I don’t think that it’s a sound argument to say that others are incorrect for wanting something you, personally, don’t have value for. Everyone plays a given game for different reasons. Some might want to get their damage as high as possible, some might be interested in “racing” to get the fastest clear times, some might be interested in themed characters. Because one person does not care about reaching 150 does not mean it can be said that the goal itself has no merit.
I am one of the people who considers 150 to be the “end” of the game. I haven’t reached it yet, but I intend to some day.
None of those questions are relevant to the point that some players will want to reach “the end”. Whether or not there is anything special about those levels -other than that they are higher levels- some players just want the feeling of accomplishment which comes with reaching them. Asking if there is new content exclusive to a higher level does nothing to address that.
The point is that the “end” of GR 'lvl must come when the player has absolutely everything maximized, and must not arrive before that, it is wrong, it does not make any sense.
As you yourself understood, there is absolutely nothing different between a 120 and a 150.
The problem is that, by making their “will” real, Blizz distorted the objective of the leaderboard;
So we have here:
Your choice to reach the maximum level just to … simply say you did it VS A real and reasonable goal that is to maintain the consistency of the leaderboard.
Those words never left this keyboard. Like some others who have tried (and failed) to get away with it, you’re attributing statements to me which were never made. In fact, this claim contradicts what I actually said, which is the complete opposite; that the difference is simply in how many levels a player has been able to clear, and that that difference alone is enough for some players to strive toward. That tactic (that of falsely attributing a position or statement to another speaker which is known to be falsely attributed) is precisely why I did not answer any of those questions. The questions were not asked to gain any knowledge, but were intended to lead me into a statement which could be wrongly twisted into some kind of endorsement of your opinion; an opinion I in fact rejected.
Now that I know you are trying to put words in my mouth, I formally refuse to continue discussing this point. It’s already off-topic as-is.
So we have 2 options:
1st You DON’T understand, and think there is some real difference in the other additional “30” lvl of GR
(I would like to know, but you don’t mean)
2nd You understood, but you don’t mean it on purpose.
Which one do you choose?
Don’t go crazy, in fact you are attributing strange intentions to me …
Certain people also still trying to prove Blizzard wrong, on this data alone, when they were told they didn’t have all the information, not to mention, if you read closely enough, they weren’t even using the most important information…the mind boggles.
This false claim is a direct contradiction of my point that the difference in levels is, in fact, a difference. Trying to force that into a form which somehow magically means I agree with you is not going to work.
This is what actually got said. Trying to manipulate that into an endorsement of the statement that a higher level is not a difference is simply incorrect.
Forgive me, but at some point you said what the difference is?. In fact, until now, you have avoided talking about it.
This achievement can be achieved in the same way with a 120 … This is not a logical reason, it more resembles a type of “OCD”. There is no reason to exchange the correct functioning of a leaderboard for a strange preference type.
If you say it is the opposite, I invite you to point out your reasons, but this time, reasonable reasons and not just “wills”.
120 is not 150. Continuing to maintain that they are identical is objectively false. There is nothing left to say on the matter.
I do not feel that it is my personal responsibility to explain basic math to others. I am not a teacher. I expect others to know when one number is higher than another.
Continuing to press me about this will be considered harassment. You were answered. Asking again will not change the answer you were given. Accept the answer and move on.
As has already been said, the larger numbers are evident. So it’s not about that.
Larger numbers, as everyone knows, are NOT content.
Do as you like … But I’m still waiting for a concrete answer, but apparently, you are not able to answer.
In accordance with the Blizzard Forum Code of Conduct, you are now officially engaging in harassment. Any and all further violations will be handled accordingly.
The claim is that you can not take the top 10 solo leaderboard (US/EU/AS) for each class and average it. Then average the 3 regions for each class to get an idea of worldwide class balance.
I think this brings up another (and to me much more interesting) idea, namely that I’ve rarely played a game which was viewed in so many different ways by so many different people. To me–and to be clear, this is just my opinion–D3 is not a game to be taken seriously; its the light beer of ARPGs, a game into which you can put time and feel a sense of accomplishment when you pull off a great GR clear (as I often have), but not one upon which you stake the kind of cred, or invest the kind of time and energy, as something like StarCraft, or Counter-Strike, or whatever the hip esports kids are playing these days.
