Double-post because it popped up too late to edit...

Hydra, hit me up on Steam a bit later--I "bumped" into you in a review post, so you'll recognize my nick pretty well. I have some fast impressions on this patch that I want to pick apart with someone that didn't just finish the download today. Preferably without getting up on a soapbox--so.. Steam.

Speaking of slapping someone with a fish is a joke. Now, if I'd said I'd slap you with a kraken it wouldn't be funny. Nobody deserves to be hit with my ex wife! ;)

And, yes.. there was in fact some miscommunication going on. The issue with the previous build was that it lacked that protection (and lacked incentive to ignore the easy prey of "I can get the same relic drop chance here but it goes faster!").

So there was no way of keeping players in appropriate content, when it was simply most efficient to stick around there; something that isn't a huge issue in Diablo 2 (I say that in present tense because the community yet lives). Sure you might have people hunting the Gull in Act 1, but they're not gaining experience in any appreciable amount while they do so.

Basically, D2 you could pick XP or early act drops. With Martyr, you could get both with no real drawback (other than the glacial pace of leveling for those tasty passives in general). So the higher challenge rating stuff wasn't really relevant outside of group Tarot play.

I'm finally in a position where I can start peeking at the new build, but from what I understand they cranked the curve way down, so I'm not sure it'll be much of an improvement on timesink until that's fixed up properly (especially not as my free time will be split up further, between writing and starting to finally throw together batches of mead).

Being a dev and all, you're surely aware that Act1 in Diablo ends with Clvl13, after which Exp gained drops throughout following 10 levels to hard-capped 5%, effectively making any Exp-farming on Act1 impossible.

Surely, you're aware that Gull, often an endgame mf% item for casters, often drops in the first levels of the game, and is pretty common in Act1.

Surely, you're aware of numerous low Set/Uniques that do drop in Act1 (including one beginning-to-endgame boots for Kick-Assassin).

Protection from boosting and 'carrying' in Diablo2 is very strong, and making Act4 or 5 with Act1 farming is nigh to impossible - let alone that item drops wouldn't allow that for most classes (casters *could* play with low-end gear, but would still suffer of 5% Exp malus).

This is not the first time Snakefist, a moustached kung-fu villain, is being threatened by an attack using water denizen. In a non-violent nature of the forum, Snakefist will slap snakeself with a sea creature of your choice (Kraken included, of course), if you're able to supply proof that any character playing Act4 or 5 is actually leveled at Act1.

Balance in aRPGs may not be what you believe it to be, but Diablo 2 was carefully and lovingly protected from both low-level Item and Exp-farming, 'carrying' included - which is protection from boosting.

I don't quite think you follow what I meant--or I don't follow your response--but it seems like it's the former.

There was no reason to move on. Experience was not penalized for being at a lower challenge in the same way as it is in other ARPGs (if you tell me you can go from level 30 to 35 in Act 1 in D2 without clearing Act 5 first and getting the increased XP from the loop and +diff, I will slap you with a fish and call you a heretic :P), and higher CRs did not increase the base experience to make them more worth doing to fit the time taken.

It's a basic breakdown of efficiency of time used and incentives to move on in the game. The last build it was just more efficient to spam CR1 missions for items, XP, and Fate, because 8k every five minutes for a half hour is 48k XP, compared to doing at-or-above level with lower clear-speed builds where a CR4 at-level mission might take 20-25 minutes, with a base award of.... 8k XP.

Now, any other game that would mean that time spent would be roughly equivalent--IE, that 20-25 minutes would be giving roughly the same XP (or more) than the 30 minutes of grinding low level content.

That is balance, not boosting. Balance includes more than just adding a penalty (which is baked into "this gives you less rewards for the same amount of time because it's so much lower than you") to something, balance also includes tweaking things like awards to make sure that at-level content is appropriately difficult and rewarding.

I'm withholding judgment on the current build until I can finally get some time in it, but the last one had some major flaws in progression and rewards that were slewed towards sticking with the easy for efficiency's sake (outside of Tarot, which was still longer to run solo than a dozen back-to-back Hunt missions).

A D2-FLAG! 

Naturally, Mighty Snakefist is compelled to comment!

Lowest level when He found Gull (endgame mf%-item for most classes, He'll skip whole Ali-Baba thing for the sake of brevity) was found, by Mighty Snakefist, earliest at clvl6, where it wasn't even equippable. Low level Sets used to be found at very low clvl, too - including that-boots, desperately sought after by Assassins (which Gull made easier to get, often used by Kick-Assassins till the end). Most of classes could use Gull endgame, primarily casters, but also some fighter classes.

Mf% isn't a thing in Inquisitor, but in D2 it used to influence QUALITY of drops - less Normal/Blues, more Rare/Set/Uniques.

More importantly, D2 PUNISHED low clvl mf-farming by reducing the Exp (and rewarded it with better drop) - kind of balancing, much alike Inquisitor Perks - give some, lose some.

