Some people live in a diablo bubble and do not compare their character to others as someone having a more powerful character outside that bubble doesn't concern them. These people are very very few as most want to 'win'..
What is winning in diablo 3? For me... well after I beat diablo on inferno the focus shifted to having the most powerful character. To measure how powerful you are is mainly done by comparing yours against others.
This is actually FUN by the way (maka).. building the most powerful character to slowly move up the DPS/MP10 ladder..
We set a goal for ourselves (like some set for themselves to be 'self found') to reach 100k dps, 300k dps, 600k dps etc
Now the way that the most powerful characters are made in diablo 3 are currently from the AH/RMAH/Trading.
I think all people want is that after we have beat the main campaign mode and our shift goes back to developing the most powerful characters in RoS, that the way to become powerful is from PLAYING THE GAME, NOT THE AH/RMAH and not TRADING (which is just an archaic AH/RMAH)
Also creating a limitation on the AH/RMAH/Trading stops people from 'Paying to Win' this D3 metagame
Honestly, and at the risk of sounding like a dick and alienating a lot of people here, you all need to take a good look at what makes you feel validated in life, and at what makes you feel a sense of accomplishment. That you are so dependent on what other people are doing, in a non-competitive game, in order to have fun, is totally out of my comprehension. And I'm being totally honest. It's something around which I can't really wrap my head, no matter how hard I try.
Seriously, know who and where you are, have fun with the journey (as long as the journey is fun - hopefully RoS delivers that), and forget about the races and the rankings.
I think my time in this thread has run its course, it's next to impossible for me to find some common ground. All I can say is that I hope they change their mind on this.
I think it boils down to personalities and that a lot of people are competitive no matter what the game.
Fuck I could play Solitaire and play it over and over but eventually the game may become stale .. so I might challenge my mate and say who can win solitaire the most times. GO.
I just made a non-competitive game competitive to make it more FUN (subjectively) after I had completed the main goal of the game.
You may not have a competitive bone in your body and that might be the reason you don't agree with the other side on this debate.
Oddly enough while I won't bother purchasing the game if BoA is here to stay.. Blizzard will make more money because there will be an increase in multiboxers so itirnitii can be jealous of their gear and he can be like OH MAN GOOD JOB NICE FIND!!!!
So the problem will still exist, but it's okay because I'm not allowed to have my fun with trading!! This is a very well thought out idea and is not an extremists approach at all!
In reality, it will be like the console and not worth playing after a couple hundred hours. Because it's not practical to find perfect gear yourself and upgrades will get further and further apart. Since you get to like 85-90% of max stats in no time.
I've played many single player games. I've played almost every Mario and Zelda game to date and I have fun accomplishing things in those games just for the sake of it. I don't need a community in those games and I don't need validation for my accomplishments. I just play to play. But, that's not how I view Diablo. It has a community. My friends log in and play with me. I care about that community and the boundaries that Blizzard sets for that community and for the scope of that to encompass a multiplayer experience that is for the most part a mutually shared experience with my friends and everyone else that I might run into. I care about how other people are playing so that when I share how neat it is that I found an item with my friend, he will know that I didn't just spend $50 to buy it. Sure, I could tell him I didn't, but somehow it doesn't hold that same emphasis. It's not to hold it over him or try to elevate myself. It's not that I need him to lavish me with praise and adulation. It's just neat. When the game enforces this concept, I can then share this experience with anyone that I run into on my travels! The fact that I couldn't just trade for it in a mere 10 minutes instills a sense of worth into the experience that is unattainable otherwise. By fate conspiring in my favor by dropping this item makes it worth more to me than owning 100 others just like it that I had to trade for. I would rather never own that same legendary item than trade for 100 of them. Having the game enforce this is the only way to make these legendaries truly feel legendary. It's not about ranks, it's not about ratings, it's about that feeling. That feeling you get when you know you found something special and the game, your friends, and the community can celebrate that victory with you without all of the background noise of pay to win, trading shortcuts to victory, and that palpable sense of entitlement that players express as though they are owed whatever item they want the fastest they can get their hands on it.
