Quickly release balanced patches, quickly release balanced patches！！！！

"

AverBeg7#1689 schrieb:

If something's broken to the point where it's just better than anything else at acertain point of investment, then they should change it. When they release new content, as a meta-shakeup, to keep the game fresh, and to keep players trying new things.

almost zero investment = "certain point of investment".
You still doesnt understand that that an online game and your playing in the same economy. Game is balanced around trade, and if there is a HUGE GAP with abused mechanics and average balanced build - your a losing but not choosing it.

"

AverBeg7#1689 schrieb:

They should not immediately nerf anything that gives you the feeling it's too powerful. That is just arbitrary, and it changes from player to player, depending on what type of content they enjoy and play, how far they prog, what build, etc.

If your build cannot reasonably do the content, with a reasonable amount of investment, then that experience is something you should give feedback on. It is however, not valid to point at players who are more invested than you, who are following builds that have been really well optimized, that have been tested beforehand, and say- "my homebaked build can't do that". Well of course it can't. You haven't invested the countless hours into theorycrafting and actually grinding the gear, and your goal was not to do the same thing, it was to play your build and enjoy yourself. So go do that.

Except that ISN'T the case right now. There's a big difference between something "feeling" too powerful.....and something being clearly and demonstrably broken powerful by comparison. We've seen this for years in PoE 1. It's easy to recognize when something is just a "feeling" and when its 100% clear.

Like you said in a few of your sentences which kinda contradicted that first one I quoted..........there's a difference between REASONABLY comparing builds of equal or somewhat balanced investment, or even greater-to-lesser investment and seeing MASSIVE inequalities, versus comparing a scuffed crap build to a fully decked out mirror build.

No one is complaining about the mirror builds. Or at the very least...I'm not. It's everything that is currently performing at about 100x the strength of everything else, at pretty much ANY level of investment.


And its THOSE cases where balance patches should be swift and frequent. I feel I need to bring it back to the fact that we AREN'T playing "leagues" right now. We aren't playing a "Game" right now. The entire POINT of the game operating at all is....to balance and develop it.

"

cowmoo275#3095 schrieb:

And its THOSE cases where balance patches should be swift and frequent. I feel I need to bring it back to the fact that we AREN'T playing "leagues" right now. We aren't playing a "Game" right now. The entire POINT of the game operating at all is....to balance and develop it.

Then what about the players who spent all their time making those builds and the players collecting gear to switch. They should just quit or reroll with 0 currency or plan because you can't wait until next patch?

How are we even supposed to know what falls under this definition, before people actually play it out? Are players just meant to guess that something is gonna be broken and not pick it? Are we gonna intentionally make weaker builds to escape the nerf hammer?

If something's broken, as long as it is not too broken, it can exist for a patch. I do not see the reason to be upset that the same league starters are still good on the same patch, that the same builds are still powerful on the same patch. We can shake-up the meta next patch.

Gutting everyone's builds will not make them want to play something else, it will make them wonder what was the point. Why bother spending that time theory crafting and grinding a character, excited to see how powerful it becomes, for GGG to just delete what is exciting about it mid-patch because it was "too broken".

"

PoWeRofGreeD#7404 schrieb:

"

AverBeg7#1689 schrieb:

If something's broken to the point where it's just better than anything else at acertain point of investment, then they should change it. When they release new content, as a meta-shakeup, to keep the game fresh, and to keep players trying new things.

almost zero investment = "certain point of investment".
You still doesnt understand that that an online game and your playing in the same economy. Game is balanced around trade, and if there is a HUGE GAP with abused mechanics and average balanced build - your a losing but not choosing it.

What is "an average balanced build". It is your build, right?

So you think, your build, you, the guy, one person, made. Home brewed. Alone. Probably on the fly using mostly whimsy. Should be able to do the same things as builds built on community effort, specific interactions, planned in detail from before they even get in character select?

No, it shouldn't. You will be lucky to make something that resembles a functioning build made by someone much better than you or a community working together. Get used to it.

You didn't pick the best thing in the game and you don't want to switch, oh what a tragedy. Tear it down. Childish.

"

AverBeg7#1689 schrieb:

If your build cannot reasonably do the content, with a reasonable amount of investment, then that experience is something you should give feedback on. It is however, not valid to point at players who are more invested than you, who are following builds that have been really well optimized, that have been tested beforehand, and say- "my homebaked build can't do that". Well of course it can't. You haven't invested the countless hours into theorycrafting and actually grinding the gear, and your goal was not to do the same thing, it was to play your build and enjoy yourself. So go do that.