System which rewards low clvl-playstyle by REWARDING both Exp and Item Quality has no PUNISHMENT, but only ADVANTAGES, making it superior to normal gameplay - true, it is harder to play it, but includes no downsides in return (D2 had those, and low-clvl farming HAD Exp punishment).

Any system giving just rewards is a BOOST, and not BALANCING at all, no matter of how much DIFFICULTY is increased (it's optional, after all).

NOTE: Snakefist is impressed, heavily, by the elegance and simplicity of devs idea for Tiered items, and is sure that many games will follow it in the future. System is changed to a point in 0.6, but Snakefist will wisely refrain from judging it until enough experience is accumulated - similar as He kept His mouth shut when Tier itemization was introduced.

D3 is dying, as it should be - too many broken core concepts.

Ok, so that makes a fair bit of sense. What language do you speak natively (curiosity, no bearing on the discussion at hand)? Frequently, many of my posts are written from the perspective of not only a gamer, but a former designer too--and if I notice something that seems close to a mistake my team made, I'll speak up and give a detailed line of reasoning why (see posts about experience curve, or if you're feeling froggy dig up one of my extensive feedback threads).

What Hydra put forward, and I supported, was that at you could get PL4 loot in CR1 missions. That'd be akin to me going and getting Legendaries in Diablo 2 from the porcupine critters right outside the encampment in act one. It doesn't make sense, right? You don't expect (nor reward) powerful players to go to someplace they should have left ages ago, especially not when the efficiency equation dictates ignoring later/more challenging content in order to do so. Thus, the recommendation to weight things slightly so that CR1 missions weren't popping out power level appropriate gear like loot pinatas. It increases difficulty by funneling players into appropriately difficult missions and investigations.

This is important to put forward because it is very unlikely that the full campaign will span a single power level, and giving feedback to keep players from being barred from the story without grinding content is important to keep the "heretical casuals" happy. 

Honestly, games can have expansive content without being an unholy grind, too--a lot of popular perception of western RPGs requiring huge time investments to simply experience the core content is built on the foundation of the MMO and the shift from story-driven gaming to loot/stat-driven skinner boxes. Roleplaying to "roll-playing", so to speak. 

D3 does not exist. To say otherwise is blasphemy of the highest order. There is no sequel, only a dangerous cult activity masquerading as a sequel.

Well, I misinterpreted the 'kids statement' and for that I do appologize. In some defense, English is not my native, so something may look different and almost exactly like it would be said in my language, and while they meaning is in fact different, the mistake comes naturally... Personally, I'd never pull age or experience card as an argument that my opinion is more correct, then someone elses - and I felt as that is exactly done against me...

On the other hand, a number of downright silly ideas were literary put in my mouth (I might as well suggest that Perks were completely removed, for example), which I don't appreciate - discussion is one thing, but using that as a counter argument hardly qualifies as one.

I have nothing personally against you and I didn't register just to contradict or downvote - my motivation was to point what I consider a wrong line of thinking (still)...

As I understood from devs statement, we'll be find ourselves in vast universe with hundreds systems of interesting and different planets/systems, some easier for players and some harder, regardless of Tiers. Also Arena-types, Endless missions and so on. Plenty of choice for both players who want easy start (though my personal opinion is they'll start Story first, with the tutorials and stuff), and 'alpha/EA veterans' who may seek different challenges - Endless mission or Arena worlds would be a perfect example, since it's impossible (or nearly) to finish. 

We won't be restricted to 5 systems with 4 tiers, where your suggestion make sense (though I'm still holding to statement that better loot or more of it cannot actually increase difficulty in any scenario).

With Early Access coming, major itemization changes are unlikely, so this isn't very important currently - I mostly wanted to tell that I did some mistakes in communication, think that you did too and that I have no intentions of countering and downvoting you on every occasion - in fact, VOTING for post should be removed, because, well... Diablo3 beta... Players VOTED for features and devs complied. It probably won't happen here.

I can't say as I agree with your statement.

Because XP is so linked with the experience (currently), I use that as part of my argument; however as it stands you can hoover up a larger quantity of PL appropriate gear from PL1 content than you can from harder content. This is... contrary to loot tables in essentally any other ARPG (disregarding the incredibly miniscule World Drop chance for a Legendary in, say, Diablo 2 or Grim Dawn, but even those are usually tied into the overall ilevel--that is, item level--of the zone). XP is inextricably linked to this, because in other ARPGs iLevel is bound to character level, rather than having a discrete Power Level (unlike MMOs, where iLevel quickly overtakes and character level and you see a level 40 running around with an ilevel 120 shield).

Let's say I'm playing Grim Dawn or Path of Exile. If I go back to the first act, I'm mowing through bosses for Uniques/Epics/Legendaries at level 40, I'm not going to get gear for level 40 characters, at best I'll get iLevel 20, maybe 25. Good for (relatively) quickly getting something for an alt, but useless for that character. Likewise, my experience per hour tanks right into the ground--instead of getting one or two million (a level and change) per hour, I get perhaps four or five percent of a level per hour, incentivising a move to harder/higher level content.

