Options

Diablo III: Patch 1.07 preview up!

12467100

Posts

  • Options
    breton-brawlerbreton-brawler Registered User regular
    So I just found a 1 handed mace with 100% crit dmg and a socket (around 830 DPS) Would it be worth it to throw a really nice gem in it and use as an offhand, and load up on other stats on a main hand for a monk? trying to decide if I should invest more to use it or jsut sell and look elsewhere.

  • Options
    _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    edited September 2012
    Jibba wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Question: Does the Monster Power MF% boost show up on one's character paper doll screen?

    And did I read correctly that the MP MF% boost can push one over the current MF% cap?

    Yeah, the MP boost is independent of normal MF. Max MF is now 550%.

    Sweet deal.

    _J_ on
  • Options
    RandomEngyRandomEngy Registered User regular
    All the rares I've been holding in my stash I'm unloading now. Value is going to go nowhere but down compared to legendaries, methinks. Given that top-level rare rolls are getting maybe a 5x increase, while legendaries are getting a much more modest increase based on MP magic find.

    Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    Question: Does the Monster Power MF% boost show up on one's character paper doll screen?

    And did I read correctly that the MP MF% boost can push one over the current MF% cap?

    You did read correctly. I'd imagine that it would show in paper doll, just as a visual indicator that you have monster power on.

    I'm curious what the effects on the economy are going to be for sub-63 items. My suspicion, per @Roz, is that both the value of anything below 63 is going to drop like a rock, while you will see extreme levels of marginal increase for anything that would constitute a "good" 63 (i.e., the price pyramid is going to get much steeper once you hit that point).

    Well, the supply of items with 63 level affixes is going to go up by about 500-600% roughly. Initially, the spike of demand from players trying out the patch may stabilize the prices short-term. But long-term, many of the mid-level 63 rares are going to plummet in price. Legendaries should remain roughly constant, theoretically.

    Interestingly, with the advent of 63 class level items + rings and amulets, there will be a land rush on high rolls of those particular items, since they've never existed before.

  • Options
    _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Was anyone else a little miffed by the news of account-bound rings?

    That seems like the first step in a problematic direction.

  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    edited September 2012
    So I just found a 1 handed mace with 100% crit dmg and a socket (around 830 DPS) Would it be worth it to throw a really nice gem in it and use as an offhand, and load up on other stats on a main hand for a monk? trying to decide if I should invest more to use it or jsut sell and look elsewhere.

    Crit Damage + Critical Hit chance are the highest scaling DPS options in the game. For end game gear, you are often looking for High DPS + Socket + Critical Hit Damage on a weapon. The weapon you have found is very nice, but you may not have an amount of crit to make it worthwhile as of yet. If you have 30% or more crit, that weapon will give you dramatic increases in DPS over a non-socketed, non-crit weapon. Of course, damage is not the only factor when selecting a weapon, there are additional benefits to spirit generation based on the weapons speed which you will probably want to consider. In the end, if you can post your profile, I can give you a much better assessment of how the weapon will perform for you.

    As an anecdote, I have a 1200 DPS Fist of Az'Turraq with 200 dex as my mainhand. I am nearly certain that your weapon would do 5-7k more DPS than my mainhand with a 100% critical hit damage gem inside of it.
    RandomEngy wrote: »
    All the rares I've been holding in my stash I'm unloading now. Value is going to go nowhere but down compared to legendaries, methinks. Given that top-level rare rolls are getting maybe a 5x increase, while legendaries are getting a much more modest increase based on MP magic find.

    Your correct, but I want to point out one little crinkle with MF and Legendaries. Rares and Legendary drops scale linearly with your MF, and both rise at the same rate. For every 1% of additional MF you have, you gain an equal amount of Legendary and Rare drop % chance. Thus, all things being equal, any change in MF has no material effect on the ratio of Legendaries to Rares. *


    *Until you start hitting mathematical limits.

    Roz on
  • Options
    breton-brawlerbreton-brawler Registered User regular
    Roz wrote: »
    So I just found a 1 handed mace with 100% crit dmg and a socket (around 830 DPS) Would it be worth it to throw a really nice gem in it and use as an offhand, and load up on other stats on a main hand for a monk? trying to decide if I should invest more to use it or jsut sell and look elsewhere.

