I've been out of D3 for ~ 3 weeks now I decided to play 95+ fast with my monk sup and nobody wants cos now meta is 3 necros + barb sup. Wtf? Where is diversity in classes. We used to have at least 4 classes for 95 now just 2... too bad. I'm really starting to hate necros there are too many of them - in public games in my friend list )) It is the worst meta ever imho.
Classes, roles and META are highly related when we talk diversity in groups.
I had posted a thread on the official forums about this long time ago, which got deleted for no obvious reason when it reached 20+ replies. I suppose someone don't like the truth. And the truth is that as long as you have some kind of endgame grind (in D3 case its paragon and primals), you will have a META. As long as you have a META and there is no class balance, you won't have diversity in groups. The possible solutions are two:
1) Remove/cap the endgame grind on seasons
2) Balance all classes
Both are valid solutions, but they won't be achieved in the near future since we expect more classes to drop as purchasable DLC packs. In order to apply 2) you have to implement equal roles for every class or said otherwise every class should be able to fulfill each role in the group as efficient as the other classes. Now if you think money wise this is not very good. DLCs will sell better if they replace the old class roles (aka you buy Necro, because he is imba). So, as others already said, don't expect class diversity in groups anytime soonTM (4-5 years). Maybe after they stop selling DLC character packs we are going to see a big balancing patch. Maybe not. Maybe simply they don't care about class diversity in groups. Just as they don't care for many other things, besides as we all know - money.
Capping seasonal paragon is an intriguing thought, but I'm not sure it coincides with what they are trying to do which is keeping players invested. The initial assumption is that capping would make the LBs more competitive, but in reality it won't. This is an RnG drop based game and paragon is a bridgegap that allows players with average RnG to remain competitive with somebody who gets a perfect primal amulet or weapon.
The meta has to change to keep players around trying new classes and spec combinations. Most players who invest a moderate amount of time play multiple characters now for specific purposes anyway. If you want to play one character and spec all the time, how can you complain about a game that is designed this way. Adapt or figure out a way to challenge yourself in other ways.
One quick fix is to compare yourself in LBs not with the top players, but players running your spec and paragon level. Thats what I do.
@steelreserv123: Capping the endgame grind here is with the intention to defeat the purpose of META, not to create a competition around it. If the devs want to push a meaningful competition they have a solid new mode to build upon called Challenge Rifts.
The whole idea of class diversity is say you have 10 classes and 4 spots in a group. In a perfect situation any combination of these 10 classes should create a group capable of acquiring the optimal resource per hour of what the endgame grind is - in D3 case main stat. Since we don't have such perfect situation aka class balance, the other option is simply to cap the endgame grind - cap main stat to 10k and gem levels to 50 for example and there won't be a need for any META thus there will be class diversity. Of course in a grind game like D3 this is somewhat counter-intuitive since one of your main goals is to be as efficient as possible and capping the grind means capping the efficiency value, but with the already split community in seasonal and non-seasonal mode this opens the possibility to abolish the META on season and as you said more people to try new specs and classes because of that.
However I don't see any of the above two options implemented any time soon, because of the DLC reasons I stated in the previous post. That said, stack all valuable items in the stash space you have available, because one day you may have to change the class if you play groups.
Understood, but still, you're right they won't change it. I try and keep in mind that a lot of what players do, is on the players. The top players figure out the most efficient/strongest/fastest ways to play the game, post a youtube video, then everyone does it. I think a lot of what blizzard does is just design components that are fun and cool and hand it off to the players to decide what to do with it. Balancing is done for the purpose of reason, not to achieve perfection.
did anyone here think that blizzard would sell a new class without it being borderline op? People want something for their money and all ive heard is positive things about it.
From the pro-meta perspective and from my experience with other dungeon style games, the meta in D3 serves multiple purposes that enhance the game including in no small measure a way for rando public groups to weed out the casuals. If i was looking to efficiently paragon farm with 2 of my friends and opened a public slot for a 4 man paragon farm session and we've done the research and put the time in to have the best group possible, we honestly wouldn't want a random spec'd casual in the group. Having meta characters shows commitment and competency.
besides, the apparent irony in this thread is the OP *played the previous meta* with a shrine monk and simply doesnt want to switch to a zbarb. He was fine when he had the meta.
^ META kills the fun in the game (and degenerates some brain cells since every char is a copy of the copy of the copy etc), it serves no other purpose. Without the need for META the new players will try to theorycraft themselves instead of watching videos with imba builds. Without META the public games will multiply, people will start grouping for the sake of it without the fear that they miss on main stat.