From what I understand, we'll be moving through power levels through the main story, meaning it's at least partially linked--and thus needing to track the ilevel drops and balance XP/itemization will be important. If a casual player hits a wall, they'll go back to what they know will quickly help them pass that wall. With the current design, that means going into PL1 content for a bit for very fast mission clears for both total XP/hour and the sheer amount of loot you'll pull out of an hour of missions compared to, say, PL4.

Of course, there are character levels and power-levels. Getting Exp for many character levels while farming the same TierX planet is basically what we are all doing now - because we don't have anything better to do, within current limits. 

However, Snakefist hopes that the following updates will change that - this is the only partial fault of tiered balance system. Other games, say Diablo2 (and what else) had inherent protection against exp-farming the same area,  namely Exp gained was declining and brought to almost nothing if PL was 10 levels <> Tier-level (for sake of comparison, same terminology). D3 didin't (of course) and best-farming-routes were 'invented', for Paragons. 

Snakefist would be happy if we'd be protected from those ill-conceived farming routes (or best PLs) in the final game.

Thing is, we can't predict it right now - if farming 3 tiers higher gave, for instance 20,000 exp max on our current levels, and that remains constant throughout the game, then abuse such as this PL3 till the end, then shopping/crafting abuse to realistic tier can be possible. If farming tier8 gave, for example 50,000 exp basic, then the things changes wholly...

As for the theory downthere, Snakefist only tried to contribute a bit, before anyone gets too carried away - loot tables are terrible to balance, while constants are a breeze.

Mighty Snakefist, a Renowned Balancer with a great experience, will take a few points, one which were normally not known to players.

Making a good loot table is about hardest thing in aRPG-balancing. It includes several slippery steps, and a lot of testing. Alterations do the same.

That was a piece of Wisdom coming from someone who did many initial and rebalances in his life, not only for aRPGs but other game-types also. As said, it's uncommon knowledge, and now to something which is more logical and understandable:

Balancing drops is balancing a VARIABLE - there are several pieces of equipment which could carry a same affix, or there is just one. Or none (say +Attribute, we can't have +1.02 Virtue). A number of affixes can overlap, for instance DoT and Ranged bonus, and so on. That makes QUANTITY rather unstable. We can get wildly different results, using the same - seemingly simple - +% rule.

As for QUALITY - there can't be one, it would be making appearance of affix-X more probable than affix-Y, depending on... something. A new rule, which needs testing and can cause a problems in general.

Balancing a CONSTANT - such as %Damage or exp-bonus, or giving Fate - really anything coming in firm, clear numbers is another story - almost no testing, clear and predictable results.

Being in Alpha, we have only 4 tiers of planets. We don't know what happens after, how progression is going, is it (relatively) easy or hard. It's too early for any loot table rebalancing (since it's probably being done constantly, and will continue in the future).

Adding more item / minute for higher difficulty - why? If Snakefist wants something to be hard, he plays it hard. Increased choice of rewards could lead to considerably better equipment over period of time, suggesting player it would be best to stay at (example) level5 where all the affixes can spawn in adequate quantity and quality, refine them to nearly perfect build (thanks to more choices) and play with PL5 character all the way to (example) 12, then do it all over again. 

Snakefist would count this as an exploit.

Migty Snakefist,

Wise and Powerful

Everything i know about this game comes from streaming :S

Me: "I've skipped the YouTube thing, because of general principles that I don't trust advices or suggestions of the people trying to make money on the game and are not the developers (slightly modified famous quote from Steve Albini)."

Note: Absolutely no age-related questions or preferences.

Hydra: "Perhaps you are new here but..."

Note: This is kind of accusation of being unexperienced with this game...

Me: "I am not new here - If you need to know, I'm pretty much in alpha since the start..."

Note: No age. No experience.

Hydra: "do you take the same view of little kids who..."

Note: Very civil. Word 'kid' emerges for the first time

Me: "I am much older than you are, so you can skip 'the kid' stuff..."

Hydra: "You weren't called a child. I asked if you assume kids have the same motivations "

Note: I kinda was called one who take the same view...

Hydra: "If you are as old as you claim then you probably have a list of 20+ arpgs"

Note: A provocation. A clear one.

Me: "I am that old as I said, and I do have a considerable experience in a large number of aRPGs. Can you say the same? But that's also irrelevant, we're talking about Inquisitor here, namely your suggestion"

Note: Well, I am and I do. And I claim for basic math it's irrelevant. Right here.

Me: "I clearly said that my personal opinion (regardless of age, gender, eye-color and so on)"

That was about accusations you and your new-found buddy did. Reading the whole text instead only parts which you like would help. You'd also notice how he escapes from the own statements often, representing them as something else.

As for my, very related for the topic, opinion, it can be found in starting posts. Unchanged, and without alterations on main theme.

Just keep in mind as we continue to converse that accessibility and "make it easy" are two different concepts--I harp a lot on the former without wanting the latter; something that gets missed quite a bit in discussions.

