Why the stat changes are a good thing

[Wolfpaq777]

Variety. That's it, plain and simple.

For those of you who played beta and had the goal of maxing damage you know how gearing went. Helm, boot, bracers, gloves, pants shoulders, get AS MUCH ATTACK as possible. For every single class. For everyone but the demon hunter, the weapon was the EXACT same, a 1 handed mace. Barbs and Monks dual wielded it.

Granted, beta is very limited in itemization but in my opinion there should NEVER be a time where all 5 classes should want 90% of the same gear. I love this change. I love finding an great item and thinking "oh i could make a great xxx class with this". With the stats how they were previously in D3, most items would be good for all classes which is not good for variety. Class specific items are not enough of a differentiation.

The drawback, obviously, is that the game will take longer to be released, but this is something that definitely shouldn't just be "patched in". I'm looking forward to the skill & skill rune changes, hoping they have made another good decision.

All the rest of the stuff in Jay's post is trivial. Sure I may agree/disagree with some of it, but it doesn't really effect my enjoyment of D3 in the same way that a core system like the stats does.

[MoUsE_WiZ]

It sounds like an improvement, but if damage is tied to a specific stat you're still going to get boring itemization. To me every Barb wanting Strength and every Wizard wanting Intellect isn't much of an improvement to every Barb and Wizard wanting attack. It's a bit of an improvement, but it's still kind of meh. That's ok though, stats in D2 were meh too.

Itemization doesn't become interesting until it becomes more involved than picking the piece that has the most +damage. I'm assuming that it's already like that (particularly in HC), but we're going to be in the wait and see camp for some time.

[Neinball]

I'm all for these changes, they play into the archetypes so well.

Str and Dex provide barbs, monks and DHs their damage and their survivability. It also increases their survivability in ways that support the archetype: barbs turn into steel-skinned juggernauts and monks/DHs start dodging bullets like agents.

But what about the casters? Their primary stat does nothing to increase their survivability! It plays into the feelings of a glass cannon wiz and weak, frail WD. It's just really well thought out, semantically, IMO. How it'll pan out in terms of balance we'll have to see once we actually get the game and start playing Inferno and PvP.

[cacophony]

So instead of choosing between damage reduction and offensive power, you don't have to (unless you're a caster). That's not a good change at all. Beta level 13 is a terrible indicator of how end game balance would have worked, especially if difficulty is supposed to ramp up non-linearly in Nightmare+.

The old system would work, if Blizzard had more imagination. Hell, one of the least imaginative things they could have done (class specific stat affixes "+13 Attack, Wizard only") is what they ended up doing ANYWAY. Only now they unbalanced a bunch of defensive stats and screwed up important choices between defense and offense. There were so many better ways to fix this problem than what they came up w/. Besides, I think having some gear class-independent was better than the alternative (where 1/2 of the core stats are practically worthless to your class, whereas the old system, everything was useful in some way).

[Urzuxo]

So instead of choosing between damage reduction and offensive power, you don't have to (unless you're a caster). That's not a good change at all. Beta level 13 is a terrible indicator of how end game balance would have worked, especially if difficulty is supposed to ramp up non-linearly in Nightmare+.

I don't think you can refer to early beta play as an indication of end game balance, you just can't. You can talk about general skill philosophy and design based on the early beta but we have no idea how the current set up would end up being balanced in inferno.

(FYI it's just inferno that has a flat difficulty, not hell.)

[Azzure]

People have no idea how important and necessary this change was. I wrote a few articles on the market site about how equally useful stats and affixes virtually breaks the item-game.

Thank the gods!

[Bowzer]

People have no idea how important and necessary this change was. I wrote a few articles on the market site about how equally useful stats and affixes virtually breaks the item-game.

Thank the gods!
Yes azzure, I honestly think the D3 honchos read your posts and acted.

I really do, or great minds think alike.

[cacophony]

People have no idea how important and necessary this change was. I wrote a few articles on the market site about how equally useful stats and affixes virtually breaks the item-game.

Thank the gods!

And you could have done it much better w/o creating the cluster-F that is tying Barbarian power and defense in one freaking stat. This screws up itemization MORE than if they added more and varied class/skill specific affixes. The least interesting method (creating class-only stats, "+13 Attack, Wizard only") is what they ended up doing, anyway, only they mucked up the balance between defense and offense. Terrible change.

[Wolfpaq777]

And you could have done it much better w/o creating the cluster-F that is tying Barbarian power and defense in one freaking stat. This screws up itemization MORE than if they added more and varied class/skill specific affixes. The least interesting method (creating class-only stats, "+13 Attack, Wizard only") is what they ended up doing, anyway, only they mucked up the balance between defense and offense. Terrible change.

You realize that there is more than 1 type of defense right?

There's dodge.
There's fire resist.
There's cold resist.
There's lightning resist.
There's poison resist.
There's physical resist.
There probably will be holy resist.

You really think that a barbarian who pumps nothing but strength will have all the defense he needs for the later difficulties?

You're crazy.

[cacophony]

You realize that there is more than 1 type of defense right?

There's dodge.
There's fire resist.
There's cold resist.
There's lightning resist.
There's poison resist.
There's physical resist.
There probably will be holy resist.

You really think that a barbarian who pumps nothing but strength will have all the defense he needs for the later difficulties?

You're crazy.

He's in a much better position than the Wizard. Especially if Armor is like the old Defense (which was damage reduction for EVERYTHING). Besides, all of those individual resistances were in the old system, anyway. That portion (picking between universal reduction versus individual reductions) hasn't gone anywhere. It was there in the old system.

[Azzure]

And you could have done it much better w/o creating the cluster-F that is tying Barbarian power and defense in one freaking stat. This screws up itemization MORE than if they added more and varied class/skill specific affixes. The least interesting method (creating class-only stats, "+13 Attack, Wizard only") is what they ended up doing, anyway, only they mucked up the balance between defense and offense. Terrible change.

The thing is, players will equip anything that has high numbers of stats over their "preferred" stat under the old system. So what you are saying about having to make the choice between offensive and defensive affixes translates to no meaningful decision to be made, since you will simply use the item that has better overall values, rather than purposely stacking one or the other and it will even out as you fill up your other equipment slots.

However if you purposely stack nothing but offensive, you will likely keep dying, than you will go get more defensive stats and your build will be balanced between offensive and defensive, which ends up being what most players end up doing, hence your choice is more of an illusion than a real meaningful decision.

[jamesisbest]

I honestly think the reason for the change was the outcry when they released the placeholder items to the public. I bet the items in fact were similar to what they had in mind for the items and everyone said the stats were dull and sucked. So Blizzard went into panic mode, they had to redesign their itemization. Eventually they came to the conclusion that 3 stats that were balanced around each other is just too dull for the Diablo system. Thus to improve itemization they had to add more stats and insure there are crappy items as well as the good items. Not just items that are better because they are a slightly better iteration of the same thing.

[Telzen]

He's in a much better position than the Wizard. Especially if Armor is like the old Defense (which was damage reduction for EVERYTHING).

It definitely sounds like it is.

"We're dropping Defense, Attack, and Precision as attributes, Armor is taking over for what Defense used to provide, +Physical Resist will take over for Armor, and +Chance to Crit will fill in for Precision. Obviously these stat changes are one of the bigger systems changes we're currently working on as they have far reaching requirements to re-itemize and balance the game."
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/blog/4325959/Systems_Changes-1_19_2012#blog

I thought the old system was fine, now each class only needs two stats each.

[Tilitoon]

I have a quick question :
What is the purpose of white items ?

