I feel ya fam. Finishing my 10 in 40 minutes. Slow slow slow slow slow day.
I hadnât worked over a 9 in almost 4 years, lol. Iâm actually surprised I am still awake.
So why does the game have to change its rules for people with a malfunction in their hands, but not for those, who lack of motoric skills? I donât get it.
You are right, it is different and my choice of words was quite poor here. What I want to say though is, that games and rules in sports should not be designed, for everyone to be able to be good at it.
And tell me, do the rules between paralympics and olympics differ? Are people in paralympic soccer allowed to use their hands? And are paralympic cyclists allowed to take shortcuts? Certainly not, because paralympics are not about changing the rules of the sports, but changing the competition.
Thatâs like having special D2R servers, where people with handicaps or very low motoric capability play with (and against) each other.
True, now you are.
Yes, on average. But the FLUCTUATIONS differ!! I explained this 2 times already in this very thread, why does everyone keep bringing this up? BOTH increases: bad streaks and good streaks. But when the length of these streaks becomes of the order of a whole ladder, it breaks the game.
1 Like
Iâm not arguing for the game to âchangeâ Iâm arguing for an alternative realm where those players can have some of their difficulty due to disabilities mitigated. It doesnât need to effect your gameplay. At all.
I agree. That is why I am advocating for a completely separate game mode, just like the Paralympics.
kind of. You should look into how the scoring works, itâs interesting.
Except in this case, anyone could play, it still wouldnât mitigate difficulties completely, but would help for those players that cannot respond quickly due to a disability. People with âsuperleetmadskillzâ would still do better than people without, but personal loot could mitigate some issues.
Edited for clarity.
You explained it, but your explanation is not statistically correct.
I am referring to not what a player sees but what a player collects.
Letâs think about this in the simplest terms.
A single item drops in an 8 player game.
In an FFA game, all 8 players see the drop but only one gets it. In an instanced loot game, an item drops. Only one player see it and only one player gets it.
This is true for each and every drop event that occurs in the two systems. If players are average clickers, their loot acquisition rate and is statistical variance for good items will be the same in both systems.
Funny to see you using that angle.
Man, talking about disabilities reminds me of a video on youtube I watched. Lowtiergod vs brolley something or other on Street Fighter. LTG rage quit on brolley (a disabled gamer) and was raging on the dude that despite his disability, was owning him.
Iâll jump in just to say Iâm with you but I gave up on this âdebateâ ages ago and while Iâll like posts I generally wonât jump in anymore unless they keep jumping it into other threads.
1 Like
Our conversation was about sampling bias. If a sample is representative of the population it seeks to model, then statistics can be applied accurately.*
'* The normal caveats about study design are still applicable that would invalidate doing statistics.
Well, I didnât even know that. Seems like I should get some proper knowledge about paralympics, before arguin about it here!
Yes, I do see, that the other realm would not change my gameplay. But I am really not arguing here, because I think, that these things would ever influence the fun I have with games. I am rather having a bad feeling about changing rules and core mechanics for a certain group of people, just because they are less competitive.
Yeah, although I edited my comment for clarity, I donât think they actually give a true âshortcutâ to any athlete, as the Paralympics have grown over the years, but I believe they used to have âstaggered-startsâ depending on severity of disabilities.
Now I think they have enough athletes and enough money to sponsor multiple events in the same sport, so itâs much easier/fairer than it used to be.
Iâm old, I donât remember it all 
2 Likes
I dont think you need to remind us you are old Geezer lol
3 Likes
Yes, everything you say is correct and yet you donât capture the problem, I am referring to, in your example.
In simple terms, letâs assume the following. We grind Monster X, which has a chance p to drop a high rune. Now letâs say we kill 1000 monsters per day and p = 0.0001. Then we find a high rune every 10 days, if we play alone.
If we play in a 8 players party, p increases, the number of slain monsters increases, but letâs ignore all that for now, since it doesnât change the principle here. So in the party we get a high rune every 80 days now.
Shared loot: You still see a high rune every 10 days and you have the chance to get the rune every 10 days. But everyone clicks equally well, so you actually only get a HR every 80 days.
ploot: You only get a HR every 80 days and thatâs all you see.
So far so good, thatâs not yet the problem. The problem is, that the deviation from the expectation value (expectation value is 1 HR per 80 days) increases with the number of monsters slain! The longer you play, the bigger gets the absolute error of your expectation value. (important: the ABSOLUTE deviation, not the relative one, which gets smaller!)
This means: On some days, 5 HRs drop but there are also 300 consecutive days without a single HR. Now the longer you play, the longer these good and bad streaks will get! And if you distribute the drops randomly in the group, this effect increases a lot!