"

cowmoo275#3095 schrieb:

And its THOSE cases where balance patches should be swift and frequent. I feel I need to bring it back to the fact that we AREN'T playing "leagues" right now. We aren't playing a "Game" right now. The entire POINT of the game operating at all is....to balance and develop it.

I completely agree with everything you're saying about the objective of the current stage of development, but trust me when I tell you that the strategy you are proposing is very poorly suited to accomplishing the goals you are describing and would actually slow down progress on the game enormously. The reasons come down to the logistics of managing a game development pipeline (or really any reasonably sized software project).

As soon as a new build gets locked for release, the dev team starts making changes to the source to progress on the goals for the next release. Each developer has a "working copy" of source on their machine that is no longer in sync with the main branch and will generally be "broken" in one way or another while they're building new functionality. They can't commit those changes back to the main source branch until they've finished their current task and tested it to ensure it's not going to break anything when they check it in.

The thing is, everyone on the team is doing this simultaneously and they are all working on tasks that take different amounts of time - but to do a full release build they all have to have their changes validated and checked in at once with no work in progress on their local machines. This means some people finishing short tasks will need to stop and wait for other people who are working on longer ones. Those developers can't start anything new until the release gets published or they risk having local source that's out of sync with the live version and that causes all sorts of problems that I promise none of us want to deal with.

And this is just one small piece of the overhead involved in doing a release - there's a ton of other stuff that goes into getting a build ready and pushed out to production and you're asking them to basically do this constantly on repeat. So while "frequent builds" might feel faster from your perspective as a player, it would be an enormous bottleneck for the development team and slow down progress on completing the game significantly.

As much as it is hard to be patient for releases, I assure you giving the team larger windows between builds will result in faster production over time.

t

"

Rakie1337#5746 schrieb:

"

saashaa#5518 schrieb:

the worst thing is - they will not nerf due to some stupid "policy" to not nerfing during league so we need to wait because they didn't test and they just destroyed game pace to the moment where we just one hold button in entire campain.

1) The problem is GGG is very bad at "nerfing" ask any long time fan, they don't nerf, they "destroy". Almost every single skill they "nerf" is not even usable after. We have hundreds of worthless unusable gems in POE 1 because of this.

They destroy it because they nerf it on multiple levels. The damage at every level, the modifier values of said damage, innate crit chance (sometimes), the mana cost, and it's interactions with other skills/effects/auras -- so by the time it's been 'nerfed' on multiple fronts, it is legitimately not a usable skill any longer. This is not hyperbole, they these skills are rarely usable afterwards.

They have most recently toned this down a little, but no joke, no exaggeration, typically after a league we can tell "xyz build is gonna die" and it won't be usable in any capacity, and I am very serious about this.. Long established tradition.


2) Everyone reacted badly to their typical nerfing, so badly (destroying skills completely) and so many quit on the spot, that GGG decided to now treat the game exactly like POE 1, as if it were fully launched... No updates mid 'league'...

That is why we don't get updates anymore. Everybody freaked out because they nuked a few builds from orbit.

There's more details like they shouldn't have nuked it, they should ahve given free respecs, they should learn how to nerf like adults not terrorists, etc etc.

Forget nerfing,they literally killed melee totems in 1 and just deleted them instead of removing their Aura buffs.

They couldn't even be assed to just hit "remove buff" on like 4 skills.

A faster rate of production 'over time' is worthless if it comes at the cost of product quality.

GGG can and should be providing more updates more often instead of allowing known issues go unanswered for months on end.

"

LeFlesh#9979 schrieb:

A faster rate of production 'over time' is worthless if it comes at the cost of product quality.

GGG can and should be providing more updates more often instead of allowing known issues go unanswered for months on end.

Yeah, so that's just completely inconsistent with the Early Access product delivery model.

PoE2 is an unfinished product and the team needs to focus on finishing it. There are still major, fundamental functional components that have not been completed.

You don't wash & wax a car while it's still on the assembly or decorate rooms in a house that's under construction. Every hour the team puts in to polish and balance right now is just an hour they're not spending finishing the game itself. Worse yet, anything they "get right" now is stuff they're just going to have to re-polish and re-balance again later because the new features they're working on now are going to completely change the game.

That's just it. Any expectation that the team should be putting any time into perfecting class balance right now let alone making that a major priority is coming from a misunderstanding of what Early Access is. It's not just an arbitrary label. It very much means something.

If playing the game while class balance is out of whack is really that unsatisfying for you then the best thing you can do is go do something else for awhile and come back later. They will turn their focus to balance and polish eventually, but it's not happening any time soon.

You presume that they'll eventually polish it as an argument to not polish it right now. I reject that notion. GGGG's track record has made it perfectly clear that "eventually" is never. Your model is just a Trojan horse for lowering standards.