Somewhat - The information will be there for anyone to ignore entries they want to ignore. We aren’t able to scope in to 1.1 filter and backend service coding for changing what results get returned to the leaderboards for a better supported UX for those players.
As answered above, we don’t have the space in the scope to fit it in for 1.1, but it’s definitely something we’ll be looking at.
The reason we felt both questions were answered by the one system change was that we feel that having the information with the entries works in both situations. While it is correct that the majority of responses indicated that they wanted a partial reset, we felt that with the system of being able to track when an entry occurred, that would not be the case. So the results are different, the system change / extra information carries over as it supports groups from both questions. I apologize that it felt like we were saying the distribution of responses was the same.
Is it doing what it says it should? If not, it’s a bug. DuckWho beat me to it, but confirming from us as well 
Thank you for the reports regarding Empowered Quest Echoes - we’re on it. They should still be accessible by completing the first two quests, but we want to get this patched back ASAP so you can skip the first two quests.
At least not initially - we don’t have the space in the scope to fit it in for 1.1, but it’s definitely something we’ll be looking at.
Appreciate the kind words. It's one of the most rewarding aspects of this whole thing considering we came from the ARPG community ourselves.
Hello Travelers,
In between attempting to save the citizens of Eterra, and eradicating them, almost 70,000 of you have joined in with your voices to discuss mid-cycle balance changes. The turnout for this survey has been fantastic; and further, is in addition to the many discussions here on the forums and other platforms on the topic. We want to first thank you all for your enthusiasm on this topic driving it forward.
Today, we want to share the results of the survey, as well as the decisions which have come as a result of the feedback.
LE_Steam_1.0-MidCycleSurvey-RECAP1440×3350 5.93 MB
...interesting, I appreciate the clarification. What sort of advantages did this system offer versus genre-standard loot generation like described previously? I'm guessing this means players find more uniques/exalted items overall compared to other ARPGs?
It lets us detach the relative rarity of unique items from their base type distribution.
It also lets us detach the overall unique item drop rate from the base type coverage spread. For example, in D2, if you added a unique Small Crescent item into the game, the overall unique item drop rate would go up. This means that we can have more granular control over each item's drop rate.
(I also don't want to make it seem like I dislike D2 at all. It's actually one of my favourite games of all time. I just know more about it than say Grim Dawn so I can use it as a reference easily.)
Edit: oh and it also lets us make unique items on special base types that can't be on rares.
Well how does it work? I think I might have had a bit of a misconception when I first saw this.
After thinking about it, I'm assuming that when an item drops it has a certain probability of being a specific item type, and then within that item type it has a probability of being of specific rarity?
And then say if it rolls as a unique, it will roll as one of the named unique for that slot, at this stage do all uniques for that slot have the same probability of being selected? And then from there there's a chance of a reroll which would make certain uniques more rare than others?
Or among the pool of uniques for a specific slot, do they already have their own rarity values on top of the reroll chance? I think this is where I was concerned, that already rare items would also have a reroll chance making them even harder to get...
What you're describing is how D2 (and many other games) generate loot. We kinda go at it in the opposite direction.
We start with rarity. If that is unique, then we pick a random unique from the random drop list. We then finish with the re-roll chance (relative unique item rarity). That's it.
edit: then we do roll the ranges on that unique but that's not really important to this question.
Read morehi mate, may i ask if there are plans in near future to make some changes on trade post UI, such as adding suffix/affix tier filter individually? right now the filter works on all suffix/affixes at once
for example lets say im looking for a t7 spell dmg + cooldown + freeze rate on my wand. i want spell dmg to be exact t7 but for cooldown-freeze rate i dont care what tier it is, unfortunately i cant search three of them seperately. i have to look for ALL t7 spell dmg wands and look at them one by one. the tier filter applies to all 3 so it means i can only look for `show me the result if all 3 stats are t7`
second example is, i would like to look for lets say %5 ward retention and %8 poison resist small idol(which should be max roll if im not wrong), but since i cant put a filter on the stats, there are hundreds of those rolls and %99 of them are crap rolls which i have to manually look every page to find the big rolls.
hope i could explain myself better and ...
We are actively working on bazaar UI and UX improvements. I don't have any details yet to share.
What about a corruption catch up mechanic within one character?
E.g. a global base corruption, that increases with the local corruption. So if I am at 600 corruption in one Monolith and I start at 100 corruption in another I would get bonus corruption from defeating the Shade of Orobyss in the new Monolith.
This way players would still have the agency to keep corruption lower in one mono if they want (via sanctuaries) but would not have to go all the way back to 100 if they are already at 500+ in another monolith.
It's a little different than this but this is already in the game.
Sorry for hijacking this thread but:
Any news on idol crafting? IIRC from a while ago it was discussed, what's the current plans?
It’s a fairly simple system that we can add some depth to in the future, though there’s no plans for that right now till at least 1.4 - so far
How about some sort of "set potential" where you can slam a set piece into a unique giving it the set piece bonus. Higher potential means higher set number bonuses.
I like the idea of decoupling the set bonus from the actual item and allowing you to put it on another item.
Oh! What about if you could add the set bonus onto an item like a 5th affix.
It's tiers would determine the number of bonuses and you'd obviously need more than one item to have it. It'd be a new crafting mechanic as well.
I've always like the idea of decoupling the set bonus from the actual item. IMO it'd be a lot easier to balance and allow for more interesting decisions that aren't as restricting as the standard set design.
This is pretty close to our current thoughts actually. Nice one
Read moreFor whatever it means; I’m excited to support a game for the first time in a long time. I’ve upgraded PC parts after spending the last long, long while on my PS4 and PS5.
Your dev team has made it beautifully obvious that you’re listening to your players. I can’t count how many times during this experience that past few weeks where I’ve said, “they’ve fixed ______ that I didn’t like about ________ “ out loud to my wife who probably doesn’t care lol.
Also, when I hear other people talk about this game, they’re overwhelmingly positive and excited. I bought the game because of a group of discord buddy’s all online at the same time (which hasn’t happened in quite a while; they all pitched the game over a couple hours while showing their screens and then I decided to get the pc upgraded.
This is how you do game development. You listen to the individual people and it goes on to appease the masses. I predict that you folks are going to be THE ARPG.
...
Cheers
Fun ideas. These are always a joy to read. We do have some plans for set items in the future that are a bit more unique, but if we saw a different solution proposed that we liked more we would of course consider it. I’ll put this in our game design internal channels so the game design team sees this. I don’t think it would quite shake us from the current plan however but sometimes even if we don’t take an idea directly we gain inspiration and ideas for other future inclusions.
In general we’re timid with sets because we don’t want sets to outcompete and solve the highest levels of build crafting you can achieve with Legendaries. Sets have been problematic for other games in the genre when they take up many slots and force players into specific OP builds. We do like the puzzle that small sets provide where they introduce the larger want to find and work around a couple other pieces of gear.
Thanks for the ideas with the visuals!
That's nice to hear. Could you elaborate it a little more ? On alts we would gain stability faster (more stability from each echo done ?)
Not yet
devtrackers.gg