for everyone who wants a challange

"

robmafia wrote:

FACT: the ONLY thing that reduces xp is dying.

FACT: the only variables are playtime and deaths

FACT: with infinite time, ALL players will reach level 100, regardless of ability

I will never reach level 100 if I roll another character because I got bored. FACT.

"

Phaeded wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

FACT: the ONLY thing that reduces xp is dying.

FACT: the only variables are playtime and deaths

FACT: with infinite time, ALL players will reach level 100, regardless of ability

I will never reach level 100 if I roll another character because I got bored. FACT.

...what part of "playtime" do you not understand?

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Phaeded wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

FACT: the ONLY thing that reduces xp is dying.

FACT: the only variables are playtime and deaths

FACT: with infinite time, ALL players will reach level 100, regardless of ability

I will never reach level 100 if I roll another character because I got bored. FACT.

...what part of "playtime" do you not understand?

The part where I'm playing another character and it doesn't count as "playtime" I guess.

Maybe you need to use more specific language. What I think you're really saying is this:

With infinite playtime on a single character and with no death penalty every player will reach level 100.

If that was what you were trying to say I won't disagree because it's true. What I disagree with is that you're saying desire is not a factor (by claiming there are the only two factors) in reaching 100 and I say it's a big factor and for the purpose of this conversation it is relevant. You can disagree but that doesn't matter. I was not talking to you anyway. For the third time.

Let me try and clarify even though I think it's pointless. Sure losing XP will slow down the march to 100 literally by removing XP from the counter and keeping you from reaching the next level. But what I think is more of a problem, at least for myself, is maintaining the necessary desire to push to 100. That being the case, the death penalty is really not a factor. The biggest factor for me is a lack of desire to keep grinding. That was the point I was trying to get to and discuss with the other poster before you decided to interject your opinion.

'i'm not talking to you!!!!'

ok, what part of PUBLIC FORUM do you not understand?

ffs, man.

argues with facts, claims to not be talking to me while repeatedly talking to me... yup, it's the current year!

i like how you disputed my factual claim but now backpedaled into it. while STILL arguing. while claiming to not be talking to me.

i can't facepalm hard enough.

"

robmafia wrote:

'i'm not talking to you!!!!'

ok, what part of PUBLIC FORUM do you not understand?

ffs, man.

argues with facts, claims to not be talking to me while repeatedly talking to me... yup, it's the current year!

i like how you disputed my factual claim but now backpedaled into it. while STILL arguing. while claiming to not be talking to me.

i can't facepalm hard enough.

I edited my post to add a little clarification.

Yes, I disassembled what you were saying to make sure I understood it and then restated it to be sure you agreed. I just don't think your position represents reality. It may be factually accurate, as I clarified above, but it's really beside the point I was trying to make. So yes, I agree with your literal statement but I still argue that it wasn't part of the point I was trying to make.

As for this being a public forum and you responding to me, I 100% agree except for one thing. I asked a direct question of another poster. I didn't make a general statement and while you have every right to respond you could have also shown some courtesy and respect.

Anyway, at this point we're not getting anywhere so YOU WIN. I will not respond any further even so you can have the last word. Enjoy.

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

"

Phaeded wrote:

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

Probably not outright, but it'd definitely be the beginning of the end. I'd get a level 100 in a league or finish pushing my 97 in standard. Next league I'd get bored really fast because death doesn't matter and quit early. Third league would probably be the point where I'd just completely stop, as playing a god mode sandbox game isn't all that fun.

I wanted to restate my question to be sure it's not misunderstood (and to hopefully get the dialog back on track). The discussion in this thread is really about what purpose the death penalty serves and whether or not there is a better alternative. Based on what you wrote, it seems like you might think that if the death penalty was removed there would be a lot more level 100 characters. While I can agree that there would probably be more, would it really be that significant? Because the amount of XP to earn is still astronomical and to me that is the bigger factor keeping people from hitting 100.