    Crit Damage + Critical Hit chance are the highest scaling DPS options in the game. For end game gear, you are often looking for High DPS + Socket + Critical Hit Damage on a weapon. The weapon you have found is very nice, but you may not have an amount of crit to make it worthwhile as of yet. If you have 30% or more crit, that weapon will give you dramatic increases in DPS over a non-socketed, non-crit weapon. Of course, damage is not the only factor when selecting a weapon, there are additional benefits to spirit generation based on the weapons speed which you will probably want to consider. In the end, if you can post your profile, I can give you a much better assessment of how the weapon will perform for you.

    As an anecdote, I have a 1200 DPS Fist of Az'Turraq with 200 dex as my mainhand. I am nearly certain that your weapon would do 5-7k more DPS than my mainhand with a 100% critical hit damage gem inside of it.

    Alright here's the profile at the moment, us.battle.net/d3/en/profile/BretonBrawl-1684/hero/3244953
    Current build was to play around with a 2-hander, but when my legnedary procs to double my attack speed I was thinking of trying to dual wield to have that level of attack speed all the time would be fun and then that weapon dropped into my hands. Also my crit % is pretty low at 14. I think the next upgrade would be my bracers, but I am fairly gold poor.

  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    edited September 2012
    _J_ wrote: »
    Was anyone else a little miffed by the news of account-bound rings?

    That seems like the first step in a problematic direction.

    Possibly. It is either a one time exception for this specific item, as they see it more as a quest reward than an actual item drop.

    Or

    This may portend the inclusion of "Binds to Account on Use" sometime in the future. I would not be surprised if they went in this direction, to be honest with you. The Auction House has a dramatic effect on the gear floor and what items are in circulation.

    The 15% transaction fee on sales, should set a theoretical hard limit on the amount of gold in the system. However, there exists no sink of comparable worth for items. The gear floor is already quite high, and with the changes in this upcoming patch it will go even higher. Bind on Account may not be the most elegant solution to curb item inflation, but it is probably one of the easier ones to code and test. Assuming of course this is something they want to pursue. It is antithetical to the spirit of Diablo, but the spirit of the game must remain subservient to the game's overall health.

    Roz on
  • Options
    DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    It's mostly disappointing because an extremely well rolled ring would be very valuable. Instead, gonna have to craft them over and over and over and pray for a great one.

  • Options
    ScosglenScosglen Registered User regular
    edited September 2012
    It seems clear to me that Diablo is not moving in the direction of all your gear being soulbound. The economic aspect of the game is way too important for that to ever be in danger. I don't mind the inclusion of some rewards that the players can only earn through perspiration.

    I'd have imagined more people would welcome the idea of being able to earn powerful account bound gear given how much people whinge and moan about how the best gear comes from the auction house.

    Scosglen on
  • Options
    _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Roz wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Was anyone else a little miffed by the news of account-bound rings?

    That seems like the first step in a problematic direction.

    Possibly. It is either a one time exception for this specific item, as they see it more as a quest reward than an actual item drop.

    Or

    This may portend the inclusion of "Binds to Account on Use" sometime in the future. I would not be surprised if they went in this direction, to be honest with you. The Auction House has a dramatic effect on the gear floor and what items are in circulation.

    The 15% transaction fee on sales, should set a theoretical hard limit on the amount of gold in the system. However, there exists no sink of comparable worth for items. The gear floor is already quite high, and with the changes in this upcoming patch it will go even higher. Bind on Account may not be the most elegant solution to curb item inflation, but it is probably one of the easier ones to code and test. Assuming of course this is something they want to pursue. It is antithetical to the spirit of Diablo, but the spirit of the game must remain subservient to the game's overall health.

    My worry is that we're headed for a situation in which the best items are Bind on Equip, or entirely account bound. That would be problematic, since it fundamentally alters the game. It's a step towards WoW and away from the Diablo franchise. Part of the Diablo structure is that one constantly sheds off items as one progresses. Those items then go to either alts or are traded to persons of lower gear level. That's how it worked in D2.

    I'll agree that this seems to be a design choice that is a reaction to the auction house. Unfortunately, Blizzard still seems to be in denial regarding the auction house and its impact upon the game. They're fundamentally confused about the relationship between gameplay and the AH.

    They're still focused upon designing a Diablo game that has an Auction House attached.

    What they need to do is realize that they've created an Auction House with an item-acquisition game attached.

    If they did that, then I think they would have a much easier time designing the game. Right now they seem to be stumbling over themselves since they're fundamentally confused about what they made.

  • Options
    Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    Scosglen wrote: »
    It seems clear to me that Diablo is not moving in the direction of all your gear being soulbound. The economic aspect of the game is way too important for that to ever be in danger. I don't mind the inclusion of some rewards that the players can only earn through perspiration.

