+- The Lurker Lounge Forums (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Lurker Games (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-6.html)
+--- Forum: Diablo III (https://www.lurkerlounge.com/forums/forum-30.html)
+--- Thread: The Auction House III: Evil is Back (/thread-13906.html)
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Chesspiece_face - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 04:21 AM)Hocus_ Wrote: The difficulty levels prior to Inferno are basically a tutorial for the game. As somebody who has been playing in Inferno mode for over a week now, I completely agree with all the points that Ashock has made. In your mind, how many people have to agree with his assessment before you deem it to be valid? Ten people? A hundred? Just trying to work out where to draw the line here so that when we reach that number we can come back and talk to you about it.
Inferno is the "kick you in the teeth" difficulty. That's the way it was always intended to be. It seems rather odd to me that people go into it understanding it is going to be a kick in the teeth then they complain that they got kicked in the teeth. Are there some things that they can do to make it better in places? Yeah definitely. I think the changes they have lined up for burst potential, crafting costs, and possibly immune minions will do more than people think to altering the general environment of Inferno. I also think you are beginning to see a mentality shift in the player base over the last week or so. People are starting to understand that they are, in fact, undergeared and that they can't just go complete glass cannon and expect to survive.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Hocus_ - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 05:03 AM)Chesspiece_face Wrote:(06-02-2012, 04:21 AM)Hocus_ Wrote: The difficulty levels prior to Inferno are basically a tutorial for the game. As somebody who has been playing in Inferno mode for over a week now, I completely agree with all the points that Ashock has made. In your mind, how many people have to agree with his assessment before you deem it to be valid? Ten people? A hundred? Just trying to work out where to draw the line here so that when we reach that number we can come back and talk to you about it.
Inferno is the "kick you in the teeth" difficulty. That's the way it was always intended to be. It seems rather odd to me that people go into it understanding it is going to be a kick in the teeth then they complain that they got kicked in the teeth. Are there some things that they can do to make it better in places? Yeah definitely. I think the changes they have lined up for burst potential, crafting costs, and possibly immune minions will do more than people think to altering the general environment of Inferno. I also think you are beginning to see a mentality shift in the player base over the last week or so. People are starting to understand that they are, in fact, undergeared and that they can't just go complete glass cannon and expect to survive.
Nice assumption on your part, but you're wrong. I knew that Inferno would be tough. I knew that I would need to gear up in order to progress. So when I got my arse kicked in Act 1, what did I do? I geared up. And now I'm in Act 3. But that's not the issue here. The issue is, the options available to gear up are extremely limited.
You can go into Act 1 Inferno and grind away for hours and still not find an item that is actually worth using. You might if you're lucky find something that is worth selling on the Auction House, but that's about it. Whereas in Diablo 2 you knew that even if a good rare didn't drop, you still had the chance to find a useful set or unique, that option is now gone in Diablo 3, with most of the legendary and set items being worthless. This is partially because they're not itemised properly, but also because not only are the possible affixes dynamic, but the value ranges can vary wildly. So not only do you have to be lucky enough to have a legendary drop, but it also has to drop with affixes that are actually useful. There's a huge difference between a Helm of Command with Resist All and a Helm of Command with Arcane Resistance, for example, or a Stormshield with 32% block versus one with 18%.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Chesspiece_face - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 05:13 AM)Hocus_ Wrote: Nice assumption on your part, but you're wrong. I knew that Inferno would be tough. I knew that I would need to gear up in order to progress. So when I got my arse kicked in Act 1, what did I do? I geared up. And now I'm in Act 3. But that's not the issue here. The issue is, the options available to gear up are extremely limited.
You can go into Act 1 Inferno and grind away for hours and still not find an item that is actually worth using. You might if you're lucky find something that is worth selling on the Auction House, but that's about it. Whereas in Diablo 2 you knew that even if a good rare didn't drop, you still had the chance to find a useful set or unique, that option is now gone in Diablo 3, with most of the legendary and set items being worthless. This is partially because they're not itemised properly, but also because not only are the possible affixes dynamic, but the value ranges can vary wildly. So not only do you have to be lucky enough to have a legendary drop, but it also has to drop with affixes that are actually useful. There's a huge difference between a Helm of Command with Resist All and a Helm of Command with Arcane Resistance, for example, or a Stormshield with 32% block versus one with 18%.
