Vote: Item Binding in Reaper of Souls?


We’ve seen a lot of conversation about the extensive use of Item Binding in Reaper of Souls, since details began to emerge and were stated quite clearly from Blizzcon. Currently, all legendaries and sets, all DiabloWikiMarquise and higher level DiabloWikigems, and any item that’s been DiabloWikienchanted become (DiabloWikiBoA) Bound to Account. The exception is the ability to trade newly-found items to other players in the game with you when they drop, or for up to two hours after the game ends.

Enchanted? Legendary? No trade for you!

Enchanted? Legendary? No trade for you!

This policy is a reaction (some would say an overreaction) to the extreme item fluidity of Diablo 3 via the Auction House, where the vast majority of high end items were bought and sold, rather than self found. Blizzard has defended all the binding in D3 by saying that it promotes self finding, that it’s more fun to find an item than to buy it, and that binding allows them to greatly buff the drop rate in DiabloWikiLoot 2.0. Most fans seem to agree in principle, but many say it’s going too far, and a prime example is Azzure’s anti-binding forum thread which has run to over 170 posts, most of which seem to be in agreement:

All Legendary items Soulbound just killed it for me.

Just when I thought that Blizzard were finally on the right track with itemization, they pull this one out. I’m sorry, but a Diablo game where loot runs are almost pointless once you have great gear is not a good idea. If Blizzard think that this won’t have enormous long-term ramifications for the future of the game they are absolutely mistaken. Half the fun of item-hunting is getting items you can trade. Finding amazing gear that doesn’t suit your character and having to throw it away is going to make loot-hunting a lot less fun.

Also, what happens when you have excellent gear? When only 1 in every 10,000 drops is an upgrade, won’t we have the exact same problem as we are experiencing now with the whole “ID 500 rares and legendaries, no upgrade”, but even worse now that we cant even sell/trade it?

This is an awful decision. I predicted the failure of loot 1.0 in Beta, and predicted the failure of the crafting system. I am saying with strong conviction that this change will once again destroy the item system.

The best counter point isn’t that trading sucks, it’s that binding allows the drop rate to be much higher, since every item players find doesn’t immediately go into an Auction House. Binding means much better loot drops, trading in-game only means an incentive to multiplayer, and that’s more fun long term. That’s the official argument, anyway. Does the community agree with it? Let’s find out.


Your opinion on item binding in Reaper of Souls.

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

I tried to keep the vote options very simple and generic to measure broad opinions, not get into specific points of what should be bound and what should not. Hit the comments if you wish to offer more detailed arguments about all the pros and cons.

Comments

You're not logged in. Register or login to post a comment.
  1. I voted 1, but not because it allows awesome loot to drop freely. Its because I play d2 to kill monsters, not play a trading game. Having more awesome loot drop freely would be a drawback, in anything.

    • They don’t need to be exclusive. People talk about inflation control, well show me the game, any game, where this has been accomplished. In fact, show me the economy in real life where this has been accomplished. We should want freedom and choice. Tired of all this control put on the player.

    • Cool false dichotomy, bro. Just like you and every other moron that thinks it can only be either or. Did you even play D2 or any other game without item binding?

    • I think the vast majority of players (>95%) don’t trade items at all. Of that 5% I believe that 95% of that only trade rarely for specific things and don’t make it a mainstay of their ARPG playstyle. While I don’t agree with Blizzard’s decision, I totally understand why they are doing it. Casuals bring the $ and finding loot = fun. Most people don’t have 2+ hours a day to game so upping the drop rate is a very important step in bringing in new people especially after the huge success of POE.

    • Nah, BoA isn’t the cure to diablo 3, its the new illness.

      Plus i don’t like your Advertisement Solve Media. Get rid of that viral piece of shit asap.

  2. Don’t forget every single crafting material, to boot. Wonder when they’ll ban gold trading, which will be the last bastion of RMT, aside from account sales.

  3. Making things bind to account makes Blizzard’s design job a lot easier, not to mention it helps combat 3rd party selling. Though it kinda goes against the whole ‘always online’ thing.

    I’m not yet sure how I feel about this, though I lean towards it being a good solution. If you couldn’t trade with people in your current game though, I’d definitely have a problem with it.

