Maybe Blizzard knows what's best for us? [Archive]

Kiroptus

23-02-2009, 02:44

Because, as much as we love Diablo 2, if we look objectively on it nowdays and compare it to the game design/art direction of today's games, it falls short and very badly.

D2 is a balance mess, has a drab art-direction, and lacks overall good thought into its design. We love it because its fun and addiction but if you look close to it, you will see the various flaws it has. Of all games designed by Blizzard I always thought that Diablo 2 was the worst game in terms of actual professional game design.

It works because the formula is great and its very rare nowdays. Its quick to get in, can be rewarding in short plays or long plays, doesnt feel like a boring job like MMOs, etc... The Diablo 2 formula is great but the game has/had way too many flaws and this community embraced its flaws as if it were an intended brilliance.

Which is why blizzard must not listen to us, maybe just a little, but overall this community just take the flaws that makes Diablo 2 easier for them and say its great! I remember the outcries when the Cow Level was nerfed (which made the game ridiculous, it was pathetic that a lv 1 character could enter hell cow level and go to lv 80 in a matter of 1-2 hours). When guided arrow ridiculous piercing was nerfed, when 1.10 made hell actually difficult, etc...

And nowdays, people still see D2's flaws as brilliance saying how its great to have rushing, how cool enigma is, how its fun to enter a instance and get instakilled by a horde of enemies that is just waiting right on the stairs, how fun it is to spam potions all the time, how TP is great and "doesnt" spoil boss fights etc... this community has so far defended every single design flaw in D2, if it was for them, Diablo 3 would have infinite TPs at any time, potion spam, teleport would be given to everyone again, etc...

Again, in D2, its formula is where it hooks us, where it addict us, that is where it lies the brilliance of the series. The GAME D2 has many flaws that must be looked at objeticvely and fixed by a proper game designer and not anyone from the community who would just want to make their life easier, if it was for the community, 90% of the games would still be cowlvl runs and the other 10% would be hell rushes to the cowlevel.

And to me, Diablo 3 is on good hands, so far all the changes to fix big flaws on D2 are perfect, like having seperated loot, no more endless potion spam, the option to respec to make rushing not as necessary as the community keep saying, etc...

D3 must be based around the brilliant diablo formula and not on the flawed game that we all love to play because the formula is so good that we can ignore its flaws.

starmelt

23-02-2009, 02:54

I wholeheartedly agree. I actually quit Diablo 2 (when D3 was announced),after playing it since release, because I was afraid I would grow sick of the concept before the actual D3-release.
Change is better then no change. If you've played one Zelda-game, youve played them all. If you've played Diablo 2, you havent really played Diablo.

What am I saying? This makes little sense. I'm tired, thats for sure.

Bladewind

23-02-2009, 03:12

Flawed gameplay =/= manual stats.

My biggest pet peave.

Kiroptus

23-02-2009, 03:16

I couldnt careless about the stats, its just boring number values, the interesting effects of the new skill rune system more than make up for it.

Plus everyone would always value Vitality anyway.

AtomicJ

23-02-2009, 03:22

I actually quit Diablo 2 (when D3 was announced),after playing it since release, because I was afraid I would grow sick of the concept before the actual D3-release.

I quit playing D2 because after staring at those beautiful D3 vids, D2 just looked terrible and couldn't satisfy me anymore. :/

starmelt

23-02-2009, 03:23

And Energy was virtually useless. I'm glad stats are dead and burried.

Bladewind

23-02-2009, 03:33

I couldnt careless about the stats, its just boring number values, the interesting effects of the new skill rune system more than make up for it.

Plus everyone would always value Vitality anyway.

I LOVE number crunching. Besides Vita is for those who cannot play carefully in Softcore. Go pure strength and pure dex. :thumbup: Also with the new Willpower (str and dex no longer affects item reqs), you will need more Willpower if you want your spells to pack extreme damage aka 1 hit to 2 hit kills.

No such thing as overkill when trying to kill something.

P.S. Energy no longer exist, but Willpower does.

Grug

23-02-2009, 03:52

A few comments.

I had the same effect with Brawl, mostly. I still play Multiplayer now and then, but it's really lost its magic. The reason was that the older games had an air of Mystery about them. You were always looking for new secrets or trophies. With Brawl they told you everything you could get before even playing it. As soon as it hit Japan, hackers pored through the code and revealed everything.

Starmelt - You know, Jay Wilson has a quote. "Change is not better. Better is Better." But yeah, D2 had a lot of problems.

Manual Stats kind of sucked. It was the constant worry that I might gimp my character that turned me off D2 the most. The automatic stats gives everyone a baseline, and then the opportunity to grow from there. Haters should know that there is going to be a MUCH greater focus on Stats from items.

Bladewind

23-02-2009, 05:30

What if I want to gimp my char on purpose ? ;)
Pure dex, pure strength, pure willpower etc All these are gimped builds.

chenghao

23-02-2009, 05:34

What made D2 fun ?
for me , its the simplicity to pick up , the impossibility to perfect it , then the items that might be interesting , the interesting characters initially , the ladder later on. the trading in the game , the PK builds later on

What will make D3 fun ?
PK is taken out so part of the fun is lost

Bladewind

23-02-2009, 05:50

Maybe the lame WoW-eqsue Arenas might make an appearance. *shrug

Silverfang

23-02-2009, 09:34

I don't think they know "what's good for us". But Blizzard has proven in the past that they envy fun before anything else, so I'm in no doubt that D3 will be maximised in fun, though not as open as the (flawed for todays measure) D2-System. As I review the material they let out already I kinda get the impression that they are making D3 exactly according to my wishes, although not in quite the form I counted on. I just hope they'll take their new ideas and concepts to full extent. (I would really like to see the monsters dropping runes to previously use them for their own skills, for example.)

NASE

23-02-2009, 09:47

Plus everyone would always value Vitality anyway.

And Energy was virtually useless. I'm glad stats are dead and burried.

Manual Stats kind of sucked. It was the constant worry that I might gimp my character that turned me off D2 the most. The automatic stats gives everyone a baseline, and then the opportunity to grow from there. Haters should know that there is going to be a MUCH greater focus on Stats from items.

It makes me said that after 5 thread of jamming about stats, people still fail to adopt a balanced view about stats.

AxlStrife

23-02-2009, 10:07

It makes me said that after 5 thread of jamming about stats, people still fail to adopt a balanced view about stats.

Troll food. *throws the slop*

Psyco

23-02-2009, 10:43

stat were just badly implented they should have switched for stat that resemble asian rpg(which btw now work like that,a bit late O_o),giving freedom to people allow them to make error and learn and get smarter,and we kind of lack intelligent gamer nowaday imo

but im pretty sure this wont be as bad as most people imagine now that armor have no stat req...but still,it is dumbed down

when you look at it both system can work,they chose imo the easy mode,lets just hope they compensate

and you can still gimp your skill in D2 also so...yeah that was kind of useless

also we didint see the D3 respec system so far

and they will make it work,D2 was a huge dissapointment at first for a tons of player that played the earliess version of it,horribly bugged and it sucked mad power from a good comp and some balance were just horrible...play the early necro trust me he was useless in hell difficulty

but they patched alots and those that followed it since the beginning know how crappy it was at first and how many stuff that had to be patched just because of bad programing from their part and now it been 8 year and still being played

i hated Warcraft 3 and basicly just play it because of DoTa and alots of people does the same compared to SC2 that keep everything SC is about and only "add" more in the game instead of changing so you see how they learned that too much change can hinder a game badly

Turnip

23-02-2009, 11:54

Ya warcraft 3 is an example of changing things for the worse rather than for the better, as much as you guys think diablo 2 had flaws it didnt. Class balance being gimped left room for optimization and unique builds, no respects added replayability, monsters that insta-kill added tension, stats added diversification, pking added to community. Nothing is really bad, just like starcraft 2 not having autocast and heroes isnt a bad thing; it ends up detracting more than helping.

So naysaying people who dislike the art style or different aspects is sort of futile as its all really personal preference. Though keeping true to the original should be expected..

Bladewind

23-02-2009, 11:56

In Classic there are only Barbs and Sorcs. ;f

Knight_Wolf

23-02-2009, 18:24

Ya warcraft 3 is an example of changing things for the worse rather than for the better

How is that .. i hope you aren't comparing Warcraft 3 to SC cause they are different franchises.

If anything .. Warcraft 3 is an insanely vast improvement in every aspect over WC2.

as much as you guys think diablo 2 had flaws it didnt.
Completely disagree.

Class balance being gimped left room for optimization and unique builds
Rather for broken builds and broken PvP

no respects added replayability
Rather added way too much grinding and turned the game into Baal/Cow running fests.

monsters that insta-kill added tension
Rather added frustration and annoyance.

stats added diversification
Rather added more broken builds and hollow customization

pking added to community.
Added grieving, annoyance, and a bunch of kids with e-peen problems

Nothing is really bad, just like starcraft 2 not having autocast and heroes isnt a bad thing
Not having autocast or heroes in SC didn't break the game, grief anyone or ruin its balance .. that's a completely different matter.

So naysaying people who dislike the art style or different aspects is sort of futile as its all really personal preference.
Partially true ... yes personal preferences do play a role ... but denying that D3 has a vastly improved art quality and art direction is just absurd (even if you don't like it).

Though keeping true to the original should be expected..

Keeping true to the original mindlessly (by denying the obvious flaws in the previous Diablo) will only produce deficient D2 mutated clones candy coated with 3D graphics.

BrotherRatcliff

23-02-2009, 20:15

How is that .. i hope you aren't comparing Warcraft 3 to SC cause they are different franchises.

If anything .. Warcraft 3 is an insanely vast improvement in every aspect over WC2.

What is wrong with comparing WC3 and SC? They are both strategy games, they even share "craft" in the name so they are obviously intended to be similar. I think he's comparing WC2->WC3 VS SC->SC2 though, not starcraft and WC3 directly.

I think a ton of the ideas in WC3 were good but in practice it didn't really work out. I'm going by my own experiences and ALL of my friends here most of whom have played every blizzard game a lot. I loved WC2, played the campaigns over and over again, bought the battle.net edition and played the heck out of that. I've actually been trying to find a WC2 game again since blizzard stopped selling it.

Compare that to WC3... I/my friends played it but most didn't even bother to finish the single player modes. Other than DotA nobody I know plays WC3 any more. I have a copy sitting around and don't even keep installed.

I'm not sure how WC3 is "an insanely vast improvement in every aspect over WC2". The graphics were better but the game just wasn't as fun, and that is the whole point isn't it?

Rather for broken builds and broken PvP

What is broken about PvP in d2? Every class can be built to succesfully kill every other class. Some classes have strengths and weaknesses but if they didn't what would be the point of multiple classes? I'm really curious what your argument is here. In certain patches some classes were way over-powered, I could understand thinking WW lance barbs were the best if the last time you played was .07, but things are fairly well balenced now if you know the right builds. You wouldn't want a game in which any way you put in your skills worked out just as well because there would be no skill/learning in character development.

Rather added way too much grinding and turned the game into Baal/Cow running fests.

A lack of re-specs only added a lot of grinding if you didn't think out your chrs before you built them... Or if you really cared about having a "perfect" chr. Besides with uber leveling it goes so fast anyway it's not really grinding. I guess my thoghts could be changed by the fact that I mostly played HC so everybody pretty much died before they would have wanted to re-spec anyway.

What it did add though was a lot more care for your chrs. I think re-specs would really make balancing a lot harder as well. The whole model of having better skills not available till later levels doesn't make sense with re-specs. You can just pump low level skills then when you hit high level re-spec into the better skills.

Rather added frustration and annoyance.

Well first off there aren't really any instant kill monsters any more. MSLE's are gone, the really bad bosses like original heph/de sies have been nerfed. As somebody who played the game when those threats where there as well as now when they are gone I have to say I miss them. There really isn't any PvM challenge to this game anymore unless you're playing untwinked. Would it have been better if all monsters were a bit harder rather than having seas of easies and an occasional killer? Probably, but it certainly did add tension and exitement in my book.

Rather added more broken builds and hollow customization

Stat's is interesting. The only time that stats really did anything is in the example of an ES sorc going pure energy. Other than that it was pretty much str for equip, dex for equip/max block, rest vit, none energy. While I don't think they added diversification they did add another way to balence your chr. You got to play with gear options based on how much str/dex they gave so you could put more into vit and had to make choices on gear depending on reqs. That did add some diversity when combined with items because with 3 given chrs of the same "build" you could have 1 low str with a set of lower defense items, 1 high str with higher defense and/or damage but lower life, and 1 max block setup with lower life/defense but higher block/ar all due to stats.

Added grieving, annoyance, and a bunch of kids with e-peen problems

This depends greatly on how you define PK. On hardcore PK meant killing people who didn't want to fight, 99% of the time via the use of hacks. If that is the PK you're refering to than I agree. However with the later changes to hostiling now allowing TP useage and a timer for WP usage those problems were mostly fixed if it werent' for the hacks. If the hacking were fixed all that really was needed was the ability to vote and kick somebody out of your game.

Now if by PK you mean any player vs player action as it is sometimes refered to in softcore than I very much disagree. On todays battle.net dueling is what holds the realms together. That really is the "point" of the game for many players. If you didn't like it that's fine but that's what private games with your friends are for. For many dueling IS the game, without it you have nothing.

Not having autocast or heroes in SC didn't break the game, grief anyone or ruin its balance .. that's a completely different matter.

Um... exactly. That's what he was saying that those additional features didn't ruin starcraft, and they didn't help warcraft 3 be any good.

Partially true ... yes personal preferences do play a role ... but denying that D3 has a vastly improved art quality and art direction is just absurd (even if you don't like it).

Saying that D3 doesn't have vastly improved art quality is absurd, but saying it doesn't have vastly improved are direction is a matter of personal preference. Personally I think the new game looks amazing and I don't understand what people complaints are, but it IS personal preference. I also still think D2 looks good compared to lots of "3d" game with bad modeling/texturing. I think just now they are getting to the point where they can make a 3d game feel as real as good old fashioned sprites.

Keeping true to the original mindlessly (by denying the obvious flaws in the previous Diablo) will only produce deficient D2 mutated clones candy coated with 3D graphics.

I don't think anybody is advocating doing anything "mindlessly". The question is what are "obvious" flaws and what aren't? I think we're more worried about "midlessly" thinking things were flaws and changing them without really looking at the impact those "flaws" had on the game.

Personally, I will miss stat customization and the tetris style inventory. Everything else looks pretty good to me. Some things like the new rune system and fury I am super pumped about. Other things like the loss of item stat reqs and the new tier based skill trees I will have to wait and see.

Mad Mantis

23-02-2009, 20:57

I'm pretty sure Visom didn't envision this thread as yet another thread on the auto-stats thing. So please keep that discussion in the appropriate threads.

visom

23-02-2009, 21:02

Yeah I didn't envision that either *hides crystal ball*

But my point is, D2 is no doubt overplayed and very repetitive so it'd be impractical to make D3 very similar otherwise it's just like repeating our past experiences with D2 which would be a turn off to soon to be dedicated players.

Mad Mantis

23-02-2009, 21:14

There is a difference between similar and a carbon copy. Wanting it to be similar doesn't mean that you want the game to be D2.1. Both sides tend to let go of that concept when discussing things.

I'd like D3 to be similar to D2. Do I want to see the flaws of D2 fixed? Yes, I do. Do I want them to expand and improve upon the gameplay? Yes, I do. Do I want to see new mechanics added? As long as they fit into the Diablo world and don't ruin the gameplay, I'm all for it. Does Blizzard really know what is best for us? Maybe they do, maybe they don't. That is something only time can tell.

Right now all we can do is judge the information and critique what we hear. Maybe we shed some light on something Blizz didn't think of, maybe we are totally barking up the wrong tree. That is the problem when you don't have all the information, you can never be sure.

visom

23-02-2009, 21:52

ThomasJ

23-02-2009, 23:26

Well Diablo 3 needed to look and play better than the previous games. This isn't 2000 anymore. So far Diablo 3 is heading in the right direction.

Kuraruku

23-02-2009, 23:31

It is time for something new D2 has had its day and then some. Yes it is time for change and people don't like change its in our nature to want things to stay the same. For me though I enjoyed D2 until I had my fill and now D3 is making me crave something new. I've though about returning to D2 until the release of D3, but I just remind myself of what needs to be change in D2 and sigh a very painful sigh.

However, I don't want D2.1 I want a new game that I can get into I want the heaven and hell system that was talked about I want to base my character on gear instead of states I want my plate melee wiz, my cloth shout barb, I want to have the game more versatile than D2 that can hold my attention for another 6-8 years...

and D2.1 or whatever isn't going to give me that or millions of others that as well.

phool

23-02-2009, 23:41

D2's longterm pull is a combination of a very addictive, detailed item system and unusually fast pacing. Its Simplicity and low system requirements also can't be overstated. There's a lot of room for improvement though.

The community as a whole never does know what's best for them*, but Blizzard aren't going to be perfect across the board either.

edit: *except, perhaps, in cases where their immunity to the fallacy of already sunk costs is beneficial.

Doctor Salvador

24-02-2009, 01:42

I'm gonna go ahead and assume that Blizzard is pretty sure what's good for us, considering that they make games for a living, and that they are gamers themselves. Also, the biggest thing that ALL of us, including the infallible me, sometimes forget is that Blizzard has to look at everyone's opinion when they sneak a peak at message boards and forums. So when they go against your opinion or don't do what you want them to do, maybe it's because lots of other players want the opposite to happen. Methinks we're in good hands :thumbup:

Srikandi

24-02-2009, 03:18

We aren't gonna know whether we like the changes in D3 until we've played the game.

Some things that sound good when considered in isolation on a feature list turn out to be less fun in gameplay, and some things that sound bad turn out to be awesome... because a real game is a system where all the features interact with all the other features. You really can't evaluate a part without evaluating the whole. [Insert obligatory remark about blind men and elephants]

Having said that, let me go out on a limb and make a prediction:

When D3 comes out and we've all played it... some of us will think it's a better game, and some won't ;)

Because a game is an aesthetic product, and just as with movies and books and music, people have different opinions! Yay!

Bladewind

24-02-2009, 03:37

AxlStrife

24-02-2009, 07:38

Wow. Am I drunk, or can anyone else see the giant troll in the room?

Which one?

@Bladewing: You know what they say about opinions... or at least I hope so. Considering Blizzard's been working on the game for over 4 years now, it's safe to assume they tested out the manual stat system with the current item/skill set. I'ma put my hat on Blizzard's side.

Kiroptus

24-02-2009, 08:17

Knight Wolf said what I wanted to say, and summing up: That is the problem with this community, almost everyone here thinks that Diablo2's flaws are the brilliance of it.

Its not, if you people want D3 to continue with the flaws of D2, I am quite sure you hate Diablo 3 as Blizzard now has a much more competent design mentality than the team which made Diablo2 (Bill Roper and his friends, which showed very amateurish design mistakes on their debut game, Hellgate London) expect D3 to be more sane and balanced than the messy Diablo 2.

For me, what was great about Diablo 2 is the quick-to-get-into action, that hope of finding good items and the thrill of actually accomplishing it, as well creating cool builds and watching things die quickly in the screen. As long as we have that, its Diablo to me. Whatever happens to less general aspects of the series like PK, Stats, Potions, etc... just doesnt concerns me because I love the diablo formula and so very few games have it nowdays.

Now everyone just wants to try to take a piece of the WoW pie by creating lots of crappy MMOs in the market, hopefully D3 can renew the ARPG genre and more people can remember it.

Now back to "Maybe Blizzard knows what's best for us?". The thing is that they certainly know it better than ourselves, so its up to them and not us, because this community defended exploits, imbalances and design flaws way too much, certainly we should leave it to professional game designers and not the players.

stillman

24-02-2009, 10:16

Ya warcraft 3 is an example of changing things for the worse rather than for the better, as much as you guys think diablo 2 had flaws it didnt. ..

Gosh, where to begin...Did you read what visom wrote?

You can't even use fend because of the problem with your passives going off which interupts fend, or w/e the issue is. The same might be true of jab, not sure, but fend is broken.

Inferno's synergy with warmth doesn't work either so you get way less damage than you should, so no one uses that either.

The lying chracter screen.

The ESLE glitch or w/e it is.

So many others.

IMO, all Blizard has to do is realize this time around that millions of people are going to be playing d3 so they better get it right (which they will by the looks of it). There is just no excuse now. In d1, they had no idea how successful it would become so it's understandable that the rogue's shots miss all the time for diagnal shots and other problems. For d2, I guess Blizzard did not anticipate so many cheaters.

For d3, by now, Blizzard surely must know they need to edit the hell out of it before release. Please Blizzard, edit the game this time! When you've got the finished product in the box ready for stores, rip it out of the box and have 200 staff members play it for 6 months editing it before you release it.

Mad Mantis

24-02-2009, 18:19

Y I guess I'll call them hardcore/dedicated players usually disapprove of the new changes and gives me the impression that they'd rather have D3 be an exact replica of D2 only with improved graphics and new quest/characters.

That is where the debate usually takes a turn for the worse. People just assume one thing and before you know it things are forced in an black and white situation. Either you love all the changes and think D3 will be the greatest thing since the invention of modern toilet facilities, or you hate D3 and want a carbon copy of D2.

That's what is driving me insane in most of these discussions. Some people seem to feel the need to make this complete distinction. There can be legitimate reasons why someone wouldn't like a certain change and not just because they oppose all change and are radicals who feel that anything other than a carbon copy is flawed. Hell, even the names they are given seem to indicate that they must be obviously wrong. Whiners, *****ers, that very vocal minority that must be wrong, even you decided upon hardcore/dedicated players after first thinking of something else.

BrotherRatcliff

24-02-2009, 20:15

I agree there aren't really 2 separate camps of people here. I for one am/was a "hardcore/dedicated" player of d2 but I still LOVE many of the changes going into D3. I also don't think that D2 was a flawed game, if it was why is it still the Arpg standard? If D2 had so many mistakes in it why hasn't anybody else done it better?

I think the rune system, the new graphics, the new classes, the new stats (not auto stats but the new stats themselves), the destructable environment, the removal of potions, refocusing balance on multiple skills rather than 1 power skill and fury all all amazingly brilliant changes to this game. That doesn't mean I like everything they are doing though, auto-stats, re-specs and the 1 size fits all inventory are good examples of things I don't like.

On the D2 flaws thing I don't think we are talking about bugs here. Obviously the stupid stuff like broken fend, fire traps doing half damage, ebugging items, duping, double stacking of sorc masteries etc are bugs and should have been fixed. A bug and a flaw are different things though. D2 was full of bugs/exploits but the things that make the game what it is were all very well done.

As for the question of "does blizzard know what's best for us" I don't know. 5 years ago I would have said yes without question. I love warcraft, starcraft, diablo, warcraft 2 and diablo 2 like no other games I've played. However, warcraft 3 left me cold and I haven't really played WoW. So I don't know if blizzard's D3 team knows best for us or not.

Knight_Wolf

24-02-2009, 20:47

To all the manual stat haters.

Stop thinking stats are useless like D2. They are useful in D3. Especially Knight_Wolf who loves the phrase "stop thinking about D2, its D3 !!".

Stats in D3 are ALOT more powerful than they are in D2. That is why manual stats HAS to stay. While items no longer have requirements, the simple strength stat now has at least THREE functions for it.

Willpower is no longer some crappy Energy stat. It improves the damage of casters (Glass nuker builds) and even how much health a health orb can heal you for (instant full rejuv healing for glass nukers, but glass nukers have really low health anyway, no big deal) !

Finally when stats are going to be cool, you people want autostats ???? This is ridiculous.

Actually it works the other way around .. with stats being more effective it must be way under control .. if it wasn't for auto-stats they couldn't have made the stats more useful or otherwise it would have been disastrous to the game balance and could have created fat gigantic exploits when abused (and they would have surely been abused if left to players).

Manual Stats in D2 ... it was like an manual rusty pistol ... it was broken and gave little usefulness and did some damage when used by a lunatic .. but being a manual gun no matter how big the mess it created it was still a small mess.

Now in D3 Stats are upgraded (becoming more useful) .. it's like giving an abusive lunatic a fully loaded rocket launcher without a safety lock (i.e manual stats in D3) ... KABOOM

Think of it .. the only reason that stats became more useful (i.e having more effects) is that they are auto-stats and can't be abused by players ... and the right way to do it is to put things under control so that players can tap into the new usefulness of stats (through items and passive skills) without giving anyone the chance to abuse the system or break it like before.

Grug

24-02-2009, 22:53

Also, Manual stat customization is being replaced with a greater emphasis on stats from items. So the items in D3 will have much greater stat bonuses than the ones in d2.

BrotherRatcliff

24-02-2009, 23:55

Also, Manual stat customization is being replaced with a greater emphasis on stats from items. So the items in D3 will have much greater stat bonuses than the ones in d2.

Which kind of stinks in my book. We already had to do too much item finding if they are trying to further focus this game toward items (read: random) with the auto-stats and rune system magic finding is going to get insane!

BrotherRatcliff

25-02-2009, 00:03

Actually it works the other way around .. with stats being more effective it must be way under control .. if it wasn't for auto-stats they couldn't have made the stats more useful or otherwise it would have been disastrous to the game balance and could have created fat gigantic exploits when abused (and they would have surely been abused if left to players).

Manual Stats in D2 ... it was like an manual rusty pistol ... it was broken and gave little usefulness and did some damage when used by a lunatic .. but being a manual gun no matter how big the mess it created it was still a small mess.

Now in D3 Stats are upgraded (becoming more useful) .. it's like giving an abusive lunatic a fully loaded rocket launcher without a safety lock (i.e manual stats in D3) ... KABOOM

Think of it .. the only reason that stats became more useful (i.e having more effects) is that they are auto-stats and can't be abused by players ... and the right way to do it is to put things under control so that players can tap into the new usefulness of stats (through items and passive skills) without giving anyone the chance to abuse the system or break it like before.

I don't understand this argument. Sure they could just add a bunch powerful effects to stats and let people run wild, but does that sound like blizzard? The other option would be for them to actually balance the stats so that all stats are required by all classes/builds that way we could still customize but it wouldn't be abusive?

I mean we only get so many points if you add something somewhere you're taking away elsewhere. If they balanced the stats so that 1 stat was not more powerful than the others how would there be "exploits"? especially with the stats having a variety of effects that somewhat overlap. For example str would add to damage, but dex could add to crit chance which also adds to damage. That way a pure dex build and a pure str build could be tuned to have similar damage but different other effects.

It's like you guys think blizzard is incapable of balancing something so simple. In reality balancing stats would be really simple compared to the skill/item balancing that has to go on. I mean c'mon there are only 4 of them and we only get so many points. Those values can be tuned to be perfectly balanced even with manual stats.

Kiroptus

25-02-2009, 02:08

I also don't think that D2 was a flawed game, if it was why is it still the Arpg standard? If D2 had so many mistakes in it why hasn't anybody else done it better?

The formula of isometric, fast paced action with class variance. That is the standard. D2's flaws like the ease of rushing, the skipping power of teleport, lack of respecs, balancing mess when non-functional skills (like Vulcano, which conceptually is a good skill but due the next-damage-source delay built in the engine it becomes much more weak than it should be), a PVP mess with the PK system in a game which is focused on PVM (Blizzard themselves said that its focus on balancing is PVM so dont try to deny), mass of exploits in its history like the Cow Level abuse which turned the game into a joke, potion spam requiring you to clutter yourself with potions, TP spoiling boss battles and making the distance between the battle zones way too short, etc... has nothing to do with its sucess. With all those fixed, it would be an even smoother and better experience than it is right now.

The main general aspects of Diablo are really the standard and work perfectly but all those flaws ARE present and are not good or brilliant. D2 is a very flawed game nowdays and its flaws are getting fixed. I love D2 its the game I played the most and I dont regret it at all but its really really flawed.

And nobody made it better because noone had such a good looby system as bnet, If for example, Titan Quest had something similar to bnet, it could be in very good shape but the open multiplayer ruined it. Plus everyone are too busy in MMO mania to remember ARPGs. If any big and/or competent company wanted to best Diablo 2 it could surely have been done long ago because D2 is good but its full of design and balance mistakes, its just a shame that no effort was put to create a worthy opponent to Diablo 2, so much time has passed and only its sequel will be able to surpass it because no one bothered.

Funkopotamus

25-02-2009, 11:44

Yes there is but with some many of those people...uh I guess I'll call them hardcore/dedicated players usually disapprove of the new changes and gives me the impression that they'd rather have D3 be an exact replica of D2 only with improved graphics and new quest/characters.

Of course the new changes has to fit in D3 but in the end I prefer a moderately changed game mechanic so I wouldn't feel like I'm still playing the same D2.

That seems to be a property of the internet. People will read too far into what others say and come to the possibly wrong conclusion on what the other is saying. I have been accused of wanting an updated version of D2 a few times because of this.

AxlStrife

25-02-2009, 17:52

Yet the same arguments, and at times the same people making those arguments, against manual stats ("It's not Diablo without manual stats!") have been made about the lack of a Necromancer ("I hate the Witch Doctor. He's not Diablo enough!"), the lack of 'item tetris' ("That's not what Diablo was about!"), and the graphics ("Goofy WoW! Not Diablo!!"). I think you can see where the correlation between the these arguments and the statement about "hardcore/dedicated players" come from.

NASE

25-02-2009, 18:06

Yet the same arguments, and at times the same people making those arguments, against manual stats ("It's not Diablo without manual stats!")

Allow me to note that there are other (more rational) arguments to keep manual stats. Better/more customisation - or certainly different - is just one of them.

Mizantrop

25-02-2009, 18:35

It's like you guys think blizzard is incapable of balancing something so simple. In reality balancing stats would be really simple compared to the skill/item balancing that has to go on. I mean c'mon there are only 4 of them and we only get so many points. Those values can be tuned to be perfectly balanced even with manual stats.

And yet it didn't happen in D2. So maybe it IS a bigger issue than some people think.

About Visom's original question, I would say that they don't necessarly know what's best for us. But they do aim to please us gamers more than any other company that aim to please their bosses first and than their gamers. Which is the best we could get from any gaming company.

NASE

25-02-2009, 19:09

And yet it didn't happen in D2. So maybe it IS a bigger issue than some people think.

You can turn it our too, the reason why stats aren't balanced is because the right skills aren't present.
People complain about vitality to be to important. A skill like energy shield break this theme by making mana much more important. However, even an energy shield builds need decent life due to some problem with the energy shield mechanism.
Other very mana hungry skill have the same effect. In the day, some magezons used a large mana pool with regeneration to cover their mana problems.
Holy shield forinstance makes dexterity less important. So between a (hypothetical) build with holy shield and a build with holy shield, that skill is responsible for a difference in stats allocation.

So eventhough the stats aren't exactly perfect in diablo II, you can claim just as good the skills aren't designed to balance them.

Brother Laz

25-02-2009, 21:04

Funkopotamus

25-02-2009, 21:24

Well... if the enemies are diverse enough there will be a best choice for killing certain enemies, but I see your point. If there many viable stat combinations then I would be happy with that and it'd be a step up from the current system. I wouldn't care what their rankings were against each other as long as they could hold their own in one way or another. In fact, it actually looks like it could be like that if they wanted to since, as far as I know, every stat helps you stay alive in one way or another. If you do less damage than you would like at least you will live longer.
Yet the same arguments, and at times the same people making those arguments, against manual stats ("It's not Diablo without manual stats!") have been made about the lack of a Necromancer ("I hate the Witch Doctor. He's not Diablo enough!"), the lack of 'item tetris' ("That's not what Diablo was about!"), and the graphics ("Goofy WoW! Not Diablo!!"). I think you can see where the correlation between the these arguments and the statement about "hardcore/dedicated players" come from.
I could see how that is one conclusion someone could come to from reading those statements but I'm not the type to end the thought process at one attempt because there's a chance I could be wrong about what they're saying.

BrotherRatcliff

26-02-2009, 03:20

It is simply not possible to 'balance' stats, if you mean 'there is more than one optimal choice for a given combination of skills'.

This is an unstable equilibrium. It is simply not possible, a specific combination will always be the best.

The same applies to skills, but at least the 'suboptimal' options are fun to play. Putting points into str instead of vit will not give you a significantly different build, just a weaker one.

That may have been true with the d2 stat model, but I don't think it applies to d3. Now that stats have wider ranging effects like crit %, dodge %, additional spell damage etc chrs with different stat builds could feel very different not just "sub-optimal". Even without that max block vs pure vit is still debated for many builds.

Edit: I thought about it a little more.
Actually I think the problem is blizzard didn't even try to balance the stats. Just look at the effect of str, 1% damage per point. That is obviously a number chosen out of simplicity not an attempt to balance. If that number had been changed to 2% or even different values for different classes or a level based calculation I bet stats would look very different right now.

Also, energy wasn't always a useless stat, in the begining when mana pots were not purchasable and spells did less damage/had higher mana costs in relation to players mana pools lots of people put points in energy. If players mana regen was tied to their energy rather than total mana and mana leech was not so easily available I bet people would be using more balanced stat builds today.

Anyway I think it's absurd to say that stats can't be balanced. Sure they can balance hundreds of skills and the way they work together plus tens of thousands of randomly dropping items no problem but 4 fixed stats is just too hard!

