Remove the Party Experience Bonus!

[Rataxes]

Yes, but it goes far beyond certain quests. Golems are all but useless, IM is useless, poison is pretty weak without massive skill point investment, and bone spear and spirit aren't much better. The only way to get some corpses for minions or CE is relying on a merc.

I've heard reports which state that Necros are going to be the next cookie-cutters, along with Hammerdins. But it's true that if the party system was to be changed back, all characters would obviously have to have a fighting chance.

[Wapptor]

No, none of my friends play D2. Pretty much all of my D2-only friends left a month after LoD was released, and I've been on and off D2 too frequently to have had a chance to make any new friends on Bnet. I also switched realm from Europe to USEast a few months ago.

I play on USEast exclusively and frequently, I'd be friendly towards any level headed lurker :P. You can message me if you want, my accounts are:
-Wapptor
-Darkwolf_WD
-Reclusewx
-recluse2
-masterwapptor
-wapptorx2

(yes I have a really hard time deleting characters)

-Wapptor

[Rataxes]

Oh, nice to know. Thanks! :)

Further Battle.net play for my part will have to wait until v1.10 is released though, I'll be playing ladder then.

[Guest]

Encouraging groups is good.

Playing with other people is fun.

BTW the preLOD goodness you discribe is a figment of your imagination.


Looking at that last paragraph, you shouldnt be playing games like this - you are WAY to emotionally invested.
And you said "newbies"? Um this is a three year old game "newbies" are not a real vocal force here. (Im sure you didnt mean low lvl characters, because we all know they did nerf exp for low lvl leachers).
And lastly, "eh" why besmirch Canadians by throwing that on the end of your drival?4

[Rataxes]

Encouraging groups is good

The party bonus encourages people not to think. No, that is not good.

Playing with other people is fun.

Yeah sure it can be, in which case you don't need the XP bonus as an incentive to party up. Exping parties, which is the by far most common type on Bnet, are no fun at all mostly.

BTW the preLOD goodness you discribe is a figment of your imagination.

The day D2 was released and the day LoD was, released mark the beginning and end of one of my top three gaming experiences ever. My memory is quite clear on that, I assure you that it is not a figment of my imagination.

Looking at that last paragraph, you shouldnt be playing games like this - you are WAY to emotionally invested.

No I'm quite emotionally detatched, I've never smashed as much as a pencil over extreme frustration in a game, any game. Just because I, unlike the "I play D2 to find shiny gold objects"-people, previously found somewhat deeper pleasures, such as the atmosphere, the or interaction with other people in a competitive environment, in this game, it doesn't mean it has anything to do with becoming emotionally involved in a game.

And you said "newbies"? Um this is a three year old game "newbies" are not a real vocal force here. (Im sure you didnt mean low lvl characters, because we all know they did nerf exp for low lvl leachers).

So just because the Lurker Lounge doesn't have any newbies, that means that Battle.net also lacks newbies? Or am I reading this sentence wrong? I must be, that'd be quite a logical disconnect on your part otherwise. Battle.net is flooded with people who are completely clueless about this game and likely have never seen any other area than the five towns, the corner of the cow level, and Mephistos durance.

And lastly, "eh" why besmirch Canadians by throwing that on the end of your drival?4

Mind clarifying this bit?

[Guest]

"newbies"

There are very few new players to this game anymore. And at this the few new player there are are some of the less vocal. Very few people wait till 3 years after a game comes out then become so upset they raise a fuss.

The vocal players are people who have played the game a long time(you and I for instance) and have developed strong opinions.


Honestly this is an obvious point. That you dont understand it sheds light on your entire perspective.

[Rataxes]

You think so eh? D2 and LoD are still in the best seller charts you know, new players are coming in as fast as veterans are quitting. Newbies are plentiful on Battle.net, regardless of whether you define them as "new" players or "bad" players.

And now I see what you meant with newbies not being very vocal. It was a response to the "uproar" I spoke of, right? There might not be a vocal uproar as such, but such a drastic change would obviously cause a lot of people to quit playing. Blizzard probably doesn't want that and so this change I've proposed is unlikely to ever occur even if they had considered it.

[Occhidiangela]

1. Large games being created wherein there is no incentive to party leads to few to no people partying. That may not be all bad. However, in game mechanics, its leads to red x all over the screen, and a lulling of the wariness versus PK's in public games. That leads to better opportunity for a PK to slip into your act/screen during a leveling game. In HC, that is simply bad.

