Diablo 4 Builds
Build Planner
Map
Diablo 2 Guides
Forums
Support PureDiablo
Vessel of Hatred

1.00 News, Info and Gossip

Does anyone have the modified dll file for 1.00 to allow for multiple instances? I'm afraid the original link in the forum sticky no longer works.
 
Stickies are in the process of being updated. I've uploaded singling for 1.00 here. It also has a fix for windowed mode to keep it from auto-minimizing and speeds up TCP loading times, which should make muling/rushing much less of a hassle.
 
[not 1.00 specific, just classic in general]

man, multi-shot lightning enchanted bosses (MLEB or MSLEB depending on your community/parlance back in the day) are very often just instant kill monsters. lightning enchanted in general is just very very dangerous. is this why they allowed the affix for 40+ lightning res on armor/helms/belts? instead of balancing the monsters, just make lightning res more easy to come by? i believe the prefix is "amber".
 
Actually the affix pool is more similar to Diablo I in many ways. Just like it, single resists go up to 50% (49 with bug). This was likely reduced in the Expansion because of the new items and charms, and they wanted to balance out how easy it would be to get max resists (consider the -100 penalty also).
 
I was referring to the ability of the "amber" prefix to spawn on armor, helms, and belts while the other 31-49 single resist affixes don't:

Code: 
Ruby       Fire Resist        31-50% Wands, Staves, Boots, Rings, Amulets
Sapphire   Cold Resist        31-50% Wands, Staves, Bows, Boots, Rings, Amulets
Amber      Lightning Resist   31-50% Armor, Staves, Wands, Bows, Boots, Belts, Rings, Amulets
Emerald    Poison Resist      31-50% Scepters, Rings, Amulets
(http://web.archive.org/web/20000818010139/http://www.battle.net:80/diablo2/items/pre.shtml)

I also didn't realise that the 31-49 poison resist was available on the fewest items compared to the others.
 
I've decided to start fresh again on 1.00 after getting bored with 1.05. going to archive the 1.05 saves and set aside.

I think I want to do a 1.00 let's play or long-play. Starting with a bloodgolemancer as it's my favorite build. Stay tuned.
 
Hello everybody!

After 8 years searching for the grail in Patch 1.13c only Tyraels is missing. But I´m getting somewhat tired of spending thousands of hours in the Ancient Tunnels with my Level 97 HC-sorc @ /players 1. I think I´m going to put my whole Diablo 2-Installation to rest, park it on my NAS and start somethimg new. Timetravelling like many of you guys do I´d like to try.

I would like to start with Patch 1.00 and obviously I would like to start with HC ;-) That´s what I did the last ten years and I don´t want to miss the thrill of being toasted in the blink of an eye.

So, the only problem is: when you start with Patch 1.00 there´s no chance to start with HC because you have to beat Diablo in SC/Normal Difficulty before you get the chance to roll over to the darker side ...

But that´s a real pain for me so here´s what I´d like to ask: is it allowed that somebody, who has already beaten Diablo on Normal Difficulty, send me a naked 1.00-HC character named something like "HC_Start"?

I would really appreciate that. If it´s not allowed then it´s ok. But if yes I´d be glad if someone send me a character via email that I could give via PN.

(Excuse my bad english, I´m not a native speaker.)

Regards, Tom
 
I suggest you start in SC. 1.00 Classic is one of the most difficult patches I have played, you may want to get the feel of it first.

Please have a read of the rules - An intro thread would be nice too :)
 
maxicek said:
I suggest you start in SC. 1.00 Classic is one of the most difficult patches I have played, you may want to get the feel of it first.

Please have a read of the rules - An intro thread would be nice too :)
Click to expand...

SC doesn´t feel right for me ...
... I might/probably will fail with the first character. But that´s the game. I am the hero, every decision should make sense and be thought over. At the end of every run I like watching my character in the startscreen. Not dead! ;)

I will open an intro thread when I´m ready with my installation of Diablo 2. At the moment I´m struggling with Trenshadows Switcher. It doesn´t start because some .dll is missing. I installed a clean 1.12 Version from my Diablo III Collector´s Edition USB-Stick ...
 
