Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Thoughts on the new patch

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 5:54:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Meh.


OK, seriously though. They haven't removed boss farming, just changed the
bosses we farm. I was always a Countess runner, so that hasn't bothered me,
and Summoner is fairly easy to get to AND kill. I think Nilly was included
to stop or reduce Pindlebots, time will tell how effective that is.

On the topic of running Nilly, I thought a guide here would be helpful, as I
doubt anyone here has done telenilly runs. The monsters I have seen:
Maggots, Baby spawners, quill rats, midgets (both with and without blowguns)
and occasionally their shamans, frenzytaurs, Inviso-apes, poison-throwing
snakes, and a3 Kurast dudes and their Healers that cast Blizard. LOTS of
poison and lightning immunes, not many fire immunes. The quill rats and
midgets tend to be in fairly nasty formations, and fire simultaneously. My
sorc got nailed by a barrage of spines and one of darts, about 10-18 at a
time, and they leave a nasty mark. The snakes are very, VERY nasty: they
seem to leave behind something when they die, so don't get close to their
corpses. You hear several hits going to your char, so it's not Nilly blowing
them up, and if it kills you you get the "killed by Tomb Viper" message.
Bug, maybe? Maggots and Spawners are fairly easy, Frenzytaurs are LI but
seem to have high res all and thus are tough to kill before they get close
an beat on you. The inviso-Apes are easy to kill, IF YOU CAN SEE THEM. I'd
recommend giving a sorc the WP and foregoing Pindles for that char, as the
extra teleporting can add 5 minutes at least to your runs. The areas are
HUGE, and I haven't discovered a pattern yet. Come back Mickey, we need your
pornographic memory! Some form of corpse exploder, or something that makes
monsters RIP, is almost essential, as Nilly will one hit you with that CE.
Otherwise, stay away from corpses, and kill him quickly.

The new runewords are a mixed bag. +skills good, distinctly average other
mods bad. CTC on striking and on struck good, nothing new and exciting bad.
Low to medium runes good, no uberwords bad. Of course, we're missing a few
of them yet.

Note that the patch notes promise uniqueS, and the keys are white-text, as
are the giblets. The charm is one new unique, what else awaits?

No more Marrow bug. This is fine by me, but it also takes away the Carrion
Wind, Moonfall, Nord's, etc bugs, which stifles some creativity.

Uber Duriel was easy: we had 7 people on him, and all he managed was to kill
my shadow master and make Kaytie's merc drink 2 pots. Uber Izzy was not
hard, but the Okies and 5-immunity Pit Lords caused some interesting
exclamations. Maytie observed that the supposed immunity-ignoring on demons
of Hammers was apparently not working. Personally, I thought it was only
undead.

Key farming is always going to be something for a sorc to specialise in, but
most chars will be able to handle it solo, just much slower. The uber-Evils
are definitely group affairs, a skelliemancer with some mages and revives
MIGHT be able to make a dent, but any other character is likely to be
overwhelmed by the volume of hard-to-kill guys.

And that's about my $0.02

More about : thoughts patch

Anonymous
August 2, 2005 7:10:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Mark wrote:
<snip>
> And once again, the current patch is a swift kick in the nuts to legit
> players. While cheaters are again rewarded, and others are enticed into
> using hacks. In 1.10 we had the Uber Diablo, where people who had lots of
> duped SoJ's were rewarded. And those who searched out the proper servers
> with third party programs had access to unlimited Annialus charms. While
> those who played the game 'the way it was intended' rarely if ever saw the
> clone. OK, confession time, I've never seen the Clone. And I think I play
> this game too much.

With you there. Never seen Clone.

Since 1.10 was released I have built 8 Guardians, but
> once I kill Hell Baal I see no point in putting up with mind numbing Baal
> runs to level my characters any higher. So my characters finish in the mid
> 80's. So in the time I've spent in Hell, the clone never showed up. Now I
> play HC, and my characters die a fair amount. So I'm building new characters
> and spend a lot more time in NM and Normal.

Again I agree. And I have built more than 8 guardians and I _have_ done
mindnumbing baal runs with some of them.

<snip section about 1337 gear. I haven't found any either>

So what does the new patch bring us. Uber
> powerful bosses to kill. That require the duped runeword and botted gear to
> kill. What chance would my untwinked Guardians, or the ones I have now with
> mid range gear have facing these uber killers? From what I've heard, slim
> and none.

I disagree. As a lot of people have said, these uber killers require a
team to defeat. And quite possibly it will require a real "team". I
believe that Blizzard has often said that they are trying to encourage
people to play together as a part of a team. So, this is what they did.
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 11:26:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

I was getting roughly the same problem at times when switching to the
CtA. It's mentioned in the patch as selecting a skill granted from a
weapon at the same time as doing a weapon switch. I'd guess it
happened so often to you partly because of your less than stellar
connection.

--
Ashen Shugar
Related resources
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 7:42:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:

>> So I might as well just download Maphack and the bots and cut out
>> the middleman. It sure seems that this is the way Blizzard intends
>> for us to play.

Dude: Chaos Empire. Community. Pull off ONE PK and you get banned
permanently, there are NO PKs and I'm ALWAYS in HC.

I needed to mule so I found a game and joined and asked if it was OK to
mule here. Other player said Yes. So I tossed 20 runes on the ground
(including Sur, Um, and Ist) said 'brb' and left. Came in with my Rune
mule and picked things up and put them away. I got asked if I had an Um
to spare (it could have just 'disappeared', but thieves get banned as
fast and as permanently as PKers.) I asked how many were needed. 2. I
tossed out 2 because I had that many, which promptly disappeared.
That's just the way the community is.

Some dude was gambling tonight, and found something a young Zon might
need, I was a young Zon in the game. It was given to me. we're just
that way.

You'll need a 1.10 installation to load the CE onto, but in the Wiki
you'll find a HowTo switch back and forth between 1.10CE and 1.11BNet.
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 7:42:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 03:42:18 GMT, Brian Brunner
<brian.brunner@verizon.net.prophet> wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:
>
>>> So I might as well just download Maphack and the bots and cut out
>>> the middleman. It sure seems that this is the way Blizzard intends
>>> for us to play.
>
>Dude: Chaos Empire. Community. Pull off ONE PK and you get banned
>permanently, there are NO PKs and I'm ALWAYS in HC.
>
>I needed to mule so I found a game and joined and asked if it was OK to
>mule here. Other player said Yes. So I tossed 20 runes on the ground
>(including Sur, Um, and Ist) said 'brb' and left. Came in with my Rune
>mule and picked things up and put them away. I got asked if I had an Um
>to spare (it could have just 'disappeared', but thieves get banned as
>fast and as permanently as PKers.) I asked how many were needed. 2. I
>tossed out 2 because I had that many, which promptly disappeared.
>That's just the way the community is.
>
>Some dude was gambling tonight, and found something a young Zon might
>need, I was a young Zon in the game. It was given to me. we're just
>that way.
>
>You'll need a 1.10 installation to load the CE onto, but in the Wiki
>you'll find a HowTo switch back and forth between 1.10CE and 1.11BNet.
However, Chaos Empire has some balance issues. ACID DOGS in
particular. Also it seems that with the hugely increased amounts on
monsters, both in numbers and in hp, some builds just DON'T work,
like a smiter is pathetic in the mod. I ended up switching him to a
zealot after finding out my smiter just wasn't going to work.