    I'd have imagined more people would welcome the idea of being able to earn powerful account bound gear given how much people whinge and moan about how the best gear comes from the auction house.

    I personally find the lack of binding to be a curious decision on Blizzard's part (I'm not speaking to "Bind on Pickup" so much as "Bind on Equip"). Off-the-cuff, I can think of some potentially disastrous long-term consequences if items are allowed to remain perfectly fungible and are never removed from the economy. At some point, you need to control the sheer amounts of gold and money flowing into the economy, and repair bills and player base attrition are just not going to cut it.

    In all seriousness, I'm surprised any government allowed for Blizzard to move ahead with the gold-for-money transfers at all, given how the currency model works in the game.

  • Options
    _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Scosglen wrote: »
    It seems clear to me that Diablo is not moving in the direction of all your gear being soulbound. The economic aspect of the game is way too important for that to ever be in danger. I don't mind the inclusion of some rewards that the players can only earn through perspiration.

    I'd have imagined more people would welcome the idea of being able to earn powerful account bound gear given how much people whinge and moan about how the best gear comes from the auction house.

    I personally find the lack of binding to be a curious decision on Blizzard's part (I'm not speaking to "Bind on Pickup" so much as "Bind on Equip"). Off-the-cuff, I can think of some potentially disastrous long-term consequences if items are allowed to remain perfectly fungible and are never removed from the economy. At some point, you need to control the sheer amounts of gold and money flowing into the economy, and repair bills and player base attrition are just not going to cut it.

    In all seriousness, I'm surprised any government allowed for Blizzard to move ahead with the gold-for-money transfers at all, given how the currency model works in the game.

    They did some legal gymnastics. That's part of the reason why there is a $250 cap on blizbucks.

    To the binding comment: Gear didn't bind in other Diablo games.

    What sorts of long-term consequences do you think shall result from a lack of binding gear?

  • Options
    darklite_xdarklite_x I'm not an r-tard... Registered User regular
    I really, really don't want them to go down the AH game w/ item hunting attached. That would be shitty as fuck. I already think the AH is ruining the game as is, and I view the current changes as a path away from it, which is great. I'm currently planning on sticking MP 1 and farming A1 for awhile. Downloaded the PTR overnight and I'll give that a try this evening to see if it'll be worth it. Also looking forward to going home and checking what my Bul-Kathos sold for. The bid on it was 140mil, but I'm hoping there was some last minute bid sniping going on as it ended while I was asleep.

    Steam ID: darklite_x Xbox Gamertag: Darklite 37 PSN:Rage_Kage_37 Battle.Net:darklite#2197
  • Options
    _J__J_ Pedant Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    darklite_x wrote: »
    I already think the AH is ruining the game as is, and I view the current changes as a path away from it, which is great.

    darklite_x wrote: »
    Also looking forward to going home and checking what my Bul-Kathos sold for. The bid on it was 140mil, but I'm hoping there was some last minute bid sniping going on as it ended while I was asleep.


    Do you see what you did there?

    1: God damn the Auction House ruins everything.
    2: God damn I can't wait to get home and check the Auction House.

    I'll give you a cookie if you can correctly explain that mentality without using the phrase "cognitive dissonance".

  • Options
    Big Red TieBig Red Tie beautiful clydesdale style feet too hot to trotRegistered User regular
    Zek wrote: »
    Yeah the MP scaling needs tweaking, either in the HP values or the rewards. There's clearly just no reason to ever play on the highest levels.
    i've heard talk about mp10 giving guaranteed key drops

    but it seems to be purely anecdotal at this point

    3926 4292 8829
    Beasteh wrote: »
    *おなら*
  • Options
    Big Red TieBig Red Tie beautiful clydesdale style feet too hot to trotRegistered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    Roz wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    Was anyone else a little miffed by the news of account-bound rings?

    That seems like the first step in a problematic direction.

    Possibly. It is either a one time exception for this specific item, as they see it more as a quest reward than an actual item drop.

    Or

    This may portend the inclusion of "Binds to Account on Use" sometime in the future. I would not be surprised if they went in this direction, to be honest with you. The Auction House has a dramatic effect on the gear floor and what items are in circulation.

