By leveling out loot generation, and spreading it out across the game, running certain spots over and over isn't really the way people will go about getting loot and XP anymore. And I'd rather play a game like that, that has me jumping around the game and compels me to go all over the place, than have the devs suddenly tell me that drop rates on bosses have been quadrupled or some such bull.
QFT.
As I mentioned in another thread already, I really don't get why some people feel it's an absolute necessity to identify the one difficulty, the one zone, the one class, the one spec, the one gear set, to maximize efficiency. Go full DPS WW barb MP10 Crypt farming in full group only, or you're a stupid inefficient noob. Sigh...
D3V has given us "some" choice and variety, at least since 1.08's mob density fix, and with the new itemization, re-balancing of classes, removal of OP builds, the introduction of bounties and rifts no one should ever feel like being pushed into this one-size-fits-all way to play D3. Maybe that's why people say there is no "end-game", because if things go well, RoS will never be like D2 ("kill Baal over and over and over and over"). I get the feeling some people don't want this freedom, they want robot-like monotony with many locked-in features.
In case I didn't say this, Bagstone, I think part of the problem is that people have been so used to various routines from D2 that anything that goes against that model is seen as "bad." Plus, since so much "fun" was had from that kind of model, which involved repeatedly bulldozing the same zones and enemies, no one ever thought to question why such a model was unhealthy or flawed.
Love 'em or hate 'em, the D3 devs are some brave souls. They're taking a community of people spoiled on the mountains of loot they were getting from repeatedly facerolling bosses, and saying, "you have to work for your reward. No more handouts." I grew up rather spoiled by my parents, so I suppose in a subconscious attempt to make up for that, I at least like to work for imaginary loot in a game.
And ya know, I like the last line you say there the best, because it really highlights how contradictory people in this community can sometimes be. I'd be willing to bet there are some people still wondering why bosses aren't dropping better loot...yet, most of those people are also the folks who are saying there isn't enough content. So they want bosses to drop the best loot, but in the process, those bosses will become farming spots, and the amount of content will become less.
In regard to efficiency, my best guess is simple...Ladders. Many D3 players were active Ladder players in D2, and in Ladders, efficiency is a key factor. Honestly, in a Ladder scenario, or in Races like Path of Exile has, I totally understand "efficiency." However, when not in a Ladder or Race scenario, efficiency shouldn't be a factor.
I probably won't partake, but I do hope Ladders show up in D3 ASAP, for the sake of those who want to compete. It's a good PvPvE stepping stone, and lets the people looking for a reason for efficiency have a purpose. Meanwhile, folks who want to kick back and enjoy the slow progression to godliness can enjoy the game the way they want it as well.
My only current wish regarding bounties is that I'd like the "rare" events of each act (like the Wheel of Fortune on Act 2 and those less common Act 1 dungeons/towers) to be more frequent in that particular game-mode.
I'm growing a bit tired of the "common events", and really wanna see more of those rare ones.
Well shaggy, I think what Zero was saying was that, as a way to spice up what types of Bounties of appear to break up all the "kill 50 mobs + this guy", they should include more of the rarer Events from the Campaign Mode. Which is why I think they threw Events in as Bounties to begin with. There are likely people who have never done hardly any of those Events, so adding those as Bounties alone increases the variety. However, very often, as Zero was saying, they're not really enough.
Though I can agree on both accounts, more variety in Bounties AND Events would be great. More of both, I'm all for that.
I was saying to Elendiro before that I feel like Bounties are a good intro point. The "Bounties" feature is being added, and if people aren't satisfied with the variety, it's not hard to add more types, more styles, even some with multi-tier objectives. I mean, they're just simple randomized mini-quests, it's easy to write in more. But the main purpose of them, I think, seems to be working. People are doing them, getting rewarded, and not running the same zones over and over.
