Was looking for some input here. As a player that is going to be returning once the AH closes, do you think that it is smart to invest some money into gold. Would it be worth spending $10 on gold for the expansion? What are the gold sinks we know thus far? I am thinking about doing this for the fact that there will still be trade chat which will be still require huge amount of gold. Another thought was maybe there will be new recipes and gems which also have a huge cost.
I'm completely guessing here, but if I had money at stake, I'd predict the following for the expansion:
1. Higher tier gems will drop than can drop currently
2. Either a lot more gold will drop, items vendor for a lot more and/or gold gets used for less stuff / stuff costs less
I think it's likely that having some extra gold / high-tier gems will help in the expansion, but I think it's also likely Blizzard will try to even the playing field somewhat between people with billions of gold and people playing for the first time, particularly with paragon 2.0 to give the older players a strong starting advantage there. I'd say if you want to spend a small amount of cash in the short term to have fun and give a small advantage in the expansion, have fun with it. Otherwise, I'd wait to at least see what Blizzcon reveals.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
I'm completely guessing here, but if I had money at stake, I'd predict the following for the expansion:
1. Higher tier gems will drop than can drop currently
2. Either a lot more gold will drop, items vendor for a lot more and/or gold gets used for less stuff / stuff costs less
I think it's likely that having some extra gold / high-tier gems will help in the expansion, but I think it's also likely Blizzard will try to even the playing field somewhat between people with billions of gold and people playing for the first time, particularly with paragon 2.0 to give the older players a strong starting advantage there. I'd say if you want to spend a small amount of cash in the short term to have fun and give a small advantage in the expansion, have fun with it. Otherwise, I'd wait to at least see what Blizzcon reveals.
first of all, of course higher tier gems will drop in the expansion. we're going to be level 70.
second, why are we going to need a lot more gold, so much so that you expect items will vendor for more and purchaseables will be cheaper? With no auction house, gold will not remain the standard of currency. People will be bartering items, and most likely a new item will become the new currency, the same as the stone of jordan did in diablo 2.
I'm completely guessing here, but if I had money at stake, I'd predict the following for the expansion:
1. Higher tier gems will drop than can drop currently
2. Either a lot more gold will drop, items vendor for a lot more and/or gold gets used for less stuff / stuff costs less
I think it's likely that having some extra gold / high-tier gems will help in the expansion, but I think it's also likely Blizzard will try to even the playing field somewhat between people with billions of gold and people playing for the first time, particularly with paragon 2.0 to give the older players a strong starting advantage there. I'd say if you want to spend a small amount of cash in the short term to have fun and give a small advantage in the expansion, have fun with it. Otherwise, I'd wait to at least see what Blizzcon reveals.
first of all, of course higher tier gems will drop in the expansion. we're going to be level 70.
second, why are we going to need a lot more gold, so much so that you expect items will vendor for more and purchaseables will be cheaper? With no auction house, gold will not remain the standard of currency. People will be bartering items, and most likely a new item will become the new currency, the same as the stone of jordan did in diablo 2.
Re gold, reread my post. I'm certainly not advocating buying up billions of gold. Having a few hundred million (a guess, maybe more, maybe less) might give a small advantage for whatever sinks there are post-expansion, but I suspect that much more than that will probably never be spent. That might be too much already, but it's not like it's hard to build up that much if you've been playing long or have $2 to spend.
Re gems, my point was that stocking up on gems right now probably won't be as beneficial as it would seem if you didn't take upcoming higher-tier drops into account.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
These prices were thought out for a D3 that had an AH; without the AH, they have to be reduced.
why do they have to be reduced, it is very good gold sink - just instead of mainly fighting inflation, it will create demand and establish gold as currency
Because Marquise gems were implemented SPECIFICALLY as a gold sink for people with lots of gold.
They're a very bad gold sink because self-found people usually can't afford them and the people for whom they're supposed to be siphoning off gold they don't even make a dent in their pile. They miss the mark on all fronts.
second, why are we going to need a lot more gold, so much so that you expect items will vendor for more and purchaseables will be cheaper? With no auction house, gold will not remain the standard of currency. People will be bartering items, and most likely a new item will become the new currency, the same as the stone of jordan did in diablo 2.
Need I remind you that one marquise gem costs, what, 20 million to craft? Plus the 'ingredients' (3 of the previous gem tier, tomes, etc). And what do they cost to remove from a socket? 4 million or something?
