The XP for Combat Megathread! DISCUSS!

[Lhynn]

You can have different rewards for doing stuff differently even without kill XP, but there's no better way to undermine player agency than dish out the biggest amount of XP for doing things in one specific way, even if it makes zero sense in the specific situation. As a resource XP is superior to everything else, and trying to somehow balance it with in-game consequences would be a daring but ultimately hopeless endeavor.

Would it? how can you know? XP isnt that important, only in really XP starved games in which leveling means everything. It wasnt in BGII, and in BGI the low level cap made it so that it wasnt really an issue either, at least after you got a couple levels under your belt. So again, you talk out of your ass. Good unique items would be more valuable than 1/8 your level.

Yes, you didn't care, even though in your previous post you just said that reactivity is one of the two things that makes people care, and it's only a quest that determines the future of an entire town or something. I wonder why Obsidian were so lazy, because obviously it would have been incredibly easy to implement reactivity that would make the players *care*, even in the case that the game's mechanics would heavily favor the playstyle that you already resorted to without any kind of extra incentive like kill XP. I'm also sure that you knew on your first playthrough what the consequences of this big side quest during the first few hours of the game would be and decided to just go full retard with it.

The game didnt make me care, it was a shit place that almost murdered 2 of your team members before you recruited them. I wasnt aware of the consequences, i just didnt care, i was chatting on the shoutbox as i was doing it, i have witnesses. it was a lazy set up to a decent place that was brought down by the game many flaws. Reactivity makes you care if you are invested in both the situation and the outcome, poe doesnt set either properly.

Well, it seems I you mentioned the examples for me already. SSR was super linear and therefore a special case, but Bloodlines definitely fits the bill, and PoE's XP system would've definitely been better had it adopted the same approach without all of those compromises. Another obvious example is Deus Ex, which is pretty much the single best game when it comes to doing stuff in different ways (Human Revolution, on the other hand, is a cautionary tale about the dangers of combat XP). If you think those games are irrelevant and instead want me to name a really good party-based isometric cRPG with different solutions to quests and only quest XP, I'm unfortunately at a loss, although I'm not sure how that matters considering that it's equally hard to come up with examples of games where ditching combat XP completely sucked (and no, PoE doesn't cut it because Sawyer chickened out instead of going all the way).

Also note that I never even said anything about quest XP, so for instance use-based systems can fit the bill just as well, or systems where character development is based on training that uses time and/or money as a resource. Basically anything that doesn't always reward murder is a likely improvement if you want to encourage different playstyles.

If you are even suggesting VtMB is even remotely similar in structure to a medieval fantasy game like BG i guess we are done talking. I can quote many examples where kill xp worked better, including the games this game draws inspiration from, i have no idea why you want to change the formula but i can tell you this much, no matter its implementation, its gun b shaite.
Deus ex hasnt got a similar estructure either, so its out.

 

[A horse of course]

XP triggers

hammering nails with microscope

Assuming player will sensibly only choose one of the routes (let's say player has every reason to believe there will be no loot, only resource attrition)? Player who backtracks will be overleveled and rewarded for failing to manage resources.

An RPG player will sensibly assume that doing 100% of content in a dungeon will give them an advantage and make them stronger in the long run, as is the norm in most games. Players who take the shortest/easiest routes do so because they want to get through content as quickly as possible, not because they think it will actually benefit their party.

 

[RK47]

That's because skipping it hurts the player more than doing it. Oh, you're heavily wounded? Head out, roast marshmallows. Or...return to free inn at Gilded Vale, return there with half the guard roster still dead and the moat still laid open, welcoming you to your slaughterhouse. Why? Because this makes sense.
Were it up to me, I'd make it tougher for people to return to the Hold after the first aggressive visit.

 

[Zombra]

Could you on your inevitable answer post some examples of games that successfully did away with combat xp in favor of quest? Dont just pull it out of your ass, show me something. And dont bring irrelevant examples like SSR or VtMB.

lol, your anticipation of a cogent rebuttal doesn't make it irrelevant.

 

[Lhynn]

Could you on your inevitable answer post some examples of games that successfully did away with combat xp in favor of quest? Dont just pull it out of your ass, show me something. And dont bring irrelevant examples like SSR or VtMB.

lol, your anticipation of a cogent rebuttal doesn't make it irrelevant.