Robert Klemic
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 12:23:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "john graesser" <graesser@tca.net>,
supreme ruler of bunnies, hopped and flopped and said:

>I'm farming USEast SC-ladder for keys, found three hate, sold one for nice
>bit of swag, alma negra, guardian angel, antlantean, ko rune, amn rune, and
>some other rune. Just about enough to start a new pally with equip. I was
>prepared to offer 3 keys for all that, but trader wanted only one. Took me
>an hour of running the summoner with my ES/FO sorc to get 3 keys, I can
>probobly do countess in about 2-3 times that, nith is going to need my
>summoner with my good equip transferred back to get those keys, that is
>going to take a day or two.

YES! Someone needs to repost WildBill's (or was it short's?) guide to
trading keys.

I hope that next patch has a "special quest" (see, I won't say world event)
based on around finding cracked sashes.


--
"My army shall destroy y- AHHHHHHHHH!"
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 12:24:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "Chris Lansdell"
<clansdell@your.nf.clothes.sympatico.ca>, supreme ruler of bunnies, hopped and
flopped and said:

>Meh.

<Meh Snips>

Hehe. I won't bore everyone by going into another of my "underwhelmed"
rants, so instead I'll simply thank you (and anyone) else who is going a write
up of their thoughts on the patch. This place certain needs extra D2
content.


--
"My army shall destroy y- AHHHHHHHHH!"
Anonymous
August 3, 2005 7:04:14 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Mark <bongofury@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:XpRHe.7320$r12.6519@trndny04...
> "Chris Lansdell" <clansdell@your.nf.clothes.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> news:eWKHe.68272$Ph4.2151441@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
> > Meh.
>

<big snip>

>
> Regards-
> Mark
>
> Bongo-Fury
>
>

Thanks Mark, you literally have said everything I want to say.

The basic way of Blizzard to handle a problem is to make the problem harder
and not actually solving it. In the end it just tilts towards cheater/hacker
more and not legit player.
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 1:39:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, wrote:

>> However, Chaos Empire has some balance issues. ACID DOGS in
>> particular. Also it seems that with the hugely increased amounts on
>> monsters, both in numbers and in hp, some builds just DON'T work,
>> like a smiter is pathetic in the mod. I ended up switching him to a
>> zealot after finding out my smiter just wasn't going to work.

I won't dispute Lava Maws are THE MOST UNPOPULAR monster around.

Yes there are LOTS more monsters! Happy hunting!

You also get a very large boost in character power.

It doesn't seem unbalanced to me (HC addict here).
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 3:20:26 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005 21:39:28 GMT, Brian Brunner
<brian.brunner@verizon.net.prophet> wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, wrote:
>
>>> However, Chaos Empire has some balance issues. ACID DOGS in
>>> particular. Also it seems that with the hugely increased amounts on
>>> monsters, both in numbers and in hp, some builds just DON'T work,
>>> like a smiter is pathetic in the mod. I ended up switching him to a
>>> zealot after finding out my smiter just wasn't going to work.
>
>I won't dispute Lava Maws are THE MOST UNPOPULAR monster around.
>
>Yes there are LOTS more monsters! Happy hunting!
>
>You also get a very large boost in character power.
>
>It doesn't seem unbalanced to me (HC addict here).
it's more that some characters got even more uber powerful, IE
Javazons, Sorcs in all varieties, Psychic Sins (the synergies take
them very high damage VERY early, by level 15 or so you could have a
psychic hammer doing in the 1000-2000 range.

Robert Klemic
August 4, 2005 3:24:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Chris Lansdell" <lansdellicious@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:p _SHe.69381$Ph4.2157045@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> Mark, my friend. Why are you still playing, if you hate the game so much?

Ah, where did I say I hated the game? My comments were critical of Blizzard,
the company, and the hypocracy of their saying they want legit play, while
again releasing a game update that rewards and encourages cheating.

> No game is perfect. This game is OLD. Do you honestly expect a company to
> put that much effort and thought into a game this old?

What effort? They've already fixed TPPK for Hydras and Hammers, implementing
it for the others should be elementary. Or like I said, implement a hostile
delay between entering a TP and declaring hostile. I'm not asking for rocket
science here. But this serious problem has existed for three years and two
patches. And still it exists, to the detriment of HC games. I just checked.
There were 20 Normal HC games available, 5 NM and 9 Hell (6 of which were
trading). The sole reason there are so few HC games beyond Normal is TPPK.
Like I said, this has been going on for 3 years. And you don't think I
should complain or be upset at Blizzard? That I should just STFU and find
another game? Well kiss my hairy ass.

> Hell, we're lucky they even support it on BNet now, let alone for free.

Oh Bullshit. Blizzard has a long history of supporting their old games and
it's a major selling point for their games. If they abandoned their games
they wouldn't be nearly as successful. And if they support their other old
games but ignore D2/LoD then I would absolutely be justified in criticizing
them.

> If you find the bugs make HC too hard or impossible to play, then play SC.

Again, where did I ever say this? Do I need to post the 'strawman' link
again?

And if I'm forced to play SC, then indeed I will find a new game.

> No, Blizzard didn't fix EVERYTHING they could have.

But to leave glaring problems unfixed is certainly grounds for criticism.
Especially when these problems effect certain segments of the playing
population (legit and/or HC players).

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
August 4, 2005 3:24:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Chris Lansdell" <lansdellicious@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:My3Ie.69569$Ph4.2164489@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> This, of course, does not mean that people with issues with the game have
> to keep playing it.

Nor does it mean they cannot complain about said problems.

> I've said before that ANY build can get to a1 Hell in SC, and if they were
> so inclined, could probably get through HC as well.

Doubtful on both accounts. There are many variants that can't make it to
Hell in SC. I believe Irene the Infirm (no stat, no skill, naked Sorc) only
made it to A2 normal.

Now if you were to say any 'reasonable' build can make it to Hell in SC I
would agree. But the list of 'reasonable' builds to do it in HC would be
much smaller.

> There are those who say the bug was left in so that people can die in NM.
> Everyone who has played long enough to want to try HC knows about this
> bug, and knows to avoid FE unique monsters. Blizzard has always wanted to
> make variety in builds viable, and also to make sure that you can't
> tightly focus on one avenue or you will fail. Could the bug have been
> toned down? Sure. Does it make HC unplayable? Apparently not, you're still
> playing it. Which reminds me, IM is no less of an instant death than FE,
> and it occurs in every difficulty. A level 99 can die in normal to it. And
> it can go off with far less warning than FE explosions. Why does nobody
> complain about that?

