Do you want experience from combat?

[Seari]

The only reason for there not being combat xp is laziness on the developer's part and nothing else. Every other negative thing about this game is because of Sawyer's balance preceding fun.

 

HA! Good Fun Balance!

[Yonjuro]

Really, what does it say about a community that seems more than happy to vote and deny the other half something that they desperately want which costs nor affects the opposing subscriber-base anything at all.

Strange.

 

Hint: Saying 'I want X' isn't an argument in favor of X that will convince anyone. Therefore, saying 'I really really...really want X' isn't either. Nor is 'Not having X causes me angst.' Sorry, but the world is mostly indifferent to your angst (Don't blame me for that. I don't make the rules; I just enforce them on the internet ).

 

(Also, if you think kill XP has no effect on the game you haven't thought this through. More below.)

 

 On the other hand, I want X because good reason 1, good reason 2 etc. is useful. We can then understand why people have the opinions they do (and have a sense who has thought about the issue and who is having a kneejerk reaction (something that people do sometimes)). Some people might even change their minds once they really think about the reasons. (Others will smear their kneejerk reaction onto all of the reasons and spout nonsense, but that's not worse than what we have now).

 

So, what are some reasons for kill XP? How about:

1. It is a more conservative way to design the game - IE games were fun and they did it that way and PoE doesn't have a big enough budget to take the risk.

2. Quest XP might prevent some kinds of degenerate gameplay (like killing **** you don't even want to kill because you gain levels) but causes other kinds (insert kinds of degenerate gameplay caused by quest XP here)

or,

2a. Degenerate gameplay isn't even a thing because (reasons why it isn't) (we've had this statement repeated ad nauseam along with disparaging remarks about an Obsidian employee who wants to prevent it - what we need is actual supporting arguments) 

3. XP numbers give you feedback on the difficulty of the fight you just had - it give you an indication of whether your tactics were good or not.

4. Other fantastic reason why you have a well founded opinion and not just an opinion pulled out of ....er, thin air

 

Reasons against kill XP:

1. Doesn't disadvantage any particular style of game play (killing works, diplomacy works, stealth works). (an argument against this point is that killing should be advantaged for some reason (hint, provide reason - **** do I have to do everything for you?  ))

2. Doesn't require encounters to be designed with a specific number creatures of a specific difficulty - the level slider can add creatures (and stronger creatures) without the unintended side effect of making the game easier due to faster leveling (you know, because hard mode should be harder)

3. Doesn't give an incentive to kill everything on a map (which can be chore) - only what you need to kill to do what you want to do

4. Other fantastic reason why you have a well founded opinion and not just an opinion pulled out of ....er, thin air

 

tl;dr More light - less heat.

[Stun]

*groan*

 

and thus we see the complete lack o' comprehension regarding the possible balance issues.  some folks will skip the bugs and spiders by stealthily getting past. others may find some more clever route.

I was talking about the lions.

 

what if developers added a secret door?

Where the lions are? They added a dungeon. Even better.

 

so why does the fighty character get more xp?

He doesn't. the lions on the gorge map aren't part of any quest. And therefore, XP rewards for killing them can only be tied to either 1) exploration, or 2) the lions themselves. Therefore everyone who gets attacked by the lions receives the same XP for dealing with them.

 

and if you do give awards for stealthy,

We don't. Just like there's no rewards for doing the Ogre quest stealthily.

 

how to you balance properly

You take into account that there's only 1 way to deal with the lions on the gorge map: Kill them. because they attacked you. . This satisfies all playstyles, since all classes and all builds in this game are geared towards fighting.

 

quest xp avoids all such balancing issues completely.

So does Combat XP. As long as we separate the two, there cannot come a time when balance is broken. You do quests for XP, and you kill non-quest tied enemies for XP.

 

 

"PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic.

Whether the game allows for stealth game play and whether it rewards it are two very different things. I asked you this precise question earlier and you managed to wildly dodge it even as you got out your dictionary and tried to re-define the word Sneak. Remember? Therefore, I'm going to ask it again. Show me how I can use stealth to complete ANY of the 4 quests in this beta. Go ahead.

 

 

give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices....