Its been brought up before, and rejected as a valid example. because the structure and pacing of those games is completely different from the one BG had and PoE tries to emulate.
SSR has a mission based structure that revolves around a hub area, it makes sense to reward objectives, but the meat of the game consist on getting the job done, not on fighting or exploring. There are several ways this canb e achieved, and every mission is self contained, makes sense to give you the reward for partial objectives and discoveries as you fulfill them and a final reward as you finish the job, as a reward you get better at doing jobs.
VtMB is much like SSR, except with a much less important combat, where a lot of your skills are meant for world interaction, thus it should be clear that you should be rewarding just that, reward the players for interacting with your world.
PoE has you fighting hordes of enemies but rewarding by significantly increasing all your combat related stats, granting you unique combat related abilities, and giving you a minor bonus in a world interaction related skill, this all achieved by getting an item to an NPC, its jarring, it makes the combat feel useless, a waste of time. This also has been brought up in the past.

Now are you done being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian and willing to put forward an actual argument zombra?

 

[Zombra]

So if POE was built differently than no combat XP would be okay?

Wait ... your "solution" above to make combat XP be no problem was "simply" to "add reactivity" ... in other words, if POE was built differently (your way) to fully support combat XP, then it could have combat XP and it would be good.

This really seems to be a case of you wanting what you want because you want it, and bending all possible interpretations on that basis.

 

[Lhynn]

If you could stop strawmaning for a second maybe we could get somewhere, you seem p. set in doing it tho.

If PoE was built differently then yes, probably no combat XP would be the way to go, probably no exp at all, probably it would be better if doing stuff got you green green, red and yellow orbs, if poe was built differently maybe your characters would level up based on how much you ran that morning, what the fuck does that have to do with this conversation tho? If your question is, are there more suitable ways to reward different types of games? then the very obvious answer is yes.


If the game was more than a series of trash fights and boring exposition, then i would give more of a shit about poe xp distribution. as it is i just dont. I just dont want to see it in actual fantasy rpgs about adventuring.

"but lhynn you create bad habits" what the fuck kind of bad habit did baldurs gate create? the first real fight you got probably ends up in you getting owned by a mage with mirror image and after that you probably killed the poor woman at that needed the ring just because it was exp, after that the next victim was probably the drunkard at the tavern in beregost, after solving the thing peacefully, cool, a bit more exp. After that nothing, you get to lvl 2 and suddenly exp isnt such a pressing concern, you get to lvl 3 and you are playing the game and enjoying and you forgot about that shit you did before. On your second run you wont even bother with those things.

Some of you bring up examples of bear hunting or whatever the fuck, never did it, if i wanted to lvl up id just get the console commands and be over with it. But then again, poe gameplay doesnt really improve as you level up, and you dont really find anything above your level because of gated content and all that shit, so leveling artificially seems p. fucking retarded, combat xp or no combat xp.

Holy fucking christ, you guys never stop, you cant bring forward a decently constructed argument but that wont stop you, you hide behind fallacies, put the proof of burden on others or try to pass the most retarded notions as facts when the truth is right fucking there, exclusive quest XP on a game such as this does not work, it feels out of place, it disrupts the flow of the game, it tingles my cock the wrong way.
I level up because i found the father of some brave dead kid, me, eder, durance, Carina (my rogue) level up, our hp goes up, our endurance goes up, our deflection goes up, our accuracy goes up. whatever, i level them up and get on with it.
I kill Firkraah, Korgan and Viconia level up, i get a new sword for keldorn and feel like a badass, new found confidence in the player to play the game coincides with him beating a suitable challenge and his team getting stronger. Its fitting.

Now im not gonna say BGII did it perfectly, some XP rewards for seemingly stupid simple fedex quest were tru the roof, weve talked about this before, but it was generally perceived as one of this games fucking flaw, how did the flaw become the standard for the spiritual sequel?

 

[Immortal]

So if POE was built differently than no combat XP would be okay?

Wait ... your "solution" above to make combat XP be no problem was "simply" to "add reactivity" ... in other words, if POE was built differently (your way) to fully support combat XP, then it could have combat XP and it would be good.

This really seems to be a case of you wanting what you want because you want it, and bending all possible interpretations on that basis.

Are you purposefully being dense.. This game has shit progression why are you still trying.. You had a leg to stand on before the Backer Beta released, now it's just laughable, Objective XP oh man what a joke.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Well, it seems I you mentioned the examples for me already. SSR was super linear and therefore a special case, but Bloodlines definitely fits the bill, and PoE's XP system would've definitely been better had it adopted the same approach without all of those compromises. Another obvious example is Deus Ex, which is pretty much the single best game when it comes to doing stuff in different ways (Human Revolution, on the other hand, is a cautionary tale about the dangers of combat XP). If you think those games are irrelevant and instead want me to name a really good party-based isometric cRPG with different solutions to quests and only quest XP, I'm unfortunately at a loss, although I'm not sure how that matters considering that it's equally hard to come up with examples of games where ditching combat XP completely sucked (and no, PoE doesn't cut it because Sawyer chickened out instead of going all the way).