Turnip

26-02-2009, 04:08

Well why not make skill selection automatic as well, you chose a build and you get a set amount of skills perfectly balanced to your character level. Imagine how easy that would be to balance, and since diablo is all about balance its probably high time they implement it that way. If you do it to stats why not do it to everything? It would be a perfectly balanced game in every way.

Bladewind

26-02-2009, 06:59

Pure Willpower Wizard

Pros:
Everything dies to her spells.
Still retain great damage even with higher number of players ingame (which is what ALL glass cannons strive to achieve)
Best party nuker

Cons:
Low life
Low mana pool (vit now affects mana regen)

FULL vita Wizard

Pros:
Nice fat Hp boost.
BIG BIG mana regen.
Great build for HC / Solo players

Cons:
Low damage
Gets weaker and weaker in large games.

In the end the game will always balance itself out. Obviously I have not tried a pure Strength but you get the drift. A pure STR wiz will have great melee damage and a VERY good physical tank (for a wiz) because Str now increases the effectiveness of armors.

AxlStrife

26-02-2009, 07:03

Allow me to note that there are other (more rational) arguments to keep manual stats. Better/more customisation - or certainly different - is just one of them.

While I never intended to have it come off as the sole argument for it I can see where that would be implied.

NASE

26-02-2009, 08:36

It is simply not possible to 'balance' stats, if you mean 'there is more than one optimal choice for a given combination of skills'.

This is an unstable equilibrium. It is simply not possible, a specific combination will always be the best.

That not true. Every person can, will and should have a different feel with the stats. Some will value strength more then life because they like higher damage. Other prefer to have high mana/fury so they don't have to look for orbs all the time. They can just go and kill.
On top of the difference in weight - cause you want to maximise based on the weights - there is a difference in approach for the character. In DII, you have characters for baal runs, for keys runs, mf runs etc. Each of those character can have their own specific weights for the difference stats again resulting in different allocation.
Note that the energy sorcerer proves that's it's possible. As far as I know, there isn't a perfect mana/life ration because they serve very different purposes. Same goes for the bowazon where some prefer full dex. Others have some life ranging from about 0.8k to 1.5k

Mad Mantis

26-02-2009, 17:44

Why did this turn into yet ANOTHER thread on auto-stats vs manual stats?

NASE

26-02-2009, 17:48

Because some people want keep coming back to it and refuse to take a mild point of view forcing those that adverser those ideas to respond.

Kiroptus

26-02-2009, 17:55

Why did this turn into yet ANOTHER thread on auto-stats vs manual stats?

Well its the nature of the subject. Blizzard made a bold move by taking out Manual stats and people wonder if it was a good choice or not.

Im fine by it. I know some people love the boring number crunching of +dex +blockrate, +armorratting, +dmg, etc... but it seems D3 will be more effect and character skill based with the rune system so for me, they are in the right direction. Plus It helps to balance the game.

So its not that off-topic I guess, its just a branch of the subject announced in the thread. Now getting back to the main issue: YES, I do believe Blizzard knows whats best for us. D2 Players always defended every exploit, imbalance, bug and design mistake whithin the game, its certainly up to blizzard to make the design decisions and we should trust them to make a good game better then we would.

visom

27-02-2009, 04:21

Because some people want keep coming back to it and refuse to take a mild point of view forcing those that adverser those ideas to respond.

Or maybe it's because "those" people cannot exercise the act of "don't reply"

NASE

27-02-2009, 17:55

Or maybe it's because "those" people cannot exercise the act of "don't reply"

Why should we allow the opposite faction to spread false rumours that polarise the public opinion making blizzard believe that suddenly we all like auto stats?

If you start the debate, don't be surprised when people join you.

Bladewind

27-02-2009, 18:38

Down with autostats.

This isn't another WC3 clone. ;)

AxlStrife

27-02-2009, 19:45

Why should we allow the opposite faction to spread false rumours that polarise the public opinion making blizzard believe that suddenly we all like auto stats?

If you start the debate, don't be surprised when people join you.

No one has ever said nor implied that everyone would love the stat system.

I believe the crux of the argument is in the belief, or lack thereof, in Blizzard's power to produce a legitimate sequel while bringing "something new" to the franchise. The logical view is FOR Blizzard, considering the amount of success their previous titles and sequels to their main franchises have incurred and the fact that they have designed the game for a decent amount of time.

You may disagree with their view but until you can give a legitimate, irrefutable argument that gives a clear advantage to manual stats in Diablo 3 that can't be reproduced by manual stats AND keep balance in the game, don't expect your view to be any different to the multitude of "It's not Diablo enough!" arguments.

Bladewind

27-02-2009, 20:41

Ability to customize. The ability to screw up. The freedom to gimp yourself.

Basically choices.

I don't want to really spent half the game play to find items to boost the stats of my choice as I expect such items to be extremely rare as high level uniques and sets. Even if you can get the item that gives the most stats of your choice, more often than not, it is bound to be weak in the damage or defense department. So that is forcing you to make unnecessary compromises.

If people think that stat boosting items are going to be common, well they are not. For example charms no longer exist, so there goes one stat boosting item. And many +stat charms are low level.

Boosting stats with items will never be easy. Period.

Kiroptus

27-02-2009, 20:49

Well I guess it was implied that it was going to be common. And yes its very easy to increase your own stats with items, look at wow, the +stats there are very common. (please no "OMG THEY ARE TURNING DIABLO INTO WOW" thing, its just a little mechanic from the game).

Srikandi

27-02-2009, 20:58

Yeah... if stats are built into just about every item, ON TOP OF rather than INSTEAD OF other modifiers, then there's no reason to think it'll be hard. Yes, it'll be one more factor to consider when choosing your gear. But I see that as a good thing.

Not that I'm opposed to manual stats. I just don't think it's possible to know what's better without seeing it in the context of everything else in the game -- items, skills, runes, the whole thing.

BrotherRatcliff

27-02-2009, 21:46

You may disagree with their view but until you can give a legitimate, irrefutable argument that gives a clear advantage to manual stats in Diablo 3 that can't be reproduced by manual stats AND keep balance in the game, don't expect your view to be any different to the multitude of "It's not Diablo enough!" arguments.

That is an unreasonable standard and you know it. Have the pro auto-stat people ever given an "irrefutable argument"? Not one that I've heard. The point is these things are subjective, it's all about the kind of game that you want to play. There are no irrefutable arguments about personal preference. Just ignoring anything that a pro manual-stat person says and dismissing it because it doesn't fit that criteria is silly.

The fact is that having auto-stats is reducing customization, no matter what. Sure you can say they are adding it in other places, but you could have those other places AND manual stats. I personally have not heard a reason why those "other" areas of customization that we don't even know about will be easier to balance than stats so I think the balance argument is bogus.

Maybe it will all work out great, I'm sure I'll love D3 regardless. However I do think that we need to keep this discussion alive so that blizzard can maybe see that people are divided on this, and give it some 2nd (or more likely 100th) thought. Does blizzard know best for us? In many ways they probably do. However I doubt many blizzard employees have played as much D1/D2 as many of us here. Also don't forget that blizzard north is gone, so the team that made D1/D2 isn't making this game. For people who loved D1/D2 but aren't a fan of the warcraft/starcraft franchises I think it's definitely questionable if blizzard knows best for them.

NASE

27-02-2009, 23:01

No one has ever said nor implied that everyone would love the stat system.

Yet they have, if only one side of the discussion is heard, people will start believing it. So I had to respond just to keep the balance in the discussion.
It's the same with the election in the US. Why doesn't the independent candidate get elected. Because he doesn't have the money to get heard as often as the others do.
Playing the public opinion isn't about giving good arguments. It's mainly about being heard. It's sad but true.

You may disagree with their view but until you can give a legitimate, irrefutable argument that gives a clear advantage to manual stats in Diablo 3 that can't be reproduced by manual stats AND keep balance in the game, don't expect your view to be any different to the multitude of "It's not Diablo enough!" arguments.

If you would have read the discussions, you would know what arguments we have, and you would know that some are quite powerful.
Now, you want advantages for diablo III, we can't give that. Yet we can do other things that clearly shows, that a system we find in diablo II can't be reproduced in a game that has auto stats. Thus showing an advantage of manual stats over auto stats.

Now someone is probably going to nag about different system that could replace the stats. If that person would have read the discussion, he/she/it would know what are the problem with such systems.

Deckard Cain

28-02-2009, 00:01

I find it funny for people to say that Blizzard doesn't know whats best for us when they are using a game made by Blizzard to defend their arguments. It's not like they just said "hey lets take away stats" flipped a coin, and that was the end of manual stats. If manual stats truly worked better (for D3) then Blizzard would be using them instead of auto stats. Blizzard will not release a game that they think is sub par, it is that plain and simple.

I know some people like to give the fans credit for "making diablo what it is today." This leads people to believe they deserve to give input on graphics game play etc. Not that i think the fans opinion doesn't matter... but Blizzard made the game we all loved and there is no reason to not fully trust them. Go back and play diablo 1 and see how improved D2 is from that game. Sure D2 still has flaws but it is pretty much undeniably a better game.

I have no doubt that D3 will be a better game than D2. It's not going to be perfect but it will be a better game. (no matter how many years it will take..... :/)

Grug

28-02-2009, 00:27

Funkopotamus

28-02-2009, 01:06

Turnip

28-02-2009, 01:28

The problem is that the pro-manual stats people are usually the Elite players. They learned how to put their stats in the right places and have forgotten what it's like to be a newb like the rest of us. Why would you want a system where every choice irreversible, and you have to constantly worry how it will affect you in the long run. I know some players like perfecting their characters, but for regular players it's just intimidating. Not to mention that if you don't study the numbers you'd have no idea which stats to invest in besides the obvious. I didn't give much thought to putting my stats in, honestly. And I liked it that way. Skills and equipment gave a much more obvious benefit.

A game is meant to put time in, I dont really understand the arguement that if someone puts more time in than you he should get nothing out of it. I have a few mmo's on the side I play every once in a while, am I gonna complain because I'm farther behind a guy who plays it as his main game? Its kind of asinine.. The reason diablo 2 lasted so long is the perfecting of characters.

Kiroptus

28-02-2009, 01:48

To be fair, it is a different team making the game.

Yeah. Its being made by a better team.

PsychoPath

28-02-2009, 01:52

I'll add something about D3 here but I want to comment on warcraft 3 because other people have. Warcraft 3 IMO is a great game. While I didn't really play wc2 so I don't have much to compare in terms of an upgrade or a down grade in quality I will say that I've been playing the game since it's release.

The death of wc3 ladder isn't due to the game itself (although because of the progression of the game and the fact that people mostly stick to particular strategies which are the best, thus fewer strategies being used would cause some people to quit) the main decline in ladder play (at least on USEast and USWest is due to the change in AMM. Blizzard patched the AMM mainly because the average or lesser skilled players complained about playing against people that keep making new accounts to be able to play the lower skilled players more frequently (as the AMM at the time was based on being within 6 levels of another player or team) and in general the lesser skilled players complained about having to often play against people better than them like 50%+ of the time anyways.

To fix this blizzard changed the AMM to make it so that players played against people of equal skill. Shortly after WoW came out and this really screwed the more skilled players (like myself, holding 87%+ wins constantly before the AMM change) causing a greatly increased search time, which resulted in the majority of the 80%+ wins players to lower their ELL (by intentionally losing games) and play against the lesser skilled players anyways. What a waste of time that is.

Really this ruined Wc3 ladder for me and while I def would get back into it if the AMM was changed to old (i'd suggested this more than once on the blizzard wc3 forums) it's not going to happen. 5+ min search times almost all the time is not exactly what makes a good gaming experience, especially for a game that takes around 15 mins to play per game.

Anyways about D3: I haven't finished reading all the comments here and after I likely do I might have more to add to this but for now I will say that I'm not exactly a fan of having to place my own stat points (except for in 1.09 when I could asside from str reqs on items pure dex a bowazon).

Also I am as well glad they are changing various things about the game to make it different from D2 or like some others have stated this could get old fast.

Anyways, I am looking forward to the release of this game and I think it will be a great game for a long time after it is released.

visom

28-02-2009, 03:30

I bet the root of people's hatred for auto stats is because of the melee spellcasters.

I'll say it again, not being able to create an alternate character that undermines the character boundaries is NOTHING to get upset about, boo hoo that you can't have a barbarian that knows how to cast meteor but I think the bigger problem that we should be discussing about instead are the new skill runes, the character abilities and the new monsters.

Geez I swear some people think having melee spellcaster is more important than the character base structure.

Also I don't care who started the argument about auto stats, Nase, Bladewind, Kiroptus but just leave those people to their "ignorance" about the auto stats, whether they support or against it. I understand that you guys feel the need to reply to those people and heck I myself have at least three paragraphs worth of reasons about why auto stat is great but I'm trying very hard to refrain myself from doing so and I hope you guys and others as well can do the same.

Oh yeah I posted my three paragraphs of support about auto stats on my vistor's message here (http://diablo.incgamers.com/forums/member.php?u=321510)
Whatever responses you guys got just PM it to me.

AxlStrife

28-02-2009, 03:53

That is an unreasonable standard and you know it. Have the pro auto-stat people ever given an "irrefutable argument"? Not one that I've heard. The point is these things are subjective, it's all about the kind of game that you want to play. There are no irrefutable arguments about personal preference. Just ignoring anything that a pro manual-stat person says and dismissing it because it doesn't fit that criteria is silly.

The fact is that having auto-stats is reducing customization, no matter what. Sure you can say they are adding it in other places, but you could have those other places AND manual stats. I personally have not heard a reason why those "other" areas of customization that we don't even know about will be easier to balance than stats so I think the balance argument is bogus.

Maybe it will all work out great, I'm sure I'll love D3 regardless. However I do think that we need to keep this discussion alive so that blizzard can maybe see that people are divided on this, and give it some 2nd (or more likely 100th) thought. Does blizzard know best for us? In many ways they probably do. However I doubt many blizzard employees have played as much D1/D2 as many of us here. Also don't forget that blizzard north is gone, so the team that made D1/D2 isn't making this game. For people who loved D1/D2 but aren't a fan of the warcraft/starcraft franchises I think it's definitely questionable if blizzard knows best for them.

It's not at all unreasonable. If you want an "irrefutable argument" for pro-auto, then here's the simplest one: It's Blizzard's game, and ultimately they make the decisions. So far they have decided to go auto-stat.

You may claim that the balance argument is bogus, but you have no other reason than your own ignorance of that which would balance it out. Just because it is not public information and you are ignorant of such information doesn't make the argument any less false.

If someone wants total customization, the RPG Maker series is for them. The less customization = evil argument fails when we look at balancing the game. While change is not always for the better mechanically, change alleviates stagnation from the game. This is part of how Blizzard wanted to have D3 deviate from D2.

@NASE: I very much have read most of the arguments, at least the ones that lack logical fallacies. Most don't hold water since once again it's applying itself not to the final D3 model, but to the D2 model and to an incomplete fraction of D3.

While I agree with "bigger voice = more influence", but the potent voice for the game will prevail. While I probably come off as "auto-stats are the devil", this is solely due to an argument I made above: it's Blizzard's game.

EDIT: @visom: Missed your post. I think a healthy discussion on the matter is needed, and meat needs to be brought to the table.

Telzen

28-02-2009, 04:11

Doctor Salvador

28-02-2009, 04:25

Does anyone think that the new skill runes will be overpowered? I mean, if they are at all decent drop rates, and you can place a rune into every active skill (With emphasis on using lots of skills, that can mean a lot), will we all be running around with super-powered versions of skills? It might get ugly if every single Wizard has a striking rune in teleport, although that's probably a good decision.

No matter what happens, I think it will be funny getting that first rune, stopping, and testing it in every skill you have.

Bladewind

28-02-2009, 04:28

Bladewind(a manual stat guy) is the one that brought it up in this thread.

Because I feel it is a valid concern in regards to this case. Blizzard thinks that adding auto-stats is a brilliant idea and definitely the best for you and but I would disagree, as well as a fair share of the community.

A voice, any voice is better than none at all. If done right or at least heard enough, it can bring about change.

Telzen

28-02-2009, 04:36

Doesn't mean you need to go and ruin a thread by bring it up. And if you want to make a difference go post at the official forums, Blizzard doesn't read here.

Funkopotamus

28-02-2009, 05:04

Yeah. Its being made by a better team.
Unless the stats on the Blizzard Pokemon Master cards were updated, that's a matter of opinion.

Doctor Salvador

28-02-2009, 05:10

. . . Blizzard Pokemon Master cards . . .

Good lord that must happen!

Lol, we really need to get another hobby, Diablo is too addicting - look at how much we enjoy talking about auto-stats.

Telzen

28-02-2009, 06:49

look at how much we enjoy talking about auto-stats.I don't really enjoy it lol.

Kiroptus

28-02-2009, 07:37

Unless the stats on the Blizzard Pokemon Master cards were updated, that's a matter of opinion.

Well lets see. Pk is taken out, potionfest is fixed and tp is no longer. Right there big design flaws from D2 were fixed right when we heard about D3. That makes it a better team than HGL's one already.

NASE

28-02-2009, 08:35

I have no doubt that D3 will be a better game than D2. It's not going to be perfect but it will be a better game. (no matter how many years it will take..... :/)

As do we. We're just wandering how much greater the game could - as in hypothetical - be when they put in a good system of manual stats.

The problem is that the pro-manual stats people are usually the Elite players. They learned how to put their stats in the right places and have forgotten what it's like to be a newb like the rest of us.

No we haven't, atleast not all of us. I haven't - or perhaps I shifted idea somewhere along the way. Therefore, I believe a system that is somewhere in between auto stats and manual stats might be the best way to go. It allows us 'elite' players to twink there characters to a much larger extend while it prevents noobs from totally screwing over their characters.

Why would you want a system where every choice irreversible, and you have to constantly worry how it will affect you in the long run. I know some players like perfecting their characters, but for regular players it's just intimidating. Not to mention that if you don't study the numbers you'd have no idea which stats to invest in besides the obvious. I didn't give much thought to putting my stats in, honestly. And I liked it that way. Skills and equipment gave a much more obvious benefit.[/QUOTE]

First, respecs - although I'm not sure I'll like them - can make the choice reversible. Second thing to remember is that with the huge overload of stat points, it's not that important to do calculations. There are very few build that fail when you've given out 20 points to much in strength. This will even more be the case when the stats are more useful - like in diablo II.
So those who worry, worry because they want to. Not because the game was designed like that.
Only the noob that puts 200 points in energy on his barbarian is screwed. Yet I'll only do this 2 times if he's smart. Is it that much or a problem to recreate a build 2 times?

I bet the root of people's hatred for auto stats is because of the melee spellcasters.

You lost, better luck next time.

I'll say it again, not being able to create an alternate character that undermines the character boundaries is NOTHING to get upset about, boo hoo that you can't have a barbarian that knows how to cast meteor but I think the bigger problem that we should be discussing about instead are the new skill runes, the character abilities and the new monsters.

The amazon is a ranged character combining physical and magic damage. Combining this requires largely different stats allocations - mainly dex/vit. Yet if you look further, the difference between using windforce - 134 - and faith mat - 87 - is quite large. And for the bowazon, who already is quite pressed for stats, I find this rather imporant.
And this is without the mageazon - which appears to be valid with full mana investment - and without theme builds such as my own - that abuse whistans shield and extra block to go with max block and as little as possible dex, so every points of life is quite important as the used gear is far from spectacular.

And why are you all complaining about the use diablo II for examples. Those who refuse to except DII examples as valid clearly don't get why we propose them.
Try thinking about why we would propose them?

AxlStrife

28-02-2009, 17:21

As do we. We're just wandering how much greater the game could - as in hypothetical - be when they put in a good system of manual stats.

If it can bedone right, I'm all for it. I'm not for throwing a ****-fit over something being removed/added as long as the spirit of Diablo is being captured. While this may be an opinion-based view, to claim that replacing the stat system makes the game less Diablo to a degree that it's too unfamiliar (For the record, I know that you are not making that argument bu tit is one that I've seen time and again.) is silly.

No we haven't, atleast not all of us. I haven't - or perhaps I shifted idea somewhere along the way. Therefore, I believe a system that is somewhere in between auto stats and manual stats might be the best way to go. It allows us 'elite' players to twink there characters to a much larger extend while it prevents noobs from totally screwing over their characters.

Why would you want a system where every choice irreversible, and you have to constantly worry how it will affect you in the long run. I know some players like perfecting their characters, but for regular players it's just intimidating. Not to mention that if you don't study the numbers you'd have no idea which stats to invest in besides the obvious. I didn't give much thought to putting my stats in, honestly. And I liked it that way. Skills and equipment gave a much more obvious benefit.

As far as I know, Elixers of ______ aren't removed from the game. If they make it to the final game, then I believe that it is a fair compromise for auto-stat and manual stat. Aside for the impact these items will have on the market, whatever it may be, it looks like a good thing.

First, respecs - although I'm not sure I'll like them - can make the choice reversible. Second thing to remember is that with the huge overload of stat points, it's not that important to do calculations. There are very few build that fail when you've given out 20 points to much in strength. This will even more be the case when the stats are more useful - like in diablo II.
So those who worry, worry because they want to. Not because the game was designed like that.
Only the noob that puts 200 points in energy on his barbarian is screwed. Yet I'll only do this 2 times if he's smart. Is it that much or a problem to recreate a build 2 times?

I'm wary of respecs in general as well, but I believe that Blizzard knows what it's doing.

The amazon is a ranged character combining physical and magic damage. Combining this requires largely different stats allocations - mainly dex/vit. Yet if you look further, the difference between using windforce - 134 - and faith mat - 87 - is quite large. And for the bowazon, who already is quite pressed for stats, I find this rather imporant.
And this is without the mageazon - which appears to be valid with full mana investment - and without theme builds such as my own - that abuse whistans shield and extra block to go with max block and as little as possible dex, so every points of life is quite important as the used gear is far from spectacular.

And why are you all complaining about the use diablo II for examples. Those who refuse to except DII examples as valid clearly don't get why we propose them.
Try thinking about why we would propose them?

There are no stat requirements for items, so that agument is right out.

NASE

28-02-2009, 17:44

If it can bedone right, I'm all for it.

What makes you think they can't? As far as we know, they didn't even try.

There are no stat requirements for items, so that agument is right out.

It's just an example. There are going to be similar things in diablo III.

visom

28-02-2009, 19:18

You lost, better luck next time.

I don't know, everytime when I hear "auto stats" I see people talking about not being able to make a melee wizard, what is your guess then?

The amazon is a ranged character combining physical and magic damage. Combining this requires largely different stats allocations - mainly dex/vit. Yet if you look further, the difference between using windforce - 134 - and faith mat - 87 - is quite large. And for the bowazon, who already is quite pressed for stats, I find this rather imporant.
And this is without the mageazon - which appears to be valid with full mana investment - and without theme builds such as my own - that abuse whistans shield and extra block to go with max block and as little as possible dex, so every points of life is quite important as the used gear is far from spectacular.

Thanks for confirming my point about how people always put "enough in dex and mostly in vitality", exactly how MANY points in energy do you suppose this mageazon need?

Funkopotamus

28-02-2009, 20:03

Well lets see. Pk is taken out, potionfest is fixed and tp is no longer. Right there big design flaws from D2 were fixed right when we heard about D3. That makes it a better team than HGL's one already.
Pking I can agree on, but tping was nice for hauling swag, which is one of my favorite parts of the Diablo series, and potions, in my experience, were not as great of an unbalancer as the current team depicts. They were very nice at low levels when I'm firing peanuts from my bow made of crap but when I'm actually in danger of dying at higher levels they did nothing but slow down my death. A 3/3 for one person is a 1.5/3 for another.

And as someone reminded me at an earlier point, more than Flagship's members were part of doing the Diablo series.

Doctor Salvador

28-02-2009, 21:03

What makes you think they can't? As far as we know, they didn't even try.

It's just an example. There are going to be similar things in diablo III.

They did try manual stats, it didn't work out that well when they did (Diablo 1 and Diablo 2). Sure, they could've done better, and if they tried, they most likely could make a superior manual stat system to D1 and D2 for the new and improved Diablo 3. However, I think manual stats have had enough fail (whether or not they broke the game, they didn't really help it), and it's high time the dev's were given a brake, i.e. making the game a bit easier for them to balance.

I'd rather have this new system, where we will have a smoother difficulty curve and whatnot from better balance, more customization from other fields (Which may be imbalanced from manual stats), and emphasis placed on more important things like skills.

AxlStrife

01-03-2009, 17:47

What makes you think they can't? As far as we know, they didn't even try.

"Argument from ignorance". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance) The same case is made for the existance of a deity (God) so often, so it's no wonder why so many people are laughing at theists... but that's for another day.

It's just an example. There are going to be similar things in diablo III.
Oh? Show me the evidence for this claim and I'll gladly accept it.

Mad Mantis

01-03-2009, 18:46

"Argument from ignorance". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance) The same case is made for the existance of a deity (God) so often, so it's no wonder why so many people are laughing at theists... but that's for another day.

This holds true for both sides. There is no way to prove that Blizz did or didn´t try to incorporate a balanced manual stat system. You can say: "but they said they tried." Do you really expect them to have said: "well we couldn't be bothered to even attempt this and Bob had a pretty decent idea so lets go with that."

AxlStrife

01-03-2009, 18:53

This holds true for both sides. There is no way to prove that Blizz did or didn´t try to incorporate a balanced manual stat system. You can say: "but they said they tried." Do you really expect them to have said: "well we couldn't be bothered to even attempt this and Bob had a pretty decent idea so lets go with that."

I agree with the first statement, but I find the notion that it wasn't even discussed or tried in the 4+ years of development while it was implemented for over 10 years to be a tad absurd. If "they say they did", there's no rational reason to believe that they didn't.

NASE

01-03-2009, 19:30

AxlStrife

01-03-2009, 20:14

If you want to test something that profound, you want to test it in the final stages of the development. Not when you barely have 2 classes finished and only 1 act. Balance isn't that important for the first act, the majority of the time is played in the final stages.

So if they wanted to do tests, they had to wait. It's not like it's something that important - developmentwise. Instead of letting player do what they want, you just search for a way that works for most builds. Just delay the game for 3 month and you can implement it even when the game is finished.
If testing was what they wanted, they would have waited. Or atleast keep the boat in the middle.

I'm sure they had very good arguments. Yet they didn't test it, not in the diablo III we know.

@ Doctor Salvador: yes, they tried it in both diablo I and II. If I look at them, I see mistakes. It's not perfect, yet it's not all bad. As already mentioned a zillion times, there are good examples. So instead of seeing diablo I and II as a bad example, you can look at the good builds and use them as a good example.

If by "it" you mean the manual stat system, then there are various things to discuss in your response.

Assuming that because it is not in the "current" D3 it wasn't tested is silly. WHile you can't refine a certain system to a perfect degree, you can test a stat system with one character and less than an "act" of playable level.

You claim it's "profound" yet say that it isn't important "developmentwise". You can't have it both ways since the two points contradict themselves.

The BIG problem with the "good builds" and good examples is that you have to throw out D1 since you could easily reach max stats for not so high a price and time. As has been shown MANY times, the D2 system broke down to the same stat placement system for all characters (enough in str and dex for gear, rest in vit), save less than a handful of subpar novelty and niche characters. The "good builds" are only difference in skills and class.

sbn

01-03-2009, 23:38

The BIG problem with the "good builds" and good examples is that you have to throw out D1 since you could easily reach max stats for not so high a price and time. As has been shown MANY times, the D2 system broke down to the same stat placement system for all characters (enough in str and dex for gear, rest in vit), save less than a handful of subpar novelty and niche characters. The "good builds" are only difference in skills and class.

First off I have to state I am really not up to speed with D3 news, so I don't fully grasp what has or has not been implemented or discussed. I will point out though that the whole issue has you have stated, where players simply put just enough in strength and dexterity really only exists later on when people no longer "manually" build a character. What I mean by that is stat points are used much differently when you know which items you will have, and if you simply get rushed and fast leveled.

When you start out in the game and play through it as it was made, the point of a stat system is for each time you level to make a decision on where to put points. They make this game for characters to be created and played through out from the beginning Act to the end Act. It seems to me at least that the stat system only becomes irrelevant after players decide that playing through the game is of no interest, and simply want the end product of a high level character decked out with all the chosen gear.

AxlStrife

01-03-2009, 23:50

First off I have to state I am really not up to speed with D3 news, so I don't fully grasp what has or has not been implemented or discussed. I will point out though that the whole issue has you have stated, where players simply put just enough in strength and dexterity really only exists later on when people no longer "manually" build a character. What I mean by that is stat points are used much differently when you know which items you will have, and if you simply get rushed and fast leveled.

When you start out in the game and play through it as it was made, the point of a stat system is for each time you level to make a decision on where to put points. They make this game for characters to be created and played through out from the beginning Act to the end Act. It seems to me at least that the stat system only becomes irrelevant after players decide that playing through the game is of no interest, and simply want the end product of a high level character decked out with all the chosen gear.

I agree with everything you said, but with manual stats comes an important question. "How long will it take for 'proper' stat placement for certain classes to pop up?" More than likely, it will only be a few months at the most. Then we're back at the problem that we are discussing: how to fix the broken stat system.

BrotherRatcliff

02-03-2009, 09:43

I agree with everything you said, but with manual stats comes an important question. "How long will it take for 'proper' stat placement for certain classes to pop up?" More than likely, it will only be a few months at the most. Then we're back at the problem that we are discussing: how to fix the broken stat system.

There's one other problem, the example of dex/str for gear and rest in vit. That is a very simple system and it is often taken to mean that every chr had the same stats. While every chr followed the same formula that doesn't mean they had the same stats. Deciding what gear to use which changed those str/dex values meant that peoples different builds had very different base stats. While the lack of item requirements in D3 negates that argument it does still apply to the examples people are using for why D2 stats needed fixing in the first place.

I agree with sbn totally, that is a great point which I hadn't thought of. Now that I think about it if there was no enigma effectively negating str, and there was no ability to rush/power level stats wouldn't be a broken system at all.

The main reason I want manual stats is because when I read about the new stat functions like crit chance and the like I got really exited. That was one of the things I had to call my friends and say:

Hey, have you heard about d3? There's a physics system so you can mess with the environment and you can use 6 skills at one time with hot-keys. Oh yeah, and the stats will actually have cool different effects like crit chance and spell damage bonuses!

I know you say it will only be a few months till the proper allocations will be found (which I disagree with considering the more powerful/varied stat effects). Doesn't it sound like a ton of fun to spend a few months playing with stats and trying out the combinations to see what happens if you build an all wisdom barb with the new system? That sounds like a blast to me. I think it sucks that they introduced us to those new stat effects and nobody thought to mention "oh yeah, the new stats are cool it's too bad you cant change them."

BrotherRatcliff

02-03-2009, 10:04

It's not at all unreasonable. If you want an "irrefutable argument" for pro-auto, then here's the simplest one: It's Blizzard's game, and ultimately they make the decisions. So far they have decided to go auto-stat.

That's not an irrefutable argument for auto-stats at all. It is an irrefutable argument for why we shouldn't bother talking about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with that statement. If we want to follow that logic though there is no reason to have a forum, they are going to make the game the way they want anyway lets just sit back and watch. There's no need for any discussion of any kind.

You may claim that the balance argument is bogus, but you have no other reason than your own ignorance of that which would balance it out. Just because it is not public information and you are ignorant of such information doesn't make the argument any less false.

I'm not sure that you understood my point. Lets just use the rune system as an example because we do know about it. Blizzard has said yes auto-stats remove customization but it's ok because we are adding it back in other areas. The rune system is one of these areas. Blizzard has also said one of the reasons for auto-stats is it makes the game easier to balance. That would imply that the rune system is easier to balance than stats right? Because otherwise they would have auto-runes and manual stats.

Personally I think it is obvious that is not the case. Balancing 4 stats of which every chr has the same and they get points in a predicable manner would be far easier than balancing a rune system in which 10+ rune types would have to be balanced in combination with 100s of skills, of which each class has a different selection, and the rune drops will be random rather than predicable. It should be clear that the rune system is more of a challenge from a balance perspective than stats.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the rune system. I also can't wait to see what the other customization options that I am so ignorant about are. That doesn't matter, it is clear that the new customization will be harder to balance than stats were. Obviously blizzard did not change to auto-stats out of balance concerns. I would love to clear up my ignorance and have them make the real reason public knowledge though.

If someone wants total customization, the RPG Maker series is for them. The less customization = evil argument fails when we look at balancing the game. While change is not always for the better mechanically, change alleviates stagnation from the game. This is part of how Blizzard wanted to have D3 deviate from D2.

Hey thanks for the RPG Maker idea, I hadn't heard of that before. It looks kind of cool, but it is in no way similar to D3. For one it for RPGs not ARPGs though it would be cool if somebody did the equivalent with a Diablo style point and click engine.

I agree that less customization makes the game easier to balance. However blizzard has stated there will be more customization in D3, just in different areas. So why aren't they concerned about balancing those other areas of customization?

I also agree that change is good. I am not one of those people who wants D2.1. I loved D2, but I'm bored with it and I want a new game. Wouldn't the change in stat functions/names have been enough change though? They always could have included a "auto-distribute stats" button for those that don't want to mess with it. Maybe somebody has a good reason why that isn't a good idea but I haven't heard it. So long as there are no stat requirements on items they could even update that auto-stat formula with each patch so that those players would also be up to date with the latest theory's on perfect stat allocation.

