Quick question RE: Classic D2

[Chesspiece_face]

See Description. I've been gambling for the last 3 days and have yet to see a single set and/or unique items. I know that in 1.9 they were removed from gambling but the 1.10 list says that these things were added back in. was this only for D2X or am i just very unlucky with my gambles?

I've probably gambled for over 200 Skull Caps. I know that when i used to play i would have gotten at least 4-5 Tarnhelm. how are things now?

[LiquidDamage]

You have a 1 in 5000 chance to gamble a unique in both CD2 and D2X. Sets are nearly as bad, though I don't know the chance off the top of my head.

Don't bother gambling for anything but rares, for which you have a 1 in 10 chance. If you are looking for good rare double or triple resistance boots, belts, and gloves, CD2 is the place to be, odds wise. It is also the place to be if you want to gamble a rare +2 necro/sorc/pally/zon/barb, prismatic amulet, or imbue a +2 necro skills wand. The odds for these things aren't fantastic, but they are a heck of a lot better than in D2X.

[Chesspiece_face]

that about sums it all up. thanks. I knew they lowered the chances of gambling uniques and sets but had no idea it was that low. ok thanks again.

[adeyke]

In 1.09, it was possible to gamble uniques and set items, as well. There, though, the chances were reallly low. I think I only gambled one or two set amulets in my entire 1.09 playing time.

[-Tempus-]

does anyone recall the odds to gamble uniqs/sets pre 1.06?

has anyone had much luck gambling duel leech rings/amulets in 1.10 in Classic or how about nice+2 amulets?

[CowInvader]

I have a strange feeling telling me that it was 3%, however I could be completely wrong.

[LiquidDamage]

does anyone recall the odds to gamble uniqs/sets pre 1.06?

It was 7% rare, 5% set, 3% unique, if I recall correctly.

[Crystalion]

You have a 1 in 5000 chance to gamble a unique in both CD2 and D2X... Don't bother gambling for anything but rares....

I can't speak in general, but for a character of appropriate level (probably clvl 11) the price of daggers and the frequency with which they are presented makes a case for gambling for a unique, depending on how much you value your time and clicking (ala carpal tunnel). We're talking a bit less than 10 million gold per Gull, on average. If you had a shop bot that seems to me to be a price that many people would consider paying.

There is also the "lottery ticket" factor to consider. If you want a particular unique, and have money to burn (i.e. there is no utility to the gold you have, to speak of), then it may make sense to throw some money down that hole. I believe a lot of money would get thrown down that hole, despite the 1/5000, if there were a more favorable "cash & carry" environment (i.e. if you weren't limited in how much gold you can carry, and people could "wire transfer" money & goods more easily, facilitating trade--an interesting bit related to this is: The Gaming Open Market ).

[LiquidDamage]

I can't speak in general, but for a character of appropriate level (probably clvl 11) the price of daggers and the frequency with which they are presented makes a case for gambling for a unique, depending on how much you value your time and clicking (ala carpal tunnel). We're talking a bit less than 10 million gold per Gull, on average. If you had a shop bot that seems to me to be a price that many people would consider paying.

Right, well, there is a lot more hassle than just clicking. A clvl 9 (which someone figured out a while back is the optimum gull gambling level) character can only carry 140k. That means the gambler will have to be reloaded with gold 71 times.

I used up 140k once trying this, and it took so long and was so annoying that I'll never bother again. Daggers don't always show on the gambling screen, you know. Trying to use 10 million gold in this manner is a horrifying concept. I am here to play a fun game, not participate in a tedious exercise that, for each second that passes, makes me more angry that there isn't a "Reset inventory" button, or that there arent 5 tabs showing one of each item type every time.

You can probably guess that I don't gamble in real life. ;)

Yeah, I suppose it would be feasible using shop bots, but I'm not fond of bot use, and certainly wouldn't risk being banned for it.

[Crystalion]

Right, well, there is a lot more hassle than just clicking...

I used up 140k once trying this, and it took so long and was so annoying that I'll never bother again.
...
Trying to use 10 million gold in this manner is a horrifying concept.

I don't disagree, but consider the following...

I grabbed a clvl 8 and timed seeing 10 daggers at gheed, getting 1:43. If we guess that buying the daggers and reloading gold bumps that up to a ~2 minute average per ten, then we have 1000 minutes of effort in addition to the 10 million gold as a cost. If we assume (for grins) that 200 minutes are needed to earn that $10m, then the "price" of a Gull dagger, by this method, is on the order of 20 hours.

I've read that according to the World Bank, roughly half the people in the world get by on the equivalent of $2 (US) a day. So it seems reasonable to suppose that a Gull dagger could be produced for a cost of less than $10 (factoring in wear and tear and costs for the computer and connection).

I know this is all absurd. But it does give the flip side--the apparent absurdity of buying stuff on ebay rather than "earning" it--a bit of a boost toward the "rational behavior" column.