Something thing I've seen on the opposite end of the spectrum in recent years is a surge of players in the hardcore side that want everything to be Dark Souls--and that would also be to the detriment of the game.

The base content of a game should be accessible to everyone, with challenge content obviously representing a larger challenge and requiring more mastery of the game--and true endgame (raid type things, not the core story) requiring real dedication, but opening up to less dedicated players when later "seasons" roll around. Going too far to either extreme (carebears or hardcore ironmen) can choke off the market, especially in a niche title in a genre that is reaching a saturation point (see Nekros: if you can find anything on it, for a good example of niche titles dying via extreme shifts towards one extreme of the fanbase; it's still in my library and I can't for the life of me remember why).

I have no problems with optional content, optional hardcore, optional ironman modes, etc... as long as it's either optional, or the game started out with that as the intent. I enjoy Dark Souls now and then, but sometimes I want to play a Diablo clone with a build that plays to my strengths and have a little cathartic fun.

As for micro transactions i would love a store for pets/costumes/paints and other non-game effecting stuff,  would def. use it. 

The main thing to remember is a lot of ppl will want everything to be easy to get or given to them on a plate. I know that, steam influx will bring a ton of it. However it will be up to the Neocore to keep the game running as economical as possible. 'Lowest Common Denominator' comments will not help. I am sure there is/will be a lot of what others class as them(myself as well) but does not need to be said(words) as it does not help your point.

As for your comment on sinking. That's the thing i most love about this game and team is the understanding of game design and communication. I have more trust in this team than i have in any since David Brevik left Marvel Heroes. 

You're not wrong there. But the full release will be more than a handful of systems with no story and investigations, and the systems will need to account for that.

Like, there's no reason I should get PL4 gear from grinding CR1 systems. The fact that I can removes incentive from doing at or higher challenge content--and tweaking Tarot means I have little reason to go do those either when it takes a quarter or less the time to clear CR1 missions. It's cheesy, both from a mechanical standpoint and a gaming standpoint in general, and a lot of casual gamers will flood the steam forums/reviews with utter garbage posts about it while still abusing it.

Likewise, the base mission experience not increasing for higher CR means that I have no level-based reason to not crank out a dozen speed-runs rather than do CR4 content; which is going to cause the same kind of perception issue as the previous point--because remember, your average Steam user doesn't understand that Alpha does not mean feature-complete.

That issue in itself is a AAA-created problem--by saturating the market with "alpha" and "beta" releases over the last decade, consisting of feature-complete games replete with microtransactions and a dozen other ways to suck your wallet dry, the concept of "alpha/beta build" was bastardized terribly and the average gamer doesn't understand that they're getting what will likely be very buggy, unbalanced, and lacking in the polish of a AAA MMO "beta". And of course then, they complain. They reviewbomb, they stink up the forums, and it's just a mess.

I don't think any of us want to see the Lowest Common Denominator sink Martyr, not when it has so much promise. Especially not when it's even now a damn fine game.

On the second part of the post. You are correct in the fact that grinding lower content to get the fate points needed to get the extra exp. points/better gear is the way it is. Like real life, Go to work do the mundane then wait for the weekend to spend big for the fun part. Getting good drops needs to be fun not over done at any difficulty. Plus I think that crafting should be the best way of getting gear not drop's. If you increase the drop chance of gear and patterns crafting becomes worthless. Unless they make the patterns as @Airsick Hydra said in a video a one of use. 

The whole idea of forums is to give factual feedback/info to the dev's, not to prove anyone is right or wrong. I am sure if it's good feedback Neocore will listen and discuss it. I you mix facts/feedback in long winded and aggressive posts they may not be heard.

I provided facts, objective statements of gameplay realities, and was told I was "siding with Hydra". I am civil when one is civil with me. You, have not been uncivil, I will continue to treat you with the respect you afford me.

The fact of the matter is, the objective reality is that currently there is no cause to push to higher difficulty content, and with Tarot being shaken up the way it was, the go-to for grinding has become lower CR stuff that you can breeze through. And that's a bad thing, because it hurts the intended path of play.

All please be civil. It takes one strong mature person to back down. We don't have to agree, but we do need to use facts to back up post's or they are all useless. 

You were the one that took Hydra's example of a kid doing youtube videos as some form of personal attack; and then went on to give us your illustrious amounts of experience and how that made you better than everyone else. That's the exact tone of every single one of your comments in this thread. You're pulling a martyr complex here, you think we're persecuting you when absolutely nobody brought up age in relation to you until you made a huge deal about it and I laid out why you needed to let it rest. So do everyone a favor and lay off this weird age thing.

Once more, with feeling: Nobody said a damn thing about your age until you went off on it. I pointed that out, and you went on to trumpet this persecuted feeling you don't deserve, nor do you warrant.

