PoE should look at D2 Median XL as an example for reasons to kill bosses

Step 5.
Uninstall the game because it's not a sandbox anymore.

Step 6: Reinstall again after realizing the Sandbox is gone from the core-game but instead there is no limitation at any scaling mechanic (Like Delve) and GGG brings in more of those.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Step 5.
Uninstall the game because it's not a sandbox anymore.

You think PoE in its current state is a sandbox?

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Step 5.
Uninstall the game because it's not a sandbox anymore.

You think PoE in its current state is a sandbox?

I dunno, but restricting the available build options even more will certainly make it less of a sandboxy game than it currently is.

I would love it if GGG released an offline version so that i could mod Poe to my heart's content. Then it would be the ultimate sandbox.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Step 5.
Uninstall the game because it's not a sandbox anymore.

You think PoE in its current state is a sandbox?

I dunno, but restricting the available build options even more will certainly make it less of a sandboxy game than it currently is.

Can't disagree with that.

If you look at the post you responded to, I think you'll see that you are both after the same thing; you just disagree on the means.

I personally am not a fan of hard caps, but I do think that a diminishing returns algorithm would make GGG's job of making the game even remotely resemble a balanced one (it currently does not, as we all know) far easier.

Exactly. I don't see how limiting dps and ms would increase build options. Everyone would get the max dps possible and only variation of builds would be in their defenses. Something similar could be said about ms. If there was a cap on ms then everyone would just try and get it or ignore it and build for travel skills (attack/ cast speed). And if you put a cap on as/cs to prevent that then rip game imo.

I also think that at least the endgame stuff should be balanced for expensive builds because if it were not then there would be no reason to get expensive items.

Diminishing returns might work. Depends on how harshly diminished the returns are. If they are too harshly dimished then players might see it as a hard cap.

hardcap is a terrible idea.

Having resistances hardcaped at 75% "just because" is already quite silly ( a proper logarithmic curve to soft cap it at a desired level and could allow pushing it slightly farther without making it crazy would have been much, much better imho, from the very start ), now hard cap to damage and speed ?

Wow, that's one terrible idea there, no thank you.



Resorting to hard caps in such a game ( without any other reasons than "because that's how balance work" lol, not that it's actually working or anything ... ) is to me a sign that they could not design the game to be intuitive and interesting without it, it is imho a design failure to begin with.

"

Pyrokar wrote:

Diminishing returns might work. Depends on how harshly diminished the returns are. If they are too harshly dimished then players might see it as a hard cap.

I think a shallow curve that gets progressively steeper as the damage gets more and more ridiculous is a pretty reasonable way to set it up.

"

Fruz wrote:

hardcap is a terrible idea.

Having resistances hardcaped at 75% "just because" is already quite silly ( a proper logarithmic curve to soft cap it at a desired level and could allow pushing it slightly farther without making it crazy would have been much, much better imho, from the very start ), now hard cap to damage and speed ?

Wow, that's one terrible idea there, no thank you.



Resorting to hard caps in such a game ( without any other reasons than "because that's how balance work" lol, not that it's actually working or anything ... ) is to me a sign that they could not design the game to be intuitive and interesting without it, it is imho a design failure to begin with.

Interesting idea. A soft cap (diminishing returns) on resistances and other stats could also benefit the game in many ways.

But now we're into game redesign territory.

Let's start with what we already know is broken (player damage and monster damage) and look into how to fix that.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

Interesting idea. A soft cap (diminishing returns) on resistances and other stats could also benefit the game in many ways.

But now we're into game redesign territory.

Let's start with what we already know is broken (player damage and monster damage) and look into how to fix that.

Do you genuinely believe that 'fixing' player and monster damage isn't into game redesign territory already ?


The disparity is too big I think, GGG have been goind bananas with numbers for too long, unless drastic changes .... there need to be some re-designing in there imho.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

Interesting idea. A soft cap (diminishing returns) on resistances and other stats could also benefit the game in many ways.

But now we're into game redesign territory.

Let's start with what we already know is broken (player damage and monster damage) and look into how to fix that.

Do you genuinely believe that 'fixing' player and monster damage isn't into game redesign territory already ?

Do you genuinely believe it is?

I too am mystified that it is taking GGG this long to recognize the damage being done to their game, but I haven't seen anything to indicate they recognize this, let alone that they have changed their priority set in any way.

These (quite serious) problems with balance are years old now, with virtually no action taken. Why expect change now?