Jump to content

curryinahurry

Members
  • Content Count

    622
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by curryinahurry

  1. Valve is likely getting 30% from each sale on Steam. Then take out the publshers' cut, which could be another 30% or more. So the reall break even number on 600k sales is likely 12 - 15 mm us dollars.
  2. ^ Thanks for posting this. It's very informative and Josh Sawyer does a great job of laying out his thinking. It seems like the biggest problem, that manifests in different ways throughout his presentation is resource management. More precisely, how do you make changes to a game to improve on the previous version and account for the complexity vs time / cost constraints. It also seems like upper management made several decisions that impacted resources while not listening to warning from the development team. That's a recipe for disaster. I only recently finished POE and started pl
  3. Yeah, I've seen the posts about this and don't want to get into a silly argument,. I'm just pointing out that Dylan Holmes, the person who started this conjecture, specifically pointed out that he received a dividend payment of 192 dollars which translates, in his calculation to 110k in sales based on 580k breakeven, even though Steamspy has over 500k registered owners, Chris avellone re-posted this for his own reasons. The problem is that dividends are almost always payed only on profits. That is the structure of almost every investment agreement ever created. If you are correct a
  4. Not sure how Fig investment agreements work, but I read a Reddit comment from the poster who posted this information. He mentioned it was a dividend payment from the initial investment. If that is the case, then in almost all cases, these types of payments are only made on profit . Usually one invests in something, they buy shares, so that is held in the investment until the owner sells the shares. Dividends are paid on profit earned by the shares to the investors. If that is the case, the sales number is closer of the sales to reach break-even + the additional sales. according to the
  5. Thank you to the OP for the analysis; I haven't had much time to play the beta, but it seems my impressions line up with the analysis and what others are saying in this thread. Let me ask a corollary question to those reading and commenting on this thread that may have been asked already in some form: If we allow for greater granularity in the system by creating higher values for armor/ deflection, penetration etc.; does it make sense to go to a totally percentile system? One where all numbers denote a 1% change in determination? BTW, I am asking this question regardless of whethe
  6. This seems to be the simplest, most straightforward solution.
  7. To build on this comment, is the idea of determining where the 'sweet spot' in the level range should be (levels where the game is challenging and characters feel sufficiently powerful), and to simply ensure that a large portion of the game occurs in that range. If the game is going to take us up to level 20, then it might be the goal of the game design to make the sweet spot between levels 10 and 16. Thus levels 1 to 10 have a steeper power curve and levels 10+ it begins to flatten out a bit. That seems to be counter logical, but if abilities are now going to be more closely tied to tim
  8. Fair enough. Those areas were a drag at times. Then again, perhaps a 15-level dungeon was destined to feel like a drag a some point. So you're suggesting that we only need trash mobs at lower levels? I could sort of get behind this, but then I could also see players complaining about later dungeons feeling "empty". Cheers More of a sliding scale; Lower levels could be 5 to 1 Trash to Set piece encounters Mid levels 3 to 1 Upper levels 2 to 1 One of the things that feels great in games like this is when you get to really unload everything in a single fight; and
  9. You just answered your own question; trash mobs have some values at the beginning of games which diminishes as the game wears on and the player gets more skilled. At upper levels, one can incorporate new skills with a half or quarter of the trash as at lower levels. Cheers,
  10. Hard to tell without seeing equipment, but check what the combat log says, as it will display the actual attack calculation with the correct accuracy. There have been bugs in the past with the character sheet UI displaying incorrect numbers
  11. ^ If I remember correctly, to have both a greater field of vision and to show more of the environmental art on screen. Josh sawyer made a few posts about this early on in Development.
  12. @ Anaeme The guy you're quoting is stating that knockdown hasn't effectively changed; not that it's effectiveness is in question. Also, the way this person has built his fighter, by dumping Intelligence, makes any abilities like Knockdown pretty useless. If you build a DPS fighter with high Intelligence, it's easy to crit Knockdowns for 10+ seconds. Combine the -10 deflection from prone, with + 15 from Disciplined Barrage, and you're looking at 3-4 attacks with a 2-hander with a +25 attack. That likely means at least 2 additional criticals. Most enemies won't get up from that.
  13. Chanters still get spells, they just don't get Vancian casting. If you want to play a melee rogue, you can dual wield stilettos (better DR bypass than daggers). But you can use pretty much any weapon and deliver plenty of damage. Melee requires careful positioning and a bit of micro as rogues don't take punishment very well PoE is not an IE clone, you need to learn game system and plan your characters accordingly.
  14. Chanter is the PoE equivalent of a bard (ninja'd). Chants can buff and de-buff (enemies), chains of buffs lead to invocations which are best used for summons but can also be used for spell like effects like charm, damage, etc. Chants don't have huse AoE so they need to stay pretty centered in the party. They can be built as either ranged, back line or off-tank with reasonable dps. Rogues take a lot of micro management, but are excellent damage dealers. Ranged rogues are great with casters or frontline that can create hobbled, prone or other status effects. Melee rogues are trickier be