The fact of the matter is, players get more experience and more loot from grinding starting zone missions. This doesn't happen in literally any other game ever, thus it's a balance issue, thus it's a topic of valid debate. That is a non-starter, there is no arguing otherwise, in the same 30 minute period a player can complete six (or more) CR1 missions at 8k XP and 7-15 items each, or do two at-CR missions for 16k (at BEST) XP and 7-15 items each. That comes out to, if we lowball it, 42 items drawn from their PL and 48,000 XP for the CR1 missions, or 32k XP and 14 items from their drop table. This means that it is, OBJECTIVELY, more efficient to grind CR1 content, which is what we're trying to change.

You wanna actually stick to the topic at hand, be my guest. Leaf through my previous posts and see the same thing happen with a few other posters (Hydra included)--the instant I am shown civility, I respond in kind. You have yet to post anything that isn't inflammatory.

Be civil to us, and we will be civil to you. Now stop derailing the damn thread.

There are always going to be Good and Bad effects. I am finding in game ATM that all my 'good/great' gear is coming from tarot runs. Which to me is way it should be. I have more issue with finding nice gear(weapon/amour) that I want to use. So sick of getting pistols/las rifles on my sniper and still using a lvl1 purple sniper rifle.

As for difficulty if I want a challenge i use crap gear or harder area's not the dev's making things harder. To me yes a better chance at better gear is great, but exp and points/fate. Will damage the balance of a game by having some level a lot faster than others playing the same amount. With the exception of the first 10 levels of play i think the balance of exp. and drops are nice the way they are. Need more ways to get fate points(love the sell items fate points).

You would do right to read discussion again, or more likely for the first time.

Virtually every thing you numbered so nicely was introduced by Hydra (age, experience, etc.), whereas I've said that they're unimportant for any reasonable debate - which this isn't.

He repeats same thing over and over in hope that someone will - well, you just did it. Glad you're buddies now. Glad that you are defending undefendable stance, too. Without arguments - oh, please repeat those nonsenses (about influence of loot qauntity and quality actually make the game harder) and say they were a different stuff, completely.

I tend to grow on people... like a fungus, or a particularly bad infection.

I largely tend to agree with your Wall of Text, especially when it comes down to the fact that items in this are largely more important than build until you reach a high enough pool of passives to largely buy out two or three trees. It needs some more pop currently, some more reason to do the higher level content that takes longer; though I would continue to add that on top of rewarding with a better pool of items, an increase in XP gain would be useful as well.

As it stands, I get more experience and more appropriate items by doing the same investigations in the same CR1 area per hour--which leads me to believe weighting the drop chance towards the area you're in (a potential to get at-power level, not a given) wouldn't be a bad thing to consider. Especially if it weights more heavily if you're at or past that--so that the CR1 zones would spit out PL1 gear, and not incentivize PL3/4 players cheesing the system by 2-4 minute speed rushes. Honestly, that helped contribute to the decision to step away from Martyr for a bit as well--I'm not a fan of playing cheese in an ARPG unless there's a good reason (or it's balanced cheese, ref: summon witch in PoE or "Pokemaster" in Grim Dawn, which are a riot to play but incredibly difficult to keep viable, good for a short session of curbstomping atavistic pleasure, bad for actually beating a game).

In short: currently Items/H and XP/H are weighted towards the low CR, and increasing the rates of acquisition/experience for higher CR content seems like the way to push us out of Tarot-spam and CR1 cheese grating.

Edit: I missed the other part of your question. Whoops.

In short, a good number of grognard tabletop-to-vidya types are focused just as heavily on experience gain (for "feats" as it were) as on items--in some cases, like myself, it's more on the skills than the items because I got my start in Steve Jackson games which favor the character over the equipment; for some of the others who started with D20 (be it AD&D or the abysmal pit of +3 Dancing Flaming Shocking Icy Burst Scimitars that is 3e/3.5e), they tend to look expressly at levels as a way to make sure they can get the skills ("feats") required to use that equipment effectively.

I step away for three days and the forums turn into a mess. Emprah on his throne...

One: Nobody here has said anything about making the game easier. Do not mistake "more accessible/more balanced" for easier, or you will very quickly have to deal with people using the kid argument. An argument that is very purile, irritating, and does not have a place here. And yet, one that is not undeserved when making rambling accusations of "you want to make the game easier" in response to, honestly, well thought out criticism.

Two: Nobody cares. Nobody cares how old you are, how old Hydra is, how old I am. Don't use it as a badge, or the aforementioned "kid" thing comes out again, and that derails discussions. Keep it in your pants.

Three: Your arguments against Hydra make about as much sense as the posts I write when I'm half shot. You keep making this blanket "making the game easier = bad", without really providing any evidence other than a nebulous "I've played for a long time". When I write my posts, I provide examples, mistakes I've made, etc. to make the point more "legible" and coherent.

The meat of the issue: What has been stated, sir, is that the fact that it's more efficient to run on PL1 missions no matter what your power level is a problem and needs to be fixed. The rewards do not befit the effort taken and difficulty present. And that is a problem, and hurts the game in the long run--especially when you compare it to the rather large pool of ARPGs that exist, both past and present.