My party of 8 is lvling in hell RoF now, got the barb at 78, the sorc at 67 and the mules/chars to forward to 1.07 etc at 56. I've been picking up amethysts and rubies apart from the skulls and I believe that by the time I'm done I'll have a nice collection to forward to 1.14. I've been leaving my skulls at flawless right now and will try to shrine them up to perfect.
Gambled 5 sojs so far, trying to get all of my sorcs to be forwarded 2, and a good set of starter rares. Have found a couple of nice rares so far, but sadly they all miss one stat to make them crazy good, or they have all the right stats but on the low end. Damn you RNG!
 
So, I made it to act 4 normal with my bloodomancer. I saw a hilarious unique monster name in act 3: View attachment 9491


Also, if you didn't find me on twitter (@harddorothy), long ago I posted this wonderful edit of a Diablo II screenshot back when I was doing my initial exploration of 1.00:

View attachment 9490
 
Barl said:
a bit off topic here but, if you're as interested in classic diablo II as i am, give this forum archive a look: http://www.network54.com/Forum/31101

it covers from september 1999 to april 2001, so pre-release to a bit before the expansion's release in 2001. many of the classic bugs we are aware of now (n-1, the 4x monster AR, etc) are discussed there and it's super interesting to me. jarulf is even present here and he's one of the first people i can identify as being interested in and able to gather technical info about the game.

the only problem is, there is no search function. i tried to make an archive with a script but it took more than 24 hours and the script crashed. is there anyone here who could archive, analyze, sort, and make a working sort function for these forums? i feel like it's important to the game's history.
Click to expand...

Damnit.. it seems they've recently changed the forum to use the Tapatalk format, which has effectively removed a big portion of the information, and made searching even harder. Many, many replies were (partly) posted as Titles, but those titles were deleted with the change, destroying a lot of good information in the process. :(

I started pre-LOD only a few weeks ago, and since I found your post with a link to that forum, I've been thoroughly enjoying the amount of information that is not yet "polluted" by all the post-Classic info.

The wayback machine is way slow, and the majority of the site is broken via it.
Quite bummed out. I don't suppose you've ripped the entire forum? ^^
 
Fruit said:
Damnit.. it seems they've recently changed the forum to use the Tapatalk format, which has effectively removed a big portion of the information, and made searching even harder. Many, many replies were (partly) posted as Titles, but those titles were deleted with the change, destroying a lot of good information in the process. :(

I started pre-LOD only a few weeks ago, and since I found your post with a link to that forum, I've been thoroughly enjoying the amount of information that is not yet "polluted" by all the post-Classic info.

The wayback machine is way slow, and the majority of the site is broken via it.
Quite bummed out. I don't suppose you've ripped the entire forum? ^^
Click to expand...

oh crap!!

no, i completely forgot about that. frick!! i didn't think the archive would be altered anytime soon since it's been the same since 2001... lol. what a horrible stroke of luck.

well, i do have a very partial archive somewhere, but i'll have to find it.

all the more reason for someone to please find a way to archive this now! please
 
Well it seems all the information is still intact, but it is indeed harder to search. I backed up some of the older pages that had information about the battle.net beta, but I've considered writing a script to dump the whole forum in .MHTML format so it can be accessed anytime. It's a shame they updated that. It was a legacy forum from 1997-20001, no reason to change it now.
 
perhaps not all information is literally deleted, but not all of it is accessible any longer. replies were done as Title + Post, but those titles are not showing any longer. if you view a user's post history, for some reason there the titles will show up, but many posts were not made with logged-in accounts, and thus you can't view the titles of their posts. it's a mess now :/

when i saw the search field at the top, i figured that must be the reason for the change. Nope. it's not working.
why would they bother with this change 17 years after the forum was closed? ;D
 
Log in to Reply / Create Site Account or log in with BattleNet
 Discord
 Twitch
 GoogleGoogle
PurePremium
Remove ads & support the site - Get PurePremium
Top Bottom
Back
Estimated market value
Low
High