devtrackers.gg → ekimarcher
ekimarcher

ekimarcher



23 Sep

How is legendary potential chance calculated?

Comment

Originally posted by ab24366

What's the point of having 4 LP for those if it's a 1/16 quintillion? There will be no community "Holy shit" moments. People were pissed off about uber unique rarity in d4, 4 LP is similar power increase, and this is way rarer than those items.

The big difference is that the unique effect that the unique item has is obtainable. The D4 uber uniques have mechanically unique effects locked behind the mega rare chance. The 4LP versions are just higher power versions of the same items.

It is not uncommon feedback though so we are going to have to figure out how to make it feel better.


22 Sep

Why does this item add 23% spell crit chance to my stat sheet?

Comment

Originally posted by les_bloom

Thank you for that

The other answers have little mistakes or missing info, this is the best answer here.


19 Sep

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

Originally posted by Eraromik

Didn't you say something about that in an interview with Rhykker? Maybe I hallucinated but I'm pretty sure you said that we will unlock the rewards and be able to change between all the unlocked rewards at will.

There are some details still not quite locked in but something very similar to that is being worked on.


18 Sep

Any chance for gender selection or character creation in general?

Comment

Originally posted by itzzzluke37

It don‘t actually would need full customization but just to being able to select male or female so from a view of development to have fixed models at first would cost much less resources than a full customization feature. And I‘m sure all people would already be happy having the option to choose between genders!

A less feature rich version of just a character template selection with a few options would probably satisfy most people's desires and that feature would require less work than full customization. However, it's more of an, only 90% as difficult, situation than "much less resources". There are a lot more little things that go into this than you might think. The related systems just aren't set up to accept it at the moment and we aren't prepared to attempt it yet.


17 Sep

Mastery Selection Improvement

Comment

Originally posted by mafifer

Fair enough. I can accept it if there was a specific reason behind the skill access order and not that it was just sorta random.

Thanks for the explanation Mike (at least I think this is Mike).

Yea it's me, but don't tell anyone, I'm in disguise. It's not a very good one though, check the first 4 letters of my username.

Edit: and we do very carefully pick the unlock orders of skills.

Mastery Selection Improvement

Comment

Which skills are granted in which section of the passive trees is surprisingly important to how the skill and passive trees and unique items are designed. Making the skill unlock order variable would cause a complete audit of every node of every tree in the game. We would have to change, move or remove many nodes.

It's a cool idea that would have a much bigger impact than you might think.

It's not feasible to implement at this time if we did decide we wanted to do it.


15 Sep

Flame Rush + Glyph of Intent feels stuck?

Comment

Just a bug that snuck in. It wasn't doing that in testing.

What's the future for endgame content?

Comment

Originally posted by mukavva

Can you make a tldr version of that thread lol? Thank you for your effort.

The answer from Judd on September 6th 2023 is probably the best tldr as it was from an interview done just as Gamescom was wrapping up.


14 Sep

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

Originally posted by danted002

Nice thank you ❤️. BTW the story is super dope. It hits perfect for an ARPG not to deep, not to shallow just enough to make you remember the important stuff and keep you immersed gudos to the team for it.

thank you :)

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

Originally posted by danted002

Any chance we get some ultra-widescreen QoL. Like being able to put the forge/shop panel being next to the inventory panel. I know asking for movable panels like in FF14 is to much but having the inventory on the right of my screen and the forge on the left makes me feel like going on a road trip every time I need to move the mouse from one end to another 🤣🤣🤣

This is not currently planned for 1.0

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

Originally posted by danted002

Wait what? The story ends how it ends now? I mean I understand why but I was hoping 1.0 will reveal what’s next in our journey

No, we have a few more chapters before the campaign is "complete". More story stuff will happen after that but the core campaign that we initially set out to make isn't done yet.

The Unity Question

Comment

We already have a thread going on this topic. Locking so people don't just make more.

https://reddit.com/r/LastEpoch/s/Vr2ZJOQy67

While getting a new bill in the mail is never fun, we don't have all the information around this topic yet so we are going to wait and let things settle.

