Why stop at 1.14d?

Honestly I hope they make a classic version and an updated new patch version with new features it would satisfy both crowds, but it could split the playerbase, however with the new influx of people this shouldn’t be a problem, it could even attract new players that wouldn’t have played otherwise.

1 Like

The beta was already in version 1.15.

You do realize that Blizz could make it factual if they allow VV to make such big changes where they would add a lot of different type of loot systems. From a variety of ploot, to ones like you see in some MMOs (need, greed, or pass). Or even the ones that are in WoW, PoE, etc… along with adding in different PvP modes. All to try to make public games in D2R for everyone. Instead of allowing D2R’s public games be for the ones that they are designed for.

With just twenty different PvP and twenty different loot systems you would have hundreds of combinations of games to choose from.

Designed for the ones that will tolerate the PvP gankers or even join them by ganking some of the ganker’s characters. They can tolerate the fact that they might not get a lot of upgrades. But since there are there for the extra xp that doesn’t bother them. That is who the public games in D2R are for, prepares to handle straw man.

Trying to set up a straw man. Where you are saying that no matter how many choices it doesn’t change the total number of games available. Okay then I guess if you are in hell difficulty you can go play normal Den of Evil and get a lot out of it right. Or go on hell Countess runs when you already have all of your gear and just want to do some cow runs or Baal runs. Don’t dare filter those things out is what this straw man is saying. This proves you fully understand that each new choice would diminish the amount of games that a player would want to play. Because they gotta add another name to the pool to filter out.

If the Plooters use the tools given then they have their ploot without forcing ploot where only FFA loot exists.

it is saying don’t you dare tell us to use the tools already given to get what we want. We want those tools to be expanded into all other areas of the game.

Do you know that not only disabled people but also those with carpal tunnel syndrome is the reason why auto loo is real. There was just too many clicks on the loot pinata that is D2.

Also it is not a problem of them not being able to pickup things as fast as others. The problem is the ones that could use special scripts to pick things up faster than what any human being could possibly do.

What are you saying that disabled players cannot make friends where they would agree to play together in password protected games where they would share the loot. Disabled players cannot join communities for such things.

Still saying that how dare anyone tell us to use the tools already there for what you want.

We don’t want to play the game the way it is designed. No, instead design it for use personally. if you go down that slippery slope then why not design it for just about everyone under the sun. Which has the chance of changing D2R into what it isn’t intended to be. Going beyond what VV is designing D2R to be. Where they stay true to D2, while only make some necessary QoL changes that don’t drastically change how D2 is played. The vary thing that D2R is being sold as.

Those players would get rightfully upset and the majority could stop playing. Then they could be right in saying that D2R is just another cash grab. Blizz and VV sold us out so they can turn our beloved D2 into something that it isn’t.

Look this was never about people with disabilities being included. Do the disabled participate in marathons with non disabled people without any handicaps on the non disabled? Would they stand a chance of winning in such marathons without some form of a handicap to help them win? You know the answers to those questions. So you are using disabled to try to sell ploot and it isn’t gonna work here.

If the disabled cannot make friends and join communities outside of D2R. Ones that will agree to play together with all in the community. Ones that will agree to share the loot. Playing in password protected games. Then they are better off playing solo then asking VV to try to accommodate them by adding in ploot. When in reality I know it isn’t about adding them into public games. It is just a ploy, trying to use a heart string ploy to get ploot added.

Back to that straw man of you will still have the same amount of total games available. How dare you filter out a single game. If you are on hell difficulty go join public normal games and you will get a lot out of them.

What that would do is more than just splitting the player base.

1.) It goes against what the game is being sold as. If you have two separate versions. One with D2R as it is now without any drastic changes. And the other with them. Then the players will say that Blizz and VV sold us out and D2R is just another money grab by Blizz. Another broken promise.
2.) With two versions of the same game now you have an increase in the cost of keeping both games updated.

I am probably missing out on a lot of other little things that could be wrong with that idea as well.

This is the whole point that I was trying to make. Sure there will be other version numbers higher than 1.14d. But they don’t have to be about making vast changes to D2R or adding in new content.

Two loot systems. FFA and Auto Allocate. There are no other loot options on the table that are being discussed in a serious manner nor are there other loot systems that would have zero effect on trading and the economy.

Making it out like people are asking for 20 different loot options only proves you have no real point so you resort to hyperbole.

Two… people are asking for two. FFA and Auto Allocate. Not 20 of each. Have you ever considered that your need to blow things out of proportion means your argument can’t stand on it’s own?

I literally explained it in the quote you posted.

This reply made no sense, but I’m guessing you just don’t get the concept.

