CatatonicMan

If combat provided absolutely nothing and only wasted time and resources, then it would be easy to argue that combat should be avoided if possible (unless you just wanted to fight because you find fighting fun). That said, PoE combat provides items and crafting ingredients. There is clearly some incentive to fight, even if that incentive is not XP. From this perspective, combat should be avoided unless it provides a net increase in player resources (or is unavoidable).

Resistant to attacks to their eyes, maybe. While a poke to the eye won't work very well, a sphere of darkness around the head is still going to blind them.

Yes, but also yes. See this request post I made.

Considering all the combat bugs, I'm not sure it's really possible to say yet.

Careful. Using the singular "they" might draw out angry grammar sticklers.

[Description of the issue] An enemy spear is drawn on top of the tree foliage, while the enemy is drawn below it. See image below: [steps to Reproduce] Start a new game, new character, etc. Exit the starting map (just to the left of the start point). Go to Stormwall Gorge. Go west-northwest past the lions until you see the spear-wielding Feral Druid. Watch the druid as he moves under any foliage. If you kill the druid and wield the spear, the spear still has the same problem. [Expected Behaviour] Weapons should be on the same draw plane as their wielders. [Other Remarks / Comments] This is the only weapon I've noticed that has this problem, but there could be others.

I proposed previously that a workable solution to this problem is to allow the player to adjust AoE range so that having a high intelligence is never detrimental. I had an additional idea that would make an interesting mechanic: Given the ability to scale the AoE effect, make Intelligence govern both the maximum and minimum AoE range. Under this system, a highly intelligent character would be able to shape his AoE into a size that's more tactically relevant - maybe even small enough to hit a single target without hitting adjacent friendlies. One advantage is that a single-target AoE would still be worse than a normal single-target ability, so we wouldn't need to worry about super dense doom fireballs. Or we could not be stupid about it and have a default starting size (your maximum size like it is now, say) that you can adjust as necessary. If no adjustments are necessary, then it defaults to exactly the system you're talking about. We could even allow the player to set a default size if we wanted to get fancy. Or maybe we could allow the option to use the last-used size. Options are a good thing.

Not wanting bad builds isn't the problem. No, the real issue is whether no builds are bad because attributes are well balanced, or because attributes don't make much of a difference. If it's viable to run a character who doesn't spend any attribute points, then the system has a problem. If it's not, then the system works.

I'd wager that OE is already aware of the various opinions on this issue, this being their beta testing forums and all.

Doesn't much matter to me when the game comes out, but I think it's a bit premature to be calling for a delay. That entirely depends on how quickly they can knock out these bugs.

Technically you could be multiclassing and don't plan on going above spell level four.

I think it's a bit silly to assume that not distributing points should be or was intended to be a valid choice. If it happens that not distributing points is valid (on normal or harder, at least), then I'd say we have a balance problem to address. That said, I'm not willing to declare anything about the stat system without testing it, and I can't really do that until the major bugs are fixed. For all I know, the seemingly small values provided by the stats will end up making a big difference.

A minimap option in the UI would be nice. I like minimaps.

It's probably because you misunderstand what "fundamental" means in this context. You also don't seem to understand what "meaningless" means, either. With respect to fundamentals: Something that is fundamental to the game isn't fixable in the beta. This is stuff like the 2D isometric view, the engine, the art direction, skill/battle mechanics, etc. Once you get out of alpha, you're usually stuck with what you've got. Things like class/character/item attributes, balance adjustments, model tweaks, specific art changes, dialogue changes, etc. are things that can be adjusted in the beta. These are not really fundamental to the game, though they're still important. You're treating a simple numerical balancing problem as if OE had accidentally made PoE a first person shooter rather than an isometric RPG. With respect to meaningless character building: The choices you make in character creation are far from meaningless. It's certainly arguable that they're not meaningful enough, but that's a far cry from them having absolutely no impact at all. Further, your complaints that I've seen so far only apply with respect to combat. It's entirely possible that they have quite an impact out of combat even if the combat aspect is weak. You also have some odd ideas as to what diversity actually is - as if something is only diverse if there are islands of workable builds within an ocean of crap. PoE is actually more diverse in the number of usable character configurations; what's lacking is that there are no builds that are immediately and obviously superior. They don't appear diverse to you because there's no sharp divider of fail in between them.

M'kay. Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I for one am not prepared to declare the end of the world due to minor statistic problems in a beta. I can't see how that's too reasonable, but there you go.

No, it's fairly obvious that you don't get it. Let me try to sum up your argument, at least with respect to the stats: Characters with the lowest possible stat values are too effective; and/or Characters with the highest possible stat values are not effective enough; and/or The difference in effectiveness between the lowest and highest stat values is not large enough. Now, I'll admit that you may very well be right. Maybe stats below 10 should subtract effectiveness. Maybe stats above 10 should be more effective. Maybe both. What you are failing to grasp is that this is a beta. Things like stat values can change. In fact, changing them is trivial. If stats are not impactful enough, it's a simple matter to make them more so, assuming you can convince the devs to do so. It's not like we're trying to go from 2D isometric to full 3D here. Unbalanced stats are not the end of everything ever. Now, if OE decides that they will never ever change them ever....well, feel free to weep for all that is lost, I guess. Or whatever.

You shouldn't. That would be murder.

It's not the only solution, of course, but, practically speaking, the larger the AoE is, the less tactically useful the ability will tend to become. After a certain point, the spells get so large that additional area becomes moot, if not detrimental. As a side note, at 20 intelligence you start having spells that are so large that it's literally impossible to avoid hitting yourself with them. That said, I think it could be done rather simply. When using an AoE ability, reassign the scroll wheel to adjust the spell area rather than the zoom level. That would be easy enough to handle on the fly.

There would need to be a limit to size or damage, otherwise a wizard could make a super powerful one-person tactical fireball. In other words, single target spells should still be stronger than AoE when used on single targets. Except that, at present, a huge fireball does exactly the same damage to a single person as it does to multiple persons. This proposed system would allow AoE effects to be great on both single and multiple targets. There has to be some disadvantage (or at least no advantage) to reducing area, because the area itself is both a good and bad thing.

[Description of the issue] Pace in the Drakogen Inn has partially invisible clothes. See image. [steps to Reproduce] Start a game, go to the inn, and look at the guy in the back. [Expected Behaviour] Clothes should not be partially invisible. Or at least I don't think they should be. [Other Remarks / Comments] None I can think of.

This should be standard in every game with an auto/quick save. No idea why developers almost never put it in.

Better to have a blurry or pixelated zoom than have to run the game at a non-native resolution in order to see things.

You actually can sell them (though I can't guarantee that it won't cause other problems). If you drag them into the sell pane rather than double clicking, they sell as normal.

Just thought of another thing, but it doesn't seem to allow me to edit the OP. 3 - Target in AoE indicator When a target is right near the edge of the AoE circle, it's rather difficult to know for certain if they'll be hit by the spell or not. Some sort of visual indicator that a target is, in fact, in range would be very helpful. If there's already one, I've yet to notice it.

Vsync will still result in at least a frame of lag precisely because it has to wait. But yes, the induced frame lag should be the same for N-buffering, when N > 1, assuming they don't do it stupidly.