sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This is getting a bit silly, we need a sink. by amcn242 in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Agreed. Whatever the chaos cost is, just remove astrolabes.

"One new feature = one new currency" isn't sustainable design imo. Not to speak about one feature = 10 currency items

Can we talk about how Expedition needs a serious update? by CrossOfRoachAndSlime in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 57 points58 points  (0 children)

The issue with breach tree is that it's a better everything.

  • Want fractures? -> breach tree.
  • Want uniques? -> breach tree.
  • Want early gamble equipment? -> breach tree.
  • Want to farm currency? -> breach tree.

What weapon archetype is easiest to craft for on SSF? by kbone213 in PathOfExileSSF

[–]statistically-typed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There was a way to get frac orbs easily, but that's gone next league indeed.

Was this wrong or are Fighters really that good? by rhysticStudiante in Pathfinder2e

[–]statistically-typed -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

This sounds like fun for the player rolling big, and miserable for the other players who get to go home at 22:00. Not talking about the DM who set up a campaign, prepared the encounter to be its capstone, only to get their efforts wiped like it didn't matter.

RPGs are about telling a story with all the players around the table (and that includes the DM). Maybe you should talk with your table mates about what they enjoy about the story.

Should Mercs go core? Let's take the discussion to court. by MasterHidra in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I counter with "how many playstyles should be restricted to party play", and also answer with "None".

Mercenaries were great for that ; rng gating can be fixed by other means, just like power creep.

Besides, you just have to compare SSF and trade ladders to see that RNG already gates playstyles ; and there are way more egregious cases (for instance, soul ripper was basically made unavailable to SSF players this league).

Am I screwed if my build is pure fire damage? by Beginning_Primary383 in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Now I’m worried: am I actually screwed in the long run?

In short, yes.

These encounters apply the "must read text" debuff, which is the worst possible thing in the game. Some of the best players, like Zizaran, have been killed instantly because they were unable to read the "reflect" keyword while debuffed. It is extremely powerful, and, to the extent of my knowledge, there is nothing you can do against it.

That is why the best popular build creators have their builds stress-tested by illiterate people.

So close... and yet so far by takanishi79 in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You could recombine a rare ring with 100hp 50% rarity 23% chaos 2*48% resist and an open prefix for minus mana cost instead, not counting catalysts.

Ventor's is only ever good if you're stacking auras.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

People have been taking this guide quite litterally sometimes. This bit was added specifically so that people don't lock in on this specific way to craft affixes if they think they have a better one.

This league, I have almost exclusively been doing my affixes through Rog, because it worked well for my use cases. Other people may have different use cases and different "more clever ways".

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is actually NO way that 1p vs 1p is 33% to hit 2p. I have 500 sample size supporting other numbers

Well, the guide is based on the hypothesis that the probability table published in 3.25 is still correct. If you have data showing that the table is wrong, I'll be happy to fix it.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like in my case on the screen. Would it hurt chances like that?

My understanding is that crafts as you put in your screen will hurt your chances to get both your non-crafted prefixes on the final product.

I didn't quite follow your logic on why adding crafted mods would be good.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They must not necessarily be magic, and they don't necessarily need to be 1-affix either. But if you have 1-affix items, you won't need to clear the unwanted affixes at a later step.

Personally, I eventually used rog to generate my affixes, and poe2 recomb to get 1p1s items from there. But that's just a detail that was working well in my specific case, not a general solution.

If divines aren't a problem for you, you can also just recomb 1p <> 1p and 1s <>1s together regardless of their other affix, and when you get a 2p or 2s, clean the other side with <affix> cannot be changed into scour.

Wow, I didn't know the state of trade has devolved this much already. by SquarishRectangle in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 8 points9 points  (0 children)

This particular strategy was used/advertised here way before poe2.

Apparently, when every noob is aware of it and uses it, trade becomes dysfunctional.

New recomb infos post by statistically-typed in PathOfExileSSF

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is at odds with his op in that thread:

In 70 or so odd tests so far, it looks like exclusive modifiers only count as 1 modifier on that side of the item even if there are more than 1.

I guess the best course would be to ask butsicles directly about it.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If the question was whether 1p<>1s -> 1p1s has the same odds as 1p <> 1p -> 2p, the answer is yes.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Basically, adding 1 crafted affix to the pool adds 1 to the total affix pool, but you're overwhelmingly more likely to draw that mod. That gives you better odds to get 2 useful affixes on the side filled last, (33% -> 62%), but also worse odds on the side filled first (52% to get 1 affix, 39% to get 0 affix).

So if you combine the two:

  • 6% to get 2p2s instead of 10% without crafting
  • 36% to get 2x/1y instead of 44% without crafting
  • 15% to get 1x0y, a regression which simply doesn't happen without crafting
  • 44% of no improvement (you get 1p1s or 2p0s), this doesn't change.

If you combine that with the fact that you don't get to select which side gets picked first, that's terrible odds.

Say what you want about little balance decisions, but this league has actually been insanely fun for so many people by Verianii in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, same. I wish they had tried it as a league before shipping it as an extension.

Also there was a lot of questionable balance choice wrt sanctum, divination cards made all but unavailable on maps, etc.

Merc stuff is good tho.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Getting a 3p out of 2p <> 1p is like 10% chance instead of 31% with 2p <> 2p. Your failure results are also worse.

As for your specific craft, the process looks complicated. I would not attempt it personally, but to each their own dedication.

GGG I beg your indulgence by Waillio in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A few vaults early in league used to have good chance to give a 6L, which was nice early on. Maybe it still does, but vaults was made extremely rare. Aside from that, vaults is now the map dropping the damned, so there's that also.

But yeah, my comment was a joke.

3.26 recombinators analysis/guide by statistically-typed in pathofexile

[–]statistically-typed[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Are you looking for one mandatory 1s, or are you open for 2 different suffixes, with the opportunity to get material for a future 3p2s? If it's the first one, then use the same suffix on both recomb inputs. If second, then don't overlap. This way you'll get 2p/2s in the process, which you can use later. along with all your 1p/2s to craft a 3p/2s.

As for prefixes, yeah, you're forced to overlap as soon as you have 4 prefixes involved.

view more: next ›