It matters and it's not a sin for that to matter for me. If you want to argue that trading is good for its own sake in the context of the game, go on ahead. I will listen. But don't invalidate my feelings or insinuate they are flawed or unhealthy because you yourself don't understand them. I have not paid you in kind.
People are just upset with the possibility of perhaps never being able to get some specific item they want. Not only will this probably turn out to be very unlikely but I also don't see why everyone feels entitled to have exactly everything they want in this game. Remember Annihilus from D2? What irks me that people see duping as a positive thing just like some people saw AH as a positive thing here.
I've played many single player games. I've played almost every Mario and Zelda game to date and I have fun accomplishing things in those games just for the sake of it. I don't need a community in those games and I don't need validation for my accomplishments. I just play to play. But, that's not how I view Diablo. It has a community. My friends log in and play with me. I care about that community and the boundaries that Blizzard sets for that community and for the scope of that to encompass a multiplayer experience that is for the most part a mutually shared experience with my friends and everyone else that I might run into. I care about how other people are playing so that when I share how neat it is that I found an item with my friend, he will know that I didn't just spend $50 to buy it. Sure, I could tell him I didn't, but somehow it doesn't hold that same emphasis. It's not to hold it over him or try to elevate myself. It's just neat. The fact that I couldn't just trade for it in a mere 10 minutes instills a sense of worth into the experience that is unattainable otherwise. By fate conspiring in my favor by dropping this item makes it worth more to me than owning 100 others just like it that I had to trade for. I would rather never own that same legendary item than trade for 100 of them. Having the game enforce this is the only way to make these legendaries truly feel legendary. It's not about ranks, it's not about ratings, it's about that feeling. That feeling you get when you know you found something special and the game, your friends, and the community can celebrate that victory with you without all of the background noise of pay to win, trading shortcuts to victory, and that palpable sense of entitlement that players express as though they are owed whatever item they want the fastest they can get their hands on it.
It matters and it's not a sin for that to matter for me. If you want to argue that trading is good for its own sake in the context of the game, go on ahead. I will listen. But don't invalidate my feelings or insinuate they are unhealthy because you yourself don't understand them. I have not paid you in kind.
So, wrap your head around that.
So what you're saying is that in the ten minutes you took to find some other arbitrary legendary that isn't for your class or maybe it is and doesn't fit your build, some other guy whose ten minutes spent playing the game also found him an arbitrary legendary that fits your build, and you wouldn't just wanna be like "Hey I spent time finding this POS i don't need but you do, and you found that POS you dont need but I do, wanna trade?"? I mean really the ridciulous amount of support for this is astounding. It's not anything about finding items. you want to find items look at what they've been saying cause apparently they're taking the worth out of finding items too, or did you miss the part whent hey said a normal solo Act 3 run at p40 got you 6 Legs, and that equates to a fullgame run of around 30 legs, and put that in co-op that's about 120 legs a game... and you still somehow feel that finding that leg is worth something and meaningful? Please don't even try to make an argument against that. because within a few days you'll be maxed out with nothing to do but jerkoff in a corner about how happy you are for finding that Legendary axe...
People are just upset with the possibility of perhaps never being able to get some specific item they want. Not only will this probably turn out to be very unlikely but I also don't see why everyone feels entitled to have exactly everything they want in this game. Remember Annihilus from D2? What irks me that people see duping as a positive thing just like some people saw AH as a positive thing here.
The age of instant gratification in gaming.
Yes the age of instant gratification in gaming is upon us. When people try to stop NO WE MUST HAVE MORE OF IT. SCREW TRADING JUST GIVE THE LEGENDARIES TO PEOPLE THEN REMOVE TRADING SO THAT THEY CAN'T INSTA-TRADE FOR THE ITEM THEY REALLY WANT! GENIUS!!! MORE TRICKERY TO MAKE THE MASSES FOLLOW US!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
Well of course I disagree with legendaries raining upon us in droves making them inherently meaningless. But that has nothing to do with my stance about soulbound legendaries. Those are two different concepts that are not mutually exclusive and require two separate arguments.
Well of course I disagree with legendaries raining upon us in droves making them inherently meaningless. But that has nothing to do with my stance about soulbound legendaries. Those are two different concepts that require two separate arguments.
