around losing roughly 15-30 minutes of mapping exp would be fine, just like it is around lower levels. But on the other hand, GGG want reaching lvl 100 to be something for "no life" grindy type of players who enjoy running easy maps for hours. So probably this leads to nothing, unless they change their philosophy.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

MrTremere wrote:

And there we are. No matter what suggestion we make, you guys will refuse it. No attempt to improve the situation, just a refusal as long as it's not the current penalty.
Not like you have any reason to change your stance, GGG will keep catering to your side, and I will keep trying the game again, then drop it again after a few days, because somewhere the penalty killed my passion for the game.

No, I didn't say that your suggestion was bad, just that putting resources into that when it's very likely to change nothing is not something that I see GGG try anytime, and I would personally rather have them focus on something that matters imho.

"

Nalwreath wrote:

However, I don't believe that the exp loss should be removed entirely... What if it was reduced? Say part I lose -2.5% exp per death and part II lose 5% exp per death, this to me would help at least with uncontrollable deaths.

I think it's 0% P1 and 5% P2 already, or ?

"

Slaanesh69 wrote:

It is unbalanced that you ALWAYS lose 10% exp whereas after level 84 you start taking exp penalties compared to the level of the map (assuming you did comparative level maps up to that point, which you did not, so you have already felt the penalty).

I think the penalty should stay, but it needs to be tied to exp gain somehow. IN other words, the exp penalty needs to be taken into account. Compared to T16? Compared to T12? That remains part of the debate.

What if it is be the exact opposite ?
The game is supposed to be harder the farther you get, the difficulty is not supposed to stay linear.
Which it would be if you would scale it "down" percent wise to keep having it mean the same amount of time for example.

Having it slightly reduced for higher level content to give more incentive to run it ?
Why not ... but how would you concretely do that ?

See, your glass is always half empty.

By tying the exp loss to the gain potential, you are MAKING IT STAY THE SAME with respect to "time invested". Disconnected as it is now, the penalty gets progressively worse as you level.

Now I agree there is the perspective of "greater challenge" but let's face it, we are not talking about hard or easy or challenging here, we are simply talking about a time sink.

"

SisterBlister wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

"

dickslicksficks wrote:

But the current system doesn't serve anyone at the moment, there are far better easy to implement systems to push players to strive for survival.

Feel free to enlighten us all.

Yup, Fruz put his finger on the main sticking point: The problem is harder than many people seem to think. Nonetheless we get a lot of kneejerk answers (in both directions) which serve only to antagonize the debate.

Please only answer if you have a suggestion, guys!

No, because I think the argument itself has to be addressed. You can't really make suggestions before there is at least some shared consensus why many people do not like the current system.

As others have implicated here, the problem lies in punishing players for trying to progress their character. The only 'knee-jerk' reaction to very simple psychological feeling of progress -or taking away this feeling of progress- has repeatedly been to 'git gut' or, if you will, 'play more slowly/carefully'. Everyone well knows there is already a HC option in game. Current system means players are de facto forced to play HC after lvl 95, no matter which mode they chose from the beginning.

OP is absolutely right: if you want to play HC, go fucking play HC. Stop pestering people who do not want to play such game mode. Pestering means excessive XP death penalty, which in turn means losing progress. It is okay for HC players exactly because that is what HC players have as a common attitude. It does not follow that other players also enjoy approaching PoE this way, or that they ever should.

I think there is a deep disregard on such very basic conception as individuals feel of being punished. Sure some people here also get their kicks for ruining PvE players' daily Leo missions, but it does not follow it makes the daily Leo system well-balanced between these 'different ways of playing the game'. The other one is pure griefing for no personal gain.

Just curious but how many people would quit POE outright if they got rid of the SC death penalty?

"

Phaeded wrote:

Just curious but how many people would quit POE outright if they got rid of the SC death penalty?

I bet there's a number that'd claim they would. But I also bet that most of them we could look back and find other times something happened and they said they were quitting PoE, too.

"

ACGIFT wrote:

"

Phaeded wrote:

Just curious but how many people would quit POE outright if they got rid of the SC death penalty?

I bet there's a number that'd claim they would. But I also bet that most of them we could look back and find other times something happened and they said they were quitting PoE, too.

Well, I've never said I was going to quit and then went back on it. But I think some of the people here would be honest about it and the ones that will exaggerate are probably folks I already don't pay much attention to.

I've definitely changed my position. I had forgotten about them giving in to our loot mode ideas. I have never had any logical reason for supporting a death penalty other than "death must have a cost". But I think some of your arguments against that cost requiring XP loss are very compelling.

For me I wouldn't quit over that, obviously, but it's not because I agree or don't agree with the death penalty as it is. It's simply because it wouldn't really change anything about the way I play other than I wouldn't avoid certain content when I was close to leveling up. Like, I would never attempt Shaper when I'm 75% to 94. I would ding first then do that. I wouldn't have to do that any more if there was no death penalty and I'm not sure that is a bad thing or unhealthy for the game. I haven't really been able to come up with any reasonable counterargument and no one in this thread has presented any yet so I don't feel I have any choice but to adjust my position.

The whole argument is completely pointless to begin with because we are talking about the developers who do their best to make leveling harder. Removing the only thing that makes it harder? hah, not in a million years. Still nice to see what the people who want it easy have to say though.

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

The whole argument is completely pointless to begin with because we are talking about the developers who do their best to make leveling harder. Removing the only thing that makes it harder? hah, not in a million years. Still nice to see what the people who want it easy have to say though.

I agree that the odds are pretty long on them changing this, if only because it's been around for so long. However, they have not published any position paper on this topic in YEARS. I honestly believe that a thread such as "SET FREE THE EXPERIENCE POINTS (or abolish the death penalty)" would get some traction if it was presented constructively, the way the Labyrinth thread was done.

But, clearly that thread hasn't had much impact so maybe this is just a pipe dream as well.