|
Now that each class has a specific attribute which gives both damage and “survivability” at the same time, It concerns me that players will be funneled into prioritizing the stacking of their primary attribute over all other considerations due to the massive disadvantage that would ensue for not doing so. It seems that the new system will cause a much larger gap to arise between the supposed “mathematically superior build choice” which is bound to be worked out sooner or later for each class, and other “viable” builds. In the old system I felt confident that the way in which all attributes were equally as valuable to attain would help to keep the aforementioned gap to a minimum, allowing for a great deal of diversity without too much reduction in efficacy for users experimenting with creative and less orthodox builds.
I suspect this problem will be least prominent in the Witch Doctor and Wizard classes because of the seemingly weak secondary effect of the new intellect attribute, meaning for those two, builds will probably work pretty much as before, although now they will need to invest in global damage reduction (now armor) and/or dodge, and as a consequence build up useless (to them) +damage to other classes. For the Monk and Demon Hunter classes the problem seems a little more prevalent, as building up both damage and dodge as a means to tank damage is immensely advantageous over any other stat they could be building. Finally for the Barbarian class the problem seems most severe, as they will be able to build global damage resistance (rather than just survivability to physical, which is what I last heard the dodge stat does although this could have changed) as well as damage, essentially allowing for this to be prioritized over all other stats. An example of my concern is as follows, consider an average player choosing the barbarian class who is about one third of the way through normal mode. Say this player currently has an axe in his possession with +20 strength; meaning +20% damage, and +20 armor. Equating to say 5% global damage resistance at his current level. He then finds an axe with exactly the same stats save that in place of the strength there is +chance to critical, which will increase his average DPS by say 25%. If the barbarian has 60% total global damage resistance, then a loss of 5% is an effective loss of 12% overall survivability, meaning even though the critical chance from the item is really nice (which it would be to give 25% extra DPS), it’s still better for him, and all other players using the class to simply prioritize that one attribute over all else. |
|
Edited by Nasabot on 26/01/12 08:52 (UTC)
Example:
"Ring of Assault" gives 20 Attack 20 Precision Trololol, which character would not like this item? It would be perfect for everybody, no itemization, and thats the reason why blizzard changed the stat system. if you have 20 Strength 15% Dogdechance it would be perfect for the barbarian, while its still not worthless for other classes. Nothing is final yet. I hope that maybe the +health per glove (from Int) will be tweaked in some way. Regarding to your concern, I think its perfectly fine if the player has to make a choice and find out what is best for him. Of course barbarian will focus strength but I doubt that it will be reasonable to ONLY increase 1 stat. To max damage or survivability you have to find the right balanced between at least 2 stats. The more armor you have, the less reduction it will probably give. As a result a barbarian will be motivated to take Strength AND Dodgechance to reduce damage because of the dimishing returns. The same for damage(critchance, critdamageincrease...) |
Community
|
This decision to change the core attributes and stats doesn't limit build diversity because the same stats exist on items as before. If you wanted precision, now you want +crit, if you wanted defense, now you should aim to get armor. It is the same concept for all stats, if you wanted attack, just go for your core class stat.
What this change is intended to do is increase the item pool by making more items that are clearly not for your character, and subsequently making it easier for you to be able to determine if you should be using an item or not :) If you are a Wizard and get an item with Strength on it, you know immediately that this item is not really for you. It used to be that you would be sitting there analysing an item with +attack for a good 10 seconds or more only to figure out that it's a bad item for you, but now it should only take a few moments to decide this. We assure you though; this change will not affect the amount of build diversity in the game :) |
#4
26/01/2012
|
This decision to change the core attributes and stats doesn't limit build diversity because the same stats exist on items as before. If you wanted precision, now you want +crit, if you wanted defense, now you should aim to get armor. It is the same concept for all stats, if you wanted attack, just go for your core class stat. That´s good to know :) |
Example: Actually, no. What you mean to say is all Classes could viably use that item. But there would still be a difference between offensive and defensive builds, i.e. a damage mitigation Barb would probably pass on the item in favour of stacking Defence and Vitality instead. if you have Actually what this system does, and Nakatoir alludes to very well in his post, is it trades having all Attributes be useful to all Classes (depending on Build, offensive vs defensive, burst vs cc, etc) while making it harder to ascertain if an item is good for your build or not (previous system) for making it more clear-cut what items are for which Class and making only Vitality and the current Class specific core Attribute viable to stack (current system), e.g. if a player is a Barbarian they will only ever stack Strength and/or Vitality because if they want +Dodge or +Health they will go straight for those modifiers directly from item modifiers and not wasting to stack a core Attribute that is not suited for their Class. Worst case scenario, and picking up the previous example, an offensive Barb will only stack Strength and a defensive Barb will only stack Vitality, all other nuances will be via items. This still allows for the exact same builds than previously, there is little difference in this regard. Where it will have a significant effect will be in Gem socketing as it will heavily segregate Gems into Classes, e.g. no Barb will collect Dexterity or Intellect/Intelligence giving Gems. |
|
Edited by Nasabot on 26/01/12 15:15 (UTC)
Where it will have a significant effect will be in Gem socketing as it will heavily segregate Gems into Classes, e.g. no Barb will collect Dexterity or Intellect/Intelligence giving Gems. Having STR, DEX, INT gems would be quite dumb, I am 100% sure blizzard reworks the gems. I guess they will have other stats like: Dodge, Critchance, Exp Gain, Gold/MF Find, +max HP, Armor, Resistances and so on but not main attributes |
