for everyone who wants a challange

"

Fruz wrote:

Spoiler

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

but most of the player base simply takes your first stance and prefers to "not do it again" due to their view that it's better to take the "easy way" and the "path of least resistance" instead of actually challenge themselves.

From what data are you throwing such a statement here ? what statistics ? what studies ?
I'm going to answer this for you : none, nothing.
You claim that "most of the player base [...]" yet you do actually know nothing of it.

And no, the xp penalty should not encourage you to go throw yourself again on x boss if you character isn't good enough for it.
If some content feels scary and you want to skip the potential rewards because you don't feel confident enough to do it without dying, it's a choice you are making.
Players that can run the content confidently are going to be at an advantage because they can do it while you are scared.
What is allowing this ? the xp penalty on death, and it is a good thing.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

The death EXP penalty should be such an intrinsic incentive, as you're not "cheated from the xp penalty on death", but "cheated" by your gained EXP upon a balance/technical issue death.

You pretty much said
"a => b" with a and b being unrelated to eachother.


The death penalty should (imho) not be balanced around balance/technical issues anyway, because those are just what I said : issues.

Still waiting for those videos of melee namelocking skills dual wielded RT characters leveling from 1 to 100 and always running the highest tier content (and I will still be waiting a long time, since no one "sane" does that)...

See, I don't need the backing of TencentGGG's own values, as I see everyone on Standard at least running the most "profitable" content EXP and loot wise when leveling to 100. But sure, I would enjoy TencentGGG coming out and highlighting the number of players which, post their most recent EXP gain penalty "adjustment", went and leveled to 100 via only >T15 content and a separate number for those that leveled that way via only the "Uber" encounters (so Guardians/Elder Guardians, Shaper, Uber Elder and Uber Atziri)...

Delve does provide at least the option of testing the limit of difficulty that your character can muster, and provides the opportunity for player to decide if they want to push further down, or simply explore horizontally. The Atlas of Worlds is a lot more restrictive. The Atlas also has the problem of boss scaling, where shaping a map to even T16 doesn't bring the boss on the same difficulty as the regular Guardians or Vaal Temple encounters. So "much balance, much wow"...

Besides, I have never been scared of content in PoE, so your supposition is wrong from the start, I might have not breached certain "damage walls" with my main melee namelocking dual wielding RT Jugg, but that is also due the skill "balance" that TencentGGG "graces us with", and make no mistake, I did actually try to run all content the game has to offer and much to my surprise, I managed myself a lot better than even I gave myself credit for.

Ideally, the balance/technical issues should be resolved independently from the death EXP penalty. Regardless due to the fact that they might be a very small % of the total deaths of the players, they also seem to be set to a very low priority to be addressed. A nice side effect of having a static and variable component to the death EXP penalty would be that those outliers might not feel as punishing as they currently are, and even more, that variable component might be more suitable to provide an incentive to learn, adapt, improve and overcome your obstacles.

The current system is lackluster regarding those aspects, and a new one should be better and encourage players to stay alive more, no matter the content they are facing, by better danger/reward ratios EXP wise even concerning the death EXP penalty...

I'm a bit late to this conversation, and don't feel like reading 30 pages of comments, so forgive me if this has been suggested before. If the xp penalty is simply too staggering, and a reduction is on the table then perhaps a flat experience loss instead of a percentage based one would be the most appropriate.

A percentage based loss needlessly penalizes you twice for your level. The first penalty is on the experience that you gain from maps, which is constantly going down the higher your level -- this makes it take longer for you to acquire experience significantly. The second penalty is on raising how much you lose the higher the level you are -- which raises the bar a second time.

You can completely eliminate one penalty by making it a flat rate instead. Say a million experience after you kill Kitava the first time, and five million experience on ascension to maps? Numbers are just for arguments sake, but a five million experience penalty is pretty insignificant before level 90 or so, so not much has changed there.

Sadly eliminating the other penalty is never going to be on the table, since GGG wants the grind to 100 to be a significant effort that most players will not achieve, which while related to the death penalty isn't really within the scope of this topic.

For the record, I don't like any of the leveling process beyond 95. I've been level 98 for several leagues now because I can't be assed to play the ridiculous amounts of time it takes to level, and then get set back at least a couple sessions by a death (usually my fault but not always). Why am I still at it? Well I still enjoy playing the character.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

*utterly irrelevant QQ about the game*

no

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

that variable component might be more suitable to provide an incentive to learn, adapt, improve and overcome your obstacles.

Again, there is absolutely nothing about a scaling xp penalty on death that will "provide and incentive to learn, adapt", nothing.

Any penalty on death will only, simple be a "you messed up" message from the game, period.
It's ALL it is, whatever the penalty.

(And because this is an only game, it might tell you that even when it's not your fault, but that can't be helped unless some GGG fuckups, it's an online)

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

Numbers are just for arguments sake, but a five million experience penalty is pretty insignificant before level 90 or so, so not much has changed there.

You would be surprised how many players mess up their builds and are already not able to progress before lvl ~85 because of it.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

Numbers are just for arguments sake, but a five million experience penalty is pretty insignificant before level 90 or so, so not much has changed there.

You would be surprised how many players mess up their builds and are already not able to progress before lvl ~85 because of it.