I know, I know, there’s a lot of bias in what I just said, and if some of y’all disagree, that’s cool, no big deal. I just feel that D3 is not a game where balance matters as much as having fun and feeling powerful with your favorite build and class. And I feel that in general, the design philosophy that has guided D3 for years has reflected a similar stance. Powercreep got swole at the gym, Season Themes let you one-shot RGs in 150s, and even poorly coordinated teams can curb stomp GR 120-140+ without breaking a sweat.
(Side note: I remember when my team and I took Rank 1 in non-Season NA 4-player, and I think that GR was . . . 120? something like that. Crazy times!)
But some folk really want it to be more akin to . . . D2 I guess? Or some other grind-heavy, more carefully balanced ARPG? They really want the game to hearken back to the days of yore, when ice cream was a dollar and kids got off the lawn when you told them to.
And again, I can respect that desire, but that’s pretty divorced from reality–the reality of the game, and the reality that the explicit design philosophy has been moving away from that direction for years.
Nah, bruhs and bruhettes. Hit that journey jackpot, get your set, and start blasting T16 48 hours after the Season start. BOOYA!
Anyway, I’m not arguing that one type of game experience is superior over the other. I’m just arguing that D3 is 100% the former, and if that’s the case, why worry about balance? Just get you some buffs, get swole, and plow 130s in your underwear. Enjoy the clicky arcade game for what it is.
Does it boggle?
Yeah, it boggles.
I am, and I want to take this opportunity to talk to you all about the importance of COFFEE. Did you know that people who drink several cups of steaming black COFFEE every morning live longer, lead happier lives, and win arguments with their cat? It’s true. Are you sick of the voices, the ones in your head that scream, and the cat that screams, and all the ghosts?
COFFEE.
But neither are smaller numbers. If your argument is that there’s no difference between GR 120 and 150 because all you’re doing is swapping some numbers . . . what are you actually arguing? Is the climb from GR 120 to 150 any more of a climb than from 100 to 120? Isn’t it all just numbers and multipliers and an arbitrary battle against RNG and a timer?
I’d argue that most people like feeling powerful when they play their favorite build, and that power gets measured against the high water mark–GR 150. If solo players can hit it (and again, doing so requires major time investments in group play, gem grinding, and fishing), they’ve earned it.
I got a forum holiday a while back for addressing Trolldemort, I just had to serve another one for actively ignoring the same. Yes, it boggles.
It boggles that it was confirmed there are no moderators on these forums. There are those with the title of moderator that appear to be nothing more than glorified flag chasers, who don’t possess the ability to moderate, and/or understand context.
Yes, it definitely boggles.
It would be nice if they treated the trolls and liars with as much contempt as they do, to those that have to deal with them.
This is why I prefer to disengage the second I learn that the person I’m speaking to is a member of the aforementioned groups. I would rather just flag and carry on than be drawn into a pointless argument.
Those who can remain civil and honest, and can stay on-topic…I’ll listen to them.
I have caught this particular person out in so many lies it’s ridiculous. I’ve even told them to stop responding to me, but they still do, trying to provoke the conflict. So I’m just flagging and ignoring.
Problem is, I know there are many people flagging this person, but nothing has ever been done about their trolling and lying. People are losing faith in the flag button and just don’t bother anymore.
The missing down vote button has been the worst thing to happen to these new forums.
So of course when you do finally lose it and address them, you are made out to be the bad guy.
As a general rule, I try not to respond in kind, but I do not appreciate attempts to assign beliefs, positions, arguments, statements, etc, etc to me that were clearly never made. I will freely admit that it’s only happened twice so far, but each incident has been carried to the point where it borders on obsession.
When I disagree with someone, I say so and provide the best example of why that I am personally capable of providing, then move on to the next topic. That seems to be a lost art form here. No one has to agree with anyone, but the debate does not stop there. There’s a difference between speaking your mind and legitimately believing you can forcibly alter another person’s opinion. The former is perfectly acceptable, if done in a civil manner. The latter is literal insanity.
I have more respect for a person who says “I don’t agree with you and here’s why” than somebody who continually zergs against me until I’m forced to just shut them down entirely. There are people in my life who were literally paid to try to force me to think differently, and even they failed. What chance has a random video game player to succeed where the professionals have not?