Straw man. No one is asking for Skyrim's systemic system. We're just asking for Kill XP. Kill XP is VERY MUCH different than trap disarming for XP, or sneaking for XP or lockpicking for XP in that it's not a singular action. There are 200+ ways to kill something in this game and by setting flat XP values for an enemy, you are allowing the player party to choose how they're going to kill that enemy. And whatever way they choose will always lead to the same XP reward. This is something SEPERATE and unrelated to Quests. And personally, I particularly see it as a perfect solution for something like the 15 level megadungeon, which SHOULD be a friggin dungeon crawl, not some diplomatic adventure <gag> Edited August 29, 2014 by Stun

[Cantousent]

:Cant's praying that the forum gods don't strike down another thread that has become focused on Grom's posting style icon:

I didn't vote because I don't care.

 

*This* is the winning argument for my side.  I wish it were the logic of our arguments, which I believe are sound.  I wish it were our clever delivery or witty repartee, which I don't think everyone appreciates.  <.<  I wish it were the desire for a hand holding campfire singing moment, which it ain't.

 

Simple inertia and the fact that it's already implemented on one side and the fact that the majority of folks probably don't care will be what wins the day.  I think the mass of backers want the devs to go with their primary instincts.  ...But, to be fair, this far out I would be doing exactly what the proponents of combat XP are doing:  advocating my position in hopes that my side might prevail on the design team.  It's one of the reasons I'm posting in these threads now.  I want the status quo and so I'm continuing to point out the benefits of challenge only XP in the hopes that inertia will carry us through to the end.  ...But I can still see some small accommodation to various things.  For example, Stun's point about this lion.  Give it a challenge value if it's tough enough and then dole out XP for overcoming or avoiding the obstacle.  That doesn't seem all that tough and it need not even be combat resolved.  ...Or maybe there are some challenges that can only be combat resolved with some that can only be resolved ideally through some other means.  That doesn't grant generic combat XP.  It just makes specific encounters the equivalent of quests for the purposes of XP feedback.  It actually *is* quest only XP by mechanic, just not with all the attending quest accoutrements.

[Gromnir]

 

I was talking about the lions.

 

so what? if there ain't currently a quest for that map, there undoubtedly will be in final build, and even if there ain't, so what? stealth past lions would get 0 points. kill would get xp. how is this difficult to grasp?

 

and you can use stealth to get past combat... which would give only the kill-lovers xp. why is kill more xp worthy than stealth? even if you believe kill is more worthy, the developers disagree.

 

for the rest, you reply/quote yourself into meaninglessness. answer the challenge:

 

"provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 29, 2014 by Gromnir

[Amentep]

I didn't vote because I don't care.

 

You lie, you care enough to post that you don't care.

 

 

Is it care, or narcissism that lead to my post?  You decide!

 

 

 

I didn't vote because I don't care.

but do you care about usc cheerleaders? honestly, the last few years has seemed like a bit o' a drop off... the ucla squad mighta' been superior.

 

sadly for Gromnir, Cal cheerleaders is rare amongst the nation's best, and the UCI/UCSB (our other alma maters) might not even current have cheerleaders. sad.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Can't say that - in the scheme of Cheerleaders - that USC has really left much of an impression on me.

 

:Cant's praying that the forum gods don't strike down another thread that has become focused on Grom's posting style icon:

I didn't vote because I don't care.

 

*This* is the winning argument for my side.  I wish it were the logic of our arguments, which I believe are sound.  I wish it were our clever delivery or witty repartee, which I don't think everyone appreciates.  <. i wish it were the desire for a hand holding campfire singing moment which ain>

 

Simple inertia and the fact that it's already implemented on one side and the fact that the majority of folks probably don't care will be what wins the day.  I think the mass of backers want the devs to go with their primary instincts. 

 

Not really inertia (I didn't care when it was announced before we saw the implementation).  Philosophically I don't think there is a "one style fits every game" approach to XP delivery. 

 

EDIT: Damn punctuation.  I think I'm going to become the ****ing e e cummings of the board just to keep from editing posts for missing a question mark or a period or a full stop/period or an ellipsis or a guillemets or whatever...

Edited August 29, 2014 by Amentep

[Sarex]

"provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I can't wait when the game comes out and in the second week guides start coming out with how to exploit the system for max xp. I can't wait to see what you will say then.