So basically what I'm saying is that I don't feel like the death penalty is that large of a factor in why more characters don't reach level 100 now. I would say it's actually a pretty small factor compared to the grind itself. There may be some that quit grinding due to discouragement after dying but I think those type of people would get discouraged or bored anyway before hitting 100. That's very much speculation though. I don't think there is any way to know for sure.

I'm just still wondering what real purpose the death penalty is serving. You're position seems to be that it is serving a purpose by keeping people from max level but is that really a big factor or are there other, less obvious factors that serve that purpose better? And if so, then why keep the death penalty around?

"

Phaeded wrote:

I'm just still wondering what real purpose the death penalty is serving.

wow, i guess it does literally need to be stated.

it's currently the ONLY skill-related factor in reaching 100.

personally, i think there should be MORE skill-related factors, not 0 - which is the amount we'd have if xp loss on death was removed.

"

Nalwreath wrote:

Right now it's at the end of P1 -5% and at the end of P2 -10%, I was saying why not make it at the end of P1 -2.5% and at the end of P2 -5%.

Hmm ... I think that it would not change much, make easier reaching 92+ ( especially the last levels ) for all, and delay the "bitching point" of many here ( which means that many would get bored before they reach that point, it would likely reduce the amount of QQing without addressing anything really ( there is imho nothing to address but ... ).

"

vmt80 wrote:

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

GGG has always been aiming at providing a HC experience to all, regardless of the "technical" HC/SC leagues.
Deal with it.

If you don't want to play something even remotely a little bit hardcore, stop pestering people who are actually playing PoE and came to PoE for that.
And "go fucking play" another game, period.

"

Slaanesh69 wrote:

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.

Funnily, I have yet to see a single lvl 100 say that kind of things.
Which really tells a lot.
Because with that way of thinking, everything boils down to being a time sink, and there is a bsolutely 0 challenge and 0 difficulty in PoE if we go down that road.

"

Phaeded wrote:

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

I think it would not be quitting outright.
I think that it would hurt player retention, and make the game more boring for many.
Plus, the meta and the game balance in SC would be drastically affected, which would be the main problem, hurting the whole game overall.

"

Phaeded wrote:

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.

So, people that are not afraid of dying because they (know the content better)/(play better)/(have a better character) and are not waiting for that level up will get their goal achieved earlier and will therefore have an edge over other players that are (afraid)/(don't want to take risks)/(don't have such a great character) this way.
Seems pretty legit, I really don't see any reason to change that.

And YES, there are such players.
This is a good thing, not a bad one.
You have a choice : take a risk and potentially have an edge, get there faster, or play it safe and get there a bit slower.

"

ACGIFT wrote:

The penalty doesn't "make it harder." No one who even comes close to winning the "race to 100" has died. There's no risk involved, just spamming UGS (which you can sleep through and not die) until you hit it.

Yes it does, and anybody arguing against that is just whosing a whole log of bad faith.
Why have players bitching about the death penalty never reached level 100 to begin with ?
Yes, we all know, we all actually know.
And nothing that you will keep telling yourself to try to convince yourself will change that.

Pretending that top SC players never ever die is also a whole lot BS, clearly.
Because it would be like pretending that nobody ever dies in the top HC players, which is absolutely wrong, and those guys play it tankier.

"

Phaeded wrote:

I will never reach level 100 if I roll another character because I got bored. FACT.

I think that there are 2 patterns here (assuming no xp penalty ):
- you would get to level 100 much faster than without the penalty, then you would get bored
- you would start feeling that something is amiss, and that there is no point going to lvel 100 now that it is so easy/everyone gets there eventually : get bored before reaching that point.

@robmafia : dude, chill out a bit, Phaeded isn't even remotely being antagonizing or anything like many others in those forums ( which is kinda rare here ).

"

Phaeded wrote:

I wanted to restate my question to be sure it's not misunderstood (and to hopefully get the dialog back on track). The discussion in this thread is really about what purpose the death penalty serves and whether or not there is a better alternative. Based on what you wrote, it seems like you might think that if the death penalty was removed there would be a lot more level 100 characters. While I can agree that there would probably be more, would it really be that significant? Because the amount of XP to earn is still astronomical and to me that is the bigger factor keeping people from hitting 100.