Not true at all! Think about it. If Legs drop at 6 an act that's 120 Legs a game with 4 people to trade. Now I understand that this is why they probably took out trading. If you could trade and 120 Legs drop every 4 player game run then we'd be geared in a day or two. But if they reduce that amount to say 1-2 an act that puts us at around 20-40 a game run still significant but much less than before. Now say we reduce it to .5 or .25 now we're at 10 to 5 a game and now it's much harder to gear yourself but still POSSIBLE. With trading now we can get items but maybe they aren't for us so I can trade with another guy who has the item I want. I didn't work any less for this item than he did, I just got bad luck and that's all. There has to be a check on this bad luck factor. Or I might consistently get bad luck and just end up with 500 storm crows instead of the single Tals I needed. Where as with trading I could trade 50 of those storm crows for the Tals and be just as satisfied knowing I put in the hours to get legendaries but I was just unfortunate to not get the one I wanted.
They need to find a middle ground. Allow trading but make it hard to find Legendaries I don't want to see 120 drop in a game that's too ridiculous and literally kills the item hunt because there effectively is none, and it also makes people who'd like trading upset because now I can't trade and the people who want meaningful drops aren't getting them because there everywhere!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
What I am saying is this... someone can argue for any of these four points:
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
They can all be an outcome of what happens. Just because I want legendaries to be soulbound does not mean I like what they are doing with making legendaries drop too much. I can want one to stay the way it is heading and desire for the other to change. So, why is that being used as a counter to my stance when I in fact agree with you on that point?
What I am saying is this... someone can argue for any of these four points:
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
They can all be an outcome of what happens. Just because I want legendaries to be soulbound does not mean I like what they are doing with making legendaries drop too much. I can want one to stay the way it is heading and desire for the other to change. So, why is that being used as a counter to my stance when I in fact agree with you on that point?
Because I feel the whole reason they took the stance of soulbound legs, which I hate, is because they put the drop rate way too high, which I also hate. I feel like they said "let's throw legs at people", but then were like "oh shit man everyone's got everything in a few days because they all just traded the perf items they found to someone who needed that and that guy had the perf item they needed, so lets remove trading so they can't do that." So they soulbounded Legs because everyone was probably using perf legs and sets instead of rares and blues. This is a problem to me. It's a cheap way to escape having to actually fix a problem they have.
You can't argue 3 or 1 in my eyes 2 is possible but it needs restrictions. I mean 1 and 3 are just stupid to me. Why would you want to kill the item hunt, and then have soulbound legs its just retarded. The point of the legs dropping like crazy is so you can get them but I don't want that. I want to work for it. 3 is similarly stupid because if the legs drop like candy and they aren't soulbound then again you'll never need to play after a few days. 2 Is sorta weird in my opinion. 2 would make it REALLY hard to find gear, because now it isn't dropping and it isn't being traded so now you'll really need to invest thousands of hours to get them. I don't like this one just because it would make it too hard to find the leg. Option 4 though makes most sense to me. You can't find tons of Legs but hey you can trade for the one you want. It's not like everyone's going to have the item either. Just like you they are hunting for a good item as well and it should take time to find a good one, but if you can trade then the time you spent getting a Mempo wasn't a waste because someone elses equal time spent getting a Tals could mean you getting the tals and him getting the mempo.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
Yeah, I wasn't saying anything about the validity of those four stances. Just, that they could be made and they are not mutually exclusive positions to take. I don't want legendaries overly abundant either, because that too diminishes that feeling of finding and owning them that I am talking about. It should be increased from what it is now, but not too extreme. I want to be hunting these things down for years to come.
Years is a little overboard. If this game is going to last it should take years to find every legendary but it shouldn't take years just to find that one you're looking for. Which is where trading would solve that. If I just happen to find your Mempo and you find My tals I could be searching for years just trying to find the Tals and he could spend years trying to find the Mempo. But if we can trade maybe it take me 6 months-1 year to find the Mempo and the same for you finding Tals. I'd love to trade for it because it doesn't mean I'm not putting work into finding it. It means that I simply got unlucky. Getting unlucky shouldn't mean I don't get to use a full build because that's just not fair.