That said, an advantage to the party system is that a nuisance PK is clearly tagged. A disadvantage is that if he just wants to kill one person, he has to hostile the whole group. Personally, I prefer it that way, particularly HC.

2. Sharing experience is a way to reward team play, or multiplayer games, which in turn reduces the number of games on a given server at a time, and hence enhances bnet stability and game availability. If the Hostility system survives pretty much intact, you still have plenty of ways to deal with leachers.

3. Your love of the dog eat dog of pre LoD glosses over the problem of perspective: is Diablo a competition? If so, fine, but you don't have to share experience NOW or did you not know that?

Just unparty, and kill away. No one else gets the XP, and while you don't get the party bonus, you get all points for all kills at the increased amount for game difficulty.

Leachers will at worst grab items, but they always did that, even in Diablo II pre LoD.

While I was still playing on realms, I frequently leveled up HC characters in areas away from BH/cows and got two benefits: All points for me, my merc leveled up faster, and whatever dropped was not immediately snapped up by someone else.

If you care about the ladder as a competition, and consider XP over time as the goal of this game, then I can understand why you take the position you do. "It's all about me!" If the shoe fits, wear it.

Your suggestion is, in my view, a plea to increase the amount of hate and discontent on bnet, which is hardly an admirable goal.

[--Pete]

Hi,

There are very few new players to this game anymore.

The August issue of Computer Games has D2 rated as the number 9 top seller. I'd guess that translates into a fair number of newbies.

--Pete

[Cryptic]

:huh:


Apparently we all had radically different experiences in D2Classic – what you refer to as “the golden age,” I remember as “hell filled with exploiting bastards.” I ran a softcore necromancer on USWest (Ashrael) who was constantly in the top 20 ladder spots, simply because I adored the character and played him all the time. Once he hit level 84, experiencing mining became an utter nightmare. The only place I could go, if I wanted experience, was the Chaos Sanctuary, in 8-player games. With ~28 maxed (and well-chosen and carefully-shepherded) Revives, CE, and maxed curses, I could do it in about 10 minutes.

My “golden” experience went like this: I created my own games, to get a head start. If my game did not happen to generate Urdar on the River of Flame, people would pop in for 10 seconds then leave, leaving me no chance to generate experience. If the Urdar were there, the game filled and stayed filled. Whenever anyone entered the game, I offered alliance. (Usually greeted with hostility, which meant I knew I had Act 4 rivals; sometimes low-level chars partied up, but they were almost never in Act 4.) I cleared the top of the River of Flame for ~10 minions, then crawled up the labyrinth to the Sanctuary.

The rivals who had hostiled me would then muscle in on my “territory” (ignoring queries to party). They were usually Iceblink Whirlwind Barbarians with mauls or dual swords. This was long before lances, and before people knew that dual-wielding and Whirlwind wasn’t really the best thing to do. They’d attack me, I’d kill them with Iron Maiden, Bone Walls, etc. I’d cover their corpse with Walls, and go on with my game. They’d leave, re-enter, and shadow me, using my Revives to cower from the dreaded “Knight Maiden” while picking up items and looking for a weakness. Once they went hostile, now wise, I’d lead them into a huge monster pack and TP, almost always resulting in their death. Then I’d go back.

Many more rivals, who were waiting in the Pandemonium Fortress for a sign, would rush to the River or Sanctuary, looking for an easy kill. It got to the point where I refused to go back through my own TP without a pack of Revives, and the first spell I spammed, before my screen even loaded, was Maiden. End result? One or more dead rivals about 50% of the time.

End result: Game length about 15 minutes, average kills of players around 3. Desired game length – I enjoyed clearing the River and Sanctuary and sometimes the City with a party, 30-45 minutes, and I never wanted to kill anyone unless they hostiled me first. Out of thousands of games, this was the scenario in at least 75% of them. It got worse once Lances came into play, at which point I shelved D2 until LoD. Things improved wonderfully once the expansion came out, despite all the balance problems, because people were playing together, and that is when D2 is the most fun.

There were exceptions, of course. Rarely, people would party to kill Diablo. This resulted in tentative alliance throughout the Sanctuary, until Diablo was down in health; then everyone would leave the party, become extremely hostile, and wait for the drop. Wheee…

Do I miss it? God no. If it came back, I would keep playing, and build PvP-specific clearing characters, and not be too happy.