Bloodlines doesn't fit the bill and especially not Deus Ex, they're games that are very differently structured than PoE which is why you'll never see anyone arguing for Combat XP in a FPS/Stealth/RPG hybrid. Even though it has few combat heavy areas (which was a mistake IMO) you can still sneak past/talk your way out of atleast 80% of the content in Bloodlines while in DX you can stealth past nearly everything, PoE is a trash mob genocide simulator in comparison. Furthermore, in Bloodlines and DX stealth vs combat is also a character development choice (in terms of skills and abilities), in PoE every class is a combat class no ifs and buts.

Also note that I never even said anything about quest-only XP, so for instance use-based systems can fit the bill just as well, or systems where character development is based on training that uses time and/or money as a resource. Basically anything that doesn't always reward murder is a likely improvement if you want to encourage different playstyles.

Maybe, that's mostly all theory. All I know is that in practice, implementing quest only XP (very different than Objective XP) in a very combat heavy game (with an undeveloped and limiting stealth system) turned out to be a lousy idea as far as I'm concerned. All the arguments I've read in favour of quest only XP fell in water once I actually played and finished the game.

I think you just have to decide what kind of game you want to make, a BG/IWD successor or a game that is about different approaches, C&C and set-piece encounters (light on trash combat and outright hostile creatures). You can't make everything at once, especially not on a tight (relatively speaking) budget and timeframe.

 

[Zombra]

If you could stop strawmaning for a second maybe we could get somewhere, you seem p. set in doing it tho.

Shrug. It's easier to call people on dumb stuff said than to really dig in and construct a case. Besides, DraQ is handling that side pretty well. Feel free to just not respond to my posts if you find them insubstantial. Not kidding, if I'm talking shit, the best response is no response. No hard feelings.

If your question is, are there more suitable ways to reward different types of games? then the very obvious answer is yes.

Good. There seem to be people out there for whom kill xp is some kind of holy grail. Glad to see you're open to alternatives.

"but lhynn you create bad habits" what the fuck kind of bad habit did baldurs gate create? the first real fight you got probably ends up in you getting owned by a mage with mirror image and after that you probably killed the poor woman at that needed the ring just because it was exp, after that the next victim was probably the drunkard at the tavern in beregost, after solving the thing peacefully, cool, a bit more exp. After that nothing, you get to lvl 2 and suddenly exp isnt such a pressing concern, you get to lvl 3 and you are playing the game and enjoying and you forgot about that shit you did before. On your second run you wont even bother with those things.

Would you be OK with the removal of harmless old lady xp?

Some of you bring up examples of bear hunting or whatever the fuck, never did it, if i wanted to lvl up id just get the console commands and be over with it.

So instead of cheesing the game, you advocate simple cheating? Are these really the best choices we can come up with?

But then again, poe gameplay doesnt really improve as you level up, and you dont really find anything above your level because of gated content and all that shit, so leveling artificially seems p. fucking retarded, combat xp or no combat xp.

No argument here.

Holy fucking christ, you guys never stop, you cant bring forward a decently constructed argument but that wont stop you, you hide behind fallacies, put the proof of burden on others or try to pass the most retarded notions as facts when the truth is right fucking there, exclusive quest XP on a game such as this does not work, it feels out of place, it disrupts the flow of the game, it tingles my cock the wrong way.

No argument here either - but as we've seen, your cock and mine are different; so don't expect arguments based on your cock to convince me of the ideal system for this game or any other.

Are you purposefully being dense.. This game has shit progression why are you still trying.. You had a leg to stand on before the Backer Beta released, now it's just laughable, Objective XP oh man what a joke.

Who are you talking to? I'm just lashing out with an occasional jab whenever I see an easy target. I never said POE's xp system was perfect. I still haven't seen a convincing argument for kill xp though.

 

[Carrion]

Would it? how can you know? XP isnt that important, only in really XP starved games in which leveling means everything. It wasnt in BGII, and in BGI the low level cap made it so that it wasnt really an issue either, at least after you got a couple levels under your belt. So again, you talk out of your ass. Good unique items would be more valuable than 1/8 your level..