Last time I leveled a character at level 85 I was still pulling over 15 million an hour doing casual maps. Five million xp might be a little harsher than 10% (I'm not entirely sure since I'd have to work the math and look at the xp tables) but is still pretty insignificant compared to level 90+. My point was that changing it to a flat rate wouldn't make the game any harder for them, but it wouldn't necessarily benefit them either. But it really helps for the folks that are level 90+.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

*utterly irrelevant QQ about the game*

no

Spoiler

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

that variable component might be more suitable to provide an incentive to learn, adapt, improve and overcome your obstacles.

Again, there is absolutely nothing about a scaling xp penalty on death that will "provide and incentive to learn, adapt", nothing.

Any penalty on death will only, simple be a "you messed up" message from the game, period.
It's ALL it is, whatever the penalty.

(And because this is an only game, it might tell you that even when it's not your fault, but that can't be helped unless some GGG fuckups, it's an online)

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

Numbers are just for arguments sake, but a five million experience penalty is pretty insignificant before level 90 or so, so not much has changed there.

You would be surprised how many players mess up their builds and are already not able to progress before lvl ~85 because of it.

I should learn my lesson and not even consider to provide a response to your "*utterly irrelevant QQ about" "any comment" you make, but still, I do enjoy explaining a different point of view to blatant white-knighting trolls at times.

My so called "*utterly irrelevant QQ about the game" is actually a well explained point of view, different from yours.

And any static + variable penalty on death will not display a simple "you messed up message from the game" as long as it provides fair incentive for the player to keep PLAYING said game and persevere towards his goals. The current death EXP penalty doesn't do anything remotely close to that, so a change might be the right idea. Your point of view, albeit limited, is not the one that I share. Deal with it.

Beside, do provide the numbers on the so called "many players that mess up their builds and are already not able to progress before lvl ~85 because of it", and please don't "QQ" about the numbers from before the rework which introduced the 10 acts instead of 12, as the introduction of the tutorial system might have provided a much needed improvement regarding retention during the storyline - yes, TencentGGG should have some more recent numbers that should shed "light" if their "improvements" are affecting that minimal "retention and playthrough" of said players, and I can't wait to see those, just like you...

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

My so called "*utterly irrelevant QQ about the game" is actually a well explained point of view, different from yours.

It does not matter if it's different from my point of view or not, it's irrelevant here and it's just complaining.

"

sofocle10000 wrote:

And any static + variable penalty on death will not display a simple "you messed up message from the game" as long as it provides fair incentive for the player to keep PLAYING said game and persevere towards his goals

Which it will NOT do more than a 10% static exp penalty.
And YES, the exp does it as well as a hybrid one.

You just keep throwing "it does that/it does not do that". just typing it down won't make it true, you haven't backed up anything or given any actual reason of why it would be better but "it will provide incentive to [...]"

BS
It does NOT provide any particular incentive to keep playing on its own, it's the only thing that keeps the balance somewhat in check at high levels in SC, which indirectly of course makes PoE a better and more interesting game.

"

ghoulavenger wrote:

My point was that changing it to a flat rate wouldn't make the game any harder for them, but it wouldn't necessarily benefit them either. But it really helps for the folks that are level 90+

well, 5 millions is ... pretty much nothing past level 90, it's like 2.5% of level 94->95 for example.

For those supporting the current death penalty because it "teaches a lesson" or something like that, I'm curious... why is 10% the correct amount? Would not the lesson be learned faster if the loss was all XP gained for that level? Or maybe 50%? I mean, why limit it at all if it's supposed to be good for the game and teach players how to beat content? Why not just wipe the bar clean if you die?

To be clear, I'm not currently on one side or the other. I'm just asking questions.

honestly, i don't think the 15% should have been nerfed to 10% to begin with...

i'd even be ok with some sort of entropy (die more than x times/xp) delevel.

"

robmafia wrote:

honestly, i don't think the 15% should have been nerfed to 10% to begin with...

i'd even be ok with some sort of entropy (die more than x times/xp) delevel.

The only issue I have with that is, why? What purpose does it serve and how does it make the game better? The only arguments I've seen for "why" are:

1. It teaches you to play more carefully/make better builds.
2. It prevents zerging to 100.

So, given those two reasons, why 10% or 15% or deleveling? How does that accomplish the goal? I mean, 1% would prevent zerging to 100 and cause players to re-evaluate their approach to an encounter, so why is 10% or 15% better than 1%? Why does the punishment have to be punishing? Just to make players suffer? Because clearly both goals can be accomplished with a lower death penalty, so why advocate for a higher one other than to just "stick it" to players that die?

Again, just asking questions. If I'm honest I don't like the death penalty but it does what it's supposed to do for me and I could live with it remaining unchanged. I just don't think it would be less effective if it were lower. Nor do I think it would be more effective if it were higher.

it's like this game/genre is supposed to be about making choices where the results matter, or something.

it's like there should be a reason to make a solid build with actual defenses and try to stay alive, or something.

it's as if there should be risk:reward or something.

screw that. 0 life/es nodes, 0 defenses, prefixes all for damage on gear, 8946783543854 billion dps cast on death build, because imbalanced failures should still get their participation trophies and are just as good as balanced builds that can actually kill map brutus without dying.