    It’s weird being a Diablo game where things bind to you, though. Previously, trading was squashed by the in-game Auction House. What is that being replaced by? Items being bound to you, i.e. no trading. Otherwise Blizzard would need some other solution for this, and something better than chat spam…

    • They had the best solution in their hands, and they fumbled it, badly. They had BoE (bind on equip), and if they took it one step further, to BoS (bind on sale) they would have kept the RM/AH humming along w/o too much fuss. Of course, they’d also need an item game that was worth a damn. And of course, they should have used that RMAH money to add content updates at a regular clip, including PvP, new Uber events, etc. But nope, they didn’t want constant money, for some reason. Just a massive failure on so many levels.

      • Yeah pretty much this. I’ve suggested bind on sale previously as well. They could have done *a lot* even with the AH, but they seem afraid to branch out. The problem is that the game is in a bad state now and needs fixing from the beginning, so they can’t really add content or events, pvp, etc. because it’d pull resources away. Still baffling… they had sooo long on this game and messed up so badly on such core features, it’s amazing really.

  4. They just need to make the game and drops progressive + BoA. The problem in D3V is you can find the best in slot items anywhere from MP0-10. You just find more stuff in MP10 and sort through more drops to find a good one.

    If instead, there are quality ceilings in MP0, then MP1, etc etc, you can gear up and at each tier, you start finding better items than you saw before. The reward curve can stay pretty flat. Self found in D3V doesn’t work well because drops don’t scale up enough with difficulty levels. You get more loot, but it’s not higher quality at higher difficulties. By introducing BoA stuff, you can make drop quality scale up with difficulty and make each tier feel like progress.

    The issue with NO binding is that the ‘power gamers’ get to max difficulty first, then start farming high quality items way faster than is possible for a more casual gamer. The result is the high quality stuff becomes widely available. It shortens the lifespan of the game for more casual players because they can avoid the entire progression for very little cost (because the market is flooded). With unbound gear, the economy is too efficient at moving goods. It’s like building a piece of furniture yourself vs. going to IKEA. IKEA is way more efficient, but the journey is very short. If the goal is a piece of furniture, you go to IKEA. If the goal is to get a piece of furniture and be entertained and feel invested, you should build your own.

    If you look at WoW (I know, evil game), people play it for years and years because they have to farm the gear themselves. If gear in that game was all for sale, the 1% no-life gamers would smash the content and sell the items to everyone else, greatly shortening the time the game feels rewarding for the majority. It would be nowhere near as compelling to play.

    • To expand on the IKEA notion — if the goal is to get everyone furniture, you send everyone to IKEA. If instead you want to maximize enjoyment and end up with a piece of furniture at the end, you have to force everyone to build their own. If some people are allowed to go to IKEA, the system falls apart. It doesn’t feel fair, and a game needs to feel fair to be enjoyable.

    • They could make gears found at MPx only usable at MPx and scale drop quality with MP.

  5. I really don’t know how I feel about this. I have never ever been into trading in any Diablo game. But I don’t begrudge those that want to. The real problem tho is all the damn people who are out to make money off of it. My blizzard account gets 4 to 5 friend requests a day from the damn pvpbank people. Its beyond annoying

    I’ve always dreamed of making a game. I would never want to deal with fighting against spammers or gold farmers. To me, its simply better to flat out deny them that ability. Then you can focus on whats actually important. (game play)

    So I certainly don’t hate Blizzard for taking this step. It is certainly something that they can change in the future if it appears to be a real problem.

    My bigger worry right now is are they making loot too available. Too much is not good. D3 console is proof of that. It just doesn’t lead to game longevity.

    • W/ a pure buy to play scheme, they don’t want you to play for all that long. They want you to finish the game quickly so you go back to WoW.

  6. I had to go with “hate” although that’s stronger than I really feel about it.

    Aside from anything else, I think the freedom of BoA is letting Blizzard get sloppy with the items. It seems to me like we’re just going to end up in the same state that D3V did, where within 2-3 months people are going to have awesome items and not be able to find better drops to replace them.