Is it possible for a white item to be better than a blue one, in a realistic scenario ? From what I understand, it is very unlikely. And now that you can't salvage them and you can't sell them with the cauldron, I don't see why they exist ? Seems like useless junk that fills up the screen unnecessary, especially when there are big monster packs. I'm sure I'm missing something so I'd really like to know what it is. Thank you !

[Azzure]

I have a quick question :
What is the purpose of white items ?

Is it possible for a white item to be better than a blue one, in a realistic scenario ? From what I understand, it is very unlikely. And now that you can't salvage them and you can't sell them with the cauldron, I don't see why they exist ? Seems like useless junk that fills up the screen unnecessary, especially when there are big monster packs. I'm sure I'm missing something so I'd really like to know what it is. Thank you !

The same purpose of White items in Diablo 2 - to make it feel more awesome when a gold item drops.

[TheDestructor]

After all this iteration, I get the feeling that at the end of the day, stats are a relatively meaningless aspect of this game and no matter how you slice it offers very little in the way of interesting or meaningful customization. Of course, you have to have a way to gauge increases in power, but these stats, in the most simplest terms are: Make Barb stronger! Make Demon hunter stronger! Make Witch Doctor stronger!

I don't see many people stacking STR as a WD just so they have a bit more armor, it just won't be appealing enough. If you're going to want to kill monsters faster, you're going to stack buckets of INT, and who doesn't want to kill stuff faster? There will never be a point where you need to decide between INT and a bit more of another less ideal stat. INT for the WD is king. STR for the barb is king, etc.

Yes, being able to gauge your gradual increase in power over time and being able to look at an item and say, "This is way more awesome than what I had at level 1!" is important to this type of game. But at the end of the day, it's all relatively meaningless as far as customization goes. There's just very little choice or decision to be made here when it comes to stats.

I doubt anyone will agree with me, but it's sort of a thought I've been harboring for some time. Maybe I've totally missed the point. Maybe I've played too much WoW, and tiny increases in numbers on gear just doesn't excite me anymore, but at least in WoW you have a certain amount of priority in which stats you go after to make things interesting.(Hit8%>Exper>Str>Hit15-17%>Crit>Hit27%>Mastery>Haste) And no, this isn't a cry for the return of manual stat points -- as if that would fix anything.

Maybe it's these stats in combination with the several other types of "fun" stats and affixes that make things interesting, but just looking at these stats alone, it's like, why even bother?

[Tilitoon]

The same purpose of White items in Diablo 2 - to make it feel more awesome when a gold item drops.

Thanks, that was also my guess but since the current team seems to be dedicated to removing unnecessary / cumbersome elements and stuff that wouldn't be intuitive for new players, I thought they would have removed that too. And from seeing the amount of magic items that drop in the beta I would have thought it would be enough to justify the awesome feeling of finding rare / legendary items... Apparently the drop rate of blue items has been decreased in each patch though so maybe that's one of the reasons...

[treader]

This is getting ridiculous. I thought it was going to be revolutionary but instead they went back to the old system.

Next up is we get to add stat points per lvl up (5 points each). Every point into vitality.

Skills and runewords will be revamped into skill tree. Runewords acts like skill points in which you put them into skills you want.

Lo and behold Welcome Diablo 2.5.

[Doppel]

After all this iteration, I get the feeling that at the end of the day, stats are a relatively meaningless aspect of this game and no matter how you slice it offers very little in the way of interesting or meaningful customization. Of course, you have to have a way to gauge increases in power, but these stats, in the most simplest terms are: Make Barb stronger! Make Demon hunter stronger! Make Witch Doctor stronger!

I don't see many people stacking STR as a WD just so they have a bit more armor, it just won't be appealing enough. If you're going to want to kill monsters faster, you're going to stack buckets of INT, and who doesn't want to kill stuff faster? There will never be a point where you need to decide between INT and a bit more of another less ideal stat. INT for the WD is king. STR for the barb is king, etc.

Yes, being able to gauge your gradual increase in power over time and being able to look at an item and say, "This is way more awesome than what I had at level 1!" is important to this type of game. But at the end of the day, it's all relatively meaningless as far as customization goes. There's just very little choice or decision to be made here when it comes to stats.

I doubt anyone will agree with me, but it's sort of a thought I've been harboring for some time. Maybe I've totally missed the point. Maybe I've played too much WoW, and tiny increases in numbers on gear just doesn't excite me anymore, but at least in WoW you have a certain amount of priority in which stats you go after to make things interesting.(Hit8%>Exper>Str>Hit15-17%>Crit>Hit27%>Mastery>Haste) And no, this isn't a cry for the return of manual stat points -- as if that would fix anything.

Maybe it's these stats in combination with the several other types of "fun" stats and affixes that make things interesting, but just looking at these stats alone, it's like, why even bother?

I agree with this.
Apart from articifically creating different classes of items there still isn't much of a point in the current attributes. Infact, when i compare it to the much criticized D2 attribute system then it still is vastly inferior. In D2 you aren't dictated that "only STR make Barb attack hurt more" (since DEX can boost DPS via AR and DEX boosts ranged/spear/dagger damage). Instead of actually looking at D2 and learning from it and trying to improve upon it i'm convinced Jay wanted to rebel against it for some reason, failed at it miserably and now is somewhat aware of the failure (yet still for some reason unable to truly fix it). I feel he's going in the right direction, but dictating that STR is for Barb DMG still fails at making sense (since, why should STR not increase Wizard DMG if the Wizard so chooses to bash enemies in the head with a huge hammer?) and fails at creating enough opportunity to truly have meaningful customization (attribute wise).

[mr punk]

Instead of actually looking at D2 and learning from it and trying to improve upon it i'm convinced Jay wanted to rebel against it for some reason, failed at it miserably and now is somewhat aware of the failure (yet still for some reason unable to truly fix it).agreed. they should have just swallowed their pride and saved themselves the development time instead of smugly proclaiming their system is superior to D2 only to turn around and say,"whoops! we f@#ked up! we meant these new changes are even better".

[Crudesash68]

Well, we can bash them for seeing the light so far in the process, and they certainly deserve a little, but I think if this makes it a better experience, I am glad they figured it out. Hopefully they are working now on the skills/runes and can introduce them in the next patch, and maybe we can start talking about release candidates...if that happens in March, say, it won't be too far off from hitting that Q1 window.

[MerLock]

The same purpose of White items in Diablo 2 - to make it feel more awesome when a gold item drops.


Problem is, that despite white only really be valuable for crafting, I still found rare and magical items to be more awesome than whites. I don't think they needed to devalue them even more.

[Scorch Hellfire]

I'm all for these changes, they play into the archetypes so well.

Str and Dex provide barbs, monks and DHs their damage and their survivability. It also increases their survivability in ways that support the archetype: barbs turn into steel-skinned juggernauts and monks/DHs start dodging bullets like agents.

But what about the casters? Their primary stat does nothing to increase their survivability! It plays into the feelings of a glass cannon wiz and weak, frail WD. It's just really well thought out, semantically, IMO. How it'll pan out in terms of balance we'll have to see once we actually get the game and start playing Inferno and PvP.

In other words, the barbs, monks, and demon hunters get awesome double-stats and the wizards and witch doctors get a nigh-worthless secondary effect... Yeah, real great design there...

[Sulle]

I can´t express enough how much I love the new changes! I seriously have no negative things to say about them not even about gimping the wizard. It´s only good news! :d

[Neinball]

In other words, the barbs, monks, and demon hunters get awesome double-stats and the wizards and witch doctors get a nigh-worthless secondary effect... Yeah, real great design there...