I didn't assume anything. That is literally what people are saying. It's a constant point of discussion throughout these topics. As for having trouble gearing up, have you been utilizing your Blacksmith? The great majority of the upgrades I have obtained that have been progressing me into Inferno have come from that source. Not only that but the great majority of the items I have sold on the AH have come from there as well.
I fail to see how mindlessly farming for hours for a good upgrade in this game is any different than mindlessly farming for an upgrade in D2. The only difference is that D2 was flooded with Dupes which oversaturated the TOP items so that practically everyone could have them if they really wanted to. It's possible that the dupe effect in D2 has so greatly perverted the player base's perception that it is actually impossible to go back to a system with any semblence of real rarity without it feeling like crap. But that is a different discussion.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Elric of Grans - 06-02-2012
I will also throw in that Blizzard have stated time and again that Legendaries are not supposed to be compared to Uniques. They used a different name for that very reason. You found a Legendary that was only so-so? Well, it sucks, but that was how the game was designed. It is no secret, Blizzard seems to state this every 30 seconds. Diablo 3 Legendary != Diablo 2 Unique. The biggest issue here is that players, such as Hocus is clearly demonstrating, have come in with the expecation that Blizzard would repeat Diablo 2's item system, and are horrified to discover that Blizzard have created a completely different game. Did Blizzard make the right decision here? Well, that is a point that can very easily be debated, and I believe the jury is still out, but the fact remains that from base design they did not want specific pieces of equipment that were `the best', so that any item could potentially be `the best for you right now'. I definitely agree, however, that the drops are pants. I believe Normal and Nightmare difficulty were fine, but even Hell difficulty has cruddy drops, and it can only get worse in Inferno (where the pool of useful gear has shrunk further). I can see plenty of room for Blizzard to tweak the drops so that level-appropriate equipment is considerably more likely to appear.
Ashock, I finally realised what you are on about. No, that comment about a conspiracy was in no way directed at you, nor anyone else. It is Generic Joke 101 to take two completely unrelated things and state `it is a conspiracy'. In fact, I cannot even imagine how you thought I was directing that comment at you. Either you are specifically looking for a personal insult in the post, or it was inadvertently a mirror where you saw yourself. Either way, it say a lot more about you that you took it as an insult than it does about me making completely random jokes without a moment's thought.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - ViralSpiral - 06-02-2012
I think when you use the word "legendary", people still expect something GOOD, though. If you want something to not be like D2 uniques or good, then why not something more like "named item" or "semi-fixed gear" or "special"? Legendary implies it was worth someone writing a legend over. That's pointless if it sucks. :op
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Frag - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 04:07 AM)Roland Wrote:I'm glad to hear that you're not a lawyer, but you can guarantee things will legally turn out in your favor. The EULA stands until it's proven otherwise as you've stated, and I think it's foolish to assume Blizzard's legal team didn't vet it.(06-02-2012, 01:38 AM)Frag Wrote: No, try reading the disclaimer and EULA section on hardcore, they're not liable for jack.
What Foxbat said. EULAs don't mean jack until they're proven in a court of law, and even then that varies from state to state (California, for example, has much more inalienable consumer protection rights than most other states). I'm no lawyer, but I guarantee you having a RMAH for HC characters would get them into trouble. It doesn't always matter if a lawsuit has merit or not; they still have to challenge it, and it's bad publicity.
(06-02-2012, 04:07 AM)Roland Wrote:Why is my beta status relevant?(06-02-2012, 01:38 AM)Frag Wrote: If they left the skill runes in, it would be a pretty valid argument for monetization. Also, the stated timeframe of the change is incorrect and seems somewhat telling.
I'm sorry, were you in the beta when they made the changes? No? They took runes out as items around mid- to late-February. The Beta ended beginning of May. That's just over 2 months time. So, explain to me again how the "stated timeframe of the change is incorrect?" And "seems somewhat telling?" Of what? Do some research before you start to question someone, and when you do at least make your arguments understandable.
They announced the change to skill runes on April 19th, the beta ended on May 1st, that's two and a half months. It seems somewhat telling that you ignore the development and iteration time needed to produce such a change, because the manner presented made it seem like a last minute change.