...angry that there isn't a "Reset inventory" button, or that there arent 5 tabs showing one of each item type every time.

Yes indeed. This is why I mentioned recently my admiration for SpellForce's (v1.10) inventory "sort" button.

I am here to play a fun game, not participate in a tedious exercise that, for each second that passes, makes me more angry... bot use, and certainly wouldn't risk being banned for it.

So you wouldn't risk having a more enjoyable time because your miserable time might be forcibly ended if you so strive? ;) I'm not making fun of you here, just pointing out that you're engaging in a complex risk/reward calculation (biased by temperment, of course).

I personally regret that there isn't a "dump results; local archive and delete" button on D2 realm, whereby I could preserve a record of my achievement but delete the public copy of my characters and items. I'm not just speculating, as I've let EQ "wealth" die twice, long ago. Now at least, there's a nifty Magelo third party EQ item/character profile tool which you can use to present a portrait of your character and items. Unfortunately I don't think they represent your faction status, which was one of my major character achievements, in my day.

I've been told of one case where a player, deciding to end their involvement with EQ, went on a several hour obnoxious-fest inducing their banning. They had a great time breaking the rules and in addition got a pro rata refund of their EQ pre-payment money (which they would have lost had they just quit quietly).

If there were a free market, lubricated by CAMM (Computer Assisted Market Making) technology, I would have the option to donate my assets to charity, or perhaps to the support of this LL website. As it is I'm overwhelmingly likely to just let them rot. This kind of waste (of players time and efforts during and post play) on MM scale in ORPG is nearly criminal, to my way of thinking. Yes, technically the individuals are "consenting" to having their effort wasted needlessly. But like your acceptance of your "angry" reaction to incidental or capricious D2 interface pain, this acquiescence is often just a matter of pragmatism or fear.

To me this is the basis of the most "horrifying concept" in D2 and other MMORPGs. To me, people's time and efforts always have value, to be respected and treated carefully, in an "ideal world". Since we can craft MMORPG worlds pretty much as we wish, I see no valid justification for not trying to make them "ideal" (I do not consider profit motive sentiments, such as the age old: "milk 'em for all they're worth!", to be moral justification).

But then I'm just a delusional positive-sum kinda guy, who has yet to be properly assimilated by the dark side. YMMV.

[LiquidDamage]

But like your acceptance of your "angry" reaction to incidental or capricious D2 interface pain, this acquiescence is often just a matter of pragmatism or fear.

Just to make things clear, if something in a game makes me angry, I don't accept it. I either cease performing the actions that make me angry, or quit the game entirely. Well, unless the game is REALLY good otherwise and I am absolutely forced to endure that which makes me angry in order to enjoy the rest. An example would be D2's hostility system, before I joined the Amazon Basin.

So, basically, my solution to the "I have to be angry for 20 hours to obtain a gull dagger" problem is to play the game in some other manner, and find something else of value. Sure, I don't have any Gull daggers, but I do have an Ali-Baba and a Silence Phase Blade, both of which I prefer to a Gull anyway.

[Crystalion]

Just to make things clear, if something in a game makes me angry, I don't accept it.  I either cease performing the actions that make me angry, or quit the game entirely.

(Warning: rhetorical speech follows--no humans are meant to be harmed in the opinions expressed and thought experiments that follow, but oven mitts are suggested...)

I am a programmer. As such I know it is likely that I can modify the behavior of software under my local control and perhaps even some software in use by others. Since making such changes entails various costs, I'm very likely to instead "accept" whatever it is that I object to, instead of working to fix it. Since I have reasonable "fears" about reprisals to my economic well being or reputation should I dare to make certain changes (I'm not entirely hypothesizing here, as I went through this a little bit with D1) I am relatively unlikely to venture changes.

I'm also fairly unlikely to start a lawsuit or protest action designed to force publisher behavior to change either.

Some of the actions in the first paragraph above many reasonable people might label "cheating" and also label users of such "cheats" (assuming I allowed my efforts to be shared by others) as "cheaters".

If you are a woman in a Muslim country, who will be harmed if you do not publicly wear a veil, then you'd better not be angry about it. Because if what "don't accept it" means is merely that you'll cease performing the angry-making action or quit, then you're still S.O.L. by circumstance.

Ala Hamlet: "To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms, and by opposing, end them?"

I *paid* Blizzard for D2 (repeatedly in fact, as I own 3 copies of D2c and 3 copies of D2x--hopefully this tells you that I largely admire Blizzard products and many people at Blizzard, past and present). Society and our legal system has allowed them certain "rights" controlling my use of the property I bought from them (albeit their attorney might claim I purchased only an abstraction, a "license"). However my fair use "rights" are quite extensive (though rarely properly enforced, since corporations spend more money on litigation than consumers). Since Blizzard makes no warranty whatsoever for their software (like everyone else) and denies any and all liability for it, I would additionally claim the right to fix or enhance the software for my own use, as needed, when Blizzard does not. If my fellow users have the same right, then one might ask why a fix or enhancement I make shouldn't be freely available to them as well? This gets into the sticky derivative works vs. fair use issue. Not to mention restraint of trade.