Truthfully, I'm looking forward to completing Bounties, but when I get a bit tired of them, or I find myself running into certain dungeons, I'm just gonna go off the trail a bit. Bounties in Adventure Mode are definitely going to be profitable for both XP and loot, however part of their purpose is to send you all round. Which means, Zero, that even if they don't include more occurrences of the Wheel from Act 2 or the Tower from Act 1 as formal Bounties, I want to say you can still visit those zones to see if they spawned. Even if they're not offering Bounty rewards for completing them, you're still bound to get a bunch of enemies and maybe a Resplendent Chest.
I think it's great the devs are being proactive in reducing cheese tactics such as "split farming" for bounties. I'm sure there will be more loopholes, so to speak, that will be discovered after launch as well. After what a disaster D3 was I'm hoping the expansion will be a lot more polished when it comes to things like this.
I think it's great, too. It's one of the things that really keeps me having a lot of faith in the D3 devs. They clearly don't want people to exploit the game, and I appreciate their dedication in fixing areas where that can be stopped. Though, when I think about it, not only are they curbing exploitation, they're also changing how an activity like "farming" goes in a game like this.
Peoples' routines have been so strictly held to the idea that in order to get the best items, one has to identify the zones and enemies that generate the most/highest quality loot and "run" them as many times per hour as possible. Which is why boss runs in D2 were so common...because players knew that bosses dropped the best stuff, and since they were easy to repeat, they'd jack up their characters to the max, run bosses over and over, and be drowning in loot. Fast forward to D3, players are suddenly confused why such an allegedly "fun" thing was eased out of the game.
By leveling out loot generation, and spreading it out across the game, running certain spots over and over isn't really the way people will go about getting loot and XP anymore. And I'd rather play a game like that, that has me jumping around the game and compels me to go all over the place, than have the devs suddenly tell me that drop rates on bosses have been quadrupled or some such bull.
They seriously need to add more types of bounties...I'd be satisfied with around 10-20...
I can agree with you, Elendiro. At the very least, I see Bounties as a kind of stepping stone. Even if that particular feature is rather shallow at first, just being added to the game means they can be added to later on. Kinda like the Mystic. Her services are great, but if it turns out she could be doing one or two more things later on, like adding a property to blue items or creating magic or rare items from white items somehow, another feature that isn't hard to add later on.
So yeah, a little more variety would be nice, but...I'm glad Bounties are going to be there at all. I'd rather have the variety of environments, enemies, and challenges of randomized targets and clearing dungeon floors than farming via "hey, there's this one dungeon that has insane drop rates, let's only go there over and over to generate mountains of loot, because FUN!"
Hmm...though, this does bring up an important point here...what stops some jacked up toon from joining public Adventure Mode games and clearing Bounties in other Acts before the remaining player(s) can do them? That'd be some serious griefing.
Dammit...hole in the plan, confirmed, :-)
Oh my god, that would be so much fun, like the D3 equivalent of PK - bounty poaching.
Ah, well, I was not a PvP or PK'ing guy back in the D2 days, so...forgive me if I don't jump on supporting "bounty poaching" wholeheartedly, ;-)
Could they do some kind of "player has to be in X range of" thing to get credit for it?
I'm only in the PTR, so I haven't been able to play the beta, nor any multiplayer within it...however, from what I gather, it seems like that's how it works to begin with.
Like, you warp to a zone, and the Bounty kind of immediately activates. You run around, kill the 50 monsters before the boss (for example), then get the boss kill, and the Bounty ends there. Now...I honestly don't know what happens if one player in the game enters a Bounty zone, kills a few monsters to start the process, then another joins in at that point. When they join after the Bounty starts, does their kill count match that of whoever started it? Or does it start from zero? So I don't know if it recognizes range for Bounties, since they seem to monopolize whole zones...
If players can split off in different directions, finish separate Bounties and everyone claims the prizes, though, there is something that shouldn't be happening. And I'm glad the devs are on board to fix that.
The best solution would simply be to move all the blood shards to the bounty boss/task/whatever instead.
and just leave them out of the bags, reduce the legendary drop rate from them also, just a minor reward a small bonus but not the main point to go after.
now with the biggest blood shard income source nerfed and team play more encouraged. due to main drop (blood shards) being on the bounty completion.
also give the gambling vendor a boost in the legendary drop rate so that its compensated.
this makes so that killing mosters and being active and bountys toghether is the best source for blood shards and in extension legendary. but i guess gamling them is not the most fun way to get ones legendarys. but i guess everything is flawed.