I have no problem with FE on the Realms or in 1.11 SP. But it was certainly
unfair for SP in 1.10 and before the server side patch on the Realms.
Coupled with the IM situation though, it makes melee builds in HC somewhat
problematic. You can certainly play them, but they are very difficult. A
little more balance between melee and ranged attackers would be better, but
I prefer ranged attackers, so I don't voice those complaints too often.

> Why does nobody complain that CE and DS are overpowered? They do the same
> damage, only the come from a character. They cover more area, and they can
> be spammed. But they don't make the game too easy?

Some people like easy game skills, while others prefer the more challenging
route. I don't think it's a bad thing to cater to both types of players.
Some people like Hammerdins, some like tri-elemental Sorcs. Viva la
differance.

>>> None of my gear is botted, dyuped or anything like
>>> thatm,
>>
>> Are you sure? Didn't you have a rune vanish the other day?
>>
> Yup. Which is why I know none of my gear is duped. Nothing I found myself
> is botted, admittedly the 3 or 4 items I've traded for could be, but the
> items I used for that trade were not.

Well if you traded for anything, you can't claim 'none of my gear is botted
or duped'. Becaus unless you saw it drop, you can't be sure.

> OK, if you want to go there: I dare say that if I had as much time to play
> as you, and enough computers to have a BO slave and an enchantress on
> every time I want to play, I could have made Guardian too. The way you
> play is NOT Hardcore. It's close to cheating. The characters I lost in HC
> were all in single-player games, with no enchants or BO.

There's nothing wrong with having 'helper' characters in the game. I use to
rail against the use of second computers as cheating, because it violated
the EULA and TOU prohibitions against multiple connections. But during one
such debate someone showed me where Blizzard specifically allows and
endorses this practice. I'm sure it's an economic over a gameplay decision,
but regardless, it's Blizzards game and they say it's OK. And that's all
that matters. Now you personally may not like someone simulating a party by
themselves, but you have no right to criticize others, nor diminish their
accomplishments, for doing so. No more than you may personally not like
Barbarians, and then criticize and disparage those who play them. Whether
it's multiple computers or playing Barbs, Blizzard has said they are part of
the game. End of story. For you to try to force your personal playing style
on people who are otherwise playing legally is nothing more than acting like
a bully.

>> Harsh, but necessary for comparitive purposes. To pass such scathing
>> comment one would think you need to be qualified.
>>
> Why? I'm not making a personal attack on anyone, or suggesting I'm better
> than anyone. I just don't understand why anyone with so many complaints is
> still playing. Would you go back to a restaurant that you had so many
> complaints about?

Well dismissing the context of my post and instead telling me to find
another game certainly is a personal attack. If you wish to dispute the
substance of my post, fine. But to basically tell me to STFU and find a new
game was certainly out of line. IMO.

>> There are two distinctly different styles of play/players. Those who
>> don't care if they die every few minutes (literally) and those who
>> enjoy the challenge of getting through without dying once, actually
>> beating the game. SC and HC. Some are good at one, some are good at
>> the other. Some have simply outgrown SC and the lack of real
>> challenges involved. Some are still getting a buzz out of finding
>> enough gold to ressurect their merc every time they die in SC, others
>> prefer a different challenge. There is nothing like the adrenaline
>> rush of barely escaping with your life in HC. I was in a situation
>> where I had to hit *seven* fat purps in quick succession with one of
>> my characters the other day before I had a chance to open a TP (must
>> hot-key it). My heart didn't stop racing for a good five minutes
>> afterwards. There is nothing like that in SC.
> No real challenges? Spoken like a true cookie cutter player. YOU have
> never challenged YOURSELF. Play an underpowered build.
> Play untwinked. Hell, play without Enchant and BO! Yes, I die a lot. I
> don't care. When was the last time you saw me play a cookie cutter? I did
> that when I was playing on East, and it got boring. You don't "outgrow"
> SC, you just change your tastes. And for the record, if I had played a
> skelliemancer in SC, I'd be a Guardian too, but I prefer to use MY brain
> and not someone else's to determine my characters.

Different strokes for different folks. However someone plays the game is
fine for them as long as they are having fun. But you certainly seem to feel
defensive about your chosen style of play. And show a penchant for slamming
others who play differently. Whether it's my complaints about the patch not
addressing any of the HC problems or Misfits chosen style. Just because you
decided that HC is not for you, don't slam those of us who like that mode.
If you like variants, great, embrace it. Don't feel defensive about it.

I would say that the vast majority of HC players would say that they have
indeed 'outgrown' SC. I tried going back, but it was just not comfortable
for me any more. So I would say 'outgrown' was a fine description.

> I really wish you didn't have to go and make things personal, man. Your
> choice method of play is different from mine, let's leave it at that. It's
> not about who's better.

'As you sew, so shall you reap'
You're the one who started with the personal, dismissive attitude. Don't be
upset when you get the same back.

> Anything new is a thrill. Seeing quintuple immunes was incredible. It's
> unfortunate, IMHO, that within seconds of the patch coming down,
> everything about it was released to the Net. I'd really like to see
> scrolls dropping ingame with hints on where to find what, or how to make
> runewords, or the like. But what am I gonna do, complain incessantly? Nah,
> I'd rather play.

I kind of wish the mystery had taken a little longer to be revealed too. But
due to the content being in the .mpq files, all the secrets were known
before the Realms went live again. At one time I thought there was talk of
secrets being revealed by scrolls dropping in game. maybe it was when the
new, unrevealed Runewords were introduced. Or maybe it was one of those
things discussed while the game was in development that was never
implemented. Oh well, another would have, should have, could have.

Isn't this forum precisely for the purpose of discussing these sorts of
things? Why are you hesitant to raise these discussion points. And why
dismiss my comments and tell me to find a new game. This forum is dead
enough. We certainly could use something to chew over.

>> Lively debate can be a good thing. Too lively can be bad. Insulting
>> even.
>
> Pots and kettles...

Indeed.

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
August 4, 2005 3:24:58 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Brian Brunner" <brian.brunner@verizon.net.prophet> wrote in message
news:5rd0f19aifhaem4ffp1i3ct4ra9gi2j09s@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:
>
>>> So I might as well just download Maphack and the bots and cut out
>>> the middleman. It sure seems that this is the way Blizzard intends
>>> for us to play.
>
> Dude: Chaos Empire. Community.

Sorry, I tried some mods and they just don't do anything for me.

Besides, if I'm going to compromise my legitimate play style to play on an
illegal private realm, I'd rather just cheat on B-net. Though now that I've
cooled down a bit, I don't think I'll be going that route either.

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 7:13:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:

>> "Brian Brunner" wrote
>> > On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:
>> >
>> >>> So I might as well just download Maphack and the bots and cut out
>> >>> the middleman. It sure seems that this is the way Blizzard intends
>> >>> for us to play.
>> >
>> > Dude: Chaos Empire. Community.
>>
>> Sorry, I tried some mods and they just don't do anything for me.

That's personal taste, and I respect yours.