Turnip

02-03-2009, 10:39

Its probably because the designers are mmorpg designers, I mean give me one mmorpg which allows stat allocation.

kavlor

02-03-2009, 14:04

Ive had exactely same thoughts about wether Ive played D2 to death that if it retains too many of the mechanics of D2 Ill get fed up quicker.Recentely Ive hardly played D2 but I have been playing other ARPGs so I know at least Im not fed up with the whole genre,just need something refreshing.

What would fix it for me is a lot more variety of viable builds more cryptic builds and of course the gameplay to feel different.They can keep item enhancement and skill interaction in fact I wouldn't mind even deeper skill interactions but done in a different way.

What I can see though is people trying to skip stuff and heading straight for the gameplay they did in D2 like MFing and Exp runs but if the questing system is better then hopefully this will become more significant.

NASE

02-03-2009, 14:05

I agree with everything you said, but with manual stats comes an important question. "How long will it take for 'proper' stat placement for certain classes to pop up?" More than likely, it will only be a few months at the most. Then we're back at the problem that we are discussing: how to fix the broken stat system.

You are looking at what happens in the end. sbn is looking at what happens with each level you gain.
You assume that ending up 100 str is all that is important. while sbn look at each level. You can add 5*20 str for the first levels, yet probably, it will be much smarter to wait until later and focus partially on vitality in the early levels.
Heck, it may even be interesting to add slightly more str so you can use a certain items while leveling. when playing the game will be more important, this might not be such a bad idea.

I'm not sure that you understood my point. Lets just use the rune system as an example because we do know about it. Blizzard has said yes auto-stats remove customization but it's ok because we are adding it back in other areas. The rune system is one of these areas. Blizzard has also said one of the reasons for auto-stats is it makes the game easier to balance. That would imply that the rune system is easier to balance than stats right? Because otherwise they would have auto-runes and manual stats.

I disagree. The problem is that the sum off all system might be hard to balance. Yet this doesn't mean only the easiest system have to be implemented. Take the runes system in comparison with the stats system. Yes, runes are harder to balance - or certainly not easier - yet they do add much more then manual stats.
So if you look at what you gain, runes are much more important then stats. Heck, auto runes isn't even a possible systems. It's simply a skill system.

Choosing between different system is more then just choosing between balance problems.

AxlStrife

02-03-2009, 19:20

That's not an irrefutable argument for auto-stats at all. It is an irrefutable argument for why we shouldn't bother talking about it. Don't get me wrong, I agree with that statement. If we want to follow that logic though there is no reason to have a forum, they are going to make the game the way they want anyway lets just sit back and watch. There's no need for any discussion of any kind.

We can talk about it, but going to the extreme and calling Blizzard lazy and wrong for not going with a piece of an outdated game that some people is unjustified. Telling someone "You're not making your game right for us" is quite selfish.

I'm not sure that you understood my point. Lets just use the rune system as an example because we do know about it. Blizzard has said yes auto-stats remove customization but it's ok because we are adding it back in other areas. The rune system is one of these areas. Blizzard has also said one of the reasons for auto-stats is it makes the game easier to balance. That would imply that the rune system is easier to balance than stats right? Because otherwise they would have auto-runes and manual stats.

That's a false dichotomy, so it isn't gonna fly. We have already established there are more variables in customization than runes and stats, so you can't say "Balancing the game as a whole is automatically harder because balancing A will be harder than balancing B". I think you're confusing balance for a single character with balance for the game as a whole. Also, your statement assumes that the stat system is the main focus on the game. This is most certainly not the case: the items will have more of an impact on a character than the stats, or so Blizzard claims. As the rest of your argument is based upon this fallacy, I don't need to address it.

Hey thanks for the RPG Maker idea, I hadn't heard of that before. It looks kind of cool, but it is in no way similar to D3. For one it for RPGs not ARPGs though it would be cool if somebody did the equivalent with a Diablo style point and click engine.

I wish that too. I brought up the "total customization pole" solely on the basis of people complaining about the assumed lack of customization. I'l warn you, it can get tedious at times.

I agree that less customization makes the game easier to balance. However blizzard has stated there will be more customization in D3, just in different areas. So why aren't they concerned about balancing those other areas of customization?

I also agree that change is good. I am not one of those people who wants D2.1. I loved D2, but I'm bored with it and I want a new game. Wouldn't the change in stat functions/names have been enough change though? They always could have included a "auto-distribute stats" button for those that don't want to mess with it. Maybe somebody has a good reason why that isn't a good idea but I haven't heard it. So long as there are no stat requirements on items they could even update that auto-stat formula with each patch so that those players would also be up to date with the latest theory's on perfect stat allocation.

I don't see how you can make the assumption that they aren't concerned about balancing the other areas when not all of them have been revealed yet. I don't agree that simply changing the stat functions alone would have been good enough to fix the stat problem since once the better stat placements establish themselves, based on class, it will be as if it's autostat anyway.

You are looking at what happens in the end. sbn is looking at what happens with each level you gain.
You assume that ending up 100 str is all that is important. while sbn look at each level. You can add 5*20 str for the first levels, yet probably, it will be much smarter to wait until later and focus partially on vitality in the early levels.
Heck, it may even be interesting to add slightly more str so you can use a certain items while leveling. when playing the game will be more important, this might not be such a bad idea.

I'm looking at a later result (upper levels) because that is the largest basis of establishing balance, considering the speed of the game. That is where the power and the greatest variation of a character will come out, and balancing that power is arguably more important than balancing the early levels since anyone can pick up a maul and swing. Of course, with auto-stats, the balancing for the early-levels is already done. I'm not certain on the issue I'm about to bring up, but I wouldn't be surprised if the allocation of stats in the system will change based on level.

(Items don't have stat requirements, so Blizzard says, so please stop using the "points into stats to use items" statement.)

Mad Mantis

02-03-2009, 21:55

Telling someone "You're not making your game right for us" is quite selfish.

Both sides are doing it. Both sides on all issues regarding this game will be doing it. It is inevitable. Going beyond that we have a right to be selfish. We are going to pay for this game and everyone wants the most out of their buck. If that means that someone will get less, than they can live with that.

That's a false dichotomy, so it isn't gonna fly. We have already established there are more variables in customization than runes and stats, so you can't say "Balancing the game as a whole is automatically harder because balancing A will be harder than balancing B". I think you're confusing balance for a single character with balance for the game as a whole. Also, your statement assumes that the stat system is the main focus on the game. This is most certainly not the case: the items will have more of an impact on a character than the stats, or so Blizzard claims. As the rest of your argument is based upon this fallacy, I don't need to address it.

His argument made perfect sense. One of the most touted pro's for the auto-stats system is that the whole game will be easier to balance if we get rid of manual stats. BrotherRatcliff correctly identified that they implemented a new system that introduces a lot more variables and will be harder to balance than a known system with much fewer variables.

If part of the reason Blizz scrapped the manual stats system for ease of balance then why introduce another system that will be more difficult to balance? It is not logical. It also raises the question if they can balance this more complicated system, then why can't they balance the old manual stats system?

BrotherRatcliff

02-03-2009, 22:32

We can talk about it, but going to the extreme and calling Blizzard lazy and wrong for not going with a piece of an outdated game that some people is unjustified. Telling someone "You're not making your game right for us" is quite selfish.

Did I say they blizzard was lazy? I don't think blizzard is lazy at all, I just think they haven't told us their real reasons for doing things. If they said "we're doing this because our goal is to make chrs un-gimpable and we're going to do anything we must to meet that goal" I would say "ok, I guess that's how it is". If they said "we're doing this because we come from an MMORPG background and MMORPGs don't have manual stats and we're sticking to what we know" I would again say "Ok, that sucks but whatever". I just want to know blizzards real thinking on this, and if what they have announced is their real thinking then I'm going to apply for a job because they need some critical thinkers on their team.

That's a false dichotomy, so it isn't gonna fly. We have already established there are more variables in customization than runes and stats, so you can't say "Balancing the game as a whole is automatically harder because balancing A will be harder than balancing B". I think you're confusing balance for a single character with balance for the game as a whole. Also, your statement assumes that the stat system is the main focus on the game. This is most certainly not the case: the items will have more of an impact on a character than the stats, or so Blizzard claims. As the rest of your argument is based upon this fallacy, I don't need to address it.

Don't need to address it or don't want to address it because you have no answer? I don't see anything wrong with saying "Balancing the game as a whole is automatically harder because balancing A will be harder than balancing B". The more variables you add the game gets harder to balance because more variables have to be checked against each other in different combinations. My argument becomes even truer when you look at the game as a whole and not a single character because the variables get exponentially more complex.

Explain to me how my statement assumes the stats are the main focus of the game? I would say the main focus of the game is killing things...

I don't see how you can make the assumption that they aren't concerned about balancing the other areas when not all of them have been revealed yet. I don't agree that simply changing the stat functions alone would have been good enough to fix the stat problem since once the better stat placements establish themselves, based on class, it will be as if it's autostat anyway.

I do think they are concerned about balancing those other areas. The point I was making is that they haven't canned those ideas out of balance concerns like they did with stats.

My comment about changing the stat functions was addressing your statement that change is good whether it's good or bad, not about fixing them in relation to d2 (which I do think they would have done). I just don't understand the idea that stats are inherently flawed. If you think about it they are basically just passive skills, yet nobody is advocating having auto-placement of your passives. The reason is you want to tune your passives to your active skill choices so why shouldn't stats be the same way?

I'm looking at a later result (upper levels) because that is the largest basis of establishing balance, considering the speed of the game. That is where the power and the greatest variation of a character will come out, and balancing that power is arguably more important than balancing the early levels since anyone can pick up a maul and swing. Of course, with auto-stats, the balancing for the early-levels is already done. I'm not certain on the issue I'm about to bring up, but I wouldn't be surprised if the allocation of stats in the system will change based on level.

IMHO this is a fairly MMO style point of view. The Diablo games have always been about leveling, not about end-game. It's not like there thousands of people running around with level 99s. I've played this game a ton and I've never even had a chr over 95. And besides once you get a 99 what do you do with it? Either duel or you start a new chr and begin the leveling process again.

If we assume that power leveling and rushing problems will be taken care of this game will have to be played one level at a time and should be balanced as such, not just for the end-game.

They always could have included a "auto-distribute stats" button for those that don't want to mess with it. Maybe somebody has a good reason why that isn't a good idea but I haven't heard it. So long as there are no stat requirements on items they could even update that auto-stat formula with each patch so that those players would also be up to date with the latest theory's on perfect stat allocation.

AxlStrife, I would love to hear your comments on this.

BrotherRatcliff

02-03-2009, 22:35

His argument made perfect sense. One of the most touted pro's for the auto-stats system is that the whole game will be easier to balance if we get rid of manual stats. BrotherRatcliff correctly identified that they implemented a new system that introduces a lot more variables and will be harder to balance than a known system with much fewer variables.

If part of the reason Blizz scrapped the manual stats system for ease of balance then why introduce another system that will be more difficult to balance? It is not logical. It also raises the question if they can balance this more complicated system, then why can't they balance the old manual stats system?

Thanks for putting that so well. I think you articulated it better than I did and I look forward to hearing the responses!

Turnip

03-03-2009, 02:29

Well I wonder how stats work in WoW, I imagine it must have a similar system and it might give some insight into what theyre trying to achieve.

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 07:52

@MadMantis: I don't see how the people defending Blizzard's stance are telling them "You're not making your game right for us". The logical law of non-contradiction won't bend to that.

Since arguably the pro-manual side would be getting less if auto-stats are here to stay, can they take the advice you have given? I assume, nay, hope they can if that seems to be the case. I back up Blizzard's decision on the basis that indeed they know what's best for their game with their lore. I could be called a "mindless drone" for taking such stance, but if I wanted Diablo 3 exactly how I wanted it I'd make my own game. I'll take the good with the bad, just like in every other game I've ever played. (For the record, I HATE how Concentration pumps Blessed Hammer but I still play D2... just not hammerdins ^_^)

I'll take a piece of Brother for this next one. "If they said "we're doing this because we come from an MMORPG background and MMORPGs don't have manual stats and we're sticking to what we know" I would again say "Ok, that sucks but whatever".

I don't know if that necessarily needed to be said, but since it's what they've done for a good while it would be easier for them to balance the game around auto-stats than to balance it around manual stats. They know what to expect and can build accordingly.

It would be similar to Li'l Wayne making a rock album. Waaaaaait... (Sorry, but "Prom Queen" is a HORRIBLE rock song. I admire him trying to branch out, but it has to be done right or not at all.)

@BrotherRatcliffe: I apologize if it came off that I was pinning you as calling Blizzard lazy. The vibe from the pro-manual side seems to be as such, like they're losing out on the Diablo feeling just because they don't have total control over the stats, much like the discussion of the WoW-ish graphics. If the min-maxing is what they got out of Diablo, then it's a sad thing they couldn't look at other aspects of the game.

@comments about my false dichotomy comment: I get what he's tryign to say, but it is still flawed. The reason it is such is because it ignored a multitude of other factors that aid to the balance of the game and said "Since manual stats are easier to balance than auto-stats, then the game as a whole would be easier to balance with the manual stats system." This ignores all items, all skills, and all enemy's stats, along with stuff I am probably missing, which would have to be tweaked to each system accordingly. NASE literally obliterated the argument earlier (in an odd turn of events in which me and him/her were not arguing against each other), so I'll quote him.

I disagree. The problem is that the sum off all system might be hard to balance. Yet this doesn't mean only the easiest system have to be implemented. Take the runes system in comparison with the stats system. Yes, runes are harder to balance - or certainly not easier - yet they do add much more then manual stats.
So if you look at what you gain, runes are much more important then stats. Heck, auto runes isn't even a possible systems. It's simply a skill system.

Choosing between different system is more then just choosing between balance problems.

Not only that but since balancing items is a major concern in D3, since the items will have more of the focus game-wise than stats, of course runes would get more attention. If you back off stats' importance you have to increase the importance of another aspect of the game.

Back to BrotherRatcliffe: One thing I haven't heard brought up form either side fo the argument is the effect of beta testing on the final product. Neither system will be perfect, but the risk of having to redo the entire stat system if one of the manual stats becomes overpowered is much more than the risk of having to redo the system with auto-stats. A simple change in values given at level is much easier than having to tweak half the game or put stat caps so we don't end up like D2 again.

I'm not ready to assume that rushing and power leveling will be out of D3 until some one from Blizzard says systems would be in place to severely inhibit such actions. Most people would consider endgame in D2 about 70+, since that is powerful enough to do the HL dueling or farming for their other characters. Heck, the entire Ladder system is based on getting to the endgame as fast as possible. Most people I know on NL are simply there to duel and to trade for top-notch gear. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of level 99 peeps in NL.

As far as online and multiplayer is concerned, the players make it more about the destination than the journey. As MP is another major focus for Blizzard, this will inherently stay.

My thoughts on the auto-stat button: This should be more fleshed out before I can give my full view on it. Are we talking random stat placement or a predetermined placment based upon each character?

Bladewind

03-03-2009, 07:59

I think he means pre-determined. Auto-stat button could simply follow the idea Blizz had in mind...

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 08:09

I think he means pre-determined. Auto-stat button could simply follow the idea Blizz had in mind...

Then it's a whole other can of worms and it leads to a dilemma I don't think Blizzard would want to come across. If the auto button produced satisfactory results as far as PvM is concerned while the manual stats would be fixed as to not break characters, it would definitely aid the learning curve. Of course, we have respecs for that. If the auto-button stats would statisstically be the better way to go as far as power level, then there wouldn't really be much use for manual stats outside of purposely gimping your character to test the limits of each stat.

Bladewind

03-03-2009, 09:28

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 10:21

Pre-determined =/= most optimal.
For example strength for a wiz or witch doctor will only improve their armor effectiveness (most of the part they won't melee). If they are playing a nuking class, they will want to have more willpower, so they can sacrifice the effectiveness of their armor.

Why have more strength to improve your armor when you goal is to decimate anything before the monsters can get in range to hurt you ?

Strength also affects block. I heard that was good when in a pinch.

The option of manual stats with the auto-stat button gives an interesting "balance", if you will, for early-game to late-game. You can auto-stat in the lower-levels, giving you a good base when your skills lack punch. Later on, you can apply stats to wherever you want, rather it be beefing up yoru strengths or shoring your weaknesses.

Here's the kicker. You can do the exact same tactic with the current system! Auto-stats will give that base, while Elixers, gems, and equipment will let you cherry-pick your stats (with Elixers for a time), PLUS you still grow your base as you level. While it is a bit of a sacrifice for the pro-manual side, it's better than a swift kick in the nuts and a "Too bad, we're getting rich anyway" attitude.

NASE

03-03-2009, 13:33

Here's the kicker. You can do the exact same tactic with the current system! Auto-stats will give that base, while Elixers, gems, and equipment will let you cherry-pick your stats (with Elixers for a time), PLUS you still grow your base as you level. While it is a bit of a sacrifice for the pro-manual side, it's better than a swift kick in the nuts and a "Too bad, we're getting rich anyway" attitude.

Why so complicated? You are introducing a system - that is chance based - that is complicated and strange while you could simply give out your base stats through autostats and give us 2 or 3 point per level we can manually distribute.

and eventually, most people will be satisfied. balance is easier, noobs can't screw things up eaisily while you can still easily twink your build.

Mad Mantis

03-03-2009, 18:25

I don't see how the people defending Blizzard's stance are telling them "You're not making your game right for us". The logical law of non-contradiction won't bend to that.

They are, however, being selfish. Right now the game is right for them. They are doing all they can to defend it and keep the game that way. That is selfish. I said both sides were selfish. Not that there is anything wrong with that in this matter.

The reason it is such is because it ignored a multitude of other factors that aid to the balance of the game and said "Since manual stats are easier to balance than auto-stats, then the game as a whole would be easier to balance with the manual stats system." This ignores all items, all skills, and all enemy's stats, along with stuff I am probably missing, which would have to be tweaked to each system accordingly.

BrotherRatcliffe argued at first that the most simple method would have been implemented if balance really was the most important thing. NASE correctly identified that gameplay enhancements might take precedent over easy of balancing. As long as you gain more with a more difficult system you could live with a bit more trouble in the balance department. This does not invalidate BrotherRatcliffe's argument that the new system is more complicated. It still has more variables and will still be more difficult to balance.

Those other things you mention only serve to complicate matters. They don't average out inherent troubles. You apply them to both systems (manual and runes) and the system with the least amount of variables will be easier to balance. If nothing else introducing other systems will only make the gap between the two systems larger. The balance argument is still inherently flawed.

Neither system will be perfect, but the risk of having to redo the entire stat system if one of the manual stats becomes overpowered is much more than the risk of having to redo the system with auto-stats. A simple change in values given at level is much easier than having to tweak half the game or put stat caps so we don't end up like D2 again.

Manual stats could also be changed by adjusting the value. If it turns out that strength gives to high a bonus at high level you can just alter that number and fix the system. Once both are in place and functioning relatively smoothly both require only small adjustments.

NASE

03-03-2009, 18:33

It still has more variables and will still be more difficult to balance.

Is it?

There will be something like 20 runes. And for each skill, you need to balance 21 versions of the skill. Yet you can do this for each rune and for each skill separate.
You have to do 21*5*60 balance each being single dimension balancing.

Stats on the other hand have atleast as many different combination, are considerable change by the build and are almost continues. And the one stat is in competition with the other stats - runes seems to have much less competition.

So I'm not even sure stats are the easier system. Stats have so many relations - with equipment, skills, passives, gameplay. While rune are mostly unrelated.

Mad Mantis

03-03-2009, 18:56

There will be something like 20 runes.

You guessed that number. There isn't any documentation, that I'm aware of, that says how many runes we get. That doesn't really matter though.

And for each skill, you need to balance 21 versions of the skill. Yet you can do this for each rune and for each skill separate.
You have to do 21*5*60 balance each being single dimension balancing.

However the various skills and their runed forms still interact with each other since you can have several skills that all have a rune. You still need to balance these version against each other. They do not exist in a vacuum.

Stats on the other hand have atleast as many different combination, are considerable change by the build and are almost continues. And the one stat is in competition with the other stats - runes seems to have much less competition.

There are four stats each with a max of three side-effects. These side effects do not change with more points, they just get a bigger number. That is not more difficult than the rune system. It still looks easier to me.

So I'm not even sure stats are the easier system. Stats have so many relations - with equipment, skills, passives, gameplay. While rune are mostly unrelated.

This is the point where the lack of definitive info on the rune system makes it hard to make predictions on certain cases. We know with a reasonable amount of accuracy how stats will affect everything. We can't yet say for certain if runes will have a relation with equipment. My guess is that it will. Bonuses provided by gear will most likely look like bonuses provided by runes. They can be in competition and reinforce each other.

Skills and passives will interact with runes. That is a given. They also impact gameplay since they heavily modify the skills. The shear number and competition of the runes still makes it a much more difficult system.

Add to that the fact that all the work on the stats has to be done anyway since there will be stats. The only difference is that we won't be in control of them so the values won't vary as widely.

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 18:58

Why so complicated? You are introducing a system - that is chance based - that is complicated and strange while you could simply give out your base stats through autostats and give us 2 or 3 point per level we can manually distribute.

and eventually, most people will be satisfied. balance is easier, noobs can't screw things up eaisily while you can still easily twink your build.

You think THAT'S complicated? Seriously?

Anyway, I could definitely get behind that system if the stats were watered down and/or the points per level were held to 6 with 1 point in each stat and 2 for customization (7-8 points per level could cause overpowering).

I'm not ready to make the assumption that the same values will be given to a certain stat on a certain class after each level.

They are, however, being selfish. Right now the game is right for them. They are doing all they can to defend it and keep the game that way. That is selfish. I said both sides were selfish. Not that there is anything wrong with that in this matter.

Indeed.

BrotherRatcliffe argued at first that the most simple method would have been implemented if balance really was the most important thing. NASE correctly identified that gameplay enhancements might take precedent over easy of balancing. As long as you gain more with a more difficult system you could live with a bit more trouble in the balance department. This does not invalidate BrotherRatcliffe's argument that the new system is more complicated. It still has more variables and will still be more difficult to balance.

Just because one system is more difficult to balance than another doesn't mean the game as a whole will be more difficult to balance f it has said harder system. The assertion that it would be is a logical fallacy.

Those other things you mention only serve to complicate matters. They don't average out inherent troubles. You apply them to both systems (manual and rune) and the system with the least amount of variables will be easier to balance. If nothing else introducing other systems will only make the gap between the two systems larger. The balance argument is still inherently flawed.

Each of those are dependent on all of the others, so when you make a major change to one it will affect them all accordingly. The two systems are not interchangable as you assert above.

Manual stats could also be changed by adjusting the value. If it turns out that strength gives to high a bonus at high level you can just alter that number and fix the system. Once both are in place and functioning relatively smoothly both require only small adjustments.

For manual stats, changing the value alone wouldn't be enough to balance if a major problem (like the current system) occurred. We can look at how Blizzard approached "balance" in D2 with the 1.10 patch. The broken stat system caused the increase in difficulty in enemies and the appearance of synergies to balance it out. The game's balance further devolved with the introduction of overpowered runewords.

The reason this wouldn't be an issue with auto-stats is because you can simply remove or add an additional trigger to put X points in (insert stat here) for X pattern of levels and achieve a larger impact for the amount of time put into it. This is very important to consider.

Mad Mantis

03-03-2009, 19:33

Just because one system is more difficult to balance than another doesn't mean the game as a whole will be more difficult to balance f it has said harder system. The assertion that it would be is a logical fallacy.

All things being equal the more difficult system will be the one that will be harder to balance. The problem is that we don't know if all things will be equal between the two systems. Without further information that would be impossible to establish. You seem intent on assuming that the more difficulty system will be balanced by exceptions when we apply the totality of the systems to either. I don't think it does and think that both will be effected equally as that would be the simplest answer. I could however be mistaken.

Each of those are dependent on all of the others, so when you make a major change to one it will affect them all accordingly. The two systems are not interchangable as you assert above.

I'm not saying they are interchangeable. I said it would be best to leave out the other systems when the two we are discussing because both of them are affect by all other systems. I never said that it didn't matter if you took either of them when looking at the game as a whole.

For manual stats, changing the value alone wouldn't be enough to balance if a major problem (like the current system) occurred. We can look at how Blizzard approached "balance" in D2 with the 1.10 patch. The broken stat system caused the increase in difficulty in enemies and the appearance of synergies to balance it out. The game's balance further devolved with the introduction of overpowered runewords.

The broken stat system wasn't the problem. The overpowered runewords lead to the system being broken. They gave tons of stats and made it possible for builds to ignore entire attributes.

NASE

03-03-2009, 19:40

However the various skills and their runed forms still interact with each other since you can have several skills that all have a rune. You still need to balance these version against each other. They do not exist in a vacuum.

You could work with a standard system. For each different kind of skill - mele, range, destruction, crowdcontrol - you could select a skills that functions as a standard and balance those against each other. Then you can balance each skills to the relevant standard.
Then have you to balance a couple of skills relative to each. The other skill have to be balanced to a standard that isn't changeable.
note that skills are the combination of skills and runes in this description.

You think THAT'S complicated? Seriously?

It's more complicated then a (partial) manual stats system and it has some properties that I do not consider an improvement.
The only advantage I see is nice and functional respecs. Though I'm not sure respecs as a system is something we should consider - certainly not until blizzard releases some more information.

The broken stat system wasn't the problem. The overpowered runewords lead to the system being broken. They gave tons of stats and made it possible for builds to ignore entire attributes.

And even that may not be true. It's the dupers that made them to easy to get. If hr were as rare as they should be, things would be different.

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 20:16

All things being equal the more difficult system will be the one that will be harder to balance. The problem is that we don't know if all things will be equal between the two systems. Without further information that would be impossible to establish. You seem intent on assuming that the more difficulty system will be balanced by exceptions when we apply the totality of the systems to either. I don't think it does and think that both will be effected equally as that would be the simplest answer. I could however be mistaken.

All things can't possibly be equal between auto-stat and manual stat since they demand different amounts of tweaking to different areas, but I'll play ball for kicks and giggles. Here's an excerpt from an article on this site:

"Another benefit of setting the attributes is that the team can balance items and skills and monster difficulty and quest rewards more precisely. With pre-set attributes they have a rough idea of how many hit points, how much mana, how much stamina, how much damage, etc, to expect from a character at level X. (And they know how level X correlates with dungeon Y from play testing.) This isn’t something of much concern or notice for players (unless/until you get way off the usual progression path and find things pointlessly easy or impossibly hard.) but it’s a major concern for the design team. Quests in D3 reward the player with magical and rare items of pre-set types (one early quest reward in the Blizzcon build was always a pair of boots) and that’s a design element that helps the team balance the game, since it gives them a rough idea of how powerful (or weak) characters will be as they progress. Knowing the character’s attributes serves the same function."

A manual stat system is harder to balance because for each level there are a multitude of choices to be made and each has to be accounted for in the balancing. Thus, the balancing argument is perfectly valid.

I'm not saying they are interchangeable. I said it would be best to leave out the other systems when the two we are discussing because both of them are affect by all other systems. I never said that it didn't matter if you took either of them when looking at the game as a whole.

You are flat out wrong here. It is absolutely absurd in the context of designing a game! You can't ignore other aspects of the game if they influence the aspect you choose to focus on and expect balance to magically fall into place. As I said above, all things can't possibly be equal between auto-stat and manual stat since they demand different amounts of tweaking to different areas.

@NASE: Easy does not equal better. The current system does give a good amount of customization, even with a pre-determined base.

Mad Mantis

03-03-2009, 23:23

You could work with a standard system. For each different kind of skill - mele, range, destruction, crowdcontrol - you could select a skills that functions as a standard and balance those against each other. Then you can balance each skills to the relevant standard.

This could work as long as all skills can be easily grouped into a single category. Adding the runes can change the category of a certain skill which can make setting up a baseline annoying. However I admit that this is mere theory crafting as I have not enough information on either system.

And even that may not be true. It's the dupers that made them to easy to get. If hr were as rare as they should be, things would be different.

True. Regarding that I have better hopes for D3. I think they can keep it under control this time. However the scammers and dupers are inventive.

A manual stat system is harder to balance because for each level there are a multitude of choices to be made and each has to be accounted for in the balancing. Thus, the balancing argument is perfectly valid.

It isn't because the balancing issue we were talking about was between the manual-stats system and the rune system. Where the rune system was the more complicated of the two and more difficult to balance, yet they introduced it anyway. I'll grant that auto-stats are easier to balance than manual stats. I just agree with BrotherRatcliffe that balancing couldn't have been that high on the list as they apparently loved to introduce the much more complex rune system. Just for the record, I love the rune system.

As I said above, all things can't possibly be equal between auto-stat and manual stat since they demand different amounts of tweaking to different areas.

I wasn't comparing the manual and auto-stats anymore. We were talking about why they would tote simplicity of balancing as a reason for introducing auto-stats while at the same time introducing a system that looks more complex.

Between just auto and manual-stats you can still keep all things equal and arrive to the same conclusion; that auto stats would be easier to balance. It has less variables and thus would require more work. It is a pretty decent system to ignore things that you know nothing about. Eventually it will go wrong, but not if you keep things general.

AxlStrife

03-03-2009, 23:37

It isn't because the balancing issue we were talking about was between the manual-stats system and the rune system. Where the rune system was the more complicated of the two and more difficult to balance, yet they introduced it anyway. I'll grant that auto-stats are easier to balance than manual stats. I just agree with BrotherRatcliffe that balancing couldn't have been that high on the list as they apparently loved to introduce the much more complex rune system. Just for the record, I love the rune system.

In the vacuum of manual stats and rune system I agree, but why does that justify manual stats over auto stats? If the point is to establish that balance isn't the #1 priority when it comes to the decisions, then I'd have to give a resounding "Duh!" since it's simply a contributing factor for the real purpose of the game, fun. Just for the record, I like what I've seen from the rune system as well.

I wasn't comparing the manual and auto-stats anymore. We were talking about why they would tote simplicity of balancing as a reason for introducing auto-stats while at the same time introducing a system that looks more complex.

Between just auto and manual-stats you can still keep all things equal and arrive to the same conclusion; that auto stats would be easier to balance. It has less variables and thus would require more work. It is a pretty decent system to ignore things that you know nothing about. Eventually it will go wrong, but not if you keep things general.

The argument that could be made for this is that the easier stat system allows for a more complex system elsewhere, once again keeping an equilibrium in the game as a whole. I chuckle even thinking about because at first it sounds like utter bull but it is the perfect spin on the topic.

Drinks?:wine::coffee:

Bladewind

04-03-2009, 08:06

AxlStrife

04-03-2009, 08:36

I foresee a major flaw with the rune system is.
That everyone will just get damage Runes for the extra damage it does for your skills.

Don't get me wrong, there are probably other useful runes that probably reduce SP cost of spells or lower the rate of Fury draining but damage runes will still be the hottest, most in demand runes, because nothing kills faster than pure damage.

Heck they might become the new 40/15s. :/

I dunno, multi-strike looks pretty freakin' fantastic for farming. For PvP, I'd agree with you given what knowledge we have. Striking or multistrike rune on Teleport or Wave of Force could lead to a BvC-esque class. I have a funny feeling about Disintegrate if it isn't capped too low (with namelocking still looming around the corner and pretty much insta-cast it looks like fun, not to mention if silence or the slow and other goodies from passives transfer to PvP.... nasty).

NASE

04-03-2009, 18:09

I foresee a major flaw with the rune system is.
That everyone will just get damage Runes for the extra damage it does for your skills.

Blizzard knows hits, so they will probably try to implement quite a few damage enhancing runes. Not to mention the fact that there will be a system similar to the runes we know in Diablo II. The rarest runes will be the most useful and therefore most used. Is that a problem?

and don't forget, those that aren't used can still be (ab)used to make other 'theme' builds. So I'm not sure it will be that much of a problem.

GarrettHeinitz

04-03-2009, 19:48

In my opinion of course theres going to be a very familiar feel to it BUT it's going to be all so vastly different
chars
maps
skills
quests
items

Its like depleting everything we know and replacing it with new items

my question is will we see repeated characters besides the barbarian

Cain dead?
yeah
hes an old hoot lol

Grug

04-03-2009, 20:27

Nope. No repeated characters besides the barbarian.

The Barbarian wasn't supposed to be in at the beginning, but as they were making the melee class they realized it WAS the Barbarian.

Mad Mantis

04-03-2009, 21:08

In the vacuum of manual stats and rune system I agree, but why does that justify manual stats over auto stats?

It doesn't. This was a side step to the ongoing manual or auto stats discussion. The reasons for manual over auto stats are covered elsewhere in this and other threads.

I dunno, multi-strike looks pretty freakin' fantastic for farming.

Definitely. Multi-strike on WD's mongrels and then enchant then with a Skull of Flame. Should be nice to see.

Turnip

04-03-2009, 21:10

Nope. No repeated characters besides the barbarian.

The Barbarian wasn't supposed to be in at the beginning, but as they were making the melee class they realized it WAS the Tauren Chieftain .

*fixed*...

Grug

04-03-2009, 23:50

I can't tell if you're being humorous or derogatory.