Yeah, not to take apart your observations, but with all due respect, it seems a bit overcomplicated a solution. But then again, my idea might not be all that sound to begin with, so...it might need an overcomplicated solution to fix it, and in which case, may just be easier left out. I'm willing to admit that, :-)
I think that if you don't help complete a bounty, you shouldn't get credit for it. In fact, it'd be fun to join a game and race to see who can complete the most bounties. But more importantly, I believe at some point it becomes the player's responsibility to just not abuse the game mechanics, and the devs just have to let players play how they want.
As I said in another thread, split-farming reminds me of Blood Runs and Baal Runs from D2 - easily the most efficient way to level your character, completely against the spirit of the game. Especially if you weren't one of the two or three OP sorcs carrying the whole group. I did my fair share of them, but I also spent plenty of time and got plenty of enjoyment out of playing through naturally. At no point did I feel obligated to do them because they were optimal.
There are grey areas - I think removing the AH was the right choice even though I could just play self-found because the drop rate really was abysmal; I think BoA is the right call as well even though I could just abstain from trading because I am really tired of third-party site spam (though I guess they will still sell gold and mats). People will disagree on those.
But I think the split-farming thing is a non-issue. If your characters are powerful enough that you can split up and complete separate bounties alone in a 4 player game, then mazel tov. And if you can't hack it, there's the door - go do something else until you can. Or maybe you have friends willing to carry you during split-farming, similar to Uber-carries. Or maybe the third party sites will start selling split-farming sessions. It'll always be something.
That's kinda the MO behind my idea. I know I've heard about people saying they used to do, um...can't remember what they were called, though I coulda sworn there was a name for it...ton of people create a D2 game, they split off and kill Andy, Duriel, Mephisto and Diablo...the others head to Baal's Chamber and maybe clear out the Minions, and everyone takes out Baal together. They would do it really fast, too. And you're right, it does kinda go against the spirit of things.
Like I said, split-farming in terms of getting things you didn't earn (i.e., rewards for other peoples' bounties) isn't fair. But...like I ask here...maybe there is something to allowing people to do Bounties and get their own credit for them, and without getting credit for other peoples'.
Hmm...though, this does bring up an important point here...what stops some jacked up toon from joining public Adventure Mode games and clearing Bounties in other Acts before the remaining player(s) can do them? That'd be some serious griefing.
Dammit...hole in the plan, confirmed, :-)
I see why you'd want individual bounties so people can farm by themselves while in a game with friends to trade items, BUT, I would be against that. I think a system to turn on / off personal bounties would end up being too convoluted, and my personal elitist view is if you're in a multi-player game the best type of farming should be working together, and I'd rather not see playing solo while in MP games encouraged.
Agreed, :-) What Travis said about split-farming doesn't seem to leave room open for this, and even from an efficiency standpoint, there's not a whole lot to be gained. Just the option to not follow the group if you don't want to.
Question then becomes...what do they have in mind to combat this, if this idea isn't going to be the answer? And I'm not asking that rhetorically either, like my idea is the end-all be-all, I'm just very curious, :-)
Personally, I don't see much point in joining a multiplayer game if you aren't going to be doing the same things working towards a common goal.
Seems like trying to make this work would be a waste of concentration on things that should take precedence.
Hard to disagree. It'd be an option for a sliver of the community that wanted to go this route, but most people, I'd like to believe, feel this particular way. You want to play solo, play in private games. You want to play multiplayer, join the group and contribute. That's why the devs said 4 people to a game is better than 8...because when it's only 4, everyone's contribution is more noticeable, while when there's 8, people either constantly get left behind or are sometimes not even acknowledged.
