Would you support a 6L Orb that cost X fusings?

"

Saltychipmunk wrote:

you do realize the whole point of an arpg is to achieve loot goals right? how is grinding fusing for a fix craft any less repetitive then .... grinding fusing for an unpredictable often frustrating craft that often takes 2 - 10 times times the normal currency.


basically you just said grinding to a fixed goal is bad , but grinding to a goal that may be 10 times farther away or really close (but more likely farther away) is ... better?


id love to hear you reasoning behind this sentiment

I didn't say that. Although I can see how you came to that conclusion through your apparent rage...

I was saying that you SHOULDN'T try to 6L necessarily... You seem to have the attitude that 6L should be achievable through a set number of fusings so long as you can see the goal post on the horizon (and lots of people will agree with you, albeit a minority IMO).

If you had bothered to put my post in context, I also said that perhaps the thing to look at was to implement a mechanism that would allow an item to not be downgraded when trying to fuse.

You say that I'm putting 6L out of reach of the norm. So shall I rebuttel and say you think everyone should have a 6L by level 70?

Neither of which are true. Many of us are trying to have a discussion and you're here throwing around out-of-context posts and being aggressive.

Chill out, sit back and take it all in for a second.

Oh and at the end of the post I stated that I think 6L is fine where it is "IMO"... despite mentioning an example of a compromise in my post.

Learn to discuss...

"

Jojas wrote:

I'd hate any fixed amount of fusings after which you are guaranteed a 5L or a 6L. It would make the whole get-your-6L thing like a countdown and very rigid and flat and I don't think that this is in the spirit of the game.

What I would like to see however, is an incremental increase of the likeliness of success with every fusing used. So if your chances are 1:1500 initially, after using a fuse you get 1:1499 for your next one.

I don't know how I feel about this -- they're already secretive about the rate as it is, so if they were to implement such a system, they surely wouldn't say by how much each fusing increased the odds, breeding even more RNG-superstition than already exists.

"

Jojas wrote:

Or maybe even just the chance for that: 50% that your next fusing will have a greater chance of success.

That's sounds a bit overcomplicated.

I think its fine the way it is,30 ex worth of fusings in average its not that much.Its like saying we should add an orb that increases exp gained cuz reaching 100 is too slow,screw that leave the challenges of the game alone.

"

deshaboo wrote:

I think its fine the way it is,30 ex worth of fusings in average its not that much.Its like saying we should add an orb that increases exp gained cuz reaching 100 is too slow,screw that leave the challenges of the game alone.

I think the point of the suggestion is to allow someone to spend, say, 35ex of fusings, all at once, to guarantee the 6L. You'd be paying more fusings in expectation, in exchange for not having to spend 150ex in fusings because you were unlucky.

"

Boem wrote:

oh I_NO, you on a thread frenzy?

To answer your question, no. I would however support the inability to reduce links on items.

Wasting fuses to end up with less link's result's in a bad experience, something i don't think GGG wants to promote. I don't mind wasting 3000 fuses to 6-link an item, as long as i can keep my 5-link in the process.

this all day !

A guaranteed recipe will at least allow a definite understanding of farm/grind required to 6L and will allow for assured progression towards an end goal without the complete demoralizing waste of time failing to 6L can be. Even if this recipe is at a 50% premium on expected value, it will be a worthwhile option for many as a longterm goal. The premium would be for GGG to decide obviously... but I don't see them changing the 6L method any time soon.

I can only assume the reasoning behind keeping 6L gated behind RNG is reduce RMT'ing the materials required for a 6L recipe. RMT'ing Exalts to convert into Fusing to gamble with is certainly far less enticing that just straight up purchasing a 6L by directly RMT'ing the requisite materials.

That being said, the game is about becoming more powerful and fulfilling your build by incrementally improving your gear through accumulation and expenditure of wealth. Once you have a level 85+ character with the bulk of your build satisfied and your gear at a point where rather small improvements will cost a significant amount (ie trading in 50 life tri res for 90 life tri res etc), moving from 5L to 6L is the cherry on top.

But this cherry isn't just the cherry, it's the icing, the chocolate drizzle and the sprinkles. Also, this cherry doesn't have a price tag on it. The girl behind the counter says, "Give me 50 hours of your time and I might finish your cake. Have a nice day!". Just seems like a kick in the balls more than anything else.