    The 15% transaction fee on sales, should set a theoretical hard limit on the amount of gold in the system. However, there exists no sink of comparable worth for items. The gear floor is already quite high, and with the changes in this upcoming patch it will go even higher. Bind on Account may not be the most elegant solution to curb item inflation, but it is probably one of the easier ones to code and test. Assuming of course this is something they want to pursue. It is antithetical to the spirit of Diablo, but the spirit of the game must remain subservient to the game's overall health.

    My worry is that we're headed for a situation in which the best items are Bind on Equip, or entirely account bound. That would be problematic, since it fundamentally alters the game. It's a step towards WoW and away from the Diablo franchise. Part of the Diablo structure is that one constantly sheds off items as one progresses. Those items then go to either alts or are traded to persons of lower gear level. That's how it worked in D2.

    I'll agree that this seems to be a design choice that is a reaction to the auction house. Unfortunately, Blizzard still seems to be in denial regarding the auction house and its impact upon the game. They're fundamentally confused about the relationship between gameplay and the AH.

    They're still focused upon designing a Diablo game that has an Auction House attached.

    What they need to do is realize that they've created an Auction House with an item-acquisition game attached.

    If they did that, then I think they would have a much easier time designing the game. Right now they seem to be stumbling over themselves since they're fundamentally confused about what they made.
    the ring seems mostly useful for the experience buff, i don't see this as a step toward all your bis gear being soulbound

    3926 4292 8829
    Beasteh wrote: »
    *おなら*
  • Options
    ScosglenScosglen Registered User regular
    edited September 2012
    I personally find the lack of binding to be a curious decision on Blizzard's part (I'm not speaking to "Bind on Pickup" so much as "Bind on Equip"). Off-the-cuff, I can think of some potentially disastrous long-term consequences if items are allowed to remain perfectly fungible and are never removed from the economy. At some point, you need to control the sheer amounts of gold and money flowing into the economy, and repair bills and player base attrition are just not going to cut it.

    Well, the way they solved this issue in D2 was the Ladder seasons which served to periodically wipe the slate clean on the game economy. I think Blizzard realizes they're going to need something that performs a similar role, but they've said that they hope they can come up with something a little more elegant than simply hitting a reset button. I would say it's not exactly an urgent issue though, so they have a lot of time to think about it.

    Scosglen on
  • Options
    darklite_xdarklite_x I'm not an r-tard... Registered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    _J_ wrote: »
    darklite_x wrote: »
    I already think the AH is ruining the game as is, and I view the current changes as a path away from it, which is great.

    darklite_x wrote: »
    Also looking forward to going home and checking what my Bul-Kathos sold for. The bid on it was 140mil, but I'm hoping there was some last minute bid sniping going on as it ended while I was asleep.


    Do you see what you did there?

    1: God damn the Auction House ruins everything.
    2: God damn I can't wait to get home and check the Auction House.

    I'll give you a cookie if you can correctly explain that mentality without using the phrase "cognitive dissonance".

    I've stated it before, I hate the auction house, but I'm not going to gimp myself by not using it. It's just like telephone/internet companies. I fucking hate Comcast, but if I'm in an area where all I have access to is Comcast then guess what, I'm using Comcast.

    Steam ID: darklite_x Xbox Gamertag: Darklite 37 PSN:Rage_Kage_37 Battle.Net:darklite#2197
  • Options
    Big Red TieBig Red Tie beautiful clydesdale style feet too hot to trotRegistered User regular
    also the ring can't really be best in slot material unless you grind mp10 a lot

    consider the effort it takes to assemble one ring, and then the chances of the 4 random properties being what you need to make it competitive to normal rings



    3926 4292 8829
    Beasteh wrote: »
    *おなら*
  • Options
    evilthecatevilthecat Registered User regular
    Scosglen wrote: »
    It seems clear to me that Diablo is not moving in the direction of all your gear being soulbound. The economic aspect of the game is way too important for that to ever be in danger. I don't mind the inclusion of some rewards that the players can only earn through perspiration.

    I'd have imagined more people would welcome the idea of being able to earn powerful account bound gear given how much people whinge and moan about how the best gear comes from the auction house.

    I personally find the lack of binding to be a curious decision on Blizzard's part (I'm not speaking to "Bind on Pickup" so much as "Bind on Equip"). Off-the-cuff, I can think of some potentially disastrous long-term consequences if items are allowed to remain perfectly fungible and are never removed from the economy. At some point, you need to control the sheer amounts of gold and money flowing into the economy, and repair bills and player base attrition are just not going to cut it.