Say we're playing literally any other ARPG. To make the jump from level 30 to level 31, you're looking at a few hundred thousand XP. This is true here as well. In any other ARPG, you can move on to a "current" zone, with 31-36 level mobs, and will get roughly half a million to a million XP per hour with a proportionally higher degree of risk. In Martyr, you don't. You get, at best, about 100k per hour, by cheesing PL1 missions. Regardless of whether your level is 30 (20+10) or 45 (20+25). And those PL1 missions are, largely, the fastest, most "efficient" mission to run for experience. This is a bad thing. This is what has been discussed.

Not "make it easier". Not "gimme more XP at all levels". But "fix the fact that players are defaulting to the easiest content and leaving large amounts of content ignored". In this case, that means making the rewards for higher PL content appropriate for time spent in them, just like any other ARPG treats tiered content.

In short: this isn't Dark Souls, this is an ARPG. If your preference is to slam your face into a wall over and over for fun, by all means go do so. But don't derail a good thread on issues with content balance with accusations that aren't even in the same zip code as the point being made, it's just rude and childish, regardless of your age.

This is your answer??? Along with animated gif of Jim Kerry???

So, with your mind being finally articulated, perhaps you'll understand that you actually didn't do anything through series of posts except trying to put words into my mouth, and twist your initial statement..

Increasing items rolls for playing higher tiers STILL makes them easier, and thus playing power-leveling easier.

There is absolutely nothing in your whole stratagem that makes any part of the game harder - it will always be harder to play 80%/200% as is now, and easier with your proposal.

You even boost with the following:
- "Change the quality of the items obtained so that it compensates for having statistically less chances at what you want"
- "Change the quantity of items per minute so that it is balanced across easy vs hard missions"

Compensate, is it now? Not making easier, but "compensated"? In quantity and quality alike?

1) I understood you very well, and responded in a way I found appropriate. Things are rather clear there - and I don't want any age-related questions hurting the discussion - "do you take the same view of little kids who..."; this was said by you, just few posts down, and I don't see how it's relevant to anything.

2) Please stop negating what you said, and persuading everyone that it meant something different and you were misunderstood. 

3) I am that old as I said, and I do have a considerable experience in a large number of aRPGs. Can you say the same? But that's also irrelevant, we're talking about Inquisitor here, namely your suggestion.

Yet again, you're trying to 'slime away' from your own initial statement: players already have bonuses for playing harder tiers, and you want them increased. That's the request to make the game easier. Better rolls = better items. 

It's not any kind of balance suggestion, such would be 'Lasgun should be something-something', it's pure 'make it all easier, for players who power-level'. I clearly said that my personal opinion (regardless of age, gender, eye-color and so on) is that it should be not - it's not that players are enforced to play at harder levels, but it's hard and they need an extra hand.

And... Playing tier4 missions with PL2 character doesn't take 4x times (even 2x, for that matter). 

Oh, sure they should be. They are now, and the amount of exp reward isn't exactly set in stone or perfect in the long range, it could be balanced differently - I'm not saying it needs to be done, but it could.

We are currently limited with system levels, very harshly - but it won't last forever.

I do have a problem with 'make it easier by giving better loot' idea. I've spent most of the gaming time on PL2, with the result in having my best overall gear, for that player level. Most of item had 2 out of 3 affixes that I really wanted. I also had some 7-10 attribute points, which haven't happened after PL2 (that may be luck).

That PL2 character cleared easily system level 2, gaining normal experience while doing it, and advanced in levels.

Same trend continued for PL3 and, finally, PL4, with ever-increasing character level. I'm pretty sure that with gear and levels in question, PL5 and maybe even PL6 could be cleared very efficiently for even greater rewards.

Same, with increased loot worth is even easier - character can 'skip' directly to PL6 (or something else, after getting the right gear), and rinse/repeat.

Another character, same class or different, has a job even easier - there is a gear inherited from previous grinder (all with proposed added bonuses), while improving them even more and leveling even faster.

That is why I think loot table PL2 should be loot table PL2 and not "extended by 2-5% PL2" or loot PL4 if PL4 is played (nobody suggested that here, just drawing an analogy).

Deportivo, if someone is playing at a level where they willingly take on a -80% damage done, +200% damage taken penalty, shouldn't they be rewarded for doing that? Shouldn't the time those missions take be respected with at *least* the same level of progression that someone grinding 'easy' missions does? We are already quite heavily gated with the PL / loot system. This isn't about enabling power levellers, its about an appropriate level of risk vs reward and respecting a player's time investment for taking on that challenging content. 

Personally I'd go further than Airsick Hydra's suggestion. I'd be down with upping the frequency of loot drops, crafting materials and blueprints as a reward and incentive to play at the higher difficulties. 

I am much older than you are, so you can skip 'the kid' stuff - my kid is much closer to your age, than I am.

The post was very clear and still is, so you might as well read it again - you obviously haven't understood it fully.