Turnip

05-03-2009, 00:56

Actually I perfer this barb over the last barb but you have to admit his skills do resemble the chieftain more than the old barb.. he could be a completely new character and they could bring the old barb back; not that they should.

Grug

05-03-2009, 01:51

Actually Blizzard cites the Hulk as their biggest inspiration.

slickr

06-03-2009, 14:44

whats not to like? better graphics overall, better monsters, better armor and weapons, better story, better online play, balanced, more meaning to the action, more skill required instead of potion spamming, cool critical deaths animations, cool monster kill effects...
DII is good for its time, but D3 surpasses it in any and all ways.

Srikandi

06-03-2009, 21:14

DII is good for its time, but D3 surpasses it in any and all ways.

We hope :)

A computer game is more than the sum of its parts, plus there's that ineffable "je ne sais quoi" which it either has or not... plus the fact that gamer psychology and expectations change...

I'm optimistic for D3, but I won't sign off on its greatness till I've played it through a few times ;)

Zarniwoop

08-03-2009, 10:25

AxlStrife

08-03-2009, 10:53

Yes, but D2 was a step UP from D1. D3 is a step DOWN from D2 in SOME areas.

I'm sure presentation-wise it will be a step up. I cannot see Blizzard blowing this. But, the decisions they've made so far are crushingly disappointing in few specific areas.

If by a step down you mean "more balanced", then I agree. Then again, opinions are like buttholes, everyone has one.

Turnip

08-03-2009, 13:12

Hmm, well they should really just make 1 build that you can choose from. Imagine how balanced that would be.

Mad Mantis

08-03-2009, 13:32

Hmm, well they should really just make 1 build that you can choose from. Imagine how balanced that would be.

Yeah, that is something that has me scratching my ears as well. If this mythical balance thing is something that everything should strive for then why have options at all? I'm not trying to go for a reductio ad absurdum, but I'm truly wondering at what point do you decide to say: "well we may want to sacrifice some of the balance so that players can have fun with the customisation."

And how much of this desire for balance is from people that play PvP and how much by people that just want to play the game, be it alone or with other people?

Brother Laz

08-03-2009, 14:31

Stat points aren't 'having fun with customisation', they are 'spend them right or reroll'.

Anyway, balance is overrated and pointless, because 100% perfect balance is impossible (balance is an unstable equilibrium) and players will play the best build for each class anyway. I don't even know why you have more than about 5 skills per class to choose from if the majority of players will never pick the others because they do less damage.

NASE

08-03-2009, 16:32

Stat points aren't 'having fun with customisation', they are 'spend them right or reroll'.

If you reroll, it's because you want to, not because there is a 'problem' with the stats - I'm talking about something like 15 points to much in str.

I don't even know why you have more than about 5 skills per class to choose from if the majority of players will never pick the others because they do less damage.

If done correct, people will use many more skills then just 5. Take again the amazon as an example. these are the skilled quite often used:
strafe, multishot, guided arrow, lighting bolt, freezing arrow, lighting fury, charged strike, jab, Valkyrie, decoy, critical strike, pierce, plague javelin - pvp poison amazons.

sbn

08-03-2009, 22:12

Yeah, that is something that has me scratching my ears as well. If this mythical balance thing is something that everything should strive for then why have options at all? I'm not trying to go for a reductio ad absurdum, but I'm truly wondering at what point do you decide to say: "well we may want to sacrifice some of the balance so that players can have fun with the customisation."

I never thought there was suppose to be balance. I thought the point of different characters was for the fun in a party system. The biggest problem I have with the Diablo game, and more so the community at large is that very few understand this has always been a coop game. There doesn't need to be balance, because there shouldn't be balance. Each character has a well defined role in a party, and that is how it was meant from the beginning, as it is with almost all such RPG games like Diablo. Problem is people are too greedy about their precious drops that nobody wanted to play nice together, now that has been fixed.

And how much of this desire for balance is from people that play PvP and how much by people that just want to play the game, be it alone or with other people?

I think it is a given that people talking about balance see this only for PvP, which I just do not understand I guess. PvP in these games is just so mindlessly a waste as it is no test of skill. When the game is so item dependent it, there is no test of skill but rather a test of who can rush out and either find or purchase the most elite of items. If people truly wanted "balance" for PvP, then what would happen is both players would use the same items. Only then can true skill be tested.

Brother Laz

08-03-2009, 23:26

If you reroll, it's because you want to, not because there is a 'problem' with the stats - I'm talking about something like 15 points to much in str.

If you don't care about having the perfect character - and you probably already beat Diablo - why are you still playing?

If done correct, people will use many more skills then just 5. Take again the amazon as an example. these are the skilled quite often used: strafe, multishot, guided arrow, lighting bolt, freezing arrow, lighting fury, charged strike, jab, Valkyrie, decoy, critical strike, pierce, plague javelin - pvp poison amazons.

You're looking at a rose-tinted computer screen. How many people really have some of that stuff? How many just have a hammerdin or MF sorc? Etc.

Telzen

08-03-2009, 23:50

Which is why they are trying to make all the skills useful for D3. Hopefully they will be balanced enough so that people pick skills based on how they like to play instead of what is most effective. I will anyway.

Brother Laz

09-03-2009, 00:00

You sure 'all skills will be useful'?
Even if by some miracle every skill will get you to Hell, then people will still pick the best ones.

Even if skills are almost perfectly balanced, people will pick the best ones even if the others are 99% as effective. I watched it happen in Median: some perfectly viable and even overpowered builds were deemed 'worthless' because something else was better, or even because nobody had written a guide about them yet!

Telzen

09-03-2009, 01:52

How are you deaming them as "best" though? All the skills have different strengths and weaknesses, some are better in some situations and some in others. All you can do is balance them as much as possible and if the masses still just try to min and max it, well there isn't much you can do.

Dahmer

09-03-2009, 08:30

If you don't care about having the perfect character - and you probably already beat Diablo - why are you still playing?

You're looking at a rose-tinted computer screen. How many people really have some of that stuff? How many just have a hammerdin or MF sorc? Etc.*raises hand* I'm probably a huge exception though, almost sure I tried everything and I even ended up with things that didn't work at all but it was fun trying :D
I also rerolled several characters after upgrading the gear to perfect stat bonus just to get a handful of points into either vit or strength (titan barb :smug: )

After all this time I'm still not a fan of the auto stat point system, I know what I'm doing and just because there's people that have no clue what they're doing and rush themselves in ****ing up their character I lose my freedom of putting up stat points?

As far as I know that's not called balance, it's called making it newbie proof.

AxlStrife

09-03-2009, 08:45

*raises hand* I'm probably a huge exception though, almost sure I tried everything and I even ended up with things that didn't work at all but it was fun trying :D
I also rerolled several characters after upgrading the gear to perfect stat bonus just to get a handful of points into either vit or strength (titan barb :smug: )

After all this time I'm still not a fan of the auto stat point system, I know what I'm doing and just because there's people that have no clue what they're doing and rush themselves in ****ing up their character I lose my freedom of putting up stat points?

As far as I know that's not called balance, it's called making it newbie proof.

You're not losing your "freedom of putting up stat points". The focus of the customization of stats is simply being shifted.

NASE

09-03-2009, 14:00

You're looking at a rose-tinted computer screen. How many people really have some of that stuff? How many just have a hammerdin or MF sorc? Etc.

It's a difference in approach. You are looking at the things that go wrong and want to do everything to prevent these from coming into the game. Which is a very respectable opinion.

I on the other hand try to look at what did work in diablo II. And I try make people realise that hoping they would see the advantages of certain system when they are applied correct. Then, maybe then, we can find some of those systems back in diablo III yet much and much better so that they function the way they could - as shown by some examples - for all characters and classes.

You're not losing your "freedom of putting up stat points". The focus of the customization of stats is simply being shifted.

But why would that focus be superior?
It's not going to easier to balance if you are going to get stats from items - as much as you would with (partial) manual systems. It's not going to be noob proof - as they might still take the wrong items. All it offers is fast and easy respecs, yet you can get this with respecs too.

AxlStrife

09-03-2009, 16:28

But why would that focus be superior?
It's not going to easier to balance if you are going to get stats from items - as much as you would with (partial) manual systems. It's not going to be noob proof - as they might still take the wrong items. All it offers is fast and easy respecs, yet you can get this with respecs too.

Now you're just arguing in circles. If you believe you can do a better job at Blizzard's game than Blizzard, by all means put up or shut up.

Those are some fat assuptions being made over a game you haven't played yet.

Who claimed the game would be completely noob-proof? I never saw that one.

NASE

09-03-2009, 16:33

noob-proofness is one the arguments people use for the use of autostats. Seen the fact that your item based stats system is a part of a possible autostats system, this is one of the question you might want to explain if you want to show why your system is superior.

What just why am I arguing in circles. I don't think you have answered the question already - or have I missed some posts perhaps?

AxlStrife

09-03-2009, 16:43

You keep the same points keep being brought up and they keep beign addressed, then you decide to drop those points momentarily to focus on another line in an argument only to bring it back up, rather it be about certain pet classes, lack of customization, or the superiority of one system over another.

You are quite the extremist when it comes to your arguments. The argument is that auto-stats are noob-friendly, not noob-proof. You and Dahmer tried to twist it. Sorry, that's a strawman. If you believe you can do a better job at Blizzard's game than Blizzard, by all means put up or shut up.

My tone is quite irritated today, in case you didn't notice. It's been a bad one and it's not even noon here.

Mad Mantis

09-03-2009, 17:52

If you believe you can do a better job at Blizzard's game than Blizzard, by all means put up or shut up.

That is such an easy way of killing discussion that it is not even fun anymore. It also completely fails to miss the point that people can have valid criticism without being an expert in a field. I can tell when someone messed up a calculation without being a master in that particular field or even being able to do the entire equation.

We are loosing our freedom of putting up the stat points. I'll get a base number of stat points distributed by Blizz in all stats whether I want to or not. Maybe I don't want those point in Vit or Str. I still get them and there is nothing that customizing with gear can do about that.

Why make the game noob-friendly at all, besides being forced to by the marketing department? How long do you realistically expect to be a noob in a certain game if it attracts your attention? If they can't even invest four hours of play time to get an idea about the game and if they want to invest the time in it then why should the game be developed for them?

NASE

09-03-2009, 19:00

You are quite the extremist when it comes to your arguments. The argument is that auto-stats are noob-friendly, not noob-proof.

That nagging about details and you know it. Noob-proof, noob-friendly or whatever you want to make of it eventually come down to the same idea. It's not any of those things are defined so try to be a little flexible.

And I bring back arguments, it probably because I still don't feel satisfied with the responses given.

Brother Laz

09-03-2009, 19:28

That is such an easy way of killing discussion that it is not even fun anymore. It also completely fails to miss the point that people can have valid criticism without being an expert in a field.

I am. In Median, I kept stat points (out of inertia, to prevent system shock for newbies) and no matter what I did, they always ended up being a mandatory choice one way or the other.

Vitality got nerfed, then everyone poured on the strength and/or dex. Energy used to be very hot, until the energy factor (to spell damage) nerf, then a lot of builds tried to ignore it. Anyway, the perfect solution was almost always something extreme, like '50 into dex, all remaining points into energy'.

Sure, some precious builds had a nice 3/2 energy/vitality distribution or something like that. But this was untenable across all builds. For the majority of builds, the best solution was to put all points into stat X. (The only reason why this didn't happen in classic LoD was item requirements)

So you get all-dex assassins, all-strength bowdruids (druid bows get a damage bonus from str, not dex), all-energy sorcs and the usual 100-str-rest-vita amazons, which ironically are the result of a passive skill that gives vita per socketed gem (implemented to reduce the need for vitality points) because people want to see just how high their hit points will go.

We are loosing our freedom of putting up the stat points. I'll get a base number of stat points distributed by Blizz in all stats whether I want to or not. Maybe I don't want those point in Vit or Str. I still get them and there is nothing that customizing with gear can do about that.

Also, maybe I don't want whirlwind at all! I want frozen orb and conviction, and barb hp. And valkyrie.

This is what 'skill-based' (what a lie) or 'sandbox' games are based on: pick your skills from a skill tree. It's the ultimate freedom! Oh yeah, there are about three popular builds, or you can make a lot of weak and gimped builds. Yay for liberty.

Rules limit freedom and that's why a game can work. Just because the rules included something that isn't included now, like 'cutting corners' in auto racing circa 1900, doesn't mean you're limited now. You may not be able to drive through the dirt and cut a corner anymore, but you get evolved drafting techniques, telemetry and skill runes.

Why make the game noob-friendly at all, besides being forced to by the marketing department? How long do you realistically expect to be a noob in a certain game if it attracts your attention? If they can't even invest four hours of play time to get an idea about the game and if they want to invest the time in it then why should the game be developed for them?

One of my development goals with Median was that it needed to be noob-friendly. This means everything short of actual respecs, because you can't just drop respecs into D2 (both from a philosophical and a practical-technical point of view).

You get all of your skills before the difficulty cranks up. You even get a resist bonus in Hatred so you don't have to scramble to collect resist gear before you meet Daystars. You can remove runes and jewels for the price of 3 town portal scrolls. There is even an 'attribute challenge' that rewards you for not spending stat points for a while... hopefully until you have figured out what your character actually needs. Even the installation is a lot simpler than most other mods.

And guess what, people say this is one of Median's strong points and often even the reason why they started playing it.

Don't forget, the customer is king. If a game is hard to start, a lot of players will return the box or will never even buy it when word gets out. Why are you not playing Flight Simulator? If you're into racing games, why are you playing Need for Speed instead of something like R-Factor? Too complex, I suppose? Yeah...

......

Noob-proof, noob-friendly or whatever you want to make of it eventually come down to the same idea. It's not any of those things are defined so try to be a little flexible.

X% of the players end up as experts. 100% of players start out as noobs.

People spend time playing a game instead of getting a second job. Wasting their time by undoing their progress (LOL, you thought your caster druid needed energy? ROFL REROLL) has a monetary cost associated with it. How long can you force a million people to do something they don't like, namely rerolling because they made a honest mistake because the correct solution is so random that you need a guide?

Mad Mantis

09-03-2009, 20:27

I am. In Median, I kept stat points (out of inertia, to prevent system shock for newbies) and no matter what I did, they always ended up being a mandatory choice one way or the other.

All that proves is that you don't know how to make them work in the D2 setting. It doesn't say anything about the possibility of stat points in D3, or whether they could possibly be made to work in D2.

Now I don't claim to have the answer to the most brilliant stat system ever, nor do I claim that I can make them function in either D2 or D3. I just think that they could have had a lot of potential in D3. The current system doesn't sit well with me.

For the majority of builds, the best solution was to put all points into stat X.

And now ignore the munchkin factor of "best build". How viable was it to go with an all strength assassin or an all dex bowdruid? Could you make it through the game? Could you do it without being bored to tears by fighting a single mob for ten minutes?

Viable variety is key. It is much nicer to see that both a strength based build and a dex based build can both make it through the game. That the strength build is somewhat faster doesn't matter that much if the dex based game is viable and doesn't feel like it lags too far behind. Every thing does not have to be equal.

Rules limit freedom and that's why a game can work.

I agree that rules are what make the game. However that was a comment on people mentioning that we have full control over the stat points via gear. We don't as there is an obvious limitation to it.

Don't forget, the customer is king. If a game is hard to start, a lot of players will return the box or will never even buy it when word gets out.

And a lot of people would like it as well. The customer may be king, but there are an awful lot of different king's out there. Which one do you let rule over your design?

Current market trends are towards the "casual gamer" who is defined by the marketing boys as being too stupid to open the box the game came in, let alone install it on a computer. Features are being cut and pasted from other popular games and all depth is being taken out in order to "streamline" and "keep the pace going". These games seldom last more than a month before being shelfed.

I hope that D3 will not be geared towards that market segment. Reading the various information we have leaves me wondering if they are or aren't moving in that direction. I hope for a game that allows complexity in its builds, more than what was possible in D2. That requires a certain strategic approach to all combats and not just the boss fights. If this means a rougher start, then so be it.

Grug

09-03-2009, 20:27

Here's a sudden inspiration. Mad Mantis and NASE are saying that without manual stats, they couldn't make any builds that needed different stats. But Diablo 2 also had builds NOT based on stats, like Meteorb Sorc and Whirlwind Barb, and the best stats for them were the usual all-vit. Even Glass Cannon zon is based equally on skills and items than on stats. In Diablo 3, Blizz is reducing the former type and increasing the latter type.

Mad Mantis

09-03-2009, 20:32

Here's a sudden inspiration. Mad Mantis and NASE are saying that without manual stats, they couldn't make any builds that needed different stats.

Damnit, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that with the inclusion of a proper manual stat system there could have been a much more interesting system for builds. One that offers, with the same skill set, a different play style regardless of what gear you would wear. THAT is the possibility that I think we have lost.

Do I think that we have less customization in D3, or that we can't work around the system to create off the wall builds? Hell no, we can still do that and we probably have more options as well. I think that a proper system could have given us a new and interesting way of looking at builds.

Grug

09-03-2009, 20:36

It's all risk vs. reward. It's worth getting rid of manual stats if it means you can't gimp your character. Is having the chance to gimp your character really that important?

And when I say "Gimp" I don't mean "a weaker build that plays differently" I mean completely nerf your character.

Mad Mantis

09-03-2009, 21:02

It's worth getting rid of manual stats if it means you can't gimp your character.

No. It severely restricts how I can play my character and in return I get something that can't truly fail. I loose out on the potential of making a build truly mine and in return we get something that is right for exactly no one.

Doppel

09-03-2009, 21:25

I am. In Median, I kept stat points (out of inertia, to prevent system shock for newbies) and no matter what I did, they always ended up being a mandatory choice one way or the other.

Vitality got nerfed, then everyone poured on the strength and/or dex. Energy used to be very hot, until the energy factor (to spell damage) nerf, then a lot of builds tried to ignore it. Anyway, the perfect solution was almost always something extreme, like '50 into dex, all remaining points into energy'.

Sure, some precious builds had a nice 3/2 energy/vitality distribution or something like that. But this was untenable across all builds. For the majority of builds, the best solution was to put all points into stat X. (The only reason why this didn't happen in classic LoD was item requirements)

So you get all-dex assassins, all-strength bowdruids (druid bows get a damage bonus from str, not dex), all-energy sorcs and the usual 100-str-rest-vita amazons, which ironically are the result of a passive skill that gives vita per socketed gem (implemented to reduce the need for vitality points) because people want to see just how high their hit points will go.

Not to burst your bubble, but did you ever considered the possibility you just sucked at balancing these 4 stats out? Yes, no? What with extremes like 20 k life, 1 k dex etc (you don't make stats be more meaningful by just adding a higher max to them, which is exactly what you did, yes?) I would also like to have some proof on your claim "For the majority of builds, the best solution was to put all points into stat X" seeing that i can't imagine someone perfecting builds in a mere month, between two of your nerf's.

Plus, its still besides the point. You won't be putting anything in anything with a auto-stat system, thus "the best solution" isn't even applicable anymore, whether that "best solution" is a monotone "put everything in X for all builds" due to bad balancing.
You don't solve a system which was badly balanced by getting rid of the system. Which is a basic undeniable logic i simply expect everyone to understand.

Also, maybe I don't want whirlwind at all! I want frozen orb and conviction, and barb hp. And valkyrie.

This is what 'skill-based' (what a lie) or 'sandbox' games are based on: pick your skills from a skill tree. It's the ultimate freedom! Oh yeah, there are about three popular builds, or you can make a lot of weak and gimped builds. Yay for liberty.

Rules limit freedom and that's why a game can work. Just because the rules included something that isn't included now, like 'cutting corners' in auto racing circa 1900, doesn't mean you're limited now. You may not be able to drive through the dirt and cut a corner anymore, but you get evolved drafting techniques, telemetry and skill runes.

Because if they couldn't balance four stats which could be manually altered then that automatically means including runes which make you able to manually alter your skills, um, i'm lost in your flawed logic, help please.

Apart from skill-runes having nothing to do with the question "auto-stats or not", lets even forget about making that question irrelevant, what makes you think Blizzard is able to magically balance out the aspect of skill customization with manually applicable skill-runes? We aren't talking about rules here, we are talking about taking out an aspect of the game for apparently no reason at all (less you call "it was badly balanced" a reason, which it obviously is not) and then simply assuming another aspect being put in the game (which might as well simply be just as badly balanced making our earlier so called reason for taking out the first aspect even less valid, if at all possible) making the previous aspect not even relevant and wished for anymore for some strange and unexplained reason.

One of my development goals with Median was that it needed to be noob-friendly. This means everything short of actual respecs, because you can't just drop respecs into D2 (both from a philosophical and a practical-technical point of view).

You get all of your skills before the difficulty cranks up. You even get a resist bonus in Hatred so you don't have to scramble to collect resist gear before you meet Daystars. You can remove runes and jewels for the price of 3 town portal scrolls. There is even an 'attribute challenge' that rewards you for not spending stat points for a while... hopefully until you have figured out what your character actually needs. Even the installation is a lot simpler than most other mods.

And guess what, people say this is one of Median's strong points and often even the reason why they started playing it.

Don't forget, the customer is king. If a game is hard to start, a lot of players will return the box or will never even buy it when word gets out. Why are you not playing Flight Simulator? If you're into racing games, why are you playing Need for Speed instead of something like R-Factor? Too complex, I suppose? Yeah...

......

Define "customer", are we talking about the long term fan here (the fan base Blizzard has accumulated along the years) or are we talking about tarfetting the most common denominator yielding you the most customers over a extremely short period of time, risking you any strong fanbase for future product obviously, together with a game which will be lost in time very fast indeed. (why would they give a ****? They're you're average marginal casual noob anyways)
I don't think one of Median's strong points is that its "noob-friendly". (i would like to see how you're fanbase would react upon that statement though, lol)
In fact i was under the impression median was pretty hardcore, saving attributes for the attribute challenge isn't an easy feat for a noob regardless wether you know what stats are the most useful to your character (and i'm not even talking about the 500 one), removing jewels from items via a simply formula means nothing when you're getting pwnt by nilathak, and so forth.
Sure, highly twinked this game is a breeze, big surprise.

X% of the players end up as experts. 100% of players start out as noobs.

And making the game noob-friendly makes them not aspire a higher goal then noob-dom.

People spend time playing a game instead of getting a second job. Wasting their time by undoing their progress (LOL, you thought your caster druid needed energy? ROFL REROLL) has a monetary cost associated with it. How long can you force a million people to do something they don't like, namely rerolling because they made a honest mistake because the correct solution is so random that you need a guide?

Wrong. Sure make the "correct" solution not simply random, but a caster druid not needing energy is a BALANCE ISSUE, get this through your head please. It has nothing to do with removing the game from manual stats. Plus, you're assumption rerolling is "something people don't like" is just a mere generalizing assumption. "People" don't care about Diablo anyways, "Diablo fans" care about Diablo, or do you want this game to be the pinnacle of hack&slash gaming played by mere "random people"?

I for one loved the transition between being a noob and (relative) "pro" Diablo gamer, i loved it when i came to the realization certain aspects of the game made me much more powerful then i had anticipated, rerolling a character to apply my newly found knowledge wasn't a burden at all, on the contrary, it was exciting to see how it would turn out and if i later came to the realization i would've been possibly much better with x instead of y then i had yet another reason to keep on playing this game instead of staying a noob forever in the case of the game not even asking me to be more then a noob.
Currently i have a freshly made first character, an mfing sorc, she's far from being perfect, she has something like 200 in strength (because i was able to make a perfect spirit shield early in the game, before i had pretty much any plus str on any gear i had, much less an anni or a torch). I ave far from perfect skill setup (not fully synergized Blizz with a relatively weak fire wall). Does it bother me? Do i rush to reroll? Nope, she does perfectly fine and if i have accumulated what i deem to be all the gear this sorc would wish for, then i'll reroll this character.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 07:47

@Mantis: Criticism is fine, but if you're gonna say "It's possible to have balanced manual stats", then by all means show me. Since the main portion of the "manual stat" side is pretty much you, NASE, and Bladewing basically repeating the same stuff ad nauseum without anything concrete to show that manual stats would be better for the game than auto stats, I'm pretty much gonna "hang up the gloves" as I'm just plain tired of arguing in circles with no ground gained.

I really don't care which way the stat system goes, as long as it makes the game fun. Since there aren't enough concrete pro-manual non-broken systems to show it can be done and Blizzard decided to take the auto-stat route since it's what's best for the game at this time, I'm sticking to auto-stats being the correct choice.

@NASE: Noob-friendly and Noob-proof are not the same thing. Normal difficulty in Diablo 2 is noob-friendly, while Adventure Quest is noob-proof. If you want to argue that they're the same thing, go right ahead and run off that cliff.

Just because you're not satisfied with the responses doesn't make them any less valid. That's a logically bankrupt view to take in general, but you're free to do it. Just don't expect many people to be swayed to your view or for anyone to take you any more seriously than what people do with what you currently bring to the table.

@ entire pro-manual group/clique/community: If you argue that manual is the way to go over auto, remember that the burden of proof is on you to prove this. I wish y'all luck, and if you can bring to light a manual stat system that makes Diablo 3 a better game for almost everyone AND the subsequent empyrical evidence mirroring such, you can expect concessions from me and a lot of other people.

Dahmer

10-03-2009, 08:39

My view/arguement = keep it like Diablo 2
People that whine for auto-stats are one of these :
- ignorant people that claim everybody always went for a full vit build
- people that are too lazy to take a minute or two to figure out where to put stats

If you think this isn't true, try and prove me wrong but even in this thread I saw several people that fit into one or even both. I think people like that shouldn't be talking when it comes to changing a game, this is Diablo (made for gamers) and not Wow (made for little kids).

Now for reality :
If you think it's best to have stats automated and a system where you can alter your stats with equipment then once again we're moving closer to noob-proof WoW where your base stats don't even matter anymore...
You also lose the ability to try different things out because if the automated stats don't allow for trying uncommon builds do you think they'll allow you to get those stats with different gear? I highly doubt that.

I want the freedom of putting up stats for everyone to do what they want because Diablo is not a game for lazy people. Every aspect of the game always required a lot of time and a lot of work (except for earlier patches) and I'm fairly sure that if the stat system gets changed to something easier we'll have more and more people whining to make everything else easier too and where would that lead us? Yup, WoW.

*edit*
Just realised something, isn't it true that they'll make energy give out magical damage to skills too? Would be another reason for a manual stat system because then I could try a "full" energy Wizard :D

The only "auto" system I'll like would have to be one where you can alter stats by how you play or by using certain skills/weapons, something that requires some work/thinking while the lazy/ignorant people probably wont even know about it.

Telzen

10-03-2009, 08:47

Whine for auto stats? lol I don't think so, D3 already has auto stats, so we don't have to whine for anything. I'm just trying to point out that auto stats with the new passives allow greater customization and balance than manual stats could, and Blizzard made a good choice by doing it that way. Remember we don't know that when they went to design the game they right away decided to drop manual stats. More like they tried them out, since they were in D2, but found they didn't work out.

Which is more customization? Moving 4 stats up and being stuck with the decision? Or being able to move 4 stats up with items at will and having 35+ passives to choose from to change your character? (I include the passives because a lot of them do the same as moving a certain stat up and they are all designed with auto stats in mind and would be unbalanced if they were manual)

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 08:47

My view/arguement = keep it like Diablo 2
People that whine for auto-stats are one of these :
- ignorant people that claim everybody always went for a full vit build
- people that are too lazy to take a minute or two to figure out where to put stats

If you think this isn't true, try and prove me wrong but even in this thread I saw several people that fit into one or even both. I think people like that shouldn't be talking when it comes to changing a game, this is Diablo (made for gamers) and not Wow (made for little kids).

Now for reality :
If you think it's best to have stats automated and a system where you can alter your stats with equipment then once again we're moving closer to noob-proof WoW where your base stats don't even matter anymore...
You also lose the ability to try different things out because if the automated stats don't allow for trying uncommon builds do you think they'll allow you to get those stats with different gear? I highly doubt that.

I want the freedom of putting up stats for everyone to do what they want because Diablo is not a game for lazy people. Every aspect of the game always required a lot of time and a lot of work (except for earlier patches) and I'm fairly sure that if the stat system gets changed to something easier we'll have more and more people whining to make everything else easier too and where would that lead us? Yup, WoW.

LOADS of logical fallacies (strawman, ad hominem, and slippery slope to name a few) and false assumptions in that one.

I never claimed that EVERYONE went the generally accepted "best" stat placement, just that most serious builds fall into that. This is a fact. I also haven't claimed that I'm too lazy to place my own stats. I wouldn't be playing D2 right now if that were the case. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/Annie_Ann/Diablo%20II%20Characters/Untitled-1.jpg)
It's true that WoW influences are in the game. It definitely works out considerign how popular the game is, so I don't see how blasphemous it can be to implement proven systems into another game. It's obvious Blizzard knows what they're doing.

Dahmer

10-03-2009, 09:09

LOADS of logical fallacies (strawman, ad hominem, and slippery slope to name a few) and false assumptions in that one.

I never claimed that EVERYONE went the generally accepted "best" stat placement, just that most serious builds fall into that. This is a fact. I also haven't claimed that I'm too lazy to place my own stats. I wouldn't be playing D2 right now if that were the case. (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v331/Annie_Ann/Diablo%20II%20Characters/Untitled-1.jpg)
It's true that WoW influences are in the game. It definitely works out considerign how popular the game is, so I don't see how blasphemous it can be to implement proven systems into another game. It's obvious Blizzard knows what they're doing.I said that because Diablo and WoW are different games, don't compare or push them in the same category just because they both have characters with stats. I'm also rather sick of games being catered for the lazy people which is also a fact. (several other builds didn't work because of how stats worked)
Besides that....what is that poor attempt of an image link doing there?

@Telzen :
But if you read around you will see a lot of people whining/complaining from both sides, people that say they love automated stats and people that say they love putting up stat points themselves.
As for the stat system you just mentioned a system I would like...but I'm not getting my hopes up, I very rarely get what I'm hoping for.

Turnip

10-03-2009, 09:10

Dahmer

10-03-2009, 09:16

So I dont understand why anyone would want to lose customization for an if statement on whether it imbalances the game. Diablo 2 has many different oddball builds that allows for thousands of hours of gameplay, what it lacks in content it makes up for in that; is a bit of balance not worth giving up for that?I'm not sure how changing from manual to auto stats will suddenly make the game completely balanced but I also never played the demo and I'm not a blizzard programmer so...wait and see? :coffee: (I hate waiting btw...)

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 09:20

I said that because Diablo and WoW are different games, don't compare or push them in the same category just because they both have characters with stats. I'm also rather sick of games being catered for the lazy people which is also a fact. (several other builds didn't work because of how stats worked)
Besides that....what is that poor attempt of an image link doing there?

the picture was simply to show I am actually playing the game and not blowing smoke up everyone's ***.

Both games are in the RPG genre. ARPG and MMORPG are simply subgenres of the role-playing arc, but Diablo happens to have elements of both. I think it's fair to compare games that are similar in so many aspects.

I never said that games weren't being catered to lazy people, but I would like you to back up your statement. Just because one system has been replaced and the new system doesn't involve clicking 5 times for every level doesn't mean they are catering to lazy people. Hell, D2 B.net definitely caters to lazy people, with rushes, boss runs, and duped running rampant.

NASE

10-03-2009, 13:25

@Mantis: Criticism is fine, but if you're gonna say "It's possible to have balanced manual stats", then by all means show me.

We have given builds in diablo II that make good use stats and if you want to be a bit flexible, we can even nominate the amazon as a class that makes decent use of the stats.
So what more do you want? These are example of how stats can work in a balanced way. I can even try to highlight the system that help to make them balanced. Yet if you are demanding that we write a mod for diablo II just to prove that it can be done. Well, then I hope you never argue against anything blizzard did.

All someone very smart has to do it try and characterise the system that provide stats balance or interesting stats questions in a lot of different game. And then use this knowledge to advise how skills, stats and equipment should work together.

I don't know why blizzard hasn't attempted this.

anything concrete to show that manual stats would be better for the game than auto stats, I'm pretty much gonna "hang up the gloves" as I'm just plain tired of arguing in circles with no ground gained.

As already said, there are builds in diablo II that would probably fail in an autostats system. And you could argue that you can equipment-stats system could take of that, or perhaps even a skills-stats system. Yet for both, there are reason to reject them.

@NASE: Noob-friendly and Noob-proof are not the same thing. Normal difficulty in Diablo 2 is noob-friendly, while Adventure Quest is noob-proof. If you want to argue that they're the same thing, go right ahead and run off that cliff.

Then I hope that from now on, you will read Noob-friendly whenever I write Noob-proof, unless I really mean Noob-proof, then you should read Noob-proof off course.

I wish y'all luck, and if you can bring to light a manual stat system that makes Diablo 3 a better game for almost everyone AND the subsequent empyrical evidence mirroring such, you can expect concessions from me and a lot of other people.

the picture was simply to show I am actually playing the game and not blowing smoke up everyone's ***.

Perhaps you can give us the empirical evidence that you were effectively playing diablo and that you aren't just good with photoshop, or windows or that you weren't just sitting in the chat room, or that you were just writing on a friends computer or...
I hope that you see that asking for empyrical evidence isn't the way to go.

lol I don't think so, D3 already has auto stats, so we don't have to whine for anything. I'm just trying to point out that auto stats with the new passives allow greater customization and balance than manual stats could, and Blizzard made a good choice by doing it that way.