    This is because the fundamentals of their item system is broken, compared to how it worked in D2 (and a lesser extent D1). In D2, there were dozens of different unique items, runewords, a few crafted items, set items and even magic and rare items that players would hunt for because they fit the perfect slot in their particular build. This was a result of being forced to min/max to reach breakpoints and different affixes and ranges that could only occur on certain item slots. D3 has a little of the “different affixes on different slots”, but not very much, and it is easily swamped by how generic the ‘main-stat / defense / resistance’ combination works, as well as simply all stats being “more is better!”.

    It seems like having BoA lets Blizzard get away with lazy design, but I feel like it’s going to come and bite them on the ass again in a few months time. They’ll throw their hands up in the air and say “what do you want?!?! first it was too easy to trade and you got everything you wanted, and now you can’t trade and you still complain that you get everything you wanted!”. The real answer is they need to greatly expand the range of things we want, ratchet down the rate of return from what we currently see in D3X and allow trading.

  7. I voted great only because there wasn’t a perfect, awesome, super great choice. I stopped playing D3 a while back because I had no interest in selling a bunch of crap items on the AH, saving and saving, and then buying one good item now and again.

    I got luck on drops exactly once with a P75 HC Wizard. It was a set ring with CC and CHD. Ironically, it was perfect for a wizard but because I didn’t have any good items, I sold it on d2jsp for 800M gold. I spent about 400M gold on upgrades. Wow, that was exciting. Finally found a good item and I couldn’t even keep it. It was like winning free tickets to the Superbowl but finding out they sell for $5000 each so you kinda have to sell them.

    From all reports, it sounds like there’s a decent chance in RoS I could go back to my wizard and, imagine that, actually play the game, kill demons, and find boat loads of shiny loot. Sign me up.

  8. They should allow more trading possibility with friends.

    • Agreed! I like how the new BoA concept might actually be able to prevent botters to a great extent but I’d prefer something like allowing to give items to long-term friends.

      Even just removing the 2 hour restriction from giving items to people who were in game with you when the item dropped would help a lot, though.

      • I agree with this completely, but I can see why they didn’t allow it. There’s no real way to control someone’s friend list, not without being much more intrusive and unpleasant about it. Because of this, if you allow players to trade freely between friends, they’ll just go to trade channels, find someone to trade with, and friend them before trading freely. Under the new system, you’re supposed to find items, not trade for them; without some system to control each player’s friends list, the BoA on items would be meaningless. You could just friend anyone you wanted to trade with, making the BoA functionally useless.

        That said, I don’t entirely agree with the Devs’ goal of taking out trading almost completely from the game. There were a bunch of times in the past that I reignited my friends’ interest in D3 by buying them better gear that made them interested in playing again, or found something really cool for my friend’s character while playing alone. I’m a little sad that I won’t be able to do that anymore, as I really prefer to play with friends, and seeing my friends get all excited to play again usually got me pumped up to do some runs. I doubt Blizzard will change their stance, since it seems pretty set right now, but I do hope that there will be some kind of easier trading towards friends. As many people have posted, some kind of Bind on Equip between friends could be a nice way to do it.

      • I would like a nice interface, after killing Diablo, where all players can display all the legendaries they don’t want and propose exchanges.

  9. I’m only interested in offline play. Anything that screws over the need for the game to be online only is a huge plus to me and will always get my vote. So I voted 1 for sure!!!!! +++++

    • Do you realize this change will not bring offline mode any closer to reality. If anything, it will only frustrate those wanting an offline mode.

    • I have a feeling there’s more people like you who voted this way and that’s one of the main reasons it gets as many votes as is. If I wanted offline more than a balanced online game, I would vote the exact same as you. People are going to HATE this system within a couple months and it’s going to be Diablo 3 all over again. Waiting months to years on patches to fix fundamental problems with the game.

  10. One thing that top level item binding in addition to removing the AH will result in is a huge drop in the amount of account hacking. Most of the account hacking happened due to the easy money to be made from a comprimised account. Now players will be able to get better significantly better gear on their own than they could ever get from a third party site, so the third party sites will see the floor fall out from underneath their business model. If there’s no profits, they won’t pay the crackers, so the crackers will move onto other games.

    This is a way of beating the account comprimisation problems much more cleanly through the game design as opposed to relying on security protocols. You see the exact same approach in Hearthstone, where compromising an account gives you absolutely nothing as the whole game design is around everything being account bound.