The solutions to leechers are as follows:

[1] Level restrictions of 30 to enter Nightmare, and 60 to enter Hell, applicable to closed Battle.net only. Precedents: Diablo, and level restrictions on Ancients.

[2] Until then – play only in games that you create, and set the level restriction to whatever company you choose to tolerate. If you don’t want the party “bonus” and can kill faster yourself, and prefer that, then don’t ally.

[3] If you want to play alone in a multi-player game and not be followed, then be deceptive about the game title – call it “Act V Ancients,” and play in the Flayer Jungle.

[4] Hostile anyone who tags behind you picking up items. (I’m assuming you don’t have a problem with hostility since you liked the “golden age.”)

[5] Don’t enter games you don’t create yourself, as you’re bound to see leeching characters everywhere, unless [1] is enacted.

[6] Joke: I suppose if you want to re-create the nastiness of the past, you could name the game “Kill Baal,” go to the Worldstone, and then hostile anyone who dares to believe you. It creates the same effect, minus only the intent of the other players. But if it’s all about the King of the Hill, then their opinions don’t matter, right?

:lol:

[Rataxes]

1. Large games being created wherein there is no incentive to party leads to few to no people partying. That may not be all bad. However, in game mechanics, its leads to red x all over the screen, and a lulling of the wariness versus PK's in public games.

Actually I think the fact that it has become a common practice to always join the party upon entering a game has lulled players into a false sense of security and a belief that players who choose not to party are more likely to be PK's, which is false, at least unless Blizzard fixes current PK exploits such as Hydras and Triggerhacks. Breaking up the current party system would increase PK wariness, not decrease it.

That leads to better opportunity for a PK to slip into your act/screen during a leveling game. In HC, that is simply bad

If the party bonus was to be removed, so that there would be less parties and you would be more likely to be alone on the map, I doubt a PK would just be able to "slip in". If you hear the sound and then see a red cross closing in on you a few seconds later, what are you going to think? Does it even matter if there are any other red crosses in the neighbourhood, unlikely as it is? One would regardless of whether you have green or red markings surrounding you, have to be pretty thick not realize that it's time to either leave or fight at that moment.

That said, an advantage to the party system is that a nuisance PK is clearly tagged. A disadvantage is that if he just wants to kill one person, he has to hostile the whole group. Personally, I prefer it that way

I don't think PK's are clearly tagged with the current party system. There's no way to be sure who can and can not be a PK. If Hydra PK'ing, Triggerhack and the likes are removed in v1.10, then maybe you'd once again be able to somewhat trust your party members to not suddenly kill you. But elimination of those things will cause everyone to have to hostile someone at least a few seconds before he can actually move close enough to become a threat. Once you hear the sound, between the name and the way the PK will be acting/moving, spotting him is easy enough, regardless of whether there are other markings around and whether they are green or red.

2.  Sharing experience is a way to reward team play, or multiplayer games, which in turn reduces the number of games on a given server at a time, and hence enhances bnet stability and game availability.  If the Hostility system survives pretty much intact, you still have plenty of ways to deal with leachers.

There are plenty of rewards for team play, if the team members are willing to put their mind to it and work for it, so there is no need for an experience bonus, particularly not with the problems it causes.

There would not be more games created. People would still fill up a game to maximize the monster experience, but players would be spread out across the acts instead of concentrated to one area. I dare say that these exping parties made possible with the party bonus have caused far more games to be created. Cow- and Blood-run games are cleared in a matter of minutes because you have 8 people focusing their efforts on one area, instead of maybe even as much as 8 areas. So in the time it takes for a Pre-LoD Hell game to clear out, 3-4 Cow run games (which due to still probably exceeding 5 minutes, or because there's always one straggler left, would remain on the servers for at least another 5 minutes) would have been created and cleared out. I bet Cow running party exp games result in at least twice as many games up and running at any given time, than the old-fashioned Hell exp games where everyone cleared their own area.

The Hostile system, while indeed working against most leeches, is far more troublesome than all-out party XP removal. Lets say you have two leeches in your party, you did not invite them, but someone else did (because of the Party XP bonus, why should he care if there are leeches in his party?). Now you want to kill them, or at least scare them away. The other players aren't really backing you up, since the leeches really aren't costing them anything. If you want to do this you either have to make an agreement with all other "real players" in the party, and if you manage that you might as well just create a new party without the leechers. Or, you have to hostile the entire party, which, even if you try to explain everything to the rest of the party, will inevitably lead to shouts of "PK!!" and half the party immediately leaving the game.

