Rares in D3 are incoherent ( class items with everything but stats for the class it's designed) way more random ( the damage range on a 60 lv weapon can be as bad as a lv 25 weapon). Caracters are much more stuff relient and stuff is much more affixes relient. And you have to add that customisation is really poor and half of what was promised was cut just before release ( mystic and other gems ).
An offline /auction house less mode would have been, and still would be the decent thing to do.
Snipping your quote a bit to save space.
My D2 experience is probably different from yours since I only played Classic - I didn't like LoD for various reasons. I'm assuming you played LoD because probably 99% of D2 players did. In classic, I do remember most rares being crap. Weapons especially needed dual +dmg mods (eg. kings + merciless) to be good. In countless hours of playing D2 I think I only ever found one truly godly item, a chu ko nu which was within 3-4 of its maximum theoretical damage - no +skills or leech though.
As for an offline mode, I support that request even though I wouldn't use it. But I see no reason why you shouldn't have the option, it wouldn't harm my experience in any way. I like the idea of options, because we all want something a bit different. One size doesn't fit all, and so the only realistic way to satisfy a broad range of customers is to allow them to customize the experience by giving them options.
I'm in agreement with you on this - Blizzard didn't give us very many options with this game. It seems to be their philosophy lately, they're actually getting to be a lot like Apple The mentality is basically "This is what you should like, and if you don't then there's something wrong with you". I see this in WoW with forced guilding, and I've seen it in D3 patches where they've specifically outlined how they want players to play the game (eg. "we want players hunting down elite packs", when justifying the MF nerf in regards to chests and the general nerf on the contents of chests, barrels, bone piles, etc.) Right, right... forget what we like, we're playing *their* game... -.-
Now, if you bought your way to your goal, sure, the result is the same, in less time, with less effort, but the emptiness that it leaves behind already destroyed that experience for you. It is just not the same.
And, this is not an opinion, this is human behavior.
I'd have to disagree with that, I think it is opinion. You find enjoyment in finding your gear, which is fine. I find enjoyment in online economies; in trading, buying, selling, etc., and also in having the best gear I can get, no matter how I get it. In fact, what drew me so powerfully to D2 was that it was the first game I played with an online economy.
Thanks for an insightful answer to the first question. I especially like the viewpoint that an item you find has a story, I can understand the appeal of that, even though I personally prefer to use the AH.
I feel I should point out what you must already know, as you said you played Diablo 2 - rares are much more common in D3 than in D2, and they're just as likely to be bad. If the D3 drop rate were adjusted for the economy, rares would be less common in D3, not more. I'm not saying that you don't have a valid point - all I'm saying is that I think the issue you are having is with the difficulty of inferno. This is what promotes AH usage, not the drop rate. If there were no inferno and it ended with hell mode as D2 did, I don't think there would be nearly as much of an issue.
However you didn't answer the second question: How could Blizzard have addressed the need for facilitated trading without implementing an AH? Whether you like to trade or not, you must admit that when a random player gets rich by giving D2 players a currency to trade with (d2jsp), there's an obvious issue, and if you're the software developer, you're going to all but be forced to do something about it, yes?
Hey guys. I wanted to see for myself what zones warranted spots in my exp runs rather than blindly follow Alkaizer's route. First, I was bored with the same 5 maps, and second, as a WD, I'm not constrained by having to keep up WotB (or Archon for that matter).
My goal is not to provide some sort of bible here - there are far too many variables, such as my class, gear, spec, playstyle, individual skill level, etc. I just wanted to provide some ballpark figures for anyone who was interested. I decided on the general forum because I figure input from all players would be welcome and help us all to figure out our own ideal paragon leveling experience, rather than limiting it to a class forum.
I took data from most zones in act 3. Notably absent is Keep lvl 2 - I feel it's a great map for exp, but my specific build makes it slow and painful for me, so it wasn't an option. I did take a couple of samples from unconventional zones such as Tower of the Cursed lv 1 and the one just outside of town, but the xp/hour sucked so I dismissed them.
All data was taken with five pre-existing stacks of Nephalem Valor. I took 5 samples from each map, and in the interest of saving space I'll just post the averages. All data is highly interpretable, what works well for a WD with my build may not work well at all for someone else.
