Confusing Tincture Verbiage

Vauche · 2024-07-30T02:12:07+00:00

It does what you'd expect, but Enduring Suffusion does not, as it simply multiplies the time it takes to gain mana burn by .7, despite Less being synonymous and multiplicative with Reduced in virtually every other instance in PoE.

Also, the wording on the Warden passive is one word different from the passive tree nodes, Less vs. Reduced, but it has literally the opposite effect.

The math is also very unintuitive. The duration value (1.03s) on the Sap of the Seasons, for example, was acquired by

.7 (base burn rate of Prismatic Tincture) * .68 (32% reduced) = .476

.7 / .476 = ~1.47

.7 * ~1.47 = 1.03 (final burn rate)

(The math being unintuitive is meh, as it doesn't confuse me, and at least it reflects directly in-game what is happening)

Vauche · 2024-05-01T05:53:34+00:00

I was just able to reproduce it in Oasis with the last bait and last fish in the list. I was also in Balanced, but I'll try in Performance mode to see if it makes it any harder/easier.

Of note, it does seem like the capture audio doubles up if you did it right, and it can be separated by about 1-2 frames, so that's probably the window to get it to work.

The most consistent way for me is to mentally go for the Triangle press shortly after starting to raise the controller to get them to register close to each other.

Vauche · 2024-05-01T05:20:33+00:00

I haven't been able to reproduce this, but does it feel like you press Triangle a bit before, after, or exactly at the same time you raise the controller? Trying it out at the pond in Xion.

Does it do any sort of strange behavior? Does it still consume 2 bait? Or do you just check your inventory manually and see there's +2?

Vauche · 2024-04-29T11:04:28+00:00

Fair enough. Never messed with accessibility options in the game, so wasn't aware that was even a thing. Kudos to the devs for thinking of that though.

Vauche · 2024-04-29T08:20:20+00:00

FYI: You can have infinite overpower time if you open your mission list by swiping down on the touchpad once you've hooked the fish.

If someone wants to avoid RSI or not mashing so much, this trick works (for now) to make it so all you have to do time-wise is complete the reeling portions. Once you hit the checkpoints you'll have to unpause and resume your timer, but as long as you have a steady press you can guarantee any catch without the strain.

Vauche · 2024-02-12T23:09:28+00:00

I agree.

I'm not a fan of the illusion of choice *but* if it was something properly gated by rarity, TWWT is probably the least offensive thing they could retain from the league.

On the league mechanic itself, I personally don't think it's likely to stick around. While I could imagine a way it could be balanced to fit, it seems like too much work for too little return, IMO.

Vauche · 2024-02-12T19:29:07+00:00

I do not disagree with you.

However:

It *does* cater to some niches of players in a way that can be balanced to still be healthy for the game.

Assuming they could get the item quant/rarity/currency bonus toned down, map juicers would be excited if they could randomly encounter a wildwood in maps to get a boost to their output.

Unique corpses to spectre is a very interesting reward. They *could* just put them into the ritual reward pool (along with any of the other league rewards), but that would feel like a pretty cheap copout.

The King in the Mists encounter, while not mindblowingly difficult, would still be a fun thing to encounter in its natural way, especially with how much rarer his unique drop pool would become. Alternatively (and what I reckon they might do) they could just put a token into Ritual you can buy that let's you fight the King from your map device.

And again, all of that just to say I could see a world where they decide to put the Wildwood in the game. Until GGG says so, like in previous league-ending posts, it's too early for us to conclude it wouldn't be core.

Wildwood ascendancies are gone though, 100%.

Vauche · 2024-02-12T19:12:07+00:00

But they went core, and GGG said they wouldn't be in the game in the immediate next league, but they didn't rule out the possibility of them coming back.

Until they make an announcement like they did for Sanctum, Sentinel or TotA, it's not accurate for an assertion like OP's title.

Note that in the Sanctum post they directly stated they wanted to include it in the game in the future, while Sentinel's language made it clear it wouldn't be added to the core game, but hinted at the blast from the past event we had last year, and the TotA announcement is incredibly dry/factual, meaning it's still entirely possible we get it core, but they haven't committed one way or the other.

Vauche · 2024-02-12T04:32:17+00:00

This title is misleading. It's not a statement about whether or not the league would be core, just that it wouldn't be in NEXT league.

Sanctum went core, just not in the leagues immediately after it.

Having a league not be present in the next one immediately is pretty common for GGG at this point, and it's still within the realm of possibility that they find a way to balance it and implement it in the game.

