In Vermintide 2 luck is has a big role. Luck decides how much specialist you will face, how many loot dies you will encounter, will you face a boss or not. That’s good, that is one of many things that keep player’s interest, making game hard. In case of Vermintide hard mean bigger reward, just like with tomes and grims. So why can’t we get extra reward for doing hard in-game activity that depends of luck? Killing one boss will not make any difference for the match, just like one loot die won’t help get emperor’s vault, but facing several monsters in one playthrough will become significant change for hardness of match and reward in the end.
I think the title should be ‘‘defeating monsters’’ to not (accidentally?) bait people into thinking you mean bosses.
As much as I get your point I feel with the addition of dices to actual bosses this isn’t necessary and just a challenge you have to deal with that’s built into the game. The game is about the hardships of a ragtag crew of heroes trying to offset the balance in their favour against an onslaught of vermin (and now chaos and whatever we may face in the future). The reward is getting to overcome the challenge and finishing your mission if you make it to the end. That reward should be sufficient, however that’s a matter all of it’s own with the current poor state of lootrewards in the base-game and shouldn’t be affected by regularly occuring monsters more so than actual bosses within the game.
That’s my opinion about this, at least.
In general I agree but since a max roll vault doesn’t guarantee a vet item like it does in VT1, I actually think this would be appropriate here. One loot dice for a troll/stormy/Spawn/roger kill would be a lot of fun imo and further balance the time & effort bosses can sometimes require, especially when they spawn in disadvantageous places. On an enjoyment level, this would also help to offset the annoyance they present, functionally “rebranding” them as apotential prize or source of greater glory. VT2 bosses aren’t very fun to have compared to how Roger is in VT1 IMO since they’re just so much more tedious.
I also feel like sack rats drop loot dice far less in VT2, but that could be wrong.
Kinda off-topic, but what are you referring to here? My understanding is that in a full book Catalcysm run in VT1 with both loot dice (a pretty rare thing in itself), the chance for a 7th slot red/vet item is painfully low…like 7%. Additional 6th slot reds have been reported to be around 25% so even if you get ‘that’ lucky it seems like a really really low chance to get reds.
Just making the comparison to highlight that I don’t think OP’s suggestion would be broken or unbalanced in VT2, as I figured some VT1 vets might have a knee-jerk negative feeling towards the idea since in VT1 it could basically guarantee reds, if implemented. Just saying how even if we get full books and six loot dice, guaranteeing an emp vault, it’s not game breaking cuz there’s still the rng within the chest itself and non-stop emp vaults is pretty much on par with the VT1 red chances, so it would help balance loot more effectively.
I guess the comparison is less relevant than intended. Just wanted to lend my support to the idea and point out it certainly wouldn’t break the game and I don’t see any real negatives to it.
All that said, I don’t think highly of a pure RNG approach to loot anyways. Any system where a brand new player can luck into a red that a veteran has been trying to find for 1000 hours is broken/bad.
Edit: To clarify, I meant for the comparison to be in regards to the guaranteed max outcome, not the roll itself (cuz loot dice in vt1 aren’t a fixed buff, just a slightly better chance than normal dice). Ie. If something in VT1 was implemented that guaranteed you sometimes got the top slot. Sorry for not stating that more clearly.
Gotcha, thanks for the clarification.
I don’t see any issues with this except for Twitch Mode basically being “farm mode” unless they also excluded monsters from dropping dice in that mode (or setting a hard cap). Monsters are just part of the game to me though…like a thick horde or a double special. I don’t expect to be rewarded regardless of if they take 5 seconds for a huntsman to kill or 2 minutes for someone else.
As for RNG: extreme RNG totally sucks (especially when you bust ass, perform at your best, and still have a 7% chance to get a red or whatever), but the fact that anyone can get a hat doesn’t bug me so much. I’m hopeful the new quest system, like the Bounty Board, will largely fix red/cosmetic loot by giving us definite goals we can work towards.
That’s fair, I hadn’t consisted twitch mode forced spawns.
Hats don’t bug me too much compared to weapons but yeah, hopefully the upcoming changes balance things out like you’re saying. Has the potential to fix a lot of the glaring endgame issues.
Dunno about that one… can’t say I’ve noticed full-on guaranteed vet items in VT1 and played that one plenty on max difficulty. I personally would despise guaranteed vet items in singular runs which is why I’d be more of an advocate for some badluck protection.
As for sack-rats, the droprates seem just fine, with the amount of chests (and hidden tucked away chests) getting lootdices hasn’t generally been an issue and I’ve frequently encountered both, and in plenty of cases gotten them both from a sackrat as well. In general sackrats seem more frequent spawns than VT1 from my experience, with the only issue being the fact that they sometimes startle from a mile away. They can take some looking-for to find however as sometimes they like to lounge in areas players don’t always come past.
That’s what I meant, sorry, I didn’t stayed it very clearly. Meant that since it’s not guaranteeing a red it’s not a big deal imo. Ie.even if we get an emp vault every time, our odds are on par with full book cata so meh.
Ahh, I see, and yea - still bothers me that loot doesn’t listen to the amount of books as much but I suppose the anti-book crowd has something to do with that xD. I hope quests come soon to give people a happy in-between medium because Deeds most certainly hasn’t done that.