When last did any of you actually kill diablo?

Seems like he is the least killed boss in the game.
Shouldn't the game-end boss see more action?

Only one of my characters has ever done Act4 inferno just to get Hellfire ring plan.

I have beaten Diablo on all five classes for the achievements. I also beat him with every new character to get to the next act.

That's about it.

I beat him twice on normal... once to kill him without getting hit by the fire, and the other to punch him. Thats about it.

well i think they screwed up the mechanics to the game when they added nv

i think before nv, ppl were "farming" act4 since thats where the best loot dropped
but there are many times when you won't even have a 5 stack by the time you reach diablo -_-

so besides getting the achievements, why bother?

I've never once hit Diablo without 5 stacks so I'm not sure if you're rushing him or something.

I did a run of Act 4 on the RMT for Izual and forgot just how much there is to Act 4. OLnce I killed Izual, I figured I may as well clean up the rest of it.

I just feel bad for the devs that spent months of their lives designing Act IV adding so much character to the level and unique enemies only to have it be completely ignored because the ongoing devs can't figure out a way to make it worthwhile. At least Rakanoth is worth clearing on the RMT while searching for recipes.

I've only hit him once myself - but i'll probably go for all classes for achievement purposes when i get bored of lvling.

It was similiar in DIILOD though as well.... big D was a pain in the ass to get to so people ran Mepth or Baal runs were more common for his drops.

If he had a specific loot table I would farm him more.

Posted by shniggies at 01/21/2013 11:49 AM

well i think they screwed up the mechanics to the game when they added nv

guessing you meant Paragon levels?

Cause NV has been there since the start.

I saw a blue saying they weren't looking to increase pack density on any of the acts in the near-term :(

Posted by Bort at 01/22/2013 12:51 AM

Posted by shniggies at 01/21/2013 11:49 AM

well i think they screwed up the mechanics to the game when they added nv

guessing you meant Paragon levels?

Cause NV has been there since the start.

not sure when you started, but nv was not there from the start

Posted by shniggies at 01/22/2013 10:18 AM

not sure when you started, but nv was not there from the start

Erm what? NV was in place at launch, you just never had it until you hit lvl 60.

EDIT: Here is the announcement back in mid-March 2012.

Posted by theoryzero at 01/22/2013 12:55 PM

Posted by shniggies at 01/22/2013 10:18 AM

not sure when you started, but nv was not there from the start

Erm what? NV was in place at launch, you just never had it until you hit lvl 60.

EDIT: Here is the announcement back in mid-March 2012.

You are incorrect. NV was released shortly after D3 was launched, but not at launch time. It was one of the first patches. Launch was on the 15th, NV introduced on the 22nd.

"Nephalem Valor is a game system introduced in Diablo III and added to the game shortly after release. "
http://www.diablowiki.net/Nephalem_Valor

Ok. So it took me more than 7 days to get to lvl 60.
But sheesh... 7 days from start might as well be from start.

So yeah, techinically i'm wrong.

Geez, I don't really kill any of the bosses. For obvious reasons, the only act worth farming is Act 3, so the only bosses that would possibly see any action are Ghom/Cydaea/Azmodan. But yeah, I never fight them because there's no reason to...

Not saying they should do it or that it's easy to incorporate, but in a game like Dragon Quest IX, after you beat the regular game, there were legacy bosses. A bunch of them, like 13. The way it worked was you started out on the first boss and he had a chance to drop either a unique set of armor, the map to the next boss, or an orb that could be used to craft uber gear. Each time you fought him, he got progressively harder, but his chance of dropping the gear (particularly the orb) increased each time. It was somewhat engaging to fight the bosses not only to keep progressing and "unlocking" the new bosses, but also because there were like 6 or 7 different orbs so only certain bosses dropped certain colors.

So yeah, the Hellfire ring thing is somewhat reminiscent of this, but I think DQ9 got it right in the sense that 1) bosses were progressive, you had to unlock each one, 2) orb drops were pretty rare and you needed a bunch of them to craft one item, but the item was BIS, so it kinda motivated you to keep farming the bosses, 3) bosses got stronger as you killed them more, so the battle dynamics began to change at certain levels.