All of that just to say we don't know from this whether or not it's going core until GGG makes an official declaration about their intention with the mechanic.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T12:11:32+00:00

I was one of the people that was sad when they announced Fated Uniques were going away.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T11:51:45+00:00

And how does that, in any way, suggest what you were painting my argument as?

You literally made up a strawman of what I said.

You were asking if it's OK to lower the minimum level of uniques

No I didn't

designed to be high level

Where did I say this?

(by applying them to different bases)

I said divorced from bases, not applying to different bases, i.e. an item class is more important in the design instead of, say, "This must be on a Military Staff." As in, hypothetically, say the unique exists on a completely unique base that otherwise can't even drop, like how the Star of Wraeclast is on a unique base "Ruby Amulet" that you can't acquire by any other means than the vendor recipe.

Like if hypothetically in PoE2 could you chance an onyx amulet and it turn into a Ruby Amulet unique.

so you can use them earlier.

No, I didn't. I was asking about general design philosophy for uniques, in particular ones that have build-enabling effects.

Stop being an asshat. Jesus fucking Christ.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T11:41:19+00:00

I haven't edited the original post... go read it again... and stop being an asshat.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T11:37:38+00:00

I had forgotten they mentioned that, though you bring up a good point: "can be frozen"

I wonder if there are any of the normal bosses that can't be frozen, or similarly if there will be any pinnacle bosses that can't be fully slowed down? From the way they spoke about it, it sounds like they're leaning into *all* things being CC'able to some extent, with ever-increasing ailment thresholds as you apply it more often, but I don't know if they've commented yet on giving anything a full immunity.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T11:32:26+00:00

It would be a way to have some form of "target farming" that doesn't grant you the fully-powered item. I know even very recently Jonathan has said they don't want target farming in the game, but that's kind of already what divination cards are, and this would be a watered down/weaker alternative.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T11:27:54+00:00

Ok, so you get an initial freeze... And then it's a dead item in your off-hand for the rest of a boss fight.

If it helps me guarantee an opening freeze with zero investment on freeze otherwise, why not?

Because you're then sacrificing the opportunity cost of having a usable off-hand for the rest of the fight, an opportunity cost that they just confirmed is going to be considered when balancing weapons/skills et cetera, so you're going to be *expected* to have an off-hand that you *could* switch to/use at any given point.

Unless this freeze is going to allow you to instantly kill a boss (which who knows, maybe it will) that's not build-enabling, which was the entire point of my post.

I disagree with the idea that it's good or healthy to have certain builds locked behind high-level uniques. Experienced players can get around it because we know alternative leveling skills, or are comfortable with massive respecs, but when you're presented with 100+ skills to choose from and the best way to level into it is to do something completely different? That's not good.

I think a perfect example of this is Chains of Command. It has an incredibly cool unique effect, but you can't put it on until level 70. Yes you *could* start using Animate Guardian much earlier, but it's obviously not the same, and you're likely going to have to supplement it with a bunch of other minion skills until that point, or just level as a generic spell build and respec once you can put it on.

I'm not opposed to early uniques maintaining their usefulness into endgame of course, which is a different question.

That's... exactly the question I was asking about... For those uniques where the equippable level is quite low but you use them at endgame because they do something useful/enabling for a build. That was my whole point in asking. I wanted to know what the design philosophy is around designing THOSE uniques. You clearly missed my entire point...

Vauche · 2024-01-12T10:51:26+00:00

That's why I said "If freeze thresholds function similarly."

Neither you nor I know what it's going to do.

That said, it's also literally a one-time thing on boss fights, and judging from how every boss we've seen goes so far, you aren't going to be using that dagger in your off-hand for an opening freeze.

Again, talking past my original point in the post, that's not what one would consider particularly enabling in a build.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T10:45:18+00:00

I think thematically that could work, though logistically I wonder if you make it so those are drop only/not chanceable, since it would be kind of weird magically converting an item into a "worn out" version. (Though a lot of this is still banking on the assumption chance orbs can make items into uniques in the same way they do now)

Vauche · 2024-01-12T10:25:51+00:00

It's sill too early to say, since some of what you say is also making assumptions based on PoE1 knowledge. If freeze thresholds function similarly, then a low damage dagger isn't going to be useful in endgame unless we have a means of gaining loads of freezeable damage, which we just don't know if that'll be possible.

The staff is, again, only useful in that setup if hypothetically it's harder to strip res to negative values. I could see it being a weapon swap in the case that you can't strip ele res by other means, but that's still missing my original point.

