Diablo® III

Will the Real Death Penalty Please Stand Up?

Posts: 4,984
They would care if the death punishment was severe enough.

Experimenting towards more survivability is already possible. I do not see a reason to punish those that experiment towards other styles.
Reply Quote
I'd think that more styles become available when balance is needed.
Reply Quote
Experimentation toward more survivability today => lower dmg, lower kill speed, less items found etc.
Experimentation toward less survivability today => higher dmg, higher kill speed, more items found etc.
I'm not convinced those two scenarios are equal.

Nor can I see how a more severe death penalty would hurt one style more than it hurts another style today.

@Bombus: Yeah, more balance means that not only are the choices theoretically available, they are also more interesting to pick, since one choice isn't endlessly better than the others.
Edited by Shadout#2849 on 10/24/2013 10:33 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 4,984
Experimentation toward more survivability today => lower dmg, lower kill speed, less items found etc.
Experimentation toward less survivability today => higher dmg, higher kill speed, more items found etc.
I'm not convinced those two scenarios are equal.

Obviously it is completely dependent on number of times someone dies. If you die all the time you're not farming at all, no XP, no items.

But still, XP farmers will prefer not to die at all, so they will pack enough survivability to stay alive. Same with ubers farming - there are enrage timers to consider.

Nor can I see how a more severe death penalty would hurt one style more than it hurts another style today.

Of course it will. Just look at HC and the gear on a DH. They look like a barb, except main stat is dex. Apply severe death penalty in SC, and everyone will become a clone. Vit/AR/Armor on every piece of gear. Not something I can look forward to.....
Reply Quote
A good reason not to have as harsh a death penalty as HC I guess. Which is why people want something "in between".

And a good reason to move spiky dmg together with LS of course.
Reply Quote
It should definately be more lenient than HC :P
That's why I like a reward rather than a punishment. Which would in turn favor HC as well as they would reap benefits from their defensive play just as much as SC would.

I'm thinking something like gaining a buff from 'mighty blows', 'massacre', 'survival' and plain 'kills'. So it would be good to have offenses as well as defense.
An incentive to push on but also keeping the balance, not risking too much just for a bonus to xp/mf/gf or whatever the reward would be.
Everything wouldn't have to be removed on death, just a portion. That would also incentivize longer play sessions which would go well with 'adventure mode'.
Reply Quote
I have often argued against a death penalty, but I could compromise with a surviver bonus. For example every minute alive you get 1% MG/GF/EXP 10 minutes alive = 10%, 60 minutes = 60 % There would always need to be a cap and what that cap is should be tested by Bliz. When you die the timer starts over in addition leave the current repair costs as is.

There I have moved my position to the center now you people advocating for harsh death penalty should do the same.

Sounds like a stronger survival bonus than most pro-death penalty people are arguing :P

It shouldn't count up simply by being alive, like 'stand in city and get survival bonus'. Has to build up through active combat tbh. Preferably build up faster the higher MP, to create a decent risk vs reward ratio.

How about an even stronger risk vs reward?
Like 100% MF/GF/XP and 10% more monster dmg. Allow people to reset it without dying (mostly for HC)
(numbers obviously arbitrary. Whatever would fit balance-wise)
Edited by Shadout#2849 on 10/24/2013 4:01 PM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 12,864
View profile
I know that there are those that would love the death penalty to return to a more hardcore death penalty similar to the days of EQ where you lose levels. But those days are gone for good and the reason is simple.

What most players like you forget is that decades ago being a video game player carried a heavy stigmata on it. You were seen as a social outcast. Someone that did not have a real life. A person that would never mount to anything at all. Along with a lot of other negative features that even I cannot remember. Anyone that was a video game player back then did not advertise it. Instead they were closet gamers. No one ever dared to talk about the games that they played due to the fear of how others would look at them.

So that meant that the game market was small. The only ones playing where the hardcore crowd. So games could cater solely to them and only them. Those games could be made to take the highest game playing skill to beat with the harshest of death penalties and the players did not mind back then.

But when the stigmata was broken for good that meant that fresh blood came into some of those games, that is right the casual crowd. Now they were entering the gaming market. These gamers needed new games that would cater to them and their play style. Developers that realized that there were more gamers than before started to make games that catered to this crowd.

Then over time when the developers seen that the death penalties of the EQ days were not needed due to the fact that getting beaten by a game is a good punishment then they knew all they had to do is to tack on a few more penalties and they would have a decent death penalty.

That is why we will not be seeing a return of the older system similar to EQ. Now if you really want a death penalty that has a real bite then go play Dark Souls. I hear that if you die you are automatically deleveled to level one and lose all of the souls you have gotten while playing.
Reply Quote
losing your character isn't enough of a penalty? maybe death in hardcore mode should also ban your account for 7 days.

