Path of Exile 2: Content Update Timeline
" You just made my argument for me. In your own example, the critical issue forces GGG to pull resources away during League B - exactly what I said happens when problems are detected during active leagues. The difference is timing and context. Finding that issue at League B launch gives them a clear window to address it. Finding it mid-League A means they're juggling that fix while managing League A's ongoing balance and support needs. " Or it creates a domino effect where League A issues impact both environments simultaneously, requiring more complex coordination and potentially affecting League A's stability too. You keep insisting it's "the same work" while describing scenarios that clearly involve different timing, coordination, and risk profiles. Earlier detection isn't always better if it comes at the cost of managing multiple unstable environments during peak player engagement periods. But I'm sure you'll find another way to pretend complexity doesn't exist. |
|
" Good Lord, you're lost. It proves the opposite. The example demonstrates that the process as-is already has the undesireable effect you think concurrent release would have. If A had an issue that only Standard could detect, it will be detected in the middle of B and thus affect B. If they are released together, it will be detected in A and affect A. Either way, nothing in terms of workload is increased. The only difference is that the problem is detected earlier. Earlier detection is an argument for concurrent release, not against. |
|
" I'm not lost - you're just moving the goalposts. Your example assumes a fantasy scenario where issues "only Standard could detect" somehow exist. In reality, most balance and mechanical issues surface during league testing because that's where the bulk of players are actually stress-testing the content. " Wrong. Detecting issues in A affects A's stability and player experience during peak engagement. That's objectively worse than finding issues during the transition to Standard when fewer players are affected and ther You're treating all detection timing as equivalent when it clearly isn't. Finding problems during an active league launch creates immediate pressure to fix them quickly to avoid damaging the league experience. Finding them during Standard integration allows for more measured responses. But sure, keep pretending that context and timing don't matter in software development. Really demonstrates your deep understanding of the process. |
|
" You really should stop using words you don't understand. My position hasn't changed. " You have gone through great lengths to agree with me that the environments are different. Are you now trying to backpedal and claim Standard and the current league are the same? " This entire discussion you've been vomiting hypotheticals of how detecting issues in Standard will throw a wrench in the whole process. Yet now, you don't think that detection is realistic? You can't even remain consistent within your own flawed arguments. " And detecting A's issues in Standard during the middle of League B affects B's 'stability and player experience during peak engagement'. See? Either way, an hotfix for Standard is spun out in the middle of a current league.Nothing has changed. Last edited by LeFlesh#9979 on Jul 18, 2025, 10:28:44 AM
|
|
" Your position keeps shifting between "it's zero cost" and "it's the same cost" while ignoring the practical differences I've outlined. That's textbook goalpost moving. " No, I'm pointing out that your hypothetical "issues only Standard could detect" is largely irrelevant because most significant problems get caught during league testing where the playerbase is larger and more active. " I'm saying your specific scenario is unrealistic, not that issues won't be detected. The problems will be mostly the same ones leagues find, just with added complexity from legacy interactions. " The key difference is that by League B, League A content has been tested and refined. Your approach means dealing with untested content in both environments simultaneously during peak engagement periods. But keep pretending timing and context are irrelevant. |
|
" Concurrent release has the same cost as the current setup. Thus, switching to concurrent release has a net cost of zero. " Okay. Since anything Standard would detect is irrelevant, GGG can go ahead and concurrently release it with the league. " But not for Standard. The environments are completely different, remember? " This already happens. |
|
" That's not how cost analysis works. Same total cost distributed differently can still have worse outcomes - like managing two unstable environments during peak periods instead of one. " Nice try twisting my words. I said most issues get caught in leagues, not that Standard detection is irrelevant. The point is that Standard's unique issues don't justify the added complexity during launch windows. " Right, which is why they test it in Standard after league refinement. Your "completely different" environments argument cuts both ways - it's also why concurrent release creates more variables to manage. " No, it doesn't. New league content isn't simultaneously deployed to Standard during league launch. That's literally what you're proposing to change. You're either being deliberately obtuse or genuinely can't see the difference between sequential and simultaneous deployment models. |
|
" Yes it is. Once B begins, A's new content is deployed in Standard during B's launch. The only thing that changes is potentially earlier problem detection. |
|
" That's not simultaneous deployment - that's sequential. League A content goes to Standard when League B launches, not when League A launches. There's a crucial difference between deploying refined content from a concluded league versus deploying untested content from an active league. Your own example proves my point. When League A content hits Standard during League B launch, it's been through months of testing and refinement. What you're proposing is deploying that same content to Standard when it's still raw and untested during League A's launch. The timing matters. Deploying tested content during a new league launch is fundamentally different from deploying untested content during an active league's run. One creates known variables, the other creates unknown ones. You keep conflating these two scenarios as if they're identical when they clearly aren't. The "only thing that changes" is actually the most important thing - when problems are discovered and how much testing has been done beforehand. |
|
" B is launched simultaneously with A’s content going into Standard. New content is being launched simultaneously into two new environments. " That process of refining A inherently pulls resources away from B’s launch. Either way, a league has to wait for Standard. If data from A is collected earlier, it can be refined earlier. |
|
