I am more of a collector. I like to have all the nice items shining in my stash..
Which is reason why I liked MF in D2 so much. Killing monsters wasn't that much of a big deal. Item collection was.
I suppose MF is ok, but MF runs are not. It is just stupid to run the same few monsters over and over again because it is fast to access those bosses and they have a lot higher drop chance.
All the bosses/monsters with higher drop chance should be located in places where you couldn't just step through portal or WP and there they are.
You should have to work through piles of monsters before you reach them.
That would make the game more interesting and it wouldn't feel that you are just farming 1 dude. Also the monsters you kill on the way would grant you exp and even more items.
Yeah I agree with this. I think that the changes to teleport will help solve this issue. No more going through walls and such.
Quote from "scyberdragon" »
My problem isn't really with MF, it is what MF suplimented. I personally don't like how item dependent Diablo became. How many SoJ's, zod runes or whatever you have or need. The fact that almost every build is gear dependent with the exact gear you need. Stuff like that. The drops in Diablo should be random and it should never be as easy to get such specific gear. MF and MF runs is what caused this aspect of Diablo. In my opinion, the focus of the game should be killing, not obtaining specific gear and drops.
As for fixing it I have come up with three options that could be used to deter the item finding scenario.
1. Lower the rate of MF. stacking MF became to easy and too potent. They need to make sure that you are not able to raise MF as high as you could in D2 which will lower it's importance.
2. Add a system like the exp bonus for killing combos but with items. The more monsters you kill, you raise your chance for better loot. This will help add the loot system to the games concept of killing hordes of monsters.
3. Give a reason for killing tons of monsters. Through in-game rewards, battle.net rewards or achievements so that later on the games life there is still a reason to actually play through the game rather than just doing MF runs.
Again, these are all just my opinions. I do understand that some people love the item findig aspect of the game. However, when these items become the focus of the game it changes the game for people who actually want to play it by creating the previously mentined problems.
I see whatcha mean Scyber. I like your 3rd idea, achievements and stuff.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A wizard is never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early.
He arrives precisely when he means to."
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
Well it isn't a *insert random rapper name* game, after all. So that would sound logical.
LOL!!!
Seen like that it does appear terrible.
You won't get many rappers being able to cast lightning or summon zombie dogs though...
Furthermore, since rings are not seen on the character(like armor), it's pointless to limit ourselves to 2 fingers.
Same goes for amulets... At least on the monk a couple of amulets won't appear that weird...but like I said...we probably won't see jewelry on the char.
Nah i think two rings and 1 ammy is sufficient. We could say "Well I can fit 2 rings on each finger so why can't I wear 20 rings?"
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. imo.
With too much jewelry the item bonuses would have to be watered down. Each ring would make less of an impact, i dunno i just think it'd get too messy with balancing items.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A wizard is never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early.
He arrives precisely when he means to."
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
Yea we could prolly squeeze a few on each finger, depending on the size. But you would lose finger functionality. I was just making the point that if you say "okay we have 10 fingers so why not wear a ring on each one?" Someone else is going to come along and say, "well I can actually fit 3 or 6 rings on each finger, so why can we only have 1 on each>?"
___________________________________Im saying draw the line at two rings 1 ammy
That is all.
Quote from "Don_guillotine" »
I just think there's no point in going beyond the 1 amulet and two rings from a gameplay pov. Just have more powerful rings and amulets instead of having several.
Exactly. We are in agreement We either get a pair of powerful ones or a slew of watered down weaksauce ones. I prefer the 1st.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A wizard is never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early.
He arrives precisely when he means to."
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
I just think there's no point in going beyond the 1 amulet and two rings from a gameplay pov. Just have more powerful rings and amulets instead of having several.
I had in mind...that you would then be able to play with more stats...from a gameplay pov. Just how powerful must you make one ring to replace 2?
And am only talking about a couple more rings...nothing very drastic. Actually on casters, it would fit pretty nicely too...
Broaden your mind people...after all the speeches about embracing something new with D3...you seem pretty attached to D2's way.