 

You are holding up the quest xp system as a beacon of unexploitability, when in fact such a system doesn't exit. The better question is, why should time be wasted on creating such a system in a singleplayer game?

Edited August 29, 2014 by Sarex

[Gromnir]

 

"provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I can't wait when the game comes out and in the second week guides start coming out with how to exploit the system for max xp. I can't wait to see what you will say then.

 

You are holding up the quest xp system as a beacon of unexploitability, when in fact such a system doesn't exit. The better question is, why should time be wasted on creating such a system in a singleplayer game?

 

not in the sense you seems to believe. for instance, ps:t were rife with unlimited xp exploits from quests. we expect more than a few o' those.

 

what you will never see from PoE is a way to choose best build or best method for garnering xp. no kill 90% underlings, unlock secret door, backtrack and then use diplomacy on final boss nonsense. regardless o' build, you will get same xp. everybody wins. no exploit.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sarex]

not in the sense you seems to believe. for instance, ps:t were rife with unlimited xp exploits from quests. we expect more than a few o' those.

 

what you will never see from PoE is a way to choose best build or best method for garnering xp. no kill 90% underlings, unlock secret door, backtrack and then use diplomacy on final boss nonsense. regardless o' build, you will get same xp. everybody wins. no exploit.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Ah the infamous double dip. When was that a big problem in the BG series? How much more xp could you even get for it anyways? Maybe a few people did it and you are saying that because of them we should now waste time on a new xp system?

[Gromnir]

 

I didn't vote because I don't care.

 

You lie, you care enough to post that you don't care.

 

 

Is it care, or narcissism that lead to my post?  You decide!

 

 

 

I didn't vote because I don't care.

but do you care about usc cheerleaders? honestly, the last few years has seemed like a bit o' a drop off... the ucla squad mighta' been superior.

 

sadly for Gromnir, Cal cheerleaders is rare amongst the nation's best, and the UCI/UCSB (our other alma maters) might not even current have cheerleaders. sad.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Can't say that - in the scheme of Cheerleaders - that USC has really left much of an impression on me.

 

we played for Cal, so we did notice usc cheerleaders... am embarrassed to admit we typical found the cheerleaders as compelling as the games. we had zero pro potential and practices were cutting into our study time-- we were not an exemplary player from coaches perspective.

 

aside: at the time, asu and arizona had best cheerleaders in the pac 10... not that we were ogling or anything like that.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

so what? if there ain't currently a quest for that map,

...then we've got a problem. Giant chunks of pointless content in the game. Pointless content that requires from the player just as much thinking, just as much time, just as much planning, just as much use of character builds, just as much use of character skills, _And_, possibly MORE use of limited player resources.

 

there undoubtedly will be in final build, and even if there ain't, so what? stealth past lions would get 0 points. kill would get xp. how is this difficult to grasp?

Stealthing past an XP reward means you're deliberately skipping out on it. So of course you shouldn't be rewarded. And this isn't unique. Try stealthing past the Ogre then returning to the farmer. You'll get exactly the same result: NOTHING. 0 xp. because you haven't completed the quest yet.

 

 

why is kill more xp worthy than stealth?

There are several answers to this question.

 

1) Because this is a combat focused game

2) Because Unlike Combat, in this game Stealth is an aspect of the Mechanics skill (or is it Athletics? I forget), and if we reward stealth XP we will need to reward Lore XP, and athletics XP, and trap disarming XP, and Lockpicking XP, and swimming XP, and jumping XP, and climbing XP, and arm wrestling XP etc. That is, if we wish to be fair.

3) Because stealth is too specifically imbalanced vis-à-vis the classes. It is a tool that Rogues have an advantage with. By rewarding XP for stealth you are giving them an advantage over the other classes.

 

"provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

Planescape Torment's system, minus the meta-gaming exploits. I would suggest NPCs/monsters who are dealt with non-violently during the course of a quest/task/objective be worth zero XP for anyone who attempts to double-dip the rewards after initially completing the quest. Edited August 29, 2014 by Stun

[Gromnir]

 

not in the sense you seems to believe. for instance, ps:t were rife with unlimited xp exploits from quests. we expect more than a few o' those.