The ironic thing with your statement is that it is precisely because of the party XP bonus that the hostile system is a very troublesome way of getting rid of leeches. When it wasn't a common practice to always join "the" party, scaring away annoying looters or leechers away with the Hostile function was the easiest thing in the world, no complications what so ever, since the looters would likely not be member of any party, and so you hostiling them wouldn't upset anyone or in any way disrupt the game.

3. Your love of the dog eat dog of pre LoD glosses over the problem of perspective: is Diablo a competition?

Yes, it used to be anyhow. I don't think I need to tell you that this competition added much more excitement to the game. It's a pretty general rule of life that making a competition out of something almost always adds to the enjoyment and excitement. While it may not add to comfort or relaxation, which is what some people value and enjoy, I frankly don't care about leisure players who for some reason want to play in the (supposed to be) competitive environment that is Closed D2.

Well, you don't have to share experience NOW, or did you not know that? Just unparty, and kill away. No one else gets the XP, and while you don't get the party bonus, you get all points for all kills. Leachers will at worst grab items.

You can't have competition without competitors :) It could be argued that the party is the competitor, but that makes it at worst 7 vs 1, which isn't really fair. Believe me, I'd be glad to unparty and fight with the rest of the party over the monsters and loot if I thought I had a fighting chance, but that's rarely the case.

I frequently leveled up characters in areas away from BH and got two benefits. All points for me, my merc leveled up faster, and whatever dropped was not immediately snapped up by someone else. Now, if you care about the ladder as a competition, and consider the XP over time is the goal of this game, then I can understand why you take the position you do.

Oh I do this almost all the time, solo in 8 player games in the untouched areas of Act 5 that is. The prime goal of the game can be argued about for ages, but the Ladder is surely one of top contenders, or used to be. The current ladder is pretty uninteresting, since one look at it reveals nothing but thousands of clvl 99 characters, but back in the classic days, the ladder did actually mean something and many were very interested in the progress of the top ladder runners. I don't at all mind it's return, which is likely to come with v1.10. I care about anything that can make for a good competition. This includes both the experience Ladder, and PvP tournaments.,

Your suggestion is, in my view, a plea to increse the amount of hate and discontent on bnet, not change it.

I want nothing but for D2 to return to the exciting and competitive nature and atmosphere it had in the beginning. I don't see how you connect competition with hatred, are all sports also built on that emotion?

[kandrathe]

While I was still playing on realms, I frequently leveled up HC characters in areas away from BH/cows and got two benefits: All points for me, my merc leveled up faster, and whatever dropped was not immediately snapped up by someone else.

That, and I find that if a PK'er does enter the game and joins/quits the normal "discontiguous" party they don't immediatly know your location. And then even after 30 minutes hunting you, are not likely even know the location of Abadon even if you told them that was where you were.

[Guest]

But it has been in the top 10 most of the time since its release.

I think that most the players and especially the vocal ones are not newbs.

[AtomicKitKat]

Reminds me of a funny story. A level 99 Amazon came into a public game while I was playing around with Backoff(my "press my belly to make me fart" Paladin) Naturally, this set off all sorts of alarm bells, since this was while I was in Normal Act 2. I simply took the waypoint to the canyon of the magi, entered a random Tal Rasha's tomb, and then "accepted" his party invite(sad fact 1: most pks are males... sad fact 2: most pks are males using female characters...), and watched with amusement as he spammed "TPTPTPTPTP" :P I refused to let him have the pleasure of teleporting to me, choosing instead to tell him "I'm in Tal Rasha's tomb. Come find me."

A less amusing reason why I now play in private games with my brother, was related on these boards some time ago. Some silly noob stole some emeralds and a couple of small poison charms from my venom assassin while I was gracious enough to help him through Act 2. After 5 minutes of "Please give me back my emeralds!", I quit the game, and I've never gone back to public gaming since. Especially not now that I have 2 coms and a shared cable connection.