Then let me try to point out that there are reason not to like such a system - I'm sure they are somewhere on this forum by now, I'm to lazy to write them all out (again).

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 18:14

We have given builds in diablo II that make good use stats and if you want to be a bit flexible, we can even nominate the amazon as a class that makes decent use of the stats.
So what more do you want? These are example of how stats can work in a balanced way. I can even try to highlight the system that help to make them balanced. Yet if you are demanding that we write a mod for diablo II just to prove that it can be done. Well, then I hope you never argue against anything blizzard did.

All someone very smart has to do it try and characterise the system that provide stats balance or interesting stats questions in a lot of different game. And then use this knowledge to advise how skills, stats and equipment should work together.

I don't know why blizzard hasn't attempted this.

So you base what you call a good decision because it worked less than 20% of the time when applied? By that logic you should support Bush, Hoover, and Harding as excellent presidents and Vista as an excellent OS. Even a broken analog clock is right twice a day, that does't mean we use it. Sure, it can be fixed, but if you're more willing to take the time and energy to fix that clock instead of getting a new clock that will function similarly, more power to you.

I'm definitely not gonna argue for you to make a mod to prove your point unless D3 is released and this agument is still going on. Show me (and Blizzard for that matter) a game that has done manual stats right.

As already said, there are builds in diablo II that would probably fail in an autostats system. And you could argue that you can equipment-stats system could take of that, or perhaps even a skills-stats system. Yet for both, there are reason to reject them.

Because you don't like them? I accept that you feel as if it won't be the correct way, but until you get your hands on the game you cannot say that for certain and be taken seriously.

Then I hope that from now on, you will read Noob-friendly whenever I write Noob-proof, unless I really mean Noob-proof, then you should read Noob-proof off course.

LOL. You could just be clear on that which you are arguing against instead of falling back on "You know what I meant".

Perhaps you can give us the empirical evidence that you were effectively playing diablo and that you aren't just good with photoshop, or windows or that you weren't just sitting in the chat room, or that you were just writing on a friends computer or...
I hope that you see that asking for empyrical evidence isn't the way to go.

You'd have to prove I have Photoshop on my computer and that I have friends. Conspiracy theories are generally considered crazy statements from deranged people, and while I disagree with that generalization I can see how people would think statements with very little to back them up are generally crazy.

Also, why would you think me not being on my own computer would stop me fomr playing D2. Maybe my "friend" has D2 on his computer and doesn't really care if I play on it. You put a lot of burden on yourself to try to poke whatever holes you want on a sincere attempt to not blow smoke.

Mad Mantis

10-03-2009, 18:32

@Mantis: Criticism is fine, but if you're gonna say "It's possible to have balanced manual stats", then by all means show me.

Why don't you prove to me that there is no way that there can be balanced manual stats? That would be as useful a challenge.

There is no logical way to prove such a statement at this point in time. Without complete access to, among other things, the developed and proper play tested game, a team of programmers and a solid definition of "balanced" it is simply impossible.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 18:39

Why don't you prove to me that there is no way that there can be balanced manual stats? That would be as useful a challenge.

There is no logical way to prove such a statement at this point in time. Without complete access to, among other things, the developed and proper play tested game, a team of programmers and a solid definition of "balanced" it is simply impossible.

I'm not making the claim that it can't be done. The burden of proof is not on me.

Mad Mantis

10-03-2009, 18:41

I'm not making the claim that it can't be done.

Funny, because that seems to be the entire argument of the pro-manual stats crowd.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 18:50

Funny, because that seems to be the entire argument of the pro-manual stats crowd.

ORLY? I think you're full of it if that's what you really believe. (http://diablo.incgamers.com/blog/comments/on-the-drawing-board-4-preset-attributes/)

Mad Mantis

10-03-2009, 19:02

It’s noob-friendly, and attributes were largely irrelevant in D2 anyway.

This talks mostly about how there is no variation and things can be a bit illogical. Which would fall under unbalanced attributes.

It enables the D3 team to better balance the game.

This straight up mentions unbalance. In this case that they can't cordinate manual stats with the rest of the game.

It works in World of Warcraft.

A non-argument. Hell, there are a lot of people who would love nothing more than to keep things well away from WoW.

Attribute respecs.

They don't want people to break their characters. With proper stats you could put points in at random and not end up with a character that is umable to continue.

It boosts the importance of items.

This actually says: "don't worry, you'll be able to get your manual stats via gear."

Late Game Equipment Finds.

Remove stat restrictions from items and you're done.

Apparently we are both reading something else into that article. Either I'm missing something, or I was correct and the idea that manual stats are impossible to be balanced are at the core of the pro-maunal stats people.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 19:23

What I get from it is that it is unfeasible to re-attempt and balance manual stats at this stage of the game.

The consequence of scrapping years of work because some people, most of those who have never even touched game design, didn't like it is MUCH more than the benefits of fully appeasing said nay-sayers. I HIGHLY doubt many people are willing to wait anymore than they already have to just to flip-flop on their stat stance.

@comment about items: Why does the pro-manual side have a problem with not having stats their way when they can do just that with items? Are they afraid that there won't be any other modifiers on gear? Granted the stats won't be to such an extreme like a titan barb, but in essense you still have manual stats!

@comment to attribute respecs: If you can put points in at random and it not have a damaging affect on your character, then that means stats have little to no effect on a character. I'm pretty sure no one wants stats to be irrelevant, but with "proper stats" as you stated it you might as well not even have stats.

I'm gonna be afk for a while so it migh tbe a bit before I can respond to your response.

NASE

10-03-2009, 19:38

So you base what you call a good decision because it worked less than 20% of the time when applied?

The points is that when you studie that 20%, you might turn it into 50%, or even 75%. I see no reason why not to try it.

Because you don't like them? I accept that you feel as if it won't be the correct way, but until you get your hands on the game you cannot say that for certain and be taken seriously.

Well, perhaps the argument I have come down to taste. Which still doesn't mean it should be ignored, just treated correctly.

I believe that a system where you mimic stat-effect with skills have 2 question that may cause a problem. If I look at what stats and skill represent, I see stats as how your character is and skill what your character can do. They are two very different things. And I believe they should be kept separate as much as possible. They simply are different things. Perhaps it's more philosophical then really game based, yet things that don't belong together should be kept separate.
The second question is more practical. When you mimic stats with skills, your stats effect are in direct competition with your skills. This means that you have to some a question similar to this question. Do I want to use fire ball, or do I want to have good life. I find those question strange and besides the points. And I can't see how they would add anything to the game.
An additional things to remember is that if those stats like effects are there using space, we might have other more interesting skills. Like active skills, or some freaking passive for an active skills. And if you ask me, that's a much more interesting way to use the space.

The system where you let items - not enchantments - take the roll of stats-effect. You can add the same questions. Do I want to use gloves, or do I want to have life? Why ask those question? They just don't make sense. On top of that, you change from a system that is there from the start to a system that depends on what you find. Relying to much on things that have to be found isn't a good thing. We already have the equiipment system and the rune system. And perhaps some more systems we don't know of.
And don't forget that changing builds dramatically -stats-wise - isn't always considered a good thing - something you can prevent with this system.

The system with enchantments is harder. It seems to be somewhere in between as it doesn't involve competition, isn't really depending on what you find. It's still not where is should be - yet I could live with that. And depending on the effective implementation, this might add a semi interesting way of respecing stats.

You'd have to prove I have Photoshop on my computer and that I have friends. Conspiracy theories are generally considered crazy statements from deranged people, and while I disagree with that generalization I can see how people would think statements with very little to back them up are generally crazy.

Also, why would you think me not being on my own computer would stop me fomr playing D2. Maybe my "friend" has D2 on his computer and doesn't really care if I play on it. You put a lot of burden on yourself to try to poke whatever holes you want on a sincere attempt to not blow smoke.

My points is simply that when you are looking for prove, you are at the wrong place. As we can just as easily get rid of you and your arguments by demanding proof for them.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 20:06

The points is that when you studie that 20%, you might turn it into 50%, or even 75%. I see no reason why not to try it.

I addressed the notion of "There's no reason not to try it" above. A gaming system that works 50% and 75% would be considered unacceptable by many people.

Well, perhaps the argument I have come down to taste. Which still doesn't mean it should be ignored, just treated correctly.

An argument based on "taste" is an argument based on an opinion. While I agree it shouldn't be ignored, per se, it shouldn't be taken that heavily either.

I believe that a system where you mimic stat-effect with skills have 2 question that may cause a problem. If I look at what stats and skill represent, I see stats as how your character is and skill what your character can do. They are two very different things. And I believe they should be kept separate as much as possible. They simply are different things. Perhaps it's more philosophical then really game based, yet things that don't belong together should be kept separate.
The second question is more practical. When you mimic stats with skills, your stats effect are in direct competition with your skills. This means that you have to some a question similar to this question. Do I want to use fire ball, or do I want to have good life. I find those question strange and besides the points. And I can't see how they would add anything to the game.
An additional things to remember is that if those stats like effects are there using space, we might have other more interesting skills. Like active skills, or some freaking passive for an active skills. And if you ask me, that's a much more interesting way to use the space.

So according to this there should be no passives that affect stats whatsoever because stats take care of those slots and that would free up room for more skills? Tell me, would you remove Pierce, Penetrate, Critical Strike, Dodge, Avoid, Evade, Weapon Block, Lycanthropy, the passive effects of Paladin Auras, all Masteries, and the entire Barbarian Mastery Tree from D2 in place of "more interesting skills"?

The system where you let items - not enchantments - take the roll of stats-effect. You can add the same questions. Do I want to use gloves, or do I want to have life? Why ask those question? They just don't make sense. On top of that, you change from a system that is there from the start to a system that depends on what you find. Relying to much on things that have to be found isn't a good thing. We already have the equiipment system and the rune system. And perhaps some more systems we don't know of.
And don't forget that changing builds dramatically -stats-wise - isn't always considered possible - something you can prevent with this system.

The system with enchantments is harder. It seems to be somewhere in between as it doesn't involve competition, isn't really depending on what you find. It's still not where is should be - yet I could live with that. And depending on the effective implementation, this might add a semi interesting way of respecing stats.

Gloves or life? Now that's absurd and you know it. Just because some builds get cut off doesn't make it a wrong decision. Some things have to be cut, sorry if it's something you like.

It sounds like you're afraid to make tough decisions based on skills, like "Put points into the passive that increases the effect of strength on damage or get that new skill", and you feel that it is wrong to have to force that choice. THe problem with this is that you aren't being forced one way or the other.

My points is simply that when you are looking for prove, you are at the wrong place. As we can just as easily get rid of you and your arguments by demanding proof for them.

The proof was the playable demo and the statements by Blizzard employees that coincide with the auto-stat points.

Back to afk, cooking and cleaning.

NASE

10-03-2009, 20:30

So according to this there should be no passives that affect stats whatsoever because stats take care of those slots and that would free up room for more skills? Tell me, would you remove Pierce, Penetrate, Critical Strike, Dodge, Avoid, Evade, Weapon Block, Lycanthropy, the passive effects of Paladin Auras, all Masteries, and the entire Barbarian Mastery Tree from D2 in place of "more interesting skills"?

If I look at that list, very few skill really affect stats life effects. And those that do are aimed towards attack rating - for which the stat isn't important at all, getting good ar by putting points in dexterity doesn't work very well - or life. And those that are aimed at life indeed questionable. Would it break the druids tree if Lycanthropy was replaced with a more interesting skill? If they really need the additional life, you can always put it into the effective shifting skills.

And yes, lets have a look at the barbarian masteries. The weapon masteries aren't really stats like effects. They add ar - see above. They add damage, yet still not like, your str will now be more effective, it's simply skill based additional damage. So that's still different from what str does. And it adds critical strike, something that isn't affected by any stat. And still, 90% off all builds will only take 1 of those masteries - making 5 of them useless. And if we look at the total use, there are some that aren't used often - ranged, spear and polearm.
So yes, those aren't interesting if you ask me.

Then look at the rest. I don't think any barbarian - safe for bvc and theme builds - puts more then one point into increase stamina and increase run speed. Then we have iron skin - for which the same argument can be made as for ar - that isn't used that often as shout offers the same ratio per point while it can be shared and natural resistance - and up to today, I haven't found what stat would effect resistances.

I'm really look at skills that say, by adding points, stats X will be more effective for property Y.
Not things like pierce or d/e/a - I don't even see the connection with stats.

There are always exception where it is a good thing. Just like some items should add some stats and some items might open up new skills. Yet I believe this should be exception and not rule.

Gloves or life? Now that's absurd and you know it.

Is it that more absurd then would could happen with an equipment based system. What if you have to chose between loh - ias and ed to demons - and a glove that add 250 to life and noting more? It's not unimaginable. And I find it a very juck question, certainly when the perfect alternative is to simply let me put my own stats. Then I can focus my gear at those things that can't be found in stats and skills - the things where gear should focus on I believe.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 21:59

If I look at that list, very few skill really affect stats life effects. And those that do are aimed towards attack rating - for which the stat isn't important at all, getting good ar by putting points in dexterity doesn't work very well - or life. And those that are aimed at life indeed questionable. Would it break the druids tree if Lycanthropy was replaced with a more interesting skill? If they really need the additional life, you can always put it into the effective shifting skills.

And yes, lets have a look at the barbarian masteries. The weapon masteries aren't really stats like effects. They add ar - see above. They add damage, yet still not like, your str will now be more effective, it's simply skill based additional damage. So that's still different from what str does. And it adds critical strike, something that isn't affected by any stat. And still, 90% off all builds will only take 1 of those masteries - making 5 of them useless. And if we look at the total use, there are some that aren't used often - ranged, spear and polearm.
So yes, those aren't interesting if you ask me.

Then look at the rest. I don't think any barbarian - safe for bvc and theme builds - puts more then one point into increase stamina and increase run speed. Then we have iron skin - for which the same argument can be made as for ar - that isn't used that often as shout offers the same ratio per point while it can be shared and natural resistance - and up to today, I haven't found what stat would effect resistances.

I'm really look at skills that say, by adding points, stats X will be more effective for property Y.
Not things like pierce or d/e/a - I don't even see the connection with stats.

There are always exception where it is a good thing. Just like some items should add some stats and some items might open up new skills. Yet I believe this should be exception and not rule.

So you defeat your own argument that passive skills shouldn't be implemented and embrace that bland passives are needed to coincide with the stat's affects on certain properties (Strength with damage, Dex with AR and defense)?

Most of a Druid's life comes from charms/gear due to the way Wereforms, Oak Sage, and Lycanthropy work. D/A/E are basically another form of defense, hence why I included them. In D3 many of the passives in D2 are condensed into the stats, so if we would compare both in a manual stat system, 1 point in D3 Dex would be roughly the same as 1 point in D2 Dex, D/A/E, and 1 in Penetrate. The potential for the snowball efect we saw in D2 is even greater in this aspect.

Is it that more absurd then would could happen with an equipment based system. What if you have to chose between loh - ias and ed to demons - and a glove that add 250 to life and noting more? It's not unimaginable. And I find it a very juck question, certainly when the perfect alternative is to simply let me put my own stats. Then I can focus my gear at those things that can't be found in stats and skills - the things where gear should focus on I believe.

It is that much more absurd, considering it's saying "Wear a piece of armor, or gain a lot of life?", which is an already-existing problem in D2 thanks to the flawed stat system.

You could have both items for different situations. There's a little thing called an inventory. You can play many hats with a quick switch of gear if one tactic isn't working. Where have I heard that as being a focus on the game before....? Hmmm.

I'll quote myself: "It sounds like you're afraid to make tough decisions based on skills, like "Put points into the passive that increases the effect of strength on damage or get that new skill", and you feel that it is wrong to have to force that choice. The problem with this is that you aren't being forced one way or the other. "

An additional things to remember is that if those stats like effects are there using space, we might have other more interesting skills. Like active skills, or some freaking passive for an active skills. And if you ask me, that's a much more interesting way to use the space.

Those already exist alongside the stat-like skills, so I don't see the problem here.

Nimbostratus

10-03-2009, 22:35

About the lack of customization: Overall, stats play a very minor role in the customization of your character in D2. The skills and resulting play style are the deciding factors in what a character truly "is." Compare a nova-based sorceress to one using lightning as her primary spell. They likely have similar stat and skill setups, but are obviously very different from one another- the Nova build dives right into a pack and relies on her raw damage over an area for safety, while the lightning build stays back for safety and tries to keep enemies lined up for damage. Now let's look at a max block build as opposed to a pure vit build: One has less life but gets hit less, while the other has the reverse of this. The gameplay hasn't changed to any large degree here.

I noticed somebody mentioning that it may be hard to get the stats you want without having to give up something important from your equipment. With properly balanced equipment, this won't be an issue. Furthermore, doesn't D2's manual system already have the same problem? Just look at how many people min/max their stats and end up requiring certain gear to keep their entire setup equipped. Even more, look at how often people rely on the strength bug and risk losing their gear just to accomplish this.

And on the subject of balance, people keep bringing up the idea that skill runes will be harder to balance than manual stats. The problem with that idea is that skill runes are effectively just creating more skills, whereas stats are an entirely separate system to balance against those already in place. It's relatively easy to balance a group of the same things as opposed to two different ones.

Grug

10-03-2009, 22:38

Just for the record, I'm dropping out of this argument. I think our stubbornness far outweighs our ability to persuade.

I've thought about it, and I realized that Manual stats were kind of nice, but ultimately a Minor part of Diablo, and unless they can fix manual stats to prevent nerfs and perversions, I'll be glad for the autostats.

That is all.

AxlStrife

10-03-2009, 22:55

Grug

10-03-2009, 23:08

Both sides.

Mad Mantis

10-03-2009, 23:09

What I get from it is that it is unfeasible to re-attempt and balance manual stats at this stage of the game.

That I agree on. At this point there will most likely be no major changes. They are trying to flesh out existing concepts, not replace them.

Still, I wanted to voice my concerns regarding the auto-stats. I knew before I got into this that all I could do was hope for the best when it comes to the auto-stats. That any discussion would be purely academical, so to say.

@comment about items: Why does the pro-manual side have a problem with not having stats their way when they can do just that with items? Are they afraid that there won't be any other modifiers on gear? Granted the stats won't be to such an extreme like a titan barb, but in essense you still have manual stats!

There are a couple of things that I'm concerned about. First of all I can't get the stats exactly the way I want them, since I'll still be stuck with the base that Blizz provides. Agreed, a munchkin problem, but still.
Second is that you now have a very fine balance between other mods and stats on gear. Make stats too important and the other mods don't matter. Make the other mods too important and stats might as well not be there. Ironically enough a balance problem that I'm concerned about. Right now there is a direct competition between all the other possible mods and stats. They'd have to really get it right and this line is finer than with normal stats. We have seen what a broken item system can do in D2.
Thirdly there is the instant respec option that comes with the territory. If your chosen build is having troubles in a certain area, just change gear and cruise through. Part of me likes that flexibility, the other part of me fears that the game will be designed with this swapping in mind. Now you can just say: "don't use it if you don't like it", but if the game is designed with it in mind it can become the only way to progress through at a reasonable pace.
Finally I don't like the fact that I'm loosing control. The skill trees are also me loosing control, but there is choice within that framework and I know what I get into before I commit. The stats are being tightly controlled by Blizz with not even the illusion of choice.

@comment to attribute respecs: If you can put points in at random and it not have a damaging affect on your character, then that means stats have little to no effect on a character.

Actually I said that the character wouldn't be unable to continue. There is a difference between a character who can still finish the game with effort and a well-built character. I'm working under the assumption that both systems will account for a sub-optimal build still finishing at least the D3 equivalent of Nightmare.

AxlStrife

11-03-2009, 00:05

That I agree on. At this point there will most likely be no major changes. They are trying to flesh out existing concepts, not replace them.

Still, I wanted to voice my concerns regarding the auto-stats. I knew before I got into this that all I could do was hope for the best when it comes to the auto-stats. That any discussion would be purely academical, so to say.

Hooray for mental masturbation, for all sides. :wine:

There are a couple of things that I'm concerned about. First of all I can't get the stats exactly the way I want them, since I'll still be stuck with the base that Blizz provides. Agreed, a munchkin problem, but still.
Second is that you now have a very fine balance between other mods and stats on gear. Make stats too important and the other mods don't matter. Make the other mods too important and stats might as well not be there. Ironically enough a balance problem that I'm concerned about. Right now there is a direct competition between all the other possible mods and stats. They'd have to really get it right and this line is finer than with normal stats. We have seen what a broken item system can do in D2.
Thirdly there is the instant respec option that comes with the territory. If your chosen build is having troubles in a certain area, just change gear and cruise through. Part of me likes that flexibility, the other part of me fears that the game will be designed with this swapping in mind. Now you can just say: "don't use it if you don't like it", but if the game is designed with it in mind it can become the only way to progress through at a reasonable pace.
Finally I don't like the fact that I'm loosing control. The skill trees are also me loosing control, but there is choice within that framework and I know what I get into before I commit. The stats are being tightly controlled by Blizz with not even the illusion of choice.

First concern, totally understandable. As the talisman system wasn't implemented yet nor explained any more than "It lets you tweak your stats", we can only speculate hwo it will work. My hopes are that it will still take stat gems, but that they won't be locked in place. If this is true, and the slots on the talisman stay at 9, then theoretically you could do a titan-esque build. Granted, this will affect item drops, I don't think it would be too big a deal in a MP sense.

As far as the second concern, I think this is a big concern only for uniques and set items, as their stats are generally rigid. I wouldn't be surprised if +stats appear very frequently in the middle-ground then tapered off at the high-end.

For the third, the game is designed more with the swap of skills than items(so says Blizz), though if the skills are strategically too far apart and you need specific items to maximize both it will bog down the game.

I agree that the D3 skill tree feels constraining, but I believe the main intention of such restrictions is to prevent hording, though I doubt it will stop this as effectively as synergies did.

Actually I said that the character wouldn't be unable to continue. There is a difference between a character who can still finish the game with effort and a well-built character. I'm working under the assumption that both systems will account for a sub-optimal build still finishing at least the D3 equivalent of Nightmare.

That's my bad and I apologize for my misunderstanding. I don't even know if attribute respecs will be in the game o rnot, or even if that information has been made public or not. I only linked it to show there was more to the anti-manual argument than "It can't be balanced".

Grug

11-03-2009, 02:23

Doppel

11-03-2009, 05:02

Lets go over some arguments "pro auto-stats" (which in reality is mere "anti-manual stats", seeing that there barely are any arguments pro auto-stats, let alone viable ones)

1. Auto-stats are noob-friendly, thus implying manual-stats were not and could not be.

This conclusion is based on a complete logical fallacy. Firstly, auto-stats are "noob-proof", auto-skills would be equally "noob-proof", auto-equip setup would be equally "noob-proof".
Secondly, if you honestly explain the effect stats have on your character, and the balance between stats makes sense and isn't broken, and you don't overly harshly punish manually placing stats not optimally, then that would be a noob-friendly system, as in, even if you are a beginning noob, the system is lenient and logical enough to help you a hand on making the right decisions. (Which ironically D2's statsystem largely was apart from some obvious balancing flaws, on contrary of what many manual-stat placement haters want to make you belief)

2. D2's manual stat-placement system (and thereby strangely generalizing all manual stat-placement systems, as if there can only be one, namely D2's) was a great way to break your character.

Which is yet again a logical fallacy. In fact D2's manual skill-placement system was a much greater way to break your character, thus can this be considered a valid argument (more so then in the case with stats) against manual skill-placement also? Of course not, any person capable of logical thinking can see the glaring flaw in such reasoning. The reality of it is that whoever makes such a claim doesn't even understand the word "broken" in game-terms, "broken" means that the game makes you unable to further advance in the game, this simply was NEVER the case with D2's manual stat-placement system (but like i said it WAS the case with the skill-system, my fire-golem necro was UNABLE to advance past nightmare difficulty due to the numerous fire immunities), thus apart from this argument being a logical fallacy, the premise also is a full-blown lie!

3. Stat-distribution generally came in the form of "this is exactly what you need for x build" and there's little variation.

Which wasn't the case with EVERYTHING, not just stat-distribution? Really?
Sure, you only have 4 stats to play around with, and at least 1 of them, namely energy was made utterly useless 99% of the time. Practically speaking we may only had 2 to 3 to play around with. Obviously many builds will then look alike stat-distribution wise, or should i say "advice to build" because i made a few characters which do not follow the advice of "str enough for gear, dex for max block, everything else vit" and i can honestly say that at least one of them seems to be doing much better then when i would have followed that advice. But this isn't even the point. How in the world can this be considered an argument "PRO AUTO-STATS"? This isn't an argument pro-ANYTHING, except "pro-making a good game". I will say this again, even if manual stat-distribution generally came in the form of "this is exactly what you need for x build", auto-stat distribution doesn't even attempt at asking the player this question, forget about "exactly doing this with little variation", its " the game will do it for you and there's NO variation".

4. Stat distribution was mostly the same. This varies somewhat between classes and builds, but with experienced players planning out most of their equipment in advance, and most characters using a lot of the same equipment, the end result is that the vast majority of D2 characters of the same type have about the same attributes.

If the player was experienced and seeing that many classes and builds were highly similar and if they planned out their high-end gear which was mostly the same, then the stat-distribution was mostly the same also. No really? I would've never guessed it. *shock*

5. It enables the D3 team to better balance the game.

Which is plainly and utterly WRONG. The correct phrase would've been "it enables the D3 team to EASIER balance the game", which is quite logical ain't it? I mean, if i take out the sniper-rifle from an FPS game then the game will UNDENIABLY be easier to balance, yes? The bigger point though is, are they having so much trouble balancing the game they feel the need to take out some form of customization? (and we are hardly talking about extremely complex customization, its a mere 4 stats for gods sake) Note then i'm not the one answering this question, Blizzard seems to be implying "yes" though which is quite scary.

6. Another benefit of setting the attributes is that the team can balance items and skills and monster difficulty and quest rewards more precisely.

Obviously. Why not take out, hmm, lets pick varying monster difficulties, then that has the benefit of balancing items and skills and quest rewards more precisely. But why stop there? Lets take out varying items, then that has the benefit of balancing skills and quest rewards more precisely, and so on.

7. It works in World of Warcraft.

This is just simply below my intelligence. WTF?

8. lots of RPGs have preset attributes, and it doesn’t break the games

Of course it doesn't "break" the game, seriously if you don't have anything then you can't break anything. Plus, you're not using the word "break" or "broken" correctly in relation with games. (I can't believe i can not simply expect Blizzard to understand this word when talking about game balance)

9. Their design teams simply need to put in enough other ways for characters to be customized and varied, and the D3 Team is confident they can meet that challenge.

Let me get this right, you admit at FAILING to rise to the challenge of balancing out 4 customizable stats, yet you simply need to put in enough other ways for characters to be customized and varied after having taken out this prior customization and somehow you're confident you can meet that challenge? Lolwut?

10. Even if there were player set attributes in D3, any customization from them would be largely undone by a respecing feature. The D3 Team has committed to providing some sort of skill respec system, and it’s a sure bet that if they’re doing that, they would have done something similar for attributes, since all the same arguments apply. They don’t want to force players to reroll if they make some point-allocation errors and “break” their characters, so there would have to have been some sort of attribute respecing.

What kind of dumbass argument is that?
"If there would have been respecing then there would have been respecing and since we don't like respecing we take out what could have been respec'd, if there would have been respecing of course, lol".
If all arguments apply both ways then this failed attempt at an argument can be applied to taking out skills to. I can't believe i'm actually reading this ****, let alone people expecting me to actually argue against it.

11. It boosts the importance of items. The D3 Team feels that items are a core mechanic of the game, and that features that emphasize the importance of items are good features.

Except that auto-stats is a NON-feature. Again, if you take out the proverbial sniper-rifle in your average FPS, then all other weaponry becomes more important BY DEFAULT. duh.
Also, the ideology to correctly make ANYTHING more important by simply eliminating SOMETHING ELSE is downright HORRIBLE. Jeez.

12. They’re adding a lot of new types of items, and adding much more variety to the mods on known item types. If modifiers provide bonuses to attributes far above, or far differently than they did in D2, it could be possible to customize a character nearly as much as we did in D2, simply from equipment.

Which characters in D2 already did, in fact its one of the reasons why stats were so imbalanced and meaningless doofus.

13. Late Game Equipment Finds. In a point related to stat-respecing, the preset attributes make it possible not to have attribute requirements on items, which removes the problem of high level characters finding a great item they can’t use. It’s frustrating to many players to build a character with 120 strength, get to a high level, and then find an awesome weapon that requires 150.

Talking about talking out of your ***, i never ever EVER had this problem, and even if i did then boohoo to me for being too stupid to only have 120 strength on an end-game character and then finding a 150 str req item, oh my god, now i completely have to reroll *sniff*, actually, no i don't but whatever right. Plus, i thought items didn't have stat reqs anymore, oh well, i guess we missed that little tid bit of HIGHLY relevant information completely and utterly undermining the argument.

Telzen

11-03-2009, 08:52

Blah blah blah. Yeah dude whatever. I'm out of this arguement, since no matter what reasons we give you spin it so it benefits you. I'm sure you know better than all the people that work at Blizzard. When you make a successful game send me a notice. Also they took out manual stats but inserted 35+ passives per class and spell runes. Those will be a pain to balance, so your arguement that they are just trying to make it easier on them is ridiculous.

AxlStrife

11-03-2009, 11:05

@Grug: The skill placement restrictions by Tier (T3:10, T4:15, so forth) makes it feel more restrictive. If I want to max a Tier 5 skill in one tree, I have to invest 40 points in that tree (assuming it's max rank is 20). I never said it wasn't a fair method, nor di dI say that constrained is necessarily a bad thing, just that it feels constrained.

@Doppel: I had a nice and pretty, detail-by-detail retort for you that would've probably been close to as long as your pose, but I think the summary will be much better.

The intro: Seeing as there are only two feasible options for stats if you want stats in the game, being pro-one on some level is inherently anti-other on some level.

I refuse to argue against people who cry logical fallacies in their arguments built upon a stawman fallacy, as you clearly show in your title of and response to argument #1.
Multiple instances of the same argument but different results (7 and 8, and 5 and 6)also make me question if you really looked into the meat of it and realized that one is simply a more narrow view of the other.

The majority of your arguments that don't contain some form of fallacy that breaks them are based upon assumptions you make with nothing to back it up, the biggest of which is that manual stats are easy to balance since it's only 4 stats. If this were true, we would see tons of games that have manual stat systems that weren't easy to break. Another one is your definition of broken, which is: " ..."broken" means that the game makes you unable to further advance in the game,". This ignores that broken goes the other way as well, by making a character, a stat, or a placement system so overpowered that it skews (or is a catalyst for said skew) the entire game into Duck Hunt with more tools and better graphics.

Some of your responses are basically "So what?" answers, even though the argument for them is perfectly valid. Take for instance 7 and 8, which are the same argument. You consider auto-stas a non-factor, yet they have to be implemented in the game and influence the game. If there were no stats in the game, then anything pertaining to stats would be a non-factor. Then we get your 1-D view of brokenness spewed again.

All together, you were able to squelch one irrelevant argument that was squelched a long time ago (13), and another (10) that was indeed horribly constructed.

Most of my sentiments mimic Telzen, as some may already know. Another sentiment, that I have shared with Mantis, is simply: What effect does this mental masturbation have on the game in its current state? Do you really expect the D3 team to scrap their current system because their view of their game differs from (most) people who have never made a game and have such a strong sense of entitlement to the franchise?

It's good to have the arguments in a civil and constructive manner, but what you've done is basically vomit in a bowl, put a label that says "Uncivilized Hypocrite Surprise" on it in, and expect us to eat it. Show that manual stats can be relatively balanced on a game-wide scale (not even classic accomplished that), then apply it to the current system in which it would work, learn how to argue without leaving holes in them large enough to fly a plane in, and finally come back with the result.

Turnip

11-03-2009, 11:13

Um responding to the end of your post I believe he explained that with his AWP counter-strike example.

NASE

11-03-2009, 13:07

I've thought about it, and I realized that Manual stats were kind of nice, but ultimately a Minor part of Diablo, and unless they can fix manual stats to prevent nerfs and perversions, I'll be glad for the autostats.

Thank you.

Atleast someone who has seen the light.

Bladewind

11-03-2009, 16:27

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 20:18

I still don't see how you can break manual stats builds when there is a respec function in the game....

And again all stats will always balance themselves one way or the other. After all you can't be doing much damage if you go all vit or neither can you be taking many hits when you go all out damage stats and ignore Vit.

Just make both parties happy.
1) Character level up.
2) Manual assign or auto assign button appears.
3) ???
4) Profit !

The problem with the stats balancing themselves is that the scenario you listed doesn't work out, in D2 at least.

In D2 you CAN be doing tons of damage if you go all vit because the effect of str on damage was insignificant compared to the bonuses given by skills and especially auras! If every melee class didn't have a might merc running around with them the value of str would be quite different.

Also in D2 you COULD take plenty of hits if you went all str, because of life leech. The balance of offense vs defense overall also plays in this situation. That issue is tied up with potion availability and the death penalty. The easy potions in d2 meant that you could take hits and nullify them by pressing a button, just re-fill when you go to town for your items. Also, if the death penalty is too insignificant than who cares if you take hits?