Also, trying to balance the individual monster killing XP and gold rewards with Strength in Numbers active and telling it to not calculate other people in the game could get really buggy as well.
the only way i can see this working is if you can "reset" a zone once it is completed.
else the other player would just get into an empty zone. with no rewards in it.
being able to reset zones could also help reduce the need to start new games over and over and that would mean less strain on the servers.
Question is what is needed to do before being able to reset a zone. bounty only could work well i guess but would not work for most other zones.
Zone reset isn't a bad a idea at all. Dare I say...Path of Exile does it with their zones or instances. You stay out of a zone long enough (I think it might be 8 minutes or so), and it resets all the monsters and such. Obviously, 8 minutes wouldn't work in this context, but...maybe some kind of game-wide player vote to reset all the particular created game world or something.
Then again, that is part of the downside of playing this way...that one person can't clear all the Acts on their own, while in the same game as another person, because the other Acts are being cleared simultaneously. They could institute a zone reset, but that'd just separate people further than they already are separating themselves by playing solo in a game with one or more other people.
The idea I'm proposing may not be that great an idea. I'm willing to admit to that. I was just thinking the community likes options, instead of "you have to play this particular way." The idea could work, but it'd be a tad awkward, for sure.
I can't believe there's already a name for people splitting up in Adventure Mode games and collecting each other's Bounty Rewards, but it's great to know the devs are looking to kill that ASAP.
However, I did have a thought....what if multiple people want to be in the same game, but are okay with doing their own Bounties and collecting their own Bounty Rewards? After all, it's their own risk being in games with other people, raising the difficulty of monsters and going their separate ways, when they could just work together and make it way easier. And I FULLY FULLY agree that people splitting off and collecting each other's Bounty Rewards, without actually participating in a particular Bounty, does suck.
But...and I don't meant to start another BoA/trading fiasco...but in a case like this, where people are simply collecting their own Bounty Rewards in the same game, they are still able to trade legendaries and set items with each other because they were present in-game when the item dropped.
For instance...if I play with my friend in a game, and we do the same Bounties together, we get the same rewards. We do a clear of Act 3 Bounties, we get the same XP, gold and Cache at the end of the Act. All fine and good, conducive to multiplayer.
But let's say, I play with a friend and I want to do Act 1 Bounties, he wants to do Act 2 Bounties. He can play Act 2 all he wants and get HIS OWN Bounty Rewards, I can play in Act 1 and get MY OWN Bounty Rewards. We don't share the immediate XP, gold or Horadric Cache rewards for each others' Bounties (i.e., when he finishes his Act 2 Bounties, I don't get a free goodie bag or any of the XP or gold for him completing his quests, nor does he collect on me finishing mine), but if I find an interesting legendary that rolled good general stats for most classes, and I want to trade it to him...I can.
I'd be fine with the devs killing any manner of split-farming, as it does sound very exploity...but I figured this caveat could act as a slightly different style of multiplayer, and maybe possibly open up the window for trading high end items by a slight crack.
In case I didn't say this, Bagstone, I think part of the problem is that people have been so used to various routines from D2 that anything that goes against that model is seen as "bad." Plus, since so much "fun" was had from that kind of model, which involved repeatedly bulldozing the same zones and enemies, no one ever thought to question why such a model was unhealthy or flawed.
Love 'em or hate 'em, the D3 devs are some brave souls. They're taking a community of people spoiled on the mountains of loot they were getting from repeatedly facerolling bosses, and saying, "you have to work for your reward. No more handouts." I grew up rather spoiled by my parents, so I suppose in a subconscious attempt to make up for that, I at least like to work for imaginary loot in a game.
And ya know, I like the last line you say there the best, because it really highlights how contradictory people in this community can sometimes be. I'd be willing to bet there are some people still wondering why bosses aren't dropping better loot...yet, most of those people are also the folks who are saying there isn't enough content. So they want bosses to drop the best loot, but in the process, those bosses will become farming spots, and the amount of content will become less.
In regard to efficiency, my best guess is simple...Ladders. Many D3 players were active Ladder players in D2, and in Ladders, efficiency is a key factor. Honestly, in a Ladder scenario, or in Races like Path of Exile has, I totally understand "efficiency." However, when not in a Ladder or Race scenario, efficiency shouldn't be a factor.