[Rataxes]

Well, obviously not all feel the same way about things, Cryptic. Most veterans I've talked with agree that things were more fun in the beginning though. The vast amount of D2C veterans who left within a a few months of LoD's release doesn't exactly speak against me either :P Practically all my friends quit playing D2 because they grew bored with the expansion very quickly and yet realized that classic would never be the same again, and I wasn't that slow to follow, though I have picked it up again periodically. Twice in hopes of being there in time to compete in the v1.10 ladder.

It's an interesting account of your D2C experience, seems to have involved quite a few more player deaths than what I experienced. Regardless of what one feels about hostility and competition, I imagine your account would make most people believe that your D2C experience was a damn sight more interesting and exciting than the endless Cow run games which is the norm now. Reading your account, I swear I had the impression you were enjoying every last minute of it until I read the words "It got worse..." :D

[1] Level restrictions of 30 to enter Nightmare, and 60 to enter Hell, applicable to closed Battle.net only. Precedents: Diablo, and level restrictions on Ancients.

I can't say I like restrictions. Still, with the increased difficulty I doubt anyone would ever want to enter the new difficulties at lower levels anyway. This doesn't address exp-leeching at all though.

What I find interesting is that you immediately connect me liking competition, with me liking PK'ing. I very rarely killed anyone back in classic, I stood my ground several times and scared away a lot of people who thought I was trespassing on their territory, but I killed very few. I still never PK and would rather leave than fight if I was hostiled,unless I reckoned my odds were good :D, but I still like the air of excitement that hostility between players create.

I know your sixth point was a joke, but if there's even the slightest hint of meaning behind it, it shows something. I didn't like D2C climate because people kept killing each-other and everyone suspected everyone of being a PK, I liked it because to have a chance to survive, you had to be able to stand your ground and be able to take care of yourself. This didn't just mean that you had to make sure your character could kill and defend himself on his own, but you also had to think, be creative and find your own solutions to problems, rather than leaning on somebody elses shoulder whenever trouble arised. This is not the same thing as liking PK'ing, liking the pretty harsh D2C atmosphere doesn't mean I enjoy trapping WP's and attempting to kill anyone that crosses my path.

[kandrathe]

The funny thing about memories is that we tend to only remember the best things, and the worst things. I think there are all kinds of different types of preferences for play styles. Building the game to favor one over the other does not make sense from a game marketing POV. There is sufficient opportunity in public games to be a PKer, and eschew partying if you like. And, for those who have friends who play, and like to work together there is something for them as well.

I would hazard to guess that the constructive RPG cooperative play aspect appeals to more people than the dog-eat-dog, competitive aspect. In this game, the softcore "Ladder" means you are capable of getting alot of experience in the shortest real world time. So, if you have nothing else in your life but playing D2 for 20 hours a day, then you can be on the ladder too. But, the ladder has no indication as to how well you can play the game and more often it is populated with the characters that can kill the most monsters the quickest. The hardcore ladder has just a little more meaning, as you must acquire the massive experience quickly without dying.

[Occhidiangela]

1. Where you sit determines what you see.
2. Fun is where you find it.

Actually I think the fact that it has become a common practice to always join the party upon entering a game has lulled players into a false sense of security and a belief that players who choose not to party are more likely to be PK's, which is false, at least unless Blizzard fixes current PK exploits such as Hydras and Triggerhacks. Breaking up the current party system would increase PK wariness, not decrease it.

I disagree. If no one is partied, all crosses are red. If partied, all are green. When all crosses are red, which one is the PK? Is he even in your act? The "all party" helped identify who the PK was, or if he/she was even on your screen. This allowed a quick "am I at risk" assessment to be made, however, Trigger and Scroll hack . . . renders a lot moot.

 
If the party bonus was to be removed, so that there would be less parties and you would be more likely to be alone on the map, I doubt a PK would just be able to "slip in". If you hear the sound and then see a red cross closing in on you a few seconds later, what are you going to think? Does it even matter if there are any other red crosses in the neighbourhood, unlikely as it is? One would regardless of whether you have green or red markings surrounding you, have to be pretty thick not realize that it's time to either leave or fight at that moment.

See above.

   don't think PK's are clearly tagged with the current party system. There's no way to be sure who can and can not be a PK. If Hydra PK'ing, Triggerhack and the likes are removed in v1.10, then maybe you'd once again be able to somewhat trust your party members to not suddenly kill you. But elimination of those things will cause everyone to have to hostile someone at least a few seconds before he can actually move close enough to become a threat. Once you hear the sound, between the name and the way the PK will be acting/moving, spotting him is easy enough, regardless of whether there are other markings around and whether they are green or red.