    Yes, of course this has downsides. It sucks not being able to trade all these legendaries you find. Yes, this is going to piss a lot of people off. However, there are so many benefits to it as well such as in terms of what they can do with the drop rates and in terms of encouraging group play. I don’t think you can objectively say which design decision is better, but I’m in favour of this change.

  11. My Diablo 3 gaming in hardcore with a perfect functioning Gold AH are counted and done…

    I will remember it as one the best gaming experiences I ever had in 3 almost 4 decades of gaming.

    I’ll never forget the clueless moaners and softcore casual pussies who killed the game I loved to play and how the PR whores of Activision Blizzard used this deleting of the AH to BS talk their way out of it.

    There was never ever anything wrong with the Gold only hardcore AH. It could have worked beautifully in the future too if they put BoA after every trade on gear, so the endless flood in softcore on THEIR AH would have stopped.

    Now a stupid dwarf killed the game I loved to play at 4 hours a day.

    I hope I never meet him in real life for HIS sake.

    D3 is a complete dead game 4 weeks after its launch because “self found” is simply useless after you killed Diablo.

    It shows BS PR talk just to sell boxes is more important than the view of thousands of active Diablo players.

    I won’t touch this expansion with a 10 foot pole.

    • Oh, come on, really?

      I love HC and the only thing I hated about it was the need to AH in order to be able to party on public games.

      While I agree that Bind-on-sell would have been much better solution, proclaiming the game dead due to the closure of the AH is a little too much.

      Hopefully, by the time RoS is out you’ll give it a chance (and I’m almost certain you will ;P )

    • “There was never ever anything wrong with the Gold only hardcore AH.”
      The gold-only illusion… SC-HC gold trading is very easy.

      “I hope I never meet him in real life for HIS sake.”
      4 decades of maturity right there.

  12. If there is going to be the option of making clans where you can all see each other in its own private chat room like on D2, then I don’t see what would be wrong with having trading between clan members and things like that.

    • It would be nice in theory but I fear it would be exploited too much.

      Soon there’d be a d2jsp clan or something only existing to trade items. So in fact a private little botters’ paradise…

      • Blizz might be able to make it safe if your clan had to get a license recognized by them in order to trade. Like Diablo.incgamers 🙂

  13. It seems I’m only one who has problems to find the poll. Where do I have to click to proceed to it?

    • It’s directly under the article – if you don’t see it maybe try a different browser or deactivate adblocker software or sth.

  14. WTF Blizzard jumping from 1 extreme to another? howabout finding amiddle ground a compromise.. Far too extreme

    if you need tips just look to Diablo 2 … trading works .. pvp works .. self found works … chat rooms worked!

    To make all items self found is totally crazy …. howabout if you equip an item it then becomes account bound .. to me this is a much better way forward ..takes items out of the item pool and leaves items for trading!

    some of us want to trade and enjoy trading!

    p.s the poll is unfair options 2/3 are pretty much the same thing .. ie item freedom..
    so positive reactions so far 41%
    negative = 55%

    and the positive are from people that do not yet see the potential pitfalls of this system of people that just want diablo 3 to be an offline single player experience

  15. How would this be implemented to offline play on console…?

  16. not being able to give stuff to my friends is, quite frankly, fucking bullshit. i understand where they’re coming from but this is way too extreme.

  17. I can’t see it either. I’m against binding FWIW; however I think the ideal solution would be two different realms: one where everything is BoA and one where nothing is. Best of both worlds imo. Why Blizz won’t do it is anyone’s guess… Probably something about someone’s granny playing BoA and not being able to join the games of her cut-throat trader baron grandsons. :p

  18. I really miss the option “only with greater stash – so you can actually collect everything”.

  19. I don’t see what’s so bad about the ‘bind on use’ model. If you use it, it’s bound, if you don’t, you can trade it. This offers up the “it’s an upgrade but maybe I can get something even better by trading it” decision which adds to gameplay.

    Honestly it’s a no-brainer to me.

  20. While incrased drop quality/quantity is great the inability to move out items that you want to keep but have no space for is an unmitigated disaster. They absolutely MUST massively increase the stash size, even if they make you “craft” new pages in-game.