Once we get those things out of the way though, I do agree with your solution. Having an auto-stat and manual stat buttons in the game on level-up would be perfect in my mind. The work of balancing the stats still needs to be done though. Here's how I would fix the above problems in the D2 system:

Make str effect the base weapon damage, instead of just adding along with other skills. The 1% per level would probably be overpowered at that point so that value could be changed or it could be a non-linear modifier or even be a set value instead of a %.

At that point str would be a meaningful stat but now to balance it against vit? I think even with just that change things would be balanced for PvP where potions are not used. Because life is easy to come by from potions/leech and monsters don't hit all that hard vit really kinda sucks for PvM, people only used it because eng/str/dex sucked more. The way I think to make vit more valuable is to actually make stamina significant. Maybe your stamina is derived from an equation like blocking so that you have to keep upping vit in relation to your level or you'll run out of stamina all the time. Obviously who cares with everybody running around using an enigma but that's a separate issues.

There's one other thing I'd like to mention though. I've been playing a lot of Titan Quest the last few weeks and that game has a fairly well balanced stat system, though it's still max whatever your damage stat is for the most part. They did introduce a really cool mechanic with the TQ equivalent of AR/DR though. You get set bonuses to your chance to hit/chance to be hit from the AR/DR skills but you can also get bonuses from their RATIO to each other! It uses a breakpoint system for every 100 points of difference between AR/DR which isn't as optimal as a system working off of the actual ratio but it's still pretty cool. Basically if you have more AR than DR you get some extra offensive bonuses and some negative defensive bonuses. This is obviously reversed if you have more DR than AR.

What this does is allow customization and variety but keeps you from min/maxing and being effective. I think if this concept were applied to the stats there is some potential for really cool things. It's probably too late in development for blizz to consider that for D3 but I think it would be a cool thing regardless.

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 20:36

I refuse to argue against people who cry logical fallacies in their arguments built upon a stawman fallacy, as you clearly show in your title of and response to argument #1.
Multiple instances of the same argument but different results (7 and 8, and 5 and 6)also make me question if you really looked into the meat of it and realized that one is simply a more narrow view of the other.

Could you explain this to me a little more? I'm not familiar with what a strawman fallacy but I didn't see anything obviously wrong with what he said for #1.

Could you also explain how 5,6,7 and 8 were the same argument with different results?

#5 is just a correction in terms but a good one I think, and is the core of what I've been questioning all along.

#6 is sarcastically showing what would happen if you took that logic to its extreme. While not totally relevant it does make you question the logic in the first place.

#7 is just a dismissal. Kind of stupid but still a unique argument.

#8 is more quibbling about words, but beyond that it's not a bad point. Removing a system won't break a game, but it can make it less fun/interesting.

After thinking about this for a few days I guess I'm back to my original conclusion. Blizzard has stated auto-stats is not going to change so it really doesn't matter. Looking at it that way I don't see why we have stats at all. Here's why:

Stat X has Y and Z effect. Since the only way to boost stat X is via items and/or skills why not just boost effects Y and Z directly? Instead of saying "+5 to wisdom" the item would say "+x% greater spell damage, +y% greater return from health globes." This simplifies things because you don't have to remember what each stat does. Also instead of showing the stats on the chr screen you just show those values so you can actually see what is going on with your chr easier.

This step would also make balancing easier because those effects can be tuned individually rather than being tied together into one stat.

Brother Laz

11-03-2009, 20:54

Firstly: the skill trees have a fatal flaw, in that if you want a high tier skill that requires you to put 40 points into the tree, you are encouraged to put those points into passives and support skills, not into another attack.

This means you have nothing to attack with until you are level 40+...

......

This conclusion is based on a complete logical fallacy. Firstly, auto-stats are "noob-proof", auto-skills would be equally "noob-proof", auto-equip setup would be equally "noob-proof".

The difference is that putting points into different skills yields a different character, not the same character but weaker. Stats have 0 added value.

Secondly, if you honestly explain the effect stats have on your character, and the balance between stats makes sense and isn't broken, and you don't overly harshly punish manually placing stats not optimally, then that would be a noob-friendly system, as in, even if you are a beginning noob, the system is lenient and logical enough to help you a hand on making the right decisions. (Which ironically D2's statsystem largely was apart from some obvious balancing flaws, on contrary of what many manual-stat placement haters want to make you belief)

Uh... the only way to build a character in D2 is by putting almost all of your points into vita and avoiding energy.

Which is yet again a logical fallacy. In fact D2's manual skill-placement system was a much greater way to break your character

Skills are a good way to provide variety. Stats are not.

"broken" means that the game makes you unable to further advance in the game, this simply was NEVER the case with D2's manual stat-placement system

No, broken means I can't fulfill the goal of Diablo: having the best possible character of a given build.

How in the world can this be considered an argument "PRO AUTO-STATS"? This isn't an argument pro-ANYTHING, except "pro-making a good game".

It is not possible to 'make a good game' in terms of stats. You want to make sure that people benefit from their 'natural' stat, but not to the point of having to put every point into it. Let me know how you plan to achieve this for tens of different builds.

If the player was experienced and seeing that many classes and builds were highly similar and if they planned out their high-end gear which was mostly the same, then the stat-distribution was mostly the same also. No really? I would've never guessed it. *shock*

Yeah, and this is an argument for stats why?

Let me get this right, you admit at FAILING to rise to the challenge of balancing out 4 customizable stats, yet you simply need to put in enough other ways for characters to be customized and varied after having taken out this prior customization and somehow you're confident you can meet that challenge? Lolwut?

If, in a racing game, you offer players a choice between X number of cars, the players will obviously pick the car that is the fastest on a track. Is this a failure to balance the game? It is not possible to balance all cars to 1/100th of a second, and any slight difference will tip the balance in favour of that car.

Same with stats. If one way to spend stats is the best, given the best gear in the game, then you should invest your stats that way, no questions asked.

Of course, if gear works like rares and there isn't a 'best' set of gear, well then you can't plan your stats at all. That's worse.

You seem to assume that manual skills (different builds) are somehow the same as manual stats (different ways to implement the same build). My meteor sorc will not suddenly become a whole new character just because I put my points into str instead of vit and wear better armor but have less hp. It will still be a meteor sorc, just a worse one.

10. Even if there were player set attributes in D3, any customization from them would be largely undone by a respecing feature. The D3 Team has committed to providing some sort of skill respec system, and it’s a sure bet that if they’re doing that, they would have done something similar for attributes, since all the same arguments apply.

Respecs are going to be tacked on anyway. Respecs are good in a game with a lot of classes, like Guild Wars and its multiclassing system, but not when you have 5 classes to choose from. This will discourage rerolling, so the early game will quickly be abandoned.

it could be possible to customize a character nearly as much as we did in D2, simply from equipment. Which characters in D2 already did, in fact its one of the reasons why stats were so imbalanced and meaningless doofus.

Like you had a choice in what equipment to use in D2.

even if i did then boohoo to me for being too stupid to only have 120 strength on an end-game character and then finding a 150 str req item, oh my god, now i completely have to reroll *sniff*, actually, no i don't but whatever right.

Think of it the other way round: you put 30 points into str for that item, then you trade for BotD or Enigma or whatever and it requires 120 and you're a caster. Yay, 30 points wasted.

Doppel

11-03-2009, 20:58

@Doppel: I had a nice and pretty, detail-by-detail retort for you that would've probably been close to as long as your pose, but I think the summary will be much better.
We'll never know will we, so don't expect me to be very impressed with this "well i had a retort but i think this summary will be better" though.

The intro: Seeing as there are only two feasible options for stats if you want stats in the game, being pro-one on some level is inherently anti-other on some level.

"Doing it or not doing it" aren't two options, its one option.
I'm sorry but "being pro-anti-something" doesn't count, auto stats is not being pro-anything, its not even a feature and the arguments they have tried to give me supposedly "pro-auto stats" show it.

I refuse to argue against people who cry logical fallacies in their arguments built upon a stawman fallacy, as you clearly show in your title of and response to argument #1.

Nice contradiction, in trying to reason why you refuse to argue arguments you argue, therefor refuting your own point. Also, just saying "straw-man" without even attempting to link me to this elusive straw-man doesn't cut it, sorry.

Multiple instances of the same argument but different results (7 and 8, and 5 and 6)also make me question if you really looked into the meat of it and realized that one is simply a more narrow view of the other.

The results show that the "same" arguments given do not hold up, if you don't think so then try to refute the results.

The majority of your arguments that don't contain some form of fallacy that breaks them are based upon assumptions you make with nothing to back it up, the biggest of which is that manual stats are easy to balance since it's only 4 stats.

Except that i never stated "4 stats having to be balanced" being an easy feat. The point is, whether or not its an easy feat is irrelevant if the (flawed) argument goes "scraping to balance these 4 stats will make us able to better balance the inclusion of other stats to be balanced" (by which they imply all the passives for example to be, or the skill-runes).

If this were true, we would see tons of games that have manual stat systems that weren't easy to break.

The fact of the matter is that D2 was NEVER broken because of the system of manually placing stats, regardless of how many other failed games there are out there, therefor the complete argument based on this lie is by default invalid, completely.

Another one is your definition of broken, which is: " ..."broken" means that the game makes you unable to further advance in the game,". This ignores that broken goes the other way as well, by making a character, a stat, or a placement system so overpowered that it skews (or is a catalyst for said skew) the entire game into Duck Hunt with more tools and better graphics.

Of course it ignores it going the other way, the definition of broken is being unable to further advance, the end. Plus you're entire argument is invalid anyways seeing that its based on manual stats supposedly being "overpowered" which they also weren't.

Some of your responses are basically "So what?" answers, even though the argument for them is perfectly valid. Take for instance 7 and 8, which are the same argument. You consider auto-stas a non-factor, yet they have to be implemented in the game and influence the game.

Wrong, i considered them to be a non-feature, in retaliation of implying them to be a feature, of course they are a "factor", bugs also is a "factor" (yet bugs aren't a "feature", get it?)

If there were no stats in the game, then anything pertaining to stats would be a non-factor. Then we get your 1-D view of brokenness spewed again.

I'm arguing against the "auto" part of "auto-stats", not the "stat" part. In fact i didn't even argue so much against auto-stats (seeing that there weren't any), i did argue against non-arguments though.

I will reply to Brother Laz in a next post.

Knight_Wolf

11-03-2009, 21:31

Respecs are going to be tacked on anyway. Respecs are good in a game with a lot of classes, like Guild Wars and its multiclassing system, but not when you have 5 classes to choose from. This will discourage rerolling, so the early game will quickly be abandoned

It shouldn't be tacked on to begin with .. any feature that gets added as a tacked-on-last-minute-addition is marked for fail ... Respecs has to be integrated into the game and streamlined for ease of use ... personally i think linking it directly to character level ups (and skill points) is the best way.

The fact of the matter is that D2 was NEVER broken because of the system of manually placing stats, regardless of how many other failed games there are out there, therefor the complete argument based on this lie is by default invalid, completely.

Fact .. what fact ? ... you assume something is a fact then build your whole argument based on that ... isn't that a fallacy .. i guess so ... and putting "invalid, completely" really doesn't make things better.

Giving the player a system that requires zero real effort (all you have to do it simply level up the character which is the most basic activity in the game), a system which can be abused (any number of points could be put anywhere with few simple clicks) isn't a smart design at all.

On the other hand the system to limit the customization of the characters to using items and skill runes is arguably better ... why? .. cause both the items and runes requires lots of skill, luck and trading to get a good combination of items and runes ... which makes abusing them quite hard and takes quite a while to master the system (assuming no one is stupid enough to put Enigma-esque broken items in D3)

On the other hand all you need to get the right stats is reading an online guide .. tada .. done ... and yes online guides can tell you about the good items and runes ... but finding them is another story (and don't compare "online guides" with "hacks" used to get items ... the first is 100% legal ... the second is 100% illegal).

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 21:49

The difference is that putting points into different skills yields a different character, not the same character but weaker. Stats have 0 added value.

Not necessarily true... It depends on what the stat effects are. It seems like you're defining a character by the actives not the passives. Also, if the game is built right weaker/stronger should not be that straightforward. There shouldn't be one character that is stronger in every situation and for every persons play style.

Uh... the only way to build a character in D2 is by putting almost all of your points into vita and avoiding energy.

Actually no. That's the only way to build an optimal chr in the current patch for general use. That wasn't always the best way to do it, and even so that's only the case because the stats suck. If blizzard had actually tried to balance them to be useful that wouldn't be the case.

Skills are a good way to provide variety. Stats are not.

I don't understand how you can say that as a fact. They are both ways to modify your character that you put points in when you level, how can one be intrinsically better than the other?

No, broken means I can't fulfill the goal of Diablo: having the best possible character of a given build.

Who said that was the goal? Some would go farther down that path and say it's to have the best character regardless of build. Others would say that getting level 99 is the goal of diablo. Many would say that the goal of Diablo is defeating Baal on hell difficulty. Lots of people would say the goal is to see how long you can go without dieing (hc). I think the goal of Diablo is having fun, and that doesn't really mean the best possible character of a given build.

It is not possible to 'make a good game' in terms of stats. You want to make sure that people benefit from their 'natural' stat, but not to the point of having to put every point into it. Let me know how you plan to achieve this for tens of different builds.

Well perhaps if stats were balanced correctly classes/builds wouldn't have a 'natural' stat. Did that thought ever occur to you?

If, in a racing game, you offer players a choice between X number of cars, the players will obviously pick the car that is the fastest on a track. Is this a failure to balance the game? It is not possible to balance all cars to 1/100th of a second, and any slight difference will tip the balance in favour of that car.

You said the answer right there, "fastest on a track". Diablo is like doing the story mode in a racing game but you have to do the whole thing in 1 car. That 1 car may be better on some tracks and worse on others so there isn't a right answer. Also, what car is fastest on a track will change given conditions, the driver, and the other drivers (if there are any).

For example in a time trial a really balanced car may be the fastest but in an actual race you can give up some cornering grip for better acceleration and braking. This is because if you can brake later and power out quicker you can pass people, but passing in corners is much harder. Even if the other car can corner better they can't get around you. It also hugely depends on driving style. If somebody is really good at clipping apexes they are going to be faster overall in a car with greater acceleration so they can put their line finding skills to use. If a player is a bad driver they need the most controllable car, even if it's not the "fastest" it will give them the best time.

Same with stats. If one way to spend stats is the best, given the best gear in the game, then you should invest your stats that way, no questions asked.

Ok so now just apply my above arguments to Diablo. It depends why you made the chr and what you are going to be doing with it. Obviously in D2 eng/str were so useless that it didn't matter, but it doesn't have to be that way. If you balanced them to within the 1/100th example then play style and purpose would make different people use different builds. Rather than the 90/100ths example of D2s terrible balancing.

Of course, if gear works like rares and there isn't a 'best' set of gear, well then you can't plan your stats at all. That's worse.

Why is that worse? That makes for variety and truly unique chrs. Lots of people have a blast playing classic where rares are king. You should try it some time, it's a blast. Actually a return to rares as king (or items like crafts that are combination rares/set attributes) is one of the things I'm really hoping for in D3.

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 21:55

On the other hand the system to limit the customization of the characters to using items and skill runes is arguably better ... why? .. cause both the items and runes requires lots of skill, luck and trading to get a good combination of items and runes ... which makes abusing them quite hard and takes quite a while to master the system (assuming no one is stupid enough to put Enigma-esque broken items in D3)

This system shifts the balance of power in the game. Making a good chr through proper stat/skill placement requires intelligence/knowledge. Making a good chr through gear just requires time. I thought we spent enough time magic finding already?

Knight_Wolf

11-03-2009, 22:09

This system shifts the balance of power in the game. Making a good chr through proper stat/skill placement requires intelligence/knowledge. Making a good chr through gear just requires time. I thought we spent enough time magic finding already?

It is clear from D2 that stats don't require any sort of intelligence ... just use your common sense and it's done (enough STR and DEX to get by and rest in VIT) that's what the majority of players did ... and there is character guides that helped those minority who wanted specific, weird or unusual builds.

But items aren't just about finding them ... you need to find them and then find the right combination that fits your current stats, other items you already had and your skills ... guides does help but it doesn't make it simple kid's play like with stats.

To me Items+Skills is better than Stats+Skills.

Mad Mantis

11-03-2009, 22:19

How does the D3 tree feel constraining, exactly? It seems to offer a lot more freedom than D2. The D3 tree lets you decide whether to get every ability or focus on one tree to get the powerful spells faster.

That I need to clarify. The skill trees in both games feel constrictive. I get that you can't make all spells available to all classes. Restrictions and archetypes are things I find enjoyable and feel they help to define a character. What I don't like is how the limits are placed within the trees.

D2 has the pre-reqs. Skills you really don't want (Weaken, the most useless skill), but are forced to take anyway. They tried to solve it via synergies, but that created its own set of problems. Mostly because they were added later rather than there from the start.

D3 has the minimum number of points in a tree. There are only tiers, but you need so many points in that tree until you can advance a tier. It really forces you to commit to a single tree, rather than choose interesting skills from all trees. While this may prove to be more exciting in the long run, I'm apprehensive about it at this point.
The problem that is still present is that of pre-reqs. They ditched the arrows so you aren't forced into a pre-req, but you still need to spend those points on something you might not want to use. Granted, they are thinking more about synergies this time around with the new passives for all classes.

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 22:22

It is clear from D2 that stats don't require any sort of intelligence ... just use your common sense and it's done (enough STR and DEX to get by and rest in VIT) that's what the majority of players did ... and there is character guides that helped those minority who wanted specific, weird or unusual builds.

But items aren't just about finding them ... you need to find them and then find the right combination that fits your current stats, items and skill build ... guides does help but it doesn't make it simple kid's play like with stats.

To me Items+Skills is better than Stats+Skills.

Right D2 didn't require any thought, but the D2 stats sucked. The D3 stats don't suck, so wizard would have a real choice to make of boosting damage using wisdom or boosting health with vit or boosting crit with dex. Which is best would depend on what kinds of skills and game play you wanted. An experienced/knowledgeable player would know which was best for the build they wanted and the limited items they did have.

BrotherRatcliff

11-03-2009, 22:30

That I need to clarify. The skill trees in both games feel constrictive. I get that you can't make all spells available to all classes. Restrictions and archetypes are things I find enjoyable and feel they help to define a character. What I don't like is how the limits are placed within the trees.

D2 has the pre-reqs. Skills you really don't want (Weaken, the most useless skill), but are forced to take anyway. They tried to solve it via synergies, but that created its own set of problems. Mostly because they were added later rather than there from the start.

D3 has the minimum number of points in a tree. There are only tiers, but you need so many points in that tree until you can advance a tier. It really forces you to commit to a single tree, rather than choose interesting skills from all trees. While this may prove to be more exciting in the long run, I'm apprehensive about it at this point.
The problem that is still present is that of pre-reqs. They ditched the arrows so you aren't forced into a pre-req, but you still need to spend those points on something you might not want to use. Granted, they are thinking more about synergies this time around with the new passives for all classes.

I really like the way Titan Quest handled this issue. Skills don't have pre-reqs, other than some specific passives that are tied together. You do have to invest a certain number of points in a tree to get certain skills but those points are invested in your "mastery" which is just a passive increasing life/mana/stats. Virtually every chr using that tree would want the mastery maxed anyway so it doesn't cost you anything long-term but you still have a method to keep you from using powerful skills early on. Of course you also get 3 skill points per level instead of 1 so you have 32 points to spare on each of your 2 mastery's.

Brother Laz

11-03-2009, 22:56

Right D2 didn't require any thought, but the D2 stats sucked. The D3 stats don't suck, so wizard would have a real choice to make of boosting damage using wisdom or boosting health with vit or boosting crit with dex. Which is best would depend on what kinds of skills and game play you wanted. An experienced/knowledgeable player would know which was best for the build they wanted and the limited items they did have.

Dream on.

This will never happen. If Disintegrate Wizard X has 5000 hp and 250 str and Disintegrate Wizard Y has 4000 hp and 300 str, they will play the same and one or the other will be better.

The builds are the same. Nobody is going to make two wizards with the same skills but different stats (but very likely make two wizards with different skills). The only difference is that one is better. Is that freedom?

And what if I'm not an experienced player? I know I want a charged bolt wizard. This is not the best path, but I want a damned charged bolt wizard!

Okay. Fine. But say I want a nuclear storm wizard like everyone else. But I don't know how to spend my stats. So I do the obvious thing and put most into energy, but wait, LOL! I don't need energy because of Item Y that gives +40% max mana. Fantastic, now my build is inferior than the build of someone whose sole virtue over me is that he read some character guide.

Building skill should be defined as being good at reasoning what would work well together (item modifiers, skills and passives), not at knowing why you just screwed up your stats.

If you do something stupid like (cold) skeleton mages and Iron Maiden, that's your fault. If your build is suboptimal because you don't know that you need to get a lot of mana steal instead of putting points into energy to support WW... well, that's newbie hostile.

......

I really like the way Titan Quest handled this issue. Skills don't have pre-reqs, other than some specific passives that are tied together. You do have to invest a certain number of points in a tree to get certain skills but those points are invested in your "mastery" which is just a passive increasing life/mana/stats.

As I said, you may not want to put points into skills you don't want to use, but this means you have something to shoot before you obtain your main skill.

They had better implement some crazy accessible respecs, because if my level 40 tier 5 Super Killer Hurricane benefits from passives A, B and C, then I will put all of my required points from level 1 to 39 into passives A, B and C and skip charged bolt at level 1 because otherwise I lose a skill point. This gives me the optimal level 99 build. But it means I have to bash monsters with my staff until level 40... at which point I'll quit the game because the penalty for being efficient is 40 levels of boring normal attack.

Doppel

11-03-2009, 23:16

The difference is that putting points into different skills yields a different character, not the same character but weaker. Stats have 0 added value.

Wrong, even with only 4 minus 1 (energy) thus mere 3 stats i can build different characters which are "different" from each other just like skills (meaning, the one is weaker in doing this, but stronger in doing that, exactly the same as with skills).
For example, i have a frenzybarb which barely put anything in vitality, according to you i severely gimped my character by doing this, except i didn't because he relies on an accurate and fast highly damaging attack, therefor keeping his relative tiny lifebulb (which isn't that tiny, even with barely any points in vit) full. I can baalrun this one very fast on players 8 without a merc and without an inventory of charms, safe anni and torch. On the opposite of this i have a frenzybarb with everything in vit, he can take a lot more hits when doing nothing, but he has to go through some lengths to have reasonable ar and damage and i regard him as not being nearly as effective. There are numerous other examples.

Uh... the only way to build a character in D2 is by putting almost all of your points into vita and avoiding energy.

In that case i think of you as a noob who really just can't see past the average guide, sorry.

Skills are a good way to provide variety. Stats are not.

See above. Stats were simplistic in D2 when compared to a lot of other games, but somehow this just can never be fixed according to the likes of you.

No, broken means I can't fulfill the goal of Diablo: having the best possible character of a given build.

No, broken means you can't complete the game, this is can't be argued. The goal you stated is one YOU made and highly subjective (define "best").

It is not possible to 'make a good game' in terms of stats. You want to make sure that people benefit from their 'natural' stat, but not to the point of having to put every point into it. Let me know how you plan to achieve this for tens of different builds.

Sigh, there really is just no point with you is there? Why not argue why "auto-stats" is such a brilliant idea? Oh right i forgot, you can't.

Yeah, and this is an argument for stats why?

Did i say it was? NOPE. But it surely isn't an argument "pro-auto-stats', now is it?

If, in a racing game, you offer players a choice between X number of cars, the players will obviously pick the car that is the fastest on a track. Is this a failure to balance the game?

Yeah, because thats all there is to cars "how fast they go". Seriously?

It is not possible to balance all cars to 1/100th of a second, and any slight difference will tip the balance in favour of that car.
Same with stats. If one way to spend stats is the best, given the best gear in the game, then you should invest your stats that way, no questions asked.

Did you like ever play a racing game? Or watched a car race on the tele? Or in fact are aware of anything that has to do with cars? Do you have any clue why most American power cars suck in a professional race, regardless of having 1000 pk under the hood?

Of course, if gear works like rares and there isn't a 'best' set of gear, well then you can't plan your stats at all. That's worse.

When are you going to define "best"?

You seem to assume that manual skills (different builds) are somehow the same as manual stats (different ways to implement the same build). My meteor sorc will not suddenly become a whole new character just because I put my points into str instead of vit and wear better armor but have less hp. It will still be a meteor sorc, just a worse one.

So, then tell me which meteorb sorc is best, the 156 str one or the zero str one? You can't can you?

Respecs are going to be tacked on anyway. Respecs are good in a game with a lot of classes, like Guild Wars and its multiclassing system, but not when you have 5 classes to choose from. This will discourage rerolling, so the early game will quickly be abandoned.

My point was that the given argument was entirely flawed, i wasn't arguing "respecs".

Like you had a choice in what equipment to use in D2.

Um, you just argued against yourself, or am i missing something?
Ok, lets assume you're not being sarcastic, then is this an argument for taking out customizable equipment? Really, i'm lost.

Think of it the other way round: you put 30 points into str for that item, then you trade for BotD or Enigma or whatever and it requires 120 and you're a caster. Yay, 30 points wasted.

So? Or do you want every choice to be without any consequences whatsoever or something? Did you maybe ever considered that the problem doesn't lie withing the manual stat system but with the item giving you 30 to all stats? And isn't this exactly what they are planning on doing even more in D3?

AxlStrife

12-03-2009, 06:23

We'll never know will we, so don't expect me to be very impressed with this "well i had a retort but i think this summary will be better" though.

Alright.

"Doing it or not doing it" aren't two options, its one option.
I'm sorry but "being pro-anti-something" doesn't count, auto stats is not being pro-anything, its not even a feature and the arguments they have tried to give me supposedly "pro-auto stats" show it.

That's quite the misinterpretation, since the dillema is not "doing it or not doing it", it's "Implementing one or inplementing the other".

Further down you will see where your definition of a feature, which you never fully establish but imply that a feature is synonymous with customization, breaks down. There are such thing as static features.

Nice contradiction, in trying to reason why you refuse to argue arguments you argue, therefor refuting your own point. Also, just saying "straw-man" without even attempting to link me to this elusive straw-man doesn't cut it, sorry.

Fair enough on my gaff.

As far as the strawman goes, you argued against the false assumption that because auto-stats are noob-friendly manual stats aren't nor could be. Nowhere in the argument "Auto-stats are noob-friendly" does it state that manual stats aren't not could be, so using the argument that manual stats can be noob-friendly does not refute nor even engate the original argument. That is a strawman argument. If you would have simply said "Manual stats are noob-friendly as well, just not as much as auto-stats" without crying fallacy in an argument with a fallact, then I would have gladly accepted the response.

Also, you made quite the disconnect on noob-friendly and noob-proof. Noob-proof is simply the largest extreme of noob-friendly, so auto-stats ARE noob-friendly.

The results show that the "same" arguments given do not hold up, if you don't think so then try to refute the results.

This one also addresses BrotherRatcliff's comment to me.

Here's argument 5: It enables the D3 team to better balance the game.
Here's argument 6: Another benefit of setting the attributes is that the team can balance items and skills and monster difficulty and quest rewards more precisely.

As you can see, argument 6 clearly falls under argument 5's scope. The fact that you treated each seperately in your response
showed that either you didn't have the foresight to think that someone wouldn't call you out on it or that they really were two seperate arguments, both of which undermine your intelligence.

You try to justify a slippery slope of "Why not remove everything? That will make the game balanced." Well, no one has stated that Blizzard was going for total balance, just more of a balance in D3 as compared to D2: a better balance. Balance isn't just one point on a number line, it's the number line itself. There are varying degrees of balance, so it is indeed correct that something can be better balanced than something else despite your proposed argument of "Better balanced is the wrong nomenclature, easier balance is" i smade without addressing why the phrase "better balanced" is incorrect.

Here's argument 7: It works in World of Warcraft.
Here's argument 8: lots of RPGs have preset attributes, and it doesn’t break the games.

It's the same basic argument as 8 naturally incorporates 7, just like with 5 and 6.

You don't even challange the arguments, which are quite valid. It's logical for a game to incorporate a tried and true system over one that was quite easily broken.

Except that i never stated "4 stats having to be balanced" being an easy feat. The point is, whether or not its an easy feat is irrelevant if the (flawed) argument goes "scraping to balance these 4 stats will make us able to better balance the inclusion of other stats to be balanced" (by which they imply all the passives for example to be, or the skill-runes).

It's been proven that a predictable system is easier to balance than an unpredictable one. Thus, we can deduce that an auto-stat system would be easier to balance than a manual stat system. Since the current D3 team is familiar with auto-stats more than manual stats (most of the D2 team left for a now defunct company), it would be MUCH easier for them to balance auto over manual. Since it will take less time/energy to balance auto-stats, they can put more focus on the features of the game that will make more impact on gameplay, like the various items. With more time/energy into said feature, a better balance is a plausible conclusion.

The fact of the matter is that D2 was NEVER broken because of the system of manually placing stats, regardless of how many other failed games there are out there, therefor the complete argument based on this lie is by default invalid, completely.

It's not a fact just because someone says "It's a fact" many times. While the management of stats wasn't the sole reason for the breaks in the game, to say that the stat system was fine when that notion has already been proven wrong time and time again is to basically close your eyes and ears to reality. You have failed to back up your "fact" with testable and repeatable observations. You LOSE!

Of course it ignores it going the other way, the definition of broken is being unable to further advance, the end. Plus you're entire argument is invalid anyways seeing that its based on manual stats supposedly being "overpowered" which they also weren't.

Your definition of broken is simply wrong. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/broken)

Once again, you fail to establish how the manual stat system isn't broken. You simply state: "It isn't broken" ad nauseum without establishing this claim as fact via testable and repeatable observations. the established fact that it is broken has met this most basic need for a competent argument repeatedly.

Wrong, i considered them to be a non-feature, in retaliation of implying them to be a feature, of course they are a "factor", bugs also is a "factor" (yet bugs aren't a "feature", get it?)

Seriously, your vocabulary is flawed. (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feature) Auto-stats are a characteristic of the game, and characteristic is a synonym of feature. Bugs are a characteristic of the game, and I already established the synonym of characteristic.

I'm arguing against the "auto" part of "auto-stats", not the "stat" part. In fact i didn't even argue so much against auto-stats (seeing that there weren't any), i did argue against non-arguments though.

I will reply to Brother Laz in a next post.

You mean you argued against what you thought were non-arguments with your own non-arguments.

Until you can produce some substance to yoru claims, don't expect me to reply to your weaksauce.

Killafornia

12-03-2009, 07:46

NASE

12-03-2009, 08:18

It's not a fact just because someone says "It's a fact" many times. While the management of stats wasn't the sole reason for the breaks in the game, to say that the stat system was fine when that notion has already been proven wrong time and time again is to basically close your eyes and ears to reality. You have failed to back up your "fact" with testable and repeatable observations. You LOSE!

Do you know what's fun. It's is a fact that DII wasn't broken because of the system. The implementation of the system might have been broken as it didn't work for enough characters. Yet you can define a 'sub-game' where it does work, thus proving that the system it's self isn't broken. It's merely the implementation that was far from perfect.

Anyway, I just thought of something new. One of the problems that some people have with manual stats is the need to rebuild their character when they screwed up a few points. And eventhough it isn't really needed, I can see why people feel the urge and do it anyway. I'm not even going to argue that having the same playing-experience is a bad thing.

My point is that they don't need to have the same experience. Diablo II has random maps, random drops, random 'boss monsters' and random parties if you play on bnet. Diablo III will have on top of that random side quest. Yet what if they implemented even more randomisation.
They could implement random monster spawn like act 5 has. They could implemented lots of random events - like that trapped chest in the first video. Heck, they could even randomise the main quest.
Let me give a (lame) example. Say your quest is to find a certain wounded demon and retrieve it's heart because it's heart is magical. So you follow the trail of blood to a mansion. There, you can randomise the quest. The demon could flee upstairs or downstairs. Upstairs and downstairs could have different monsters and different layouts. You could go even further and have the monsters flee through the back-door and into a cave - again with different layout and different monsters. Then if you encounter the demon, there is a chance that you have to fight the monsters, yet there is a chance that a rivalling demon hunter will steal the heart and flee to town. You return to town and there you are told where the demon hunter fled to. You follow him, track him and kill him to retrieve the heart.

So my question is, when is there enough difference in game play. For, different monster in different maps with different AI - depending on the other monsters that spawn - is more then enough for me.
What do you think they could implement to prevent people from having the same experience over and over again when they rebuild a character? Could it even be a good thing that people are 'forced' to rebuild? If so they are 'forced' into new and interesting game play, this may be a good thing, right?

AxlStrife

12-03-2009, 08:29

I can see it already, the wizard is gonna cry that the barb has too much life compared to wizards, and witch doctors are gonna cry that they don't get enough willpower. Barbs are gonna say why the hell do I even have willpower.

It's ridiculous to make the game auto-stats when you could just allow for respec of stat points then even noobs would be able to fix their builds instead of looking at their messed up character and crying for endless hours.

It really takes away from the flavor of the game, and makes stat points practically pointless when you could just assign their bonus percents per level instead of having meaningless numbers.