An RPG where caster classes have less passive defenses and must rely on active skills for their survival? Unheard of!

It's the same niche that almost every other RPG under the un does, casters have less armor or defensive stats then other classes. Heck even in D2 the only defensive core stat you could get, vitality, benefited casters least with only 2hp per point vs 3/4 per point for the others. The important aspect will be if it's balanced properly when matched with the classes skill sets and like I said before, we just won't know the answer to that question till we have the game.

[Hideo]

I think Wilson is an abyssal designer...

White items in D2 weren't just a decoration. Only a noob would said so. Anybody ever got dropped Archon Plate 500+ def? Anybody got WHITE Monarch shield 15ed 15dura? This Monarch, after Larzuk, would go for several ist runes. Hardly worthless junk, no?

[diablosminion]

I think Wilson is an abyssal designer...

White items in D2 weren't just a decoration. Only a noob would said so. Anybody ever got dropped Archon Plate 500+ def? Anybody got WHITE Monarch shield 15ed 15dura? This Monarch, after Larzuk, would go for several ist runes. Hardly worthless junk, no?

You are obsolutey right about the archon plate and monarch shield bit....but thats for D2, where runewords rule the scene. There is no such thing in diablo 3.

[Neinball]

You are obsolutey right about the archon plate and monarch shield bit....but thats for D2, where runewords rule the scene. There is no such thing in diablo 3.

Exactly my thoughts, that 500 def archon plate without runewords is worth what exactly?

[Hideo]

You are obsolutey right about the archon plate and monarch shield bit....but thats for D2, where runewords rule the scene. There is no such thing in diablo 3.

Yeah but why is EVERYBODY saying that white is worthless junk in DIABLO LOD? It's not! However, in D3 it is. Now, you can't salvage it, so it is, indeed, worthless junk, BY DESIGN.

There is also Charsi quest reward which works only on white items. It makes a nice rare out of it.

[Kvothe]

I think the change to whites was unnecessary. It made sense when you could salvage stuff mid map; did you really want to have to pick up every single item that dropped? But now that salvaging takes a trip back to town, who is really going to pick up every white?

[Doppel]

Making whites not worth a lot of (vendor) gold and unsalvagable was definately necesary, unless you think it's good design to make players systematically pick up tons and tons of **** to salvage/turn into gold every 5 minutes? Doesn't sound like much fun right?
But... That doesnt make Hideo wrong when he says it's a terrible idea to design items to be absolutely worthless by definition.
Good design would have been when a small amount of white items are potentially worthful, for example to be used in crafting/enchanting/whatever.

[Wolfpaq777]

He's in a much better position than the Wizard.

Without seeing the numbers at 60 you have no way of knowing this. If they are equivalent percentages, then yes, the wizard is worse off. However we have no basis for that. Which is better 150% more health from health orbs or 5% damage reduction? There exists a point where the health orb health bonus would be better.

[SuggestiveName]

I think Wilson is an abyssal designer...No, they cancelled that dungeon before 4.1. (Then again, having the Diablo team work on WoW dungeons would explain the delays. . .)

[MoUsE_WiZ]

Without seeing the numbers at 60 you have no way of knowing this. If they are equivalent percentages, then yes, the wizard is worse off. However we have no basis for that. Which is better 150% more health from health orbs or 5% damage reduction? There exists a point where the health orb health bonus would be better.

Lots of Wizards are likely to be ranged.
Ranged characters avoid hits.
Characters that avoid hits don't need to heal as often.
Characters that don't need to heal as often receive less benefit from healing bonuses.
Therefore, the health orb benefit sounds kind of weak for Wizards.

PS: An armour boost for Wizards would be nice because although the goal is to avoid hits, it's inevitable that you'll take some hits, so the less squishy you are, the better.

That's my stance on the two stats in terms of balance, but it's another wait and see thing.

[Crudesash68]

No, they cancelled that dungeon before 4.1. (Then again, having the Diablo team work on WoW dungeons would explain the delays. . .)

I see what you did there...well played sir.

[JustAnotherOldGeezer]

agreed about the variety of items. good thinking, and a necessary change.

the only thing i am leery of is that they will make the non-class stats insignificant. for instance, if i am a wizard and i want to increase my armor rating and survivability by adding a lot of +strength gear, they need to have it be equal to the tradeoff in damage i am giving up (by not just grabbing +int gear).

basically i don't want to be forced into having to always get +int, +vit on my wizard. i want strength and dex to be equally useful, even if they are not class specific.

[JustAnotherOldGeezer]

Exactly my thoughts, that 500 def archon plate without runewords is worth what exactly?

i have been thinking about this a lot too. they should've allowed the mystic to make a white into a blue/yellow for a price. the blue/yellow could have randomly generated affixes, and investing in upgrading the artisan could either increase the quality of the random affixes or increase the number of affixes granted (eg level 1 artisan, 1 random affix; level 7, 5 random affixes of a great quality)

that way, whites wouldn't be completely worthless and it would bring back a gambling aspect to NPCs as well as providing a gold sink

[Abomb]

agreed about the variety of items. good thinking, and a necessary change.

the only thing i am leery of is that they will make the non-class stats insignificant. for instance, if i am a wizard and i want to increase my armor rating and survivability by adding a lot of +strength gear, they need to have it be equal to the tradeoff in damage i am giving up (by not just grabbing +int gear).

basically i don't want to be forced into having to always get +int, +vit on my wizard. i want strength and dex to be equally useful, even if they are not class specific.

If you get strength on all of your gear and ignore intellect, you should reroll barbarian and transfer over that gear. A common misconception is that you chose between getting intellect on an item (your classes main stat) or something else that increases survivability and that you can not have both. Some items had attack and defense on them. It would make sense that in the next patch some items have intellect and strength on them. In beta patch 9 you get somewheres around 20-30 total magic attributes from gear at lvl13. In the end game those numbers will be around 40-60 (guessing from the 4-6 rand attributes on rares on the wiki page)

For example, compare these theoretical rare gloves with 4 magical attributes.

1.
+100 Intellect
+75 Strength
+300 Armor
+10% Melee Damage Reduction

2.
+100 Intellect
+10% attack speed
+40% Crit Damage
+45 All Attributes

3.
+100 Strength
+300 Armor
+10% Melee Damage Reduction
+100 Vitality

Glove #1 would be suitable for a wizard wanting some major durability/survivability. Glove #2 would be for those wizards wanting some good pew pew capabilities. Glove #3....you are now a barbarian. The combinations on an item with 6 magic attributes (1 of which having to be intellect) is still a huge huge number. 80% of your magic attributes on gear will be used to determine if you want to be a glass cannon, a mage tank, a crit machine, a regen god, etc, etc, etc. 99% of wizards will have intellect on every item (if it can be on every item) and use the remaining magic attribute slots to customize their characters.

Depending on the size of the bonus from secondary attributes from STATS (+armor, +dodge, +health from globes) you will have to determine whether getting the actual + armor mod on an item is better/worse than getting an amount of strength on a piece of gear.

[Karpalo]

Combined defense and offense is generally speaking flawed design philosophy. I played League of Legends quite a bit at one stage and that game was kind a struggling with that concept. If defense is trade off for other classes while some others acquire higher durability while stacking pure offence it starts to cause problems with game balance.

There is never such a thing as too much damage and with these shared attributes there is no trade off. Where casters will want to achieve defense levels that keep them alive, other classes will get the best of both worlds and become unnecessary bulky while their goal is just to get more and more offensive potential.