>>
>> Besides, if I'm going to compromise my legitimate play style to play on an
>> illegal private realm,

Who brought up anything illegal? I didn't...
Anonymous
August 4, 2005 10:21:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Chris Lansdell wrote on Thu, 04 Aug 2005 21:36:24 GMT:
> I just asked how you can consider your
> style Hardcore when even level 1 chars are doing thousdands of damage with
> hundreds of hit points.

I'm guessing he considers his style Hardcore because his character only
gets one life. By coincidence, that is the same definition the game uses.
You are of course welcome to define "Hardcore" in whatever way you like.


--
"Ruleless 'law' will be a political weapon and control of the
judiciary will therefore be a political prize. 'Democracy' will
consist of the chaotic struggle to influence decision makers who are
not responsive to elections." -- Robert Bork
August 4, 2005 11:32:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Brian Brunner" <brian.brunner@verizon.net.prophet> wrote in message
news:0v13f11i3vrpspe02u9sk349b7s68pknh5@4ax.com...
>
> Who brought up anything illegal? I didn't...

Excuse me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say that the mod runs on a non-Bnet
server? Those have been ruled illegal in a court of law (though the case is
under appeal).
http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/doc/2004/bnetd_30sep.p...

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 12:50:28 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

~misfit~ wrote:
> Chris Lansdell wrote:

> >> I would say that the vast majority of HC players would say that they
> >> have indeed 'outgrown' SC. I tried going back, but it was just not
> >> comfortable for me any more. So I would say 'outgrown' was a fine
> >> description.
> >
> > I'd rather not argue over a choice of words, but saying "outgrown" is
> > very condescending and suggests you think you're better than SC
> > players. Like you said, different strokes.
>
> That's perception Chris. You choose to interpret "outgrown" as a personal
> put-down. That is abnormal behaviour by any standards and points to serious
> self-esteem issues.

I'd have to say it's a pretty common perception. Unless you're
refering to him taking it _personally_ as a put-down instead of being
the general put-down to all Softcore players that it was. Essentially,
you just called a heap of people babies/whiny assed little brats. I
doubt you meant to, but that's usenet for you.

> > As I said above, I never meant for you to be personally offended. Just
> > asking a question.
>
> Then you need to pay attention to how you phrase things. Hell, *I* was
> offended on Mark's behalf, hence my reply. Your post was very offensive.

You might want to pay a tad more attention also, unless you enjoy these
HC vs SC debates that often seem to spring up. ; )
Really, you didn't "outgrow" SC, you simply got addicted to HC.
Nothing wrong with prefering HC over SC. But when you go around saying
HC is better than SC, you're going to bug people. By all means, say
why YOU prefer HC over SC but the sake of bandwidth and reading times,
please refrain from saying you prefer HC over SC because it's better in
ways X, Y and Z.

: )
--
Ashen Shugar
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 1:06:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Wed, 03 Aug 2005, wrote:

>> On Wed, 03 Aug 2005, Brian Brunner wrote:
>>
>> >On Tue, 02 Aug 2005, wrote:
>> >
>> >>> However, Chaos Empire has some balance issues.
>> >
>> >Yes there are LOTS more monsters! Happy hunting!
>> >
>> >You also get a very large boost in character power.
>> >
>> >It doesn't seem unbalanced to me (HC addict here).
>> it's more that some characters got even more uber powerful, IE
>> Javazons, Sorcs in all varieties, Psychic Sins (the synergies take
>> them very high damage VERY early, by level 15 or so you could have a
>> psychic hammer doing in the 1000-2000 range.
>>
>> Robert Klemic

So tell me which class/build got left in the weak and dark dust? I have
yet to find one...
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 1:10:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Thu, 04 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:

>> "Brian Brunner" wrote
>> >
>> > Who brought up anything illegal? I didn't...
>>
>> Excuse me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say that the mod runs on a non-Bnet
>> server? Those have been ruled illegal in a court of law (though the case is
>> under appeal).
>> http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/doc/2004/bnetd_30sep.p...

(keep in mind I remember you being all frothy AND wrong about multiple
connections to bnet from one IP being a violation of UAP/TOS when bnet
really has NO problem with it, so I'll ask about this before I
"understand" you. The pdf file refuses to load on my machine atm)
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 2:42:24 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

~misfit~ wrote:
> Ashen Shugar wrote:

<snip a lot all of which is simlar to below>

> > You might want to pay a tad more attention also, unless you enjoy
> > these HC vs SC debates that often seem to spring up. ; )
>
> Ok.
>
> > Really, you didn't "outgrow" SC, you simply got addicted to HC.
> > Nothing wrong with prefering HC over SC.
>
> I understand where you're coming from. However, to me, it felt like a growth
> thing. I'd learned some stuff playing SC and was ready for the HC challenge.
> I would think that the majority of HC players played SC first and then
> progressed to HC. In a way, that can literally be seen as growth.

There is an implication by using the word "outgrown". The implication
exists due to the perception that growing = improving, etc. By
"outgrowing" SC, you imply that HC is a progression from SC that comes
when you have "grown" enough. You also say that once you play enough SC
you were then ready for the HC challenge, thereby implying that HC is
more of a challenge than SC.

I take offence to that. I only play HC. The only time I played SC was
back when you had to finish normal in SC to play HC. Tell a lie, there
was also the time when I _thought_ you had to finish normal in SC to
play HC (shows how clever some of us HC people are). There is no need
for implying anything, you should just come out and say it. HC players
are just so much better than SC players. And being someone who has
played almost the least amount of SC possible, I am better than almost
everyone. :) 

chaliban
who is quite possibly one of the worst players to have ever played the
game
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 3:01:56 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

~misfit~ wrote:
> Ashen Shugar wrote:
> > ~misfit~ wrote:
> >> Chris Lansdell wrote:
> >
> > Unless you're
> > refering to him taking it _personally_ as a put-down instead of being
> > the general put-down to all Softcore players that it was.
> > Essentially, you just called a heap of people babies/whiny assed
> > little brats. I doubt you meant to, but that's usenet for you.
>
> Wow! See what I mean about perception and then quoting it? Someone could
> read your post and think I actually said that whereas you just *feel* that I
> said that.

They wouldn't think that if they actually *read* what I wrote, but I
suppose they might if they were only skimming.

Oh, and I don't *feel* you said that, I *think* you implied it. And
people reading my post would, if they believed me, think that you said
something that could be construed as belittling SC players. They
wouldn't know what it was you wrote, just that there was something.

> It was never my intention to put down SC players. I'm one myself a lot of
> the time.
>
> >>> As I said above, I never meant for you to be personally offended.
> >>> Just asking a question.
> >>
> >> Then you need to pay attention to how you phrase things. Hell, *I*
> >> was offended on Mark's behalf, hence my reply. Your post was very
> >> offensive.
> >
> > You might want to pay a tad more attention also, unless you enjoy
> > these HC vs SC debates that often seem to spring up. ; )
>
> Ok.
>
> > Really, you didn't "outgrow" SC, you simply got addicted to HC.
> > Nothing wrong with prefering HC over SC.
>
> I understand where you're coming from. However, to me, it felt like a growth
> thing. I'd learned some stuff playing SC and was ready for the HC challenge.
> I would think that the majority of HC players played SC first and then
> progressed to HC. In a way, that can literally be seen as growth.