So basically what I'm saying is that I don't feel like the death penalty is that large of a factor in why more characters don't reach level 100 now. I would say it's actually a pretty small factor compared to the grind itself. There may be some that quit grinding due to discouragement after dying but I think those type of people would get discouraged or bored anyway before hitting 100. That's very much speculation though. I don't think there is any way to know for sure.

The grind is too much because you need to avoid any potentially dangerous (read:fun) factors, like reflect, -max, double/triple extra damage, bosses... Many a 1%'er would have a lvl 100 by now if it wasn't for the fact that road to there is synonymous to "AVOID ALL CONTENT".

If I didn't need to care about death penalty and could just run all the fun stuff I want, based on the exp gain I had while messing in standard before Delve launched, I'd get my 97 to 98 in about three sessions.

There are loads of people who are willing to go through the grind but don't have the skills and knowhow to stay alive through it. Then there are those oblivious ones who, god forbid, try to engage content while leveling and don't run safe maps 24/7. Last but not the least, there are those whose build hampers their road to 100, whether it be due to not having enough currency (fyi, only a very very very small part of the player base can make 100c/h) to buy a build or they simply haven't copied a forum build.

Without exp penalty on death, all of these people would be able to get 100.

"

Fruz wrote:

GGG has always been aiming at providing a HC experience to all, regardless of the "technical" HC/SC leagues.
Deal with it.

GGG has always been aiming at providing a "cutthroat" experience to all, hence why the original design only had free-for-all loot.

Deal with it.

GGG has always been aiming at an un-cheatable, HC experience to all, hence why they said they HAD to rely exclusively on a system that, by design, produced endless amounts of desync.

Deal with it.

"

Fruz wrote:

If you don't want to play something even remotely a little bit hardcore,

Ah yes, you're resorting to the extremist straw-man: making a SLIGHT change would make PoE not "Even remotely a little bit hardcore."

You've run out of ideas.

"

Fruz wrote:

Funnily, I have yet to see a single lvl 100 say that kind of things.
Which really tells a lot.
Because with that way of thinking, everything boils down to being a time sink, and there is a bsolutely 0 challenge and 0 difficulty in PoE if we go down that road.

We've still passed your level, buddy. You're projecting a LOT when you're talking about "challenge," as it appears you've never even run a T16 map in your life?

And also, more of that straw-manning, arguing that there's "no challenge" if you don't lose loads of EXP on every death. So apparently, the game has "zero difficulty" if you're at 0% EXP, since you cannot lose any further EXP.

"

Fruz wrote:

Plus, the meta and the game balance in SC would be drastically affected, which would be the main problem, hurting the whole game overall.

Yeah, this argument is entirely bunk, given that the game still has SC vs. HC builds.

"

Fruz wrote:

And YES, there are such players.
This is a good thing, not a bad one.
You have a choice : take a risk and potentially have an edge, get there faster, or play it safe and get there a bit slower.

Of course you're gonna try to defend a meta as dumb as that. What next, praising "boss skip meta?"

"

Fruz wrote:

Yes it does, and anybody arguing against that is just whosing a whole log of bad faith.

The fact that you think that there's real risk below the "deadly encounters"-type content says a lot about your playing style.

"

Fruz wrote:

Why have players bitching about the death penalty never reached level 100 to begin with ?
Yes, we all know, we all actually know.
And nothing that you will keep telling yourself to try to convince yourself will change that.

And what's that? Oh please, since you seem to know everything about this game and everything about its players, please do go on.

"

Fruz wrote:

- you would get to level 100 much faster than without the penalty, then you would get bored
- you would start feeling that something is amiss, and that there is no point going to lvel 100 now that it is so easy/everyone gets there eventually : get bored before reaching that point.

Again, you've utterly run out of ideas to throw, so you just run on repeat with such a bad argument claiming that the EXP penalty is the only risk, and only challenge, in this entire game.