 

what you will never see from PoE is a way to choose best build or best method for garnering xp. no kill 90% underlings, unlock secret door, backtrack and then use diplomacy on final boss nonsense. regardless o' build, you will get same xp. everybody wins. no exploit.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Ah the infamous double dip. When was that a big problem in the BG series? How much more xp could you even get for it anyways? Maybe a few people did it and you are saying that because of them we should now waste time on a new xp system?

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1495117

 

people game the system. hell, we has mentioned numerous bg exploits. dual-class and then immediately add max spells to bg2 spellbook to gain multiple mage levels in less than a  minute. do the basilisk map in bg with a solo dual-class player to get them level'd quick. simplest "exploit" were the worst: encouraging folks to play combat focused to maximize xp, regardless o' what they might otherwise think were fun.

 

is a pleasant fantasy to believe folks don't game the xp system... just as folks gamed fallout special system. there were literal innumerable possible fallout builds, but only a handful o' builds actual got played. that were in part to maximize xp.

 

any game that has a balancing act for xp may be exploited... so obsidian removes the opportunity to eploit. if there is no advantage to play combat-focused, people will be more likely to try other builds. should be obvious.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

(edit: changed olay to play... weird)

Edited August 29, 2014 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

(complete nonsense)

the fact that you could possibly believe the bg2 xp system would be more simple and as straight forward to implement shows you ain't even trying to be reasonable... and fact you don't believe stealth should get as much xp as kills is fundamental opposed to goals o' a system wherein the developers specific said they were trying to make all builds equal rewarding and that body count weren't gonna be rewarded.

 

you ain't serious, or you simple ain't capable o' understanding obvious goals o' the developers.  which is it?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Stun]

the fact that you could possibly believe the bg2 xp system would be more simple and as straight forward

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Definitely not my post though.

 

LOL You're dodging.

[Sarex]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1495117

 

people game the system. hell, we has mentioned numerous bg exploits. dual-class and then immediately add max spells to bg2 spellbook to gain multiple mage levels in less than a  minute. do the basilisk map in bg with a solo dual-class player to get them level'd quick. simplest "exploit" were the worst: encouraging folks to play combat focused to maximize xp, regardless o' what they might otherwise think were fun.

 

is a pleasant fantasy to believe folks don't game the xp system... just as folks gamed fallout special system. there were literal innumerable possible fallout builds, but only a handful o' builds actual got played. that were in part to maximize xp.

 

any game that has a balancing act for xp may be exploited... so obsidian removes the opportunity to eploit. if there is no advantage to olay combat-focused, people will be more likely to try other builds. should be obvious.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

The things you say are the same exploits that will be made with the quest xp system. They may not be the same type of exploits, but so what, they will still be exploits. It's foolish to think that PoE will be less exploitable in 15 years no matter what system they implement. Even if it wasn't, the people who did those things (used exploits) did them because it was fun for them.

 

I didn't game the system, whats the point. Not once in any of my playthrough of the BG series did I use any exploits.

 

Again so what, who cares and why should time be wasted on such a thing as an unexplotable system. People who care about diversity will use it, people who don't will min/max and find optimal builds, as was already seen in the bb.

 

edit: I mean you do realize that you are calling people incompetent of having fun in the game they are playing. You are advocating for policing how people should play the game, which is the pinnacle of stupidity, because that can only make the game less fun for the people who don't want to play it that way. You are removing all other routes and leaving only yours because you deem it as the only fun one.

Edited August 29, 2014 by Sarex

[Stun]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1495117

 

people game the system. hell, we has mentioned numerous bg exploits. dual-class and then immediately add max spells to bg2 spellbook to gain multiple mage levels in less than a  minute. do the basilisk map in bg with a solo dual-class player to get them level'd quick. simplest "exploit" were the worst: encouraging folks to play combat focused to maximize xp, regardless o' what they might otherwise think were fun.

 

is a pleasant fantasy to believe folks don't game the xp system... just as folks gamed fallout special system. there were literal innumerable possible fallout builds, but only a handful o' builds actual got played. that were in part to maximize xp.

 

any game that has a balancing act for xp may be exploited... so obsidian removes the opportunity to eploit. if there is no advantage to olay combat-focused, people will be more likely to try other builds. should be obvious.