These prices were thought out for a D3 that had an AH; without the AH, they have to be reduced.
I'm saying a reduction in crafting costs is way more likely a scenario considering a players income will drop significantly when the AH shuts down.
why do they have to be reduced, it is very good gold sink - just instead of mainly fighting inflation, it will create demand and establish gold as currency
they'll still remain a gold sink. The average percentage of gold spent on crafting will be easier to regulate because there won't be such a disparity between the rich and the poor. The average mp1-5 player doesn't make billions daily like mp10 players do.
I've stocked about 4 billion gold and just waiting for the announcements at blizzcon. Right after gamescon I quit crafting and upgrading on all fronts and just waiting for blizzcon to find out what happens... it's too early to tell right now if gold will even matter anymore, but at the very least I will have a large stockpile for crafting costs and such?
My guess still is that everything will move to non-ladder, including your gear, gold and paragon XP. We will have to start completely from scratch once the new ladder hits.
So ANYTHING you do now has no influence on your ladder chars.
and there alwaysgonna be someone who will just laugh at the cost but it doesnt change the fact that you probably dont have such person in your vicinity
Everyone doesn't have to afford them. But the Marquise Gem philosophy doesn't fit with Loot 2.0. It fits with Loot 1.0 where the mega-rich needed some kind of goldsink to help (lawl) curb their massive income.
What would cause you to believe that a system that obviously was designed as a band-aid fix for a problem specific to Loot 1.0 has to be maintained in Loot 2.0? What about Loot 2.0 would suggest that we need a "trillionaire only" goldsink? To me, everything about Loot 2.0 suggests that Blizzard wants to move away from everything that Marquise Gems represent.
EDIT
Furthermore, why would Blizzard keep a system that locks out "poor" people but doesn't even fill its role as a goldsink for rich people? Let's face it, Marquise Gems didn't live up to what they were supposed to do. The rich people didn't blink at the cost, and all they amounted to were another item that "poor" people could never attain.
My guess still is that everything will move to non-ladder, including your gear, gold and paragon XP. We will have to start completely from scratch once the new ladder hits.
So ANYTHING you do now has no influence on your ladder chars.
Nothing will move to non-ladder. There is likely to be two ladders, the perpetual paragon ladder which all of our current chars are apart of and seasonal ladder chars get dumped to. Then there will be seasonal ladders(clvl 1,plvl 0, 0 items and gold) with frequent resets.
You must be out of your mind to think Blizzard would undermine paragon 2.0 before it even released with the single ladder you propose. The majority will probably play "non-ladder" with maybe playing a season here or there.
Obviously the longer the game goes on the more likely people are to play on the seasonal ladder, but I doubt they will totally abandon the "non-ladder".
Though I did not see any new gems in the datamined info, despite the new shards being there. So, I'm not sure how much of an economy reset Blizzard is going to pull if any. Which would impact how soon the majority would play seasons.
@ OP It would never hurt to have <5 B gold, that would cover all your artisans and crafting costs for quite some time(over 60k crafts at the current price). Remember the console has lower crafting costs because they do not have an AH. So you can expect the costs to lower on PC too.
Nothing will move to non-ladder. There is likely to be two ladders, the perpetual paragon ladder which all of our current chars are apart of and seasonal ladder chars get dumped to. Then there will be seasonal ladders(clvl 1,plvl 0, 0 items and gold) with frequent resets.
You must be out of your mind to think Blizzard would undermine paragon 2.0 before it even released with the single ladder you propose. The majority will probably play "non-ladder" with maybe playing a season here or there.
Obviously the longer the game goes on the more likely people are to play on the seasonal ladder, but I doubt they will totally abandon the "non-ladder".
It does not matter if you call it non-ladder or old-ladder or seasonal ladder or whatever.
The "seasonal" ladder will be where everything is new and fun. If it is anything like in D2, most people will play the "seasonal" ladder. The "old" ladder chars are allready maxed out anyway. The entire idea of ladders is to have item and char resets in the game every now and then. Even the most hardcore will eventually get bored of their perfect char and start a new one.
Nothing will move to non-ladder. There is likely to be two ladders, the perpetual paragon ladder which all of our current chars are apart of and seasonal ladder chars get dumped to. Then there will be seasonal ladders(clvl 1,plvl 0, 0 items and gold) with frequent resets.
