30 replies to this topic

[mbease]

1) Adjust the total amount of enemies in each act:
1a. Current amount in Normal mode.
1b. Current amount multiplied by 1.5 in Nightmare mode.
1c. Current amount multiplied by 2 in Hell mode.
1d. Current amount multiplied by 3 in Inferno mode.

Increasing the amount of enemies to kill would greatly increase the amount of fun people have in each difficulty and actually making the difficulty modes different from each other.

2) Add a real secret level:
2a. Create a zombie cows level.
2b. Create an endless dungeon (guaranteed one legendary-dropping chest every 10 levels).
2c. Create a massive dungeon (20 levels, guaranteed legendary in level 20).

The thing that disappointed me the most about Diablo 3 is the lack of a substantial secret level. The Secret Cow Level was so amazing in Diablo 2 and there is no excuse to skip adding another one.

3) Improve Whimsyshire:
3a. Triple/quadruple total amount of enemies.
3b. Add unique/champion monsters and 4 bosses (only one boss randomly spawns each game).
3c. Triple the level size.

The secret level sucks, period.

4) Add Multiplayer dungeons:
4a. Create dungeons that are too hard to solo.
4b. Create dungeons that only groups can enter.
4c. Create multiplayer-only events.

Why do multiplayer right now? Multiplayer-only content is a major need for a game that is intended to favor multiplayer gaming.

5) Create difficulty-specific, random spawning monsters that have a 20% chance to drop a legendary (very rare, only 3 spawned in random locations in each game):
5a. Normal mode - none.
5b. Nightmare mode - monsters named "Nightmares" that look like wraiths.
5c. Hell mode - "Hell Soldiers" that are fiery skeletons wielding swords.
5d. Inferno mode - "Inferno Beasts" that resemble minotaurs with large axes

Seriously, this whole repetitive story thing sucks, especially when every difficulty is the exact same, but slightly harder. This would at least add some uniqueness and something new to the difficulties for people leveling characters for the 3-100th time.


Suggestions/comments/praising/refuting appreciated. What do you think?

Edited by mbease, 04 January 2013 - 10:34 PM.

[Diavolo222]

Man those are some good ass suggestions. I basically liked them all. I agree most with the dungeon ones that would just make it much more interesting. Tho I would say that if that happens people will just play Mp1-2 and just fly to the end level in a few minutes.Then it would be a race to what is the best way to do the endless dungeon or the big dungeon to maximes your legendary hourly rate. I really like the idea and mb there are some suggestions to make it happen , like you have to kill X amount of creeps and elites or just one of them to be eligible for the drop.

[Bleu42]

Sorry I'm completely against guaranteed dropping legendaries, one of diablo's aspects is it's randomness. why would I run ANY part of the game if there were some dungeons that ALWAYS drops legendaries?

Also against forced multi-player. There's a reason monsters scale with the amount of players; So everything can be solo'd if need be, but is also harder with more people to even it out.

I would like to see some more mob density in the earlier acts though, and an endless dungeon would be nice, but again you'd have to adjust it so that isn't the single best farming method.

[Diavolo222]

Tbh the multiplayer although I really like its still very weird because if there are perks to being in multiplayer then people will just farm like that because being solo would not be ideal anymore.And lets be honest more HP is not hard if there are roughly equally geared people in the party.I mean MP0-1 in 4  people with 40k+ dps which is achievable with 1million nowadays is more than enoyable.

[mbease]

Bleu42, on 05 January 2013 - 12:58 AM, said:

Sorry I'm completely against guaranteed dropping legendaries, one of diablo's aspects is it's randomness. why would I run ANY part of the game if there were some dungeons that ALWAYS drops legendaries?

Also against forced multi-player. There's a reason monsters scale with the amount of players; So everything can be solo'd if need be, but is also harder with more people to even it out.

I would like to see some more mob density in the earlier acts though, and an endless dungeon would be nice, but again you'd have to adjust it so that isn't the single best farming method.

I think that having a random spawning enemy that has a 20% chance to drop a legendary would be really sweet, especially since there wouldn't be one location for it to spawn. It would give players that treasure goblin feeling, but actually be worth it to go after and be much more exciting when encountering one.

[ruksak]

IMO, PvP and hostiling would improve this game 1000% over.

After that, it's all about the items. They decided to get rid of Rune Words and not replace this item base with anything at all. They need to think of something that fills this void.

As far as content, I'm fine with waiting until an X-pac for this, but they really need to offer more than just one short act.

I would love to see a sanctioned 1v1 duel format that is based on a 'weight class' system (i.e. DPS ranking). This system would be quite a blast if their was a gold wager involved. As in D2 when you died you dropped gold, have a 'weight class' style ladder that involves the the loss/gain of a substantial amount of gold.