We aren't entertaining the topic of switching engines roughly 3 months before launch.

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

Originally posted by Kalashtiiry

System, you say?

Also, why update systems and not just story at 1.0, given bug potential?

Because there is room for big wins in gameplay experience and we aren't adding more story chapters at 1.0

Please make it so that you can minimize the reward window

Comment

That system and panel are slated for 1.0 updates. No details at this time.


12 Sep

Is there a way to fix the squares behind the font?

Comment

The padding around the glyphs in the font atlas is too low. It's something we will have to fix.


11 Sep

Entire zone respawning when popping back to town is kind of annoying.

Comment

Originally posted by deljaroo

wouldn't that state information also have to be on a server with costs? I'm sure you know what you're doing, but it is very cool that y'all talk with us players about this stuff. a lot of game companies want to be opaque about their internal functions which probably makes sense for optics, but this way is joyful.

I'd assume in an ideal situation, the information the server keeps for an active player in a zone would be as small as possible and would closely match the amount of information in the "state information". while you may want to make it so the zone the player left is inactive, players probably expect it to keep living: monsters move and regen etc during this time. on the other hand, this is such an unimportant issue: this game is quite fun the way it is and I don't mind going through enemies again if I tp. if I didn't like going through enemies, I wouldn't play this game!

While it does matter what the server is doing for associated costs, just having one dedicated to that empty zone at all is the majority of the cost. Storing the static data of what that server looked like with the intent of being able to recreate it is WAY cheaper to do than allocating a server to sit there and remember the game state. Like orders of magnitude cheaper.

Entire zone respawning when popping back to town is kind of annoying.

Comment

Originally posted by deljaroo

I've not played multiplayer much, but if one of you leaves and comes back, the state of the map should persist for the person who stayed, right? So surely this isn't an issue if a player is staying there right? A fix could be to make a virtual player (perhaps make a parent class to the player that includes the functionality that keeps a zone active but without the other unneded player stuff, and then make this virtual player an instance of that or something that inherits it) that stays behind in the zone when you tp?

Given the server cost associated with each instance, they have no close fairly quickly upon exit. We wouldn't have to leave a dummy character there to keep it open. The state information needs to be able to be stored and restored to implement this.

Entire zone respawning when popping back to town is kind of annoying.

Comment

Originally posted by Alzeric

u/ekimarcher
maybe something sorta like this (little generic but hopefully helpful)

Save following on TP
- Map generation seed

- current "living" monsters and their positions

- dropped loot + positions
- TP location = Player's return location

- ... etc

Save this map state data to player (last_dungeon_data)

Then when you TP from town back into the zone then load the map state setting everything remaining back to it's position before you TP'd

Yea, that's what we've been unsuccessful in making so far.

Entire zone respawning when popping back to town is kind of annoying.

Comment

Originally posted by TooMuchAdderall

Maybe expanding upon the town portal function then? Whatever method you guys used to get that to work properly could maybe be duplicated. Possibly each instance that the player enters could be essentially stored in an invisible town portal that is attached to the player character. Interacting with a waypoint with a certain hot key combination could allow them to access those portals.

The in-game rationale could have something to do with visit previous timelines or something.

If I sound like an ape that’s because I essentially am. I know literally nothing about programming but I did watch Silicon Valley.

Hope you are able to solve your problem with relative ease some day soon. I really like what you guys are doing. Keep up the good work.

You're on the right path of where we started. The town portals don't work though, that's the problem OP was talking about. We have been trying to do exactly what you suggested, there are some problems that I don't understand either.

Entire zone respawning when popping back to town is kind of annoying.

Comment

Originally posted by TooMuchAdderall

The PoE approach may be your best bet. You can have players continue to automatically reset zones if you’re unable to fix that and institute a way to store previous instances that can be accessed later.

Yea, that's the problem, storing the previous instances.