I think it wouldn't be completely out of the question to do something like add more keywardens, make them extremely strong, make the "key" drops rare, but make the crafted item extremely strong or unique. Like it can roll 3 sockets or 5000 LoH or something. And different combinations of keys craft different weapons or armor. People would actually get up for farming these bosses.

Well, whatever...

Posted by Metta at 01/23/2013 05:20 AM

I think it wouldn't be completely out of the question to do something like add more keywardens, make them extremely strong, make the "key" drops rare, but make the crafted item extremely strong or unique. Like it can roll 3 sockets or 5000 LoH or something. And different combinations of keys craft different weapons or armor. People would actually get up for farming these bosses.

Well, whatever...

They have to save something for the expansion. Expansion packs have a different audience, in general, and I'm certain they'll be adding more endgame content. Until then, they can't blow their best endgame content on Diablo 3. In 18-48 months when they're done with the expansion ... well, everyone will be sick of D3 and have stopped playing, but we'll all come back for the new class(es) and content.

Posted by tjn182 at 01/22/2013 07:36 PM

Posted by theoryzero at 01/22/2013 12:55 PM

Posted by shniggies at 01/22/2013 10:18 AM

not sure when you started, but nv was not there from the start

Erm what? NV was in place at launch, you just never had it until you hit lvl 60.

EDIT: Here is the announcement back in mid-March 2012.

You are incorrect. NV was released shortly after D3 was launched, but not at launch time. It was one of the first patches. Launch was on the 15th, NV introduced on the 22nd.

"Nephalem Valor is a game system introduced in Diablo III and added to the game shortly after release. "
http://www.diablowiki.net/Nephalem_Valor

I thought I was going crazy...NV not until the 22nd? Then I checked that link I posted and people are talking about how NV was working in the game on posts dated as early as 5/18, so I think that wiki is incorrect in saying it was added later.

Indeed, their own archive of patch notes and hot fixes make no mention of adding NV after launch. http://www.diablowiki.com/Diablo_III_Patches

Posted by ecocd at 01/23/2013 06:23 AM

They have to save something for the expansion. Expansion packs have a different audience, in general, and I'm certain they'll be adding more endgame content. Until then, they can't blow their best endgame content on Diablo 3. In 18-48 months when they're done with the expansion ... well, everyone will be sick of D3 and have stopped playing, but we'll all come back for the new class(es) and content.

I really have no idea what they will do for the expansion. Of course a new Act and a new class or two seems almost a given...and new items. However, anything beyond that is hard for me to grasp at this point.

I do agree however, many will be sick of the game and have quit by that point. Seems crazy to think that if they sync'd up dates with the D2 and D2: LoD releases, we'd be just a few short months away from a D3 expansion. When in all reality, it's probably at least another two years away if the SC2 expansion can be used as a reference.

I can't think what they will add in terms of mechanics. But if you look at the massive difference between D2 and D2:LOD they might be able to come up with something. Not that D3 can really be compared to D2.

Posted by Bort at 01/23/2013 10:52 PM

I can't think what they will add in terms of mechanics. But if you look at the massive difference between D2 and D2:LOD they might be able to come up with something. Not that D3 can really be compared to D2.

Right, but D2 felt pretty plain compared to D2:LOD. It was like an entirely new game when that expansion came out. Indeed, that's how I remember my D2 days, I have a really hard time remembering that game before LOD, even though I played it a lot that first year.

Obviously they could borrow some of the LOD ideas like charms and runes, but the items as they are now don't really support rune words. Just not enough sockets in things.

Just a thought.

They can extend the rune word idea to having specific runes in specific gear items.

For example instead of having a rune-word on item level, have it on inventory level.
So you have to have a certain rune in ring, and another in amulet and another in helm to make the rune word.

Posted by Bort at 01/23/2013 10:52 PM

I can't think what they will add in terms of mechanics. But if you look at the massive difference between D2 and D2:LOD they might be able to come up with something. Not that D3 can really be compared to D2.