I probably won't partake, but I do hope Ladders show up in D3 ASAP, for the sake of those who want to compete. It's a good PvPvE stepping stone, and lets the people looking for a reason for efficiency have a purpose. Meanwhile, folks who want to kick back and enjoy the slow progression to godliness can enjoy the game the way they want it as well.
Well shaggy, I think what Zero was saying was that, as a way to spice up what types of Bounties of appear to break up all the "kill 50 mobs + this guy", they should include more of the rarer Events from the Campaign Mode. Which is why I think they threw Events in as Bounties to begin with. There are likely people who have never done hardly any of those Events, so adding those as Bounties alone increases the variety. However, very often, as Zero was saying, they're not really enough.
Though I can agree on both accounts, more variety in Bounties AND Events would be great. More of both, I'm all for that.
I was saying to Elendiro before that I feel like Bounties are a good intro point. The "Bounties" feature is being added, and if people aren't satisfied with the variety, it's not hard to add more types, more styles, even some with multi-tier objectives. I mean, they're just simple randomized mini-quests, it's easy to write in more. But the main purpose of them, I think, seems to be working. People are doing them, getting rewarded, and not running the same zones over and over.
Truthfully, I'm looking forward to completing Bounties, but when I get a bit tired of them, or I find myself running into certain dungeons, I'm just gonna go off the trail a bit. Bounties in Adventure Mode are definitely going to be profitable for both XP and loot, however part of their purpose is to send you all round. Which means, Zero, that even if they don't include more occurrences of the Wheel from Act 2 or the Tower from Act 1 as formal Bounties, I want to say you can still visit those zones to see if they spawned. Even if they're not offering Bounty rewards for completing them, you're still bound to get a bunch of enemies and maybe a Resplendent Chest.
I think it's great, too. It's one of the things that really keeps me having a lot of faith in the D3 devs. They clearly don't want people to exploit the game, and I appreciate their dedication in fixing areas where that can be stopped. Though, when I think about it, not only are they curbing exploitation, they're also changing how an activity like "farming" goes in a game like this.
Peoples' routines have been so strictly held to the idea that in order to get the best items, one has to identify the zones and enemies that generate the most/highest quality loot and "run" them as many times per hour as possible. Which is why boss runs in D2 were so common...because players knew that bosses dropped the best stuff, and since they were easy to repeat, they'd jack up their characters to the max, run bosses over and over, and be drowning in loot. Fast forward to D3, players are suddenly confused why such an allegedly "fun" thing was eased out of the game.
By leveling out loot generation, and spreading it out across the game, running certain spots over and over isn't really the way people will go about getting loot and XP anymore. And I'd rather play a game like that, that has me jumping around the game and compels me to go all over the place, than have the devs suddenly tell me that drop rates on bosses have been quadrupled or some such bull.
I can agree with you, Elendiro. At the very least, I see Bounties as a kind of stepping stone. Even if that particular feature is rather shallow at first, just being added to the game means they can be added to later on. Kinda like the Mystic. Her services are great, but if it turns out she could be doing one or two more things later on, like adding a property to blue items or creating magic or rare items from white items somehow, another feature that isn't hard to add later on.
So yeah, a little more variety would be nice, but...I'm glad Bounties are going to be there at all. I'd rather have the variety of environments, enemies, and challenges of randomized targets and clearing dungeon floors than farming via "hey, there's this one dungeon that has insane drop rates, let's only go there over and over to generate mountains of loot, because FUN!"
I'm only in the PTR, so I haven't been able to play the beta, nor any multiplayer within it...however, from what I gather, it seems like that's how it works to begin with.
Like, you warp to a zone, and the Bounty kind of immediately activates. You run around, kill the 50 monsters before the boss (for example), then get the boss kill, and the Bounty ends there. Now...I honestly don't know what happens if one player in the game enters a Bounty zone, kills a few monsters to start the process, then another joins in at that point. When they join after the Bounty starts, does their kill count match that of whoever started it? Or does it start from zero? So I don't know if it recognizes range for Bounties, since they seem to monopolize whole zones...