Finally, the last thing I said according to you, is a pure fabrication (removing leveling process and so on). You probably wished that I said that, so you could 'score a point' - unfortunately for you, It didn't happened. 

Base difficulty gives base rewards, increased one gives more. In this case, experience. YOU asked for additional loot bonuses plus already given experience, thus making game nothing but easier. When I disagreed, all what you did was make a construction of what you wished I said, compared to what your arguments would looking rational and reasonable, and mine like a total nonsense. 

You CLEARLY asked for reducing difficulty, and it has nothing to do with all the things you arbitrary decided to put as MINE potential arguments, all of which have zero connection to your own OP. 

There is a very clear invitation to subscribe to YouTube channel, which can be read only one way. You're not having 10,000 subscribers, so there's that - a fact. I have nothing against you making some money in the future - just a general, as I said clearly, principle in influencing development. Call me paranoid, I don't mind.

We have number of monsters killed per type, which can influence about anything - exp, fate, whatever. Currently, there is also a small drop-chance upon killing monster.

Statistically, if I run one Purge and kill 200 monsters, then run 3 Hunts for the same time, during which I kill same 200 monsters, everything is the same, expect I got three times the experience. It also applies to chests loot. The Mission loot is bigger. 

This clearly puts Purges into a disadvantage, but we can't turn all mission types into Purges (though some people play almost this way, but not 100%).

The only reasonable solution is making a difference which will 'punish' speed runners by giving them more or less exp, in the proportion to the amount of general Heresy cleared. On Hunt maps, we don't have a peaceful citizens loyal to the Empire of  Man, but declared enemies of The Emperor! 

A real Inquisitor would uproot a Heresy, so the one that does not and only care about exp (and does speed runs) should get how much he actually deserved.

I am not new here - If you need to know, I'm pretty much in alpha since the start, but some people doesn't have a need to register and post 10 times a day, and are content to occasionally read, mainly news. I can call you a troll, using the same system.

What you did is exactly asking for lowering difficulty, an even if it is on a more subtle level it may be even greater Heresy to make the game easier for group of players who do power-leveling. 

I've skipped the YouTube thing, because of general principles that I don't trust advices or suggestions of the people trying to make money on the game and are not the developers (slightly modified famous quote from Steve Albini).

But I've read TLDR, and can make it even shorter:

"I want the game easier."

About your hunt/assassination proposition - I really fail to make any sense of it. While they can be finished faster, there are real  methods for doing it - for instance, part of experience coming from the monsters, part from the mission bonus. No speed runs, and no "collecting codes dropped randomly to unlock...", which are exactly the same thing and can be speed ran (and honestly sounds like a terrible idea).

Agreed here speed farming for any game is a pet hate of mine for Assassination/Hunt types, I would personally have mechanisms in place or even sub quests that have to be completed in order to gain access to/lower shields of the targets of these types of mission.

Couldn't draw it out too long though could be something like collect 3 codes to down a shield and these are dropped from 3 randomly placed enemies or terminals on the map per target for example.

Agreed, on the difficulty side, once At those higher PLs it becomes a bit too easy, hopefully as development progresses difficulty (and reward) is ramped up a notch.

As for the reasoning behind killing lowly mobs I could see a 'key' system working here i.e. last enemy in room killed drops key for progress to next, or even have a leader type per room that has to be taken down for the key.

This however would need additional incentive to kill mobs such as exp per kill or higher drop chance be it credits or higher random gear drop rates.

Could even push for a 1-2 fate reward per room/hall cleared in a mission which would enhance the reason and reward for a complete purge., could further the enticement with a bonus 10 fate per 100 enemies killed and give grinding an additional incentive.

So agree with this. The only issue i am having is that its harder and slower to get to PL 2 than it is to get >2 solo. It should be easier and faster at lower levels and get slower/harder.

D3-thinking. Paragons and exp/hour. Farming exp. Wrong things to have, each of them.

On The Well of Wisdom that is D2, wrongdoing explained:

- Farming, and exp/hour - there was, or could have been, but never important. Why? Huge exp / level demand (10x) making builds basically ending there, at 85th 

- No stupid paragons at all

- Additional levels, though possible (oh, Snakefist knows so much of that) aren't a game requirement, because good items >>> level99 (which is the hard-cap level, and there's no Paragons which are there, and everyone has them, and they use exactly for nothing if summed up)

There will be grinding!

We are all expecting it. It wouldn't be an aRPG is there wouldn't. But, what to grind?

Exp grind is happening, but is hardly a memorable thing. So, less noticeable it is, the better. Item tiers are excellent for this - jump-start and start item-grinding faster (and somewhat harder). We all have done exp-grinding, but aren't proud of it.

And there's the exact point where 'youtube guy' type of characters appear, in games such as D3. (Snakefist thinks of one especially irritant one, one who fancied himself a player and used nothing but abuses, but was a crappy player otherwise - Snakefist saw his micro, Emprah protect from having that - and enough about him, he's not worthy).

There, the youth of today, or rather 5 years ago since D3 popularity declines constantly, could have and did see the 'newest exploits', which was the enterance in the Endless Fun of exp/hour Paragon grinding.

