widescreen resolution removed from the game.
The idea that the economy in PoE makes the game PvP competitive, when all the mechanics of the economy are demonstrably, objectively cooperative, is ludicrous nonsense.
For example, there is no such thing as finite resources in PoE. There is no upper bound and no limit to the amount of currency and items players can generate. Major elements of IRL economic theory, like scarcity, simply do not apply in the same way in a *video game*. The idea that trade, based on cooperative mechanics, in a video game, somehow transforms that game into competitive PvP, is so silly that I won't be dignifying it further unless someone wants to actually discuss game mechanics. "PoE is a competitive PvP game because it has a trade economy and I can find IRL economic theory that understands IRL trade through the lens of competition, therefore PoE should be understood as a competitive game" is fallacious nonsense. 1 year, 303 days. Fix it. The 352nd character to hit Level 100 in Standard The 82nd character to hit Delve 1000 in Standard Last edited by tackle70#1293 on Jun 16, 2024, 9:25:06 AM
|
|
Spoiler
Sure.
Screen: Disclaimer: Calculations within 1% margin of error. A)U.Wide. 1132 x 1.27 = 1437.64 pixels. 13,5% wider for each side. 305 pixels wider than standard. B)16:9. 1132 pixels wide. Wide Range Reference: 16:9(Top). Stacked: U.Wide > 16:9 > 4:3 (Middle). U.Wide (Bottom). Strong Box Reference (Middle Left). All images stacked adequately to assure quality. Skill in Question: Tornado Shot Lightning Strike Bladestorm Empirical Tests: The baseline used was un-juiced T16 with 90%+ quant. Tree used: Map Sample used: Videos: Tests for U.Wide vs 16:9 agro distance. U.Wide x 16:9 Top Left against mildly active enemies:https://puu.sh/K8z8S/125159ac5a.mp4. Enemies do not agro. Wide x 16.9 Approach against fairly active enemies:https://puu.sh/K8zaw/ea95ea59e7.mp4. 16:9 enemies agro. Direct horizontal Sight wide:https://puu.sh/K8zc4/b4955c3af5.mp4. 10 seconds to agro. Direct horizontal Sight 16:9:https://puu.sh/K8zc7/199e978cbc.mp4. Instant agro. This proves an advantage exists. But you might as well say that it's impractical to use it on a regular play. Extra paper 0% exp TS Build: Build proof: Essence Monster 1 x 0% exp TS build: https://puu.sh/K8zj6/c7e5856e6a.mp4. @24 seconds, meteor does 3/4 of my life. Unsafe at 16:9. Pretty safe at U.Wide. Essence Monster 2 x 0% exp TS build: Wide x essence:https://puu.sh/K8zto/4729d40dee.mp4 I can reliably keep track of him. Blood corruption rarely spawns near me. Yes, i smooth brained near the end with 16:9. 16:9 x essence:https://puu.sh/K8zty/920fc8e23c.mp4 I can't keep track of him in the same way. Blood corruption spawns near me constantly. I could attack from offscreen, but that diminishes damage substantially. The survivability aspect i'm putting in question pertains to the distance one has from the monsters when you are playing an absolute paper build. The damage aspect i'm putting in questions pertains to the damage output sustainability and increased damage from Far Shot. But you are probably right, MB is not budget friendly. You know what is? Headhunter. https://poe.ninja/economy/necropolis/unique-accessories?name=Headhunter Which also makes able to do relatively juiced maps with mirror of delirium. I made a video with the same character but it was too large and i don't have a way to cut it atm. Oneshot BS build: Build proof. Forgot about life: 5693 mana:851 ES:0. Essence Monster 3 x Paper(?) BS build x 4:3: https://puu.sh/K8zyc/6dcbc00b24.mp4 Then we convert that same BS build to the same stats as the TS build: Essence Monster 4 x Paper BS Build: https://puu.sh/K8zFX/2f6a915de8.mp4 Yeah. So, should you get U.Wide or keep 16:9? Tornado Shot: U.Wide gives QoL and damage increase for TS and similar builds. Lightning Strike: similar performance, but has tradeoff as projectiles do less damage. Bladestorm: literal waste of money. " Let's see what you concluded and apply it to a few simple questions: U.Wide doesn't affect tanky builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL. U.Wide doesn't affect oneshot builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL. U.Wide doesn't affect melee builds? You would be correct. Mostly QoL. LS is not melee. /s. U.Wide doesn't affect ranged builds? Partially correct. It will increase Tornado Shot and Toxic Rain damage and survivability(builds that need to click on the enemy location precisely), but Kinetic Bolt, Split Arrow and other projectile based builds are unaffected. U.Wide doesn't affect paper builds? You would be incorrect. U.Wide is large enough so that it can and will affect mapping survivability and visibility. Which