    In all seriousness, I'm surprised any government allowed for Blizzard to move ahead with the gold-for-money transfers at all, given how the currency model works in the game.

    define long-term.
    good items don't drop with the frequency they do in wow.
    and once the market gets saturated they will just introduce the ladder seasons again making your point moot.

    tip.. tip.. TALLY.. HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
  • Options
    darklite_xdarklite_x I'm not an r-tard... Registered User regular
    Man I loved the ladder seasons. They should bring those back.

    Steam ID: darklite_x Xbox Gamertag: Darklite 37 PSN:Rage_Kage_37 Battle.Net:darklite#2197
  • Options
    MyiagrosMyiagros Registered User regular
    I think I'll end up trying out MP2-3 for my current 60's and do MP 4-5 on my WD and DH as I finish getting them to 60. Monk is sitting at 58 and should be done tonight. Surprisingly enough, my Wizard is my best geared and hasn't done much of act 1 yet.

    iRevert wrote: »
    Because if you're going to attempt to squeeze that big black monster into your slot you will need to be able to take at least 12 inches or else you're going to have a bad time...
    Steam: MyiagrosX27
  • Options
    ZekZek Registered User regular
    I think for the most part you won't be grinding ubers, you'll just be farming Acts 1-3 and adding the key warden to your normal run. Then once in a while you'll build an infernal machine and do an uber run to eventually get another chance at the ring. But yeah, getting a great one is going to be very difficult.
    sumwar wrote: »
    Hmmm well I know the damage is being reduced so monster power lvl 2 or 3 should have the same damage as the current difficulty but if the chart I read on the battle.net forums is correct monster power level 2 has 218% HP of monster power level 0. I doubt monster power level 0 in act 1.0.5 will make the monsters have less than 50% 1.0.4 HP. It's possible but I doubt they're reducing the health that much. I can see people using the first 2 monster power levels for the increase gold/xp/magic find and maybe even 3. But monster power 4 and up to me just won't be efficient even if you've got 100K+ DPS. I see myself using monster power 1 for the sake for doing act 1/2 inferno to break the tedium of constantly doing act 3 over and over again but other than that, I don't see myself using the monster power levels beyond level 1-2.

    Monster Power 0 has considerably less HP than 1.0.4, i.e. default Inferno is much easier than before. They've said that MP2 is supposed to be roughly the same as the previous difficulty. It's not clear if the 25% damage nerf they talked about applies to MP0 or MP2.

  • Options
    darklite_xdarklite_x I'm not an r-tard... Registered User regular
    So I did about 30 min of the PTR at lunch. Admittedly this isn't enough time to gather solid facts, but I guess I'm even more confused now than I was before, regarding the ilvl/mlvl business. I put the MP to 1 and ran through A1 a bit and I started picking up every rare, because it's currently my belief that every item should be able to roll ilvl 63 stats at that point, even if it says ilvl 61 for example. That said, I didn't find anything that indicated it was rolling ilvl 63 stats. So generalize that, I pretty much assumed that w/ MP1 on, every item that drops is essentially ilvl 63, but my short test seemed to indicate otherwise. Is there a way someone can clarify this in 'stupid speak' for me? Am I still better off skipping everything that doesn't say ilvl 63 when I hover over it on the ground?

    Steam ID: darklite_x Xbox Gamertag: Darklite 37 PSN:Rage_Kage_37 Battle.Net:darklite#2197
  • Options
    ZekZek Registered User regular
    Even ilvl63 items can roll lower level affixes. It's just a matter of the highest level ones being available. So yes, you should pick up everything.

  • Options
    ScosglenScosglen Registered User regular
    edited September 2012
    When the game rolls a mod for an item, it's assigned a range of values that It can have, i.e. this ring generated a LoH mod and the game needs to randomly pick a value between 100-300 for it. Higher ivl equipment can draw from mods that have higher minimum and maximum values, so a lower ilvl ring might only be able to roll 50-250 LoH. There's still no guarantee that you're going to get well rolled mods on those items, it's just that now everything is weighted higher and can potentially hit the highest possible values for a mod.

    ilvl 63 weapons are the best in the game, but that doesn't mean most of them aren't 500 dps turds.

    Scosglen on
  • Options
    RandomEngyRandomEngy Registered User regular
    Roz wrote: »
    RandomEngy wrote: »
    All the rares I've been holding in my stash I'm unloading now. Value is going to go nowhere but down compared to legendaries, methinks. Given that top-level rare rolls are getting maybe a 5x increase, while legendaries are getting a much more modest increase based on MP magic find.

