Not talking about passworded games because those always get depopulated.(people dont speak english) (dont want to be invovled in inclusivity)
Its about time we had this there are too many people in this community who are neurotic and fascinated with being possessive over people. Lets get the option to get them out. Atleast a temporary 24 hour ban from game option
3 Likes
What exactly do you mean with âdonât want to be involved in inclusivityâ?
A function like âonly players on friendlist can joinâ would be nice. Banning from the game would be easily abused by trolls.
3 Likes
People that feel uncomfortable interacting interpersonalbly. They could tweak it so they are just banned from the next game you make. Not being able to boot you. I dont see that being bad
If you are anti-social there is always SP?
2 Likes
OP needs to add more salt.
Im social but there is a limit to how you can act towards other people
This would be an option to get rid of the salty people having tantrums in game yes
1 Like
Humans knows no limit when it comes to harassment so it is up to you to limit how much it affects you. If someone is rude ignore them, if someone hostiles you just save and exit, someone steals your game name? Make a new one.
In Diablo 3 you can ban a player with a votation, may be would be nice in D2R
2 Likes
None of your sugestions are practical for maintaing p8 xp. While i agree that harrassment and bonded reciprocation are synonymous in regards to emotionally possessive players. I find people can always be encouraged to not abuse other people or attempt to make them feel the emotions that they themsleves dont feel worthy enough to feel.
1 Like
No, this would be more abused than being actualy usefull.
2 Likes
Trolls attacking as usual. There exists a large part of the player base that is toxic, full stop.
2 Likes
players x was a requirement the moment they forced everyone onto bottle-net by deleting the legit multiplayer options which implemented the players command (after advertising that they would not do so). The only arguments counter to players x coming to bottle-net are ridiculous mental diarrhea from disingenuous trolls.
I do not agree with any âban from gameâ option as this is equivalent to deleting PK. However, Neo-Buzzard should do itâs due diligence and complete the bare minimum pre-release work of implementing the basic features of decades ago that provided adequate anti-harassment solutions, such as functional chat, the âprevent player from hearing youâ option, and game level restrictions that work (currently, they donât work). The chat module should be reverted completely to how it was in legacy D2, even if the new chat worked (it doesnât), it is worse in every conceivable way.
Yet another issue that could be solved if the scam artists at Neo-Buzzard would do their job and fix their broken chat.
Get gud and learn to fight
Well put. Would add the game list is trash as well. You should be able to see all games always.
Typically, that means only involved in the kind of inclusivivity that âIâ want⌠LOL.
ETA;
OK, I have to add more;
Throwing the word âinclusivityâ into a thread clearly positioned to exclude⌠is pure ludicrous.
I will add that OP probably didnât even recognize the ridiculousness of it⌠because âpoliticsâ and âbroadcastingâ have been forcing this theme down our throat for so long, some people are brain washed to it⌠obliviousâŚ
The other current theme is to make accusations of others to hide your true agenda, which is the actual accusation you make/madeâŚ
hmm.
Goodnight.
1 Like
I mean he is at least somewhat right. Certainly I would prefer it if there was a clean game list, good population, clean chat channels, and that there was no longer a divide between TZ/Non TZ games. If that all was true, then cool I can easily see the argument for players 8 command not being necessary. And not having it would keep people in public games. But in the current state of the game whatever reasons you have against it are weak at best.
2 Likes
Agree.
Agree.
Itâs nothing but a Buff to already OP characters⌠who frankly do not need a buff, and would never again populate public runs with P8 option availableâŚ
In a multiplayer game.
I have a lvl97 Summon Druid (no points in Shape-Shift/Elemental) no way in heck heâs doing P8 solo (with any resemblance of self preservation) As a project? Sure, ok, but not for sustainable play⌠too risky, way too slow, too many deaths to progress.
But, heâs actually an asset (Oak-Sage/Meat-Sheild) in a P8 run.
I have a lvl99 Zealot, no way heâs doing P8 solo (see above)⌠yet, he is an asset in P8 runs⌠cleansing/sanctuary/smite-the-boss/meat-shieldâŚ
I have a lvl96 Javazon⌠she is quite comfortable doing P8 Chaos/Nihla/Baal runs⌠any TZâŚ
She has no incentive to play with others if P8 were an option.