makes me wonder. You yourself said that U.Wide "has no correlation with access to ways of negating mobs attack capabilities", yet i've proved the advantage exists and i've proved that it does affect survivability in projectile paper builds, and let me stress this again, does fuck all for melee, so i'll ask again, why try to force GGG do address something that beyond U.Wide is at best useless, by your own words, and at worst gives an advantage to mostly ranged builds, also being a QoL that GGG doesn't benefit one cent off of? 1)It has a player based economy, making it inherently competitive. Denial and lack of understanding is hardly proof against. Most of the best delve players literally keep their accounts hidden as to not disclose information to others. 2)Which is bannable. 3)It is. It's like saying water isn't wet and refusing to elaborate. Your opinion doesn't change a fact. All proof against is saying "Nuh uh". But keep at it, i'm sure who is winning everyone's hearts acting like that. 0 year, 7 days that proof was given that further extending vision is abusable. No "fix" needed. 1)Which is "illegal" by GGG rules. 2)Conjecture. All items have fixed "obtainable" attributes. 4)Supply and demand corrects the price at the end. 5)Everyone has the same information of what the item does, not what can be used for. One has no correlation to the other. 6)Talking about trade, not what GGG sells, which has no correlation. 7)You mean like graveyard? Also, cherry picking the statements as literal or subjective when it suits you is really telling. Ruthless should be [Removed by Support]. Last edited by AdRonZh3Ro#4713 on Jun 16, 2024, 11:55:53 AM
|
|
idk if its funny or not, don't know my own hardware according to the 32:9 haters.
5120x1440 aint 32:9 btw guys, fix your hardware, nothing wrong with big black bars you guys are just silly billies for wanting nice things! I honestly give up, at least with all the posts maybe GGG will see this and at least consider a better solution. Edit: Should have maybe emphasised the sarcasm a bit more it seems, just repeating what Pashid said, he knows more about my computer than I do it seems. Haters gonna hate sadly... Last edited by Vequis#6679 on Jun 17, 2024, 7:26:14 AM
|
|
"It is. "Thanks for confirming that yourself. |
|
" Apparently you don't, according to yourself. Come on, a calculator can do that math for you The opposite of knowledge is not illiteracy, but the illusion of knowledge.
|
|
" This thread is the gift that keeps on giving. |
|
" Hehe....what a misunderstanding and misrepresentation right here. First of all, the market is cooperative AND competitive, but way more balanced towards competitive. There is nothing more "demonstrably" true than that. Competition is literally what creates the market, it is what creates "value" for items and maintains the stability of that value. It is only cooperative in that we all work together to maintain the item-base that is available within the market. Trade, any kind of trade, is inherently competitive. Without competition, there IS NO TRADE or market. Second, you are correct that there is no such thing as "finite resources" but your conclusion is so far off base as to just simply be wrong. Sure, resources are infinite BUT that doesn't mean they are equal. You can get an infinite number of mirror-tier rare crafted items, but an infinite number do NOT exist on the market. Scarcity ABSOLUTELY continues to play a role in the market, regardless of finite vs. infinite resources. The REAL problem with "infinite resources" is Standard: after a certain amount of time, inflation "breaks" the economy and causes everything to be way way way way more expensive. But scarcity STILL plays a role in that scenario. A market with infinite (yet weighted) resources will STILL follow all the rules of a finite market, except that inflation will wreak havoc after a certain amount of time. Heck, even irl markets and economies are "technically" infinite because we are constantly bringing more resources and money into that market. We are not living in some self-sustained environment created thousands of years ago where we just recycle everything. There is this whole metric known as "economic growth" which we always want to be positive....indicating INFINITE growth potential with regards to resources. Dude.... Last edited by jsuslak313#7615 on Jun 16, 2024, 1:48:40 PM
|
|
