Separate Atlas Tree for EACH character?

"

Prof549 wrote:

But then again, it's true for me. Not gonna say it is for the rest of the players, and nor should you.

yeap
and thats where GGG has to make a middle ground where they deem its fair for most players, and so far based on them ignoring this feedback for many leagues, it tends to favour players like me, and i am thankful for it.

This has pluses, but also minuses. For things like the syndancate it would be useful. I hate having to Aislings all set up and ready to sell...but there's no buyers. However, it's already like this for Alva missions, different characater different temple. This became annoying when they made it so you can now store temples as an item.

I could see my way around having stored atlas "templates" which will automaticly respect it for the apporiate unmaking orb cost. However, making a different tree for each character is like saying "i don't want to spend so many unmaking orbs"

"

Quiex__VZ wrote:

is like saying "i don't want to spend so many unmaking orbs"

Unmaking orbs has no (in-game/intended) value for people that know what they are doing and have a plan. It's a "noob currency" so to speak.

"

exsea wrote:

yeap
and thats where GGG has to make a middle ground where they deem its fair for most players, and so far based on them ignoring this feedback for many leagues, it tends to favour players like me, and i am thankful for it.

Thankful for GGG ignoring players :D funny(not really)

"

Prof549 wrote:

"

exsea wrote:

someone mentioned ggg not wanting people to feel obliged to play 5 different characters.

thats one solid point

A solid, but completely unrelated point tho.

It's not about "feeling obliged" to play different characters, it's about "wanting" to play different characters.

but it kind of is.

this entire game is an ocean of maths and choices that invites a player to make decisions that are beneficial to them.

life, dps, block, movespeed, resistances, gear, stats, monsters, modifiers, the whole thing is about making smart choices. picking the item that results in the best numbers, be that damage or clear speed or survival odds or loot per hour theres maths and choices behind all of it.

if you set up a situation in game where the most efficient thing to do is X, people are going to feel obliged to do X. that is as inherent to the game format as shooting the other team in counterstrike or driving around the track faster than the other cars in a racing game.






you want to pay a different character, but nothings is stopping you. you want to play different content on it? ok. some people want to play different content on the same character, theyre bored of their first atlas tree. if you want to play one set of content on this character and then another set on another character then you need to make a tree that compromises between both those choices, same way someone who wants to stick with the same character but play 2 different content styles on that one character needs to.

its fair because regardless of if you are a 1 character person or a 10 character person, you all have 132 atlas passives to spend on the same tree, you all have the same opportunity costs and if you want to completely redesign it at some point you have the same respec costs, regardless of if you are respeccing it for another character or the same character.

that is a completely fair and even situation. if you change that so that the person with 2 characters gets the functionality of 2 trees, thats not fair is it?




that is creating a situation where you are making the players at a disadvantage feel obliged to play the other advantageous way. so you say its about wanting to play another character not feeling obligations, but surely its more about affording everyone the same costs and benefits so that everyone can feel free to play the way they want to play, not creating a system that just makes the particular way you want to play more cost effective at other peoples expense.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

its fair because regardless of if you are a 1 character person or a 10 character person, you all have 132 atlas passives to spend on the same tree, you all have the same opportunity costs and if you want to completely redesign it at some point you have the same respec costs, regardless of if you are respeccing it for another character or the same character.

that is a completely fair and even situation. if you change that so that the person with 2 characters gets the functionality of 2 trees, thats not fair is it?

It's entirely fair. First because...everyone is playing by the same rules. You start the game, you can make the same choices anyone else does. If you don't, that's on you, right? Second, for all the same reasons it isn't "unfair" to have multiple characters.

If I have a Glacial Hammer character and a Soulrend character, I have the functionality of two passive skill trees! I can play Soulrend in places where that's efficient, and GH in places where that's efficient (ha ha, good one right)! How is this fair? Surely everyone should be bound to only one tree, and if they want to play GH sometimes and Soulrend sometimes, they should be forced to build a tree that compromises between both those choices!

Treating everything like a competition is corrosive.

Besides, Path of Exile is fundamentally not about fairness. It's not fair that I play a map and drop some amazing item and someone else plays it and gets a few alteration orbs. Randomness isn't fair. It's not fair that some players have all the free time in the world to spend building 'wealth' in the game and others don't. There are far more significant places to start if we suddenly think everyone's experience of POE should be the same.

Realistically, anyone playing this game has to learn to accept that some people will have more stuff than they do and better opportunities than they do. If you can't do that, you'd lose your mind on paranoid nonsense. And if you can, then what difference does it make to your life if some stranger on the other side of the world is playing one character sometimes and another character other times?

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

It's entirely fair. First because...everyone is playing by the same rules. You start the game, you can make the same choices anyone else does. If you don't, that's on you, right? Second, for all the same reasons it isn't "unfair" to have multiple characters.

If I have a Glacial Hammer character and a Soulrend character, I have the functionality of two passive skill trees! I can play Soulrend in places where that's efficient, and GH in places where that's efficient (ha ha, good one right)! How is this fair? Surely everyone should be bound to only one tree, and if they want to play GH sometimes and Soulrend sometimes, they should be forced to build a tree that compromises between both those choices!

Treating everything like a competition is corrosive.

Besides, Path of Exile is fundamentally not about fairness. It's not fair that I play a map and drop some amazing item and someone else plays it and gets a few alteration orbs. Randomness isn't fair. It's not fair that some players have all the free time in the world to spend building 'wealth' in the game and others don't. There are far more significant places to start if we suddenly think everyone's experience of POE should be the same.

Realistically, anyone playing this game has to learn to accept that some people will have more stuff than they do and better opportunities than they do. If you can't do that, you'd lose your mind on paranoid nonsense. And if you can, then what difference does it make to your life if some stranger on the other side of the world is playing one character sometimes and another character other times?

