What is the "value" of the XP Death Penalty post 90

The whole point is building your char, from 1 to 100.
If you often lose 10% of experience, the point is to stop, think, and see where the problem is.
If it weren't for that, "building" would probably lose its meaning.
Then the players would try to achieve some things by repeating them without consequences a hundred times.

The fact this is even a question is what the value is, its so irrelevant to your experience that it doesn't even feature until you reach a certain threshold lmao

XP loss is there for the same reason that a map closes after 6 Portals; to penalize you dying.

And getting to 100 is a reward for not dying. Why people think they should be entitled to said reward without at least a little bit of effort won't ever not be hilarious.

"

Bleu42 wrote:

XP loss is there for the same reason that a map closes after 6 Portals; to penalize you dying.

And getting to 100 is a reward for not dying. Why people think they should be entitled to said reward without at least a little bit of effort won't ever not be hilarious.

You missed the point of the question. If you didn't see getting to 100 isn't a thing that isn't doable. It's actually quite doable. It's BORING.

So the question was to the level of the penalty relative to the value of the map.

Do you have a better answer to that question?

"

ebondark wrote:

"

Bleu42 wrote:

XP loss is there for the same reason that a map closes after 6 Portals; to penalize you dying.

And getting to 100 is a reward for not dying. Why people think they should be entitled to said reward without at least a little bit of effort won't ever not be hilarious.

You missed the point of the question. If you didn't see getting to 100 isn't a thing that isn't doable. It's actually quite doable. It's BORING.

So the question was to the level of the penalty relative to the value of the map.

Do you have a better answer to that question?

I think his response perfectly answers your question. The reward for not dying outside of HC is getting higher level. There are ways to get there that allows glass cannons to easily not die and get 100, but they're expensive and not available to everyone because of the cost.

If the death penalty was not there, defenses would become even more useless than they already are. And that's saying a lot as it's barely worth it now.

If 100 was necessary, then you might have a stronger point, but it's not. It's practically a glamour stat with exceptionally diminishing returns when compared to the effort.

"

ebondark wrote:

"

Bleu42 wrote:

XP loss is there for the same reason that a map closes after 6 Portals; to penalize you dying.

And getting to 100 is a reward for not dying. Why people think they should be entitled to said reward without at least a little bit of effort won't ever not be hilarious.

You missed the point of the question. If you didn't see getting to 100 isn't a thing that isn't doable. It's actually quite doable. It's BORING.

Would not losing XP make it less boring somehow?

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

"

ebondark wrote:

"

Bleu42 wrote:

XP loss is there for the same reason that a map closes after 6 Portals; to penalize you dying.

And getting to 100 is a reward for not dying. Why people think they should be entitled to said reward without at least a little bit of effort won't ever not be hilarious.

You missed the point of the question. If you didn't see getting to 100 isn't a thing that isn't doable. It's actually quite doable. It's BORING.

Would not losing XP make it less boring somehow?

I think his point was that you could have the freedom to do any content without the fear of losing so much time in the push to 100.

Granted 100 isnt required or neeeded, but somehow defending afk 5-ways, breach rotas, or running blue T16's until your eyes bleed to reach 100 is some great achievement in terms of your gameplay. It just isnt.

The 10% loss is just lazy from a design standpoint imo. It encourages people to not engage in some of the harder content in the game, or postpone until they reach a new level. Its not an access gate, it's a set of benchmarks that penalize the player for attempting that dangerous content. To be honest its backwards logic. If it was so important, then they should weigh more difficult content with significantly more exp rewards. Right now it's out of whack logically.

It is a short simple solution but the community would riot if they actually had any real penalties applied to them, which maybe should be the way they proceed going forwards as SC in its current form may as well not have the penalty. It doesn't really achieve its objective as a mechanic anymore so why even include it?

Personally though I think the only thing wrong with the 10% xp loss is they have added and left in so many ways to circumvent it on your way to 100 that its more of a tax on those that aren't willing/don't know to rota than any kind of limit on 100.

Chain running blues however is a penalty all by itself, it turns it into an endurance event but you are also trading safety for speed as you xp far faster in juiced maps than non-juicers. It has a gameplay cost associated with it in the same way it does for loot.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

I think his point was that you could have the freedom to do any content without the fear of losing so much time in the push to 100.

Granted 100 isnt required or neeeded, but somehow defending afk 5-ways, breach rotas, or running blue T16's until your eyes bleed to reach 100 is some great achievement in terms of your gameplay. It just isnt.

The 10% loss is just lazy from a design standpoint imo. It encourages people to not engage in some of the harder content in the game, or postpone until they reach a new level. Its not an access gate, it's a set of benchmarks that penalize the player for attempting that dangerous content. To be honest its backwards logic. If it was so important, then they should weigh more difficult content with significantly more exp rewards. Right now it's out of whack logically.

"Freedom to do any content"? You have that freedom right now. What you're trying to say without saying it is removing the penalty would allow the player to be lazier. To not have to think about what content their character can handle. To just, as ya'll LOVE to use, make the grind "boring" because you don't have to pay attention.

What's ironic though is calling the penalty lazy, when it's in fact ya'll who want the benefit of level 100 without trying or putting in effort. IE; lazy.

And of course there's the straw-manning of the breach / 5 way rotas as somehow proof that there shouldn't be a penalty. Is isn't, at all. It's some of the fastest exp per hour, and guess what? If you removed the penalty, they would still exist. The argument is invalid.

This entire discussion always boils down to you players feeling entitled to a reward in the game that you're supposed to actually try for, but without trying.

"

Bleu42 wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

I think his point was that you could have the freedom to do any content without the fear of losing so much time in the push to 100.

Granted 100 isnt required or neeeded, but somehow defending afk 5-ways, breach rotas, or running blue T16's until your eyes bleed to reach 100 is some great achievement in terms of your gameplay. It just isnt.

The 10% loss is just lazy from a design standpoint imo. It encourages people to not engage in some of the harder content in the game, or postpone until they reach a new level. Its not an access gate, it's a set of benchmarks that penalize the player for attempting that dangerous content. To be honest its backwards logic. If it was so important, then they should weigh more difficult content with significantly more exp rewards. Right now it's out of whack logically.

"Freedom to do any content"? You have that freedom right now. What you're trying to say without saying it is removing the penalty would allow the player to be lazier. To not have to think about what content their character can handle. To just, as ya'll LOVE to use, make the grind "boring" because you don't have to pay attention.

What's ironic though is calling the penalty lazy, when it's in fact ya'll who want the benefit of level 100 without trying or putting in effort. IE; lazy.

And of course there's the straw-manning of the breach / 5 way rotas as somehow proof that there shouldn't be a penalty. Is isn't, at all. It's some of the fastest exp per hour, and guess what? If you removed the penalty, they would still exist. The argument is invalid.

This is absurd. Players aren't moronic automatons. If you are at 96% to level 98 you ain't running a 100 deli, or a difficult blighted map, some sextant scarab juiced map, or an uber boss. I love how you describe anyone not engaging in difficult content for fear of death and penalty as lazy. No, they are fucking smart to do a risk assessment, and not to throw away hours of gameplay potentially to some classic bullshit PoE death.

You know what people do instead? Run safer content(tedium to the max), rotas, or pay for 5way service. This happens all the time, it's not a strawman, that's completely ridiculous. Anyone that plays the game knows this.

The exp penalty is lazy. If it wasnt they would reward difficult content with more exp. They dont. So what happens is people find ways to "cheese" it, or they are simply bored to quit. Thats the reality.