Edit: Unless they balance the game around fairly easily reachable defense hard caps, but that would be kind a awkward choice.

[Abomb]

Combined defense and offense is generally speaking flawed design philosophy. I played League of Legends quite a bit at one stage and that game was kind a struggling with that concept. If defense is trade off for other classes while some others acquire higher durability while stacking pure offence it starts to cause problems with game balance.

There is never such a thing as too much damage and with these shared attributes there is no trade off. Where casters will want to achieve defense levels that keep them alive, other classes will get the best of both worlds and become unnecessary bulky while their goal is just to get more and more offensive potential.

Edit: Unless they balance the game around fairly easily reachable defense hard caps, but that would be kind a awkward choice.

Nobody knows the magnitude of the secondary attribute of each core stat. What if at end game, a barbarian has 1000 strength, and that gets him something like an extra 300 armor. What if I could get that much + armor on an item in a single random attribute? What if it took 2-3 random attributes with armor? Is that small enough to not matter? How much does armor contribute to dmg mitigation? What if wizards will never want to get strength because they can get + armor and it will be a better benefit per point overall?

All of these debates hinge on how significant the seconday STAT bonuses are; how much they boost armor/dodge/healthglobes. How much armor will strength give? how much dodge will dexterity give? We don't know is the answer. But I guarantee you this, you will see high dmg/fragile barbarians, tank barbarians, versatile barbarians, and everything else across the spectrum. Thats just how games like this are built. Not all characters of the same class will make the same gear choices and will be differentiated accordingly.

EDIT: Although I've been thinking, and a barbarian, even monks are designed to be in the middle of the action, taking hits. Ranged classes are designed to be at range, avoiding taking hits. So why shouldn't strength/dex classes get more mitigation innately? barbarians will be more durable, wizards more fragile. Its been like that in RPG's since the beginning of time. Like I've said before, there is plenty of room for customization (tank wizard v glass cannon) with the remaining 80% of attributes on your gear and I honestly believe that will have a bigger impact than the stats youll get leveling to 60.

[Karpalo]

Well concept is simple, but it's true that it can be toned down to be less significant with number adjusting.

Still other class has to split it's resources where other one get's 2 in 1 deal. Difference always becomes more apparent the further into the game it goes when numbers tend to get bigger and bigger. As said there is no too much damage and that's really the underlying problem with offense to defense conversions.

[Jedouard]

I have to disagree with the OP.

I imagine that the problem with the old stats was that everyone was looking for the same item affixes. That discouraged trade, which is bad in and of itself, but even worse for a game that, as Kotick said, is intended to draw significant revenue off of an RMAH.

However, switching every class to only needing 2 affixes - their main attribute and vitality - creates a new problem: lack of choices and thus lack of variety. All barbs are going to be awesome at mitigating damage. No one will make a trade off. There is no potential for a PvP thwamping build, a boss critting build, a PvE safety build, etc.

On top of this, it looks like some classes - namely the WD and Wiz - have worse secondary modifiers on their main attribute, which means that they are going to have to spread themselves over 3 attributes. They might get away with improved health globes alone in PvE, but I doubt that improved health globes will confer the same advantage that straight up damage mitigation does in PvP. And if that is true, then casters are going to have to make a tradeoff between damage production and damage mitigation while melee and, probably to a lesser degree, ranged are going to be free from such a tradeoff.

Some people will probably say that there are health globes in PvP, but if one class is not nearly as dependent on health globes and thus freer to move around the arena, then that class has an advantage over the other.

There are game mechanic options to balance out the tradeoffs that some classes face (for example, making casters deal far more damage such that the post-tradeoff damage dealing is comparable to that of classes who avoided the tradeoffs), but solutions like these just create more problems (for example, pigeonholing barbs into tankers, casters into globe hunters, etc.)

I think a much more viable solution would have been to make every passive modifier a separate attribute, some of which could auto-level according to class (i.e., be 'attributes' in the traditional sense), all of which would be dependant on items for further modification and none of which would encompass more than one single modifier. And many of these could and should be parcelled further into class, damage type or whatever other distinction. The game largely already works this way (except with the new dual-attributes); all I am saying is put them all in the display window for attributes so that players stop focusing so much on attribute modifiers, and more on all of the modifiers out there when designing their build.

With so many attributes, demand for items would not be based on "I'm a Monk so I need Dexterity", but "I'm a Monk and I want to go straight up glass-canon assassin, so I need 'monk damage', chance to hit, chance to crit, crit damage, crushing blow chance, crushing blow damage, movement speed, wielding speed, resource recovery, resource cap and chance to avoid while moving, and all other modifiers are not only tertiary, but moreover negate my build idea" versus "I'm a monk and I want to tank, so I need damage reduction, chance to dodge, chance to block, block amount, health recover, health cap, thorns, counterattack, life steal, chance to hit and 'monk damage' - and only once I have made myself invincible will I consider other modifiers."

As it is, it seems like they are trying to save "traditional" attributes just to make RPG fans happy when it really does not fit their design goals, let alone do anything to improve the game experience.

[Hideo]

I think the problem is that many of you here are thinking like elite hardcore gamers. There has been a lot of hints from Wilson, that this game is much more casual oriented. The new system, which replaces 4 stat builds to essentially 2 stat builds, was implemented for the following reasons:

1. Problems with itemization (everybody stacks Attack etc.).
2. Increasing "accessibility" of the game (that is, making it more understandable by casual players, who make the BULK of sales).

Some of you are putting much more depth into this system than it has. Let's face it. They want us to simply stack TONS of +Strength and +Vitality gear on a Barb and forget about everything else. That's it.

[Karpalo]

How is that more casual friendly than D2 version? Put enough STR to be able to wear gear and put rest into vitality, or 2 points into DEX per level if you wanted to cap block.

You are giving D2 way too much credit for what it really is. All that was really complex was optimizing FCR and AS for optimal attack frames and to be frank i just looked that info up from some shady website. Even today i got no actual clue how those values were actually determined.

I think you have played D2 too much for too long. Now you are some sort of purists who wants D3 to be exactly like D2. I shall name this "The Dota 2 effect".

Other theory could be that you are a guy with old computer who tries to condition himself to hate the game so he doesn't need to upgrade his rig just for this game.

[JustAnotherOldGeezer]

I think the problem is that many of you here are thinking like elite hardcore gamers. There has been a lot of hints from Wilson, that this game is much more casual oriented. The new system, which replaces 4 stat builds to essentially 2 stat builds, was implemented for the following reasons:

1. Problems with itemization (everybody stacks Attack etc.).
2. Increasing "accessibility" of the game (that is, making it more understandable by casual players, who make the BULK of sales).

Some of you are putting much more depth into this system than it has. Let's face it. They want us to simply stack TONS of +Strength and +Vitality gear on a Barb and forget about everything else. That's it.

I don't like the idea of just adding two stats... I can't imagine they'd keep it that basic. Surely the off class attributes must have SOME function... they wouldn't just have them be filler.

How boring would that be if the only gem socketing decision you had to make was:
1. i need more damage
2. i need more HP

We'll see what happens when patch 10 is released. We could all (hopefully) be in for a surprise.

[Bowzer]

I don't like the idea of just adding two stats... I can't imagine they'd keep it that basic. Surely the off class attributes must have SOME function... they wouldn't just have them be filler.

How boring would that be if the only gem socketing decision you had to make was:
1. i need more damage
2. i need more HP

We'll see what happens when patch 10 is released. We could all (hopefully) be in for a surprise.
They did say that they will be fine tuning the affix system to allow for new and also suboptimal affixes.