Blizzard's extensive (and welcome) support for the D2 modder community as of v1.10 is in apparent contradiction of their license agreement. Facetiously speaking, this is a little like an imaginary Bush administration initiative to give away a bong inscribed with "Don't do Drugs!" to every teenager. (and in the fine print: "Drugs" is not meant to discourage your lifelong paid use of pain relievers, nicotine delivery products, caffienated products, alcoholic beverages, Viagra or any other drug offered for sale by corporations with lobbyists who make political contributions).

Jarulf is enshrined in the D2 product and thanked on the Blizzard website, yet Blizzard maintains, in court, that some of what he does (code reading and publication/use) is illegal under the license agreement under US law (note: Jarulf is apparently not subject to US law in this regard--at least not until we finish conquering the world by force).

Let us not forget that the EFF is still fighting Blizzard's legal ship-sinking salvo vs. BNETD (which is no longer relevant, apart from the principles involved, as the BNETD technology and "threat" has been eternally neutralized, whether Blizzard loses the case or not).

I am probably being too abstract, as usual, eh?

Let's say I make a code mod adding a "gamble reset" button to the gamble shop screen. This allows you to look at the next set of gambles a few seconds faster and with less clicking. The process is still pretty insane (for trying to get a unique at least). My current understanding of what you're saying is that you'd agree that this makes some sense (though it still falls short) but that you would not use it (perhaps for fear of being banned).

But where is Blizzard's fear of you? Where is small claims case (or cases, in the tens of thousands) accusing them of forcing you into gratutious clicking hand strain and eye strain? Of causing emotional distress? (I mean, you did use the word "angry" and all of us know exactly how you feel, and understand that the software is to blame). Why should the only choice here, for you, be "accept it or leave it"?! Is software and its makers somehow some sort of deity that we should pay/worship thoughtlessly and endlessly while any grumbling is considered heresy punishable by death?

Now, when I get myself worked up in this way, you could perhaps say that I am "angry". I could cease buying commercial software (instead using only open-source, etc.). I could quit using software entirely. Maybe if either of those options appealed to me, I'd be a nicer person. Maybe if I were a nicer person I'd not be implictly criticizing your "acceptance" in this way. Perhaps I should buy a sedative (instead of being seditious). What do you think?

Edit: correction to truncated Hamlet quotation.

[Chesspiece_face]

Just a little tip to save you some effort if you are going to gamble for Gull Daggers. I've found it is easiest to get a friend to clear out Normal Cow Lvl then while your gambler runs through and sells everything/uses that money to gamble for Gulls the Cow Killer starts another game and clears that out. This cuts out the entire need for muling money to the Gambler and also cuts down on the monatony. If you can't find a friend that can kill the cows for you you can just join cow games that are about finished, but this is harder cause you can waste a lot of time with games that never started.

[LiquidDamage]

I am probably being too abstract, as usual, eh?

Nah, just random and long winded. And possibly a little crazy. I have those attributes as well, so please don't take the response as an insult.

Maybe if I were a nicer person I'd not be implictly criticizing your "acceptance" in this way. Perhaps I should buy a sedative (instead of being seditious). What do you think?

I think you are quite a character. I say I don't want to gamble for Gulls because the tedium and interface issues make me angry, and here you are saying I should be out suing them instead of "accepting" it.

By the way, I am a programmer too, for about 7 years now. This actually makes me look at some things and say "why the hell didn't they do X? It takes me all of 30 seconds to do it by changing a couple of lines in the .txt files" as well as "yeah, I understand that decision, as it would be a real pain to do otherwise". So, it goes both ways for me.

[Crystalion]

And possibly a little crazy.

Only a "little"?! Hmpf!

*After* my previous post I read in the news that Bush is going after prescription drug abuse. Do his people read my stuff? Nah, too paranoid. Am I actually the center of the universe? Nah, too solipsistic. Obviously I'm just "random" enough to notice the coincidence.

I say I don't want to gamble for Gulls because the tedium and interface issues make me angry, and here you are saying I should be out suing them instead of "accepting" it.

Hehe, gotta start somewhere, ala...

Pinky: Gee, Brain. What are we going to do tonight?
The Brain: The same thing we do every night, Pinky. Try to take over the world.

[Warleader]

Well, i have mi luckt gamble today. Normally i gamble for amuletes, and in europe my necro goldfinder, cashmaker, get 2500,000 in one hour and items.

I go nohtlalak act 5 hell, and decide try a few rings. My first was ,,,, carrion wind !!!