If players can split off in different directions, finish separate Bounties and everyone claims the prizes, though, there is something that shouldn't be happening. And I'm glad the devs are on board to fix that.
Yeah, not to take apart your observations, but with all due respect, it seems a bit overcomplicated a solution. But then again, my idea might not be all that sound to begin with, so...it might need an overcomplicated solution to fix it, and in which case, may just be easier left out. I'm willing to admit that, :-)
Agreed, :-) What Travis said about split-farming doesn't seem to leave room open for this, and even from an efficiency standpoint, there's not a whole lot to be gained. Just the option to not follow the group if you don't want to.
Question then becomes...what do they have in mind to combat this, if this idea isn't going to be the answer? And I'm not asking that rhetorically either, like my idea is the end-all be-all, I'm just very curious, :-)
Hard to disagree. It'd be an option for a sliver of the community that wanted to go this route, but most people, I'd like to believe, feel this particular way. You want to play solo, play in private games. You want to play multiplayer, join the group and contribute. That's why the devs said 4 people to a game is better than 8...because when it's only 4, everyone's contribution is more noticeable, while when there's 8, people either constantly get left behind or are sometimes not even acknowledged.
Also, trying to balance the individual monster killing XP and gold rewards with Strength in Numbers active and telling it to not calculate other people in the game could get really buggy as well.
Zone reset isn't a bad a idea at all. Dare I say...Path of Exile does it with their zones or instances. You stay out of a zone long enough (I think it might be 8 minutes or so), and it resets all the monsters and such. Obviously, 8 minutes wouldn't work in this context, but...maybe some kind of game-wide player vote to reset all the particular created game world or something.
Then again, that is part of the downside of playing this way...that one person can't clear all the Acts on their own, while in the same game as another person, because the other Acts are being cleared simultaneously. They could institute a zone reset, but that'd just separate people further than they already are separating themselves by playing solo in a game with one or more other people.
The idea I'm proposing may not be that great an idea. I'm willing to admit to that. I was just thinking the community likes options, instead of "you have to play this particular way." The idea could work, but it'd be a tad awkward, for sure.
I can't believe there's already a name for people splitting up in Adventure Mode games and collecting each other's Bounty Rewards, but it's great to know the devs are looking to kill that ASAP.
However, I did have a thought....what if multiple people want to be in the same game, but are okay with doing their own Bounties and collecting their own Bounty Rewards? After all, it's their own risk being in games with other people, raising the difficulty of monsters and going their separate ways, when they could just work together and make it way easier. And I FULLY FULLY agree that people splitting off and collecting each other's Bounty Rewards, without actually participating in a particular Bounty, does suck.
But...and I don't meant to start another BoA/trading fiasco...but in a case like this, where people are simply collecting their own Bounty Rewards in the same game, they are still able to trade legendaries and set items with each other because they were present in-game when the item dropped.
For instance...if I play with my friend in a game, and we do the same Bounties together, we get the same rewards. We do a clear of Act 3 Bounties, we get the same XP, gold and Cache at the end of the Act. All fine and good, conducive to multiplayer.
But let's say, I play with a friend and I want to do Act 1 Bounties, he wants to do Act 2 Bounties. He can play Act 2 all he wants and get HIS OWN Bounty Rewards, I can play in Act 1 and get MY OWN Bounty Rewards. We don't share the immediate XP, gold or Horadric Cache rewards for each others' Bounties (i.e., when he finishes his Act 2 Bounties, I don't get a free goodie bag or any of the XP or gold for him completing his quests, nor does he collect on me finishing mine), but if I find an interesting legendary that rolled good general stats for most classes, and I want to trade it to him...I can.
I'd be fine with the devs killing any manner of split-farming, as it does sound very exploity...but I figured this caveat could act as a slightly different style of multiplayer, and maybe possibly open up the window for trading high end items by a slight crack.
Thoughts, anyone?