 

HA! Good Fun!

So let me see if I can translate this post of yours.

 

Gromnir wants quest-only XP because quest-only XP insures that Gromnir won't be able to game the system.

 

Fair Enough. If Gromnir can't control himself when playing a computer Game then maybe the developers should Baby sit/police Gromnir. Not sure why the rest of us should be punished, though. I can do a BG2 run without resorting to Spell-writing exploits. Can't Gromnir?

 

 

Actually This isn't even an argument against Kill XP. This is another dodge. Placing XP value on monsters does not cause XP exploits, provided those critters DIE when you kill them, or go away after you spare them. Yes?

Edited August 29, 2014 by Stun

[Seari]

Gromnir wants quest-only XP because quest-only XP insures that Gromnir won't be able to game the system.

Fair Enough. If Gromnir can't control himself when playing a computer Game then maybe the developers should Baby sit/police Gromnir. Not sure why the rest of us should be punished, though. I can do a BG2 run without resorting to Spell-writing exploits. Can't Gromnir?

 

 

Actually This isn't even an argument against Kill XP. This is another dodge. Placing XP value to monsters does not cause XP exploits, provided those critters DIE when you kill them, or go away after you spare them. Yes?

@Mayama

[Gromnir]

 

the fact that you could possibly believe the bg2 xp system would be more simple and as straight forward

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Definitely not my post though.

 

LOL You're dodging.

 

*sigh*

 

before the edit, you used bg2 as the model, but it don't matter

 

 

Quote

"provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

 

Planescape Torment's system, minus the meta-gaming exploits. I would suggest NPCs/monsters who are dealt with non-violently during the course of a quest/task/objective be worth zero XP for anyone who attempts to double-dip the rewards after initially completing the quest. 

Edited by Stun, Today, 02:28 PM.

 

ps:t is no better. is no way possible you can be honest and believe that ps:t approach were more simple and straightforward. you is showing you ain't even trying for reason.  and as for suggesting stealth deserves no xp, that further removes you from the realm o' rationale discourse, seeing as how an espoused goal o' PoE is to make all builds equal viable and rewarding.

 

sarex comments is simple silly. will respond quick 'cause is funny rather than contributing anything. quest xp precludes the possibility o' the most obvious exploits as no XP advantage for any particular build is possible. the developers wanna encourage folks to try different approaches, so making no particular build or set o' builds has a numeric xp advantage makes diversity o' playable builds more likely. you don't wanna take just enough perception/intellect/lore to get the good diplomacy xp rewards? guess what, there is no such perfect amount o' perception for xp maximization. is no XP advantage for killing everything on the map. is no xp advantage for having X levels in mechanics. sure, there will be practical advantages to having various skills, but obsidianis avoiding the obvious xp imbalances, 'cause they ain't balancing. after we diplomacy the ogre, does we go back and see if kill gives more xp in PoE? no. gosh.

 

"PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest."

 

 

repeating self is so tedious.

 

oh, and again, ‘cause some folks has very short attention spans, this entire debate is moot. There don’t exist the resources to change the mxp mechanic at this point, not that the developers believe it is warranted based on their firsthand observation o’ QA actual playing the game.

 

Your Best Case Scenario is coming up with a new contribution to this debate and convincing obsidian to change future games. stun ridiculous notions o’ repeating what obsidian developers such as sawyer and cain consider past xp mechanics failures is not the least bit helpful to your possible ‘cause o’ bringing about future change and improvements. you is gonna need come up with something new, ‘cause old is what is considered the fail, and is too late to change for this game anyway.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 29, 2014 by Gromnir

[Sarex]

sarex comments is simple silly. will respond quick 'cause is funny rather than contributing anything. quest xp precludes the possibility o' the most obvious exploits as no XP advantage for any particular build is possible. the developers wanna encourage folks to try different approaches, so making no particular build or set o' builds has a numeric xp advantage makes diversity o' playable builds more likely. you don't wanna take just enough perception/intellect/lore to get the good diplomacy xp rewards? guess what, there is no such perfect amount o' perception for xp maximization. is no XP advantage for killing everything on the map. is no xp advantage for having X levels in mechanics. sure, there will be practical advantages to having various skills, but obsidianis avoiding the obvious xp imbalances, 'cause they ain't balancing. after we diplomacy the ogre, does we go back and see if kill gives more xp in PoE? no. gosh.