    As others have mentioned, Bind on Use/Equip is a much better usage model as it allows the freedom to trade or run self found, Bind on Pickup essentially makes everyone Ironborn (nearly) even those who don’t like that play style. So much for letting players choose that Blizzard like to crow about so much.

    • Blizzards original intention was to add more stash tabs in the expansion. You can see three perfect place holders for them in the current stash (the three red bars below the existing tabs).

      I believe the tabs will eventually be added, but maybe not this expansion.

  21. A thought:

    It seems preferable to have more restriction initially. Such restriction can then be reduced should further experience indicate that to be necessary, rather than having to increase restriction after items have already become prolific.

    Some questions:

    \When only 1 in every 10,000 drops is an upgrade, won’t we have the exact same problem as we are experiencing now with the whole “ID 500 rares and legendaries, no upgrade”, but even worse now that we cant even sell/trade it?\

    Would the rate at which players reach that point not be proportional to how (un)restricted trading is, especially considering the type of drops which are currently planned to occur?

    \Half the fun of item-hunting is getting items you can trade.\

    Will the need to obtain items via trade not be reduced with the new quality drop frequency?

    If drops will provide stronger items upon a more regular basis, is it not possible that having up 3 other players, who also experience such drop rates, to give or trade any item with will suffice?

    Would the in-game opportunity for players present when an items drops, and the time period following leaving game, to give/trade that item maintain a social aspect of the game which trading can provide? Would allowing unlimited trading only between players present at the time of a drop not encourage more co-op play, thereby not only maintaining the social aspect of trading but motivating more social game play?

    \Finding amazing gear that doesn’t suit your character and having to throw it away is going to make loot-hunting a lot less fun.\

    Will we be permitted to play only one character/class?

    Another thought:

    Reading the descriptions of Hard, Expert, Master levels, etc., it appears that more powerful items will drop corresponding to the difficulty. If less restrictive trading were permitted, such items would be more readily available, potentially allowing players to equip such items as soon as a character reaches a certain level, thereby eliminating the progression process of the game.

    Final thoughts before casting my vote:

    Considering that everything is a work in progress, restricting trading this way appears to be an aspect of an overall plan to provide the game with more depth and longevity. Though removing trading may seem counterintuitive to providing more depth, when evaluated in context with the rest of the changes, it seems reasonable.

    Though many players have become accustomed to it, value it, and will be averse to the removal of it based upon their previous experience with it, I believe I understand the developers’ eventual intention and am not opposed to this change as part of it.

    All that mentioned, I am eager for the opportunity to evaluate BoA practically. Theoretically, the vote option which most closely represents my current opinion is #1.

  22. What is the point of even trading in game for those 2 hours? I thought the new idea was that drops were tailored for your character. What are the odds that a drop I get for my WD will be of use to anyone else I’m playing with? At best there is WD or Wiz in game that would use an INT based item otherwise it will be useless.

    Aside from the already mentioned BoS approach that Blizzard isnt doing, they could allow clan trading, with a limit on members per clan and how many clans you can join. This would make spamming a bit harder and still allow friends to trade freely.

    Blizzard went from one extreme of the uncontrolled AH to no trading for anyone. Why not look for a happy middle, so the game can feel like a live community.

  23. I don’t see BoA working on a long term, as Azzure predicted. Imo, Azzure is 100% right on his statements, but… I like that kind of game.

    I played D2 for 10 years and traded around 10 times. I’m a single player at heart. I don’t think it will work the way blizzard thinks it will, but I think I’ll like it.

    The uglyness of system is the following: you’re forced to build around whatever drops, not the other way around. As in – you can’t copy a legendary based build from internet. And people will get enraged.

    I would rather have people dealing with their bnet “economy” and an offline mode any day instead of this.

    I’m more worried with the abysmal low XP (It looks like Kongor is taking around 20h/level on para 250) and some gold costs I hope to see fixed (do a couple bounties and upgrade your whole stash, but it takes a bazzilion bounties to reroll an ammy); but that’s a playstyle thing.

