RAN 7 PLATEAU MAPS TODAY

"

jackof8lades wrote:

fucking lvl 84 and i am basicly forced to run docks save up some currency and then buy maps again cuase those platea were bought whit a exalt i found .

Wow, you are finding exalts? Lucky you.
Wonder after how many thousands of hours I will get one. lel.

"

Grimmnyr wrote:

"

jackof8lades wrote:

fucking lvl 84 and i am basicly forced to run docks save up some currency and then buy maps again cuase those platea were bought whit a exalt i found .

Wow, you are finding exalts? Lucky you.
Wonder after how many thousands of hours I will get one. lel.

this is partly why id ever buy maps, if I spent currency on them and they bricked the rage would be real. Its putting too much pressure on a system that is inherently trolly and out to fuck you over.

"

tramshed wrote:

Someone made a point earlier which was mostly ignored but I feel is important. Its important to not start trying to run a higher tier of maps until you have enough of them to even out the rng. 5 maps is on the very low end of what I would call enough.

Benefit of doing this is primarily psychological.

Other than that, I do wonder if this is the best strategy. You're afraid of running a couple of higher level maps and then maybe having to drop back to lower level ones.. so instead, you choose to run those same lower level maps, over and over?

And think of this, any map you run, there's a chance of Zana or carto. Would you rather have them while you were running your 72s, or in that Gorge you already had in your stash.. ?

"

TheAnuhart wrote:

Competitive players in a temp league would totally not want to run the highest maps asap. I mean, why would they want earlier access to higher ilvl bases and XP when they could have put it off, knowing it isn't affecting their map drops long term but omitting 'player stress accumulated due to erratic mapping progression opposed to steady progression'.

10/10

"

Miská wrote:

...I wish everyone would realize this game is just not ment to be played solo. And with solo i mean also self found. Your currency is not supposed to sit in your bank and stack up.

...

And where is this written and confirmed? Besides, this is irrelevant to the discussion at hand, which revolves around map sustainability and map progression. Solo or party play should have ZERO impact on map drops.

It is a whole different story to be able to roll maps in a long run without running out of currency. This is where solo and self-found might come into discussion. Again, different topic.


The post on Reddit was very useful information. It also confirmed what I was doing lately, based on my own experience and some reading on the forums.

I only roll blue maps until sufficient quantity was achieved rather than going for max size pack or magic/rare mobs. If I try to go for pack size it usually consumes my currency really quick and I cant tell much difference in map drops-obviously due to low sample numbers.

I start to chisel lvl70 and higher maps and still continue blue rolling it. This way I can get 55 to 65% quantity, which should be enough to sustain maps up to lvl75.

What I dislike about the whole system that it is prone to streaks, luck or drought, which can cause huge fluctuation in map availability or what level of maps are you running. Due to this, I always start my sessions from lvl67 map and only proceed higher when I find a map of the same or higher level. If I do not find such map, I replay same level of map from my stash one more time. If I still dont get same or higher level map, I move to a lower tier and repeat the process. I can tell you that I spend most of my time in lvl68 maps for now-partially I still need a bit of gear to easily tackle 73+ maps and partially because I simply do not get the maps I need.

My wish would be to implement a system to map drops similar to avoidance in this game. It would be adding hidden quantity bonus to the character the longer you do not get map of same or higher level. Once you get such drop, the counter would reset and would not start increasing for certain period of time. Obviously, this is just a rough idea and wishful thinking that would have to be properly balanced.

1 st : Make a toon who can run every map mods.
2 nd : Alchemy orb every map. Use your selfound chisel on 78 map. (or save 78 for party)
3 rd : do Zana daily.

You'll end with 75 + / 76 + map pool.
I'am doing 76 map most of the time this way, with really bad rng i have to do some 75s.

If you want 78 map all the way, you have to play with friends, to run 78s with : 4 chisels / pack size / regal / 10 chaos domination mod from Zana's map device.

"

davidnn5 wrote:

"

grepman wrote:

"

davidnn5 wrote:

n=1. I'm not saying everyone needs to be a scientist to play games full of RNG but please, for the love of all that's holy, understand what that means before saying 'well, my experience...'

n=1 as in one trial per player? If so it's clearly fallacious. A player who does 10k coin flips and player who does 10 coin flips clearly possess different statistical relevancy. The number of trials - the proverbial coin flip - is number of maps ran, not a players experience.

Yes, which is my point.

My experience is my experience. "I", the indefinite article, may be able to say that you can sustain 78 maps run white... but, what "I" probably don't mention is it's as long as you run 10000 lower level maps per 78, or run with domination every map, or get a whole load of lucky carto boxes (random is random, after all). There is no before and after information - for example, that my build uses herald of thunder and crits all day and therefore hits every environmental object (which can give maps). These vary on a map by map basis.

"X maps are sustainable easily" means nothing and provides no information to others. There are so many variables - domination, randomness, time played per day, zana level, maps played, number of maps at a given level, environmental objects hit, that people who say 'but brah, it's just like soooooooo eezy to sustain 78s!' are really just measuring the proverbial.

the more maps you run, the less relevant all those variables (and randomness is not a variable) are. some of them are not even relevant- time played per day is utterly irrelevant, for example, while number of maps ran and time spent PER MAP does matter.

when you run something 10k maps over two years in the long run, the only variable that will matter is the number of trials. so all that other stuff is utterly useless.

so again, someone who ran several thousand maps clearly can talk about their experience because it has large enough sample size, while a player running 10 maps really shouldn't.

get a lvl 8 zana, and do rotations, its easy steady maps


The only strategy that I know that works, is run shit maps until you save enough to buy 4x lvl 76 maps, run them. And repeat until you get a hot a streak. Works every time. I made the same post when I was starting maps, but I know now you gotta look at the big picture, it takes weeks or months to run steady high end maps. This isnt d3.

"

grepman wrote:

the more maps you run, the less relevant all those variables (and randomness is not a variable) are. some of them are not even relevant- time played per day is utterly irrelevant, for example, while number of maps ran and time spent PER MAP does matter.

when you run something 10k maps over two years in the long run, the only variable that will matter is the number of trials. so all that other stuff is utterly useless.

Level of maps run is useless? Yeah, no. Variables matter; the things I mentioned matter. I agree randomness is not a variable in the classic sense, although I was using it to refer mostly to hidden effects (the map itself will have a certain density of objects and npcs which varies from map to map prior to any modifiers rolled on it).

"

grepman wrote:

so again, someone who ran several thousand maps clearly can talk about their experience because it has large enough sample size, while a player running 10 maps really shouldn't.

The OP advised upthread that he's played 1000+ maps.

Map experiences for players, regardless of number played, will always represent a bell curve when graphed. Those on the upper 'lucky' end will be swimming in maps. Those at the lower end will be constantly running out of maps despite doing what others say will always help them to sustain maps.

We don't know how many people sit on the lower end of that bell curve, and whether their experience is poor luck or bad management. However, it's still not useful to say 'eezy to sustain maps bro'; it's no less of a kick in the teeth when someone reports 6000+ fuses to 6-link something and someone posts 'HEY BRAH 6LINK EEZY DID 1 FUSE LEL'. Luck is not easy or hard, it's just luck.