 

You do realize that your example will be blown to pieces with metagaming as it was with bg. Maybe the metagaming won't affect the quest xp system, but it will still affect everything else. People who min/max attributes and skills will still do it to get the optimal solution and best rewards.

 

The sad thing is that you keep dodging the important questions, why should we care that a hand full of people chooses to play the game that way?

 

 

oh, and again, ‘cause some folks has very short attention spans, this entire debate is moot. There don’t exist the resources to change the mxp mechanic at this point, not that the developers believe it is warranted based on their firsthand observation o’ QA actual playing the game.

 

Now your are just talking out of your ass.

[Immortalis]

 

 

 

In fact *some* of the quest xp-only people are deliberately painting this as a binary choice when it isn't.

 

The *vast* majority of 'combat xp' proponents are in fact (as Msxyz points out) 'wider spread of xp reward methods' proponents, amongst which combat is only one.

sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing.

 

What a load of baloney. There's nothing stopping the devs from utterly separating combat from quests.

 

Take the Ogre quest in the beta. That one is worth 2000xp regardless of how you complete it. Therefore, the Gromnirs are the world are happy.

 

Now, what about the totally-unrelated-Lions on the other map? Hmm? Oh, I know! we can make them worth XP if they stomp on the party while they're exploring. Problem friggin solved.

 

getting 2000 xp for the ogre quest is admitted not the problem. getting 2000 xp for the ogre resolution and then trying to add in and balance awards for combats against the bugs and spiders you need to fight or avoid to get to the ogre, or perhaps awards for some other unexpected route to confronting the ogre the developers did not plan for, is what creates a Balancing problem.

 

is this genuine confusing? how?

 

the lions example is pointless with quest xp.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

 

Actually the opposite.. I think you hide behind this persona so you can always play off bad arguments as "I was trolling and didn't care".

 

I wouldn't bring it up if I could honestly understand everything you said perfectly. Whenever you enter the argument people start interpreting what your saying in different ways and it adds unnecessary confusion.

 

I admit you've tighten it up a bit.. you have switched to typing normally minus typos and referring to yourself in third person which is manageable for now.

It's when you try to do ye olde English when your background is not even modern English that things go to the gutter.

 

I believe your background is Brazil or Portugal ? I could be wrong..

[Stun]

ps:t is no better. is no way possible you can be honest and believe that ps:t approach were more simple and straightforward. you is showing you ain't even trying for reason.  and as for suggesting stealth deserves no xp, that further removes you from the realm o' rationale discourse, seeing as how an espoused goal o' PoE is to make all builds equal viable and rewarding.

And... No rebuttal. You've just spouted out a simple "nuh-uh!". You haven't demonstrated what's wrong with it and why.

 

Here, let me help you out. In the Drown Nations, you can do the Undead priest guy's quests, receive XP for them, and then run straight to the Rat Catacombs and receive Many-as-One's quest....which will require to pretty much kill everyone in the Drown nations (XP Double dip #1). But then you can return to Many-As-One, Show them them the Silent King's Skull and get XP for it.... and then Turn around and Kill Many-As-One (XP Double Dip #2).

 

Oh wait....Those aren't double dips at all. Those are LEGITIMATE, Story-based, Roleplaying, options. And if one were stupid enough to argue that such a betrayal-based playstyle is "unfair" because it rewards more XP than the "good, honest route", everyone else who's played PS:T can simply point out the f*cking obvious: that the XP difference isn't enough to matter at all, since you'll be receiving 10x the XP rewards from Pharod when you return from that dungeon with the Bronze Sphere.

 

Yep, PS:T's system is better than the garbage you're proposing. A lot better, since it offers Kill XP and quest XP. ie. it's a win-win.

 

sarex comments is simple silly. will respond quick 'cause is funny rather than contributing anything. quest xp precludes the possibility o' the most obvious exploits as no XP advantage for any particular build is possible.