Really? The nuisance PK is the only red x, the party remains the same color as you. That is as clearly tagged as necessary. I don't disagree that IF the hacks are defeated (not holding my breath) yes, wariness around TP's and Waypoints and town entries are still anyone's best defense.

  2.  There are plenty of rewards for team play, if the team members are willing to put their mind to it and work for it, so there is no need for an experience bonus, particularly not with the problems it causes.

What problems? I see no problems. I see greed, and dog eat dog, but No One Is Required to Party Up. For those who do, the reward should remain, but perhaps the bonus needs to be reduced. If you check the comments on how the party bonus is being changed, you might understand that leaching will be more difficult, while true party play will still get a small reward. You can also choose not to party. So, choose it. Why rain on the parade of others?

The Hostile system, while indeed working against most leeches, is far more troublesome than all-out party XP removal.

Mixing apples and oranges, IMO.

Leechers will apparently not be able to leach as they did. Do you understand that? Also, one can always lure a few champs to a leacher now and again. Re partying also helps. Level limits on games help prevent leeching also.

 
I don't think I need to tell you that this competition added much more excitement to the game.

For some, true enough. Bnet is for everyone who bought the game.

While it may not add to comfort or relaxation, which is what some people value and enjoy, I frankly don't care about leisure players who for some reason want to play in the (supposed to be) competitive environment that is Closed D2.

Yep, you don't care about anyone else's fun, just your own. For some of us, Diablo II is indeed a hobby, a leisure activity. If I wanted to get wound up, I'd play and RTS like Starcraft. That, sir, is REAL competition, and it is well balanced.

  You can't have competition without competitors  It could be argued that the party is the competitor, but that makes it at worst 7 vs 1, which isn't really fair. Believe me, I'd be glad to unparty and fight with the rest of the party over the monsters and loot if I thought I had a fighting chance, but that's rarely the case.

Right. But is every party by definition a competitor? No, a party can also be a team. Some games, like basketball, are a competition between teams. Some games, like golf, are solo competitions, though it too can be competition in a team format. Poker, on the other hand, is a Many V Many solo competition. Blizzard's ability to make the games appeal broad enough is part of the secret to Diablo II's success.

  The current ladder is pretty uninteresting, since one look at it reveals nothing but thousands of clvl 99 characters, but back in the classic days, the ladder did actually mean something and many were very interested in the progress of the top ladder runners. I don't at all mind it's return, which is likely to come with v1.10.

The current ladder in simply more of a joke than the original pre-LoD ladder.

The ladder means something? Right, XP over time.

In 1.10 it means, to me, a less likely chance that folks will have dupes, it also means that I need to understand that every game I am in will probably have some folks in it who are playing very competitively with an eye on the ladder. That does not demand that a party penalty by inflicted. The two ideas can coexist in harmony. Since parties tend to kill faster anyway, a small reduction in the party bonus would not necessarily hurt party play. However, since killing speed looks to have been curtailed, unless partied, by design, maybe the reward for partying up is appropriate. The aim, I think, is to make each game last longer so that the time factor you mention, which at present is indeed a pretty gross loophole, is mitigated.

  Your suggestion is, in my view, a plea to increse the amount of hate and discontent on bnet, not change it.
I want nothing but for D2 to return to the exciting and competitive nature and atmosphere it had in the beginning. I don't see how you connect competition with hatred, are all sports also built on that emotion?

Diablo II can be enjoyed on a variety of different levels. Far better that the game be enjoyable either as a team venture or a competition than to preclude either. The party penalty penalized team play in a multiplayer game. Think about the paradox involved in that.

I'd say your position on "what the game is" borders on myopia, and your assessment on the impact of the party bonus is premature: we have not seen the ladder season open, and have yet to see what loopholes folks will and can exploit.

Since you like the Ladder, I suggest that 1.10, whether or not they change the party experience, will give you what you want: a ladder season that is finite, and where 99 is tough to get to. There is your competition. Now, if you form a team who plays together, you can run the ladder together and even duel on another, both at the same time.

Fun is where you find it.