Given that every patch seems to bring back something from Diablo 2, I think you can fairly speculate about similar changes. first it was Uber bosses. Now they've given us a limited gambling system which I liked a lot in D2.

I love @Bort 's idea of runewords. It could even move to Socketing them in skill slots, for instance. Each player can socket 1-3 Runewords in the skills tab at a time. They would enhance skills that already exist (think passive skill boosts) or add new a new Rune to your skills. Even if they give each class only 2 or 3 useful runewords and a dozen niche or cosmetic runewords, it's something people would probably strive to collect (and sell on the RMAH for monies).

@Bort 's idea specifically sounds like a set. They're already got sets built into the system so it would be something similar to what players are accustomed to. Each "charm" would be Legendary and have its own mild bonus when socketed. Each additional "charm" of the same set would get a set bonus. Something like +2% IAS in a single Charm, +10 AR in another Charm, but both of them would add +10% Movement Speed.

I think they really need to add more content to the game to reward players who are actually playing. I was hoping the crafting would do this with the new crafting materials but it sounds like they drop so frequently it doesn't do that & the gold cost to craft is so high that it's not worthwhile for the absolute randomness of the items.

What do I get for sinking 500+ hours into the game? the same randomness as someone that's played 30 hours.
The more I'm playing the less I'm feeling like I get much except RNG RNG RNG, there needs to be more to it.

While I was playing the other night and slaying yet another of those randomly named (purple) Unique monsters wouldn't it be cool if they dropped something different? Then there would be a purpose for people to go and hunt them, at the moment it's just for a reward - and the rewards don't actually give you anything!

Ubers and keywardens have helped, but I can't solo the ubers so I just have a lot of keys - joy :(

Posted by ninjax at 01/24/2013 07:30 AM

What do I get for sinking 500+ hours into the game? the same randomness as someone that's played 30 hours.
...
Ubers and keywardens have helped, but I can't solo the ubers so I just have a lot of keys - joy :(

To be glib about it, if you have gotten 500 hours out of this game, that's a pretty good return for $60 and I don't think Blizzard really owes you (okay, us) anything more. I understand your point that it seems like there still isn't much content for the long-time players. It took many years and an expansion for Diablo 2 to get to the point that a player with 300 hours could still play the 301st hour with anticipation.

Maybe the better strategy would be to go slow burn on D3 for a while and just play less. I think a lot of the people around here are doing that now. Playing enough to stay in touch, but not really grinding anymore.

I think you'll be able to find at least 2 groups for Uber runs each week, especially if you're providing 2 of the Machines for each run. That ought to get rid of a few of those keys. ;)

Sadly I also think that the sets in D3 are pretty bad.

I mean, no bonus for wearing a full set?
So no motivation. Blizz keeps talking about diversity, but the BIS items are so dominant that there is no choice.
I prefer to use the Inna set for my monk, but I will never use the wpn, it's simply too aweful and there is no bonus for using the full set. If they gave the full set a proper bonus then there could have been a choice between using the full set, or using different wpns (or other non set piece) But as it is now there is no real choice if you want to get the higher DPS.

Hmm... this thread has derailed, but good discussion. :) I like it.

I think it's almost exclusively the weapons are a problem in the Sets right now. I'm willing to wear every piece of armor in the Nat's (modern) Set and they can all roll some of the best affixes. The damage on the 1H XBow is really poor, particularly because it's limited to Cold Damage (inherently rolls lower).

There are rare BiS for some items. Even Crit Chance Lacuni's aren't necessarily the best, because rare can roll Exceptional Dex, Exceptional Vit, AR and CC. Jewelry is almost entirely dominated by Rares. Rare 2H and 1H XBows can roll better than the ilvl 63 Legendaries. Rare boots are also going to roll better than any Set of Legendary boots. If you want a Shield with CC and Dex, you're looking in the rare market.

Yes, Chest armor is almost exclusively Set and Legendary, Vile Wards are pretty much always better than Rares drops and Dead Man's Legacy Quiver & Echoing Fury were real brain farts on Blizz' part. The situation as a whole is not as bleak as you make it out to be.