In your example you wouldn't let an undergeared noob to play with you and this way you would miss a potential cool person who recently started the game. If the grind is capped at season and uncapped at non-season you would still be able to farm with competent players at non-season, while having fun at season.
There are plenty of games that you can meet new people while being tasked with random stuff to do where your time and character progress arent at stake.
Im just saying that for paragon farming, which people take seriously, why bother complaining about what the meta is, if you don't take it seriously enough to devote the time to explore the potential of the meta.
This game is complicated and that appeals to the playerbase. Youtube and even this website aren't negatives. They are necessary in fact. Casual and serious players alike can draw benefit from it in order to get better and more competitive, which is the point of it all.
You're talking about a plug n play game where basically nothing matters. You find one class and spec and play nothing else in perpetuity.
D3 is about trying new things, playing different gear, spec, class combinations. The meta will develop and so play that until it changes again.
You are basically saying META is the only reason to try new specs. People will try new things and specs when there are new sets, unique items, patch changes, gameplay styles they haven't tried. It doesn't have to be the current META for people to try it, if they don't miss on something by not following this very same META.
Seasons would be plug and play game where only the builds you have fun with matter. If a META build is fun for you, you would play it, otherwise you won't. And this doesn't have to be one class or one spec, quite the opposite. You will see all kinds of builds in public games and you won't feel bad for playing with them because they are sub-optimal.
META is bad for build diversity and when this game enters full maintenance mode, when the META won't change and there will be no patches, the players will BEG for a seasonal cap.
Not what Im saying. Im saying that the players are responsible for the meta. Since that is the case, there will always be a meta as theorycrafters and numbers crunchers will always figure out the best classes and specs for a specific purpose and then the community will embrace it.
This particular discussion is in regards to the paragon progression meta. The OP was complaining about his old meta build not being the meta build anymore and how he can't find old meta groups. Where my point is if you are that serious about paragon, why not create a meta class? He doesn't want to, so he's just stuck complaining when clearly the vast majority of players have moved on and obviously don't agree.
You added that any player, casual or elite should be able to play any spec they want and it should be "balanced". Im fine with balancing. Sure, why not.
But im willing to accept the fact that with the amount of different sets and legendary item combinations, that total balancing between everything is not only extremely difficult but also illusory because elite players will always find "the best", and the community will follow. It will also serve to dumb the game down (plug n play) as there would be no reason for players to meticulously create their builds if you can sneeze and create a competitive build.
Regardless, my monk for example has 5 different builds and some sub builds. So i have plenty of diversity. Im constantly tweeking them. I could create a paragon meta build, i chose not. But im also not going to force an entire community to accept any build I want like its a heroic dungeon in WoW. especially since time efficiency and finding the perfect class synergy is what the playerbase wants which is all the meta is.
The player base wants build diversity not playing 2 classes from 7 lol. We had a poll about that last year. And there is nothing wrong to have plug and play seasonal mode and a heavy grind non-seasonal one. Right now season and non-season pretty much overlap and people want an option to retire their chars from season just to be able to grind more efficiently at non-season with their already acquired gg gear there.
Also, perfect balancing is very hard to do in a game with uncapped difficulty, but it is also possible to fix the power of your sets and try to at least bring most items to certain equal level. Patch after patch fine tuning the numbers will pay off at the end. However that is not the direction this development team has taken. It is power creep and buffing multipliers to oblivion.
Fair enough. But you can look at every competitive game, either pvp or in this case, pve, players always want balance, and it still rarely happens. If you want to play one class and its competitive in support, aoe and single target and no other class thats fine but I think the evidence shows that more players are not only willing to switch classes when they rise to the top (which will always happen) but also that this model keeps more players interested in playing long term.
one thing players tend to forget is that blizzard makes all classes different is so players see clear differences between classes (so the game doesnt get stale) and more importantly, this allows us to develop synergies between classes to enable us to clear content better/faster. Aka meta
power creep is an inevitability. It allows them to focus on content, bumping difficulty and let the players decide how to use buffs/class synergies to best defeat that content. Its a win win.
i had a conversation the other day with a clanmate and he wanted to try his zdps support necro (perm land if the dead) with my LoN monk that is aoe oriented with cyclone strike. We were working it out and decided against it. Thats fun for me.
Class differences in terms of gameplay feel is one thing (that is good to have it, classes should feel different when you play with them, that is the designers job - you give teleport to the wizard and jump to the barb for example), class differences in terms of roles each class fulfills in the group is another thing and it is bad to not have concurrence/alternative for each role in the group between the classes, especially when each class is designed to have offensive, defensive and movement skills.