Broaden your mind people...after all the speeches about embracing something new with D3...you seem pretty attached to D2's way.
My mind is wide open. But I have no idea what the items and their bonuses are going to be like in D3. I can only assume that they will be SIMILAR to D2. If that's the case I think having more rings or ammys is unnecessary. If they do increase the #, I have no problem with it. If they don't I'll be fine too. I'm just saying based off what what we know about the items in D3 (nothing really, which is why i can only assume they'll be similar to D2) I fail to see the benefits of more. Either way you should end up with balanced items. Either more weak ones, or a few more powerful ones...
Quote from "Don_guillotine" »
One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them.
I just couldn't resist.
You've made my day....Thank you. :thumbsup:
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A wizard is never late Frodo Baggins. Nor is he early.
He arrives precisely when he means to."
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
I still say MF needs to be associated with kills rather than items. Having it be on items breaks the gameplay of Diablo.
Ohh good idea !!
or having mf only for ring is good too. But I think it's better a mf killing system, more you kill in a row more you increase your chance of drop and it's reset after dying or after 10 sec. without killing.
Considering there is no equivalent for a teleport in Diablo 3, and I hope they will make something more meaningful in the end game than just kill the old bosses over and over, I doubt farming in the D2 sense will make a return.
Farming exists and eventually ends up happening in every game I've ever played online (even some offline). It might not be as easy or rewarding, but there will be some level or form of farming in D3. Every game has it's players that eventually end up finding a method that can be repeated over and over again to equate some reward; whether it's currency, items, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Long, long time Diablo fan; short, short time with DiabloFans. USEast D2 Ladder/1.13 Beta: Accnt = ChezPizmo USEast WCIII Ladder: Accnt = TeeheeSprinkles A cool, unrelated video; "Dude Bids 420 on Price is Right" ("420, Bob") "I'm nasty, I'm old and a little bit ornery; I look like Patrick Stewart and sound like Sean Connery." Patch 1.13 = (click here)
Yes, farming will obviously return, just not in the way it was in D2, you ignored all the preceding monsters and just did the boss over and over again.
I hope you're right. I just have this feeling with knowing B.Net players that some cheap method will emerge.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Long, long time Diablo fan; short, short time with DiabloFans. USEast D2 Ladder/1.13 Beta: Accnt = ChezPizmo USEast WCIII Ladder: Accnt = TeeheeSprinkles A cool, unrelated video; "Dude Bids 420 on Price is Right" ("420, Bob") "I'm nasty, I'm old and a little bit ornery; I look like Patrick Stewart and sound like Sean Connery." Patch 1.13 = (click here)
I didn't really see any problem with MF in Diablo II, except for maybe whats already been stated, that it didn't really have a trade off on certain classes like the necromancer and sorc.
Diablo is heavily based around Magic Find, its what keep you going for years at least its a big part of that. You create a magic finder find all the gear you need for new toons etc.
I hope farming wont return.
And the best way to do it is:
- You killed the boss, he stays dead. -
Entrance to boss zone is blocked or he just does not show up. I hate farmers.
I don't think that's a good solution either. I think a better one is just to place every boss in hard-to-reach locations and make them hard to kill. And make no skills able to skip the content.
The best way is to adjust stats of monsters depending your level ("average" in multiplayer) like this every time it will be hard !!! and indeed quality of drop must follow your level too (it's why mf need to be nerf, or change to a new system?)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Which is reason why I liked MF in D2 so much. Killing monsters wasn't that much of a big deal. Item collection was.
Hehehe...nice idea indeed!
Speaking of jewelry...
Do we know how many rings and amulet the character is going to wear?
Is it going to be 2 rings + 1 amulet like D2???
Yeah I agree with this. I think that the changes to teleport will help solve this issue. No more going through walls and such.
I see whatcha mean Scyber. I like your 3rd idea, achievements and stuff.
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
LOL!!!
Seen like that it does appear terrible.
You won't get many rappers being able to cast lightning or summon zombie dogs though...