  24. that’s not an easy decision, but I voted for more freedom. But i do not want RoS to become a trading simulator like PoE. So in general, binding items is not a bad idea, but in end-game where you already have insane loot, grinding for more loot can get pointless when you cannot trade that loot. so we’ll see what will happen.

  25. The 180 turn on trade and game philosophy is a proof of teams utter incompetence.

    I wanted to write more but instead I will suggest to read excellent comments by some community members, namely:

    Lanthanide and craezyjim – these guys know whats going on.

  26. Personally I’m good with Item binding of high end gear. What would be nice though is if they provided you a recipe to unbind it, which would be expensive to do, and then you could trade it to somebody else and it would bind to them unless they unbound it as well.

  27. Why is everyone so blind to the fact that we need an item sink in the economy? Why is blizzard so blind that they don’t realize that an economy (especially a strong one) is what creates the desire for many players to seek out those incredible top tier items? You need to be able to trade period. Any item, any time. However, once you equip it, it is yours forever. Give players the choice to be excited about the item they are going to use, or the prospect of engaging the community with that item to get something they want.

  28. I voted number 2, since I don’t really mind item binding but would like some freedom of item movement. I have played WoW for several years with it’s item binding so I guess I am used to it. WoW has some high end player created gear, or in the world of D3, crafted gear, that you can sell and is not account bound.

    What really gets me though is this quote:

    Is it just me or is Blizzard still trying to tell us what’s fun? It seems they are saying this almost all the time when defending something. Is anyone else bugged by that?

    • Yes, I am. They started doing that when D3V came closer to release. I have wanted a fair number of times to reach through my monitor, grab a Blizz employee by the collar, shake him and shout out ‘noobifying the game and taking away the relevance of choice does not make it fun – even if you tell me I think it is fun 1 gazillion times.’.

      I actually don’t think their main driver is that they try to make it fun for us. Their main driver is to maximize profit – and that works better with an easier game that you play for a month or two before getting back to Wow (as someone very rightly pointed out).

      I’ll probably buy the expansion anyway 😉

  29. The random rares that drop are good enough for trading, so definitely number 1: “Great! It promotes selfing and allows awesome loot to drop freely!”

  30. Why not make it so you can trade freely with anyone whose account shares the same physical address, or anyone who was on your friends list already when the item dropped? Or anyone who is in your guild? I’m in favor of the item binding, but I think it is a bit too harsh. As it stands now, I can’t even trade items with my husband. People who have more than one account can’t trade items between accounts. Keep the item binding, but loosen the rules just a little.

  31. I think what blizzard wants is to focus on is items diversity that allow for interesting fun builds instead of items that focus on only High DPS.

    Making items BoA removes all the bad stuff that come with AH. Allowing trading will just make other forms of 3rd party AH.

    Imaging finding a legendary that give you less DPS but allows you to use a skill for free. Or a legendary that give you a free passive effect. Items will now directly influence your builds.

    Just wondering what does “It’s okay, but I’d like more freedom of item movement.”

    Also the article felt a bit biased but that’s just me. 🙂 Anyways its +1 for BoA from me.

  32. I’m with Azzure on this. There are very clear ramifications of such a system that can be analyzed quite easily. Blizzard is terribly illogical in their approach and it will come back to bite them just as so many of their other decisions have.

  33. Surprised by the poll results so far.
    Nice to see more people being happy about BoA though.

    • I have this theory, which I can’t confirm without getting the sales/marketing/usage data that Blizzard likely holds very close to the vest, that the median (well, mode, I guess) “person who bought and played D3” has a very different view of the way the game functions for them that is wholly distinct from all the nerdraaaage on forums/etc.

      So this doesn’t really surprise me, in view of my theory.

  34. Oh Flux. You had your opportunities to bring up these concerns before. But you didn’t. Now it’s too late. Maybe you were hoping they’d can the auction house so you could profit from an auction house like you had on dii.net. Either way, you should have been speaking up from the very moment they introduced BIS BOA rare gear.

    You of all people should understand the massive failures in itemization, particularly their failure to keep the trade game at the end game where it belongs. But you just ignored it all to keep on Blizzard’s good side. Well sleep with the enemy and sometimes they stab you in the back.