Additional notes: I rounded to the nearest quarter of a minute for easier maths. In zones with possible dead-ends such as the keep depths and arreat crater 1+2, I ended my run if I hit a dead-end unless it would take a very short time to backtrack. If I died on a run I discarded the data. I killed all goblins and did not deduct any time for doing so. My build tends to kill them quickly anyway. I pick up all recipes which I don't know, or which are for legendaries or 6-property items. I pick up all legendaries, set items, rings and amulets, and most 61+ weapons and armor with a few exceptions. I know most by name and don't waste time with ctrl+mouseover. I do not pick up blues (except gem recipes), potions, gems or tomes of secrets. Lastly, I did not separately weight the average for each run based on the total exp of the run, I simply averaged each run's exp/hour. As I said, I'm only attempting to provide a ballpark figure.
For reference, here's my WD My gear was a bit different when taking data from what it is now, I had bought a few upgrades while collecting but kept them stashed until I was done. If interested, I use this build, with much thanks to the author for providing such a detailed and well thought out approach.
Format:
Zone Name
Average time per run // Average exp per run (millions) // Average exp per hour (millions)
Stonefort
5:06 // 1.62m // 19.44 m/h
Keep 1
4:36 // 1.24m // 16.40 m/h
Keep 3
2:18 // 0.82m // 22.24 m/h
Rakkis Crossing south to fields
5:09 // 2.10m // 24.82 m/h
Fields of Slaughter
5:57 // 2.05m // 20.64 m/h
Crater 1
3:27 // 1.60m // 28.96 m/h
Tower of the Damned 1
2:33 // 0.95m // 22.30 m/h
Crater 2
3:27 // 1.77m // 31.18 m/h
Core
1:54 // 0.62m // 19.46 m/h
My interpretation of the data: For starters, Stonefort and Keep lv 1 don't seem worth it. Secondly, Arreat Crater lv 1 and Rakkis south to Fields, maps not in Alkaizer's route and which most players ignore, yielded excellent exp for me. I feel it's probably best to start in the small zones which give lower total exp, I go Core -> Keep 3 -> Tower 1 personally. On average, you'll probably encounter the same amount of trash while stacking up no matter where you begin, but the smaller maps are guaranteed at least a pack or three, whereas on a larger map you might get unlucky and kill tons of trash before fully stacking up.
That's not true, you decided to take his POV to the extreme. Where did he say that he wants to get the best loot in 15 minutes? There is a middleground between "99% of drops are garbage" (current state of the game) and "all drops are awesome.
Flat out, the AH was the motivation behind the crap drops, and it was a bad call. I don't care what the devs have said in the past, it is logically impossible to believe that the AH has no affect on how they have balanced item drops.
What I said was stupid, so I edited it out. Sorry about that.
It does seem like the biggest issue people have with this game is that they want a single player experience when the majority of players want the online multiplayer experience of diablo. Diablo really isn't a single player game, and what's more, there are thousands of great single player games out there. My friend's been playing Skyrim lately and keeps telling me about how good it is.
Purchasing Diablo 3 and then complaining about things that are a result of its orientation as a multiplayer game strikes me as stalking into Burger King, demanding they sell you a pizza, and refusing to accept their answer of "Sir, there's a Pizza Hut next door, if you want pizza you should go there."
In short, people who want a single player game and bought Diablo 3 should learn from their mistake, and go purchase a single player game. At least they can sell a few things on the RMAH and make back what they paid for this game, you can't say the same about most other games.
It's just a tooltip change to clarify what the skills do. If you look at them currently they say the same thing, just in slightly harder to understand wording. Caltrops: JS is still 45% Weapon Damage every second since 45 X 6 = 270 and Gas Grenades are still 75% weapon damage over 3 seconds since 25 X 3 = 75.
it could also be an insidious way to nerf proc chances to LoH, crit and CC (stun freeze etc) in order to destroy CaC Hunters which don't rely on specific legendaries (natalya and new items) to survive. It specifically targets LoH runes, gas grenades trail choking gas dark cloud jagged .. Fear the worst.
All I see there is an absence of new skill mechanics, old ones being eventually nerfed, and snazzy dmgs buffs which won't improve anything.
That's exactly what it is. They're actually nerfing the survivability of a class which is so frail that it must use Nat's set for a bonus which, when it went live, was considered a bug at first. Unbelievable. Blizzard's left and right hands have no clue what the other is doing, their patches invariably buff the strong, nerf the weak and change the balanced. Absolutely mindboggling.