If the Wiz wants more life, they can don gear to get more life, and the same with the WD and willpower. The barb won't complain about willpower once he sees an increase in health orb drops (or bonuses, I'm confused as to which the bonus applies to) as the game progresses.

Allowing for total stat respecs will lead to what D2 has become as far as stat placement goes for most characters.

Relating those bonuses to seperate numerical values (stats) gives ease of balance and makes for a nice, neat package.

Wouldn't you rather see
+ 5 to all attributes
on an item instead of:
+x% Melee and Ranged Physical Damage Bonus
+x% Armor Bonus
+x% Block Amount
+x% Critical Strike Chance
+x% Dodge Chance
- chance you will be interrupted by getting hit
+x Life
Mana Regeneration of +x per second
+x% Spell Damage Bonus
+x% Health Globe Bonus
?

Do you know what's fun. It's is a fact that DII wasn't broken because of the system. The implementation of the system might have been broken as it didn't work for enough characters. Yet you can define a 'sub-game' where it does work, thus proving that the system it's self isn't broken. It's merely the implementation that was far from perfect.

Is your logic that just because the system works less than a quarter the time it isn't broken? I'm trying to see what angle you're coming from. If this is so, then why would you pick a system that can only repeat successful results at that low of a percentile instead of one that has shown much higher percent of successful results, especially with a finite amount of time to prepare the entire game before the costs become more than the profits?

Anyway, I just thought of something new. One of the problems that some people have with manual stats is the need to rebuild their character when they screwed up a few points. And eventhough it isn't really needed, I can see why people feel the urge and do it anyway. I'm not even going to argue that having the same playing-experience is a bad thing.

My point is that they don't need to have the same experience. Diablo II has random maps, random drops, random 'boss monsters' and random parties if you play on bnet. Diablo III will have on top of that random side quest. Yet what if they implemented even more randomisation.
They could implement random monster spawn like act 5 has. They could implemented lots of random events - like that trapped chest in the first video. Heck, they could even randomise the main quest.
Let me give a (lame) example. Say your quest is to find a certain wounded demon and retrieve it's heart because it's heart is magical. So you follow the trail of blood to a mansion. There, you can randomise the quest. The demon could flee upstairs or downstairs. Upstairs and downstairs could have different monsters and different layouts. You could go even further and have the monsters flee through the back-door and into a cave - again with different layout and different monsters. Then if you encounter the demon, there is a chance that you have to fight the monsters, yet there is a chance that a rivalling demon hunter will steal the heart and flee to town. You return to town and there you are told where the demon hunter fled to. You follow him, track him and kill him to retrieve the heart.

So my question is: when is there enough difference in game play? For, different monster in different maps with different AI - depending on the other monsters that spawn - is more then enough for me.
What do you think they could implement to prevent people from having the same experience over and over again when they rebuild a character? Could it even be a good thing that people are 'forced' to rebuild? If so they are 'forced' into new and interesting game play, this may be a good thing, right?

I'd have to agree that rebuilding can be a good thing if you want to get the most out of your gameplay. What I don't agree with is how a lack of knowledge of the manual stat system forces rebuilding. There is much more leniency in manual stats for PvM than for PvP, but Blizzard believes that rebuilding due to a stat flaw is not the way people should have to replay the game. I agree with them on that. There are situations where even a 5 point discrepancy from the theoretical best is a manner of godly to pub-nub (LLD for instance).

NASE

12-03-2009, 08:48

Wouldn't you rather see
+ 5 to all attributes
on an item instead of:
+x% Melee and Ranged Physical Damage Bonus
+x% Armor Bonus
+x% Block Amount
+x% Critical Strike Chance
+x% Dodge Chance
- chance you will be interrupted by getting hit
+x Life
Mana Regeneration of +x per second
+x% Spell Damage Bonus
+x% Health Globe Bonus
?

Would it make any difference? Atleast, with the last list, you know what you are getting.

Is your logic that just because the system works less than a quarter the time it isn't broken? I'm trying to see what angle you're coming from.

Yes, you need to make a distinction between the system and the effective implementation. The system can be observed in any magnitude - small game or large game - while the effective implementation has the been seen in the whole of the game and other systems.

It's just like with airplanes. The first airplanes crashed. Yet the system of creating under pressure above the wings by acceleration of the air above the wings is a good systems. It's still used in the modern airplanes. It was just the implementation that wasn't good - probably something with balance or materials.

There are situations where even a 5 point discrepancy from the theoretical best is a manner of godly to pub-nub (LLD for instance).

That would force rebuild right?

AxlStrife

12-03-2009, 09:25

Would it make any difference? Atleast, with the last list, you know what you are getting.

There would be a problem with obstructing the view of other items in your inventory, or the battlefield, needlessly. Nice and tidy usually beats out sloppy when it comes to presentation. You wouldn't want to implement jagged polygonal graphics when a much smoother look can be accomplished on the same system (except for nostalgia purposes but I can't see that being applied in a wide scope as far as items go).

Yes, you need to make a distinction between the system and the effective implementation. The system can be observed in any magnitude - small game or large game - while the effective implementation has the been seen in the whole of the game and other systems.

It's just like with airplanes. The first airplanes crashed. Yet the system of creating under pressure above the wings by acceleration of the air above the wings is a good systems. It's still used in the modern airplanes. It was just the implementation that wasn't good - probably something with balance or materials.

Why would you pick a system that can only repeat successful results at that low of a percentile instead of one that applies to the same subject and has shown much higher percent of successful results, especially with a finite amount of time to prepare the entire game before the costs become more than the profits?

Until such time that said system can get a widespread success rate, it is not safe to assume that said system if not flawed.

That would force rebuild right?

Indeed.

It's been fun, but I have to be up in 4 hours so I gotta hit the hay. I'll try to respond to responses my way when I wake up. 'Night!

Turnip

12-03-2009, 09:40

Scorch Hellfire

12-03-2009, 12:23

I can't wait for the new things they are doing for Diablo 3...

Diablo 2 had many flaws that distracted from the good parts for me...

I've been playing D2 recently to re-experience the story, etc. and after playing WoW for so long there are many things that bother me about the game play...

Having to use endless potions to keep up your health and mana, having a relatively tiny inventory (although I like the grid system because its more realistic, just wish there was more space) and having to make a run back to town every few minutes and several times in a row after killing a boss or finding a special chest, having to run a long way back to your corpse with no items equiped and no gold to rehire your mercenary, no real incentive to explore more than you have to for the quests except for maybe more experience, etc...

I really hope that D3 will fix all these things... I'm really looking forward to the new skill rune system and new classes amongst many other things... I just wish it was coming out sooner than it really is...

Doppel

12-03-2009, 20:07

That's quite the misinterpretation, since the dillema is not "doing it or not doing it", it's "Implementing one or inplementing the other".

Implementing what exactly? Stats are already there, you either make them customizable (feature) or you don't (non-feature).

Further down you will see where your definition of a feature, which you never fully establish but imply that a feature is synonymous with customization, breaks down. There are such thing as static features.

Again, stats are already there, there is no feature.

As far as the strawman goes, you argued against the false assumption that because auto-stats are noob-friendly manual stats aren't nor could be.

But i didn't, i assumed that by using the (pro) argument that auto-stats are noob friendly they are implying manual stats could not be (else why even use the argument in the first place?), which i do not agree with. (thus i'm arguing the same thing you are, yes?)
So yes, it is a total and utter non-argument, ironically you fully agree with me whether or not you meant to.

Also, you made quite the disconnect on noob-friendly and noob-proof. Noob-proof is simply the largest extreme of noob-friendly, so auto-stats ARE noob-friendly.

Semantics, you could as well say someone is merely "unhappy" when in fact he's severely depressed because a severe depression is just the largest extreme of being unhappy.

Here's argument 5: It enables the D3 team to better balance the game.
Here's argument 6: Another benefit of setting the attributes is that the team can balance items and skills and monster difficulty and quest rewards more precisely.

I already argued against those, i do not see any counter-argument.

As you can see, argument 6 clearly falls under argument 5's scope. The fact that you treated each seperately in your response
showed that either you didn't have the foresight to think that someone wouldn't call you out on it or that they really were two seperate arguments, both of which undermine your intelligence.

So is that your whole grief? That i replied to two arguments (which were the same, like almost all of their arguments are) seperately to strengthen the point i'm trying to make? Instead of attacking the form, why not discuss the issue, because it clearly doesn't show much intelligence from your part.

You try to justify a slippery slope of "Why not remove everything? That will make the game balanced." Well, no one has stated that Blizzard was going for total balance, just more of a balance in D3 as compared to D2: a better balance. Balance isn't just one point on a number line, it's the number line itself.

So Blizzard isn't going for total balance, is that what you are saying?
The assumption that automating stats while including stuff like skill-runes "simply balances the game better" is highly doubtful at best.

Here's argument 7: It works in World of Warcraft.

Thats not an argument, WoW isn't even a hack&slash similar to Diablo.

Here's argument 8: lots of RPGs have preset attributes, and it doesn’t break the games.

Then why not name one, name one RPG where stats are completely fixed which supposedly isn't broken (because of it).
How can you even count "and they aren't broken" as an argument? I might as well list a number of games which do not have a mage class "and it isn't broken because of it", now is this a valid argument to take out a mage class? Please.

You don't even challange the arguments, which are quite valid. It's logical for a game to incorporate a tried and true system over one that was quite easily broken.

Haha, now its "incorporating", yep the game is suddenly incorporating a tried system (i'm assuming stats?) which can be less easily broken because said stats are completely automated, well duh captain obvious.

It's been proven that a predictable system is easier to balance than an unpredictable one. Thus, we can deduce that an auto-stat system would be easier to balance than a manual stat system.

Good going genius, you just made my point how its an entire non-argument.
What happened to "better" all of a sudden? I think you're just grasping for straws to be honest.

Since the current D3 team is familiar with auto-stats more than manual stats (most of the D2 team left for a now defunct company), it would be MUCH easier for them to balance auto over manual.

Yep, and they're more familiar with the Warcraft universe, so lets scrap Diablo all-together.

Since it will take less time/energy to balance auto-stats, they can put more focus on the features of the game that will make more impact on gameplay, like the various items.

And they couldn't have made stats have more impact on gameplay somehow, they can with items though, but with stats, nah thats impossible for unknown and vague non-reasons.

It's not a fact just because someone says "It's a fact" many times. While the management of stats wasn't the sole reason for the breaks in the game, to say that the stat system was fine when that notion has already been proven wrong time and time again is to basically close your eyes and ears to reality. You have failed to back up your "fact" with testable and repeatable observations. You LOSE!

I never said the stats were fine, so don't talk to me about using straw mans.
What i did say is that the game wasn't broken because it had manual stats, and amusingly your dictionary definition of the word broken (although i clearly made a distinction for games) doesn't contradict that.
If you're telling me the game (D2) was "broken" because it had manual stats then you're a straight up liar.

Once again, you fail to establish how the manual stat system isn't broken. You simply state: "It isn't broken" ad nauseum without establishing this claim as fact via testable and repeatable observations. the established fact that it is broken has met this most basic need for a competent argument repeatedly.

Doesn't work like that, if you are telling me it was broken then give me clear factual examples it was, i can't give you factual examples of what isn't. (just in the same way i can't prove to you God does not exist)

Seriously, your vocabulary is flawed. Auto-stats are a characteristic of the game, and characteristic is a synonym of feature. Bugs are a characteristic of the game, and I already established the synonym of characteristic.

Thus you conclude bugs are indeed a feature. Rofl.

SlechtWeerBeer

12-03-2009, 21:01

Thus you conclude bugs are indeed a feature. Rofl.

They are features, just not intended/disfunctional features.

Doppel

12-03-2009, 22:05

I highly doubt Blizzard meant "unintended/disfunctional" feature, so don't argue semantics.

apedog

13-03-2009, 01:35

Actually it works the other way around .. with stats being more effective it must be way under control .. if it wasn't for auto-stats they couldn't have made the stats more useful or otherwise it would have been disastrous to the game balance and could have created fat gigantic exploits when abused (and they would have surely been abused if left to players).

Manual Stats in D2 ... it was like an manual rusty pistol ... it was broken and gave little usefulness and did some damage when used by a lunatic .. but being a manual gun no matter how big the mess it created it was still a small mess.

Now in D3 Stats are upgraded (becoming more useful) .. it's like giving an abusive lunatic a fully loaded rocket launcher without a safety lock (i.e manual stats in D3) ... KABOOM

Think of it .. the only reason that stats became more useful (i.e having more effects) is that they are auto-stats and can't be abused by players ... and the right way to do it is to put things under control so that players can tap into the new usefulness of stats (through items and passive skills) without giving anyone the chance to abuse the system or break it like before.

People like to make characters based on their needs, not based on what someone perceives as fair. If you do not like the current system nor the CUSTOM system that the general MULTIPLAYER public enjoys, stick to single player/lan. It's obvious you do not like playing multiplayer with people who enjoy getting the most out of every single attribute in the game whether it is an item or a stat point. In the end, you are a casual player who does not enjoy "hardcore" players obtaining advantages over you. It's ludicrous to expect blizzard to even the playing field when you are obviously too lazy to plan out your character or spend the time getting the best of the best. You mistake abuse for perfection, if you wanted an easy game play something more streamlined like a single player rpg.

Knight_Wolf

13-03-2009, 03:00

People like to make characters based on their needs, not based on what someone perceives as fair.

Classes exist for a freaking reason .. Blizz has the right to define how each class plays and what differentiates it from the other classes (be it skills, stats or items) .. if you don't like that go make your own game where every one creates his own class from a blank sheet .... yay for customization ... screw balance ... right !!!! /sarcasm

If you do not like the current system nor the CUSTOM system that the general MULTIPLAYER public enjoys, stick to single player/lan.

You are the one complaining about the current system in D3 not me, like i said .. if you don't like it stick to the outdated systems of D2 or make your own RPG with blank sheet classes.

It's obvious you do not like playing multiplayer with people who enjoy getting the most out of every single attribute in the game whether it is an item or a stat point.

Spare me the self-conceited L337 lecture, getting too much out of something is abuse, D2 is full of exploits and it's too obvious to deny, if you can take benefits from something more than was planned for it that's abuse ... like it or not.

In the end, you are a casual player who does not enjoy "hardcore" players obtaining advantages over you. It's ludicrous to expect blizzard to even the playing field when you are obviously too lazy to plan out your character or spend the time getting the best of the best.

There is nothing lazy about playing for long and long hours fighting, collecting items and trading to get the right combination of items for my current skill build ... LAZY is for those who simply want to spam some +stat button every level up and call that customization ... lols .. the irony.

You mistake abuse for perfection

That perfection is only in your head, most of D2 system were exploitable in one way or another ... people weren't UBER cause they were really skilled .. but because they knew how to exploit the game's systems and cheaply abuse them (use them in other ways than they were intended to)

if you wanted an easy game play something more streamlined like a single player rpg.

Yeah ... lols .. a streamlined rpg like D3 .. yeah sure, i'll surely buy D3 (god knows when it comes out) and play its SP to its fullest while trying out loads of different builds using the NEW customization options .. then move on to its MP and applying the knowledge i got there to the test ... but guess i won't find you there either way .. what a pity XD

apedog

13-03-2009, 03:22

Classes exist for a freaking reason .. Blizz has the right to define how each class plays and what differentiates it from the other classes (be it skills, stats or items) .. if you don't like that go make your own game where every one creates his own class from a blank sheet .... yay for customization ... screw balance ... right !!!! /sarcasm

You are the one complaining about the current system in D3 not me, like i said .. if you don't like it stick to the outdated systems of D2 or make your own RPG with blank sheet classes.

Spare me the self-conceited L337 lecture, getting too much out of something is abuse, D2 is full of exploits and it's too obvious to deny, if you can take benefits from something more than was planned for it that's abuse ... like it or not.

There is nothing lazy about playing for long and long hours fighting, collecting items and trading to get the right combination of items for my current skill build ... LAZY is for those who simply want to spam some +stat button every level up and call that customization ... lols .. the irony.

That perfection is only in your head, most of D2 system were exploitable in one way or another ... people weren't UBER cause they were really skilled .. but because they knew how to exploit the game's systems and cheaply abuse them (use them in other ways than they were intended to)

Yeah ... lols .. a streamlined rpg like D3 .. yeah sure, i'll surely buy D3 (god knows when it comes out) and play its SP to its fullest while trying out loads of different builds using the NEW customization options .. then move on to its MP and applying the knowledge i got there to the test ... but guess i won't find you there either way .. what a pity XD

Yet again you fail at reading. Perfection in a sense of perfecting a character over time, not having it given to me stat-wise because people like you do not have the ability or intelligence to make the best out of the best. The only people who disagree with a customizable system are the same players who never make it to the top of competitive gameplay. I don't see how using something blizzard implemented to be cheap just because you cannot carry out the same task as well. Btw, spamming a stat into a specific field is far from "ironic", if a person has planned it out why should he/she have to wait to implement their build? People like you ruin multiplayer and allow mediocre gameplay become streamlined as the standard of being "skilled." I havn't complained about the current d3 system because it is not completely set in stone, im simply refuted your point of what is "fair." Promoting dilution of a games mechanics because you simply are bad at the game is far from benefical to the masses in the multiplayer crowd. Like I said before, stick to single player and enjoy it because you can't complete with the rest of the world. Your mentality suggest that you can only be good by luck because you should only be able to obtain benefits by whatever drops :jig: Btw, who are you to say how much something can be used for? If it really was a problem it wouldve been clearly stated that it would be removed 100% (i.e charms)

quick note,
nothing will never be balanced because there will always be someone better than you at the game. This is probably why you believe that the game isn't balanced, simply because you can't compete. Blizzard can't make a game where skill is given to you with the game, nothing is that automated yet.. noob.

Grug

13-03-2009, 04:05

Balance doesn't mean "everyone completely equal." It means the power spread is smaller. There would still be good builds and bad builds, but even a mediocre player won't be left in the dust. you l33t players will still get to pimp your characters, and with the smaller spread, every little boost counts a lot more. The l33t will get prestige for finding each new tweak and strategy to power up, and the rest of us get to feel like the game is for everyone.

Like I say, oftentimes l33t players don't get their pleasure from becoming powerful like they say, but by being powerful they get to feel superior to the regular players. They're worried that they can't lord over the noobs if there is a smaller difference.

Knight_Wolf

13-03-2009, 05:04

Yet again you fail at reading.

Assume whatever you want :whistling:

Perfection in a sense of perfecting a character over time, not having it given to me stat-wise because people like you do not have the ability or intelligence to make the best out of the best. The only people who disagree with a customizable system are the same players who never make it to the top of competitive gameplay.

"like you do not have the ability or intelligence to make the best out of the best." ... yeah .. yeah .. more self-conceited L337 lectures ... when is the E-peen lecture going to start. /sarcasm .. lots of it :crazyeyes:

The system is already customizable ... just not the TYPE of customization that has been done ages ago and is outdated and replaced by more streamlined and interesting ALTERNATIVE.

I don't see how using something blizzard implemented to be cheap just because you cannot carry out the same task as well. Btw, spamming a stat into a specific field is far from "ironic", if a person has planned it out why should he/she have to wait to implement their build? People like you ruin multiplayer and allow mediocre gameplay become streamlined as the standard of being "skilled." I havn't complained about the current d3 system because it is not completely set in stone, im simply refuted your point of what is "fair."

Promoting dilution of a games mechanics because you simply are bad at the game is far from beneficial to the masses in the multiplayer crowd.

You haven't refuted anything, Promoting over intoxicating the game with unnecessary (cause they have better alternatives) exploitable systems (fully open to user manipulation) isn't going to serve the game balance or increase the overall game quality ... more doesn't equal better .. that's childish thinking ... sometimes one bar of good chocolate is better than stupidly stuffing your self to the mouth with cheap chocolate, dirtying you clothes and getting stomach ache.

Like I said before, stick to single player and enjoy it because you can't complete with the rest of the world. Your mentality suggest that you can only be good by luck because you should only be able to obtain benefits by whatever drops :jig: Btw, who are you to say how much something can be used for? If it really was a problem it wouldve been clearly stated that it would be removed 100% (i.e charms)

Blah blah blah .. i didn't say the items will be the judgmental factor in online play .. i said it will require time and skill to collect the items you need for ... yeah LISTEN closely .. your SKILLS .... the SKILLS are what make and define the characters and how they are used are the first major factor in PVP play.

Placing stats is a lazy job that any monkey (if they played Diablo) can do right by reading some online guides. :coffee:

quick note,
nothing will never be balanced because there will always be someone better than you at the game. This is probably why you believe that the game isn't balanced, simply because you can't compete. Blizzard can't make a game where skill is given to you with the game, nothing is that automated yet.. noob.

Ah .. MY GOD .. apedog are you an #$@@$#@$ (joke) ... You don't even know what balance is ... god ... how can you be like that !!!? ... having someone better than me has nothing to do with balance being in the game or not ... EVER PLAYED A FEAKING VERSUS GAME AT THE FREAKING ARCADES BEFORE ..... versus games (you know like street fighters and such in case you don't know) require fine balance between the various characters (equvialnt to diablo's classes) so that the game becomes playable not dominated by idiots who are abusing one unbalanced character (or even move) over and over to win all matches.

And that's talking about balance being very important for predefined characters with predefined moves or skills .. now add a little bit of customization and you have a balance disaster .. unless there is some control over what is class represents it's gonna turn into a big mess (like D2 was being dominated by a class or a certain build after each feeble attempt by the D2 team to balance it ... not knowing that it was all in vain cause the aren't dealing with the main PROBLEM that's causing the unbalance ... yes .. too much customization in the hands of idiots .. there you have it.

AND YES ... NOTHING WILL BE 100% BALANCED .. WHO SAID OTHER WISE !!!? ... but seeing a chance to offer a more balanced .. MORE BALANCED game and wasting it over some self-conceited nonsense like stats placement is down right retarded and STUPID.

Turnip

13-03-2009, 07:02

I dunno removing content in order to provide this balance urks me in the end, like the other guy said why not just make it so we can use every single skill in the game all the time; diversification is a boon to a game and should be provided.

As diablo 2 shows diversification>balance.

ShadedOne

13-03-2009, 07:30

My 2 cents...
As I like to say, Balance Shmalance. Balance has to be the most overused word in gaming, when it really is quite nicely encompassed by the word ENJOYMENT.

A few points on balance..
Everyone loves an uber character. If having a character that was in the elite of the elite as fast as possible wasn't an appealing notion to a lot of gamers, you wouldn't be seeing as many exploits. Tell me this; if Blizzard decided to cater to the niche gamer that enjoys playing underpowered characters just for the challenge and game experience (count me in) and whom isn't concerned with the ' My sword is bigger than your's" mentality, they likely wouldn't make as much...drumroll please... CASH.

Let us not forget the cash. Blizzard wants to create a game that pleases their Diablo 2 fanbase, but they are also wanting to draw players in and hook them with the formula of "Wow I love how fast paced this game is, I really feel like my time sink is getting me somewhere". I have to be honest with myself as a human and say that I am competetive by nature. There are a lot of things I do for my own enjoyment, but I will admit to playing a rather drab build just to say I played it, and just to have one.

EDIT: On a sidenote, I have to admit that Blizzard is quite dedicated to their games, and continues to release patches and content for quite stable-fanbased games such as ours.

Back to balance, I must clarify that I am no means against having a "harder to break" system that encourages dedication to achieve lofty goals, but there will always be in the background those 13 year old power gamers who infest all games. This rather large and annoying group cannot be ignored as a source of profit, and once again being honest with ourselves we have to understand that even though creating an amazing game is the main way to get profit, reducing the size of a market just to make the perfect balanced game just leaves to must cash out in the cold. Those games are left to small-market developers, who coincidentally are often without resources.

Cash Rules Everything Around Me(Us)=Cream, so put a splash in your coffee and think about it.

Killafornia

13-03-2009, 07:42

If the Wiz wants more life, they can don gear to get more life, and the same with the WD and willpower. The barb won't complain about willpower once he sees an increase in health orb drops (or bonuses, I'm confused as to which the bonus applies to) as the game progresses.

Allowing for total stat respecs will lead to what D2 has become as far as stat placement goes for most characters.

Relating those bonuses to seperate numerical values (stats) gives ease of balance and makes for a nice, neat package.

Wouldn't you rather see
+ 5 to all attributes
on an item instead of:
+x% Melee and Ranged Physical Damage Bonus
+x% Armor Bonus
+x% Block Amount
+x% Critical Strike Chance
+x% Dodge Chance
- chance you will be interrupted by getting hit
+x Life
Mana Regeneration of +x per second
+x% Spell Damage Bonus
+x% Health Globe Bonus

Damn right I would rather see the second list. It's exactly what this game is about. If you see something drop with that many mods it's insta boner. If I see something drop with +5 all attri it's charsi food. The big list of modifiers defines the end game of diablo 2. It gives the item a feeling of power sorry this isn't a game for someone with OCD. Not everything is all tidy and neat about it, infact most things aren't just hope you don't sit there trying to wipe the bloodstains off of your monitor while playing.

And your wrong, because I will complain about willpower as a barb. Screw health orb drops. I'm not gonna be getting health orbs in PvP. Which is always my endgame goal in any game I play always, period. If blizzard can make PvM fun for me then good, but my ultimate goal WILL be PvP, and the auto-assigned stats just takes part of the fun out of it. Doing your homework for your build was one of the best parts of the game. Like my last barb I spent a whole day figuring out what items I have to get, what items I might get for different situations, how much strength am I gonna need to wear all of equipment when I decide to switch out my beast for a different weapon. It added another side to the game that I don't think Blizzard even realizes existed. Nor do you.

And when you finished planning and you started building, and you started acquiring every single piece of equipment, and finally you finished it all, and stepped into your first duel game it was all just worth it, and smashing some nub who put 50 points too many into strength or dex was satisfying because you spent all your time planning for your perfect build. You probably don't know what I am talking about, but all of the hardcore PvPers here do, and that's why stats are an important part of this game's history. Anyone who says D2 PvP was terrible just needs to leave. Diablo 2 PvP is the only PvP I've put 8 years of my life into, and the only flaw with it is the programmers are just too lazy to fix the weaker classes and give me a chance to experience those in PvP.

Chorkstain

13-03-2009, 12:25

To the above post, the second list is completely inelegant. My interpretation of what you say about it is the elation one feels upon seeing such a boner-inducing list of modifiers, which I can understand in an abstract sense. But if you can express this in one line rather than 20, then I'd prefer the first.

I wonder about players of Diablo 2 who spend 'a whole day' contemplating what kind of equipment to find for your WW Barbarian or whatever. No disrespect here, but have you considered becoming professional chess players? You might be mismanaging yourselves.

And finally, I'd like to note that most posts here are emotional vomit behind a facade of intellect. Instead of guarding so zealously your points of view by hammering your logic against each other, try to see each other's point of view! Some points eventually will be reduced to axiomatic beliefs which aren't wrong, but that you may disagree with. If you can debate with each other, clearing the debris of misconceptions until you agree on points and disagree on others, that's a successful discussion.

And here's my subjective opinion: I don't want to spend my time processing excessive statistics, looking at 15 modifiers which translate to a 2% increase in killing efficiency. If I see a modifier, it would be nice for it to translate to a noticeable gameplay effect. Look, I *know* that I probably sound like a 'noob' or whatever, but to me the game would be much more fun that way. Excessive statistic grinding in a game is merely inelegance. Elegance! When a game is elegant, it's easier to navigate the fog and see the game inside! If you were to look at the Diablo 1 Warrior, the system is very simple. You move on a grid and you attack things. But it has embedded complexity. There are a lot of tactics in fighting different opponents, positioning, etc. And yet you're just moving and hitting. That's what I mean by elegance.

Knight_Wolf

13-03-2009, 12:42

Damn right I would rather see the second list. It's exactly what this game is about. If you see something drop with that many mods it's insta boner. If I see something drop with +5 all attri it's charsi food. The big list of modifiers defines the end game of diablo 2. It gives the item a feeling of power sorry this isn't a game for someone with OCD. Not everything is all tidy and neat about it, infact most things aren't just hope you don't sit there trying to wipe the bloodstains off of your monitor while playing.

Overflooding the item description with too much informartion that can be summed up in a more streamlined way causes clogging the view of the user (especially that whenever you switch items you see the stats of both the new and the old item ... sorry but stats are there for a good reason.

Ever heard about "tree charts" ... Blizz could say "Attributes" and list everything under it directly ... but no .. that's not how tree charts work ... It is better to say "Stats" .. then fork them in four categories ... then fork each one into attributes ... there is a reason people use tree charts .. accessibility, ease of use and organization .. and you simply want to remove all that for ... hmmm .. for what ... nothing !!?

And your wrong, because I will complain about willpower as a barb. Screw health orb drops. I'm not gonna be getting health orbs in PvP.

Who knows, maybe health globes will drop in PVP (like blizz is planning to do with bosses .. every successful critical attack the enemy drops a health globe), not to mention that even in PVP there will be monsters around (we don't know if there will be a duel arena or not for PVP), but even if there is a duel arena .. it could have destructible environments that can drop health globes .. there are many ways to integrate HG in PVP.

Which is always my endgame goal in any game I play always, period. If blizzard can make PvM fun for me then good, but my ultimate goal WILL be PvP, and the auto-assigned stats just takes part of the fun out of it. Doing your homework for your build was one of the best parts of the game. Like my last barb I spent a whole day figuring out what items I have to get, what items I might get for different situations.

Removing manual stats simply removes additional versions of the same exact build ... like with manual stats you could make 4 versions of a bowzon .. but only one of them was effective and the other three weren't ... removing extra broken versions of the same builds isn't a big deal (the only exception of this rule were the unusual builds a rare minority made by abusing stats assignment ... they are nothing to cry over either)

how much strength am I gonna need to wear all of equipment when I decide to switch out my beast for a different weapon. It added another side to the game that I don't think Blizzard even realizes existed. Nor do you.

Stat requirements aren't needed anymore ... items work differently than they used to in D2 .. they are now the stat modifiers not the other way around.

And when you finished planning and you started building, and you started acquiring every single piece of equipment, and finally you finished it all, and stepped into your first duel game it was all just worth it, and smashing some nub who put 50 points too many into strength or dex was satisfying because you spent all your time planning for your perfect build. You probably don't know what I am talking about, but all of the hardcore PvPers here do,

and that's why stats are an important part of this game's history.

Seriously, your nostalgic remarks about crushing noobs is the reason for wanting to include stats in D3 regardless of how much they degrade the game balance and overall quality !!!! ... SIGH

Anyone who says D2 PvP was terrible just needs to leave. Diablo 2 PvP is the only PvP I've put 8 years of my life into, and the only flaw with it is the programmers are just too lazy to fix the weaker classes and give me a chance to experience those in PvP.

It's not the developers feeling lazy .. they kept trying patch after patch to balance them but they weren't smart enough to notice that this will never happen because the game is exploitable .. whenever they change anything in classes balance L337s find a way to abuse it right away .. removing manual stats could have solved that and made the classes more balanced ... but there weren't brave enough to do it .. it was too late anyway .. but not with D3 thankfully.

NASE

13-03-2009, 18:09

And here's my subjective opinion: I don't want to spend my time processing excessive statistics, looking at 15 modifiers which translate to a 2% increase in killing efficiency.

If you do the statistics, it's because you want too. You can just as easily play on the go and be effective.
And eventually, if you spend the time thinking on your character, you are doing so because you believe that in the end, it pays off and that you gain the time wasted back by more effective gameplay later in the game.

Removing manual stats simply removes additional versions of the same exact build ... like with manual stats you could make 4 versions of a bowzon .. but only one of them was effective and the other three weren't

That's not true. There are two main stream bowazon builds that differ in vitality. Depending on what gear your use, this can be as much as 100 (that's 20 levels) stats point different. Count in the hardcore players that probably want even more life and the 1.09 poison bowazon - there was something strange with poison back in the days - that could go with almost full life if wanted and you have your 4 builds that both have and should have their place in diablo.

If you want to pick on a character, pick on hammerdins. Nobody likes hammerdins so nobody will defend them.

P.S With that said, I do agree with what you say. Yet this may be just as much a problem with the other mechanisms then with manual stats. As you can see in that example.

removing manual stats could have solved that and made the classes more balanced ... but there weren't brave enough to do it

Or they were brave enough and didn't choice the easy way out. Instead, they tried to get things right and learn from what they did (wrong).

And btw, lets have a look at the unbalanced classes. Hammerdins aren't overpowered because of stats. Yet simply do to much unresistable damage and have decent teleport speed. Same goes for sorcerers where convictions and synergies turn things over the top. Bonemancer (pvp) do a lot of unresisting damage too, that is homing and large ranged or fast on top of that.

Where do stats come in I wonder?

SlechtWeerBeer

13-03-2009, 18:27

And btw, lets have a look at the unbalanced classes. Hammerdins aren't overpowered because of stats. Yet simply do to much unresistable damage and have decent teleport speed. Same goes for sorcerers where convictions and synergies turn things over the top. Bonemancer (pvp) do a lot of unresisting damage too, that is homing and large ranged or fast on top of that.

Where do stats come in I wonder?

You have proven (kinda) stats are not a major part of Diablo II. Thank you.