P8 is a buff for her, while other charters cannot dream of being effective at P8.
It is a nerf to multi-player.
Now the only players grouping up are the poopy builds, which, admittedly, might be rather fun⌠hmm⌠interesting angle⌠but why would you play those builds if P8 were available?
I mean, the enlightenment above may just be the answer⌠lets forget that for a moment.
I think P8 kills off all the actual interesting junk builds⌠because, in my observations, very few enjoy a challenging build⌠so those poopy public games, are going to be populated by one poopy build soloing, while a tonne of other games are going to be OP builds running solo.
Welcome to solo multi-player D2R.
The above are my first -adult beveraged- responses⌠that at this moment I think might have some relevance come tomorrow morning.
I can run down the list with you, and while your concerns have the slightest validity, theyâre not valid enough to prevent this change if the other things arenât fixed. Now, nothing is going to happen regardless, weâre never getting P8 on bnet most likely, but I still think your concerns arenât good enough that if I had to choose I would have to allow P8 if that was the ONLY thing that was on the table.
It being a buff to already great characters changes nothing. Now the lesser characters can not struggle to make P5 or P3 games. Theyâd at least be on par.
And while perhaps public runs would suffer, theyâre already dead in the water after a couple weeks. Not to mention people are already just accepting the hit and playing P1 private or open anyways because it is simply currently impossible or not worth attempting to organize P8.
Not all builds in any game are built equally unless all are crushing and even still that isnât the case. Just because you opted to go for a known inferior build doesnât mean those who went for the better one should be limited in their gameplay.
Then you move on to talking about your javazon, are you currently farming 3/4 hours a day in P8 games with no downtime? Nope.
And nobody is stopping the lesser builds from still grouping, remember as you said they werenât P8 capable anyway, but managing P3 or P5 with a friend or two is now doable.
Not only that, but P8 is still an option, making it easier to achieve doesnât change that fact. Nerfing access to it doesnât make sense if your issue is that bad/awful/noob builds canât keep up. You should instead be asking for them to be brought in line with those better builds. Even if it was at the cost of a nerf to the better classes or buffs to the weaker ones. You could even go beyond that and ask for the game to be made universally harder as well. But not allowing content access off the premise that your build/ability or even your own personal gameplay cannot keep up isnât valid IMO.
And again I will fully admit I see the validity in some of your concerns, but because of the state of the game, if the option were on the table I couldnât recommend not adding the option to bnet. Is it the most ideal thing? Nope. But I doubt blizzard does anything about the actual issues.
1 Like
How could someone abuse this? Couldnt they just go host their own game? Why is everyone so convulsive and myopic about rationally considering this peaceful option
Then make it like the normal slider or allow it to be turned on and off? Im suggesting it for private bnet games. Are other characters stronger then others? Yes but that is subjective if you consider the contrast to BIS gear. Am i going to tele baal 400 games with a javazon with no insight? No thats not productive.
That would be a balance issue anyway. A barb or melee druid are not going to clear p8 anywhere close to the speed of a nova sorc. Thats how it is, it has nothing to do with a p8 slider or ban people from your game option
You definitely misconstrued how i used the word.
Alot of players who dont ever type in game dont want the personable interaction of a symbiotic communication. So when a password is implemented they just find another game. I know this because ive done over 20k baal runs easily
1 Like
Your arguments are all over. Iâm sorry but Iâm confused. Are you for or against P8? As for player banning Iâve told you before I donât think PK is an issue if it is for you, you should simply use your brain and if it works in even the slightest it will no longer be an issue.
If youâre arguing both of these in tandem Iâd say there isnât valid reasons to ban people from games. I mean itâs cool youâd like it and it might help you, but Iâve listed all the reasons PK isnât really an issue previously. And again would like to remind you that if it is indeed an issue for you, then perhaps you should figure that out instead of asking a game developer to babysit you.
As for P8 being linked to such an idea, no. No ideas should be intrinsically linked together or a justification for or against. People use this all the time to cry that a certain idea might help botters. Sorry, just because blizzard doesnât do anything about botting doesnât mean that a feature shouldnât be implemented just because a botter could use it too. The correct answer is that Blizzard should do something about the Botters, but regardless of that we should talk about the specific merits of the feature itself.