" If you (again) require lawsuit-style formulating, fine, I can repeat exactly same thing (and those "criteria" were all in your statement, in the same order of appearance): 1) all firms contribute insignificantly to the market " Fine, you got me, will not mention mirror shops:) PoE player's "market share", hence "contribution" is directly proportional to how many premium stash tabs he/she has, which cost real money. And then player has to actually manage and price hundreds of items in tabs manually. You cannot have proof that entire playerbase is happily And for pity's sake, don't bring "b-but you can trade without stash tabs!" here, no one realistically does that, certainly not on the whole economy scale. 2) all firms sell an identical product " And this is relevant to the point 2) because? I see lots of players selling fragment "products", another lot selling low-affix-tier items, and much less players selling T2+ tier items. The former don't sell T2+ because they flat don't have access to those "products" en masse, for various reasons, most of all top crafting being masochistic casino. 3) all firms are price takers ERROR: no nitpicking input found, falling back to original statement 4) market share has no influence on price " Great, hard to argue here:) But, calling on general supply and demand rules requires general assumption that suppliers are motivated to sell their supply. This is not true in videogame, you won't go starving while sitting on your pile of mirror-tier gear if no one buys them. If you are able to craft top gear, you automatically cannot be considered so low on basic currency, that you won't balance your books without trade. 5) both buyers and sellers have complete or "perfect" information " Have you understood what you said here?:) Sure, if a chest armor has double %aura effect, maybe I should put it on aurastacker, thanks for reminding. But those are trivial cases only. The better part of prices set by knowledgeable sellers is not just the sum of affix prices, you know that yourself with your experience. And the rest are just following the pricing example with 3rd party software. Which is far from "perfect information everyone". You cannot have proof that every seller actually cares for full list of potential uses for item he/she is about to sell. 6) resources are perfectly mobile and firms can enter or exit the market without cost " You cannot participate in trade without getting what GGG sells first, this alone makes entering the market unequal. Everyone RMT their market share, as said in 1 One exception is TFT listings, but you said yourself "which is illegal by GGG rules" and called it a day. Let me do the same:) Again, please don't drag subforum listings here, good luck selling there. 7) Another key feature of a perfectly competitive market is the variation in products being sold by firms. The firms within a perfectly competitive market are small, with no larger firms controlling a significant proportion of market share. These firms sell almost identical products with minimal differences or in-cases perfect substitutes to another firm's product. " Point was, demand boundaries are defined by GGG, not supply. You may gravecraft/harvestcraft/recombinate weird item, good luck selling it if it isn't a part of known busted OP build. Thus the "firms" have no creative freedom in designing their "products", considering what resource hog crafting is. You still think "trades occur are pretty similar to market economics and Perfect Competition is a very accurate description of PoE"?:) Or maybe profiting from trade in this game is more akin to rushing through the bottleneck before other 200k players do the same? As a side note, I'd be really interested in hearing your opinion about how situations of "exploit found, market inflation skyrocketed, exploit eventually fixed, market left overinflated" map to real life economy. Do you have any idea what would happen IRL if government regulators would disappear and not intervene? This is close to how GGG never directly intervenes with the market after another exploit. |
|
" And further waste time going off topic when the entirety of the point was to say that trade is competitive, quoted sources to prove that point, then the rhetoric presented against is nit picking, cherry picking, gross misinterpretation and further off topic? Nah. Thanks. Ruthless should be [Removed by Support]. Last edited by AdRonZh3Ro#4713 on Jun 16, 2024, 3:06:04 PM
|
|
" I have just explained why poe trade is neither equal nor competitive, which directly relates to your supposed point. As opposed example, consider D3 AH before it was ritually closed after being blamed for overinflation of resources in the game. Everyone had access, everyone had same amount of listings, everyone could try to outbid on the same item. D3 market problems came not from AH concept themselves, but from absence of gold and item sinks, latter were only introduced in D4. Last edited by Echothesis#7320 on Jun 16, 2024, 3:05:50 PM
|
|