Ex: My Wiz is going to be a Frost Wiz come RoS. I already know because that's what I want. I want to use Sleet storm, Frozen Orb the Cold rune on the new skill, Blizzard, Ice Armor and hopefully they put in a frost generator, if not probably Shock pulse with the fire for some extra damage. So now that I know what I want I have to find items with the passives and stuff that will enable me to get alot of AP regen or APoC and alot of extra frost damage. If I never find Frostburns but find 10 IK gloves, is it so wrong for me to just say "hey can we trade?" It's not like I never worked for those 10 IK gloves I just simply was SOL when grinding. Hopefully they rectify both situations before release. I can't stand this extremity It'll literally kill the game.
Maybe Soulbound wont be so bad, but dear god that Legendary drop rate is TOO DAMN HIGH
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
Maybe Soulbound wont be so bad, but dear god that Legendary drop rate is TOO DAMN HIGH
You don't know the drop rate. You pulled that 120 legendaries per run out of your ass based on some very early development stuff (numbers were compiled pre-Gamescom, so probably 2-3 months ago). There will be more legendary drops as there are right now, but I doubt any character will find 120 legendaries per run - ever. No way. Please keep in mind it's all subject to change.
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
But I will go one step further and say that I want some legendary drops to be rarer than others.
For instance currently if a legendary drops it will roll for what items type it is, lets say it rolls a two handed sword.
There are about 10 possibilities it can be and each have a 1/10 chance to be rolled.- all are equal
I would prefer if 1 of those 10 legendaries actually had a 1/100 chance to be rolled, and another 1/1000.
Those 2 legendaries might be BoA items but the other 8 are not as they are more common and can be traded
I doubt any character will find 120 legendaries per run - ever. No way.
He's not saying one character will find 120 per run. He's saying, based on the console drop rate, it might be possible for a group of four people to find 120 in a full game. If we're ONLY allowed to trade with those three people, well, you can see where he's going with that. Instead of casual trading when you see your friends online, the best way to gear up would be to have a dedicated group of four where everyone freely shares items.
Even this system is "exploitable" to gear up faster than average. That's the whole point. If you're not in a group of four, freely handing out loot you can't use to the others, you're behind. Just like if you don't use the AH. The problem still exists, except now, instead of relying on an external system, you're relying upon having three people in your group as much as humanly possible to hedge your bets against RNG.
Even this system is "exploitable" to gear up faster than average. That's the whole point. If you're not in a group of four, freely handing out loot you can't use to the others, you're behind. Just like if you don't use the AH. The problem still exists, except now, instead of relying on an external system, you're relying upon having three people in your group as much as humanly possible to hedge your bets against RNG.
There are always ways to gain an advantage. I think the main problem with the AH was that people saw very easily how much they are behind while it's much easier to feel good about yourself when you can't compare that directly and easily. The diablo armory goes into the same cathegory.
There are always ways to gain an advantage. I think the main problem with the AH was that people saw very easily how much they are behind while it's much easier to feel good about yourself when you can't compare that directly and easily. The diablo armory goes into the same cathegory.
I don't disagree, and it's mostly a discussion of "how much" if you get my meaning.
But for people who are arguing that "trading would let you gear up faster" it's now turned into "if you're not in a four-person group freely trading items for the benefit of everyone then you're going to gear up slower."
I'm not sure how that is actually better. In my mind, it's actually worse because it's forcing people into a very narrow playstyle in order to maximize their gear. If you don't play that way, you literally have about 1/4 the opportunity for gear as other people.... all because you can't trade outside of the immediate game.
In order to solve that all you have to do is come to the common-sense middle ground and allow people to trade with their friends and clans without all this "bound to game" nonesense. Suddenly you're still restricted to a very small microcosm of the D3 population with whom you can trade... but you're not forced into playing four-player games in order to have the optimal gearing experience.
To me that sounds pretty damned reasonable and probably exactly what we need. We don't need people to feel forced into playing co-op. The game is SUPPOSED to not be slanted in one direction or the other. If you want to play single-player you shouldn't be at a massive disadvantage. Right?