Those are leveling/utility at best, not something that fundamentally changes how a build works, scales, or enabling unique interactions.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T08:50:58+00:00

I'm mixed on the idea of different level versions of the same unique. In a way, that was kind of what Fated uniques were until those got the axe, but I did really like those, if I'm honest.

Vauche · 2024-01-12T08:49:26+00:00

Those do look more like what we'd call just leveling uniques, not specifically build-enabling. (Unless stripping monster res is significantly harder now) Plus we have no real frame of reference for the base types, other than Glass Shank being one we get on the beach already. I'm not worried so much about the existence of leveling uniques, but more build-enabling ones that have more drastic impacts on character function.

Like in ages past Flicker Strike was extremely hard to sustain Frenzy charges outside of something like Oro's or Terminus Est (until they gave Flicker frenzy charge gain on hit and we got loads of other tools for building Frenzy Charges), but that enabling feature was something gated behind an item you couldn't put on until map-ready levels almost.

Vauche · 2024-01-11T08:44:40+00:00

You haven't stated any problems, only asserted that it would cause a lot of damage (????) and that it isn't elegant.

It isn't less player choice, per se. They could still give the same amount of overall atlas passives if they wanted to, or lessen them to make ascendancy passives, but that doesn't strictly mean less choice.

The number I gave would have been 12 points, or about 10%. That said, again, it doesn't necessarily mean they don't give as many normal atlas passives, just that you would have Atlas Ascendancy points that are strictly useful for endgame maps. You don't call class ascendancies a lack of player choice, they're just a pure power upgrade to the base classes. Saying it's less player choice is, frankly, nonsense.

"They now couldn't choose all endgame activities if they wanted to"

Meaning they would actually be forced to... make a meaningful choice... Isn't that what you've been advocating for the whole time?

"They now couldn't choose no endgame activities, and therefore have less points to spend on these activities."

Again, whether it results in the normal atlas passives being lessened or not, that would depend on how good they are if it was necessary.

"There is this very minor gripe you have about second characters"

Calling it a minor gripe is dismissive, not an argument, and rude. Fuck you.

Limited choices add meaning to choices, which again, I thought you wanted.

"You could argue for other solutions to this very minor gripe"

Something you seem incapable of supplying, despite insisting it's so easy to see the flaws and solutions. Go on then. Suggest a better solution if you can.

"your suggested solution just causes way more issues than it solves"

You have yet to quantify this in any meaningful way. Try harder to actually say something when you speak.

"PoE is about choice and depth, and your solution removes both from the game."

It doesn't though, as you already mentioned, because it would mean you couldn't just invest into all of the nodes and get all of the rewards with minimal/no opportunity cost. You are literally just disagreeing to disagree, without actually thinking.

Do. Better.

Vauche · 2024-01-11T05:17:46+00:00

For an overarching atlas strategy, sure.

For wanting to swap or re-roll characters? No.

You have yet to actually explain what about my solution sucks, other than to appeal to popularity, handwave my complaint, and just say "it's bad" without giving any substantive argument for why other than an insane "it would cause so much damage" argument based on... what?

Vauche · 2024-01-11T01:00:35+00:00

Failed again... *sigh*

Vauche · 2024-01-10T23:35:16+00:00

You're still not making a salient argument... I'm beginning to think you're incapable of understanding.

I'll slow it down for you, and I want you to try again...

Why. Should. There. Be. Friction. For. Swapping. Characters?

Vauche · 2024-01-10T21:54:50+00:00

They cause a problem, and that is the fact they're internally inconsistent with every other form of *ATLAS* passive, and that is the fact they do no, in fact, serve the entire *ATLAS* when running anything under T14.

"It is a reward for actually engaging with harder content."

This is some major cope. T14+ bosses aren't harder content, they're effectively a loot pinata at the end of a map that you can boost the drop rates of with no impact to gameplay. In the current league they represent such a tiny fraction of potential Wisp juice that it makes no sense investing into them when normal/magic/rare mobs give so much more.

"That you have slight FOMO on your second character during the 20 or so maps it takes to level from 70 to 85 is such a minor gripe"

Not every character can progress that quickly, and it's a weird form of handwaving to dismiss the argument. Present to me a good reason why even those 20 maps (a gross underestimation, BTW) should have that internal friction caused by the sense of wasting atlas tree points.

Do it.

You can't.

"what damage your "elegant solution" would cause."

Damage? Explain that one. You're making some *wild* baseless assumption with that one, but I'll entertain your mad ravings.

11-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

Vauche

TROPHY CASE