Funkopotamus

13-03-2009, 18:35

Regarding the streamlined vs expanded item stat view, I vote for no such thing as too much information. I'd be fine if they had everything down to the file name for the item model on there.

AxlStrife

13-03-2009, 18:51

If you do the statistics, it's because you want too. You can just as easily play on the go and be effective.
And eventually, if you spend the time thinking on your character, you are doing so because you believe that in the end, it pays off and that you gain the time wasted back by more effective gameplay later in the game.

The whole point of the RPG system is to take a character from basically an apprentice to an effective neutralizing machine. If a person doesn't crunch the numbers or have said numbers crunched for him/her, that person will never truly know if weapon A would be better than weapon B with his current gear. Despite what you believe, you can't play willy-nilly and be effective in the later difficulties and stages of the game because, to put it simply, the actions of the game as a whole are designed on various frame breakpoints and various numbers. The game is a number-crunching game at it's heart.

Or they were brave enough and didn't choice the easy way out. Instead, they tried to get things right and learn from what they did (wrong).

And btw, lets have a look at the unbalanced classes. Hammerdins aren't overpowered because of stats. Yet simply do to much unresistable damage and have decent teleport speed. Same goes for sorcerers where convictions and synergies turn things over the top. Bonemancer (pvp) do a lot of unresisting damage too, that is homing and large ranged or fast on top of that.

Where do stats come in I wonder?

Stats come in at how you approach PvP.

All of those cookie-cutter builds follow the same stat guidelines, yet outside of Bonemancer, those builds are not considered the best PvP builds in that class. Different characters with different power levels have to be approached differently. Arguably the most important stat in the game, life, has the largest effect on this. Low life forces character speed and tight play to be at its highest to be successful, while high life eases the pressures of tight play. While there are more factors that dictate gameplay(FBR, FHR, FCR, Resists, etc.), but none as important as your amount of life.

I argue that the Hdin's abuse of certain game mechanics (without Concentration, Hdin's damage is mega weak and without deynch most are easy to beat if you know what you're doing) are why many people consider them a top class, even though I don't. Sorceresses can be absorbed and mercs are easily killed, synergies are apparant in every class. Every class has

Ultimately, all of the unbalancing systems in D3 are getting an overhaul (those being stats, skills, and equipment). Each of those aided the others in the downward spiral of balance.

Turnip

13-03-2009, 20:36

What balance are you trying to achieve in the end making everything carebear? Can a wizard even technically outdamage a barb to achieve good balance? Should that not take away his ability to solo, because if he can solo he will do more damage than a barb thus it isnt fair?

The answer is your idea of balance is crappy, games like action rpg; first person shooters; and RTS games can have a more skewed balance system that relies on player skill instead of just statistics. You played zerg versus terran in starcraft? The zerg have it way worse, but with a bit more skills and unit control they can win; it takes 1 mess up and the terran is dead, if he plays perfect he will win yet a zerg is considered equal powered. I just think trying to achieve some optimum balance is foolhardy, and I think adding health globes to pvp would be rediculous to balance..

Knight_Wolf

14-03-2009, 00:40

You have proven (kinda) stats are not a major part of Diablo II. Thank you.

LoLs, good point really, that's what i'd call shooting your own feet XD

What balance are you trying to achieve in the end making everything carebear? Can a wizard even technically outdamage a barb to achieve good balance? Should that not take away his ability to solo, because if he can solo he will do more damage than a barb thus it isnt fair?

The bears only exist in your head, there aren't any bears out there ... besides bears ... what were you talking about again ?

Oh .. hmmm .... what ? .. Who took anyone's ability to solo, and what does removing manual stats has to do with wizards outdamaging barbs !!!? .. you can't be seriously expecting that wizards to go fully melee and being able to out damage barbs in melee damage is a good thing or a reason to keep manual stats ( then clearly you missed what the word WIZARD means .. and what a melee wizard or warlock is supposed to be) ... if that's what you mean then screw the concept classes all together .. congratulations .. you just made it useless.

The answer is your idea of balance is crappy

Yeah, says who !!? .. you who seem to have no idea what balance even is.

games like action rpg; first person shooters; and RTS games can have a more skewed balance system that relies on player skill instead of just statistics.

Lols, you categorization is made of big fail, each type of those games plays completely differently and has a different set of play rules and conditions, actually you are even more wrong cause the most competitive games out there (vesus games) in which characters balance is top priority to create a GOOD BALANCED RESPECTED COMPETITIVE SCENE don't depend on statistics at all .. FAIL pretty much.

You don't even need to know how much is Ryu from street fighter is faster than Cammy as much as you need to learn their moves, how and when to use them .. last thing you need to know in a Versus game is stats ... not to mention you can't even alter them anyway ( yet each player using the same character could have a completely different play style of his own because of how differently each one uses the moves at the character's disposal and understands its advantages and disadvantages) .... player skills comes first and before any other thing in VERSUS games ... which is sadly not the case with games like D2 .. i want to played a streamlined action RPG not the RPG "Fill The Spread Sheet vr.2".

(OMG Ryu is a carebear character cause i can't max his STR .. mommy help me out .. waaaa .. /lols)

You played zerg versus terran in starcraft? The zerg have it way worse, but with a bit more skills and unit control they can win; it takes 1 mess up and the terran is dead, if he plays perfect he will win yet a zerg is considered equal powered. I just think trying to achieve some optimum balance is foolhardy, and I think adding health globes to pvp would be rediculous to balance..

One of the most things that every player (of equal or close skill level) can play with any race and still has EQUAL chance to win ... which is what balance is all about ... imagine if you had complete freedom to alter any Zerg units stats or max Terran units HP during the match ... WTH .. the competitive side of the game will be completely screwed over ... great job :whistling:

And there is nothing ridiculous about adding Health Globes to PvP ... naturally PvP happens in the instanced Diablo worlds and each will be filled with monsters like typical SP fare ... and potions will still be around too .. but will require more skill to tactically choose the time of when to use them.

apedog

14-03-2009, 01:07

It's pretty obvious that Knight_wolf is bad at d2 and he wants the game to be dumbed down for his simple mind. All his posts point to outside sources of information (e.g. looking up guides for builds) which have nothing to do with the game. He fails to realise that someone people are just good at the game and some are bad. He'll only be satisfied once blizzard makes pvp arenas where everyone has the same level gear. He's just mad he was never able to top pvp in battle net :( My "1337" attitude that you seem to point out isn't even an attitude, im just naturally good and you're just naturally bad. Stick to something simple like world of goo if you want balance.

Turnip

14-03-2009, 01:16

No, the point about the sorc versus barb thing is that if a sorc can solo and a barb can solo a sorc must be overpowered because she has the potential for more damage. Its just an example that nothing is ever really balanced, something is always gonna have a slight edge over something else. The only way to truly balance is to make everyone have the same character..

So what if they add stats and its not completely balanced, as long as its somewhat closer than d2 had it who cares..

For the zerg versus terran, the terran will win on an equal skill playing field assuming he makes no mistakes; but they're so close that people will still play zerg without feeling gimped. AWP versus M4 in counter-strike arent balanced but are close enough, and both give the potential to do well. So I say theres no point in being that nitpicky about it.

Kingu

14-03-2009, 01:17

Apedog tell me you were joking...

AxlStrife

14-03-2009, 03:55

Blizzard knows what is best for Diablo 3.

<.< >.>

Killafornia

14-03-2009, 04:16

Overflooding the item description with too much informartion that can be summed up in a more streamlined way causes clogging the view of the user (especially that whenever you switch items you see the stats of both the new and the old item ... sorry but stats are there for a good reason.

Yes, because your obviously gonna go into battle with you inventory screen open and your mouse hovering over your items. Crying screen clutter is a stupid reason to fight over this one, and so is saying it's streamlined to have stats versus %'s because when you put the item on the first thing your gonna do is open your character screen and check how much the item increases your statistics. Adding a whole other pointless step to the process of finding out how badass you just got. If you don't do that then just put the item on and hush. You shouldn't care what it looks like.

Ever heard about "tree charts" ... Blizz could say "Attributes" and list everything under it directly ... but no .. that's not how tree charts work ... It is better to say "Stats" .. then fork them in four categories ... then fork each one into attributes ... there is a reason people use tree charts .. accessibility, ease of use and organization .. and you simply want to remove all that for ... hmmm .. for what ... nothing !!?

Stats are pointless when they have no meaning. It's pointless to have strength when you don't need it to wear anything. Especially since it can be streamlined into the statistics it represents. Which is what you are all about isn't it? Mister streamlined. Mister I fear math. Can't crunch numbers on a 5th grade level?

Who knows, maybe health globes will drop in PVP (like blizz is planning to do with bosses .. every successful attacks the enemy drops a health globe), not to mention that even in PVP there will be monsters around (we don't know if there will be a duel arena or not for PVP), but even if there is a duel arena .. it could have destructible environments that can drop health globes .. there are many ways to integrate HG in PVP.

I hope not, potions/health items have no place in honorable dueling period. Unless you play hardcore. And even if they could drop I wouldn't care screw willpower on my barb.

Removing manual stats simply removes additional versions of the same exact build ... like with manual stats you could make 4 versions of a bowzon .. but only one of them was effective and the other three weren't ... removing extra broken versions of the same builds isn't a big deal (the only exception of this rule were the unusual builds a rare minority made by abusing stats assignment ... they are nothing to cry over either)

Well you see if they aren't the same then they aren't the same so that is a flawed argument at best. Let me just show you the difference in builds.

Example: Three lite sorc builds.
Build 1: Vita Lite Sorc Max Block
str: enough to wear gear dex: probably around 150 maybe more depends on gear
vita: the rest
Lower pure +to skills then a non block, you'll probably do 30-40k top end dmg.
Build 2: Vita Lite sorc no block
Str:Enough for gear Dex: None Vita:The Rest
Massive damage depending on how you gear I've seen these get up to 57k top end.
Build 3: ES lite sorc 200% fcr
str: about 45 dex: none vita: enough for 1k life with BO Ener: Rest
Damage tops out at about 20k top end and the character plays real fast, deadliest build if your good.

Now there is probably four more variations of this build I did not list, and all are viable duelers, and the difference between these builds REQUIRES assignable stat points this is not something you are gonna see in d3 and that is for sure. I mean just look up all the different builds for each class for just PvP only. You'll see atleast 10+ for each character and each build will give you different options stat wise, skill wise, and gear wise.

D3 MIGHT be able to do this but to make builds like this blizzard will have to put BIG + to stats on all good items and design each item to be used in one or 2 specific ways. This is where the game become more two-dimensional then d2.

Stat requirements aren't needed anymore ... items work differently than they used to in D2 .. they are now the stat modifiers not the other way around.

/invalid
Gear always was stat modifiers.

Seriously, your nostalgic remarks about crushing noobs is the reason for wanting to include stats in D3 regardless of how much they degrade the game balance and overall quality !!!! ... SIGH

They don't degrade game balance, or quality. They add more depth to the game. People are just too lazy to spend 15 minutes with Google.

It's not the developers feeling lazy .. they kept trying patch after patch to balance them but they weren't smart enough to notice that this will never happen because the game is exploitable .. whenever they change anything in classes balance L337s find a way to abuse it right away .. removing manual stats could have solved that and made the classes more balanced ... but there weren't brave enough to do it .. it was too late anyway .. but not with D3 thankfully.

Yeah removing manual stats would have stopped hammerdins from getting 15k unstoppable damage, and probably would have completely stopped game desync.

Your opinion is flawed this games problem was NEVER stats it was always the design of skills. ALWAYS, and you can't even argue otherwise, and they where too lazy to fix it because it never got fixed. Every time a new bug came in or a new skill design could be abused it was because they designed it that way. Not on purpose, but they did do it. They always implement stuff with out testing it to the extreme it requires. This game has always been broken in one way or another and the only people at fault is Blizzard.

Now I love blizzard don't get me wrong, but they made the game, and they own the game. They are responsible for the mistakes in the games design.

Now please think before you post instead of just rambling crap out there. You don't even understand diablo 2 so your opinion of what diablo 3 should be like isn't even valid.

Grug

14-03-2009, 04:32

No, the point about the sorc versus barb thing is that if a sorc can solo and a barb can solo a sorc must be overpowered because she has the potential for more damage. Its just an example that nothing is ever really balanced, something is always gonna have a slight edge over something else. The only way to truly balance is to make everyone have the same character..

So what if they add stats and its not completely balanced, as long as its somewhat closer than d2 had it who cares..

Wow. Just... wow. You can't honestly say that you thought that through. I mean, could you BE any more ignorant?

"Sorc can solo and Barb can solo, therefore Sorc is overpowered"? There is SO much more to consider than pure numbers. If a Barb does 50 damage to one enemy with Hammer of the Ancients, then Blizzard isn't going to make the Wizard do 50 damage to 5 enemies with arcane orb. That wouldn't be fair. Balanced would be arcane orb doing 10 damage to 5 enemies. Then factor in mana costs, recharges, ranges, and the health of the character and you get a wide variety of things to look at. I mean, did you honestly think that the only thing that mattered was number of targets?

NASE

14-03-2009, 08:13

LoLs, good point really, that's what i'd call shooting your own feet XD

No I didn't. I agree that if simply base you importances calculation on the number of builds, that aren't important - which I btw never contested. However, you can look at the importances based on how they used this systems. The mentioned bowazon makes much better use of the stats. So eventhough they are rare, they count for as much al those hammerdins. Then we have the builds that only work because of manual stats allocation and for those, stats are very important.

As important that I wouldn't dare to say that stats aren't important, not when you base their weight on the use of stats.

If you simply look at the number of bots, you have to conclude that bots are quite important for the game. Making it an argument to have bots in DIII.
Now, I know that this is the wrong way to look at bots. Just number crunching is to easy. The same can be said for the use of stats.

Knight_Wolf

14-03-2009, 11:05

Yes, because your obviously gonna go into battle with you inventory screen open and your mouse hovering over your items. Crying screen clutter is a stupid reason to fight over this one, and so is saying it's streamlined to have stats versus %'s because when you put the item on the first thing your gonna do is open your character screen and check how much the item increases your statistics. Adding a whole other pointless step to the process of finding out how badass you just got. If you don't do that then just put the item on and hush. You shouldn't care what it looks like.

It's actually the other way around ... it's not a pointless step it is a required on for the sake of organization and tidiness and ease of item checking (again look up tree charts and what purpose do they serve)

Like it or not you will spend a lot of time in the item screen and switching items around while arranging you inventory and trading .. i don't want every freaking item info popup to cover the whole freaking screen (which will happen if you remove stats and add attributes instead) .... it makes arranging and managing the inventory way easier .. besides .. who said you won't have to play at some moments with the inventory open for one reason or another .. IT HAPPENS.

OMG i have to memorize what each stat does .. but nooo ... i'm soooo L337 and UBER i can't even remember some attributes in relation to stats .. so let's clutter the screen with every piece of information possible. :crazyeyes:

Stats are pointless when they have no meaning. It's pointless to have strength when you don't need it to wear anything. Especially since it can be streamlined into the statistics it represents. Which is what you are all about isn't it? Mister streamlined. Mister I fear math. Can't crunch numbers on a 5th grade level?

You apparently got the whole streamlined thing wrong, what you are talking about here is cluttering not streamlining.

How do suggest we make the Barbarian skill that makes each point in STR more effective (look it up in the Barbarian skill trees) ... by making four different skills each one increasing one of the attributes that STR increased (notice that the skill didn't increase your STR but made each point more effective on the attributes indirectly) .. yay .. skill clutter too :smug:

If that's your line of thinking why didn't you whine about Blizz not giving you the ability to add points directly into you Block, HP, DPS in D2 .... sigh .. doesn't make much sense, does it !!! .. too much for the D2 blind support/fanboyism !!!

I hope not, potions/health items have no place in honorable dueling period. Unless you play hardcore. And even if they could drop I wouldn't care screw willpower on my barb.

Yeah, that's why all most L337's players want their potion spam back .. makes sense :whistling:

And don't talk to me about HONORABLE cause there was nothing honorable about PKing.

Well you see if they aren't the same then they aren't the same so that is a flawed argument at best. Let me just show you the difference in builds.

Nope, your argument is the flawed one, here is why ... with manual stats we got the chance to create variations of each build (with some definitely more effective and popular than others) but we also got the risk of having game breaking builds that abuse the stats,skills and items combination to exploit the game .... with items only we get the same build with limited variations (cause you can alter your stats with items) which aren't game breaking or abusable like before ... so it is a gain not a loss.

D3 MIGHT be able to do this but to make builds like this blizzard will have to put BIG + to stats on all good items and design each item to be used in one or 2 specific ways. This is where the game become more two-dimensional then d2.

It's not two dimensional .. it just extended in a different direction .. you just don't see it because of your narrow D2 view of things .. everything must be done the D2 way or it is wrong .. what kind of thinking is that !!?

/invalid
Gear always was stat modifiers.

Not invalid at all, you yourself admitted that many of the builds just filled certain stats specifically to use certain items so they were more limitations than stat modifiers ... but not with limitations gone they will become THE MAIN stats modifiers .. meaning their stat bonuses will be much more effective and have a much greater impact .. there is nothing invalid about what i said .. read carefully next time.

They don't degrade game balance, or quality. They add more depth to the game. People are just too lazy to spend 15 minutes with Google.

Unneeded depth, i could say the same about allowing the player to alter every stats of every item in the game or move skills between classes .. but NO .. it just makes things more easily exploitable and heavily damage the game balance and overall quality.

Yeah removing manual stats would have stopped hammerdins from getting 15k unstoppable damage, and probably would have completely stopped game desync.

Yes it won't completely stop them .. but it will definitely limit how powerful they could get by abusing stats+items+skills .. so they will be much less of a problem if they existed in D3.

Your opinion is flawed this games problem was NEVER stats it was always the design of skills. ALWAYS, and you can't even argue otherwise,

Yes I CAN :yes: ... /lols

but they made the game, and they own the game. They are responsible for the mistakes in the games design.

And they are working on fixing them beforehand.

Now please think before you post instead of just rambling crap out there. You don't even understand diablo 2 so your opinion of what diablo 3 should be like isn't even valid.

I do understand what a good game is and i have been an avid gamer for longer than i can remember (before even doom was made) .. so don't lecture me about games please.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No I didn't. I agree that if simply base you importances calculation on the number of builds, that aren't important - which I btw never contested. However, you can look at the importances based on how they used this systems. The mentioned bowazon makes much better use of the stats. So eventhough they are rare, they count for as much al those hammerdins. Then we have the builds that only work because of manual stats allocation and for those, stats are very important.

And you can still alter them using items (which will surely have bigger stat bonuses than before) .. the only differences are.

1-you can't abuse it since you will have to choose between wearing an item the has a large +stat bonus or one that has a item effect you want .. so it encourages risk and reward and planning and is less exploitable than before.

2-Notihng is permenant, if you want to alter your PvM charater for a quick Duel you CAN do that with ease without having to log out and bring your PvP character from you +30 character collecting dust in your account.

A toon for PvM .. the same toon build for PvP .. the same toon build for MFing .. the same exact build again but for Baal running ... so much for creativity and experimentation .. this systematic method of mass producing characters for systematic tasks has nothing to do with creativity .. it is just reading guides and hours of long grinding sessions creating the same build over and over .. a very artificial was to lengthen the game life span that only the obsessed L337s care about.

As important that I wouldn't dare to say that stats aren't important, not when you base their weight on the use of stats.

I don't get you point, are they important or not in your opinion ?

If you consider them important for character builds .. let's say they were ... but they also were flawed ... if your arm (which is important to you) got a disease spreading in it you will have to cut it in order to live ... same case with manual stats .. more cons than pros.

If you consider them not important for making character builds then there is nothing to even talk about.

If you simply look at the number of bots, you have to conclude that bots are quite important for the game. Making it an argument to have bots in DIII.
Now, I know that this is the wrong way to look at bots. Just number crunching is to easy. The same can be said for the use of stats.

Bots weren't made by Blizz, manual stats were.

NASE

14-03-2009, 12:21

1-you can't abuse it since you will have to choose between wearing an item the has a large +stat bonus or one that has a item effect you want .. so it encourages risk and reward and planning and is less exploitable than before.

That still doesn't have to be a good thing. What if you find the perfect items for a build with the wrong stats? You will probably need stats from items, so this item suddenly isn't interesting anymore.
I fear that stats might overrule other mods. Certainly if that's the only way to get a certainly stats-orientation in your build.

2-Notihng is permenant, if you want to alter your PvM charater for a quick Duel you CAN do that with ease without having to log out and bring your PvP character from you +30 character collecting dust in your account.

Is it that important? Changing some items just to do some pvp? Build for pvp will probably be different from builds for pvm, so just changing items won't work very well

I don't get you point, are they important or not in your opinion ?

Yes they are important. Why do I think they are important you don't, because you ignore the builds where it does work because they are to few in numbers. I believe they are important because the builds that don't use them correct simply weren't designed correct and should be ignored for that reason.

If you consider them important for character builds .. let's say they were ... but they also were flawed ... if your arm (which is important to you) got a disease spreading in it you will have to cut it in order to live ... same case with manual stats .. more cons than pros.

You assume that the disease are the manual stats. I believe that disease are the wrong designed character that fail to make good use the stats - a rash can have many origins. The difference is that I want to cure my arm. You simply want to play butcher and cut it all out. And In my point of view, you aren't even cutting out the parts that are infected, you are cutting out everything.
btw, who says the disease is spreading. The skills system and most of the items system works find as far as I'm concerned. At least the flaws aren't stast depending.

Bots weren't made by Blizz, manual stats were.

And why is this important. If you investigate what's important about the game, you need to look at the real game, not what blizzard intended. And in the real game, based on simple numbers, bots are important.
That's why you shouldn't just look at simple number, you should look at what damage they do to the game and make that count.
Something similar can be for stats.

Killafornia

14-03-2009, 16:14

It's actually the other way around ... it's not a pointless step it is a required on for the sake of organization and tidiness and ease of item checking (again look up tree charts and what purpose do they serve)

It's not necessary, this has never been a game about nice and tidy. It's a game about power, exploding bodies, dirty dungeons, and bloodstains. When you get a godly item it's supposed to look godly, not like some crappy magic hand axe with only two modifiers you pick up in act one norm.

Like it or not you will spend a lot of time in the item screen and switching items around while arranging you inventory and trading .. i don't want every freaking item info popup to cover the whole freaking screen (which will happen if you remove stats and add attributes instead) .... it makes arranging and managing the inventory way easier .. besides .. who said you won't have to play at some moments with the inventory open for one reason or another .. IT HAPPENS.

Then go play barbie horse adventure or World of Warcraft whatever it's called.

OMG i have to memorize what each stat does .. but nooo ... i'm soooo L337 and UBER i can't even remember some attributes in relation to stats .. so let's clutter the screen with every piece of information possible. :crazyeyes:

Yes couldn't agree with that anymore, BTW thanks for recognizing how 1337 and UBER I am. :yes:

You apparently got the whole streamlined thing wrong, what you are talking about here is cluttering not streamlining.

How do suggest we make the Barbarian skill that makes each point in STR more effective (look it up in the Barbarian skill trees) ... by making four different skills each one increasing one of the attributes that STR increased (notice that the skill didn't increase your STR but made each point more effective on the attributes indirectly) .. yay .. skill clutter too :smug:

Oh yes that obviously how you have to do it. Obviously, you couldn't just make it affect the four attributes that strength affects could you?

Besides this isn't streamlined at all, it adds a percentage to those attributes that you will have to calculate out for each level of the skill to find out how advantageous it is going to be. Looks like even you might have to do some number crunching in d3. Next please. :coffee:

If that's your line of thinking why didn't you whine about Blizz not giving you the ability to add points directly into you Block, HP, DPS in D2 .... sigh .. doesn't make much sense, does it !!! .. too much for the D2 blind support/fanboyism !!!

/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS/LOLS
In d2 I already could, they where called stat points, and it was the whole reason for their existence. So much for the defending a game you know nothing about that's not even out yet.

Yeah, that's why all most L337's players want their potion spam back .. makes sense :whistling:

I haven't seen one single zOMG 1337 UBER11!!1! PvPer whine about their potion spam. You see you have us confused with nubs who go into a public duel games with chicken mod, auto-aim, and the mod that increase your breakpoints. They talk trash spam potions can't kill anyone without a farcast zon, and still died to my barb anyways because they don't have skill.

And don't talk to me about HONORABLE cause there was nothing honorable about PKing.

And that obviously proves you've never done real dueling. The way you belittle people and pretend to be so high and mighty it's no wonder you got mass PK'd in d2. You say things you don't even know what you are talking about and try to seem like you are an expert in them, and every time someone argue against you, you just type /lols spew some crap and end it with a smiley like you brought something cunning to the convo.

Nope, your argument is the flawed one, here is why ... with manual stats we got the chance to create variations of each build (with some definitely more effective and popular than others)

Variations, versions, builds whatever the hell you want to call them, the point is they are different, and play different. If you have two hammerdins and one uses enigma, and the other uses b tals then you know just by looking that they are gonna play different, and that they got a different stat setup. They are not the same. They are different, and taking that away from the game lessens the depth, not increases it. Removing character customization doesn't make a better game it makes a worse game. In d2 you can customize your build in three ways, stats, skills, and items. In d3 you can only do it 2 ways skills and items. It might not suck, but I can tell you it won't be as good.

but we also got the risk of having game breaking builds that abuse the stats,skills and items combination to exploit the game .... with items only we get the same build with limited variations (cause you can alter your stats with items) which aren't game breaking or abusable like before ... so it is a gain not a loss.

You mean that abuse the skills/items combination. Stats haven't been abused for a while. Since they fixed skill gloves a long time ago, and yet again this is the fault of poor design not the game, and the way it is now you can't even say d3 won't be abused in any manner possible. Blizzard said they fixed pierce bug in 1.09, but they didn't. Blizzard said they fixed aura stack in 1.11, but they didn't. Blizzard says they are gonna stop cheating completely in bnet2.0, but they aren't.

Really skills aren't even abused anyways. Other then aura stack the skills work how they where designed down to the teeth, if blizzard was too lazy to throw all the best items in the game on a paladin, max hammers and all it's synergies plus concentration and figure out that 15k unstoppable damage was game breaking then should they even be designing games? At what point did they say this is a good idea?

Really I think it's funny you find it the players fault for min/maxing the game. Just because you don't have all the good items, and the will to spend an hour planning out the best stat distribution, and somebody else does they are abusing the game. Clearly you should rethink your position on that. :girly:

It's not two dimensional .. it just extended in a different direction .. you just don't see it because of your narrow D2 view of things .. everything must be done the D2 way or it is wrong .. what kind of thinking is that !!?

Moot point. I'm arguing that taking stat customization out of the game decreases the depth. Your arguing that something I could already do in d2 is going to elevate the depth of d3. So far we have d3 = d2 - custom stat distribution. So yes I am obviously the one with a narrow view I'm arguing for something I know about your arguing for something you have no knowledge of.

Not invalid at all, you yourself admitted that many of the builds just filled certain stats specifically to use certain items so they were more limitations than stat modifiers ... but not with limitations gone they will become THE MAIN stats modifiers .. meaning their stat bonuses will be much more effective and have a much greater impact .. there is nothing invalid about what i said .. read carefully next time.

Actually it is still invalid. On my barb I dropped 20 points into strength for gear that left me with 500 stat points to customize my character in ANY way I seen fit. And I could wear ANY item you'd ever see a barb wear. You probably don't understand the scope of items that was so I'll tell you.

Helms: perfect COA 2x Ber, up'd Arreats with ber, up'd arreats with UM
armor: AP enigma, DS fortitude, treachery
amulets: highlords, atmas, angelics, crafted +2 barb skills 10% fcr strength AR tri resist
weapons: 2x wiz spikes, grief zerker, beast zerker, 2 x doom zerker, Widow Maker, CTA, bo stick , demon limb
Shield: SS
gloves: steel rend, crafted/rare gloves, vamp braces
belt: tgods, arachnid, verdungos, hsarus
rings: 2x 20 dex raven frosts, 2x angelics, 2x wisps, 2x BK, 1x soj, 2x crafted str rings with resists and life
boots: up'd gore riders, grim spurs, hot spurs, hsarus

As you can see the whole stat points as limitations is out the window, Hell I had so much I couldn't keep it on my barb. He had his own mule to cart his gear around, and all these items served one purpose. To increase my stats. That's right they did exactly what they are going to do in d3, but in d2 I can assign my stat points exactly how I want them, therefor increasing the depth of the game catering to the players.

Unneeded depth, i could say the same about allowing the player to alter every stats of every item in the game or move skills between classes .. but NO .. it just makes things more easily exploitable and heavily damage the game balance and overall quality.

I see where you are going, Diablo 3 Communism Edition. Down with individualism. That's right, just so you have a chance in the game everyone must be the same. Hell you should even go one step further and cry about different skills.

Yes it won't completely stop them .. but it will definitely limit how powerful they could get by abusing stats+items+skills .. so they will be much less of a problem if they existed in D3.

Now this is a good one, blaming desync on stats+items+skills. I could take a hammerdin in a game with no stats, and enough items to max my resists no +to skills, and still kill just about anyone in that game with desync. Which again leads back to the whole point of the only thing messed up in d2 was the skill designing.

Yes I CAN :yes: ... /lols

Well you can, but there is no validity behind it.

And they are working on fixing them beforehand.

Mmmhmm that's one we'll have to see when the game comes out, and not anytime before then. If that game comes out and I can't use every single skill as efficient as any other given skill then they are miles off from what you promise. :coffee:

I do understand what a good game is and i have been an avid gamer for longer than i can remember (before even doom was made) .. so don't lecture me about games please.

Well someone needed too looks like the task fell upon me.

HappyAssassin

14-03-2009, 17:50

Gotta send some props to Killafornia for resorting the Republican party's signature finishing move: accusing dissenting views of communism. Well done! :thumbup:

What made high-level D2 interesting over the long term was the subtle differences between builds. Could you make an Amazon survivable with D/E/A and smart movement while loading all of your points into Dex for more damage? People made some awesome characters like that. Could you make an amazon that stacked block, high HP and D/E/A to tank while still keeping high enough damage? Also a fun challenge, people made some characters like that too. Now have 'em duel, which one wins? Which strategies work for which? This was the depth in D2 that made it fun month after month, at least for me. Removing stats takes part of that away. Now the match up becomes: Bowazon 1 puts on tanking gear, Bowazon 2 puts on damage gear, they fight, Zon 1 wins, 2 runs back to her stash, puts on tanking gear and they 50/50 each other for the rest of the day. In D2 this doesn't happen, since even if Zon 2 can wear the tanking gear, her life still sucks because she put all her points in Dex, so she goes out and Zon 1 still out-tanks her and wins every time. Maybe what Zon 2 needed to do was change tactics, or maybe if she had just a tiny bit MORE damage she would have won. Now Zon 2 also needs to think about whether it would be worth it give up her damage against another player (call him Smiter 1) so that she can beat Zon 1. The tanking abilities that help against Zon 1 are no good against smiter 1, but damage is. Now, there are also Assassins, Sorceresses, Barbarians, Necromancers and Druids in the game. Zon 2 needs to pull off a balancing act against every PvP class in the game. The "best" Bowazon will be the one who gets it right against the most builds. And this constantly changes. Maybe anther guy, call him Smiter 2, comes up with a completely new way to use a paladin that changes the calculus all over again. Add in team duels, things get even more complex. Add in the fact that some builds work only when they execute their game plan perfectly while others are more forgiving, and you have another level. The fear is that without stats Zon 2 is not encouraged to explore all those possibilities because there's no penalty for having the wrong build - you just change gear.

All this assumes the D3 item system will be similar to the D2 one, which it might not be, but if it is, then taking away stats really diminishes the overall depth of the game, especially for PvP, over the long term. If D3 items are more like rares and less like runewords, the lack of stats is less of a problem.

Kiroptus

14-03-2009, 18:53

*sigh* I guess not even Blizzard expected stats to be that much of a big deal afterall 99% of your character numbers come from items anyway.

Plus everyone is saying about "subtle diference between equal builds because of stats".

Thats BS, the diference is not even that great or fun. Everyone keeps talking about the old boring stat system and saying that the lack of it will make D3 a game with lesser depth than D2... Sorry but thats just ridiculous specially with the new rune skill system that already blows stats out of the water and any depth that was done with builds in D2.

With runes there will be completely new ways and strategies to play a same builds and not only boring number diferences like one has more % ED because the bowzon put more on dex or she had more HP because she could put more on vit. BORING. Now with runes will be a whole new playstyle with much more fun effects.

A WD using multistrike rune on his fire skill will cause it to bounce hitting multiple targets, great for crowd control while the other WD using powerstrike rune on the same skill will cause the skill to be more powerful, dealing more damage to stronger and boss monsters. A Wiz using multistrike on her images will create more images and more confusion, using powerstrike on her desintegrate will cause it to cause more damage, etc...

Thats with just 2 runes announced and there will be more. I cant believe people are crying over such a boring change of builds with stats over the much more fun and strategic play of the runes... Plus they said that there are more unannounced customization options so there it goes.

But whatever arguing this is pointless everyone here will buy D3 anyway. And dont expect that your views will change Blizzard's new game designing direction on D3 because this community must have no say on Diablo3 balancing as all we did was to exploit the game to make the life of our characters easier and not caring about how ridiculously the game was being played (1.09 Cow Levels anyone?)