[Rataxes]

I think there are all kinds of different types of preferences for play styles. Building the game to favor one over the other does not make sense from a game marketing POV. There is sufficient opportunity in public games to be a PKer, and eschew partying if you like. And, for those who have friends who play, and like to work together there is something for them as well.

I agree fully with this. It does make sense to try and make your game appeal to as many preferances as possible, and it is possible for people who don't particularly care for the parties of average bnet slugs that make up most Cow- and Bloodrun games to play solo and avoid such parties. But there was room for more than one playing style in Classic as well.

People are arguing that partying is good (which is an entirely subjective statement), and that partying was suppressed in classic, therefore, classic was not good. But who's to say whose preferred playing style is the best one? I think I've shown that there were several very clear advantages with the "egocentric" playing style that D2C favoured. The fact is that solo play is currently just as, if not more suppressed than party play was back in Classic. Now if it came down to a choice between them, I'll admit that it would be more sensible to favour the party-orientated playing style since, as you say, there are now more "constructive RPG cooperative" players than there are "dog-eat-dog" players. Though I very much doubt the same was true in Classic.

[Occhidiangela]

1.  People are arguing that partying is good (which is an entirely subjective statement), and that partying was suppressed in classic, therefore, classic was not good.

2.  But who's to say whose preferred playing style is the best one?

3.  I think I've shown that there were several very clear advantages with the "egocentric" playing style that D2C favoured.

1. Classic had any number of strengths and problems that went well beyond partying, so the simple logic flow on point 1 is too limited in scope. In Diablo II, 1.06, Hell Diablo was quite defeatable with characters anywhere from 38-65 in clvl. Once into the 70's and 80's, there was no question that one was embarked on a ladder or XP chase, or the pursuit of a particular level, possibly for the purposes of duelling, or just "to have one of ____ level" Thus, once one entered into the leveling game, one was FORCED into being in game with ladder runners whose XP options were limited to Diablo in Hell in large games. LoD changed that, but then, it changed a great deal. Kill stealing is grief play.

2. We probably have to ask: best for what aim? If one's aim is ladder achievement, then to a certain extent, dog eat dog does fosters competition, and hunting ladder players in HC added something rather harsh to the game: a typical "I succeed by putting others down, not by my own achievement/progress." That is adding hate and discontent to the Realms.

3. The advantages were limited, IMHO, to the XP over time race. The problem with the way that Blizzard blended PvM and PvP in Diablo II is of course a subject that has been discussed ad nauseum.

[Rataxes]

I disagree. If no one is partied, all crosses are red. If partied, all are green. When all crosses are red, which one is the PK? Is he even in your act? The "all party" helped identify who the PK was, or if he/she was even on your screen. This allowed a quick "am I at risk" assessment to be made, however, Trigger and Scroll hack . . . renders a lot moot.

Blizzard could also implent a big flashing arrow that pointed at the PK and displayed a sign stating: "THIS IS THE PK!", but it wouldn't be necessary, would it? You don't need that to tell who's the PK, just as you don't need color-coding to see who the PK is. It sure wasn't necessary in Classic. You saw the name of the PK'er when he hostiled you, you'll see the same name on the map when he appears, and he'll most likely be moving in a very obvious pattern that should give him away the instant he enters your map if you, for some reason didn't catch his name.

Really? The nuisance PK is the only red x, the party remains the same color as you. That is as clearly tagged as necessary

The point is, that with Triggerhack and Hydra PK'ing, anyone - green, red, or rainbow colored, is a potential PK. This is why you cannot tag PKs with color-coding, not until Blizzard gets rid of these unlawful PK'ing methods.

No One Is Required to Party Up

No One Was Required to Play Solo When There Was No Party XP Bonus

For those who do, the reward should remain, but perhaps the bonus needs to be reduced. If you check the comments on how the party bonus is being changed, you might understand that leaching will be more difficult, while true party play will still get a small reward.

Yes it will be somewhat harder to leech, though I don't doubt that it'll still very much be alive in v1.10. Rushing will at least hopefully cease to exist, but removing the party XP bonus would completely eliminate leeching.

You can also choose not to party. So, choose it. Why rain on the parade of others?

Feels like I've repeated this enough by now. The point is that I do not want to eliminate party play, I do not want to force everyone to play solo. What I want, and I dare say I speak for more people than myself, is not something I can get by merely choosing to do this or that. I want a return of the D2C atmosphere and gaming climate, and if it should ever come back, what would be a better time than now, when Blizzard with v1.10 apparently is trying to go back to D2's roots in all other aspects?

