'Legacy' items policy, re:patch 0.10.5

"

Boarhead написал:

Personally, I'm not sure how I feel about having "legacy" items. I'm not too concerned about it right now, but I see how it could potentially be a problem.

But anyway, I wanted to pose a question to the others in this thread:

What if they changed Silverbranch so that it could no longer drop?

And then what if they created a new similar unique that had only +1 to bow gems?


This seems to be logically identical to the change they are making, except the new unique has the same name. Would this still be a problem simply because you can no longer obtain an item that doesn't drop any more?

That sounds exactly what they just did.

"

unkempt написал:

"

Chris написал:

There are already time-limited things in the economy like Demigod's Presences and Triumphs.

There are many, many types of changes that we will have to do over the years that will leave items in a state they can't currently spawn in. This is very difficult to avoid, unfortunately.

Correct, but Demigods are useless paper weights. Silverbranch actually has use.

woah now.. +20% character size is pretty much the best mod in the game. I beg you to counter.

Do create legacy items please. Diablo 2 did no wrong. Ever.

"

AlienFromBeyond написал:

Frankly if legacy items truly become a thing I know I'll be quitting the game.

Quitting over that? aight...doors to your left...

"

wiggin написал:

"

Chris написал:

There are already time-limited things in the economy like Demigod's Presences and Triumphs.

There are many, many types of changes that we will have to do over the years that will leave items in a state they can't currently spawn in. This is very difficult to avoid, unfortunately.

Not in this case for sure.

GGG has it perfectly correct in this case. That somebody somewhere might want a "legacy" version of an item enough to do something unscrupulous to get it is not a valid reason to destroy a legitimate player's character that depends on the way that "legacy" item functions.

Pay to win is a terrible thing, and destroying a game to avoid unauthorized pay to win shenanigans is almost as bad. Short term, I'm not sure what the answer is. Long term there is a solution - a real life legitimacy tracker - just like credit agencies. Players who choose pay to win would accumulate a very negative legitimacy rating and could be banned from public games. When someone couldn't play any public games because they had a terrible rating, they might think twice.

But, that won't be feasible until the governments of the world make online anonymity an enforceable crime.

Legacy items will not make or break POE. If you want them, find them and hang onto them. Can't find them? Join the rest of the crowd that hasn't had a whole lot of luck.

If an item was OP and new versions get nerfed, then consider yourself lucky to have/had the old one. Should GGG roll back your character's level because you had an advantage newer players won't have? Should they take back all the items traded for with all the chaos orbs found with the older easier recipe?

Should we all have to go back and redo all the bandit quests because the waypoints were much easier for fighting them?

Change is going to happen. Most of it will be for the better. As players find lesser and greater exploits of the game, GGG will close up those loopholes.

The fact that they aren't doing any legacy leagues or ladder seasons or any other planned separation of characters by time is a major bonus for the long term health of the playing community.

The whole avoiding incentive for Pay to win argument is something I don't buy at all. The people who will P2W won't be dissuaded by the lack of legacy items. They will take any advantage they can easily get. If GGG properly balances the game, no one will Need any legacy item for a build, thought they might want it so they can be OP.

Now, if GGG effectively ruins a popular end game build by nerfing a unique item, then it could cause some serious problems, unless that build was breaking the game by being so out of balance.

Altering the +skills on this bow isn't that at all. An example IMO that might be would be if GGG altered the way Chaos damage interacts with Energy Shield on Shavronne's Wrappings.

I think people are missing one major thing.

Just because they were able to retroactively change Volls DOES NOT mean they did the same as Retroactively nerfing Silverbranches.

Volls Protector has a MECHANIC CHANGE. They changed the mechanic of how a Power Charge was accrued UNIVERSALLY on the item, thus affecting the old ones.

Silverbranch change is a numeric VARIABLE. Noted by the fact a Divine Orb will change a Legacy Silverbranch to a current. They did not change NUMERIC VARIABLES on ANY EXISTING ITEM. Were Voll's to have gotten a 2 power charge on crit,, I doubt the buff would be automatic, but it likely could be divined were that the case.

They changed a MECHANIC VARIABLE on one. And altered the allowed drop range of a Number on the other. Meaning that the new "die" for Silverbranches can roll 1-1 bonus to Gems.

And most people clamour for Quillrain, Silverbranch is okay but it really only made PA OP in low levels negating in races the changes to low level PA dmg.


Alexis
*smiles*

"

Synchrotron написал:

Allowing legacy items to be introduced will make impossible for them to ever get their hands on these kinds of items.

The logic here is flawed. If you nerf the item, it does not become possible to get the older legacy version. For example if all Silverbranches became +1 (old ones found included), you could never ever ever get a +2 version.

However, if the legacy items remain, it would be possible to get them - not by finding them as a drop, but by trading for them.

As for trying to balance the game around a pure player who only uses what they find - well that would become unbalanced for the whole POE community. There are players who probably don't enjoy crafting at all, but GGG shouldn't change the drop rates so that there is a decent chance they will find 5 linked sockets and 6 linked sockets items with just the right color sockets.

I do think POE should have some way for players to find more uniques and higher gear for solo playing if they can do it while maintaining a challenge and not disrupting the economy.


Destroying someone's build is never nice. As an example of a build killing nerf - If chain was still 3 hits, I'd use it instead of LMP/GMP on one of my builds. If they had suddenly nerfed the chain gem from 3 to 2, my main character would have been useless. That character was never OP in closed beta, but chain made that character's funky skill usage viable. The new chain with 2 hits just doesn't cut it for the same build, but since I knew about it ahead of time, my character isn't relying on it either.

I agree!

WTB Silverbranches btw! (HC)

"

knac84 написал:

"

Moosifer написал:

I don't understand the change in the first place.

Races.

And it doesn't bother me that much cause it's a low lvl item, only would bother me if I was some sort of collector. But I agree that it's a bad precedent.

IFthese are nerfs based solely on how they affect races, then have any that drop during a race even be nerfed for the race and let them revert to normal after the players drop back into hardcore/default. They could do the same with a lot of potential race effecting items.
I'm not sure they drop enough to skew the races though.

The Silverbranch isn't a good enough item anyway. It will not matter. Obviously old ones will be more valuable but not by much.

What they shouldn't do, is nerf, for instance the Kaom's Heart to +500 health instead of +1000 and keep the old one's in. Now that would be ridiculous.