Furthermore, since rings are not seen on the character(like armor), it's pointless to limit ourselves to 2 fingers.
Same goes for amulets... At least on the monk a couple of amulets won't appear that weird...but like I said...we probably won't see jewelry on the char.
So we could actually increase the jewelry worn.
There has to be a line drawn somewhere. imo.
With too much jewelry the item bonuses would have to be watered down. Each ring would make less of an impact, i dunno i just think it'd get too messy with balancing items.
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
Maybe if you want them on your toes too but then I 'll have to agree with the statement below...
5 rings on each finger eh?
All of a sudden my original idea becomes so much more sensible...
A couple of rings more...that's what I had in mind...
One more amulet...
And everything is just fine.
Yea we could prolly squeeze a few on each finger, depending on the size. But you would lose finger functionality. I was just making the point that if you say "okay we have 10 fingers so why not wear a ring on each one?" Someone else is going to come along and say, "well I can actually fit 3 or 6 rings on each finger, so why can we only have 1 on each>?"
___________________________________Im saying draw the line at two rings 1 ammy
That is all.
Exactly. We are in agreement We either get a pair of powerful ones or a slew of watered down weaksauce ones. I prefer the 1st.
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
Hahaha! Nice. :cool:
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
I had in mind...that you would then be able to play with more stats...from a gameplay pov. Just how powerful must you make one ring to replace 2?
And am only talking about a couple more rings...nothing very drastic. Actually on casters, it would fit pretty nicely too...
Broaden your mind people...after all the speeches about embracing something new with D3...you seem pretty attached to D2's way.
Imagine how many of the 'one' ring you'll have to make too! lol
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the News team
My mind is wide open. But I have no idea what the items and their bonuses are going to be like in D3. I can only assume that they will be SIMILAR to D2. If that's the case I think having more rings or ammys is unnecessary. If they do increase the #, I have no problem with it. If they don't I'll be fine too. I'm just saying based off what what we know about the items in D3 (nothing really, which is why i can only assume they'll be similar to D2) I fail to see the benefits of more. Either way you should end up with balanced items. Either more weak ones, or a few more powerful ones...
You've made my day....Thank you. :thumbsup:
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
You've made my day....Thank you. :thumbsup:
"Losers always whine about their best, winners go home and Fvck the prom queen."
Ohh good idea !!
or having mf only for ring is good too. But I think it's better a mf killing system, more you kill in a row more you increase your chance of drop and it's reset after dying or after 10 sec. without killing.
Farming exists and eventually ends up happening in every game I've ever played online (even some offline). It might not be as easy or rewarding, but there will be some level or form of farming in D3. Every game has it's players that eventually end up finding a method that can be repeated over and over again to equate some reward; whether it's currency, items, etc.
USEast D2 Ladder/1.13 Beta: Accnt = ChezPizmo
USEast WCIII Ladder: Accnt = TeeheeSprinkles
A cool, unrelated video; "Dude Bids 420 on Price is Right" ("420, Bob")
"I'm nasty, I'm old and a little bit ornery; I look like Patrick Stewart and sound like Sean Connery."
Patch 1.13 = (click here)
I hope you're right. I just have this feeling with knowing B.Net players that some cheap method will emerge.
USEast D2 Ladder/1.13 Beta: Accnt = ChezPizmo
USEast WCIII Ladder: Accnt = TeeheeSprinkles
A cool, unrelated video; "Dude Bids 420 on Price is Right" ("420, Bob")
"I'm nasty, I'm old and a little bit ornery; I look like Patrick Stewart and sound like Sean Connery."
Patch 1.13 = (click here)
Diablo is heavily based around Magic Find, its what keep you going for years at least its a big part of that. You create a magic finder find all the gear you need for new toons etc.
God I can't wait for this game.
The best way is to adjust stats of monsters depending your level ("average" in multiplayer) like this every time it will be hard !!! and indeed quality of drop must follow your level too (it's why mf need to be nerf, or change to a new system?)