Turning off XP loss/gain as an option?

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

There are lots of valid suggestions which would, ultimately, be detrimental to the game.

Gotta love this zinger of a one-liner.

Man I love reading threads like these: one side completely level-headed with direct proof and good arguments, and the other with contradictory statements, inflammmatory remarks based on nothing, and then the eventual breakdown to: "I don't care, I know I'm right".

The lesson here is that, if you always think you are right, you don't learn anything. And you are almost always wrong.

I'm probably on that "ignore list script": even if you shut out or ignore every single other person on the planet claiming you are wrong......that doesn't make you right. The sky will never actually be made of chocolate no matter what you personally think.

Honestly, I feel this is more of an accessibility feature that some people need.

You will get told a lot by veteran players that you don't need to hit level 100 after you spent ages on the build you love but find that its going to be a terrible experience getting from lvl 95-100.

But you still want to play the build.

Your only option therefore is to train your brain to ignore the xp bar. Which, in itself is a huge mental distraction and for some people, nearly impossible.

Regardless of whether or not people feel that xp loss is good or bad for the game, it might be worth it just so people don't feel the constant anxiety when they just want to log in and kill some monsters.

"

StarburstSilver#4888 wrote:

Honestly, I feel this is more of an accessibility feature that some people need.

You will get told a lot by veteran players that you don't need to hit level 100 after you spent ages on the build you love but find that its going to be a terrible experience getting from lvl 95-100.

But you still want to play the build.

Your only option therefore is to train your brain to ignore the xp bar. Which, in itself is a huge mental distraction and for some people, nearly impossible.

Regardless of whether or not people feel that xp loss is good or bad for the game, it might be worth it just so people don't feel the constant anxiety when they just want to log in and kill some monsters.

Just no. If I typed how I really felt about this post I would be banned.

don't bother complaining about xp loss.

people have been doing this for years.
i am betting it is the NO 1 forum complaint EVERY single league.

GGG doesn't care.

even though it makes people rage quit more than any other game aspect i am betting. it is NOT a good business plan in my humble opinion to design the game such the hordes of people quit again and again. they could be paying customers after all. the fact that they also keep coming back is a positive for the game.

this could be the greatest game ever, but, alas, it is not.

I mean... all you need to consider is the fact that they added Omen of Amelioration as a counter measure for the EXP loss. There is nothing you can say to pretend this isn't a problem, otherwise such an item wouldn't even need to exist and GGG wouldn't have added it if their stance on this was as firm as some of you like to claim it is. It's a relatively recent addition, too, as it was added with patch 3.22.

"

gladiatorpie#3317 wrote:

Spoiler

"

StarburstSilver#4888 wrote:

Honestly, I feel this is more of an accessibility feature that some people need.

You will get told a lot by veteran players that you don't need to hit level 100 after you spent ages on the build you love but find that its going to be a terrible experience getting from lvl 95-100.

But you still want to play the build.

Your only option therefore is to train your brain to ignore the xp bar. Which, in itself is a huge mental distraction and for some people, nearly impossible.

Regardless of whether or not people feel that xp loss is good or bad for the game, it might be worth it just so people don't feel the constant anxiety when they just want to log in and kill some monsters.

Just no. If I typed how I really felt about this post I would be banned.

Dunno about you - but I'd be open to a UI option to toggle off XP bar visibility if that is genuinely helpful to people. Accessibility-focused solutions for purported accessibility problems!

---

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

I mean... all you need to consider is the fact that they added Omen of Amelioration as a counter measure for the EXP loss. There is nothing you can say to pretend this isn't a problem, otherwise such an item wouldn't even need to exist and GGG wouldn't have added it if their stance on this was as firm as some of you like to claim it is. It's a relatively recent addition, too, as it was added with patch 3.22.

This argument sounds reasonable at first blush, until you stop and consider that implementing this item was objectively more work for GGG to do than simply editing the Death Penalty value to "0%" and calling it a day. At which point the argument ceases to hold water (at least in my view).

The GGGang has always been a team that wants decisions to matter and for opportunity costs to exist and be meaningful. That is quite literally why the death penalty exists. The option of investing into an item (they do treat the temp league with no challenge modes enabled as their default assumption) which can only be used once, does not fully 'resolve' the alleged problem, and comes at the price of not being able to avail of other Omen items in the same zone all fit that bill.

The design of the Omen of Amelioration is not them retreating from that design philosophy - it is quite literally them doubling down on it. I think the bosses who had their arenas explicitly flagged as being exempt from the death penalty are a far better example of GGG compromising on their design goals. One could even ask if the cheesing potential of Soulbound was an initial step in that direction.

But I don't believe they regard it as being a problem to be addressed; I strongly suspect they view 1) the boss arenas as more of a QoL change than anything, and, 2) Soulbound as an item just being a bit of a meme. I think if Soulbound ever became popular it would be nerfed in short order.

---

"

Toforto#2372 wrote:

where you can buy your way to lvl100 with legion 5-way carries if you pay them enough divines. I've done that, I've also done Sanctum to lvl100 multiple times

So, I am being a bit unfair here and wish to be clear - you were retorting to a point about the milestone of hitting level 100 conferring a sense of accomplishment, and I am not trying to wade in on that one way or the other. I just wanted to 'poach' this set of examples. Sorry!


I really do think this is what GGG fundamentally wants.

Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to make their character more powerful - instead they buy a Headhunter / Mageblood / shrine belt. Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to rake in more currency - instead they start trying to monopolise one corner or another of the market. People do alter their behaviour in response to the specific goal they have at the time. This expands the game beyond "do you do nothing but top-tier maps or nothing but Delve or nothing but Heist?" and contributes to people doing different things in different leagues.

It really is difficult to articulate just how aggressively players will optimise for in-game success over fun and then turn around and complain that a game sucks because it has nothing to do. The campaign exists not so you play the campaign, but so getting to endgame-content-of-your-choice feels like something to achieve and be rewarded with. Ditto with level 100. If you want to opt-in to some perceived low-level bragging rights, you can do things differently for a while, tick that box, and then get back to what you usually do. I'd liken it to someone wanting to go for 40/40. Or going for 127/127 (or whatever it is on consoles). Games need goals; games need things to strive for; games need decisions to feel impactful. Otherwise, what's the point?

I would have been up in arms if level 100 was required to equip the new shrine belt, or if they ever buffed the reward for hitting it to be multiple passive skill points rather than just one. But so long as the benefits from reaching it are negligible, it is just some optional thing you can decide to reach for - or not. Removing the XP death penalty in some ways gives Level 100 to everyone - but in another, very real way, it removes it from the game. XP loss on death matters, and is good for the game.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

I mean... all you need to consider is the fact that they added Omen of Amelioration as a counter measure for the EXP loss. There is nothing you can say to pretend this isn't a problem, otherwise such an item wouldn't even need to exist and GGG wouldn't have added it if their stance on this was as firm as some of you like to claim it is. It's a relatively recent addition, too, as it was added with patch 3.22.

I believe you drew the wrong conclusion.....GGG introduced this item because they recognize that folks erroneously have a major issue with the exp penalty: thus, this item would see usage and retain value. It shows that they listen to feedback, disagree with it, but offer countermeasures because they ultimately do want people to be happy in general (without destroying their own game).

It was not created specifically to "solve a problem", it was created because the item holds value to some.

By your logic, Mageblood (or flask enchants) were specifically created because using flasks was a problem. Incorrect; if that were the goal it would have been far simpler and *far more effective* for GGG to simply remove the need to use flasks altogether and set them all on a timer system. Instead, they created items that allow each player to customize how they interact with a BASE function of the game. These had the added benefit of shutting up the constant complainers, but it certainly wasn't a problem in GGG's eyes.


Your conclusion would only make sense if GGG were being deliberately incompetent and throwing their own money away. As Sarno already outlined, why would they approach it in such a circuitous fashion if the intent was to "solve a problem re: exp penalty", something they could EASILY do outright? If anything, the example of the Omen of Amelioration existing leads to almost the exact opposite conclusion you are attempting to make with it. It's existence over a straight up reduction or nerf to the exp penalty shows that GGG very specifically disagrees that it is a problem.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

Removing the XP death penalty in some ways gives Level 100 to everyone - but in another, very real way, it removes it from the game. XP loss on death matters, and is good for the game.

That seems rather disingenuous. level 100 is already accessible to everybody. And it's not like removing the death penalty would change that. It takes time to pull it off. If you can go from 99 to 100 in less than 2 hours by running the right content, the argument is dead in the water from the very beginning. Next, you are gonna cry about how that is bullshit and that EXP gain from certain mechanics needs a nerf.

I think what's really happening here is that some folks would prefer to keep up the illusion of feeling like a superior player by achieving something their "lesser" peers most of the time do not.

"

BaumisMagicalWorld#0673 wrote:

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

Removing the XP death penalty in some ways gives Level 100 to everyone - but in another, very real way, it removes it from the game. XP loss on death matters, and is good for the game.

That seems rather disingenuous. level 100 is already accessible to everybody. And it's not like removing the death penalty would change that. It takes time to pull it off. If you can go from 99 to 100 in less than 2 hours by running the right content, the argument is dead in the water from the very beginning. Next, you are gonna cry about how that is bullshit and that EXP gain from certain mechanics needs a nerf.

I think what's really happening here is that some folks would prefer to keep up the illusion of feeling like a superior player by achieving something their "lesser" peers most of the time do not.

The very post you quoted from contains my rebuttal to this point (which does not consist of the words you seek to put in my mouth).

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

I really do think this is what GGG fundamentally wants.

Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to make their character more powerful - instead they buy a Headhunter / Mageblood / shrine belt. Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to rake in more currency - instead they start trying to monopolise one corner or another of the market. People do alter their behaviour in response to the specific goal they have at the time. This expands the game beyond "do you do nothing but top-tier maps or nothing but Delve or nothing but Heist?" and contributes to people doing different things in different leagues.

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

The very post you quoted from contains my rebuttal to this point (which does not consist of the words you seek to put in my mouth).

"

Sarno#0493 wrote:

I really do think this is what GGG fundamentally wants.

Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to make their character more powerful - instead they buy a Headhunter / Mageblood / shrine belt. Nobody pays for legion carries if their goal is to rake in more currency - instead they start trying to monopolise one corner or another of the market. People do alter their behaviour in response to the specific goal they have at the time. This expands the game beyond "do you do nothing but top-tier maps or nothing but Delve or nothing but Heist?" and contributes to people doing different things in different leagues.

I ignored it because I found it a baseless point to make. Not everyone needs or buys a carry. Farming for the next level is no different than a crafting session. If you are going to argue how that is any more relevant with a death penalty, I don't know what to tell you.