Oh well, I'm looking forward to the WD changes. If summoning becomes a viable build I'll sell my DH's gear and just play the doc.
Without a monthly fee, each hour we spend using their server & bandwidth is a small slice into the $60 we paid for the game. Unless we're regularly using the RMAH with Blizzard getting its cut, they'd rather we quit since that would be more profitable for them.
I eat, sleep, and live cynicism but your post still makes me cringe.
Does it hurt?
I'm not a cynic, I'm a realist.
I also know how the business world works and how cutthroat it is. People make their fortunes at successful companies like Blizzard and either retire or move on to greener pastures. The fresh meat that replaces them has to prove themselves capable of filling those shoes.
So it's not about whether Blizzard is successful, it's about whether the new executive was able to shave a few million dollars off a budget, or make a few extra million with a new scheme. There's a phenomenon of ever-heightening goalposts within the culture of a successful company. If there wasn't, they wouldn't be successful. But it's a double-edged sword, as it eventually makes them start screwing their customers in the ever-present quest for bigger profits.
I too have used the ferret, though not in any regular build. Basically just when I'm farming act 1, cause act 1 is so easy, or when I'm gobby farming.
IMO the ferrets should be invulnerable, but not attack anything. They should also be much faster. Their sole purpose should be to pick up gold, and they should excel at this task.
More like: you drive to work but still get there later than the people who bike to work, so naturally you rage at bicycle shops.
I'LL PUT THEM ALL OUT OF BUSINESS, I SWEAR IT!!! >_< DAMN LANCE ARMSTRONG AND HIS INFLUENCE!!!
No seriously though. Everyone knows Siegebreaker is the primo farm spot in the game. It's not at all surprising that they turned the fight right before it into a major cockblock in 1.03 (last patch). This encourages people to use the RMAH, because if you're a Blizzard exec, 10 Ferraris just isn't enough - they have to make more money for that F50 they've always wanted... and hey, maybe a foray into the world of Lamborghinis!
You're probably young & naive, and don't understand just how cutthroat the business world is. You think it's an absurd notion that businesses would act this way, but the reality is it's just another day for them. In the top tiers of the business world, you'd either cut your mother's throat for $5, or you'd be looking for a job because someone else who would gladly do it just took yours.
I'm old enough to remember when game designers laid out a framework and allowed you, the player, to decide what about the game you found fun.
These days game designers tell you what to do, in some cases quite explicitly. For example, with the recent 1.03 patch to D3, they specifically said something along the lines of "We don't want players breaking pots or farming goblins, we want them farming elite packs".
To me, that's BS. People are different and enjoy different aspects of a game. Trying to pigeonhole all of a game's players into doing the exact same thing smacks of lazy design. Basically, they don't want to flesh out the other areas of the game, so they work hard on only a few areas and then punish any player who likes the game, but prefers to do something other than what the developers intended.
While most software developers are doing this, Blizzard is leading the pack and it stinks >_<
You can afford to wear MF in act 1, but not acts 2+ unless you spend an absolute fortune on your gear... and even then you'll be somewhat more limited, since you won't have certain set bonuses which are all but required.
Never heard of gear swapping? I use just as much MF in act 2 as in 1
.
I don't have the patience to do something so cheesy. I'm actually astonished that such a glaring oversight went live with the game, but then again "Blizzard" is just a label. The intelligent and creative people who gave it its good reputation are gone / retired now, and it's just a bunch of incompetents now, milking the reputation for all they can before they bury it in the ground.
It seems to take 2-3 seconds to identify a single item. By now, many of us have wasted HOURS in "the void" of waiting there, patiently, for it to be identified. Most rares, as many have discussed; are complete junk. Why not allow for us to ID the junk faster so that we can merc it??? PLEASE fix this ASAP. I understand that your initial intention with the concept was because you felt the few second wait is an "anticipation" of something great to come. Well, the truth is, we are over it. We have next to no expectation what so ever that the item we are identifying is going to be halfway decent. I'm not asking for better loot, i'm asking to get rid of this annoying process of time it takes to ID an item. A few ideas: Hold SHIFT and right click, identifies entire inventory. Allow for craftsman to have a ID inventory button. OR just make it be instant! Like in D2, only no scrolls. PLEASE HELP, a friend of mine joked the other day that he is about to stop piking up rares altogether. LOL LOL LOL
1
Snipping your quote a bit to save space.
