Diablo® III

So who's using Rare Belts?

I have had mine for a loooong time and I can't quite find anything to replace it either....I'm not rich :)
Reply Quote
I have a pretty sweet Freeze belt on my DH if you view my profile :)

Although I don't and haven't used that character in probably 6 months
Reply Quote
Tarzan, looking forward to seeing it.

As for the rare challenge : I'm liking it. I think, though, that introducing BOA stuff in there would be counterproductive to the exercise. The idea would be to see how much DPS/EHP one can eke out of rares only. BOA's are too RNG-dependent.

Here is what I'd propose :

- A budget cap;
- A minimum EHP number. I'd say 400K, and one would probably be wise to specify minimums in each EHP category as well, to ensure a participant doesn't cheat by aiming for the number alone, but having the resulting toon be very difficult to play;
- A minimum sustain method and quantity;
- An MS boost. Not sure if there's that much of a difference between 10 and 12% (I think the min is 8?), but aiming for MS on boots, in my book, is a must;
- A specified amount of time.

Of course, those who know me also won't be surprised that I'd like to suggest a min APS, but hey. =) MS would be capped at 12, unless there's MS in a rare slot other than boots that I don't know about.

I love the idea of the challenge, but I think some pretty strict criteria must be laid down if this is to work well. Any other ideas I'm missing?

I don't mind spearheading the whole thing if there's enough interest. I'm sure Wraith, Megan, Nameless and myself at least will participate.

Oh, here's a question - what to do about gems? I would suggest that, in the interests of fairness, either all or none of the players use the socket in helm for life (assuming a socket, of course), and that all slots have to be filled with flawless squares, color to be determined by maker of set.
Reply Quote
- A budget cap;
- A minimum EHP number. I'd say 400K, and one would probably be wise to specify minimums in each EHP category as well, to ensure a participant doesn't cheat by aiming for the number alone, but having the resulting toon be very difficult to play;
- A minimum sustain method and quantity;
- An MS boost. Not sure if there's that much of a difference between 10 and 12% (I think the min is 8?), but aiming for MS on boots, in my book, is a must;
- A specified amount of time.

Of course, those who know me also won't be surprised that I'd like to suggest a min APS, but hey. =) MS would be capped at 12, unless there's MS in a rare slot other than boots that I don't know about.

I don't think we need to specify the way to get to that minimum EHP number. That's all according to the gearing philosophy of the individual involved. Some people value HP, others value mitigation.

And with sustain, I think LS needs to be the method of choice. However, in terms of the amount, I'd set it as low as 2.7% and see where it goes.

I think setting MS at 12% would be a good idea.

I definitely don't think we need to do CHC/IAS/ChD requirements -- each person participating would have a preferred style of play - some may choose to DW fast weapons, others may choose 2H. I think being less specific can allow for more play in terms of gearing styles and philosophies.

This might be an interesting exercise. I've never built a set from scratch before, so this might be actually quite interesting to see how this would work out. If you spearhead this, I can certainly try to participate.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,683
View profile
Count me in when I'm on. I did something like this awhile back but only used crafted items. Was a challenge indeed.

Cheers,
CC-
Reply Quote
When I do my Xtreme Budget Monking (TM) exercises, I judge the characters by what they can accomplish. So, for example, one of my benchmarks is what MP can I handle Ghom or Azmodan at. It requires both DPS to avoid enrage and defenses to not die. Another benchmark might be what MP I can farm 5 Stacks and a Key warden and not die. Or how quickly I can clear VotA at a given MP.

Setting EHP, MS, and DPS goals tends to downplay the importance of how gear and skills can interact and cover each other. Plus, my last monk survived a great deal by his +18K health globe bonus and potions so you don't want to rule out fun playstyles like that.

It's also important to set a time limit. If you take a week, you can afford much better gear than a night.

Finally, when I play the budget game, I usually treat it as if I actually have that budget. Meaning I don't bid on 10 items and take the best one. I pretend I only have so mucg money, so if I bid on something I don't have that cash and if I bid on three rings and win them all, that cisys me.

Anyway I greatly approve this thread and encouage everyone to try doing this at some point. It's hella fun.
Reply Quote
Oh, and just really it's generally best to assume you have to buy the gems you want in the AH. No reason not to allow whatever you can afford.
Reply Quote
Hmmm... those benchmarks sound like a great idea, rather than arbitrary numbers. Although I still think MS is still important.

With that said, as a bonus round, we should take these rare sets, throw them on our toon and try to duke it out in PvP. :)
Reply Quote
Eh. MS is important if it lets you survive more or kill things faster. It might be that Fleet Footed + MS is the fastest way to clear an area. But maybe TR+DPS with no MS would work better. Really, your skills and gear need to work together to satisfy whatever yout goals are.

Then again, I can't stand playing without MS whenever I re-roll. I really miss it and usually sacrifice ither stats to get it. MS is what I miss most when playing pre-60.
Reply Quote
The only problem I have with benchmarks like the ones Wraith proposed is that they are simply too player-dependent. Numbers are numbers - but a clear time can vary way too much based on player skill - not to mention random oddities thrown in on maps or such!

I like the idea, but I'm afraid that I can't really support it. Plus - what do you mean by "clear"?

I can see it already :

"Hey! You missed a lone skeleton right....THERE! At 2:31 of your video!" Or some such...know what I mean? I remember a very animated discussion going on in wiz forums about this recently, where some guy was bringing forward an idea that was challenging the established gurus, and somehow, the idea of a challenge to prove a winner once and for all emerged. However, they quickly realized it wasn't taht simple...I'm going to have to stick to EHP/DPS numbers here.

That being said - I'd be willing to allow variations due to playstyle, to allow for cool builds like the ones Wraith mentioned. But I think the participants should try to build a set that is versatile vice geared for one thing only (i.e. TR).
Reply Quote
I have mine on now.. its not too shabby
Reply Quote
I can see it already :"Hey! You missed a lone skeleton right....THERE! At 2:31 of your video!" Or some such...know what I mean?


I really didn't think people going to demanding proof or even necessarily trying to "win" per se. Just showing off in the "Hey , look at what I built sense."

But hey... any rules, restrictions, or goals you come up with are going to be arbitrary. I'd say just pick some, make thread and see who rolls on in to take the challenge. You've got enough interest and I'm sure whoever's interested isn't too concerned about the specifics. Megan's gonna show us all up and win the whole thing anyway.
Reply Quote
My DH wears my old monk belt. Damn thing has almost +700 armor/vit/AR :)
Reply Quote
I have a rare belt in my monk's inventory that I use for tanky purposes. (I only recently started using that inna's belt. I actually found it a few days ago).
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]