It seems to me that the simplest solution to this issue would be to create/join a community which has established structure for handling non-meta 4 man groups. I think in practice, it would need to list various known-good compositions and rate them according to their GR clears. In essence, what I am describing is just an extension of the meta, in that it lists the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. best compositions, as opposed to just the top composition (meta). To cater to the free spirited, such a community would probably also want to establish a free-for-all sub-community, whereby anyone just joins with the expectation that any player will bring any class of any build type (possibly with some minimal restrictions, i.e. must be a Set or LoN build), although accuracy in determining the appropriate GR lvl to open would be prone to error.
The main issue with this approach is that it would require some level of effort to establish. For instance, testing would need to be performed to determine the performance of any given group composition, which involves farming and building numerous sets/LoN setups and then determining the most appropriate GR tier for each. This level of build testing is probably uncommon amongst players who do not take interest in meta (read as efficiency), which I would imagine as being the largest barrier to such a solution.
I think you misread my post. The free spirited players are referred to the sub-community, where the only requirement is any standard/LoN set. The 2nd, 3rd, nth "meta" is to add diversity in upper GR lvls for non-meta "advanced players", made available through the main community.
Ok, my reading skills are just a bit worse than my WD skills. But I have a question. In your open minded 2nd-10th meta, how many supp chars would you have in 4 ppl grifts 80+? I ask that because anyone with just 2h per day could solo 75+ in first month of season. So I don't see the point of group grifts lower than 80. And if you go group just for xp, 1st meta is way more efficient. So, as I see it, why would ppl lose their precious and limited time in the game on playing less efficient group style and that way deprave themselves of any competition on the leaderboards? Because if you don't do this for leaderboards, then why even bother making 2nd meta, 3rd meta, 11th meta.
My suggestion. Find some friends and enjoy the game as you want, if you do not care about leaderboards. But if you do, find some friends and start gearing for meta, or your struggle might end in vain. Every single paragon matters, and you know it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Season 6 barbarian solo sc EU grift 85 12m 23.199s MotE build
Probably the use of the term "meta" is causing the disconnect between us. The purpose of the community is basically to expand your options for "fun GRs" outside of your FL or RL friends. It would be a larger community which is less focused on efficiency and more focused on running a variety of builds (rather than just 1 of 4). As stated above, the issue with this approach is that it would take some degree of setup to get it streamlined (so you don't have to wait an hour to get a group together).
4 players (A, B, C and D) all join "non-meta group" community
They all see a list of known-good configurations (not the most efficient, but something different and which is more enjoyable than say GR75)
A posts that he is running a non-meta build W.
B sees that build W is listed in the same composition as his build X and posts in reply to A.
C notices a group is forming and checks which builds can safely run with W and X. C's build Y is listed as an option, so he replies to A and B.
D, who is running build Z, finds that he can complete the 4 man group and replies to A, B and C.
A, B, C and D all group up together and run at a predetermined GR lvl (as determined by testing).
Obviously, the seek time for any given group is going to be dependent on the popularity of the community (its number of members), as well as the available range of non-meta compositions (and variance within these groups).
The most common group compositions will always come down to efficiency and players' willingness to play those builds. The fact that the meta is widespread and includes multiple supports demonstrates that this community is willing to accept support roles within the game. Basically, if the majority of players did not like playing support, they would create alternative compositions and we would already have a community similar to what I have described in earlier posts. That we don't have said community, or that said community is unpopular, shows that the opinion "support meta is bad" is not as widely accepted as certain threads will lead us to believe.
Unill the 3 support + 1 wizard bullshit will end, diablo 3 is back again to be garbage. And just when the game actually got better with all the new content and legendaries revamp.
Blizzard - what on earth are you doing there ?
no, it doesn't. you keep ignoring that D2 had no difficulty
Hell is like 123123123x harder than t10. Ubers in d2 vs 1shotting ubers in d3?
My concen pally in d2 season 1 (i ran amazon) did damage, didnt just stand there.
Multiplayer should give 100% less xp since its so easy vs solo. They have everything backwards in d3