If they had a deep end game like the POE atlas then sure.
You DO realise that you ARE solo and there is no way a solo should be able to keep up with a group of 4 unless you cheat like crazy
You could also play in groups instead of expecting to be able to keep up with a group in any way shape or form whilst solo
I would be cool with just starting to give us the full bonus as if we are wearing them to be honest. Just something.
what about systems like D2 and POE where you have a starter build to acquire currency to help equip your stronger build? Personally Iâll take that over D3âs loot pinata.
D3 could also benefit by keeping paragons per character. That way the leaderboards are for people that spent the time on that class/character.
That was the original system which no one liked.
1 Like
Thatâs how Paragon v1 was, which capped out at 100 levels. Back then, Paragon levels not only gave you main stats, but also 3% MF and GF per level. This meant a Paragon 100 hero had an innate 300% MF and GF, plus whatever they had on gear. This led to people being incredibly unwilling to play alts as the alts would get a lot less loot and gold than their Paragon 100 mains. You were better off playing on the main, getting loot you could sell on the GAH/RMAH, and then buy gear for the alts with the proceeds. Paragon v2, which made paragon levels account-wide, meant you werenât disincentivised to play multiple classes / heroes.
I mean, of course upgrades are going to become more rare with the more time you put in.
What do you expect? Upgrades to be available at the same rate as they were when you were a fresh 70? How soon would you be âdoneâ if that were the case?
/shrug
1 Like
Well we donât have an AH now so the system could work fine with paragons per char. The way it works now you grind all of your paragons on one character yet can compete on all leaderboards on chars you play a LOT less. Assuming you no life the game or bot.
But if you had to do it per char then the playing field would be more spread out and based on playing that class a lot. You shouldnât get on leaderboards for characters you play hundreds of hours less than others.
The current game really doesnât hold people and itâs probably too late to fix anyway. Itâs just bandaid fix after bandaid fix. And while theyâve been putting more time into the game over the past year, they really have ignored the biggest issues keeping past D3 streamers away.
Again, even with the AH issue removed, whoâd want to play on heroes that potentially have thousands of paragon less than their main?
3 Likes
Wouldnât change things in the direction you think. The most dedicated (addicted) players would still be far ahead of casual players like you.
1 Like
Currently solo by very far cannot keep up with group. Not even cheatersâŚ
In my opinion the gap is way too big. I am asking for a smaller gap. To be clear, I am asking to buff soloplay, not to nerf groupplay.
No gap at all would be perfect. It should not matter HOW someone likes to play. Solo, group etc. It would not affect groupplayers either. Groupplayers would still be getting what they get now.
Without such gap, every one can play the way they want without feeling forced to play in groups because of its huge advantages over solo.
I know that removing the gap is never going to happen. But perhaps and hopefully a smaller gap is going to happen. Not holding my breath thoughâŚ
The only really viable way to reduce the gap would be removing the xp bonus in group which wouldnât do much. Removing in altogether would be pretty much impossible, even reducing it a substantial amount would require some massive changes to how skills/buffs/debuffs work, which clearly wonât happen.
The gap is far too big. Itâs silly.
Groups get more xp baseline, less monster HP per player (50% scaling), less monster damage per player (more targets for them to hit), get to stack buffs or bring in more buffs, and as a result get to do higher GRs fast than a solo player can even reach at all. All of these benefits happen at the same time and compound each other leading to a HUGE gap between solo and group play.
At the very least, monsters should have 100% HP scaling per player. And it would still be a big advantage for playing in a group.
They do in greater rifts. Base HP is 62.5% solo, 125% for two players and additional 62.5% for every additional player up to 250% in a full group.
That is the perk of grouping.
I mean, there is a good reason why people get their friends together to beat 1 guy instead of 1 v 1. Faster, safer, and have a higher chance to win the fight.
1 Like
Well the other issue is that paragons have to be capped.
Itâs not about me, itâs about people who still get thousands of paragons, just not enough to compete. People who spend 99% of their time playing DH shouldnât be able to compete on leaderboards of other classes.
And yeah Iâd play a lot more hours if they capped paragons at say 2.5k to 3k AND kept paragons per char.
In the end it doesnât matter as D3 was mostly abandoned and without mod support the band aid seasonal themes canât really fix it. D2R is a lot more fun than D3 for me anyway.
So your only motivation for playing is to get on the leaderboard? And you can get on the leaderboards even without high paragon points by the way.
Anyway youâre just a disgruntled D2R player
1 Like
Oh, boy. Not this again. So, when a player reaches that cap, what incentive do they have to keep playing?
2 Likes
The same as now, improving their times and skill? Just it will not be helped by 5 main stat for every extra level or to build up a whole new char. Shared stash and paragon have both advantages and disadvantages; it is more meaningful to stay with your char and easier to play alts in an endgame meta. On other hand it makes making new chars basically meaningless as an experience, so all that is left is that endgame meta and rest of game is basically worthless after having seen it once.
Shared basically makes for a playstyle where you play an account with alts (WOW), where not shared is more inducive of a play style where you play different characters (D1).