It all depends on how they balance the scaling. Just as an example, Diablo 3 gave enemies 2.5x as much health when playing with four players and added 30% more loot. Assuming everyone is doing equal damage compared to solo, you should be killing enemies about 30% faster and getting 30% bonus loot, meaning you’ll get more than 50% more loot (and XP, and gold) than you would playing solo. That’s already a huge bonus, but because of the crazy power creep a decent player can probably still one-shot most enemies in T16, so you actually end up killing 4x faster and getting 30% bonus loot on top of it.
So that’s an example of being skewed really heavily with multiplayer giving over 5x as much loot, but you can balance the increased enemy HP with bonus loot to hit whatever target you want.
The Shred mechanic does make balancing a challenge because groups that use Shred are going to synergize easily. Multiple players using Armor Shred are going to stack quickly on bosses for example and make everyone do extra damage. So how do you keep it balanced for those groups without throwing off the balance for a group of four that have all focused on buffing their individual damage rather than armor/resistance shred?
I did not, as I showed quite clearly in that longer post above. I proposed taking the existing Mono modifiers (all of them) and scaling them up. I used and quoted the “enemies deal 25% more damage” modifier as my original example, and then expanded the example in the subsequent post to include Chill, health & crit chance.
That is nothing whatsoever like saying “all enemies should deal more damage to parties”.
So, with that put to bed, the fact is that going into Monos with harder enemies doesn’t automatically mean a group will go faster and have an easier time. If a system like mine is used, then each Party can decide which modifiers work for their group composition, and choose the level of difficulty they think they can handle. They can even push it, and take on modifiers they think are too hard. If they succeed, there is no way the game should say “Oh whatever, don’t care, here is the exact same loot you would have gotten solo, why did you even bother to group?”
You didn’t actually mean “more damage”. Gotcha. Don’t be surprised if you get asked what you mean when you say something that you then later deny saying.
And yet you say you want a modifier to the damage the mobs do (from 25% to 50%, 75% & 100% with 4 players) yet that you don’t want a damage modifier? What else would you call the 25/50/75/100 increase? A player debuff?
The question still stands, when is a damage modifier (increasing the putative 25% increased damage mod from a mono node) not a damage modifer?
Are you sure you’re not a politician rather than a coder?
Again, you’re being 100% dishonest. You can obviously read my entire post where I said they should modify the “Monolith Modifiers”. Yet, you insist on cherry picking just 1 part of the post to imply that I think all monos with more than 1 person should have increased damage.
Flatly dishonest of you. Period.
You and Jerle should just admit you didn’t read my entire post, or you didn’t understand it. Trying to claim I said something I never said isn’t going to fly.
So applying a party-sized modifier to the mono modifiers which results in a party-sized damage modifier if the player picks a damage modifier isn’t adding a party-sized damage modifier?
Scale all modifiers by # of players.
Scale damage modifiers only slightly (based on Jerle’s feedback)
Scale neutral modifiers more.
Scale defensive modifiers the most.
That’s called “refining an idea.” It’s a common practice in software development (not that I expect everyone on the forum to be professional software developers or understand how software design works.)
But if you think “Hey, I think for MP monsters should do more damage” is the same thing as “Here’s an idea: take the existing mono modifiers and scale them up for MP”, then you’re either dishonest or stupid.
I have one small & weird note. Every game I have played that uses Amazon Servers has been nothing but problematic for me (I word this very, very carefully). I am sure that some of these problems are also quite well documented out there on the “web”.
So, I would personally really appreciate it if your selection process for game servers was given a ton of though and that tons of focus was done on documented issues with some providers, rather than the plethora of “good time stories” that are pumped out there by schills.
I have no doubt that this is foremost in your minds, but I just thought it needed saying nonetheless