If your group has a bad streak and after that streak, finally a HR drops, you will still only have a 1/8 chance to even see the drop with ploot!
Now with real numbers: According to DBrunski (YouTube D2 player), he has months, in which he does not find a single HR. Now if you play in a party and you have such a bad streak, but ALSO only see 1/8 of the drops, you can easily have 8 months without seeing a HR. This means, you donât have a HR drop for almost 3 ladders! >>> game broken!
Btw this whole effect is not a weird estimate of mine, but a very well known scientific fact. It has been understood first bei Albert Einstein, when he described the movement of dirt particles in water without any net force acting on them and it is called âBrownian Motionâ: On average the dirt particles donât move, because water molecules hit them equally distributed from all angles. But the deviation from the expectiation value becomes bigger and bigger in time, so they actually move.
XYZ won the loot because it was personal loot also stopped master looter favoritism.
What else should we go around trying to change in the name of the disabled? Itâs endless. You guys should leave that topic out of these discussions. I think itâs worth flagging over, which I may start doing, unless you, yourself are disabled, which nobody knows for sure. We also donât know if people are saying they want these changes for their own personal gain or because they really care. If somebody wants personal-loot just because, well, okay, I can accept that and we can debate it, but please, stop using the disabled card to get changes passed. Itâs pretty low and once again, possibly insulting.
Man, Iâve vented about this before, but regardless of what happens, Iâm always going to have a bad taste in my mouth towards some of these people that want personal-loot and their arguments. Not only are people trying to use disabled people to get changes passed, theyâve told us over and over how outdated the game is, how apparently bad it is, how people are stuck in the past, how the game is doomed to fail. They erroneously label people over and over.
1 Like
I have read this before in here and it disgusted me a bit⌠It is not on us to speculate, wether or not someone uses such a sensetive topic, just to argue in personal interests. There is no reason to believe, that someone in here did that and so we shouldnât even start asking this question imo.
I think, it is a very important topic. IMO, games shouldnât change the rules and mechanics for people with disabilities, but instead take the approach of designing games with mechanics and rules completely free from all of that and gain more accessibility with features.
Apparently some people in here have a very different opinion on this and a proper discussion about it can be 100 times more fruitful for the âploot vs shared lootâ fight, than most of the discussions evolving aroung âthe game is oldâ / âthe game is hardâ / âD2 has always been like thatâ.
First instance of âdisabledâ in this thread from Geezer:
Iâve argued in favour of a personal loot option on numerous occasions on this forum for two reasons.
1 - Pickit.
2 - I work with children with disabilities, and I do think they deserve a fair shot at loot, even if it needs to be a separate game mode. I also have family members with debilitating wrist issues, who also are gamers.
I also understand if they do not want to make this an option in this remastered game.
In games going forth though, it is clear personal loot is the superior design option.
I think he has a justification in speaking about it. If this was Micro bringing it up (sorry Micro, but you are the most outspoken here), then you might have a leg to stand on with that argument on trying to ram something in by using another group for their own agenda.
Also, the devs have also spoken quite extensively in two blogs about accessibility; from controller support being praised by disabled gamers, to having auto-gold, loot display toggle, new hotkey binds, etc. They want the game in more playersâ hands. Solve for one, solve for many.
Now how does this play to personal loot? As an option, it could be an accessibility function for both disabled gamers and controller players. Let us say that between Beta and launch, the looting is the most critically panned feature of consoles due to the controllers. Maybe they add mouse and keyboard to consoles, but they could simply change the looting system if they feel enough mouse and keyboard players want it too. Lots of things could happen. At this point, things just need to progress naturally and weâll see what happens.
1 Like
Spekkio, flagging for bringing up legitimate physical or mental handicap is clearly false flagging and against the rules of the forum.
I wonât stop bringing it up because I deal with children who have special needs every day, and try my best to accommodate their needs where I can. Itâs not something I can âturn offâ. Itâs simply second nature for me to see how they would struggle to play a game many of them would enjoy, in a public setting.
Due to some of their specialized needs, itâs no doubt a part of the social aspect of gaming will be lost, as they will want to be involved in looting/trading, etcâŚhard to do if you have severe wrist issues, as an example.
4 Likes
WUT
It is not the same to win a completely random item, which may be the worst of all, than to bid DKP for a BiS item.
There is no way to defend a system as bad as Personal Loot.
I am always in favor of more options.
But Personal Loot was forced in WoW and Diablo 3.
What would have been the best option?
If 50% or more of the group are part of the same guild then it is FFA / Loot Council
If it is less than 50% then it is Personal Loot.
This way the guild groups can use any system and the pugs are safe from the ninjas.
We could apply the same in Diablo.
If they are all friends, make it FFA and if they are not friends, make it Personal Loot.