    Your correct, but I want to point out one little crinkle with MF and Legendaries. Rares and Legendary drops scale linearly with your MF, and both rise at the same rate. For every 1% of additional MF you have, you gain an equal amount of Legendary and Rare drop % chance. Thus, all things being equal, any change in MF has no material effect on the ratio of Legendaries to Rares. *


    *Until you start hitting mathematical limits.

    My point was that both Rares and Legendaries are going to increase the same amount with the added MF, but on top of that high-end rare rolls are going to increase by a factor of 5. An increase that won't affect legendaries.

    Profile -> Signature Settings -> Hide signatures always. Then you don't have to read this worthless text anymore.
  • Options
    ShenShen Registered User regular
    For example, the top tier dual stat roll for i63 is 30-100, so even if you hit it there's still a tonne of variance (single stat roll is 90-100/170-200 depending on the "favoured stat", like dex for boots, str for shoulders).

    I wonder what this change will do for crafting? I kinda miss the days of picking up blues :P

    3DS: 2234-8122-8398 | Battle.net (EU): Ladi#2485
    ladi.png
  • Options
    darklite_xdarklite_x I'm not an r-tard... Registered User regular
    When you say dual stat roll do you mean if an item drops with int and agi then neither of those will go above 100, but if it drops only with int then it could go potentially to 200? I think I understand how the variance works between most items such as MF only going to 18 on rings at ilvl 62 and 20 at ilvl 63, ok that's well and good. What I'm still confused about is how stat rolls work on items. For example when you look on the legendary item pages some will say something like "Has a chance to roll one of the following properties: +70-100 agi or +170-200 agi". So what it's saying is that either you can roll a good stat or a shitty stat?

    Steam ID: darklite_x Xbox Gamertag: Darklite 37 PSN:Rage_Kage_37 Battle.Net:darklite#2197
  • Options
    JibbaJibba Registered User regular
    In the case of that legendary, yes.

    Each affix type has different levels, so the +70-100 and +170-200 are the same affix type, just at different levels.

    Affixes aren't to be confused with modifiers themselves (the actual +stat.) Some affixes come with two modifiers, mainly STR/DEX/INT plus VIT.

    One of the rules is that you can't have two of the same affix type (so it would be impossible to get +70-100 DEX AND +170-200 DEX), however it is possible to stack the same type of modifier by getting +170-200 DEX AND +150 DEX/150 VIT, since those are two different affix types. That's what people mean by a double roll of a stat.

  • Options
    ZekZek Registered User regular
    Yeah, for example there's a +Str affix and a +Str/Vit affix(with lower values). You can get both on one item. So when you see a +300 Str armor piece, you're seeing an item that maxed out the rolls on both.

    Each affix has multiple levels of effectiveness that are constrained by ilvl. So the best +Str roll of 170-200 is only available to an ilvl63 item(or in 1.0.5, an item dropped by a 63 monster). But that is also determined randomly, so an ilvl63 item might still get the crappier roll of 100-130 or whatever.

  • Options
    Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    They did some legal gymnastics. That's part of the reason why there is a $250 cap on blizbucks.

    Right, but most of those mechanism are in place to combat money laundering, currency transfers/speculation, etc. I don't think anyone ever bothered to just look at the system and ask themselves, "Would doing this create a de facto currency that is implicitly backed by the United States government?" It sounds a bit ridiculous, but functionally speaking that's what we have right now with the official gold:RM system. Blizzard is working like AmEx and taking their cut in the transaction. The only reason it isn't being abused is because the fees (Blizzard's cut) are so onerous that it's hard to make any money off of it, and the price (transfer) limits make it difficult to do easily. So the issue (gold = money) is being peripherally mitigated, but not actively managed.

    _J_ wrote: »
    To the binding comment: Gear didn't bind in other Diablo games.

    What sorts of long-term consequences do you think shall result from a lack of binding gear?
    Scosglen wrote: »
    Well, the way they solved this issue in D2 was the Ladder seasons which served to periodically wipe the slate clean on the game economy. I think Blizzard realizes they're going to need something that performs a similar role, but they've said that they hope they can come up with something a little more elegant than simply hitting a reset button. I would say it's not exactly an urgent issue though, so they have a lot of time to think about it.
    evilthecat wrote: »
    define long-term.
    good items don't drop with the frequency they do in wow.
    and once the market gets saturated they will just introduce the ladder seasons again making your point moot.

    Regarding long-term consequences, they would largely revolve around inflation. If items and gold never go away, then prices for items will rise constantly. One way to mitigate that would be to make things BoE in some fashion.