  15. My point is that the game developers can't and shouldn't try to anticipate gameplay that either goes to extreme lengths to ensure a fully loaded party; whether those extremes are trudging back and forth to an inn (what I would consider meta-gaming) or changing the rules (using Mods or cheating via console). The people who post on this forum represent a very small fraction of the people playing the game. Currently, the IE Mod on Game Nexus has been downloaded about 54,000 times. That represents about 7% of game owners +/-. Not every one is using the mod to rest spam, but even if they are, t
  16. One thing I want to clarify about the whole rest spamming complaint I have been seeing on this thread and other threads. The camping/resting system is designed to work around the concept of attrition in line with the difficulty setting the player chooses. Thus the lower levels of difficulty (easy/normal) are set up to have copious opportunities for the player to rest. At the higher difficulties, resource management is meant to be a significant strategic factor. Thus, if you are playing on Hard/ POTD, you should be able to progress through the game using the camping supplies you carry/ find
  17. ^ There will still be per encounter spells. They are just tuning the balance by allowing access to 1 per encounter spell at level 9, which will be separate from the spells in the per rest system (but not new spells). I assume that after level 9, such spells will accrue at 1 per level and new spell levels available every other level (level 1 spells at ninth level, level 2 spells at 11th, 3rd at 13th, etc.). It brings the Vancian casters more in line with the 4E D&D versions that was the inspiration for the game's class design.
  18. I never play non-human, non-male characters in any genre of games. Of course that is your right, only problem I see is that a 3 gun build will leave you with a fairly mediocre dps build at higher levels when you face tougher enemies. Darguls for example, have 300+ health. Even a crit oriented build likely won't even take one of those down. If you want to go in that direction(with a human), a chanter is probably a better option as what you give up in damage you can make up for in additional abilities and chants, including the one that allows you to reload faster. As to your other
  19. That is likely the pathfinding, not AI, but yes, it is pretty hilarious to see one of your characters walk around half the map to attack the enemy. There were a few Raubritter fights where my monk was all the way on the other side of the map trying to go around a wooded area. Bringing back on topic...I wonder how hard it would be to have enemies switch to ranged weapons if they can't get around an obsticle? Not an option for monsters that only have one form of attack, but at least fighting Kith would be a bit better.
  20. OP, If you're going to build this fighter, you might want to consider an Island Aumaua, which gets +1 weapon set. You can thus do 4 and tank or off-tank after you've fired your guns. Also, I would personally do this build around a Soldier focus because of Aquebuses and Greatswords. The pump perception and dump a little con and resolve. Wear light armor, and pick up knockdown or a crit talent and you will have an excellent back line guardian/ off-tank. Add lashes for extra damage.
  21. Great change, and what I think many people who were around during the Backer period thought was going to be implementation of the per rest >>>> per encounter. I am expecting this to possible be the first of several passes at balancing out the per encounter spells. Obsidian might, in a future patch, allow for one favored per level from level 9 (as another poster suggested), or start favored spells at a lower level. Either way, it's a change for the better and returns an important strategic element to gameplay. Next I hope, they start looking at metamagic feats for levels 15+
  22. There may be a solution by combiningsome of the suggestions made by Elric Galad, Infinitron and Tigranes. It may look something like this: At level 9 Druids, Priests and Wizards get one per encounter casting of any first level spell, beyond that all other spells (including first level) come out of the per rest numbers. At Level 11 Druids, Priests and Wizards all First level Spells casting becomes fully per encounter. Any Second level spell can be cast be cast once per encounter, any additoinal casts are per rest. At Level 13, Second Level Spells become fully per Encounter, 3rd le
  23. This game was deigned with certain specific goals. Some of those goals for Caster classes included casters being more powerful at lower levels, but with a smoother power curve (no quadratic mages). The point behind having stronger low level spells, as I stated before, was to avoid the problems in the IE games with Caster classes being marginal until 5th level when they get more powerful spells and enough casts to have a reasonable impact on combat. That is why Fan of Flames is as strong as it is. It serves a specific design purpose at lower levels (make wizards effective damage dealers) bu
  24. Your rationalization is an act of grasping at straws. None of the spells you named are particularly OP, particularly at the levels you gain them. and none you mentioned are broken. The fact that they become OP once you can use them per encounter speaks to the problems with the per encounter use and not the relative power of those spells. Truth is that all RPG systems start getting funky at higher levels because keeping power curves reasonable is very difficult. The per encounter spell system needs to be addressed because it so heavily favors 3 classes at the moment, that Obsidian's on
  25. @ FlintlockJazz I'm glad that you and others are happy...there are many, including myself, who think it's a fairly awful design decision that needs to be addressed. So far, nothing you or anyone else has stated makes that decision seem as anything other than a fairly arbitrary, broad brush solution to a problem that likely needed a finer, directed tuning, and works against the design principles espoused by the games lead designer. The point behind my comment about the fighter thread is that what is mostly being asked for there is an expansion of fighter capabilities in a very modest m
×
×
  • Create New...