If people that want ploot left the game or just made private or PW protected games, FFA looters wouldn’t see them when they searched for games.

If people that want ploot made ploot games, FFA looters wouldn’t see them when they searched for games.

There is no change.

Yes, this is my point.

It is a problem if picking up loot requires a lot of fast movement and mouse click spamming like it does in FFA games. If picking up gold is too much for people with disabilities, then a FFA loot system will also be too much. These people should have an option.

Don’t “So basically what you’re saying is” me. I said what I said.

Some people can’t get out as much as they like and use online gaming to socialize. I’ve met many in a variety of games. Their ability to do this can be held back by not allowing options for them to successfully play on equal terms in multiplayer games.

It’s about choice. People want to have the choice for a multitude of reasons. I used people with disabilities as an example because VV/Blizz already made changes in auto gold pickup to accommodate them. Auto allocation fits into the same pool as that.

And yes, I see people with disabilities participating in marathons and triathlons with non-disabled people all the time. It’s literally the people in the race wheelchair you see in every race.

You said a lot of things in between that was just odd. You really have to turn off any ounce of critical thinking and logic to come to these conclusions.

Heck, they could even color-code the games in the lobby (yellow for FFA, green for pLoot), and you wouldn’t have to toggle a thing…


I can confirm he has never considered that.

Tries to claim others are making a strawman, then immediately goes on to make a strawman. Or 10.

Uh, Blizzard is literally selling it as a game that tries both stay true to the original experience, but allows for changes to cater to a wider audience. They have said that again and again, most recently in a forum thread around here. And have already implemented such changes.

The entire point is that the Original version would not be kept updated.


Maintaining 2 baselines with so small a difference is trivial. It would be much more expensive in the server area. Even so, I suspect those numbers could be dynamically managed, based on demand, and would also be quite small/manageable for a company as large as Blizz.

@Lumpus, what are you telling me there is only one type of ploot that has been suggested in this thread. Only Shadout that says all of the party’s loot is randomly assigned to one play. I do believe that I have seen others suggested in this thread as well as others. Why should his way be the only way. Their groups should be catered to as well right. Why should one group be better than the rest?

On to PvP, there have been others that have made suggestions with PvP in hostilities. Where it would be more consensual. But there already exists a way to have that as well. Where instead of public games you go private yet again only playing with those that will not gank you. Playing in games you know is solely for PvP.

The game already caters to a wider audience with the amount of changes it has right now. You have ploot in the ways that it is designed now. You have FFA loot the way it is designed right now. You have solo mf that is the best way to get loot. Still crying about that one I guess, right. Then as far as other loot options goes you could have those that come from other games like PoE that has short allocation which is a timed ploot, which was one of the methods suggested instead of Shadout’s.

They should have their choice represented in public games just like your choice. Whether it is PvP or loot system it should be represented.

We hate using the tools given. Heck you might want public games to be the most efficient way to get geared up in D2R.

I guess some players just can’t make friends that would agree to play where all shares the loot. Where you have more than enough players to play with. Or even reach out to others in public games. Where you can take a bit of a hit in gear just to make some friends to add to your list. That way you can play together in password protected games to socialize and hopefully get better gear.

What you don’t realize is that in D2 the best way to get gear is solo mf runs.

Multiplayer is the best way to get experience and socialize in D2.

But heaven forbid VV/Blizz keeping the authenticity of the original D2 experience. They have to add ploot because that is what will keep the authenticity of the original D2 experience even though D2 doesn’t have it other then the methods that you just hate. Which is why you don’t want to use them and force into public games where it is a check box. But still why not have other check boxes as well.

@Shadout, what do you think that randomly allocating all of the party loot is the only ploot that was suggested in this thread. I am sure that it wasn’t. Because I have seen other types suggested not only here in this thread but elsewhere as well. Do you really want to count the different types.

Problem is you don’t understand that adding ploot as an option will change the authenticity of the original D2 experience. Come on show me where ploot is in either public or private multiplayer. You can’t because it isn’t there. Just its existence changes the authenticity of the original D2 experience.

What you don’t understand is that Worldslayer was saying that having a new patch version with new features that would satisfy both. And the both crowds is the following.

1.) The ones that only want improvements to D2R that still holds the authenticity of the original D2 experience.
2.) The ones that want new content like new acts, new endgame activities, etc…

This is what I was responding to.

Now if you are saying that there isn’t anything else that can be added to D2R that would improve it. Then it should stay the same an never have ploot at all. Even keep the dumb AI of the hireling that causes it to get stuck and stop following you. Along with not being able to use the hireling you would love to use because you have to have the act 2 hireling to insure you have something that breaks immunities.