You're right, in a way. But that sort of assumes that HC is the way
the game is supposed to be played, and SC is just for learning. Rather
than growth, its more just a change. I'd say at least. By playing HC,
you're changing the challenge. Instead of being challenged by build
types, speed and that sort of thing, you're foremost being challenged
to stay alive. Yes, you still have those other challenges, but they
come after staying alive.

But that doesn't change that it felt like growth to you. What can be
done?

> > But when you go around
> > saying HC is better than SC, you're going to bug people.
>
> Mate, you're doing it again! Putting words into my mouth. Please quote where
> I said that HC is better than SC. I said I outgrew it, like my older brother
> outgrew clothes and then I got them. It didn't make the clothes any worse or
> "better". They simply were no longer a fit for one person but were fine for
> another. To each his own.

"Some have simply outgrown SC and the lack of real challenges involved"
"There is nothing like the adrenaline rush of barely escaping with your
life in HC"
"There is nothing like that in SC."
"and those who enjoy the challenge of getting through without dying
once, actually beating the game"

As for the clothing metaphor, it still highlights the potential
quarrel. It makes it look like you're saying SC is too small for you
now, that you're a big boy now and don't need mother holding your hand
to cross the road. Implying that people who aren't playing SC are
still babes.

Oh, and passed down clothing translates to older clothes, and newer is
generaly percieved as better. May not always be true, but it's the
general perception.

Anyway, just because you didn't write the literal words "HC is 733t, SC
is teh n00b", doesn't mean that what you did write didn't suggest it.
Part of that is context. In another thread it may not have gotten
commented on, but in this one, with the adversarial tone already set,
it got picked up on.

> > By all
> > means, say why YOU prefer HC over SC but the sake of bandwidth and
> > reading times, please refrain from saying you prefer HC over SC
> > because it's better in ways X, Y and Z.
>
> I play both and both are good for different reasons and different times. I
> won't go into the details why here. :-)

Yes, good, this isn't the place for that sort of thing. This is for
wild accusations, yelling, pointing of fingers and foot stamping!!!! ;
)

--
Ashen Shugar
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 1:51:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

I think it was "~misfit~" <misfit61nz@yahoot.co.nz> that wrote
something like...

>Ashen Shugar wrote:
>> ~misfit~ wrote:
>>> Ashen Shugar wrote:
>>>> ~misfit~ wrote:
>>>>> Chris Lansdell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Unless you're
>>>> refering to him taking it _personally_ as a put-down instead of
>>>> being the general put-down to all Softcore players that it was.
>>>> Essentially, you just called a heap of people babies/whiny assed
>>>> little brats. I doubt you meant to, but that's usenet for you.
>>>
>>> Wow! See what I mean about perception and then quoting it? Someone
>>> could read your post and think I actually said that whereas you just
>>> *feel* that I said that.
>>
>> They wouldn't think that if they actually *read* what I wrote, but I
>> suppose they might if they were only skimming.
>>
>> Oh, and I don't *feel* you said that, I *think* you implied it.
>
>This is getting rather circular ay what?

All the good discussion do. Otherwise they might end and then what'd
we do??

>> And
>> people reading my post would, if they believed me, think that you said
>> something that could be construed as belittling SC players. They
>> wouldn't know what it was you wrote, just that there was something.
>>
>>> It was never my intention to put down SC players. I'm one myself a
>>> lot of the time.
>>>
>>>>>> As I said above, I never meant for you to be personally offended.
>>>>>> Just asking a question.
>>>>>
>>>>> Then you need to pay attention to how you phrase things. Hell, *I*
>>>>> was offended on Mark's behalf, hence my reply. Your post was very
>>>>> offensive.
>>>>
>>>> You might want to pay a tad more attention also, unless you enjoy
>>>> these HC vs SC debates that often seem to spring up. ; )
>>>
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>>> Really, you didn't "outgrow" SC, you simply got addicted to HC.
>>>> Nothing wrong with prefering HC over SC.
>>>
>>> I understand where you're coming from. However, to me, it felt like
>>> a growth thing. I'd learned some stuff playing SC and was ready for
>>> the HC challenge. I would think that the majority of HC players
>>> played SC first and then progressed to HC. In a way, that can
>>> literally be seen as growth.
>>
>> You're right, in a way. But that sort of assumes that HC is the way
>> the game is supposed to be played, and SC is just for learning.
>
>Yeah, not meant like that, not at all. But I'm so damn busy trying not to
>offend anyone that it's getting confusing.

Yeah, try not to offend anyone with your posts and they take forever
to write.

>>>> But when you go around
>>>> saying HC is better than SC, you're going to bug people.
>>>
>>> Mate, you're doing it again! Putting words into my mouth. Please
>>> quote where I said that HC is better than SC. I said I outgrew it,
>>> like my older brother outgrew clothes and then I got them. It didn't
>>> make the clothes any worse or "better". They simply were no longer a
>>> fit for one person but were fine for another. To each his own.
>>
>> "Some have simply outgrown SC and the lack of real challenges
>> involved" "There is nothing like the adrenaline rush of barely
>> escaping with your life in HC"
>> "There is nothing like that in SC."
>> "and those who enjoy the challenge of getting through without dying
>> once, actually beating the game"
>
>But nowhere do I state that HC is better than SC right? Yet you said I did.
>Didn't you? I'm confused now.

This was what the "HC is 733t" bit below was about.

>> As for the clothing metaphor, it still highlights the potential
>> quarrel. It makes it look like you're saying SC is too small for you
>> now, that you're a big boy now and don't need mother holding your hand
>> to cross the road. Implying that people who aren't playing SC are
>> still babes.
>>
>> Oh, and passed down clothing translates to older clothes, and newer is
>> generaly percieved as better. May not always be true, but it's the
>> general perception.
>
>Ok, bad analogy but the only one that came to my fatigued mind. A lot going
>on in my real life at the moment, not much of it good, and not a lot of
>brain-power left over. Or something.

Ah hell, there'll always be someone that can find a way to be offended
by something, even if they have to try real hard to find it. ; )

>> Anyway, just because you didn't write the literal words "HC is 733t,
>> SC is teh n00b", doesn't mean that what you did write didn't suggest
>> it. Part of that is context. In another thread it may not have gotten
>> commented on, but in this one, with the adversarial tone already set,
>> it got picked up on.
>
>I guess. <shrug> Hate me if you want.

Nah, I got better things to hate. Like Blizzard resetting the ladder
right at the start of my ski trip. Anyone want to bet that by the
time I get back (friday night) there'll already be a level 90 on the
new ladder?