In order to solve that all you have to do is come to the common-sense middle ground and allow people to trade with their friends and clans without all this "bound to game" nonesense. Suddenly you're still restricted to a very small microcosm of the D3 population with whom you can trade... but you're not forced into playing four-player games in order to have the optimal gearing experience.
But that would just mean that you need as many friends as possible to maximise your progression, which is not a good idea either IMO.
I still think that all they need to do is improving the loot. Trading and even the AH can stay IMO. The only people that would not be pleased by this are the flippers who have their economy ruined. But for the average player it would mean better loot and the possibility to buy some missing items occasionaly.
I agree with the trading in clan sentimentality. As long as the item is time stamped and someone can't just join your clan to trade with them. I just don't want a huge free market.
Maybe Soulbound wont be so bad, but dear god that Legendary drop rate is TOO DAMN HIGH
You don't know the drop rate. You pulled that 120 legendaries per run out of your ass based on some very early development stuff (numbers were compiled pre-Gamescom, so probably 2-3 months ago). There will be more legendary drops as there are right now, but I doubt any character will find 120 legendaries per run - ever. No way. Please keep in mind it's all subject to change.
Well they reinforced that exact same thing at a panel at blizzcon. I remember hearing it again that, that was still the case. I mean come on 120 Legs per game between 4 people is absurd. Even you can see the inherent flaw in that number. I'm not one to usually bash Blizz but this is ridiculous.
And for arguments sake let's say they reduced that number. If their initial plan was 6 how far do you think they'd go down to... 3 Legs average act run? I mean there's a certain mentality you can see in their decision making here. They want it to rain from the sky. Otherwise they would've seen that average number and been like " OH FUCK NO! Too much gotta tone it down" Then gotten new data, instead they were like "Hey guys just a heads up Loot 2.0 gives you 6 legendaries on average in an act 3 run at P40 :D:D:D:D:D:D:D Pretty awesome huh?"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Not even Death will save you from Diablo Bunny's Cuteness!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I think it boils down to personalities and that a lot of people are competitive no matter what the game.
Fuck I could play Solitaire and play it over and over but eventually the game may become stale .. so I might challenge my mate and say who can win solitaire the most times. GO.
I just made a non-competitive game competitive to make it more FUN (subjectively) after I had completed the main goal of the game.
You may not have a competitive bone in your body and that might be the reason you don't agree with the other side on this debate.
I think they already have a mode in development for people who like to compete such as yourself.
It's called Ladder.
There's no need to remove the trading of highly desired loot in order to make that happen.
So the problem will still exist, but it's okay because I'm not allowed to have my fun with trading!! This is a very well thought out idea and is not an extremists approach at all!
In reality, it will be like the console and not worth playing after a couple hundred hours. Because it's not practical to find perfect gear yourself and upgrades will get further and further apart. Since you get to like 85-90% of max stats in no time.
It matters and it's not a sin for that to matter for me. If you want to argue that trading is good for its own sake in the context of the game, go on ahead. I will listen. But don't invalidate my feelings or insinuate they are flawed or unhealthy because you yourself don't understand them. I have not paid you in kind.
So, wrap your head around that.
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
The age of instant gratification in gaming.
So what you're saying is that in the ten minutes you took to find some other arbitrary legendary that isn't for your class or maybe it is and doesn't fit your build, some other guy whose ten minutes spent playing the game also found him an arbitrary legendary that fits your build, and you wouldn't just wanna be like "Hey I spent time finding this POS i don't need but you do, and you found that POS you dont need but I do, wanna trade?"? I mean really the ridciulous amount of support for this is astounding. It's not anything about finding items. you want to find items look at what they've been saying cause apparently they're taking the worth out of finding items too, or did you miss the part whent hey said a normal solo Act 3 run at p40 got you 6 Legs, and that equates to a fullgame run of around 30 legs, and put that in co-op that's about 120 legs a game... and you still somehow feel that finding that leg is worth something and meaningful? Please don't even try to make an argument against that. because within a few days you'll be maxed out with nothing to do but jerkoff in a corner about how happy you are for finding that Legendary axe...