If your talking about softcore though, well man up and play hardcore.
Reply Quote
10/24/2013 09:13 PMPosted by ShadowAegis
That is why we will not be seeing a return of the older system similar to EQ. Now if you really want a death penalty that has a real bite then go play Dark Souls. I hear that if you die you are automatically deleveled to level one and lose all of the souls you have gotten while playing.

You aren't. No de-leveling. It does have a lovely death penalty though. It can be harsh, but at the same time, death is very much part of the experience.
Dark Souls death penalty is fairly weak in some ways. Since you are essentially the one in charge of how much you are going to lose on death.

Also a very different game than D3 of course.

Still plenty of need for decent death penalties (or survival rewards) in games. Depending on their genre/gameplay.
Edited by Shadout#2849 on 10/25/2013 8:43 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Posts: 517
10/25/2013 01:45 AMPosted by Asmosis
If your talking about softcore though, well man up and play hardcore.

I am aware of the number of responses that simply default to 'play hardcore'. I do play some hardcore. That doesn't mean there's no room for improvement.

Thing is, hardcore has no lenience. Zero. That means these two things (among others):

- A small connection issue can cause entire and permanent character loss (due to online only) But even if that changed...

- All experimentation with appropriate risk vs reward is thwarted due to the severity of the penalty for failure. (This isn't so much a problem as it is a game style, but read on:)

So, while hardcore is hyperdefensive, and realistically only for a small portion of D3 players, softcore is hyperoffensive. The polar opposite. It's ridiculous, really. You might as well charge in as crazily as possible just for the reward of such ambitious play - and if you die, who cares? Oh, a small gold cost? That's the problem - there simply isn't the risk to balance out the reward of aggressive play. It also sways the game excessively towards offensive stats, builds and playstyles, which D3 already has more than enough of a focus on, and quite frankly, could do with some relief from.

All I'd want is a middleground. Sufficient incentive to stay alive with much more tenacity than current softcore, without the sheer deletion in hardcore.

Heck, if online-only truely never leaves, I'd actually be pleased if hardcore characters only stayed dead for, say, 72 hours. That's still a pretty gnarly death penalty, while at least being sympathetic towards lag/connection deaths and other largely uncontrollable circumstances. (Offline mode would largely suffice, though).

But, my suggestion for softcore is what's in the OP.
Reply Quote
dumb.
Reply Quote
10/26/2013 04:02 AMPosted by Sarahimus
dumb.

Just try and practice various stuff.
Do math and read books.
You're not dumb, just inexperienced. You can learn. Just focus.
And remember, don't do drugs.
Reply Quote
The current Death Penalty is perfectly balanced with the game.

If you Survive you receive No Reward, if you Die you receive No Penalty.

While the game is currently being changed, we don't actually know if the "Rewards" are actually going to be better. If past experience means anything were likely to have more of the same with different names and appearances.

The penalty for Death needs to remain "As Is" until we can balance it with the yet unknown Rewards for Survival.
Reply Quote
Most people arguing for a death penalty seem to be perfectly fine with changing that for a Survival reward.
For all intents and purposes those two are interchangeable.

If there was a meaningful reward for surviving, then a penalty for dying would be superfluous
Edited by Shadout#2849 on 10/26/2013 7:04 AM PDT
Reply Quote
Call me bad, but playing as a CM/Archon Wizard on MP 5 until about Paragon level 30-40 I went negative gold on each run because of repairs.

Once you attain the "ivory heights" of significant paragon level repair gold looses relevance.
Reply Quote
10/22/2013 02:09 PMPosted by babinro
NV stacks can extend beyond 5 but 'reset' back to 5 upon death.

This would be really nice. Or maybe doubling the current NV bonus per level, but making you lose all NV stored upon death. Or maybe a mix of both.

The ideal setup is some kind of buff that is increased by defeating bosses and elite monsters consecutively without dying. For example: every elite you kill consecutively (without dying) increases your damage by, say, 5%. This could give the players the choice between steamrolling in low MP, or trying to tackle higher MP due to such a bonus, but with bigger risks.

Durability loss should remain, for it works as a gold sink.
Reply Quote
Probably a bit of both, an incentive that requires you to survive multiple sessions (or during the whole game session) and a higher death punishment in order to make room for players for actually consider back some defensive stats.

These times its all focused about dee pee ess and Im seeing very unbalanced players (towards damage) that get away because of the current game difficulty.
That approach shouldnt be that easy in my opinion.

Regarding to the incentives I agree something helpful about the adventure bonuses would be interesting (mf, gold find, even pick up radius and movement speed !).

Regarding to the death penalties, I would try losing 1 nephalem valor stack per death, raising a bit the gold death penalty AND how about a chance to destroy a gem in the socketed gear acting somewhat as a gem sink that would encourage multiple gem crafting (a marquise costing 20 m its not to joke about).
Along this Idea maybe the destroyed gem could be a state where it retains only 50% of its bonuses and can be repaired by covetus for 50% of the gem price.

That way people would think twice before going full marquise, Jewels are fragile after all.
Reply Quote
Hardcore Mode™
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]