WHY DID U MAKE BOSSES HAVE REDUCED CHANCE OF DROPPING WAYSTONES IN 0.11

"

KubaLy#4534 wrote:

All the people saying "Sustaining T15 maps is super easy" clearly had average-to-high RNG at the start of mapping and just don't see the problem. Before saying that please consider those players that were on the low side of RNG, and imagine how frustrating it is.

I had two lvl 81 bosses (+1 diff) in a row not drop any freaking waystone let alone a T15. It pushed me back to T12/T13s for a couple of DAYS, even tho I was fully specced into waystone tiers and drop chance. Only after my luck averaged out I'm now in the same boat as all those claiming that T15s are overabundant and I have more of them than I can use. However that WAS NOT the case at the start of T15 mapping, and this change might make things even worse for the "unlucky ones".

I also experienced a dip in map sustain when I first arrived at T13 and above. If you hit a bad stretch of rng at athat moment that sucks, but the thing is you are expected to juice your maps a little bit at that point. If you want to sustain, you need to kill bosses, you need to run your maps rare, put a few tablets in, run breaches etc.

If you can't do that yet because your character is not strong enough then you need to work on that first

"

KubaLy#4534 wrote:

"

Scarletsword#4354 wrote:

"

KubaLy#4534 wrote:

even tho I was fully specced into waystone tiers and drop chance.

Which are STILL the weakest stats compared to boss modifiers, +1 zone level and anything that adds more monsters to your maps.

And that's counter-intuitive. We're talking about the first days after release, one would expect that the nodes with improved waystones are the means to sustain maps. Now the testing shows that probably the better way to go are the density/rarity atlas nodes, and this seems rather wrong and makes the waystone passives basically a trap.

Yeah if true it doesn't make sense.

The +100% waystone drop chance surely has to be better for waystones than any of the +3% monsters etc.

10% chance to get +1 tier is effectively a 20% increase (10% of the time you get a stone worth 3x what would have dropped so +2 waystones). Again, this should be better than 3% more monsters or drops.

The trade-off should be that's all you're getting - same amount of currency, XP, items etc.

If that's not how it's working then they need to look at it again. The passive tree should be the way for those who struggle with sustain for whatever reason to help fix the issue, while those who get lucky, never die etc can spec into stuff that has a wider range of benefits.

The reduction on Boss related passives probably make sense to try and balance out the fact there are more bosses. And perhaps bring parity with the other waystone passives. I guess only time will tell if it actually works out.

"

twostroketom#5281 wrote:

I also experienced a dip in map sustain when I first arrived at T13 and above. If you hit a bad stretch of rng at athat moment that sucks, but the thing is you are expected to juice your maps a little bit at that point. If you want to sustain, you need to kill bosses, you need to run your maps rare, put a few tablets in, run breaches etc.

If you can't do that yet because your character is not strong enough then you need to work on that first

I understand all of that. Lvl 81 maps were juiced out by tablets (u put irradiation on corrupted bosses) and my waystones are always at least 150% implicit. It was few days after release and back then I did not have the exalts to fully juice the waystones to 300%+. I did all I could back then and it wasn't enough and it sucked. It's all good now after my RNG "averaged out" tho, now I do see overabundance of T15s.

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

"

mikeab79#3627 wrote:

There are 2 outcomes this early in development of a game. One is the devs hold on to their vision of a game, and players either like or they don't. The other is the devs cave to everything the community asks for out of fear of losing profits, and you end up with what happened to D4.

Firstly that's a false dichotomy. It's very possible for devs to hold onto things they think are most important while making changes players are asking for. Which is what GGG seem to be doing.

Secondly what happened to D4 was that, in most players' eyes, it became a much better game over time. So even scenario 2 is not necessarily a bad thing. Because it is possible the devs' original vision just doesn't work out well and they are right to change the game's direction. Originally D4 tried to be a mixture of D2 and D3 and it didn't please anyone. So they went with the more modern approach D3 had and it became like a much improved D3, again to most players.

Sure, there's a fine line to tread sometimes but there also needs to be balance. And devs should also learn to recognise when their vision doesn't work out as they had hoped. Or could be improved on.

My absolute favourite part of the recent interview was them saying that they want to experience the issues the players have themselves in order to really understand them before they make sweeping changes. imo that's the only way to consistently find good solutions to these issues as opposed to easy fixes. I'm convinced that taking the easy way out again and again will ruin a game much faster than sticking to your guns in the face of raging reddit mobs until you have analyzed and understood the underlying issue.