Ashen Shugar
--
The lions sing and the hills take flight.
The moon by day, and the sun by night.
Blind woman, deaf man, jackdaw fool.
Let the Lord of Chaos rule!
Anonymous
August 5, 2005 10:13:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "Ashen Shugar"
<deathsabyss@yahoo.com.au>, supreme ruler of bunnies, hopped and flopped and
said:

>> I play both and both are good for different reasons and different times. I
>> won't go into the details why here. :-)

>Yes, good, this isn't the place for that sort of thing. This is for
>wild accusations, yelling, pointing of fingers and foot stamping!!!! ;
>)

Hey now! I already have the market cornered on foot stamping. You'll have
to settle for flailing arms and askew eyebrows, tankyouberrymudge.


--
"My army shall destroy y- AHHHHHHHHH!"
August 5, 2005 11:19:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Chris Lansdell" <lansdellicious@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:hawIe.70200$Ph4.2183471@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> Of course, freedom of speech and such. But still, "love it or leave it"
> applies nonetheless.

I fail to understand why you feel this way. Makes for a pretty boring forum
if we're only allowed to post happy thoughts.

>> Some people like easy game skills, while others prefer the more
>> challenging route. I don't think it's a bad thing to cater to both
>> types of players. Some people like Hammerdins, some like
>> tri-elemental Sorcs. Viva la differance.
>>
> Some like SC, some like HC. I'm not disagreeing or arguing that, just
> saying that nobody complains about overpowered PLAYER skills...

Over powered players skills are optional, over powered monster skills are
not. If someone decides that they think Blessed Hammer is too powerful and
game unbalancing, they can choose no to use/expliot that skill. But people
who though the FE 'bug' was too game unbalancing when 1.10 was first
released (or throughout 1.10 in SP) had no choice in the matter. It could
not be ignored. So playing many character builds with this 'bug' became
problematic. With no options on the matter, many people (justifiably)
complained about it.

> I am not forcing anything on anyone. Misfit made allusions to my lack of
> ability to comment, due to never getting out of a1 normal in Hardcore, or
> at least as far as he knows. If you or he or everyone else chooses to play
> with a game full of helpers, fine. But don't go playing high and mighty
> (and you haven't Mark, this is not aimed at you) just because you have a
> Guardian.

'Helpers' are no different than playing in a party. And IMO, the game is
significantly easier playing in a party as compared to playing SP/solo.
That's the issue here.

> Compare that accomplishment with someone like Roy and his stable of
> Ironman guardians, or anyone with a less questionable method of achieving
> the feat.

Roy's Ironman Guardian was done in a party. I believe Hannes latest Ironman
effort was the first reported solo to finish NM. I have yet to hear of a
solo Ironman Guardian. Don't disparage Misfit's MP Guardian as compared to
Roy's MP Guardian. Misfit has one Guardian, Roy didn't make his Ironman
Guardian till after he had built dozens of other Guardians. If you just want
to take a shot at Misfit, then do it. But don't use the MP/SP argument to do
it, because it rings hollow.

> Don't get me wrong, reaching Guardian is impressive in and of itself, but
> the way it was achieved lessens the achievement significantly.

How many SP/solo Guardians/Mats/Pats do you have? Just out of curiousity.

> I don't want
> to get involved in a dick-waving contest, nor do I want to say "I'm better
> than you." But you must admit that having enchant and BO in game EVERY
> TIME YOU PLAY makes it a lot easier.

Oh absolutely. But so does having a Druid with OS in your party, or a
Skellimancer, or a Hammerdin, or a MetOrb Sorc, or any character with godly
gear. SP/solo and multiplayer are two very different games.

> I'm sorry you inferred my post as an attack. You have often posted your
> feelings on TPPK and other annoying bugs in the game, and about Blizzard's
> apparent reticence in fixing them. If you find them so annoying though,
> what DOES keep you coming back?

I play private games and don't have to worry about TPPK. But it would sure
be nice to be able to play public games and meet new people.

> No, I don't enjoy slamming anyone, but I won't sit down and let someone
> call me a bad player because I play SC, or because I die a lot.

Well, IMO, if you die a lot you're not a very good player. And it doesn't
matter if you play underpowered/unusual/quirky builds or not. If you play
such characters you need to use more skill, strategy and tactics to make up
for the weaknesses of your character. And players who use more skill,
strategy and tactics are better players than those who do not.

But I guess that brings up the question, who is a better player? Someone who
sticks to the basics and does them well, or someone who trys to do advanced
things and does them poorly? I'd say the advanced/poorly player, but only if
they showed progress. If they habitually played advanced/poorly, then I'd
say the former was a better player.

>> I would say that the vast majority of HC players would say that they
>> have indeed 'outgrown' SC. I tried going back, but it was just not
>> comfortable for me any more. So I would say 'outgrown' was a fine
>> description.
> I'd rather not argue over a choice of words, but saying "outgrown" is very
> condescending and suggests you think you're better than SC players. Like
> you said, different strokes.

Why is it condescending? Ten years ago I was running 2-3 marathons and 2000+
miles a year. Today I run about 500 miles a year. And due to the change I
have otugrown the jeans I wore 10 years ago. Does that mean I'm better today
than I was when I weighed 40 pounds less? I don't think so.

>> 'As you sew, so shall you reap'
>> You're the one who started with the personal, dismissive attitude.
>> Don't be upset when you get the same back.
>>
> As I said above, I never meant for you to be personally offended. Just
> asking a question.

'If you don't like it, find another game' is dismissive. How am I suppose to
feel?

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
August 5, 2005 11:37:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"~misfit~" <misfit61nz@yahoot.co.nz> wrote in message
news:42f33196$1@news.orcon.net.nz...
>
> Yeah, not meant like that, not at all. But I'm so damn busy trying not to
> offend anyone that it's getting confusing.

In today's world, it doesn't matter what you say or how innocent the
comment, someone will take offense.

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
August 5, 2005 11:37:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Brian Brunner" <brian.brunner@verizon.net.prophet> wrote in message
news:k015f1pe0r0jqnut63t8lps4vqiqmvkuq3@4ax.com...
>
> (keep in mind I remember you being all frothy AND wrong about multiple
> connections to bnet from one IP being a violation of UAP/TOS when bnet
> really has NO problem with it,

Yes, I did use to argue against the multiple connections thing. Until
someone showed me a statement from Blizzard approving the practice. And then
I changed my tune. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong and changing
my opinion.

> so I'll ask about this before I
> "understand" you. The pdf file refuses to load on my machine atm)

Try this one:
http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/
I suggest reading the legal documents and distilling the truth from there.
EFF has become a party to the lawsuit, so their statements are less than
impartial. The bottom line is that the courts have ruled in favor of
Blizzard and against Bnetd and private servers.

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:06:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "Mark" <bongofury@verizon.net>, supreme
ruler of bunnies, hopped and flopped and said:

>> Don't get me wrong, reaching Guardian is impressive in and of itself, but
>> the way it was achieved lessens the achievement significantly.

>How many SP/solo Guardians/Mats/Pats do you have? Just out of curiousity.

