The reason why XP penalty exists and why it's not for everyone

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

So, if GGG want to limit POE2 to pretty much the same demographic as POE1 that's their choice. But I don't believe so, I believe they want to attract new players, and most of them will not put up with this.

Thats again one of those "You think you want it but you don't"-things. D4 catered to the absolute most casual players and nobody likes that game now. You think casuals want easy victories and no penalties but you would be wrong. Ironically Elden Ring is proof of that. The whole concept that casual gamer dads with 20 wives and 3 trillion children want easier games is dead wrong. 2024 saw plenty of AAA launches like Star Wars Outlaws that were so easy and casualized games that nobody liked them.

XP penalty did not prevent PoE 1 from gaining more and more players over the years. You can argue that current PoE 2 system where you have multiple layers of punishment on top of each other needs some fine-tuning (and I agree), but XP loss on death is not among them. Unless you can figure out a better replacement that would still discourage people from learning bad yolo-kamikaze behaviour.

"

Battousai21#8595 wrote:

The way as it is, even without the XP penalty, getting to 100 is much likely 3x to 4x longer than D4. Why is it so taboo for POE players reaching 100? Will it destroy the economy or something? I don't think so. It only caters to those "racers" to 100. Why gatekeep this milestone to other players who doesn't care to race? We go back to basics of gaming where it should provide players some sense of achievement. People will to git gud or be an expert to avoid the xp penalty, the thing is, being an expert on a game usually applies to fighting games, or racing, or FPS shooters.. this is an ARPG in which you just grind to get XP and get great gears.

It's clear that our thoughts and ideas will never meet. Again, let's just agree to disagree. I respect your point on this, and we can just both hope GGG will do what's best for their community.

Yeah but I'm not talking about MY ideas, I'm talking about GGG's ideas. I think you should watch Chris Wilsons GDC conference from 2019 where he lines up all the target demographics for the game:

https://youtu.be/pM_5S55jUzk?si=C-RTT9nkQaLDEnWx

Basic idea is that they cater to multiple type of players at once, they throw a bone to both casual and extreme veteran audiences. Level 100, Pinnacle bosses and Ubers are specifically designed to be a challenge for the veteran players and they are intentionally not supposed to be easy to reach for casual players.

"

MEITTI#3999 wrote:

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

So, if GGG want to limit POE2 to pretty much the same demographic as POE1 that's their choice. But I don't believe so, I believe they want to attract new players, and most of them will not put up with this.

Thats again one of those "You think you want it but you don't"-things. D4 catered to the absolute most casual players and nobody likes that game now. You think casuals want easy victories and no penalties but you would be wrong. Ironically Elden Ring is proof of that. The whole concept that casual gamer dads with 20 wives and 3 trillion children want easier games is dead wrong. 2024 saw plenty of AAA launches like Star Wars Outlaws that were so easy and casualized games that nobody liked them.

I don't know what you are talking about. I do want to be able to play challenging content. This system forces you not to be able to do that for the vast majority of the time. Elden Ring and other Souls-Likes does not give that same feeling, they are very different games.

I like challenging games. I platinumed Sekiro which is way more difficult than Elden Ring. Elden Ring is just bigger and you can actually level up in the traditional sense. I'm not including the DLC as I don't have it, so can't comment there.

"

XP penalty did not prevent PoE 1 from gaining more and more players over the years. You can argue that current PoE 2 system where you have multiple layers of punishment on top of each other needs some fine-tuning (and I agree), but XP loss on death is not among them. Unless you can figure out a better replacement that would still discourage people from learning bad yolo-kamikaze behaviour.

Lots of alternative suggestions have been made:

- Backload XP onto map completion instead of it all coming from killing monsters.
- Give an increasing XP bonus for completing consecutive maps without dying.
- Only take away the XP earned on that map.
- Adjust the XP curve in conjunction with other changes to maintain a similar length of journey.

And lots of others I have probably forgotten about.

Any or all of these would be better than a system where you can go backwards through no fault of your own. A system which actually forces you to play easier content than was previously fun and worthwhile, because the XP loss increases exponentially but player power might not through bad RNG.

"

Battousai21#8595 wrote:

The way as it is, even without the XP penalty, getting to 100 is much likely 3x to 4x longer than D4.

IDK if you're up to date on D4, but if you're referring to getting to level 60 it will be many more times than that.

If you mean Paragon 300, my guess is they are actually quite comparable.