Their reasoning for this was to increase the value of items with great affixes.

The post did also mentioning they were looking at gems, affixes, and runes particularly and that will be in their next update.

[Abomb]

Some of you are tunnel visioning super badly right now. How do we just stack two stats and be done with it? what about the other 4 magic attributes on gear? They don't matter? Go read the main page article. I will let Bashiok speak for me.

Bashiok says:
"Core attributes are important. They’re your core attributes! But they have never been and continue not to be the primary driving force behind your itemization choices. At all times you’re going to need to keep doing and avoiding more damage. Enemies get tougher, they hit harder, and take more hits. No matter who you are you have to counter those inevitable truths. No character would ever say “I can ignore defensive stats because I am a glass cannon!” no, you get to Inferno and you’ll die. You can be a glass cannon, but it’s going to be a balance between offense and defense, not an all-in decision. There is an inevitable requirement to have a variety of the core stats, offensive and defensive. It’s the balance that’s important.
Ok, so, core stats are super great, but they’re still just four of all the bonuses that items can roll and provide your character. Four. And for most builds they’re never going to be where you’re focusing your attention. The other things that can roll up (which still include +armor, +dodge, +health globe, +crit chance, +crit damage, by the way) have always been the more important decision. It’s your choice between doing more damage or being more defensive, but that’s a forgone conclusion. That’s not where true build diversity ever comes from, it’s too broad a plateau."

[Abomb]

I don't like the idea of just adding two stats... I can't imagine they'd keep it that basic. Surely the off class attributes must have SOME function... they wouldn't just have them be filler.

How boring would that be if the only gem socketing decision you had to make was:
1. i need more damage
2. i need more HP

We'll see what happens when patch 10 is released. We could all (hopefully) be in for a surprise.

It's not that basic, they have 50 other modifiers that can go on items.

Other class attributes have functions, they provide bonuses to survivability.

Gems provide more options that damage and hp. Currently, there are % life, defense, precision, attack, magic find, gold find, experience, etc. You can't put life or attack in every slot.

[JustAnotherOldGeezer]

It's not that basic, they have 50 other modifiers that can go on items.

Other class attributes have functions, they provide bonuses to survivability.

Gems provide more options that damage and hp. Currently, there are % life, defense, precision, attack, magic find, gold find, experience, etc. You can't put life or attack in every slot.

Agree on other item mods being equally across classes (+crit damage for instance), but if you're a wizard you'll always be attracted to +int gear over other items, at least in the initial difficulties. I wasn't saying that other mods will be neglected, just that most people are going to gravitate toward the simplistic system of +int, +vit.

As for gems, we've currently got 4 gems, each boosting a stat (i am not considering the unique mods found on helms for the time being). Taking this structure as it is today (and rolling it over to the new stat system), most classes will be faced with a simple choice of +damage or +vitality when they're deciding on what to socket.

Sure, we'll see builds that might choose to socket +strength for the increased armor, or +dex for the increased chance to dodge, but would that outweigh vitality (a stat which is equally beneficial to ALL classes)? it's going to come down to balance as always. they have to make the off-class stats equally attractive if they want gems to require careful decision making.

[Hideo]

Many of you are mixing two important things - stats and itemization. Good stat system should be interesting WITHIN itself, without any items. Currently it isn't. In D2 there were interesting choices to be made and at least, we COULD make some choices. In D3, it's all about items, since we have auto-stats.

[mr punk]

How is that more casual friendly than D2 version? Put enough STR to be able to wear gear and put rest into vitality, or 2 points into DEX per level if you wanted to cap block.apparently, Jay Wilson disagrees with you:


Wilson: Stat progression as a system is very difficult for a lot of players to understand because you get these 5 points, but you don’t exactly know where to put them or what benefit you’re getting with them. You might make some obvious choices, for example, with Diablo II’s Sorceress, you might put all of your points into energy because that’s the obvious choice, right? Except that for almost every build out there, you’ve just made the wrong choice. (http://www.g4tv.com/games/pc/28197/diablo-3/articles/68225/blizzcon-2009-diablo-iii-game-director-interview/)
i wouldn't be so quick to dismiss to rule out Hideo's argument. in fact, it's possible you guys are giving wilson a lot more credit than he deserves (ie: it's a deeper and complex system than it appears).

[galzohar]

Whatever that is, they still just replaced the overpowered "attack" stat with overpowered "class-specific attack stat with some kind of secondary bonus".

If items still have armor, dodge and health globe affixes on their own, those affixes will obviously be more powerful than their relevant non-primary stat (ex: health globe bonus vs int for a barb), or else they will be avoided by characters who get them from their primary stat (ex: wizards would tend to avoid health globe bonus items). Why have 2 stats that give the same bonus (ex: int and health globe bonus for a barb)?

Currently, there are 2 options: Either there's no way you'll want items that don't have your primary stat on them as 1 of the modifiers, OR that you'll never want items that have attributes (str/dex/int) that aren't your primary. If your primary stat is competitive with the non-attribute affixes, then non-primary attributes become useless. If your primary stat is the end-all-be-all by far the best stat possible, then you'll never want items that don't have it. Maybe even both options will be true, making it even a bigger problem.

I think they should have stuck with an attack stat that just gives extra damage, and seriously nerf it so that it is not the end-all-be-all of stats, that you would never want an item that doesn't have it.

Defense was indeed redundant with armor and resistances. Precision was not removed, it was just not competitive with attack, and there's no indication that it will be competitive with the "new" attack. I also don't get why we need a "vitality" stat when they could have just made a "+X HP" affix. Unless they only let you increase your HP from vitality, and make vitality have different effects for the different classes.

In fact, giving each stat a different effect depending on class can help them a lot to make stats interesting while keeping each class sticking with its own style and be balanced while doing it, but that would be a bit complicated. Another alternative would be to simply give the melee classes better skills overall so that they can deal more damage with same gear but must compromise damage gear for survivability if they want to stay alive in melee, balancing everything out in the end (this might already be the case, hard to tell without actually trying all the skills).

[Abomb]

Whatever that is, they still just replaced the overpowered "attack" stat with overpowered "class-specific attack stat with some kind of secondary bonus".

So now class X doesn't share gear with class Y. Imagine in World of Warcraft, every character class able to use every item in the game. It would be a cluster F.



If items still have armor, dodge and health globe affixes on their own, those affixes will obviously be more powerful than their relevant non-primary stat (ex: health globe bonus vs int for a barb), or else they will be avoided by characters who get them from their primary stat (ex: wizards would tend to avoid health globe bonus items). Why have 2 stats that give the same bonus (ex: int and health globe bonus for a barb)?

Items will still have those affixes on their own. They won't magically disappear just because they are included in the auto-allocated stats. Why have two stats that give the same bonus? because some players will want to customize their character to be more of X rather than more of Y. That is the beauty of diablo. I can use my gear choices to differentiate myself from other players. A barb with strength and dmg on all of his gear won't tank as well with a barb with strength and armor on all of his gear. This is true in any rpg and any mmo. If you gear a warrior to tank in world of warcraft, he can tank. If you gear a warrior with dps gear he wont be able to tank (even though his base strength stat may give him increased damage blocked with shields). Both warriors will have strength on all of their gear.



Currently, there are 2 options: Either there's no way you'll want items that don't have your primary stat on them as 1 of the modifiers, OR that you'll never want items that have attributes (str/dex/int) that aren't your primary. If your primary stat is competitive with the non-attribute affixes, then non-primary attributes become useless. If your primary stat is the end-all-be-all by far the best stat possible, then you'll never want items that don't have it. Maybe even both options will be true, making it even a bigger problem.