Jabber's HC achievements are quite irrelevant to the point at hand, and I
think you're well aware of that, and would appear to be arguing with him for
the sake of arguing (just how I view it, and I'm willing to admit that I may
have a bias there) It's no different than the way achieving a SC Patriarch
or Matriarch title in multiplayer eight is less of an achievement than doing
it entirely solo (hell, you just got through saying it yourself) It's simply
a matter of ease. Easier = less of an achievement.

Anyway, I went back to read Jabber's initial response again now, and I see
nothing personal about it, so your "you started it" argument is one I don't
agree with.

I agree that forums that don't have open discussion, both of the negative
(without becoming heated) and positive, are less interesting. And
fortunately, this thread hasn't become as heated as some threads have in the
past.


--
"My army shall destroy y- AHHHHHHHHH!"
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:06:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

~misfit~ held her like they did by the lake on Naboo, while posting
42f3f1e0$1@news.orcon.net.nz to this Interweb chatroom:

>> Anyway, I went back to read Jabber's initial response again now, and
>> I see nothing personal about it, so your "you started it" argument is
>> one I don't agree with.
>
> So where Jabber, in his initial response, said to Mark:
>
> "Enjoy the good, put up with the bad, or play something else."
>
> And then admitted in the very next line that it was "harsh but
> neccesary" it wasn't personal? Jabber himself said it was harsh!
> However, by some unknown standard he judged it neccesary. In another
> post you say you perceive me as being condescending. Doesn't the
> above seem a little school-teacher-ish to you? Holier-than-thou?
> Superior? "Harsh but neccesary" is someting you do with kids, from a
> position of (perceived) power. You call me condescending but you pass
> that off as being fine? Hammy my friend, you are indeed biased. (As
> are we all to a degree).
> Who is Jabber to say that something is "neccesary" for Mark? I know
> you play a lot with Jabber but look at the facts man. That comment
> started the whole thing. And it wasn't just Mark and I who found it
> offensive.

I had a whole long post typed up to reply to this, but then I realised I'd
outgrown this discussion.
August 6, 2005 12:06:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Stephen van Ham" <svanham@xtra.co.nz> wrote in message
news:8mg7f11h4nsnprnrjbtdgarg3k43cae884@4ax.com...
>
>>How many SP/solo Guardians/Mats/Pats do you have? Just out of curiousity.
>
> Jabber's HC achievements are quite irrelevant to the point at hand,

The question is absolutely relevalt to the discussion at hand. But the
thrust of the question isn't about HC. It's about how many characters Jabber
has completed the game with (both HC and SC) playing only solo. Because if
he hasn't played any/many purely solo characters, then his criticism of
Misfit is quite hypocritical.

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:06:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005 23:45:02 GMT, "Chris Lansdell"
<lansdellicious@gmail.com> wrote:

>~misfit~ held her like they did by the lake on Naboo, while posting
>42f3f1e0$1@news.orcon.net.nz to this Interweb chatroom:
>
>>> Anyway, I went back to read Jabber's initial response again now, and
>>> I see nothing personal about it, so your "you started it" argument is
>>> one I don't agree with.
>>
>> So where Jabber, in his initial response, said to Mark:
>>
>> "Enjoy the good, put up with the bad, or play something else."
>>
>> And then admitted in the very next line that it was "harsh but
>> neccesary" it wasn't personal? Jabber himself said it was harsh!
>> However, by some unknown standard he judged it neccesary. In another
>> post you say you perceive me as being condescending. Doesn't the
>> above seem a little school-teacher-ish to you? Holier-than-thou?
>> Superior? "Harsh but neccesary" is someting you do with kids, from a
>> position of (perceived) power. You call me condescending but you pass
>> that off as being fine? Hammy my friend, you are indeed biased. (As
>> are we all to a degree).
>> Who is Jabber to say that something is "neccesary" for Mark? I know
>> you play a lot with Jabber but look at the facts man. That comment
>> started the whole thing. And it wasn't just Mark and I who found it
>> offensive.
>
>I had a whole long post typed up to reply to this, but then I realised I'd
>outgrown this discussion.
>

<sticking my soon to be non-ladder butt in the fire>

I found all of you at some point in this thread to be offensive. I
agree with Mark and Misfit in finding offense in Jabber's original
statement.

I, being one of the SC players, find offense in Misfit's and Mark's
implication that HC is better than SC.

And last but not least, perhaps you were trying to be funny with your
final response Jabber but I find this response just as offensive as
your first statement. It sounds as though you are saying that you are
adult enough and above this argument while your opponents in this
thread are still acting like children.

Alan
P.S. when all is said and done, can't we all get along and blame
short? :-)

*Disclaimer: of course I am biased as well as I only have the
viewpoint of a SC player.

--

USWest - SonofJorEl, SonofJorEl2-7 Ladder SC

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:06:52 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Mark wrote:
> The question is absolutely relevalt to the discussion at hand. But the
> thrust of the question isn't about HC. It's about how many characters
> Jabber has completed the game with (both HC and SC) playing only
> solo. Because if he hasn't played any/many purely solo characters,
> then his criticism of Misfit is quite hypocritical.
>
> Regards-
> Mark
>
> Bongo-Fury

I consider my crowning achievement in the game to be an untwinked HC
concentrate barb I nursed through to Guardian just after the 1.10 patch and
ladder reset, all solo except for the Hell Ancients, which I sought help
with because of my experience with the beta Hell Ancients, heh. The
highlight of his career was a 3+ hour battle with Baal, precipitated by my
poor barb's mostly yellow and blue gear--poor bastard was the unluckiest
magic finder I've ever played, I think. :-)

I've played quite a few other characters of different classes/builds through
the game in HC, several solo or nearly, but none brought me as much
satisfaction as this one. I'm not sure what this proves though, other than
me being overly obsessed with this game. :-)

--
chainbreaker
August 6, 2005 12:06:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

"Alan Ladd" <OnlyALadd68@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jh58f19otj6fahdghim26t50pd3k8tfb55@4ax.com...
>
> I, being one of the SC players, find offense in Misfit's and Mark's
> implication that HC is better than SC.

Well I'm offended that you would accuse me of implying that HC is better
than SC, when I said no such thing. I reread all my posts in this thread to
be sure, because I thought I was being very careful not to pick at this old
wound. The closest I came was to say I felt most HC players would say they
have outgrown SC. No disparaging SC there, just an observation on the HC
community. The only other thing that was close was my comment that a player
who dies a lot is not a good player. And that doesn't have anything to do
with HC/SC either. Because as many pointed out in previous HC/SC jousts,
many SC players avoid dying just as much as HC. So dying a lot is not
exclusive to either HC or SC.