(06-02-2012, 04:07 AM)Roland Wrote: Your point is what, exactly?People who jump to conclusions rarely alight on them.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - BellaStrega - 06-02-2012
(06-01-2012, 07:43 PM)Ashock Wrote: So basically, once those ppl who are going slower get to Hell+, they will see the game for what it really is. I am also sure that there of course will be ppl that actually like this game even when they get to those levels.
I bet they will not be either Barbs or Monks, though.
I have ~91 hours on my monk (167 hours total played across five characters). A lot of that is just idling on that particular character as it did not take me 91 actual hours of game time to get to Inferno (although I'm only halfway through act I), and I still like the game so far.
I know act II is a game changer, so I may change my mind then if Blizzard doesn't rebalance Inferno a bit before I get there. I suspect that is highly unlikely, barring an unforeseen patch released on a Saturday, so I may hate Inferno a lot tomorrow. That is, I don't completely disagree with you, but my experience going into Inferno wasn't all that bad on my monk. I occasionally run into packs I have no chance to defeat, but the other packs are not much harder than they were in Hell.
I will not deny the game has flaws - bosses and champions in inferno are problems, as is the item system. But I do not believe Blizzard will leave it in that state, and they have a history of actively developing their games after launch.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Sirian - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 02:56 PM)BellaStrega Wrote: I know act II is a game changer, so I may change my mind then if Blizzard doesn't rebalance Inferno a bit before I get there.
There isn't going to be a rebalance of the primary factor involved, which is ramp up of mob levels.
If you've ever played WoW and tried to fight mobs above your level, you quickly realize how painful it is unless your toon is way OP for its own level.
I doubt the Diablo level gap is that harsh, but there can be no doubt that the biggest factor in the "increase" in "difficulty" of Inferno is the level of the mobs. Every single one of them is higher level than you, and this gap grows significantly the farther you progress.
I am finding out that even a couple of levels matters quite a bit. Redoing an act in Hell after picking up a couple more levels from the first time through makes a dramatic difference. Act 1 Inferno isn't going to have too big of a gap, so in a way you aren't feeling the real pinch there yet, only the pinch from the double-strength math on the mob stats. Once a bigger level gap is added on top of that, though... Yeah.
Inferno's scaling monster levels means that at any given time, you will have only a very narrow range of opponents whose opposition is well matched to your current gear. This means a LOT of farming of the same couple of areas over and over and over, then leaving them behind for good to move to the next scene. ... This is most definitely not how I would have done things. In fact, I think it sounds quite cruddy. The worst part about it is that it is Act4, the least randomized content in the game, that is what you are left with farming once your progression has been completed.
What I would have much preferred is an ENTIRE difficulty level wherein all the mobs are the same level and all the gear is the same level, so that once the true "end" is reached on progression, we have a wide variety of content on which to play.
Truly shaking my head and rolling my eyes at the way they chose to go.
- Sirian
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - ViralSpiral - 06-02-2012
I guess they didn't like "one pass, full clear." Which is a shame, because I think there's more to be lauded in a full clear than "farm the sweet spots 35 times each." Less monotony, too.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Concillian - 06-02-2012
To be fair, the appropriate level range is a full act in Diablo III, where in Diablo II it was generally less than 1/6th of an Act.
It'd be nice if it was an entire difficulty level, but it's still miles better than the Diablo II solution, so there was some improvement.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Quark - 06-02-2012
(06-02-2012, 06:30 PM)Sirian Wrote: There isn't going to be a rebalance of the primary factor involved, which is ramp up of mob levels.
If you've ever played WoW and tried to fight mobs above your level, you quickly realize how painful it is unless your toon is way OP for its own level.
I doubt the Diablo level gap is that harsh, but there can be no doubt that the biggest factor in the "increase" in "difficulty" of Inferno is the level of the mobs. Every single one of them is higher level than you, and this gap grows significantly the farther you progress.
This isn't true in the slightest. In addition to the Armor penalty for level (which s
Act 1 Level: 61
Act 2 Level: 62
Act 3 Level: 63
Act 4 Level: 63
Armor mitigation %: Armor / (50*Level + Armor)
So the constant changes from 3050 to 3150. In practice, my mitigation drops from 51% to 50%.