Wizards will use intellect on every piece of their gear if possible. That is what differentiates them from other classes. There will be items with Intellect and say, Strength on them. Those items would be for wizards who want a little added armor, or barbarians who want some added healing power. What if it has all attributes? That piece would be for those characters that wanted a well rounded item with dmg and survivability. I don't think primary stats will provide larger bonuses to their secondary bonus than the actual affix will. That would eliminate the need for that affix.



I think they should have stuck with an attack stat that just gives extra damage, and seriously nerf it so that it is not the end-all-be-all of stats, that you would never want an item that doesn't have it.

That wouldn't have solved the problem of every character class (all 5) going for the exact same gear.



Defense was indeed redundant with armor and resistances. Precision was not removed, it was just not competitive with attack, and there's no indication that it will be competitive with the "new" attack. I also don't get why we need a "vitality" stat when they could have just made a "+X HP" affix. Unless they only let you increase your HP from vitality, and make vitality have different effects for the different classes.

Precision is removed. The affixes for chance to crit fill that role. Crit chance and crit damage doesn't have to be competitive with attack in terms of raw dps. What if my build is based on one critting so I can get procs, or decrease cooldowns so I can spam skills more? Build diversity.

There is a + max health affix. http://diablonut.incgamers.com/affixes Vitality also increases Max health ( I would imagine it is to a greater degree.) In diablo 2 there was a different betwen + health and + vitality items when you took into account % life increases from gems/etc. I think diablo 3 will be similar.



In fact, giving each stat a different effect depending on class can help them a lot to make stats interesting while keeping each class sticking with its own style and be balanced while doing it, but that would be a bit complicated. Another alternative would be to simply give the melee classes better skills overall so that they can deal more damage with same gear but must compromise damage gear for survivability if they want to stay alive in melee, balancing everything out in the end (this might already be the case, hard to tell without actually trying all the skills).

This is overcomplicated. "Giving melee "better" skills so they can deal better damage with the same gear, but must compromise damage for survivability if they want to stay alive in melee, balancing everything out int he end" ??? Why does melee need better skills? What is wrong with them now? Gear choices have always been how you customize your character to increase damage, increase survivability, or a combination of both. This is how rpgs work.

[galzohar]

Well, if barb and wizard deal same damage with same gear, but wizard takes less damage and doesn't have to chase stuff because he's ranged, then something is wrong, don't you agree? Why would any power-gamer play a barb if a wizard/DH/WD kill just as fast and can take less damage? Sure, Blizzard promised us that ranged classes will still get hit no matter how well they play, but I'm pretty sure they didn't mean they'll get hit just as much as the melee. While the barb and monk do have some survivability skills, those come at the cost of damage skills, and it's not like wizard/dh don't have any survivability-boosting skills of their own. The real question is, whether at the end they'll decide to balance melee (takes more damage thus needs more survivability while sacrificing less damage) with ranged (less damage taken, less damage needed to be sacrificed for survivability) by balancing out the skills, or maybe by balancing out the gear? Before the stat system change, it seemed like they were trying to balance it with skills (example: Barb got a new defense as % of vit passive). After that, I'm no longer sure, considering barbs and monks get extra survivability from their primary stat, while I'm not sure of the survivability value of Wizard/WD. Why DH gets the same non-skill-based survivability as the monk is beyond me, though. In any case, we don't actually know if they are going to make all stats equal for all classes (aside from a different stat that increases damage), so we'll have to wait and see. It's going to be very complicated for them to get their new system to make sense, though, and I think I brought up many good reasons why.

The only thing the new system "solves" is that gear will become class-specific (mostly, at least). Which IMO is not a real problem, especially not compared to the other very real problems they have, like some stats being way better than other with no way they can get away with it.

Other than that, everything you said was actually just as possible with the old system. Balancing between non-primary damage stats and defensive stats and all that. Just the same as it was before. I don't see why people keep praising the new system for forcing you to make such decisions, when in fact they already existed.

In D2 the fact we had a vit stat and a life stat was completely messed up IMO. If you're looking for what is over-complicating things, that is where they can get rid of over-complications. Either have vit or have +HP. Note that WoW has no +HP stat on items, only the attribute that adds HP. "Uniform" gear actually has a lot of advantages, for example not being forced to spend so much time on the AH and be able to spend more time playing the game. You would still be able to spend time on the AH to try get better items, but at least you wouldn't be completely screwed if you, you know, actually want to play the game instead of browsing the AH. Having trading as a part of the game is cool, but having it as the main thing you'll spend your time on is not. Maybe the "Everything Blizzard does is with the intention of maximizing RMAH revenues" trolls were right...

Note that if armor is better than strength for non-barbarians, why would any non-barbarian use an item with strength over an item with "real" stats (like straight-up armor!) if they had a choice? Is this there just to add crappy items to the system? If yes, I don't like this at all. I want it the choice between items to be difficult, not a "this one has strength but this one has straight armor and I'm not a barb, of course I'll take the second one!" which is boring to me. Having crappy items is also not necessary for fueling the AH/RMAH - What fuels the AH/RMAH (aside from making a lot of items that are only useful for very specific classes/builds) is having the truly great items rare enough, and how many crappy items are out there is completely irrelevant.

[farsycal]

I'm sure a lot of the people eager to defend these changes are the same people eager to defend the previous system. if blizzard came out tomorrow and said, "d3 is now a racing game." there would be a post on this forum telling everyone why d3 being a racing game is a good thing.

in reality we went from one fairly uninteresting stat system to another fairly uninteresting stat system.

[Abomb]

Well, if barb and wizard deal same damage with same gear, but wizard takes less damage and doesn't have to chase stuff because he's ranged, then something is wrong, don't you agree?

No I don't agree. A barbarian takes less damage per hit, but gets hit more often. A wizard takes more damage per hit, but gets hit less often.



Other than that, everything you said was actually just as possible with the old system. Balancing between non-primary damage stats and defensive stats and all that. Just the same as it was before. I don't see why people keep praising the new system for forcing you to make such decisions, when in fact they already existed.

The balancing already existed, right. But the end result was a character wearing gear that was optimal for other classes also. That limits item diversity immensely. A barbarian wearing the same chest piece as a wizard (both going for pure damage for example) doesn't make sense to me in the diablo 3 universe (or any other rpg universe for that matter).



In D2 the fact we had a vit stat and a life stat was completely messed up IMO. If you're looking for what is over-complicating things, that is where they can get rid of over-complications. Either have vit or have +HP. Note that WoW has no +HP stat on items, only the attribute that adds HP. "Uniform" gear actually has a lot of advantages, for example not being forced to spend so much time on the AH and be able to spend more time playing the game. You would still be able to spend time on the AH to try get better items, but at least you wouldn't be completely screwed if you, you know, actually want to play the game instead of browsing the AH. Having trading as a part of the game is cool, but having it as the main thing you'll spend your time on is not. Maybe the "Everything Blizzard does is with the intention of maximizing RMAH revenues" trolls were right...

Your argument is for less customization in gear, the system that world of warcraft currently has. In diablo 3, everyone doesn't want to be wearing the same thing.



Note that if armor is better than strength for non-barbarians, why would any non-barbarian use an item with strength over an item with "real" stats (like straight-up armor!) if they had a choice? Is this there just to add crappy items to the system? If yes, I don't like this at all. I want it the choice between items to be difficult, not a "this one has strength but this one has straight armor and I'm not a barb, of course I'll take the second one!" which is boring to me. Having crappy items is also not necessary for fueling the AH/RMAH - What fuels the AH/RMAH (aside from making a lot of items that are only useful for very specific classes/builds) is having the truly great items rare enough, and how many crappy items are out there is completely irrelevant.