[wizzypopje]

good ideas, but id rather see pvp before any of this is implemented.
and yes, the secret level totally sucks

[Nikdik]

Bleu42, on 05 January 2013 - 12:58 AM, said:

Sorry I'm completely against guaranteed dropping legendaries, one of diablo's aspects is it's randomness. why would I run ANY part of the game if there were some dungeons that ALWAYS drops legendaries?

Don't worry Blizzard would never implement that. They would lose too much money from their precious RMAH

[Shadout]

I like the difficulty-specific monster spawns.

And endless dungeons. Goes without saying. Such an obvious addition to the game. Do it Blizzard!
While a secret level is always nice, lets be honest here, there is nothing secret about it, adding one would be just like adding any other new area. While nice, I'd much rather see them add endless dungeons or similar.
Maybe they could make endless dungeons, where there was like a 0,1% chance that it spawned a special "cow level" design in one of the levels

mbease, on 04 January 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

4) Add Multiplayer dungeons:
4a. Create dungeons that are too hard to solo.
4b. Create dungeons that only groups can enter.
4c. Create multiplayer-only events.

Why do multiplayer right now? Multiplayer-only content is a major need for a game that is intended to favor multiplayer gaming.

Why is the game in any way intended to favor multiplayer gaming?
It is intended to make it easy to get into a multiplayer game, but it would be pretty bad design (and go strongly against its own heritage from Diablo 2) to favor multiplayer.
Multiplayer and single player should simply be equal.
As much as I like MMOs, Diablo 3 is not, and should not, imo, be an MMO. Not even a little bit.

Nothing is fundamentally stopping people from playing multiplayer now, it is mostly their own choice if they do not - as it should be.
That said, a few things could probably be improved, such as making it easier for different character specs to keep up with each other - a teleporting wizard or WW Barb just doesn't play well with a lot of other specs for example.

Bleu42, on 05 January 2013 - 12:58 AM, said:

Sorry I'm completely against guaranteed dropping legendaries, one of diablo's aspects is it's randomness. why would I run ANY part of the game if there were some dungeons that ALWAYS drops legendaries?

It depends on how the guaranteed drops work imo.

If you got guaranteed drops from playing lots of varied content (and not just one dungeon), then it would only open up for more varied farming runs. Such as a guaranteed legendary from act bosses, if you played through all the quests in the act or similar - and killed enough elites in the process of course (redesigned NV buff).

A guaranteed legendary would still be pretty random in any case, just like guaranteed rares are from elites.

Edited by Shadout, 05 January 2013 - 03:49 PM.

[Melt]

- Random infinite dungeons with randomized monster spawns: Destroying a door in Cain's hut opens a path to a dungeon system. Every zone can spawn and its entrance and exit lead to the next/previous level of the dungeon. Combine this with random monster spawns and the game loses a lot of its repetitiveness. E.g: You start in Cathedral level one which has sandworms, charging bulls and fallen inside of it. Finding the exit you continue in the Festering Woods which contains act 4 monsters inside of it. Entering one of the tombs inside of festering woods you continue at The Battlefields...

- Rare (rare) monsterpacks: Give monsterpacks a chance to roll these rare affixes. A chance of 2% per group would allow to meet one of these groups every 5th run. The idea behind this is to make the player go "WTf?!" once in a while and stop snoozing grinds by giving the player a chance to die again or to prove himself. These affixes can be made really powerful. Examples: Invulernable minions, double damage, huge horde or triple sentr

[Shadout]

Melt, on 05 January 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

- Random infinite dungeons with randomized monster spawns: Destroying a door in Cain's hut opens a path to a dungeon system. Every zone can spawn and its entrance and exit lead to the next/previous level of the dungeon. Combine this with random monster spawns and the game loses a lot of its repetitiveness. E.g: You start in Cathedral level one which has sandworms, charging bulls and fallen inside of it. Finding the exit you continue in the Festering Woods which contains act 4 monsters inside of it. Entering one of the tombs inside of festering woods you continue at The Battlefields...

Yeah. It doesn't get mentioned often when people talk about endless dungeons, but that is exactly how it should be!
This is the places where "lore" placement of monsters goes out of the window and pure gampelay concerns enter

Melt, on 05 January 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

- Rare (rare) monsterpacks: Give monsterpacks a chance to roll these rare affixes. A chance of 2% per group would allow to meet one of these groups every 5th run. [...]These affixes can be made really powerful. Examples: Invulernable minions, double damage, huge horde or triple sentry

While interesting variation in Softcore, it could easily turn into unfair RNG in Hardcore. If adding such random challenges, then at least it should be added in a way that made it a players choice - such as not having these spawns below MP5 for example.