Xp loss is necessary and those who pretend it isn't don't understand or refuse to recognize human nature. All of the arguments against it also hold for skipping large portions or even the entire game, which of course would create a stupid experience. If you have problems with portal count or bad enemy design, that has nothing to do with the very existence of a failure state in a videogame.

i like how this is a big topic right now because as i predicted a a few years ago
they attracted more people with poe2 which is a good thing but also they attracted more people who wont like the exp penalty
if racing to 100 is the only answer to that then why race in standart mode?
why not hardcore? i know races from roguelikes and there when you die its over with the run, you start over.
why punish softcore players 3-4 times after 1 death? map gone fragments gone exp gone time gone, how does that make anyone want to proceed playing the game?

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

I don't know what you are talking about. I do want to be able to play challenging content. This system forces you not to be able to do that for the vast majority of the time. Elden Ring and other Souls-Likes does not give that same feeling, they are very different games.

I like challenging games. I platinumed Sekiro which is way more difficult than Elden Ring. Elden Ring is just bigger and you can actually level up in the traditional sense. I'm not including the DLC as I don't have it, so can't comment there.

But again just like in Sekiro or Elden Ring if you play in Softcore you can simply level up first before you try the really super-juiced maps or Arbiter of Ash, the strategy is the same. Grind first so you level up and lose nothing on death.

"

- Backload XP onto map completion instead of it all coming from killing monsters.
- Give an increasing XP bonus for completing consecutive maps without dying.
- Only take away the XP earned on that map.
- Adjust the XP curve in conjunction with other changes to maintain a similar length of journey.

Not so sure about the first one because it encourages skipping monsters instead of killing them. Other than that while those are neat suggestions, it would also mean further XP nerfs so that consecutive map completions would be the only way to effectively gain XP. I'm not sure if having extremely slow XP progression would be a good compensation.

"

Any or all of these would be better than a system where you can go backwards through no fault of your own. A system which actually forces you to play easier content than was previously fun and worthwhile, because the XP loss increases exponentially but player power might not through bad RNG.

Thing is you're not supposed to rush into the high tier maps immediatly. That was actually a common balance problem with PoE-beta pre-map system where people ignored the lower levels to immediatly rush into higher ones, then complained they couldn't complete it or it was too hard. The whole mapping system is designed around slowing player progress down so they would spend more time in lower tier maps if their builds are not ready for higher tier ones. Same goes for XP penalty.

It is a common practice in Hardcore to grind for XP in certain map level tresholds like minimum 15 levels below your character for maximum safety. If its the XP you worry about, then thats the strategy of doing it. Generally GGG does not want you to reach level 100 easily so you should keep that in mind when you're playing.

"

Orion_3T#9801 wrote:

"

Battousai21#8595 wrote:

The way as it is, even without the XP penalty, getting to 100 is much likely 3x to 4x longer than D4.

IDK if you're up to date on D4, but if you're referring to getting to level 60 it will be many more times than that.

If you mean Paragon 300, my guess is they are actually quite comparable.

oh eff me, you are right. Since my 350 hours in POE2, feels like D4 is too far away. Indeed, this season, I had to do countless of pit 100 (as that SB flash evade build can clear it fast) to get to paragon 300 to get that mount. lol! And that's the one reason i got fed up with D4, countless hours just grinding pit 100... not looking for drops or anything, just looking to level up. Was thinking of previous seasons.. sheesh! The good thing on that new system is that the paragon is shared, so you can immediately work on your next character.

For POE 2, you have to do it all over again if you decide try out new character. Again, i don't mind the long grind. Only on the robbery of XP earned on death.

I think it's a lame excuse from dev.

People can choose to opt in for race IRL. Their is also natural race and challenge IRL that you can't choose and that also already in the game as other element.

I just wonder ..... If it's that reason, why not have a toggle-able during character creation and "Race to 100." By choosing it, you are agree upon exp deduction on death. You'll be record on scoreboard for being high level and announce in game for being first to reach 100. All while still in the same league as other player. If not toggle, even at 100 your character are not record anywhere beside your own profile.

Fairness? trade with other build that can farm more easily? ..... You know that scoreboard for SSF exist too... Get good in that category instead mate.



Again.. I don't mind penalty, but the less forgiving the game is, the less punishment player should have.

Just like making soul-game but you have to wait at bonfire for 20 second x level as to punish you for not gid gud.

"

MEITTI#3999 wrote:

Unless you can figure out a better replacement that would still discourage people from learning bad yolo-kamikaze behaviour.

How about making challenging content instead?

If you go into a fight and don't have a good chance of dying, then the content is not challenging, by definition.

And why is yolo/kamikaze behavior bad? Oh noes - someone is playing the game differently than me. Challenging content will be a natural block since they won't clear it - and if they do, then they proved that they deserve the win, since they mastered the fight and beat it.