My D2 experience is probably different from yours since I only played Classic - I didn't like LoD for various reasons. I'm assuming you played LoD because probably 99% of D2 players did. In classic, I do remember most rares being crap. Weapons especially needed dual +dmg mods (eg. kings + merciless) to be good. In countless hours of playing D2 I think I only ever found one truly godly item, a chu ko nu which was within 3-4 of its maximum theoretical damage - no +skills or leech though.
As for an offline mode, I support that request even though I wouldn't use it. But I see no reason why you shouldn't have the option, it wouldn't harm my experience in any way. I like the idea of options, because we all want something a bit different. One size doesn't fit all, and so the only realistic way to satisfy a broad range of customers is to allow them to customize the experience by giving them options.
I'm in agreement with you on this - Blizzard didn't give us very many options with this game. It seems to be their philosophy lately, they're actually getting to be a lot like Apple
I'd have to disagree with that, I think it is opinion. You find enjoyment in finding your gear, which is fine. I find enjoyment in online economies; in trading, buying, selling, etc., and also in having the best gear I can get, no matter how I get it. In fact, what drew me so powerfully to D2 was that it was the first game I played with an online economy.
1
I feel I should point out what you must already know, as you said you played Diablo 2 - rares are much more common in D3 than in D2, and they're just as likely to be bad. If the D3 drop rate were adjusted for the economy, rares would be less common in D3, not more. I'm not saying that you don't have a valid point - all I'm saying is that I think the issue you are having is with the difficulty of inferno. This is what promotes AH usage, not the drop rate. If there were no inferno and it ended with hell mode as D2 did, I don't think there would be nearly as much of an issue.
However you didn't answer the second question: How could Blizzard have addressed the need for facilitated trading without implementing an AH? Whether you like to trade or not, you must admit that when a random player gets rich by giving D2 players a currency to trade with (d2jsp), there's an obvious issue, and if you're the software developer, you're going to all but be forced to do something about it, yes?
4
My goal is not to provide some sort of bible here - there are far too many variables, such as my class, gear, spec, playstyle, individual skill level, etc. I just wanted to provide some ballpark figures for anyone who was interested. I decided on the general forum because I figure input from all players would be welcome and help us all to figure out our own ideal paragon leveling experience, rather than limiting it to a class forum.
I took data from most zones in act 3. Notably absent is Keep lvl 2 - I feel it's a great map for exp, but my specific build makes it slow and painful for me, so it wasn't an option. I did take a couple of samples from unconventional zones such as Tower of the Cursed lv 1 and the one just outside of town, but the xp/hour sucked so I dismissed them.
All data was taken with five pre-existing stacks of Nephalem Valor. I took 5 samples from each map, and in the interest of saving space I'll just post the averages. All data is highly interpretable, what works well for a WD with my build may not work well at all for someone else.
Additional notes: I rounded to the nearest quarter of a minute for easier maths. In zones with possible dead-ends such as the keep depths and arreat crater 1+2, I ended my run if I hit a dead-end unless it would take a very short time to backtrack. If I died on a run I discarded the data. I killed all goblins and did not deduct any time for doing so. My build tends to kill them quickly anyway. I pick up all recipes which I don't know, or which are for legendaries or 6-property items. I pick up all legendaries, set items, rings and amulets, and most 61+ weapons and armor with a few exceptions. I know most by name and don't waste time with ctrl+mouseover. I do not pick up blues (except gem recipes), potions, gems or tomes of secrets. Lastly, I did not separately weight the average for each run based on the total exp of the run, I simply averaged each run's exp/hour. As I said, I'm only attempting to provide a ballpark figure.
For reference, here's my WD My gear was a bit different when taking data from what it is now, I had bought a few upgrades while collecting but kept them stashed until I was done. If interested, I use this build, with much thanks to the author for providing such a detailed and well thought out approach.