    Now this game is toast because people like you who could have had a positive and rational voice to warn Blizzard of their impending mistake instead decided to remain silent. We reap what we sow.

  35. Item wise the end result will be the same as D3V….except that we can’t trade (AH) for the game-changing items that we want.

    The longevity of the game (aka item game) is dependent on content and pacing. These can be heavily influenced by drop rate, difficulty and binding. If the drop rates are high then content is devoured quickly. If the difficulty is high then it takes longer for gear to ‘catch up’. If binding is in game it takes even longer to conquer content because it scales with drop rates.

    As you can see the AH is just a trading post and is not the core issue. Content is the limiting factor to the ‘item game’. More difficult content requires better gear, most difficult requires nearly perfect gear. How many people have near perfect gear with the AH ingame? How many in Hardcore?

  36. QUOTE

    Blizzards original intention was to add more stash tabs in the expansion. You can see three perfect place holders for them in the current stash (the three red bars below the existing tabs).
    
    I believe the tabs will eventually be added, but maybe not this expansion.

    Yeah, I don’t really understand this. Unless they are keeping ti secret as a surprise. But if they want people to find items why don’t they expand the stash? They know people are collectors.

  37. QUOTE

    Surprised by the poll results so far.Nice to see more people being happy about BoA though.

    a lot of people (and blizz) are convinced a sanctioned AH and trading is the same and when combined with the player base and designers obsession with an egalitarian game utopia. it’s not surprising at all.

  38. I really got the feeling very few people think more than the length of their nose. – As I’ve already explained: what will people do when they have “80%” equipment? To collect even better equipment you have to take exponential more time (instead of quadratic when you share everything). Really there will be a hard wall everyone hits after collecting for 40-50 hours where they suddenly have to wait 200+ hours for a single upgrade.

    On top of that: what about sets? How can you build specific builds that require X stat on Y item instead of the standard “good” stats? And this build simply won’t work with these items? How do you ever get enough bank space to collect such builds?

    Did people think about this when voting? Throwing such a vote is really subjective when you don’t show the implications of all things, which is terrible on incgamers’ part. The options are not simple 1 liners and should never be shown as. Even I can’t explain it (I’m not good at communication) – however I expect at least a few paragraphs describing the effects of each.

  39. QUOTE

    I really got the feeling very few people think more than the length of their nose. - As I've already explained: what will people do when they have "80%" equipment? To collect even better equipment you have to take exponential more time (instead of quadratic when you share everything).  Really there will be a hard wall everyone hits after collecting for 40-50 hours where they suddenly have to wait 200+ hours for a single upgrade.

    Because this will be true with and without trading.
    The higher you get on the item curve the lower chance an upgrade will drop.
    The higher yyou get on the item curve, the more time it will take to find an a seller that is offering an upgrade, and the more expensive it will be.

    BoA and trading is more or less equal in this regard.
    Just a matter of tuning the gear acquisition rate so that you will have enough upgrades to find for a reasonable amount of time. After that Blzizard can either release new content, or use the “cop-out” solution of having ladder resets.

  40. Because this will be true with and without trading.
    The higher you get on the item curve the lower chance an upgrade will drop.
    The higher you get on the item curve, the more time it will take to find a seller that is offering an upgrade, and the more expensive it will be.

    With trading you can however trade away all “subpar” items that are lower on the curve.. This means that instead of an exponential growth you reduce the curve to a quadratic one – everything becomes harder and more time consuming. However you’re not looking for an upgrade, but instead enough sidegrades & small downgrades that you can sell and then buy an upgrade.

  41. Oh, look, the itemisation discussion again, the duscussion about the MEANS of transportation while moving in the wrong DIRECTION.

    BoA will imo change very little, which is a bad thing, because change is needed.

    As long as we are showered in items, have guaranteed yellow drops and legendary drop rate is trough the roof, people will still get desensitivized to the excitement of getting a good drop, now even faster, since boa will enable more legendary drops to be good.

  42. I think it is a little too far to bind to account. A lot of the fun I had with diablo 2 was to be able to join a random game and just hang out in town showing off all my stuff as well as seeing what everyone else had and making trades that way. Also I don’t like that if im not playing with my friends at all times and I find something they might find useful I would have no way to trade or give to them

Comments are closed.