How to Balance Solo Map Play and Group Map Play
You can read the previous version of this idea here; this is version 2.
1. The Changes The Eternal Laboratory map device gains some additional features:
Party modifiers are also changed.
2. The Results Every type of party, from solo to six-man, now gets the same amount of loot and experience per map, including map drops. For four- and five-person parties, this requires a small currency contribution; however, that bonus increases travel efficiency slightly (more loot per monster, but not more time finding monsters, just more time killing them), so it's arguable that the time savings more than make up for the minor fee on high-level rare maps; on low-level maps the option exists not to pay it. For all other party types, it's cut and dry: if every person in a six-man party contributes a map, they get six runs at six times the item quantity split six ways, for a total yield of 600% quantity per map; if someone playing solo uses a map, they get six runs at normal quantity split one way, for a total yield of 600% quantity per map. Experience is also equalized this way. Additional pleasant side effects:
If you like this suggestion, please post with a +1; if you don't like it, with a -1. Reasoning is nice but optional. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Apr 7, 2013, 1:42:59 AM
This thread has been automatically archived. Replies are disabled.
|
![]() |
bump
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
![]() |
Thanks for taking the time to write this idea out. At first glance it seems like a good idea - it will be interesting to see if anyone can find any flaws with this.
AngronTheBloodPrince: 'i essentially play lag with brief breaks of poe'
the_Peacekeeper: 'i play path of Trading with brief breaks of, Disappointment.' |
![]() |
bump -__-
When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
![]() |
bump
|
![]() |
I was thinking about something similar on my own just this morning. I like the idea generally, however I would suggest that the first mode also require currency, albeit a small amount. 2-4 alt or equiv for 66 maps. More for higher level maps. Just a minor sink, that's all.
The system would therefore only have one variation from present: add currency, and things change. What we could do with amounts more than 2-4 alt is have the devs calculate a relative value for the currency added and have extra goodies added to the maps in response. It need not be clearly documented what the effects are; in fact it could deliberately be a bit mysterious, somewhat like vendor recipes. Overall, A+ for the idea; minor tuning to touch it up, and I'm onboard. --C p.s. not sure of the motivation for the extra IIQ for group play. Last edited by Courageous#0687 on Apr 8, 2013, 5:27:00 PM
|
![]() |
Or just implement the /players command from D2.
|
![]() |
For maps, I like Scrotie's idea better, because it fits in with the game more seamlessly.
|
![]() |
Yeah sounds good
Dunno if destroying portals for using currency on it would be that good though I mean, you use a fusing on the thing and only get +20% IIQ (right?), yet one portal is destroyed That portal could have gotten you a 2nd run in the previous +0% IIQ map, which in relative terms seems more profitable right? |
![]() |
"It's not designed for solo, but for 4/5-man parties. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
![]() |