    I didn't play D2 enough to know about the Ladder system. Would you be allowed to use the AH in a Ladder system?

    I'm not sure that the Ladder would remove the problem entirely, because everyone who isn't playing the Ladder is stuck in the hyper-inflated economy. Then again, if you're catering to your end-game long-term users, maybe it's just not a big enough problem to solve, as most of those players will both cycle through the Ladder constantly and will also be at the upper end of gold holders (on their "mains").

  • Options
    TenekTenek Registered User regular
    I didn't play D2 enough to know about the Ladder system. Would you be allowed to use the AH in a Ladder system?

    I'm not sure that the Ladder would remove the problem entirely, because everyone who isn't playing the Ladder is stuck in the hyper-inflated economy. Then again, if you're catering to your end-game long-term users, maybe it's just not a big enough problem to solve, as most of those players will both cycle through the Ladder constantly and will also be at the upper end of gold holders (on their "mains").

    The Ladder system segregates the players on the ladder. You'd still be able to use the AH but it would be a different AH the non-ladder players can't touch, just like how Hardcore is separate. At the end of the season, everyone from Ladder gets punted into the general economy and there's a clean start for the new season. So even if you can buy a Skorn for 5000g in the dupefest economy of farmed-to-oblivion, they're still rare on Ladder.

  • Options
    Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    Tenek wrote: »
    The Ladder system segregates the players on the ladder. You'd still be able to use the AH but it would be a different AH the non-ladder players can't touch, just like how Hardcore is separate. At the end of the season, everyone from Ladder gets punted into the general economy and there's a clean start for the new season. So even if you can buy a Skorn for 5000g in the dupefest economy of farmed-to-oblivion, they're still rare on Ladder.

    Well, D2 didn't have an AH, right? So how it would be used in a prospective D3 Ladder season is just speculation...although your idea makes a lot of sense. I was thinking that removing the AH entirely would make things pretty ridiculous.

    It's would be kind of sad if the only solution Blizzard could come up with would be to essentially reset the game constantly. It would also not do anything about the main economy, which would be left as a shanty-ghost town where everything costs 12 million pesos.

    Also, I'd be surprised if Blizzard would be able to simply shunt everything from a Ladder system back into the main economy, because now stuff is actually worth "real money". If your Skorn is worth $250 in the Ladder season, but then drops to $5 in the main economy, a lot of funny business can go on during that transition...

  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    Scosglen wrote: »
    I personally find the lack of binding to be a curious decision on Blizzard's part (I'm not speaking to "Bind on Pickup" so much as "Bind on Equip"). Off-the-cuff, I can think of some potentially disastrous long-term consequences if items are allowed to remain perfectly fungible and are never removed from the economy. At some point, you need to control the sheer amounts of gold and money flowing into the economy, and repair bills and player base attrition are just not going to cut it.

    Well, the way they solved this issue in D2 was the Ladder seasons which served to periodically wipe the slate clean on the game economy. I think Blizzard realizes they're going to need something that performs a similar role, but they've said that they hope they can come up with something a little more elegant than simply hitting a reset button. I would say it's not exactly an urgent issue though, so they have a lot of time to think about it.

    The changes this patch compress that time by a couple of factors, though.

    I hope they find an elegant solution. There are a couple of ideas I've been mulling over that I think could work and be sustainable. However, a full reset is always there as a measure of last resort, should the problem prove to be too intractable.

    Also, @_J_ Longterm, the biggest problem I see is the gear floor rising to the point where farming becomes impractical. I'm not sure of what a timeline for that would look like, but it's probably not wrong to assume that eventually the gear will saturate the market to the point where the amount of time it takes to find an item worth selling is so large that farming is no longer worthwhile.

  • Options
    CogCog What'd you expect? Registered User regular
    edited September 2012
    Game.
    Needs.
    Gear.
    Sinks.

    Can someone give me a legitimately compelling explanation for why unsocketing equipment does not destroy either the gem or the item? Cause that'd solve the fuck out of a lot of problems.

    Cog on
  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    RandomEngy wrote: »
    Roz wrote: »
    RandomEngy wrote: »
    All the rares I've been holding in my stash I'm unloading now. Value is going to go nowhere but down compared to legendaries, methinks. Given that top-level rare rolls are getting maybe a 5x increase, while legendaries are getting a much more modest increase based on MP magic find.