Yes the age of instant gratification in gaming is upon us. When people try to stop NO WE MUST HAVE MORE OF IT. SCREW TRADING JUST GIVE THE LEGENDARIES TO PEOPLE THEN REMOVE TRADING SO THAT THEY CAN'T INSTA-TRADE FOR THE ITEM THEY REALLY WANT! GENIUS!!! MORE TRICKERY TO MAKE THE MASSES FOLLOW US!
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
Not true at all! Think about it. If Legs drop at 6 an act that's 120 Legs a game with 4 people to trade. Now I understand that this is why they probably took out trading. If you could trade and 120 Legs drop every 4 player game run then we'd be geared in a day or two. But if they reduce that amount to say 1-2 an act that puts us at around 20-40 a game run still significant but much less than before. Now say we reduce it to .5 or .25 now we're at 10 to 5 a game and now it's much harder to gear yourself but still POSSIBLE. With trading now we can get items but maybe they aren't for us so I can trade with another guy who has the item I want. I didn't work any less for this item than he did, I just got bad luck and that's all. There has to be a check on this bad luck factor. Or I might consistently get bad luck and just end up with 500 storm crows instead of the single Tals I needed. Where as with trading I could trade 50 of those storm crows for the Tals and be just as satisfied knowing I put in the hours to get legendaries but I was just unfortunate to not get the one I wanted.
They need to find a middle ground. Allow trading but make it hard to find Legendaries I don't want to see 120 drop in a game that's too ridiculous and literally kills the item hunt because there effectively is none, and it also makes people who'd like trading upset because now I can't trade and the people who want meaningful drops aren't getting them because there everywhere!
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Pro legendaries dropping like crazy
- Anti soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
They can all be an outcome of what happens. Just because I want legendaries to be soulbound does not mean I like what they are doing with making legendaries drop too much. I can want one to stay the way it is heading and desire for the other to change. So, why is that being used as a counter to my stance when I in fact agree with you on that point?
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
Because I feel the whole reason they took the stance of soulbound legs, which I hate, is because they put the drop rate way too high, which I also hate. I feel like they said "let's throw legs at people", but then were like "oh shit man everyone's got everything in a few days because they all just traded the perf items they found to someone who needed that and that guy had the perf item they needed, so lets remove trading so they can't do that." So they soulbounded Legs because everyone was probably using perf legs and sets instead of rares and blues. This is a problem to me. It's a cheap way to escape having to actually fix a problem they have.
You can't argue 3 or 1 in my eyes 2 is possible but it needs restrictions. I mean 1 and 3 are just stupid to me. Why would you want to kill the item hunt, and then have soulbound legs its just retarded. The point of the legs dropping like crazy is so you can get them but I don't want that. I want to work for it. 3 is similarly stupid because if the legs drop like candy and they aren't soulbound then again you'll never need to play after a few days. 2 Is sorta weird in my opinion. 2 would make it REALLY hard to find gear, because now it isn't dropping and it isn't being traded so now you'll really need to invest thousands of hours to get them. I don't like this one just because it would make it too hard to find the leg. Option 4 though makes most sense to me. You can't find tons of Legs but hey you can trade for the one you want. It's not like everyone's going to have the item either. Just like you they are hunting for a good item as well and it should take time to find a good one, but if you can trade then the time you spent getting a Mempo wasn't a waste because someone elses equal time spent getting a Tals could mean you getting the tals and him getting the mempo.
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
Ex: My Wiz is going to be a Frost Wiz come RoS. I already know because that's what I want. I want to use Sleet storm, Frozen Orb the Cold rune on the new skill, Blizzard, Ice Armor and hopefully they put in a frost generator, if not probably Shock pulse with the fire for some extra damage. So now that I know what I want I have to find items with the passives and stuff that will enable me to get alot of AP regen or APoC and alot of extra frost damage. If I never find Frostburns but find 10 IK gloves, is it so wrong for me to just say "hey can we trade?" It's not like I never worked for those 10 IK gloves I just simply was SOL when grinding. Hopefully they rectify both situations before release. I can't stand this extremity It'll literally kill the game.