It's only fair?

They buffed waystone drops by over 300%

reducing 50% is still a buff

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

"

mikeab79#3627 wrote:

There are 2 outcomes this early in development of a game. One is the devs hold on to their vision of a game, and players either like or they don't. The other is the devs cave to everything the community asks for out of fear of losing profits, and you end up with what happened to D4.

Firstly that's a false dichotomy. It's very possible for devs to hold onto things they think are most important while making changes players are asking for. Which is what GGG seem to be doing.

Secondly what happened to D4 was that, in most players' eyes, it became a much better game over time. So even scenario 2 is not necessarily a bad thing. Because it is possible the devs' original vision just doesn't work out well and they are right to change the game's direction. Originally D4 tried to be a mixture of D2 and D3 and it didn't please anyone. So they went with the more modern approach D3 had and it became like a much improved D3, again to most players.

Sure, there's a fine line to tread sometimes but there also needs to be balance. And devs should also learn to recognise when their vision doesn't work out as they had hoped. Or could be improved on.

Holding on to your vision doesn't mean not making changes. D4 changed its direction/vision entirely when they left the "wanting a D2 (not that they were even close to start with) feel" and went with the D3 feel. GGG's holding to their overall feel, and fixing things that make players not have that feeling. Rather than just that thing directly. In the case of waystones, sure they can just up the drop rate, but does that really fix the problem?

"

twostroketom#5281 wrote:

My absolute favourite part of the recent interview was them saying that they want to experience the issues the players have themselves in order to really understand them before they make sweeping changes. imo that's the only way to consistently find good solutions to these issues as opposed to easy fixes. I'm convinced that taking the easy way out again and again will ruin a game much faster than sticking to your guns in the face of raging reddit mobs until you have analyzed and understood the underlying issue.

Yes, it's good they want to experience issues players face but in some cases that's literally impossible.

They can't un-know all the knowledge they have which most players won't have and which the game doesn't provide. (and in some cases knowledge only a developer could possibly know for sure). Especially with many tooltips and searches not even working (at least not on PS5 - no Atlas search, tooltips not working on Atlas, etc.). So it's very hard for them to experience what a new player experiences. They can't blindly apply this policy to everything or they will end up with POE1 opacity again.

So far they did a good job of making POE2 much more accessible and understandable than POE1 so they definitely have the ability. But they can't blindly apply this policy to everything and I'm sure they won't.

They are also right not to make big knee-jerk changes that can't easily be undone. Though if they are considering trying something, EA is absolutely the time to do it so they can't hold off forever.

"

mikeab79#3627 wrote:

Holding on to your vision doesn't mean not making changes. D4 changed its direction/vision entirely when they left the "wanting a D2 (not that they were even close to start with) feel" and went with the D3 feel. GGG's holding to their overall feel, and fixing things that make players not have that feeling. Rather than just that thing directly. In the case of waystones, sure they can just up the drop rate, but does that really fix the problem?

Agreed but I wouldn't advocate for increasing the overall drop rate.

I think the way to address this would be to boost the waystone passive nodes and let players tailor the drop rate to suit themselves. Which would come at the obvious cost that passives in waystones don't give you more of anything else.

Not saying the boss ones shouldn't be adjusted as they made bosses much more common. But in general, the waystone related passives ought to be good enough to fix this problem - even if at significant cost to monster density, items and currency.

If the waystone passives are not the best way to get more and higher tier waystones, that is an absolute trap and needs to be addressed. I'm not claiming they are, just trusting what others have said in this thread. Personally I do have the waystone passives and so far have plenty of waystones including a few tiers higher than I am ready to play. So it's working so far but it sounds like it might not last.

On a side note I did check and from what I can tell the tablet bonuses are multiplicative with the waystone drop rates. So if you have 200% drop rate and a tablet gives +20%, you get 240% total.

Happy to be corrected but I think I checked this when I first used a tablet.

The +10% chance to get higher tier is effectively multiplicative. The +100% passive is additive I'm sure. Like if your waystone says +200% and you have the passive that's +300%.

Again, please someone correct me if I'm wrong. Either in theory or in practise.

I don’t have a waystone sustainability problem. I have more waystones than I can use, especially tier 15 waystones.

Do you not combine waystones to upgrade them?

Do you die a whole bunch?

Not sure why you are having waystone sustain problems unless you die a lot or don't combine what you have.

Weird.