Resistance mitigation %: Resistance / (5*Level + Resistance)
Constant from 305 to 315 (this is why 1 resistance = 10 armor at even gearing). In practice, my mitigation drops from 30% to 30%.
The Armor formula from WoW has a steeper change between levels (instead of 50*Level, it's essentially 467.5*Level), but more importantly WoW has a formula completely missing from D3: To hit. To hit in WoW was affected by both attacker and target level. It hits pretty harshly once you get into 3+ range on level.
Meanwhile, I'll quote this from another forum.
Quote:I went through the damage numbers in the Brady guide.
If the numbers are to be trusted:
All monsters have base damage determined their level, and a multiplier determined by their class.
Base damage is approximately: 9k for level 61, 13k for level 62 and 56.5k(!) for 63.
Later the same guy showed a graph of linear progression of monster health and damage between levels 1-60, then hyper accelerates with a much steeper linear progressing in 61-63. They specifically changed the damage ramp up for 61-63 to be harsher than all other levels before.
IE: all they really have to do to make Act 2 not as nuts, and Act 3/4 not as insane, is reduce the effect of their own kludge.
Edit: late noticed missing sentence finish.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Sirian - 06-03-2012
(06-02-2012, 11:46 PM)Quark Wrote: IE: all they really have to do to make Act 2 not as nuts, and Act 3/4 not as insane, is reduce the effect of their own kludge.
Fair enough, but the essence behind my analysis remains. The "wall" people are hitting is based more on the mlvl and how it's been tuned than any other single factor. ... Is there, in effect, any real difference between setting the mlvls in Inferno to 70, 85, 100, 100 vs doing it as 61-63 but making 63 behave like it's 100?
- Sirian
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - BellaStrega - 06-03-2012
The problem is not really so much the monster levels as it is the damage spike from bosses and champions. It's my understanding that they're looking at evening out those spikes so inferno isn't quite as punishing. I've also seen comments to the effect that invulnerability effects are seen as "ridiculous" and will probably be modified.
As far as WoW, I know what it's like to fight over my level and how gear affects that. That is, the difference between having high end raid gear and fighting above my level and having instance gear and fighting above my level. What I have read is that 60-63 gear is supposed to account for inferno monster levels to some extent.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - ViralSpiral - 06-03-2012
See, the cute thing about clvl-mlvl curves is that when they make an expansion which raises the max clvl, everyone is pretty much forced to buy it or stop playing, since it will be such a huge help to all the players. So shrewd.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - FoxBat - 06-03-2012
Some thoughts versa the OP after reaching Inferno: after several somewhat frustrating hell a3/a4 runs (various elite packs still destroy me), I decided to start playing Auction House III, and indeed, I have some cheap upgrades on order that should double my resistances and DPS. Unfortunately I had to navigate a fairly primitive auction house system to find these affordable likely-not-even-good-deals, and then you have all the inherient drama of an auction system, watching for being out-bid, watching people ignore your sell auctions, waiting a day for the results only to find you've been out-bid and need to look anew, etc. It is something I have already spent hours trying to figure out. Meanwhile I don't feel like playing my high-level toon much while waiting for these upgrades to come in. So I can already see why some people are disliking Auction House difficulty, not only is it far faster than farming stuff yourself, it's also sufficiently clunky to consume a fair amount of time trying to figure out, and put one off from playing.
However as for people playing nothing but the auction house, there have been games with auction houses before, even games with actual working economies (as opposed to WoW's BoPs), and yes there is a subset of people who spend most of their time buying low and selling high. These are usually among the richest players in the game world as well, as at a certain point of capital, any and all farming methods will be outstripped. It remains a small group though because this isn't easy to do, not everyone has the skills or patience or interest for it. The only reason these power traders can make money is because other players are making economically poor choices that either cost them money or simply don't make money as efficiently, and in order to keep supplying goods or money to the market, they must cover any shortfall by actually creating game goods (playing/farming.) The power traders "leech" their game goods off of what others generate, so someone must be generating the goods then for the traders to gain anything.