You must be out of your mind to think Blizzard would undermine paragon 2.0 before it even released with the single ladder you propose. The majority will probably play "non-ladder" with maybe playing a season here or there.
Obviously the longer the game goes on the more likely people are to play on the seasonal ladder, but I doubt they will totally abandon the "non-ladder".
It does not matter if you call it non-ladder or old-ladder or seasonal ladder or whatever.
The "seasonal" ladder will be where everything is new and fun. If it is anything like in D2, most people will play the "seasonal" ladder. The "old" ladder chars are allready maxed out anyway. The entire idea of ladders is to have item and char resets in the game every now and then. Even the most hardcore will eventually get bored of their perfect char and start a new one.
There is a big difference between d2 and d3. The economy was fucked in d2, classic and .08 items being bis, dupes, hacked items, etc. It is not like that in d3. There was a reason NOT to play the non-ladder in d2. In d3, if I'm correct, they'll be giving you a reason to play both.
You can look to PoE for a current perspective on it. People play the 4 month leagues (think season) then they play "non-ladder" when it's over. There are also those that play 1 league and when it resets skip it the next time around. Nobody did that in d2, well if any did they were few and far between.
Nothing will move to non-ladder. There is likely to be two ladders, the perpetual paragon ladder which all of our current chars are apart of and seasonal ladder chars get dumped to. Then there will be seasonal ladders(clvl 1,plvl 0, 0 items and gold) with frequent resets.
You must be out of your mind to think Blizzard would undermine paragon 2.0 before it even released with the single ladder you propose. The majority will probably play "non-ladder" with maybe playing a season here or there.
Obviously the longer the game goes on the more likely people are to play on the seasonal ladder, but I doubt they will totally abandon the "non-ladder".
It does not matter if you call it non-ladder or old-ladder or seasonal ladder or whatever.
The "seasonal" ladder will be where everything is new and fun. If it is anything like in D2, most people will play the "seasonal" ladder. The "old" ladder chars are allready maxed out anyway. The entire idea of ladders is to have item and char resets in the game every now and then. Even the most hardcore will eventually get bored of their perfect char and start a new one.
Not everyone is going to want to start over everytime a new seasonal ladder comes out. I myself don't like the short term goals of a seasonal ladder. I like to find BIS on characters only once, and I would hope that since paragon is infinite there would be an overarching ladder for "non-ladder" players as well. It's not like D2 where there would be no point with it being a bazillion level 99s; paragon is infinite so it would always be competitive, no one could permanently be locked into the top position(s).
The only real downside would be botting, but hopefully bots won't be able to do the hardest content that actually gives competitive reward experience.
The only real downside would be botting, but hopefully bots won't be able to do the hardest content that actually gives competitive reward experience.
they won't need to grind the hardest content for competitive experience. They'll be grinding 24 hours a day 7 days a week until infinity because there is no limit on paragon levels. Humans will never be able to compete with that.
Any insight is greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Wrak
1. Higher tier gems will drop than can drop currently
2. Either a lot more gold will drop, items vendor for a lot more and/or gold gets used for less stuff / stuff costs less
I think it's likely that having some extra gold / high-tier gems will help in the expansion, but I think it's also likely Blizzard will try to even the playing field somewhat between people with billions of gold and people playing for the first time, particularly with paragon 2.0 to give the older players a strong starting advantage there. I'd say if you want to spend a small amount of cash in the short term to have fun and give a small advantage in the expansion, have fun with it. Otherwise, I'd wait to at least see what Blizzcon reveals.
first of all, of course higher tier gems will drop in the expansion. we're going to be level 70.
second, why are we going to need a lot more gold, so much so that you expect items will vendor for more and purchaseables will be cheaper? With no auction house, gold will not remain the standard of currency. People will be bartering items, and most likely a new item will become the new currency, the same as the stone of jordan did in diablo 2.
Re gold, reread my post. I'm certainly not advocating buying up billions of gold. Having a few hundred million (a guess, maybe more, maybe less) might give a small advantage for whatever sinks there are post-expansion, but I suspect that much more than that will probably never be spent. That might be too much already, but it's not like it's hard to build up that much if you've been playing long or have $2 to spend.
Re gems, my point was that stocking up on gems right now probably won't be as beneficial as it would seem if you didn't take upcoming higher-tier drops into account.