I demand an apology. Or I'm going to get hardcore on your ass.
;-)

> when all is said and done, can't we all get along and blame
> short? :-)

I've outgrown blaming Short, I don't find it a challenge any more.
;-)

Regards-
Mark

Bongo-Fury
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:06:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Sat, 06 Aug 2005 03:20:25 GMT, "Mark" <bongofury@verizon.net>
wrote:

>
>"Alan Ladd" <OnlyALadd68@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:jh58f19otj6fahdghim26t50pd3k8tfb55@4ax.com...
>>
>> I, being one of the SC players, find offense in Misfit's and Mark's
>> implication that HC is better than SC.
>
>Well I'm offended that you would accuse me of implying that HC is better
>than SC, when I said no such thing. I reread all my posts in this thread to
>be sure, because I thought I was being very careful not to pick at this old
>wound. The closest I came was to say I felt most HC players would say they
>have outgrown SC. No disparaging SC there, just an observation on the HC
>community. The only other thing that was close was my comment that a player
>who dies a lot is not a good player. And that doesn't have anything to do
>with HC/SC either. Because as many pointed out in previous HC/SC jousts,
>many SC players avoid dying just as much as HC. So dying a lot is not
>exclusive to either HC or SC.
>
>I demand an apology. Or I'm going to get hardcore on your ass.
>;-)
>

I apologize. I re-read the thread as well and apparently my own bias
made me see/read things that were not there. I was mistaken... for
this I truly apologize. Serves me right for sticking my ass where it
does not belong.

>> when all is said and done, can't we all get along and blame
>> short? :-)
>
>I've outgrown blaming Short, I don't find it a challenge any more.
>;-)
>

Why do I get the feeling that this whole "outgrown" thing is patch
1.11's answer to Whitedog's list :-)

Alan
--

USWest - SonofJorEl, SonofJorEl2-7 Ladder SC

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 12:17:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "~misfit~" <misfit61nz@yahoot.co.nz>,
supreme ruler of bunnies, hopped and flopped and said:

>Reading what is written and not what you want to see is a great skill.

Very much so. And it applies to all of us, you, too, misfit.

If you want my opinion (and you may not, and I can accept that if it's the
case), I've been back and read through all your comments twice, and I still
think you come off as condescending (again, I'm willing to admit I may have a
bias, but then again, I think everyone does) However, I'm not going to
respond to each part of your responses individually, as I feel that would be
splitting hairs and lengthening a sub-thread just for the sake of it.

I agree with comments made that Blizzard don't give players of hardcore mode
enough support, in terms of fixing what I *perceive* as bugs, and I believe
Jabber agrees with that, too.

Anyway, probably time for us to focus on other things.


--
"My army shall destroy y- AHHHHHHHHH!"
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 6:32:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Fri, 05 Aug 2005, "Mark" wrote:

>> "Brian Brunner" wrote
>> >
>> > (keep in mind I remember you being all frothy AND wrong about multiple
>> > connections to bnet from one IP being a violation of UAP/TOS when bnet
>> > really has NO problem with it,
>>
>> Yes, I did use to argue against the multiple connections thing. Until
>> someone showed me a statement from Blizzard approving the practice. And then
>> I changed my tune. I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong and changing
>> my opinion.

My Infinite Intellect and Omniscient understanding didn't catch this
last event taking place... I thought things just got quiet.

>> > so I'll ask about this before I
>> > "understand" you. The pdf file refuses to load on my machine atm)
>>
>> Try this one:
>> http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/
>> I suggest reading the legal documents and distilling the truth from there.
>> EFF has become a party to the lawsuit, so their statements are less than
>> impartial. The bottom line is that the courts have ruled in favor of
>> Blizzard and against Bnetd and private servers.

Update information: until the legal dust settles, CE won't fire up a
front-end or back-end server in the U.S. (His are all in Europe, which
takes a different viewpoint on whether you've bought a *license to use*,
or *a copy of* the program).

In the (Greenwich) mean time, I've noticed the cross-post idiocy has
toned down, and might eventually go away; care to experiment with CE?
Single Play mods aren't anything the suit(s) talked about...
Anonymous
August 6, 2005 7:19:27 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 17:45:15 +1200, "~misfit~"
<misfit61nz@yahoot.co.nz> wrote:

>Alan Ladd wrote:

>> *Disclaimer: of course I am biased as well as I only have the
>> viewpoint of a SC player.
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>DISCLAIMER: The following is meant as a joke and is not to be read by the
>humour-impaired.
>
>Well, as you haven't actually played the game properly, WTF would you know?
>
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>

LMAO. Actually, I did venture in to HC for a wee bit but two
successful PK attempts (both while trying to kill Mephisto) ended my
brief forage in to HC. This was on USEast and I never bothered to try
it again here in USWest with a group of players I know rather than a
pubby game.

Alan - who HAS played the game somewhat properly including falling for
the TPPK trick :-)
--

USWest - SonofJorEl, SonofJorEl2-7 Ladder SC

Where are we going and why am I in this handbasket?
Anonymous
August 8, 2005 8:00:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

While pondering glazed doughnuts Stephen van Ham <svanham@xtra.co.nz> mistakenly typed
:
: Long ago, in the world without shrimp, "~misfit~" <misfit61nz@yahoot.co.nz>,
: supreme ruler of bunnies, hopped and flopped and said:
:
:>Reading what is written and not what you want to see is a great skill.
:
: Very much so. And it applies to all of us, you, too, misfit.
:

It's applied to me also a number of times in the past. It's just so easy to
read the wrong thing into a message. That's one of the problems or written
communication between parties that don't really know each other that well.
I've had to go back and re read notes after a misunderstanding a few times
and have been pretty surprised at how I first interpreted them. In the
middle of a 'discussion' it's pretty easy to start reading more into messages
than is really there.

Most of the time it just wouldn't happen if we were all face to face.

-dave
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 2:33:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Compare that accomplishment with someone like Roy and his stable of
Ironman
guardians,

?? My.. my _what_??!!??

-- Roy L
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 2:54:33 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

royls@telus.net wrote:
> Compare that accomplishment with someone like Roy and his stable of
> Ironman
> guardians,
>
> ?? My.. my _what_??!!??

Those things you keep with the horses.
Anonymous
August 19, 2005 2:55:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.diablo (More info?)

Mark wrote:

"Roy's Ironman Guardian was done in a party."

It was my wife's team, actually. I only played one session.

"I believe Hannes latest Ironman
effort was the first reported solo to finish NM."

My wife's solo ironman hammerdin (fifth try, IIRC) died in Hell A1
(double boss pack of XF Conv afflicted) a few months back.

"I have yet to hear of a
solo Ironman Guardian."

Me too.

"Don't disparage Misfit's MP Guardian as compared to
Roy's MP Guardian. Misfit has one Guardian, Roy didn't make his Ironman

Guardian till after he had built dozens of other Guardians."

For the record: I have built quite a few guardians, but not an ironman
guardian. Yet ;^)

I would not disparage anyone who builds a guardian by actually
fighting, whether solo or MP, but to do it entirely solo is definitely
a bigger challenge, especially untwinked, and I have to admit I did not
manage it even once in 1.10. Stand-in-town "guardians" are of course
another matter, even if they are not cheating.

-- Roy L
!