Diablo 3 ought to be roughly the same, even if most inferno players end up using the AH, only a small handful will be saavy enough to significantly increase their gold through trading alone, not to mention also be so interested in trading as to not bother with killing demons. It also bears noting that power trading was perfectly viable in Diablo 2 as well, particularly if you used forums to facilitate. The AH may make power trading more accessible to a different generation, but it didn't create power trading itself, nor can it turn everyone into a power trader.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Quark - 06-03-2012
The AH has some issues with it, definitely. There's something I noticed in WoW, and people have carried it over into Diablo. At the beginning of WoW buyouts were really expensive, and people bid on items incrementally while ignoring the buyout. Overtime it shifted to an emphasis on "give me, NOW" on both buyer and seller - buyouts are lower comparatively, and bids are practically ignored.
The same is holding true in D3. You could have a bid for 100 gold, and it'll often get ignored completely if the buyout is too high.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - Jester - 06-03-2012
(06-03-2012, 02:12 PM)Quark Wrote: The AH has some issues with it, definitely. There's something I noticed in WoW, and people have carried it over into Diablo. At the beginning of WoW buyouts were really expensive, and people bid on items incrementally while ignoring the buyout. Overtime it shifted to an emphasis on "give me, NOW" on both buyer and seller - buyouts are lower comparatively, and bids are practically ignored.
Is that bad? Buyout seems to be the most efficient, and the more competitive the market, the more it also reflects the true market price of the item.
-Jester
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - MongoJerry - 06-03-2012
(06-02-2012, 07:28 PM)Concillian Wrote: It'd be nice if it was an entire difficulty level, but it's still miles better than the Diablo II solution, so there was some improvement.
I don't think being able to farm a full difficulty level would be a good thing. If it were set up like that, then one could just farm the slow moving zombies at the beginning of Act 1 and get all of the best loot in the game. Hello, Pindle runs?
The way it's set up right now, you farm Act I to be able to progress to Act II, farm Act II to progress to Act III, and farm Act III to be able to progress to Act IV. A lot of the problems people are running into is that they want to skip a lot of those steps and end up in later acts without having the gear to support it, which is enabled by being able to resurrect infinitely in softcore, even during set-piece encounters, if you are in a party. The players then forge on ahead, even though the multiple deaths to get there should have told them to hold back until they get better gear, and they then complain on the Blizzard boards about later acts being "impossible."
As I've stated previously, though, it's possible or even likely that Blizzard held back on some of the higher tier items both so that they have something to release over subsequent patches and so that they get an opportunity to spot and fix exploitive farming areas before releasing the very good items.
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - ViralSpiral - 06-03-2012
The expansion will also include the fifth difficulty, "Impossible." Everything there hits for at least 25K damage. Good luck, folks!
RE: The Auction House III: Evil is Back - ErickTheRed - 06-03-2012
(06-03-2012, 06:49 PM)MongoJerry Wrote: The way it's set up right now, you farm Act I to be able to progress to Act II, farm Act II to progress to Act III, and farm Act III to be able to progress to Act IV. A lot of the problems people are running into is that they want to skip a lot of those steps and end up in later acts without having the gear to support it, which is enabled by being able to resurrect infinitely in softcore, even during set-piece encounters, if you are in a party. The players then forge on ahead, even though the multiple deaths to get there should have told them to hold back until they get better gear, and they then complain on the Blizzard boards about later acts being "impossible."Except this part is a bit broken currently. The higher acts ramp up so quickly that it starts being very difficult to farm the current act for better gear. As I look to break into act 2 it seems my demon hunter friends really do hit a wall where it doesn't seem possible for them to gear defensively and not get flattened. Blizzard has learned that it's better to release overtuned content and balance it down rather than err the other way. Presumably that's what is happening here.
For now the overall plan of having different difficulty levels for each act still appeals to me, as it suits my play style very well. I like to have goals ahead of me, and it doesn't hugely bother me if some of them are out of reach. I don't want to farm content just to collect items and let me farm the same content slightly faster. I already somewhat overgear act I in that I can carry a fresh 60 through it (Makes the butcher fight pretty exciting.) I like that there's still a lot more for my character to do.
I recognize that there are different play styles and some are not well fitted by the current game. Many people would rather inferno didn't exist and they would either be done, or just farming hell. Others would like to be collecting set and unique items and are probably frustrated at their rarity. It's difficult to please everyone.