What is 'fun grinding', then?

Items. Unpredictable drops that happen during gameplay. Snakefist can mostly remember where exactly he got his Mighty Gear, even that tree-trunk which gave him The Precious (Perfect Blue item, he can't stress enough how important is *not* having completely useless tiers of items). The ecstasy of seeing unidentified Unique drop. The hope during opening Mighty Inventory and the joy or disappointment upon seeing item, or it's stats.

THOSE are memorable moments, and 'this is the pre-drawn path where I grinded 10 zillion exp using the 'Baba-Yaga's quickened route+ v.2.01', which I found (of course) on youtube.

Item drops can't be found on youtube. Nobody can teach you how to abuse RNG. In that part, even repeatable Mephisto-runs were fun. What is completely unfun is having a 'Set Dungeon' where complete sets can and must be found - they were so painful to collect in D2 (most were completed by trade) and too easy in D3. Fan service. It was *done* because spoiled players *demanded* it and they got no joy from having it.

Item drops in Inquisitor?

Well... We are kinda testing endgame or open world or whatever. But fond remembrance of founding item on End Mission screen - well... Well well... There's that part with blueprints and chests, a tiny bit better. Tiny.

Tarot is currently most fun item grind Inquisitor can offer - player *needs* to grind for those, both for directive and if he wants some extra (mission bonus is fun that way), then playing WITH FRIENDS - that was reason Mighty Snakefist reacted so quickly and uncompromisingly on the Fate change - the arbitrary best part of the game was 'nerfed'. 

It is a thing that CAN be remembered (and later lovingly cherished) - 'I was playing with my own build which I chose by *myself* and got experience (seamlessly) and Fate, without omnipotent youtube-recipe, and then found friends from Cabal and then we played Tarot TOGETHER (not everyone paying the same, so someone could work for the Emprah overtime, and everyone feels connected to each other and to Emprah and the founding that-famous-item, even if it is on the on the End Mission screen).

Can be done ALONE, too(higher price since no friends, but manageable still. And still memorable.

And the Youtube-Guy and His Many Exploits can be ignored completely - in fact, wherever someone post quickest-leveling guide, devs can see it clearly and adjust the game to become more balanced.

Mobs and bosses - we saw what careless and clueless devs can do with, how they changed it in many, many patches and how it's still worthless (in D3, of course) - first, we'll farm Act-bosses, then no - we'll farm random Elites, then no - now we'll farm maps and small mobs (not unlike Purge, in result), and then we'll starting with 'inventions' such is Adventure Map (oh, so like the Teleports in D2, but they are Adventure Map, The Feature). And others. There is *some* quality in the current state of game, but weight of the incorrectable mistakes is too great.

Balance would be somewhere inbetween, Snakefist suspects, rationally. Something is achieved by grinding (Fate) then spent giving at least *some* result and something is crafted, and something is mob/elite (or boss) connected.

PL-leveled drops are very good, shouldn't be changed. 

Coming from Marvel Heroes 2017 which was full on boss rushing as almost all Exp. came from bosses or kill boss quests/drop's. It is not a good thing to have happening all the time. I love clearing, killing, destroying everything and enjoying the work the dev's put into games. I know it will happen but the rewards need to be good for trash and object's. There also needs to be a mix of tarot missions to encorage all types of play. Having only eg exp. on timed run's will force players to build and play only OP styles. The rest will be forgotten and never played.

Realistically, how many casual players are gonna have the know-how to speed-run right off the bat? Or the inclination? I know I did some hardcore grinding there, but these are my people. I know them. I know their laziness, and the "IDGAF" reaction to "here's an optimal build with which to speedrun/super endgame grind/play HC with".

Didn't misread you, just pointing out a potential flaw in the reasoning and using Purge missions as an example. Really though, speed-farms are going to be a thing period, they've been around for as long as there have been games one can farm in (yes, there are "optimal farming circuits" for FF1!), so trying to lock them down is just going to create an arms race with the few players that want to figure out how to do things the most efficient way. It's not a fun race, for either side, and it's almost as bad as having designers on your staff working at cross-purposes because each one thinks that their mechanic should be more powerful than the other. Yes, I have a lot of these stories. We were a dysfunctional crew.

The point is that getting too bogged down in the future of potential exploiters is going to drive you nuts. Some things, such as the (apparently unintended) shop-cheese are just there in the collective memory because "it's always been done that way". Others, such as speedrunning/farming, are going to be there because there are always players who see it as a challenge to "go fast", and they'll work out a system and share it because that's what they do.

In the long term, it may be more beneficial to leave this sort of thing in place so that the neurotic types have their fixation to go along with the casuals and their story. Time will tell, but I'm of the opinion that blocking playstyles that don't harm other players isn't the way to go, even if it's not the way I like to play a game, because I've seen enough to see how detrimental that can be to a playerbase (ref: D&D Paladins and the alignment restriction shenanigans present in all but 5e).