Maps drop are okay

"

They are absolutely NOT okay.

Content should be GATED by difficulty NOT RNG, Watch everyone quote this post.

I'll gladly join in.

"

They are absolutely NOT okay.

Content should be GATED by difficulty NOT RNG, Watch everyone quote this post.

"

Maps drop up to 75 are okay

Fix'd title for you.

"

They are absolutely NOT okay.

Content should be GATED by difficulty NOT RNG, Watch everyone quote this post.

And build enabling uniques like shavronnes should too. Balance through RNG is the worst design possible.

"

vachadavid wrote:

I only had problem to sustain my pool when i reached 77+, feel like at that point its getting hard to sustain, but thats NORMAL, 78 used to be the max and GGG even said they WANTED the higher maps (79+)

Your argument falls apart pretty hard here; you DO know that 77 and 79 are two different numbers, right? So you contradicted yourself.

No one is arguing for easy sustain of the new map levels whatsoever. However, map levels that have been around forever are now unsustainable.

"

vachadavid wrote:

The way map drop are right now is perfect, it forces you to roll your high map really hard to be able to sustain,

No, even high rolls are ENTIRELY insufficient for sustain. At best, you just happened to get lucky and think that's the norm.

Pre-2.0, you needed to average roughly a +50% complete drop bonus (combining both quantity and packsize) to sustain maps of the mid-70s. (73-76 or so) This was pretty reasonably achievable on a variety of fronts: you could simply packsize+regal (which was a tad broken) you could chisel the map, or you could, y'know, just alch it and take on a challenge. (which is what should NORMALLY be happening)

Post-2.0, with the base sustain chances cut, that +50% is now around +150-200%. The current cap on non-corrupt, crafted maps is +141% quantity: 20% from chiseling, with the prefixes Fleet, Deadly, and Unwavering, and suffixes Of Fracturing, Of Smothering, and Of Stasis. Sure, if you're willing to burn 3 sacrifice fragments on EACH AND EVERY map (another 3c sunk) that can bump it to +156% quantity. (and yes, 2.0 cut the quantity bonus on most mods) Yes, packsize bonus will improve that... +27% packsize still barely puts you in "averaged sustain" rate...

Sure, you can potentially get higher numbers from Vaal or unID'd maps, but neither are "un-demand" that you can roll as long as you have currency: an unID'd map is just as liable to have weak mods (and usually averages only 4 total) and Vaal'ing could do ANYTHING. (it's a VERY unreliable method of trying to improve drops, as it could actually worsen them: it's mostly for getting sac fragments, since it adds a chance for that no matter what)

This brings us to the main point: it's too RARE to get map mods that will provide enough drop bonus to sustain. These mods are just too HARD to get at; most alch/chaos results yield only 4 mods, yielding an average of 50-60% quantity with usually no packsize bonus. This was perfect for mid-level sustain pre-2.0, but now will yield a loss rate of 50%: on average you'll get 1 "sustaining" map back every 2 maps you run.

"

vachadavid wrote:

That was my 2 cents, stop complaining and go play D3 if you want to have everything given to you without effort :/

Your 2 cents happen to be counterfeit. "Not reliant entirely on pure, unadultered luck" is HARDLY the same as "doesn't require effort." If that's your idea of what skill is, I'd recommend just gambling.

Oh, and before I forget:

"

They are absolutely NOT okay.

Content should be GATED by difficulty NOT RNG, Watch everyone quote this post.

OP, This is all that the players want: GGG claimed that they wanted players to have to work to get their sustain/grow maps. The playerbase is VERY WILLING: Those of us engrossed enough are eager to run RIP-difficulty maps with >100% quantity and tons of nasty mods. It can be fun!

The problem is that the ones we can pull up are insufficient: the abovementioned "maximum roll?" odds of getting it are one in 48.8 MILLION, and that's assuming all maps are rolled with 6 affixes. (They aren't: the overwhelming average is 4)

So currently, high-end content is gated by the RNG, and not by difficulty whatsoever.

"

ACGIFT wrote:

This brings us to the main point: it's too RARE to get map mods that will provide enough drop bonus to sustain. These mods are just too HARD to get at; most alch/chaos results yield only 4 mods, yielding an average of 50-60% quantity with usually no packsize bonus. This was perfect for mid-level sustain pre-2.0, but now will yield a loss rate of 50%: on average you'll get 1 "sustaining" map back every 2 maps you run.

"

They are absolutely NOT okay.

Content should be GATED by difficulty NOT RNG, Watch everyone quote this post.

OP, This is all that the players want: GGG claimed that they wanted players to have to work to get their sustain/grow maps. The playerbase is VERY WILLING: Those of us engrossed enough are eager to run RIP-difficulty maps with >100% quantity and tons of nasty mods. It can be fun!

The problem is that the ones we can pull up are insufficient: the abovementioned "maximum roll?" odds of getting it are one in 48.8 MILLION, and that's assuming all maps are rolled with 6 affixes. (They aren't: the overwhelming average is 4)

So currently, high-end content is gated by the RNG, and not by difficulty whatsoever.

Completely agree with your points, well said.

Hah! Told you.

Keep living in denial. Meanwhile, people will just quit the game, and at this point probably not bother coming back.

2.0 does not have enough new content to warrant gating maps behind ruthless RNG like this. Nobody is going to do Act 4 constantly because there's nothing to gain from it, and the only thing that leaves is maps. And not only are map drops bad, but damage is so overtuned that it's impossible for many builds to make progress without random oneshot deaths every several maps. So you can't even run the maps that you need to roll to "supposedly" get more maps (it's an unreliable RNG crapshoot as always).

Game has a ton of problems right now honestly, between bad design decisions and even worse balancing. 2.0 did not have any of the magic I expected, or that it should have had. If anything it burned me out on the game, and I'm just holding out to see if these things are addressed.

At this point, if a contender showed up, I wouldn't hesitate in jumping ship. And this is all because of the problems 2.0 brought with it. I was enjoying the game fine before.

"

vachadavid wrote:

I see a lot of nerdrage post about people saying they cant find 74-76s
Please, lets get real, if you cant sustain a map pool below 76, it IS because your rolling them too easy, not chiseling or not vaaling.

I only had problem to sustain my pool when i reached 77+, feel like at that point its getting hard to sustain, but thats NORMAL, 78 used to be the max and GGG even said they WANTED the higher maps (79+) to be really rare to avoid people just chaining them and reach 100 in a couple days.

The way map drop are right now is perfect, it forces you to roll your high map really hard to be able to sustain, so even if your high level and geared, you still get a challenge and you also have the options to be less tanky with more dps or MF by losing some map drop potential.

That was my 2 cents, stop complaining and go play D3 if you want to have everything given to you without effort :/

You've just overstressed my being-a-total-dick-for-no-reason-measuring-device it's completeley inoperative now.


Thank's a lot :(

difficulty doesnt change the level of dropped maps. i played a bunch of level 75 maps and all i got was a new bunch of level 68-72 maps.