That's some wise Crocodile if i ever seen one.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

its fair because regardless of if you are a 1 character person or a 10 character person, you all have 132 atlas passives to spend on the same tree, you all have the same opportunity costs and if you want to completely redesign it at some point you have the same respec costs, regardless of if you are respeccing it for another character or the same character.

that is a completely fair and even situation. if you change that so that the person with 2 characters gets the functionality of 2 trees, thats not fair is it?

It's entirely fair. First because...everyone is playing by the same rules. You start the game, you can make the same choices anyone else does. If you don't, that's on you, right? Second, for all the same reasons it isn't "unfair" to have multiple characters.

If I have a Glacial Hammer character and a Soulrend character, I have the functionality of two passive skill trees! I can play Soulrend in places where that's efficient, and GH in places where that's efficient (ha ha, good one right)! How is this fair? Surely everyone should be bound to only one tree, and if they want to play GH sometimes and Soulrend sometimes, they should be forced to build a tree that compromises between both those choices!

Treating everything like a competition is corrosive.

Besides, Path of Exile is fundamentally not about fairness. It's not fair that I play a map and drop some amazing item and someone else plays it and gets a few alteration orbs. Randomness isn't fair. It's not fair that some players have all the free time in the world to spend building 'wealth' in the game and others don't. There are far more significant places to start if we suddenly think everyone's experience of POE should be the same.

Realistically, anyone playing this game has to learn to accept that some people will have more stuff than they do and better opportunities than they do. If you can't do that, you'd lose your mind on paranoid nonsense. And if you can, then what difference does it make to your life if some stranger on the other side of the world is playing one character sometimes and another character other times?

you are proposing they make 1 style of play advantageous over another, and your reasoning for why the devs should do this is simply because it would benefit you personally.



its not just about everyone having the same options, its about the devs looking at what options the game rewards and punishes. theres no reason to reward or punish people based on how many characters they want to make. that should be a neutral decision people are free to make without the game enforcing a reward or punishment on them depending on their choice. its about is the option simply one of preference or is the game putting the weight of an advantage on one over the other. i dont think thats a hard concept to grasp if you make even a slight attempt to look it honestly and objectively.


feeling like you need to reroll your character because you messed up your atlas tree is also not cool, or any of the other down sides people have mentioned that youre not really presenting any counter to.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

you are proposing they make 1 style of play advantageous over another, and your reasoning for why the devs should do this is simply because it would benefit you personally.

its not just about everyone having the same options, its about the devs looking at what options the game rewards and punishes. theres no reason to reward or punish people based on how many characters they want to make. that should be a neutral decision people are free to make without the game enforcing a reward or punishment on them depending on their choice. its about is the option simply one of preference or is the game putting the weight of an advantage on one over the other. i dont think thats a hard concept to grasp if you make even a slight attempt to look it honestly and objectively.

feeling like you need to reroll your character because you messed up your atlas tree is also not cool, or any of the other down sides people have mentioned that youre not really presenting any counter to.

Please, let's not pretend we're being "objective" by specifically insisting that we indulge certain people's feelings as if they're any more valid or real than my own. You are taking a subjective position. That's okay, it's not a problem.

You may feel like you need to reroll your character because you "messed up" your passive tree. But you don't. Your feelings are lying to you. Insisting that the game validate those feelings only strengthens them.

"

GusTheCrocodile wrote:

Please, let's not pretend we're being "objective" by specifically insisting that we indulge certain people's feelings as if they're any more valid or real than my own. You are taking a subjective position. That's okay, it's not a problem.

no, im not actually. its not indulging anyones feelings, its leaving the choice neutral so that no one is indulged or punished based on their preferences.


you want the game to move away from a neutral position, to put other people at a disadvantage and promote undesirable behaviours in order to save yourself a bit of currency.



you talk about corrosive opinions, people having to face reality and learn to accept things. ya, maybe they do.




youve typed a lot of words, but you havent actually made a single cohesive argument to support your stance. Im not responding to points your making, im simply restating my initial post over and over again because you havent said anything to counter it. its getting a bit old now, so how about you stop messing around pretending you dont understand the simple logic of whats been said because you dont like its implications?

i spend at least half my time on standard, i have 29 chars in endgame there, you dont think it wouldnt massively advantage me to be able to have 29 different atlas trees to pick from depending on what content i wanted to play that day? the difference between you and me is that i can take a step back and see that its bad for the game overall even if it massively benefits me personally and then be honest enough to admit it.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

no, im not actually. its not indulging anyones feelings, its leaving the choice neutral so that no one is indulged or punished based on their preferences.

The game design is not "neutral". It asserts itself in a particular direction that, inevitably, some people like and some don't. There are an infinite amount of designs and no zero point besides nonexistence.

The game having character builds not stretch into Atlas bonuses, or having character builds that do enter that area, are both entirely valid designs. Neither are "punishments" of anyone.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

you want the game to move away from a neutral position, to put other people at a disadvantage and promote undesirable behaviours in order to save yourself a bit of currency.

My preference has nothing to do with currency. I'm not interested in respecs, they always just stack up in my inventory.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

its getting a bit old now, so how about you stop messing around pretending you dont understand the simple logic of whats been said because you dont like its implications?

I don't know why you think I would be trying to "counter" your post. This isn't a debate, there's nobody keeping score and nothing to be won here. If you don't want to post, don't post, that's fine.

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

the difference between you and me is that i can take a step back and see that its bad for the game overall even if it massively benefits me personally and then be honest enough to admit it.

Disagreeing with you is not dishonesty. What arrogant tripe.