    Your correct, but I want to point out one little crinkle with MF and Legendaries. Rares and Legendary drops scale linearly with your MF, and both rise at the same rate. For every 1% of additional MF you have, you gain an equal amount of Legendary and Rare drop % chance. Thus, all things being equal, any change in MF has no material effect on the ratio of Legendaries to Rares. *


    *Until you start hitting mathematical limits.

    My point was that both Rares and Legendaries are going to increase the same amount with the added MF, but on top of that high-end rare rolls are going to increase by a factor of 5. An increase that won't affect legendaries.

    Which is 100% accurate. I just wanted to take the opportunity to expand upon the MF interaction with Legendaries and Rares, which I didn't cover in my previous post. I was using your post as a lauch pad :)

  • Options
    RozRoz Boss of InternetRegistered User regular
    Shen wrote: »
    For example, the top tier dual stat roll for i63 is 30-100, so even if you hit it there's still a tonne of variance (single stat roll is 90-100/170-200 depending on the "favoured stat", like dex for boots, str for shoulders).

    I wonder what this change will do for crafting? I kinda miss the days of picking up blues :P

    Yeah, that's another foggy area. I haven't been able to find what mLvL crafted items will have. I could see that not being updated with this patch, but I can't imagine they wouldn't correct this by the next one. Crafting will need to keep up with item drops in order to remain marginally viable.

  • Options
    ZekZek Registered User regular
    _J_ wrote: »
    They did some legal gymnastics. That's part of the reason why there is a $250 cap on blizbucks.

    Right, but most of those mechanism are in place to combat money laundering, currency transfers/speculation, etc. I don't think anyone ever bothered to just look at the system and ask themselves, "Would doing this create a de facto currency that is implicitly backed by the United States government?" It sounds a bit ridiculous, but functionally speaking that's what we have right now with the official gold:RM system. Blizzard is working like AmEx and taking their cut in the transaction. The only reason it isn't being abused is because the fees (Blizzard's cut) are so onerous that it's hard to make any money off of it, and the price (transfer) limits make it difficult to do easily. So the issue (gold = money) is being peripherally mitigated, but not actively managed.

    _J_ wrote: »
    To the binding comment: Gear didn't bind in other Diablo games.

    What sorts of long-term consequences do you think shall result from a lack of binding gear?
    Scosglen wrote: »
    Well, the way they solved this issue in D2 was the Ladder seasons which served to periodically wipe the slate clean on the game economy. I think Blizzard realizes they're going to need something that performs a similar role, but they've said that they hope they can come up with something a little more elegant than simply hitting a reset button. I would say it's not exactly an urgent issue though, so they have a lot of time to think about it.
    evilthecat wrote: »
    define long-term.
    good items don't drop with the frequency they do in wow.
    and once the market gets saturated they will just introduce the ladder seasons again making your point moot.

    Regarding long-term consequences, they would largely revolve around inflation. If items and gold never go away, then prices for items will rise constantly. One way to mitigate that would be to make things BoE in some fashion.

    I didn't play D2 enough to know about the Ladder system. Would you be allowed to use the AH in a Ladder system?

    I'm not sure that the Ladder would remove the problem entirely, because everyone who isn't playing the Ladder is stuck in the hyper-inflated economy. Then again, if you're catering to your end-game long-term users, maybe it's just not a big enough problem to solve, as most of those players will both cycle through the Ladder constantly and will also be at the upper end of gold holders (on their "mains").

    A few things to keep in mind:

    1. Item supply going up(because of non-soulbound loot) means prices go down. This acts as a counterbalance to gold supply going up, to some extent.

    2. The 15% AH fee is a constant gold sink every time these items change hands which further offsets gold inflation.

    I think what we're seeing is actually that most items are getting cheaper or staying the same, while the biggest spenders are focused on the trade of increasingly more perfect loot. Let's say there's a minimum price of 50k below which things are not worth auctioning. I think the quality standard for that price point keeps rising, due to the perpetually growing supply of good-to-great loot, meaning the loot you can get for a minimal investment keeps getting better. Back near launch the general standard of loot quality for most people was just completely different(far far lower) than it is today. Sometimes this frustrates people because they perceive that they can't make any money due to nothing they find being valuable anymore. But the flipside that they're missing is that this means they can buy more with their money than ever before.

    After 1.0.5, beating Inferno won't even be a thing anymore. You can gear yourself up for that in a heartbeat. So whatever happens to the economy it's not like there's anything in the game that you can't do, it's just about making your character more badass.

Sign In or Register to comment.