He did say that the exploits would be different, yes? And Those differences will probably manifest themselves in the way of extreme metagaming exploits, unless they make every quest in the game as simplistic and one dimensional as the Ogre quest, where you need not have to actually rely on any build choices to achieve success. Edited August 29, 2014 by Stun

[Immortalis]

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1495117

 

people game the system. hell, we has mentioned numerous bg exploits. dual-class and then immediately add max spells to bg2 spellbook to gain multiple mage levels in less than a  minute. do the basilisk map in bg with a solo dual-class player to get them level'd quick. simplest "exploit" were the worst: encouraging folks to play combat focused to maximize xp, regardless o' what they might otherwise think were fun.

 

is a pleasant fantasy to believe folks don't game the xp system... just as folks gamed fallout special system. there were literal innumerable possible fallout builds, but only a handful o' builds actual got played. that were in part to maximize xp.

 

any game that has a balancing act for xp may be exploited... so obsidian removes the opportunity to eploit. if there is no advantage to olay combat-focused, people will be more likely to try other builds. should be obvious.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Actually This isn't even an argument against Kill XP. This is another dodge. Placing XP value on monsters does not cause XP exploits, provided those critters DIE when you kill them, or go away after you spare them. Yes?

 

You ruin Gromnir's arguments!

 

HEY.. Not So Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

didn't avoid the question of why should we care, we have answered many times, you just don't wanna hear. is a problem you exhibit frequent. might wanna have that checked out btw.

 

"PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest."

 

fallout is an example. is not a handful o' folks exploiting. is the fallout community as a whole quickly realizing that there were clear best builds. all those customization choices were largely pointless, 'cause only a handful o' actual builds were typical played. take out a major motivation for finding a best build, and you increase likelihood o' diversity.

 

as for talking out our arse about issue being moot or what developers has learned from QA. HA! 

 

perhaps you should ask the questions o' the folks with the answers before making such claims. you is the one talking out his arse.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

It's not a one off thing as regards XP.  If the entire system uses combat XP, then it has an impact on everyone.  I wish folks advocating combat XP would stop pretending that their method has no effect on folks that don't want combat XP whereas quest only XP places an undue burden on folks who oppose that view.  The fact is, there is a profound impact on either side in choosing one or the other.

 

I have never said that quest only is always better in every game.  I have even referenced some RPGs where I thought combat XP made sense (Diablo, which I *did* like), but I have said that in anything but a dedicated *action* RPG, quest only makes more sense.  I have suggested ways in which quest XP could be made somewhat more palatable to folks who need the immediate gratification of combat XP.

 

To further the point, I suggest something like (but of course only as a rough example):

 

goblins threaten town:

1  Killng all goblins:  900 xp (town saved)

2  convincing the goblins to sign a peace treaty 300 xp only to find out later they've slaughtered the whole town when they got the chance.  Players can then eradicate them to solve the problem for an additional 300 xp

3  convince outside group to invest in mining rights to nearby minerals that employs the goblins and townsfolk, creating a truly multi-cultural blossoming metropolis 1200 xp

4  Setting up a puppet state that enslaves the goblins and the townsfolk

 

While I wouldn't take 4, it's one case where the devs could include that 'evil' option.  However, there's always the possibility of redemption later and it might even have more rewards.  The point is, combat might yield the most xp in any given situation and maybe less xp in others.

 

EDIT:  for clarity

Edited August 29, 2014 by Cantousent

[Gromnir]

 

And... No rebuttal. You've just spouted out a simple "nuh-uh!". You haven't demonstrated what's wrong with it and why.

 

 

is so difficult to tell if you is being intentional obtuse for effect, or not. perplexing.

 

*sigh*

 

is not a "nuh-uh" argument. is axiomatic that NOT making any attempt to balance is easier than attempting to balance a myriad different xp award types. quest xp does not make any attempt to balance. it is therefore less resource intensive than ANY xp mechanic that attempts to do so. this should be so obvious that it is beyond question, but somehow it ain't.

 

and as for immortalis perception o' a change in our posting, that is your imagination. perhaps you has read more posts and become familiarized, or more likely, you don't wanna simple admit that you were caught by ye olde schmuck detector 2000. am not sure if that is a sign o' growth or regression on your part. curious.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 29, 2014 by Gromnir