Because Marquise gems were implemented SPECIFICALLY as a gold sink for people with lots of gold.
They're a very bad gold sink because self-found people usually can't afford them and the people for whom they're supposed to be siphoning off gold they don't even make a dent in their pile. They miss the mark on all fronts.
I'm saying a reduction in crafting costs is way more likely a scenario considering a players income will drop significantly when the AH shuts down.
they'll still remain a gold sink. The average percentage of gold spent on crafting will be easier to regulate because there won't be such a disparity between the rich and the poor. The average mp1-5 player doesn't make billions daily like mp10 players do.
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
So ANYTHING you do now has no influence on your ladder chars.
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/profile/Twoflower-2131/hero/47336841
Seriously, you have your answer, you don't like it, stop trolling, it's boring.
http://www.diablofans.com/topic/103168-use-non-ladder-gear-on-ladder/
Everyone doesn't have to afford them. But the Marquise Gem philosophy doesn't fit with Loot 2.0. It fits with Loot 1.0 where the mega-rich needed some kind of goldsink to help (lawl) curb their massive income.
What would cause you to believe that a system that obviously was designed as a band-aid fix for a problem specific to Loot 1.0 has to be maintained in Loot 2.0? What about Loot 2.0 would suggest that we need a "trillionaire only" goldsink? To me, everything about Loot 2.0 suggests that Blizzard wants to move away from everything that Marquise Gems represent.
EDIT
Furthermore, why would Blizzard keep a system that locks out "poor" people but doesn't even fill its role as a goldsink for rich people? Let's face it, Marquise Gems didn't live up to what they were supposed to do. The rich people didn't blink at the cost, and all they amounted to were another item that "poor" people could never attain.
Nothing will move to non-ladder. There is likely to be two ladders, the perpetual paragon ladder which all of our current chars are apart of and seasonal ladder chars get dumped to. Then there will be seasonal ladders(clvl 1,plvl 0, 0 items and gold) with frequent resets.
You must be out of your mind to think Blizzard would undermine paragon 2.0 before it even released with the single ladder you propose. The majority will probably play "non-ladder" with maybe playing a season here or there.
Obviously the longer the game goes on the more likely people are to play on the seasonal ladder, but I doubt they will totally abandon the "non-ladder".
Though I did not see any new gems in the datamined info, despite the new shards being there. So, I'm not sure how much of an economy reset Blizzard is going to pull if any. Which would impact how soon the majority would play seasons.
@ OP It would never hurt to have <5 B gold, that would cover all your artisans and crafting costs for quite some time(over 60k crafts at the current price). Remember the console has lower crafting costs because they do not have an AH. So you can expect the costs to lower on PC too.
It does not matter if you call it non-ladder or old-ladder or seasonal ladder or whatever.
The "seasonal" ladder will be where everything is new and fun. If it is anything like in D2, most people will play the "seasonal" ladder. The "old" ladder chars are allready maxed out anyway. The entire idea of ladders is to have item and char resets in the game every now and then. Even the most hardcore will eventually get bored of their perfect char and start a new one.
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/profile/Twoflower-2131/hero/47336841
There is a big difference between d2 and d3. The economy was fucked in d2, classic and .08 items being bis, dupes, hacked items, etc. It is not like that in d3. There was a reason NOT to play the non-ladder in d2. In d3, if I'm correct, they'll be giving you a reason to play both.
You can look to PoE for a current perspective on it. People play the 4 month leagues (think season) then they play "non-ladder" when it's over. There are also those that play 1 league and when it resets skip it the next time around. Nobody did that in d2, well if any did they were few and far between.
Not everyone is going to want to start over everytime a new seasonal ladder comes out. I myself don't like the short term goals of a seasonal ladder. I like to find BIS on characters only once, and I would hope that since paragon is infinite there would be an overarching ladder for "non-ladder" players as well. It's not like D2 where there would be no point with it being a bazillion level 99s; paragon is infinite so it would always be competitive, no one could permanently be locked into the top position(s).
The only real downside would be botting, but hopefully bots won't be able to do the hardest content that actually gives competitive reward experience.
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
they won't need to grind the hardest content for competitive experience. They'll be grinding 24 hours a day 7 days a week until infinity because there is no limit on paragon levels. Humans will never be able to compete with that.