OP Legacy Uniques are the worst decision i've seen from the devs thus far

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

iamstryker wrote:

If people want to support OP legacy uniques then why don't all of you just let EVERYONE play how they want. Full respecs and no death penalties if you choose. Standard is just a dumpster legacy league anyway. Who gives a shit.

Because a full respec isn't something you've earned (unless you have 100 Regrets lying around, in which case you have earned it, and you can spend them if you choose), and a scott-free death isn't something you've earned. Have you noticed that, when they do give you a passive respec because of big changes to the passive tree, that you keep your level? They don't take your level away, because you've earned that. Also, an important point I just brushed on: they do give you free full respecs when they change around the tree and thus potentially change how you would allocate your passives.

In short: Earned? Legacy. Unearned? Just plain nerf it.

When it comes to skill gem adjustments, the idea of a "legacy Cleave" is something which, until very recently, I'd never seen or thought of. But I actually really like the idea! It is, after all, an item. It's probably far too late to do anything about it for 1.0, but in the future I'd like to see legacy gems instead of retroactive changes.

"

Slider13 wrote:

When someone finds a kaoms in two days, why will tyey have earned it any less than someone who found it two weeks ago? Why should theirs not be the same kaoms?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

It's all one big loot-finding slot machine; may RNGesus be your guide. Those who found the old Kaom's found more value than those who find it now; that's just luck. There are plenty of folks who found those Kaom's and traded it off already; they already have the increased value difference, and there is nothing we can do, ever, to equalize that find with the new one. Should we go back and find those people — the ex-Kaom's owners, like you — and deduct Exalts from their stashes? Essentially, what you're asking for is that the value of farming per unit time constant between all patches. This is an impossible desire.

Not to mention those who traded for their Kaom's; they didn't get lucky at all, instead paying for what they got.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

If you find 1 Exalt on release day, have you earned it any less than someone who found 2 Exalts in a single day two weeks ago? Why shouldn't you have found 2 Exalts instead?

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Slider13 wrote:

When someone finds a kaoms in two days, why will tyey have earned it any less than someone who found it two weeks ago? Why should theirs not be the same kaoms?

If you find 1 Exalt on release day, have you earned it any less than someone who found 2 Exalts in a single day two weeks ago? Why shouldn't you have found 2 Exalts instead?

"

iamstryker wrote:

Your comparison doesn't work because yours is based on luck and his is based on the devs making a decision. There is nothing RNG about the devs deciding to leave OP legacy uniques in the game.

First you go on a rant about what players have earned and then you go on a rant about how they are just lucky. color me confused.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

iamstryker wrote:

Your comparison doesn't work because yours is based on luck and his is based on the devs making a decision. There is nothing RNG about the devs deciding to leave OP legacy uniques in the game.

First you go on a rant about what players have earned and then you go on a rant about how they are just lucky. color me confused.

I admit that there is some confusion about whether an item you farm is earned or luck. But this isn't particular to my argument; asking anyone whether items farmed are earned or luck is a difficult question. I guess the best we can say on the issue is that it's a mix of the two, but even figuring which is dominant is tricky.

The point is: essentially, since legacy Kaom's has more value — both functionally and in trade — drop rates were functionally higher pre-1.0, assuming we consider all other factors irrelevant, because players got more value per unit time (better Kaom's). Retroactively nerfing Kaom's at this point wouldn't be an issue for self-found legacy Kaom's; that would work out just fine, because it would be just as if he found a new one now. However, it would be an issue for any traded Kaom's, as the original finder got extra profit from it, which we can't tax, and the buyer paid extra for it, which we can't refund.

To play devil's advocate to my own argument, it's an issue regardless. Those holding onto powerful legacy uniques are making a sizable profit right now. For example, Slider13's push for retroactive nerfs isn't surprising; as one of the folks who found powerful uniques and traded them away, he no doubt regrets that decision and wishes he had held onto them instead, while someone else out there — the bastard — is making a mint off his mistake. Or so thinks Slider13.

So no matter which way you choose in this issue, there is someone benefiting from the decision and someone losing. However, I think the best way to decide is to look at the original transaction itself. Finding a Kaom's and then trading it was a big win; having to pay for that Kaom's through the nose was a big cost. Retroactively nerfing Kaom's makes the loser lose again, and the winner win again. I believe it's best to have the previous winner regret that he didn't win even more, and the previous loser win by getting more value than he initially predicted.

edit: You're killing me, Bex. I love my haters, and I want to know what they have to say!

"

Ozgwald wrote:

think issues like these that pit the player base against each other are the worst, it is one thing to whine at GGG and adapt or take your leave/ break from the game, but with the low amount of real discussions on the discussion forums and the amount of trolling, the envy/ hatred towards alpha players or certain streamers the community really doesn't need another reason to be divided and that is the saddest thing happening here.