Items can be replaced with better ones and gold can be spent, but XP is eternal and will give you an edge for the rest of the game. In basic gameplay the route of most XP is generally the superior one to take, even if it means getting fewer items and a bit less money (although in most games you get the most experience AND the most loot AND the most money if you kill everyone). If you're directly confronted with the choice of either choosing a meager amount of XP or a unique Vorpal Sword of Doom +5, then yeah, I suppose it can be a difficult choice on its own, but that's something you can only use in very special circumstances and which, again, has to be added in manually everywhere in the game. You're saying that PoE is different in structure from VTMB and DX (which it is), but the solution you're proposing is something that would ideally fit a game with either exceptionally good and complex mechanics regarding the consequences of killing stuff (most likely not happening anytime soon) or a very tight focus on quests and hand-placed encounters and little free-form exploration ― in short, a game more like Bloodlines or Deus Ex than Baldur's Gate. If you want to solve the issue in a more open game with a heavy focus on exploration, where the player is ideally free to do what he wants, you'll want to come up with a systemic solution rather than trying to fix it with bubble gum.

If you are even suggesting VtMB is even remotely similar in structure to a medieval fantasy game like BG i guess we are done talking. I can quote many examples where kill xp worked better, including the games this game draws inspiration from, i have no idea why you want to change the formula but i can tell you this much, no matter its implementation, its gun b shaite.
Deus ex hasnt got a similar estructure either, so its out.

I'm not suggesting anything, those are examples where the lack of kill XP undoubtedly makes the game better, and just because it hasn't been properly done or even tried in a different type of game doesn't mean that it couldn't be done. I suppose the BG formula is OK if your game is designed to be a genocide simulator to begin with, which unfortunately applies to a lot of the less interesting content in PoE.

 

[Cadmus]

XP triggers

hammering nails with microscope

Beats hammering nails with your dick.

For starters, kill XP based system is a massive disincentive for not just quest but also area design that goes beyond a corridor or a tree.

Want alternative routes with alternative challenges? Bam, problem.
Assuming player will sensibly only choose one of the routes (let's say player has every reason to believe there will be no loot, only resource attrition)? Player who backtracks will be overleveled and rewarded for failing to manage resources.
Assume player will backtrack? Player who goes right through will be underleveled, also, why make alternative routes then? - just make a corridor.

Meanwhile with XP triggers you just slap XP reward where the paths reconverge and move to the next thing.

Dude who the fuck takes 1 of the 2 alternative routes without exploring the 2nd one as soon as he gets the chance? What are you even talking about.

 

[Lhynn]

Carrion im gonna level with you, because im tired of writing entire bloated posts just to see you run into the wall face first at the first opportunity. Truth is fallout never had this problem, you didnt try to maximize quest xp rewards simply because you could go out there and explore and get experience at any time, combat xp gives freedom to the player to experiment and experience the quests however they feel like, because xp isnt a resource with only 1 source.

What im saying is that players will do quests, regardless of the reward, and will feel satisfied if the quest is good, because quests give context to the world and a purpose to the player. Combat on the other hand, enjoyable as it is, represents a waste of resources and time, remove the xp reward that represents the growth trough combat and you will find that people will more often than not dread it, no matter how enjoyable you make it, because you made it pointless.
This is not what you want in your fantasy rpg, this is not how you want your players to think, "dont bother, it doesnt matter" is not a good mentality for your players to have, and thats just what poe did, and thats how it will always be.
Now, if you want your players to think they shouldnt bother with combat, make it as pointless as you want, but let me tell you something, pointless combat in any of the BG games would have absolutely killed those games, their pacing, their structure and the way players played them, for the worse.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Dude who the fuck takes 1 of the 2 alternative routes without exploring the 2nd one as soon as he gets the chance? What are you even talking about.

About illusion of choice, DraQ's (and POE's fans) wettest dream.

Meanwhile with XP triggers you just slap XP reward where the paths reconverge and move to the next thing.

Meanwhile just slap a "skip to next quest" in the middle of the screen and enjoy the ride. Simple, brilliant and you won't have to deal with crazy stuff like people stepping off the railroad to do unthinkable things like getting more XP than they should!

 

[DraQ]

In your example, why on earth would you not expect players to explore both paths?

Why would I expect players to do anything in particular?
That's the beauty of not tying the rewards to the method of completion, only to the results.

If players choose to skip content, then they miss out on the rewards, tough shit. C&C, bitch.