And a kick in the balls is shitty.. whether it's "Casual" or "Hardcore".

"

Deathstar2x wrote:

(Names and numeric values may be placeholders)

I don't feel that a guaranteed method of obtaining a six linked item should be implemented.
I rather have the current [Orb of Fusing] become [Orb of Fusing Fragment].
X Amount of [Orb of Fusing Fragment] creates 1 [Orb of Fusing].

The (new) Orb of Fusing reforges the number of linked sockets on an item. However, if the number of linked sockets is equal or less than the current number of linked sockets, its effect will not apply and the Orb of Fusing consumed.

I would argue that many of the other currencies need something similar to my above suggestion.

• It proves a microscopic chance of a gain, a large chance of no gains, and no chance of a loss.

If tested correctly, the percentage would be very low, but offer risk-free ways of obtaining positive item progression. For example, Orb of Fusing Fragment's chance of six-linking an item is 2% and the (new) Orb of Fusing's chance of six-linking an item is 0.5%.

no need to be that complicated, just prevent downgrading the item when using a fusing :)

"

ffogell wrote:

"

Deathstar2x wrote:

(Names and numeric values may be placeholders)

I don't feel that a guaranteed method of obtaining a six linked item should be implemented.
I rather have the current [Orb of Fusing] become [Orb of Fusing Fragment].
X Amount of [Orb of Fusing Fragment] creates 1 [Orb of Fusing].

The (new) Orb of Fusing reforges the number of linked sockets on an item. However, if the number of linked sockets is equal or less than the current number of linked sockets, its effect will not apply and the Orb of Fusing consumed.

I would argue that many of the other currencies need something similar to my above suggestion.

• It proves a microscopic chance of a gain, a large chance of no gains, and no chance of a loss.

If tested correctly, the percentage would be very low, but offer risk-free ways of obtaining positive item progression. For example, Orb of Fusing Fragment's chance of six-linking an item is 2% and the (new) Orb of Fusing's chance of six-linking an item is 0.5%.

no need to be that complicated, just prevent downgrading the item when using a fusing :)

Which is better: 4+2 or 3+3?

I guess that one is pretty easy.

Now what's better: 4+1+1 or 3+3?

"

deshaboo wrote:

I think its fine the way it is,30 ex worth of fusings in average its not that much.Its like saying we should add an orb that increases exp gained cuz reaching 100 is too slow,screw that leave the challenges of the game alone.

The issue here is that 6-Linking isn't "challenging". It's simply a matter of sinking currency into an item. Currency isn't "challenging" to acquire. It is time consuming.

I'd prefer to spend my time in game with challenging encounters, mapping and levelling not time consuming gambling. I would assume (perhaps incorrectly) that many would agree with me.

For the 4mo standard league, you're looking at ~13Ex at 70Fuse/Ex assuming ~900Fuse to 6L. Accumulating that takes many days if you're mapping and levelling with an average amount of playtime. So instead the 6L "challenge" becomes MF runs and flipping until the slot machine hits triple 7s. Pretty tough.

Now if there was a definitive recipe, you could at least know that your slow build up of currency was working towards a certain end. To me, this would improve the game. I'm sure many agree and many disagree. I doubt it will ever change, but may as well make some noise on the forum I guess.

---------------

TLDR 6L isn't challenging. It's time consuming with no assurance your time won't be spent on absolutely nothing.

---------------

"

Cataract wrote:

"

deshaboo wrote:

I think its fine the way it is,30 ex worth of fusings in average its not that much.Its like saying we should add an orb that increases exp gained cuz reaching 100 is too slow,screw that leave the challenges of the game alone.

The issue here is that 6-Linking isn't "challenging". It's simply a matter of sinking currency into an item. Currency isn't "challenging" to acquire. It is time consuming.

I'd prefer to spend my time in game with challenging encounters, mapping and levelling not time consuming gambling. I would assume (perhaps incorrectly) that many would agree with me.

For the 4mo standard league, you're looking at ~13Ex at 70Fuse/Ex assuming ~900Fuse to 6L. Accumulating that takes many days if you're mapping and levelling with an average amount of playtime. So instead the 6L "challenge" becomes MF runs and flipping until the slot machine hits triple 7s. Pretty tough.

Yeah; time sinks are not "challenging." That's like saying

"Compute 1310598 x 4867287" is a "challenging" math problem. It isn't -- it's just stupid.