for everyone who wants a challange

"

Fruz wrote:

"

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.

That same 5 million takes me about an hour to get unless I'm chaining Poorjoys (I play incinerate totems, kill map bosses, and pick up whatever I feel like -- in standard no less, so not even close to optimal). Think not in percentage, I wasn't. But I'll say again that 5 million was just for arguments sake. It could still be much higher and not be nearly as penalizing as a 10% penalty when you're level 90+.

"

dummyacct7 wrote:

IIRC the death penalty used to be 15%, and they lowered it to 10%. People are going to keep complaining no matter how many times it gets adjusted, and it's doing its job just fine at the current rate.

Pretty much that, of course.

"

Phaeded wrote:

This is probably kind of stupid but it occurred to me so what the hell... what about instead of a penalty that makes you go backwards you instead had a penalty that stopped you from going forwards? So let's say that 10% XP at level 90 is 1 hour of mapping (just picking some numbers for demonstration purposes). What if instead of losing an hour of XP you just can't gain XP for an hour? Each time you die it adds an hour on to whatever time you have left, up to a maximum amount (maybe 24 hours?).

it's still basically the same as not having a penalty. with enough playtime, even the worst players would hit 100.

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Phaeded wrote:

This is probably kind of stupid but it occurred to me so what the hell... what about instead of a penalty that makes you go backwards you instead had a penalty that stopped you from going forwards? So let's say that 10% XP at level 90 is 1 hour of mapping (just picking some numbers for demonstration purposes). What if instead of losing an hour of XP you just can't gain XP for an hour? Each time you die it adds an hour on to whatever time you have left, up to a maximum amount (maybe 24 hours?).

it's still basically the same as not having a penalty. with enough playtime, even the worst players would hit 100.

I don’t think that’s true actually but I'm not married to the idea so I don’t really feel like trying to break it down more to see if that is accurate. Just thinking outside the box a bit. I’ll get back in my box now and let the big boys get back to their arguments.

Edit: If your claim is correct then it would be true under the current mechanic as well. In either case if you die your progress to 100 is hindered by the same amount per death. If you can make up the time in the system I proposed then you can also make up the time in the current system. Just don’t die, right? ;)

"

Phaeded wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

it's still basically the same as not having a penalty. with enough playtime, even the worst players would hit 100.

I don’t think that’s true actually but I'm not married to the idea so I don’t really feel like trying to break it down more to see if that is accurate. Just thinking outside the box a bit. I’ll get back in my box now and let the big boys get back to their arguments.

it's literally true.

it's factually true.

it's true.

worse, it's so obvious.

if one never loses xp, one can only gain xp. 100 would be literally inevitable, with the only factor remaining being playtime. i don't know why you refuse to believe this obvious fact.

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Phaeded wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

it's still basically the same as not having a penalty. with enough playtime, even the worst players would hit 100.

I don’t think that’s true actually but I'm not married to the idea so I don’t really feel like trying to break it down more to see if that is accurate. Just thinking outside the box a bit. I’ll get back in my box now and let the big boys get back to their arguments.

it's literally true.

it's factually true.

it's true.

worse, it's so obvious.

if one never loses xp, one can only gain xp. 100 would be literally inevitable, with the only factor remaining being playtime. i don't know why you refuse to believe this obvious fact.

I think you are missing the fact that the player would be forced to play a period of time with no XP gain. How is it a steady march with no hindersnce if they are blocked from gaining? Even if they cannot gain until they’ve earned back the same 10% you think they should lose. It is an equal effect, just presented differently. Seems as obvious to me as your point does to you.

Anyway, really not worth debating so I’ll let it go. I just think there is room for nuance that you are not willing to allow.

Edit: Btw, I got this idea from the XP fatigue vs. XP boost thing WoW did. I was trying to think of how you could get an equal effect without it feeling so shitty. Moving backwards probably feels more shitty than not moving forwards. I thought anyway. But, I did start the whole thing off saying it was probably a stupid idea so w/e. :P

because they can still only gain. you can reduce the rate in which they gain, but it's still always going to be gain.

Getting to high level in this game is an achievement not guaranteed claim, it shows you know the mechanics and you can ballance your character both defensive and offensive way.

If you are not able to do that you stay at the lvl which reflects your knowings and skill thats all. Otherwise you can play cast on death build and get to lvl 100 in the same tme as someone with zero deaths and perfectly balanced character.

You can either give up or deal with you being bad and try to figure out and improve/addapt, choice is yours. Making T_T posts won't help in any way.

If this is too much for you, there is plenty of arpgs with zero penalty. Enjoy

why is this 33 pages long?

"

Anonymous1749704 wrote:

why is this 33 pages long?

Dunno prolly some ppl asking stupid questions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