What rewards? A bucketful of spider guts? 20 rat asses?

How about that - if player chooses to burn resources without any reason to expect it to be worth it they lose resources they might need later on.

For starters, kill XP based system is a massive disincentive for not just quest but also area design that goes beyond a corridor or a tree.

This here is the biggest lie DraQ ever told.

Want alternative routes with alternative challenges? Bam, problem.

Oh wait, now this is a p. good contender to the biggest lie DraQ ever told.

Ur mom is fat too.

Assume player will backtrack? Player who goes right through will be underleveled, also, why make alternative routes then? - just make a corridor.

Just an excuse for lazy design

As good description of combat XP as any.

easily solved (...) adding a bit of reactivity.

Anything requiring specific, hand crafted content is by its nature not an easy solution.

OTOH placing a reusable object and specifying two numbers per bunch of encounters is an easy solution that stands on its own, but without clashing with any sort of specific reactivity you may also have in mind.

Lets say you clear the dungeon by killing its master, but you stealthed it tru all the way to the end, reward? you get to the end of the dungeon and the master has no traps in place, some of his valuables are not secured under lock

So apart from lack of kill XP stealthing also rewards you with lack of trap and lockpicking XP?

You make it impossible to measure the value of your choices in terms of exp and suddenly you will find that players go with whatever they think they should be doing.

So they go with their best judgement of viability of given approach and expected consequences instead of going with whatever gives the most of abstract reward currency?
And it is somehow the worse approach?

But no, your solution is to put an arbitrary XP reward behind a door and call it a day, 10/10, genius design.

As compared to putting an arbitrary XP reward on each mob type?

You are as boring as sawyer some days. My solution is not only more organic

In terms of producing putrid stench after lying around for a while?

it has an superior amount of replayability

Yes, you can LARP Suboptimal Hero Man in addition to actually playing effectively.
So options, much replayable!

Give me 10 hours of this game im proposing and ill give you my money over the 60 hours of boring shit that PoE is turning out to be.

So Sawyer's failure to adhere to his own (rather simple) ideas is somehow relevant here. How?

 

[AN4RCHID]

If players choose to skip content, then they miss out on the rewards, tough shit. C&C, bitch.

What rewards? A bucketful of spider guts? 20 rat asses?

How about that - if player chooses to burn resources without any reason to expect it to be worth it they lose resources they might need later on.

Do you see how banal level design has to be for your example to work? There can't be anything interesting on either path for this to make any sense. Rare items, NPCs, or shortcuts? They need to go, because in your words "let's say player has every reason to believe there will be no loot, only resource attrition". This is a very limiting vision of alternate paths: a pair of functionally symmetric obstacles with nothing to entice players to explore the level fully, not even the possibility of one path offering an exclusive reward. Because incentivizing players to fully explore the dungeon is somehow a bad thing?

That is not a kind of "alternate path" that I care about.

 

[Lhynn]

Oh god, it was just an example DraQ, use your imagination. The point isnt the example, the point are the possibilities born from spending an afternoon writing a quest, instead of making it a p. direct fetch quest or one where the outcome doesnt matter. And it is in fact an easy solution because ive seen 16 year old kids make modules in nwn with branching dialogues and reactivity, that is literally all it fucking takes, yet you are telling me "its hard work"? fuck you.

Combat Xp isnt lazy, its there to emulate the growth of the characters combat capabilities, weve gone tru this a thousand fucking times, yet you refuse to accept it as valid. As if human beings were incapable of learning by experiencing.

So they go with their best judgement of viability of given approach and expected consequences instead of going with whatever gives the most of abstract reward currency?
And it is somehow the worse approach?

This aproach im proposing will make it so that they will pay attention, the aproach you propose just makes them click faster and end the quest for the reward (which i admit i started doing while playing poe, when i understood it was pointless), because it makes NO FUCKING DIFFERENCE. Its like you dont understand players at all.

As compared to putting an arbitrary XP reward on each mob type?

Yup, much better overall, do you even have to ask?

Yes, you can LARP Suboptimal Hero Man in addition to actually playing effectively.
So options, much replayable!

Suboptimal hero man? what the fuck are you even getting at? its like we are talking about different things. Im saying different rewards with similar value, you are talking about minmaxing. What does one thing have to do with the other? HOW ARE THESE THINGS RELATED?

So Sawyer's failure to adhere to his own (rather simple) ideas is somehow relevant here. How?

You can clearly see his ideas didnt work, his failure to adhere to them fully shows that he somehow realized how fucking wrong he was.