I would rather see more  new affixes being added to the pool that elite monsters could get - while keeping it at the same balance as the current ones.
And maybe add some "positive" affices as well (that could randomly appear on top of the normal affixes), for increased variation. Like "Drops lots of gold", "drops extra loot", "gives a random shrine buff when killed", "spawns a treasure golbin when killed" etc.

Edited by Shadout, 05 January 2013 - 04:00 PM.

[mbease]

Shadout, on 05 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

I like the difficulty-specific monster spawns.

And endless dungeons. Goes without saying. Such an obvious addition to the game. Do it Blizzard!
While a secret level is always nice, lets be honest here, there is nothing secret about it, adding one would be just like adding any other new area. While nice, I'd much rather see them add endless dungeons or similar.
Maybe they could make endless dungeons, where there was like a 0,1% chance that it spawned a special "cow level" design in one of the levels

There's a lot of value in what you're saying.

I really like the idea of a randomly spawning secret level (like a cow level) inside of a dungeon. That just sounds too fun.
While it could become the one place people want to farm, it wouldn't be that easy finding one, thus making players farm places up to it, too. What could be wrong with that?
I wanna kill me some more damn cows.

Shadout, on 05 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

If you got guaranteed drops from playing lots of varied content (and not just one dungeon), then it would only open up for more varied farming runs. Such as a guaranteed legendary from act bosses, if you played through all the quests in the act or similar - and killed enough elites in the process of course (redesigned NV buff).

A guaranteed legendary would still be pretty random in any case, just like guaranteed rares are from elites.

Exactly.
My suggestion for random spawning monsters specific to difficulty actually betters the RNG system instead of breaking it. Let's say it takes someone an hour to find a legendary on average. Randomly throwing in three or four of the monsters (never two in the same area) in every act would give players an extra thing to look forward to encountering while grinding. Each of these monsters would have a 20% chance to drop a legendary, which, if you think about how long it would take to find one of these guys (maybe an hour), would give players only a slight increase in legendaries found if they are lucky enough to have the monster drop a legendary.

In higher difficulties, I see how this may be controversial, but in Normal through Hell modes, lower end legendaries would have a better chance to drop and it would give a little more excitement to the tediousness of leveling a character.

I might even suggest messing with the numbers a bit like so:
In Normal mode, 20 of these monsters spawn in each act and have a 20% chance to drop a (obviously low-end) legendary.

In Nightmare mode, 15 of these monsters spawn in each act and have a 20% chance to drop a legendary.
In Hell and Inferno modes, 10 of these monsters spawn in each act and have a 10% chance to drop a legendary.

Melt, on 05 January 2013 - 03:47 PM, said:

- Random infinite dungeons with randomized monster spawns: Destroying a door in Cain's hut opens a path to a dungeon system. Every zone can spawn and its entrance and exit lead to the next/previous level of the dungeon. Combine this with random monster spawns and the game loses a lot of its repetitiveness. E.g: You start in Cathedral level one which has sandworms, charging bulls and fallen inside of it. Finding the exit you continue in the Festering Woods which contains act 4 monsters inside of it. Entering one of the tombs inside of festering woods you continue at The Battlefields...

This idea is so great. I wonder if this could be turned into an actual mode, though.

Let me throw this out there:
In the menu for turning on/off MP levels, why not add another option for something like "Chaos mode." This mode would be exactly like regular questing mode, except all questing dialog is turned off. The world spawns completely random monsters instead of area-specific monsters and random act bosses have a chance to spawn in every area (especially areas where bosses do not regularly spawn).
This would bring true randomness to the game, and it likely wouldn't replace regular mode because pure randomness isn't always wanted when farming. Many people like predictable enemies for efficiency. This mode would give players who are tired of the same crap something to go wild in.

[As03]

if only we could get what you suggest man ... if only they cared ... ( cause they can't say its hard to do )

[Melt]

As03, on 05 January 2013 - 09:04 PM, said:

if only we could get what you suggest man ... if only they cared ... ( cause they can't say its hard to do )

I think they simply can not implement anything big because most of the staff is sitting on other projects and can´t be bothered to come back for every 1.0.x + 1  change. But once the big numbers 1.1 or 2.0 come i´m sure they will be able to change a lot more!