Format:
Zone Name
Average time per run // Average exp per run (millions) // Average exp per hour (millions)
Stonefort
5:06 // 1.62m // 19.44 m/h
Keep 1
4:36 // 1.24m // 16.40 m/h
Keep 3
2:18 // 0.82m // 22.24 m/h
Rakkis Crossing south to fields
5:09 // 2.10m // 24.82 m/h
Fields of Slaughter
5:57 // 2.05m // 20.64 m/h
Crater 1
3:27 // 1.60m // 28.96 m/h
Tower of the Damned 1
2:33 // 0.95m // 22.30 m/h
Crater 2
3:27 // 1.77m // 31.18 m/h
Core
1:54 // 0.62m // 19.46 m/h
My interpretation of the data: For starters, Stonefort and Keep lv 1 don't seem worth it. Secondly, Arreat Crater lv 1 and Rakkis south to Fields, maps not in Alkaizer's route and which most players ignore, yielded excellent exp for me. I feel it's probably best to start in the small zones which give lower total exp, I go Core -> Keep 3 -> Tower 1 personally. On average, you'll probably encounter the same amount of trash while stacking up no matter where you begin, but the smaller maps are guaranteed at least a pack or three, whereas on a larger map you might get unlucky and kill tons of trash before fully stacking up.
1
What I said was stupid, so I edited it out. Sorry about that.
It does seem like the biggest issue people have with this game is that they want a single player experience when the majority of players want the online multiplayer experience of diablo. Diablo really isn't a single player game, and what's more, there are thousands of great single player games out there. My friend's been playing Skyrim lately and keeps telling me about how good it is.
Purchasing Diablo 3 and then complaining about things that are a result of its orientation as a multiplayer game strikes me as stalking into Burger King, demanding they sell you a pizza, and refusing to accept their answer of "Sir, there's a Pizza Hut next door, if you want pizza you should go there."
In short, people who want a single player game and bought Diablo 3 should learn from their mistake, and go purchase a single player game. At least they can sell a few things on the RMAH and make back what they paid for this game, you can't say the same about most other games.
1
Oh well, I'm looking forward to the WD changes. If summoning becomes a viable build I'll sell my DH's gear and just play the doc.
1
I'm not a cynic, I'm a realist.
I also know how the business world works and how cutthroat it is. People make their fortunes at successful companies like Blizzard and either retire or move on to greener pastures. The fresh meat that replaces them has to prove themselves capable of filling those shoes.
So it's not about whether Blizzard is successful, it's about whether the new executive was able to shave a few million dollars off a budget, or make a few extra million with a new scheme. There's a phenomenon of ever-heightening goalposts within the culture of a successful company. If there wasn't, they wouldn't be successful. But it's a double-edged sword, as it eventually makes them start screwing their customers in the ever-present quest for bigger profits.
1
IMO the ferrets should be invulnerable, but not attack anything. They should also be much faster. Their sole purpose should be to pick up gold, and they should excel at this task.
1
I'LL PUT THEM ALL OUT OF BUSINESS, I SWEAR IT!!! >_< DAMN LANCE ARMSTRONG AND HIS INFLUENCE!!!
No seriously though. Everyone knows Siegebreaker is the primo farm spot in the game. It's not at all surprising that they turned the fight right before it into a major cockblock in 1.03 (last patch). This encourages people to use the RMAH, because if you're a Blizzard exec, 10 Ferraris just isn't enough - they have to make more money for that F50 they've always wanted... and hey, maybe a foray into the world of Lamborghinis!
You're probably young & naive, and don't understand just how cutthroat the business world is. You think it's an absurd notion that businesses would act this way, but the reality is it's just another day for them. In the top tiers of the business world, you'd either cut your mother's throat for $5, or you'd be looking for a job because someone else who would gladly do it just took yours.
1
D2 was, IMO, definitely the better game.
I'm old enough to remember when game designers laid out a framework and allowed you, the player, to decide what about the game you found fun.
These days game designers tell you what to do, in some cases quite explicitly. For example, with the recent 1.03 patch to D3, they specifically said something along the lines of "We don't want players breaking pots or farming goblins, we want them farming elite packs".
To me, that's BS. People are different and enjoy different aspects of a game. Trying to pigeonhole all of a game's players into doing the exact same thing smacks of lazy design. Basically, they don't want to flesh out the other areas of the game, so they work hard on only a few areas and then punish any player who likes the game, but prefers to do something other than what the developers intended.
While most software developers are doing this, Blizzard is leading the pack and it stinks >_<
1
I don't have the patience to do something so cheesy. I'm actually astonished that such a glaring oversight went live with the game, but then again "Blizzard" is just a label. The intelligent and creative people who gave it its good reputation are gone / retired now, and it's just a bunch of incompetents now, milking the reputation for all they can before they bury it in the ground.