@swagman, I don’t think it would be wise to have two separate versions of the same game with two different sets of servers. Besides there is something else you and others haven’t figured out. What about offline mode. Does this mean you have two different offline modes?

Multiple baselines will already exist in the launched baseline (Classic, LoD, HC, SC, etc.). Adding another won’t present too difficult a code maintenance burden. But, if pLoot is toggeled, it can easily be done in the same version of the game. In fact, that’s really the only way to do this.

And servers can be virtually/dynamically managed quite easily. Lots of load balancing software that can handle it on the fly.

In this case, no server issues. And again, there would be no need for a separate version of the game.

On the larger issue. Several games offer more than 2 allocation alternatives. This problem has been solved in code many times previously. No need to reinvent the wheel. There are many design methods accompanying these designs, so the devs have many examples on how to code this.

Technically, this is a trivial problem to implement. The real question is whether it’s a wise thing to do. Again, fair minded people can disagree.

I’m only hoping it can be done without all the insults, as it’s quite likely none of these suggestions, no matter their merit, will ever see the light of day.

Not figured out…
D2 offline already have two different offline modes. Classic and LoD.
Somehow, it works. Must be magic! No other video game has ever had two different modes offline! Oh wait.

But, of course the different modes should also be available offline. It needs to be possible to play Original 1.14 Unchanged Forever After when playing offline. Just like when playing online.

Also, note that FFA and Ploot works the exact same way when playing solo, so that on its own would not need two modes offline, as it would not make any difference.

Indeed. That part should be considered a non-issue.

  1. One could argue more people would buy it if there are more options
  2. No because the classic version is the version that stays the same and needs no updates lol…
1 Like

Hmm, so you really believe that a gaming company can fix all bugs in a game where there are zero bugs at launch. If true then you would be correct. But what about the need to improve on what was released. You might love the fact that hirelings get stuck and stop following you in D2. I don’t though, nor do I like the idea that the act 2 hireling is the obvious choice to take with you where that ones is almost always used by all builds unless you play paladin.

This always bugged me about D2 balance and one of the things I don’t see a substantive argument against: rebalance mercs from all acts to make them equally useful. Or equally useless. Either way. But, if we’re going to keep all but act 2 mercs viable, just remove the rest of them from the game…

I would say that the only way to make them all merc (game calls them hirelings) viable then each merc would have to have a unique way to help you break immunities that would allow you to damage. Some could come from changing their skills to making new items that would be for that purpose.

1 Like

That would strongly go against the original experience though.
Add that stuff to the Changes server, and let Original server remain pristine.

It is not only annoying, but it can be dangerous if you are in hell and you need your hireling with the special aura to either break immunities or help you with regenerating your mana.

What is so great about the hirelings when they stop following you. Why is that so special to D2’s experience. That is unless this is a back door trick to try to win me over to ploot. That won’t work at all on me and you should know it.

So you also loved the fact that Blizz North chose your hireling for you by how they designed the game. Look my idea won’t break anything at all. Making all viable in some way would only add to the experience. Want to take some of the barbs you saved on adventures check, like that rogue from act one check. Or a mage as backup check.

Again I say don’t try and use that as a back door to win me over on ploot because it won’t work and I am sure you already know that.

Still the original experience. If you fix a bug that makes the merc more reliable, you make the game easier.

Not at all saying it shouldnt be fixed. But it sure is a change to the game.

Completely agreed. Definitely one of the changes that should come to D2R.
But it is a significant change. It should be applied to the “Change server”, while the “Original 1.14 server” should remain the way D2 has worked in the past. That is the only way we can protect and preserve that original experience.

Oh believe me, I am aware that nothing works on you. But in general, I am not trying to win anyone over. If people want to see the light, that is their job, not mine.

So then you are saying that the auras of meditation or conviction are not needed at all. With that idea I could take any hireling and it wouldn’t matter who I had.

As usual only the strawman in your head is saying that.
But you know what? Of course those auras are not needed :slight_smile: Most people know that.

Anyway, you are pointing out perfectly well, that changing merc balance would be a significant change to the game.
The original game experience should not be changed.
Keep such changes to a separate server.

You are one of those people, and you are sadly not alone on the forum, who try to pretend they want to preserve the original gameplay. But it always turns out that you dont care at all about the original gameplay, and are perfectly fine with drastic, non-optional changes. As long as it is the changes you like.

Which is fine btw. Just let go of the hypocrisy.

If those auras are not needed then why does anyone bother to suggest which hireling to take.

You should love D3’s way of choosing your build and follower if you don’t mind D2 choosing which hireling to have with you.