[Oxidys]

the endless dungeon, to prevent people from speed farming it, could easily start at MP0 and go up 1 mp every 10 floors.  where the mob density would increase as well.

the only thing i really want in diablo 3 is to have mp standardize the mob density like it does the mob lvls.  boosting density slightly per MP would also be awsome.  make people think hard about wether MP0-1 are actually the fastest exp.

but yeah, i wouldnt be mad about any of those suggestions going live except the forced multiplayer.

[mbease]

As03, on 05 January 2013 - 09:04 PM, said:

if only we could get what you suggest man ... if only they cared ... ( cause they can't say its hard to do )

I definitely appreciate that. I think they do care, but capitalistic bureaucracies tend to be too slow and too many reservations.

I have just posted this stuff on the official forums, so if you like my ideas and would like to contribute more, or even just bump the post, please do.
Here's the link: http://us.battle.net...ic/7593399517#1

[As03]

the problem is that its been 8 months now and we are all asking for such a content and nothing happens :'(

I so love the dungeon ideas we need some badass levels

Edited by As03, 06 January 2013 - 04:36 AM.

[Sagathiest]

Shadout, on 05 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

mbease, on 04 January 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

4) Add Multiplayer dungeons:
4a. Create dungeons that are too hard to solo.
4b. Create dungeons that only groups can enter.
4c. Create multiplayer-only events.

Why do multiplayer right now? Multiplayer-only content is a major need for a game that is intended to favor multiplayer gaming.

Why is the game in any way intended to favor multiplayer gaming?
It is intended to make it easy to get into a multiplayer game, but it would be pretty bad design (and go strongly against its own heritage from Diablo 2) to favor multiplayer.
Multiplayer and single player should simply be equal.
As much as I like MMOs, Diablo 3 is not, and should not, imo, be an MMO. Not even a little bit.

Diablo is clearly intended for multiplayer gaming. Monster immunities in Diablo 2 meant that you really had to team up if you wanted to be efficient. There were a few classes that could Solo, and most classes could solo with very high gear level,merc or by dealing different kinds of damage. But on the whole there were huge advantages to playing and progressing as a group. Its one of the problems stirred up by not having a single player mode and batte.net mode. Seriously you try being a fire sorc and clocking diablo 2, you cant do it without a really good merc or by playing with other people. So yeah i would say that diablo is intended to be multiplayer game and Diablo 3 is much less so than diablo 2 was. Because clocking the game by yourself without a team is really easy.

So yeah i think some of these suggestion for multi-player are great and they really do consist of bringing back some of the things which made diablo 2 teamplay enjoyable.

[mbease]

Sagathiest, on 06 January 2013 - 04:47 AM, said:

Shadout, on 05 January 2013 - 03:39 PM, said:

mbease, on 04 January 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

4) Add Multiplayer dungeons:
4a. Create dungeons that are too hard to solo.
4b. Create dungeons that only groups can enter.
4c. Create multiplayer-only events.

Why do multiplayer right now? Multiplayer-only content is a major need for a game that is intended to favor multiplayer gaming.

Why is the game in any way intended to favor multiplayer gaming?
It is intended to make it easy to get into a multiplayer game, but it would be pretty bad design (and go strongly against its own heritage from Diablo 2) to favor multiplayer.
Multiplayer and single player should simply be equal.
As much as I like MMOs, Diablo 3 is not, and should not, imo, be an MMO. Not even a little bit.

Diablo is clearly intended for multiplayer gaming. Monster immunities in Diablo 2 meant that you really had to team up if you wanted to be efficient. There were a few classes that could Solo, and most classes could solo with very high gear level,merc or by dealing different kinds of damage. But on the whole there were huge advantages to playing and progressing as a group. Its one of the problems stirred up by not having a single player mode and batte.net mode. Seriously you try being a fire sorc and clocking diablo 2, you cant do it without a really good merc or by playing with other people. So yeah i would say that diablo is intended to be multiplayer game and Diablo 3 is much less so than diablo 2 was. Because clocking the game by yourself without a team is really easy.

So yeah i think some of these suggestion for multi-player are great and they really do consist of bringing back some of the things which made diablo 2 teamplay enjoyable.

My thoughts almost exactly.
Blizzard has stated that Diablo 3 should be more towards multiplayer than solo gameplay, though mostly balanced. I don't necessarily agree that is a good thing, as I prefer playing solo and only messing around while playing multiplayer (I could only quest so long without giving up on other people and soloing).

PVP, in its few forms, should bring a lot of multiplayer action to the game enough to thrill the developers, but I hope some (or all) of these suggestions will make it in some form sometime. I feel these ideas would greatly enhance both multiplayer and solo-player gaming.

[bruteMax]

Guaranteed legendaries are a bad idea, and given their current state hardly serves as an incentive to plow through X levels of an inifinite dungeon.