For some, true enough. Bnet is for everyone who bought the game.

I'll be egocentric enough to say that I think the competitive hardcore players (not the game mode) was Blizzard's first priority when they designed D2 Closed. And I guess it evened out in the end, competitive players were the ones to get the shaft when LoD was introduced. The somewhat decent PvP balance that existed in Classic was crushed, and the Ladder was turned into a true joke with thousands of lvl 99 characters. The competitive ladder will hopefully make a return in v1.10, but PvP is probably forever doomed.

Yep, you don't care about anyone else's fun, just your own.

No, but like I have previously stated. I believe D2 Closed was originally designed with competitive players primarily in mind. Leisure players belong as little in a competitive environment as novice players belong in Hell. Of course, this balance shifted completely when LoD came out. Just as you claim there's more than enough room for my playing style, there was more than enough room for leisure players back in classic.

For some of us, Diablo II is indeed a hobby, a leisure activity. If I wanted to get wound up, I'd play and RTS like Starcraft. That, sir, is REAL competition, and it is well balanced.

Did you ever play D2 competitively? If not, who are you to judge how fit D2 once was for competitive play? I play a lot of Starcraft and Counter-Strike as well, that doesn't change the fact that I think D2 offered some very good competitive play.

Right. But is every party by definition a competitor? No, a party can also be a team. Some games, like basketball, are a competition between teams. Some games, like golf, are solo competitions, though it too can be competition in a team format. Poker, on the other hand, is a Many V Many solo competition. Blizzard's ability to make the games appeal broad enough is part of the secret to Diablo II's success.

A party is a competitor if I choose to compete with it, and a team is also a competitor by definition. The ladder race between RUSSBarb and GERBarb was indeed a fight between teams, but that is really the only existing example in the pretty short history of D2, unless you count Team PvP. It's also proof that there was no need for an XP bonus for parties, a good and well-planned party could still achieve far greater things than any soloist could.

The current ladder in simply more of a joke than the original pre-LoD ladder.

The ladder means something? Right, XP over time.

The ladder runners displayed admirable degrees of commitment, effort and determination. Yes I'd say it meant something for many people. I'm sure Sirian killing NM Diablo with 10 000 Firebolts meant something to some people, even though it means absolutely nothing to me.

That does not demand that a party penalty by inflicted. The two ideas can coexist in harmony. Since parties tend to kill faster anyway, a small reduction in the party bonus would not necessarily hurt party play. However, since killing speed looks to have been curtailed, unless partied, by design, maybe the reward for partying up is appropriate

One thing I liked about the past penalty of partying, vs the current godly rewards which makes partying a no-brainer, was that optimizing XP/time was very complex. Will I gain more experience by going solo? Can I make up for the halved XP with halved killing time or increased safety if I party up with this Necro? What is really the ultimate balance between party sizes and and increased killing speed from character combinations? But I guess unless Blizzard makes any drastic changes to the Party system, the best party combination will be as much of a no-brainer as ever - 8 partied killer machines who don't really contribute much to one-anothers efficiency, but that's not something they have to concern themselves with, because of the Party bonus.

I would've loved it if people were forced to consider which combination would work best, weigh drawbacks with benefits for every single viable party size and combination. I bet you'd see a lot of creativity and different ideas about how to gain experience the quickest. Some people would go solo, some people would team-up in carefully planned 2-3 player parties, while some would maybe decide that they'd rather go for the challenge of trying to get a whole 8-player team up on the ladder - with each player up right after one-another, which would indeed be quite a challenge if the PXPB (I'll just call it that in the future) was removed. Just like how it was in the very beginning of D2.

Diablo II can be enjoyed on a variety of different levels. Far better that the game be enjoyable either as a team venture or a competition than to preclude either. The party penalty penalized team play in a multiplayer game. Think about the paradox involved in that.

Multi-player doesn't necessarily have anything to do with co-operative play, so I see no paradox. The thing is that Blizzard really hasn't been able to balance the game for different playing styles. According to you and others, leisure and party players were suppressed in Classic. According to me, competitive players were completely shafted in LoD. I personally think that removing the Party XP bonus would improve the balance for the different playing styles. But maybe v1.10 already has enough in store to revive the competitive side of D2 to what it once was.