Maybe Soulbound wont be so bad, but dear god that Legendary drop rate is TOO DAMN HIGH
You don't know the drop rate. You pulled that 120 legendaries per run out of your ass based on some very early development stuff (numbers were compiled pre-Gamescom, so probably 2-3 months ago). There will be more legendary drops as there are right now, but I doubt any character will find 120 legendaries per run - ever. No way. Please keep in mind it's all subject to change.
- Pro soulbound legendaries, Anti legendaries dropping like crazy
But I will go one step further and say that I want some legendary drops to be rarer than others.
For instance currently if a legendary drops it will roll for what items type it is, lets say it rolls a two handed sword.
There are about 10 possibilities it can be and each have a 1/10 chance to be rolled.- all are equal
I would prefer if 1 of those 10 legendaries actually had a 1/100 chance to be rolled, and another 1/1000.
Those 2 legendaries might be BoA items but the other 8 are not as they are more common and can be traded
But, it means you'll be so happy when you find that item seven years after it doesn't matter anymore!
That is if you haven't said "fuck it" and quit five years ago because you're sick of not having recourse against bad luck.
He's not saying one character will find 120 per run. He's saying, based on the console drop rate, it might be possible for a group of four people to find 120 in a full game. If we're ONLY allowed to trade with those three people, well, you can see where he's going with that. Instead of casual trading when you see your friends online, the best way to gear up would be to have a dedicated group of four where everyone freely shares items.
Even this system is "exploitable" to gear up faster than average. That's the whole point. If you're not in a group of four, freely handing out loot you can't use to the others, you're behind. Just like if you don't use the AH. The problem still exists, except now, instead of relying on an external system, you're relying upon having three people in your group as much as humanly possible to hedge your bets against RNG.
There are always ways to gain an advantage. I think the main problem with the AH was that people saw very easily how much they are behind while it's much easier to feel good about yourself when you can't compare that directly and easily. The diablo armory goes into the same cathegory.
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/profile/Twoflower-2131/hero/47336841
I don't disagree, and it's mostly a discussion of "how much" if you get my meaning.
But for people who are arguing that "trading would let you gear up faster" it's now turned into "if you're not in a four-person group freely trading items for the benefit of everyone then you're going to gear up slower."
I'm not sure how that is actually better. In my mind, it's actually worse because it's forcing people into a very narrow playstyle in order to maximize their gear. If you don't play that way, you literally have about 1/4 the opportunity for gear as other people.... all because you can't trade outside of the immediate game.
In order to solve that all you have to do is come to the common-sense middle ground and allow people to trade with their friends and clans without all this "bound to game" nonesense. Suddenly you're still restricted to a very small microcosm of the D3 population with whom you can trade... but you're not forced into playing four-player games in order to have the optimal gearing experience.
To me that sounds pretty damned reasonable and probably exactly what we need. We don't need people to feel forced into playing co-op. The game is SUPPOSED to not be slanted in one direction or the other. If you want to play single-player you shouldn't be at a massive disadvantage. Right?
But that would just mean that you need as many friends as possible to maximise your progression, which is not a good idea either IMO.
I still think that all they need to do is improving the loot. Trading and even the AH can stay IMO. The only people that would not be pleased by this are the flippers who have their economy ruined. But for the average player it would mean better loot and the possibility to buy some missing items occasionaly.
http://eu.battle.net/d3/en/profile/Twoflower-2131/hero/47336841
Top 10 Solo Wizard Leaderboard - North America
Highest: Rank 6 // Greater Rift 42 12m40s
Well they reinforced that exact same thing at a panel at blizzcon. I remember hearing it again that, that was still the case. I mean come on 120 Legs per game between 4 people is absurd. Even you can see the inherent flaw in that number. I'm not one to usually bash Blizz but this is ridiculous.
And for arguments sake let's say they reduced that number. If their initial plan was 6 how far do you think they'd go down to... 3 Legs average act run? I mean there's a certain mentality you can see in their decision making here. They want it to rain from the sky. Otherwise they would've seen that average number and been like " OH FUCK NO! Too much gotta tone it down" Then gotten new data, instead they were like "Hey guys just a heads up Loot 2.0 gives you 6 legendaries on average in an act 3 run at P40 :D:D:D:D:D:D:D Pretty awesome huh?"