So you are saying they should eliminate stats that are not ideal for you and your build? Even + attacker takes damage skills will be incorporated into builds (a thorny monk video comes to mind). Having mods that are not blatantly/obviously good for your character is what makes gear choices that much more important and fun in diablo games.

"Crappy items" is also very subjective. If you aren't aware of certain builds, you will overlook certain items and trash them, This separated players in diablo II, where the knowledgable ones could sell a low level dueling item for ungodly amounts.

[Azzure]

The topic is quite simple - Having equally balanced attribute points means homogenization of attributes. This is a 180 degree turn from Diablo 2, in which items were extremely specialized for class X and even spec Y.

I can't stress enough how important it is for itemization to not be homogenized. It ruins the randomness and satisfaction when all items and stats are equally good for every single person in the game. Not to mention the economical consequences that it causes.

I put this out to anyone who thinks the previous attribute system was better:

If two Rare chest armors drop.
First one has:
+65 Attack
+50 Vitality
+10% attack speed
+20 Lightening resist

The other has:
+65 Precision
+50 Defence
+2% Damage converted to Life
+5 Vitality.

Which one is better for a whirlwind Barbarian?

The answer is neither. You could interchange ANY of those stats with ANY affixes of similar stat ranges and the result will be the same. Neither.They are both virtually identical in terms of what it provides, and depending on what your other stats and builds are will determine which is SLIGHTLY better for you (which doesn't make one less valuable than the other, because any other player may find the other one slightly better for them). And what makes this even worse is that it is ALSO equally as good for a Wizard.

Now times this by every single item in the game, and you are left with a WoW-style item system in which items are one-dimensional stat upgrades that are about as fun as watching paint dry.

Now if we convert this to a non-homogenized Diablo-style item system (which the attribute changes move in that direction) they will look more like this:

+50 Strength
+50 Vitality
+10% Melee Attack speed
+20 Lightening resist

vs

+50 Dexterity
+50 Intelligence
+10% faster cast rate
+10 to Phyiscal melee damage

Tada! Now there is a clear distinction which item is better. The first item is awesome for a Barb. The second item is pretty trashy for most classes/specs but pretty decent for a WD and actually quite good for a melee Wizard. Look at that, we actually have an economy here and a clear distinction on which item is awesome and which is junk.

For the record, I think Blizzard still need to un-homogenize more affixes to fix the current item system. It is a pretty serious problem.

[TarnishedHope]

I honestly avoided saying this kind of things, but it's getting to be more and more obvious nowadays.

This is not Diablo 3 they're trying to make; Blizzard is trying to recreate the commercial success of World of Warcraft onto an ARPG platform.

Sure, Diablo 3 might still be a phenomenal success, but the deviation from its original franchise has became so great that you can pretty much call it anything and it would fit the bill. It is neither a spiritual nor physical successor of the original franchise. Love it or hate it, that's just how it is. :pancake:

They are just burrowing the title Diablo to retain its original fanbase while producing an entirely different game.

[TheDestructor]

It is neither a spiritual nor physical successor of the original franchise. Love it or hate it, that's just how it is.

Well, thank you for enlightening us, Engie.

[Azzure]

I honestly avoided saying this kind of things, but it's getting to be more and more obvious nowadays.

They are just burrowing the title Diablo to retain its original fanbase while producing an entirely different game.

Sure, Diablo 3 might still be a phenomenal success, but the deviation from its original franchise has became so great that you can pretty much call it anything and it would fit the bill. It is neither a spiritual nor physical successor of the original franchise. Love it or hate it, that's just how it is. :pancake:



Your name suits you well! :)

A few comments about what you said.

You claim they are using the Diablo name to retain its original fanbase because Diablo 3 is an "entirely different game" (and by that I assume it is not worthy of a Diablo game). Are you aware that they are currently developing a new IP right now as we speak? Under your theory Project Titan should be WoW2.

Also, what better way to make a game a commercial success than to .....make a great game?

[Abomb]

The topic is quite simple - Having equally balanced attribute points means homogenization of attributes. This is a 180 degree turn from Diablo 2, in which items were extremely specialized for class X and even spec Y.

I can't stress enough how important it is for itemization to not be homogenized. It ruins the randomness and satisfaction when all items and stats are equally good for every single person in the game. Not to mention the economical consequences that it causes.

I put this out to anyone who thinks the previous attribute system was better:

If two Rare chest armors drop.
First one has:
+65 Attack
+50 Vitality
+10% attack speed
+20 Lightening resist

The other has:
+65 Precision
+50 Defence
+2% Damage converted to Life
+5 Vitality.

Which one is better for a whirlwind Barbarian?

The answer is neither. You could interchange ANY of those stats with ANY affixes of similar stat ranges and the result will be the same. Neither.They are both virtually identical in terms of what it provides, and depending on what your other stats and builds are will determine which is SLIGHTLY better for you (which doesn't make one less valuable than the other, because any other player may find the other one slightly better for them). And what makes this even worse is that it is ALSO equally as good for a Wizard.

Now times this by every single item in the game, and you are left with a WoW-style item system in which items are one-dimensional stat upgrades that are about as fun as watching paint dry.

Now if we convert this to a non-homogenized Diablo-style item system (which the attribute changes move in that direction) they will look more like this:

+50 Strength
+50 Vitality
+10% Melee Attack speed
+20 Lightening resist

vs

+50 Dexterity
+50 Intelligence
+10% faster cast rate
+10 to Phyiscal melee damage

Tada! Now there is a clear distinction which item is better. The first item is awesome for a Barb. The second item is pretty trash for everyone, and worth very little. Look at that, we actually have an economy here and a clear distinction on which item is awesome and which is junk.

For the record, I think Blizzard still need to un-homogenize more affixes to fix the current item system. It is a pretty serious problem.

Reinforcements have arrived! Finally someone who can speak more clearly than me and help me explain what is obvious to me, but not so much to some people.

[Hideo]

Man, if armor in this game will be a "stat carrier", without any interesting mods, like on most WoW items, this game will be dead very soon.

[Azzure]

Man, if armor in this game will be a "stat carrier", without any interesting mods, like on most WoW items, this game will be dead very soon.

This is a concern that I have had since we first saw item stats in Diablo 3. At the moment it is a bit too early to cry havok because Blizzard have said that they are not done with Affixes and are creating many new ones.

Personally I suspect that Blizzard is getting internal feedback about this problem, and the changes to attributes are a product of that feedback. Hopefully Blizzard recognize the importance of having a very high Item ceiling, and keeping the item-hunt meaningful.

I am hoping that the new affixes are highly diverse, and not homogenized like the ones we currently know about. I would love to see a return to +1 to X skill, + to X damage type, + X ranged damage etc so that affix combinations have the potential to be absolutely awesome when the right stats meet the right combination of stats. That is what Diablo is all about, and that is what kept people loving the item-hunt for over a decade.

[Bandreus]

I like the new stats more. But yeah, I think we can't really judge the system until we can get a bigger picture of the item's pool as a whole.

Beta wont likely be enough, since the vast majority of mods will only roll later in the game (possibly in higher difficulties only). I'm pretty confident though, it's not like Blizz is a random/unknown game-studio made up of people who can't do their homeworks... we're talking industry vets here.