|
Edited by mykro on 26/01/12 15:51 (UTC)
So then the player looses their core Attributes customization system? I am not sure random and sporadic core Attribute modifiers on items will be enough to give any meaning to those core Attributes. [edit 1] Well I guess in the current system all Classes might collect +MF Gems to socket helmets too... but beyond that... I am not sure. [edit 2] By the way Blizzard has already updated the Game Guide to include the "new" Gems: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/item/gem/ They do give bonus to Strength, Dexterity, Intelligence and Vitality in everything but the helmets. |
I d really more than appreciate if developers were on the hunt to eliminate unnecessary timesinks. However, as ppl with beta access are reporting from patch 10, there s new or removed stuff that leads to timesinks inevitably: Salvage items only at blacksmith, a lot less storage space in the chest (no mules or mule accounts, no plz no), no more cube / cauldron, 30 sec cooldown on ability switch (which now also hits you when you learn a new spell due to lvl up, even the old altar solution in town was faster), slow item identification (cast can be interrupted by monsters / dmg) and a few more. On a sidenote, i fear the worst concerning the rune system after the mystic is already out of the game. So you have called blizzcon to free time for working on the game(s), good. Then again, being short on programing / development time usually is bad news for any feature list. There havent been any news about the progression of the rune sys for quite some time, and the shortened stash space also doesnt look like made for rune and gem collecting. A clarification here that runes will make it into the game for release would be nice, i m also eager to know how runes are supposed to work together with the new skill switching on the fly. |
Yeah, but Shinia understood it also... as perceivable by the emoticon and the expression "equipable pieces". Which is why I deleted my post... it could be seen as paternalizing. Not my intent at all. |
Many valid points... though I expect few answers from Blues as Blizzard is not prepared to share info on work-in-progress the Skill and Runestone systems, which at his point matter a lot in understanding the game as a whole. I will say though, that releasing the game without Runestones is probably impossible at this point since Blizzard would never release D3 without this mega customization system. I would really like to know which directions Blizzard is exploring with Skills and Runestones and with all the changes to core systems we have seen lately I really think Blizzard should re-evaluate the "no sharing until its implemented" policy. They could be getting community feedback on stuff while working on them. I really do not see why not, it is not like we can force them to do A instead of B if they do not like it or find it subpar. |
|
Edited by Fringybab on 26/01/12 21:07 (UTC)
The diminishing returns of resistance based stats are balanced out by the fact that they get more valuable as you stack them. In the previous system for example, defense was designed so that each point of defense will always have the same value (in Effective Hit Points). I am assuming that in the new system, armor works the same way. Regardless, you will be able to get more than just your core stat and vitality simply because you will be getting 4-6 affixes from each item especially at the later levels, what I’m saying is the way the new system works it is a disadvantage to the player not to have 1 of those 4-6 as their core stat, and when the core stat conflicts with anything else it will always take priority. This decision to change the core attributes and stats doesn't limit build diversity because the same stats exist on items as before. If you wanted precision, now you want +crit, if you wanted defense, now you should aim to get armor. It is the same concept for all stats, if you wanted attack, just go for your core class stat. Meaning no disrespect, I dont find this post at least to be very reassuring. You say if I was going to aim for defense before I should aim for armor (on its own) now, and yet also that I shouldnt be going for strength (ie, armor +attack for barbs) on a wizard, but the provided the two values are the same, the wizard mightaswell carry the useless +barb attack around for the sake of the armor, so the decision really does not get any clearer in that respect. This isnt really what Im trying to talk about however, what im saying is on an individual level each class will be funneled into prioritising their core attribute. If two items have different combinations of affixes on them but the first contains a core attribute for the class in question and the second does not, then it will be very hard for the affixes on the second item to make up for that, to such an extent that they will have to be much greater in value compaired to the first. |
|
Edited by Shinia on 27/01/12 03:18 (UTC)
<span class="truncated" /> Ya i did... was just messing a tad with you :-) Seriosuly hope we'll get a release date soon :c |
|
Edited by Christophe on 28/01/12 18:10 (UTC)
Meh, diablo already was a verry stripped down and 'basic' rpg. Which is fine to 'some' level. Now they make it even simpler... Stats and personisation are the backbone of games like this and im starting to doubt this game will offer any depth, or will just turn into a mindless mouseclicking exercise. Im really not liking this.
At first i was verry happy to hear they were working on diablo 3 but later slowly more and more announcements like this one made me step by step less enthousiastic... but i wont whine much more about it, because they dont care anyway. In the end its my choice if i find the end product to be worth my money or not. Not saying i wont buy it, cant say that without having seen the finished product, but im getting more and more sceptical and honnestly less intrested. |
|
am i the only one who feels like strength is the better of the 3 stats for the simple fact that it decreases incomming damage by a constant percentage, meaning the heath pool wown't spike as much, where as health globes means taking large hits, and then finding globes to regain huge chunks and dodge being a % chance to not take damage (aka luck based) ?
i see a static damage reduce as the best of these options anyday. and yes i do realise that items will have several stats on them, but for most of normal you will have up to 3 attributes, and would it really be fair to let one class be way superior in the leveling process ? |
|
Worst case scenario is you will have to leave your computer"s" t to buy " food".
|
