nzer

I'm not in favor of increasing inf rewards as a solution to this problem, but I do very much doubt changes in low level inf rewards would move the needle at all on inflation. A single fire farmer probably makes more in ten minutes than a new player's first character would make in its entire journey to 50.

That would only be the case if you couldn't level out of them. Because you can, whether they became more or less affordable depends on the ratio of the increases. If XP was increased more then inf gain, for example, they would become less affordable because you would level out of them more quickly.

I'm not saying you said the devs were infallible. I'm saying the argument you're making requires them to have been infallible, otherwise it's not a sound argument. There are like four different comments immediately above this one demonstrating that your reasoning is unfounded. Where's your proof?

No, they're not. Their argument was that the devs intended for players to be able to fill their enhancement slots at level 20+, and that is still their argument. They categorically can't be moving the goalposts if their argument isn't changing. You're trying to use the fact that the devs set the rates and never changed them as evidence that all the results of those particular rates were intentional. That's a reasonable argument, but it's still just a supposition, because the original devs were not infallible. So it is also reasonable for someone to disagree with that based on other pieces of evidence, which is exactly what's happening.

They're not moving the goalposts, your argument is genuinely fallacious. The original devs were not infallible, so you can't assume something being the way it is is concrete proof it was intended to be that way. Charitably, the disagreement is indeed just a difference of opinion.

Good thing their argument doesn't rely on that then.

This is such a ridiculous reason to oppose potential improvements. The game is not perfect, not even at what it's trying to be. And Homecoming is already different from live in a lot of fairly major ways, so this ship has sailed. If you're looking at Homecoming and having this thought, you're failing to recognize what "the game" even is.

This is a slippery slope fallacy, no one is suggesting removing all challenge from the game. In fact I don't see anyone talking about challenge at all, except the people trying to dismiss the suggestion. Again, the root of the issue here is the expectation among new players that they'll be able to fill the slots the game keeps giving them. It has nothing to do with difficulty.

Getting multiple warnings over this kind of thing when the issue being brought up is so completely uncontroversial, especially when it was ostensibly caused by a change you yourself disagreed with, should probably be cause for some amount of self-reflection. If it was me, at least.

Clearly not, based on the consistent stream of posts about this. If you're going to continue refusing to acknowledge any kind of criticism of the game at all on the grounds that the original devs could do no wrong and the game is perfect the way it is, we're done talking. We're also apparently going to just ignore that TOs are a thing that existed in the original game and were only removed here on Homecoming. Why exactly are we pretending that not being able to fill your enhancement slots is how the game was meant to be when it is only the case because the cheapest enhancements were removed?

Rudra, what on earth are you talking about? The problem here is that when the game gives the player enhancement slots to assign to their powers the player expects to be able to use those slots, while the game is (allegedly, according to you) actually designed around the player not using all of those slots. As I already said literally just minutes ago, misalignment between player expectation and design intent is a player experience issue. And both of the links you posted confirm this. So can you please not be aggressively contrarian about everything? It isn't productive for anyone in this thread.

That's irrelevant, because, as I've said multiple times now, this is not about effectiveness. It's about the player experience.

You have to realize it's obvious you couldn't have had time to actually read those articles in the 30 seconds between our posts, right? Take a few minutes and try actually doing that, and you'll see that misalignment between the player's perception of a mechanic and the design intent of the mechanic is a textbook player experience issue. Not that this is even relevant, since the point I'm making is obvious even if you don't know exactly what the term "player experience" means, but clearly you need something to be contrarian about. Yes, exactly. This kind of thing is poor design, which is why, more than a decade ago, spells in WoW were changed to be automatically unlocked at no charge when you reached the required level. And prior to that they were changed to not have multiple ranks, which made unlocking them immediately feasible with just the gold acquired from leveling.

Then you don't have a correct understanding of what the term "player experience" means, and I suggest you look it up. Equipment slots in WoW are inherent, you have all of them at level one. A better comparison would be if WoW required an exorbitant amount of gold to slot each talent point, far in excess of what you could actually afford by the level the talent point was earned.

Irrelevant, as the concern here is not about balance. It's a poor player experience to award things the player is not intended to use. This has already been brought up and addressed. Even with DOs, it's not feasible for a player to fill their slots without special knowledge about inf-making and the AH. If this is true, the expectation is ill-conceived and should be reevaluated. Players should not have to make use of an auction house to make use of basic game features.