[galzohar]

Going far like having bonuses to a specific skill is going way too far! Unless you want to spend 95% of your inferno time staring at the AH UI, this is going to be a very bad idea. And after all, they put a lot of work into that inferno thing for us to be sitting in front of the AH UI all day long. I honestly don't like changes that do nothing beyond making us go use the AH more. Until now I've called the people who *****ed at every change as "Blizzard only did this to increase RMAH revenue!" trolls. Now I'm not so sure they were actually trolling (well, mostly they were, but now they got something legitimate to complain about, since these changes do nothing to the actual gameplay and only affect how much you have to trade).

I don't like item choices being obvious. I like difficult item choices. I want you to be able to equip a rare knowing it won't be terrible, but also knowing that if you really want the best you'll have to pick and choose the stats best for your build. Of course, if some stats are way better than others (see: Attack in old system, primary stat in new system, same problem), you'll pick items with said stats over items without them. I don't think we can all this "customization", because it's the exact opposite. Making items class-specific also does absolutely nothing for customization. It just makes some items useless for some classes. Having more than 1 stat that do the same thing for your class also does nothing for customization - If they want more chance for lower rolls on +HP or +health globe bonus, they can make it so without having more than one stat providing the same benefit. Notice WoW where there are many duplicate stats (only HP and max mana aren't duplicated iirc) - People just pick the items that have the "better" stat for them whenever they have the choice, and to know which stat is better for you, all you have to do is just read on the forums.

For customization to be meaningful, affixes need to have some kind of similar value. If they don't have a similar value, you'll just always pick items with the obviously better affixes. That kills any need to be able to decide what is better.


I want to be able to look at 2 items that both got similar rolls on their affixes (say, for example take 2 items that got all max rolls), and need to think which one complements my build and the rest of my gear the best. Without affix balance, this simply isn't going to happen, at least not very often, since for almost every pair of items, one will be obviously stronger than the other, and nobody will need to ever think at all. Granted, the old stat system had similar problems, but the new system is basically them officially admitting that they don't want to deal with those problems. If anything is killing customization, that's it right here.

[Dimatisah]

Yes azzure, I honestly think the D3 honchos read your posts and acted.

I really do, or great minds think alike.

Hear, hear!

[TarnishedHope]

Your name suits you well! :)

A few comments about what you said.

You claim they are using the Diablo name to retain its original fanbase because Diablo 3 is an "entirely different game" (and by that I assume it is not worthy of a Diablo game). Are you aware that they are currently developing a new IP right now as we speak? Under your theory Project Titan should be WoW2.

Also, what better way to make a game a commercial success than to .....make a great game?

You assume wrong. It is not about being worthy or otherwise, but a simple deviation from everything established by its predecessors.

When you say developing another IP, it's honestly just because the existing franchise have simply been exhausted by the producer. A MMORPG titled World of Warcraft 2 simply would not make sense, so they opt to create a new IP.

You're missing the point entirely.

A commercially successful game is not necessarily a great game, just as a commercially successful movie could be horrible in its own right. The two are not mutually exclusive, but rarely coincide.

The fact of the matter is, the changes made to Diablo 3 have been so drastic that, outside of the fictional story line, the game no longer resembles its predecessor.

What do you think of when people mention Diablo 2?

Hack and bots aside, the most prominent features would be the skill tree, the itemization, and the customized stats. In sum, they create an expansive pool of possibility for the players.

Take that away and what do you have...? Diablo 3.

If anyone pays attention to the World of Warcraft scene, you would realize almost every single changes made to Diablo 3 are concurrently or previously applied to World of Warcraft. You can make an argument otherwise, but...

Facts are facts. I don't doubt that Diablo 3 will be a great game in its own right, but its resemblance to its predecessors is now insignificant.

It's like bio-engineering a banana to taste like an apple. You still eat it the same way, and its outer appearance remains consistent, but to call it banana 2.0 makes less sense to me than banapple.

Like I've mentioned before, you can changed the name of Diablo 3 to Nox 3 or Warcraft: ARPG and it would make just as much sense. To those expecting Blizzard to change their mind, Blizzard has no history of making changes due to player feedbacks.

Diablo was, from the start, never meant to be a casual friendly franchise, and that simply doesn't fit into Blizzard's ongoing scheme anymore.

[Bowzer]

A commercially successful game is not necessarily a great game, just as a commercially successful movie could be horrible in its own right. The two are not mutually exclusive, but rarely coincide.
Rarely is a commercially successful movie good? Please don't make generalizations about matters of opinion.


Hack and bots aside, the most prominent features would be the skill tree, the itemization, and the customized stats. In sum, they create an expansive pool of possibility for the players.
The most prominent feature in the Diablo series is that it is top down ARPG where you kill monsters to get better loot, to then kill better monsters and get even better loot. Looks like a diablo game to me.

Also, you are wrong on the itemization. It's nearly identical to diablo 2 in how there are blues, rares, uniques and set items. I suppose the fact that it's going to be harder to get the best combination of affixes is somehow a more casual thing now?


Diablo was, from the start, never meant to be a casual friendly franchise, and that simply doesn't fit into Blizzard's ongoing scheme anymore.

Every Diablo game is the epitome of a casual game. There are no clans, or raids you have to schedule. Hell you don't even have to play with anyone else if you don't want to. The only feature that makes diablo even remotely non casual is hardcore mode.

If you don't want to play a casual game, go play ultima online.

[mr punk]

Rarely is a commercially successful movie good? Please don't make generalizations about matters of opinion.actually, he has a point. media companies are fully aware the auidence of a huge commercial hit is literally composed of large aggregate bodies of noobs who can't tell s#@t from shinola when it comes to judging the quality of said media.

www.economist.com/node/14959982Cached

[Spens]

The topic is quite simple - Having equally balanced attribute points means homogenization of attributes. This is a 180 degree turn from Diablo 2, in which items were extremely specialized for class X and even spec Y.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Diablo 2 had four stats, and all classes wanted them for the same reasons, similar to the previous iteration of the D3 stats. However this had little affect on itemization, because there were dozens of other mods besides stats.

It only becomes a problem if the main way of boosting your character is through these four stats. If that is the case, then itemization has a huge problem, going beyond homogenized stats.

[Abomb]

You are comparing apples and oranges. Diablo 2 had four stats, and all classes wanted them for the same reasons, similar to the previous iteration of the D3 stats. However this had little affect on itemization, because there were dozens of other mods besides stats.

It only becomes a problem if the main way of boosting your character is through these four stats. If that is the case, then itemization has a huge problem, going beyond homogenized stats.

Please read the blue posts.

"Core attributes are important. They're your core attributes! But they have never been and continue not to be the primary driving force behind your itemization choices. At all times you're going to need to keep doing and avoiding more damage. Enemies get tougher, they hit harder, and take more hits. No matter who you are you have to counter those inevitable truths. No character would ever say "I can ignore defensive stats because I am a glass cannon!" no, you get to Inferno and you'll die. You can be a glass cannon, but it's going to be a balance between offense and defense, not an all-in decision. There is an inevitable requirement to have a variety of the core stats, offensive and defensive. It's the balance that's important.

Ok, so, core stats are super great, but they're still just four of all the bonuses that items can roll and provide your character. Four. And for most builds they're never going to be where you're focusing your attention. The other things that can roll up (which still include +armor, +dodge, +health globe, +crit chance, +crit damage, by the way) have always been the more important decision. It's your choice between doing more damage or being more defensive, but that's a forgone conclusion. That's not where true build diversity ever comes from, it's too broad a plateau."

-Bashiok

[Nizaris]

@Abomb - I think you confirmed Spens' post. I'm not sure if that was your intention, but from what I read, that's exactly what Spens was saying.