 

[Gurkog]

Instead of general xp for genociding everything in sight, the game should give your characters bonuses in combat against whatever you genocide. So you kill a fuckton of rats, and thus become really effective against rats. Since it doesn't give a bunch of general xp that rat killing won't make slaying ogres a breeze.

 

[AN4RCHID]

Instead of general xp for genociding everything in sight, the game should give your characters bonuses in combat against whatever you genocide. So you kill a fuckton of rats, and thus become really effective against rats. Since it doesn't give a bunch of general xp that rat killing won't make slaying ogres a breeze.

Why? Rats will already be easier to kill as you progress through the game. Why is it desirable to make them even less of a challenge? And why even place rats in the later game if they're going to be trivial obstacles?

 

[Cadmus]

Instead of general xp for genociding everything in sight, the game should give your characters bonuses in combat against whatever you genocide. So you kill a fuckton of rats, and thus become really effective against rats. Since it doesn't give a bunch of general xp that rat killing won't make slaying ogres a breeze.

I still fail to see why the shit can't I get my XP for killing 32239 dragons. This fucking game is built for kill XP. It's not a game like VtM:B or PS:T where a huge part of the gameplay is talking and even simple problem solving. Don't fucking repeat that "OH WELL ONCE THE PLAYERS REALIZE THAT THE COMBAT IS JUST ATTRITION AND SENSELESS THEY'LL THINK LOGICALLY ABOUT WHO TO FIGHT AND WHEN"

PoE and games like PoE can't manage that:
1) you don't know what the fuck is the group of mutated rats guarding, if anything so you need to see
2) you don't know what they might drop unless it's literally a bunch of mutated rats and you'd killing rats for the entire game and you know they only drop mutated rat asses AND you can clearly see the border of the map AND you can highlight all object in the area, thus making sure there's nothing there ever for sure

3) the enemy placement in this game is absolutely arbitrary or random so that you NEED to fight a bunch of shit trash mobs in order get somewhere or explore an area. It's fucking annoying and frustrating if you get fuck all to show for that. What the fuck is the point? To piss you off enough so that you don't explore half the map so that you don't fight shit?

 

[Lhynn]

To piss you off enough so that you don't explore half the map so that you don't fight shit?

Yes, because normal people dont fight shit /DraQlogic

 

[circ]

You know what the best source of fun would be? Make it fun. Skip resource attrition, make a challenging encounter at both ends with different AI routines with rewards with plenty of lore thrown in. Why do you have to reinvent things that aren't broken?

 

[Immortal]

Are you purposefully being dense.. This game has shit progression why are you still trying.. You had a leg to stand on before the Backer Beta released, now it's just laughable, Objective XP oh man what a joke.

Who are you talking to? I'm just lashing out with an occasional jab whenever I see an easy target. I never said POE's xp system was perfect. I still haven't seen a convincing argument for kill xp though.

You are envisioning a system that doesn't exist (especially in this game) and defending it hypothetically.. If I take empirical data of the IE games / Wasteland 2 / PoE.. it's clear who shit the bed when it comes to game progression. (If you bring up Bloodlines / Shadowrun as a comparison to these games I will slap you)

In a perfect world.. Kill XP would die.. If they could deliver what Objective XP was promised to be, then good riddance. They can't though, not on this budget. Kill XP would be better then what we got and that is the sole reason why it works for combat heavy games like this and why I push for it so much.

Doing a good objective XP system requires time, skill and money.. have you seen my post on the dragon area? They were obviously missing one of those three.

 

[AN4RCHID]

So if POE was built differently than no combat XP would be okay?

This was basically my point from the beginning of this thread. Some games work better with no combat XP, because they are intentionally presenting combat as the sub-optimal solution. PoE presents combat as the sub-optimal solution through its mechanics and then, as I predicted, it forces you to solve problems using combat 99% of the time. It's stupid and it's contradictory game design. Besides arguments about incentivizing the wrong actions and restricting player agency, it just plain feels bad, like the game is setting you a challenge and then punishing you for completing it.

 

[Ninjerk]

Instead of general xp for genociding everything in sight, the game should give your characters bonuses in combat against whatever you genocide. So you kill a fuckton of rats, and thus become really effective against rats. Since it doesn't give a bunch of general xp that rat killing won't make slaying ogres a breeze.

Why? Rats will already be easier to kill as you progress through the game. Why is it desirable to make them even less of a challenge? And why even place rats in the later game if they're going to be trivial obstacles?

What if the rats get bigger/smarter