Diablo® III

WTF is the point of elemental damage?

01/21/2013 02:31 AMPosted by SeeknDestroy
What I don't understand is why it was removed from the final version, it was already working on ''official'' beta.


they said something along the lines of "the players would just go straight to the best one and only ever use that one"

ie. "oh most monsters in act 3 are weak to lightning damage, better use a lightning damage weapon and nothing else"

their design philosophy in this game was retarded. "Oh every player needed a TP scroll/Identify Scroll anyway so we took those out and made them part of the UI instead" "Oh every player wants to run at the maximum move speed anyway so lets take stamina and stamina potions out" "Oh every player is going to use a full belt of potions anyway so lets take those out and just make a single potion type and single potion button"
Reply Quote
Posts: 38
none.
Reply Quote
I always wondered why elemental damage was even there in the first place. Like OP said, it does nothing, except for cold. What's the point? Is it to make all the black weapons worth more and drive AH sales?

On a further note, why even have skills that do elemental damage? Works the same way. Doesn't matter if your skill does arcane or fire damage. It would still be the same number damage either way.
Reply Quote
01/21/2013 12:45 PMPosted by TopStock
remember that the Blizz team workin on D3 are LARP professionals so use your imagination like they do and it will be finetry to stay in character more and don't overplay your roleThat's a good excuse for neglecting a game mechanic. They should get rid of armor and weapons too. I'm sure if you roleplay hard enough it won't be a big deal.


remember the early days of MtG? When all the role players only played huge multiplayer games with mainly white, blue and green decks?

If someone went hostile with evil red and black cards they would gang up to nullify the threat but not kill you.. or anyone.. for like 8 hours??

that's who made D3


They need a designer who played a green/black deck...massive damage after 5 turns and sacrifice your thallids and thrulls for life :)
Reply Quote
blizzard slacking
Reply Quote
it's weird. i remember seeing that trailer and being so freaking excited for this game. the live version is so dumbed down it makes me sad and insulted. don't get me wrong, i had fun playing this game, but i'm probably not going to touch another blizzard game after this.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,691
To provide the illusion of depth and gip you out of +X%damage as element X affixes.
Reply Quote
*sigh*

Elemental damage is just one of the many, many, many sources of unrealized potential in D3.

There is no point to elemental damage, purely cosmetic.

Should have been:

Lightning - chance to release chain lightning, hitting up to 3 targets
Cold - slow/freeze (duh!)
Fire - char, chance to crit on elemental damage only
poison - DoT(duh!)
Holy - +damage to undead/demons
Arcane - I don't know, something cool
Reply Quote
It makes NO sense they removed this from the beta. Why do you even include it in the game if it's completely useless? WTF
Reply Quote
Posts: 12,560
01/21/2013 12:17 AMPosted by l3atu
Puggleman made a very good point. I've played many ARPG games from young till now. Certain monsters should be weak against certain element. I'm surprised that nobody mentioned it at all till now.
They have. This isn't new.

The problem with introducing say... "Fire Immune" monsters is that certain classes that are dispositioned towards Fire would be at a SEVERE disadvantage. Believe it or not, this was a chief complaint in the Diablo 2 system - "the character I built is useless against Lightning/Fire/Magic immune mobs!"

So I agree from a tactical standpoint that it would be cool to have mobs immune or resistant to elements, but this isn't an element game. You can't freely choose your element. You just bought a 1400 dps 1h weapon that's Fire? Oh, so sorry, everything in Act 3 is immune to Fire! Joke's on you!!! lololol. In other RPGs, you can easily swap from Fire to Ice to Lightning at a button press. Here? Not so much.

So in the end; elemental resistant/immune monsters do not make sense for Diablo.
Reply Quote
01/21/2013 08:32 PMPosted by CyberGoat
Puggleman made a very good point. I've played many ARPG games from young till now. Certain monsters should be weak against certain element. I'm surprised that nobody mentioned it at all till now.
They have. This isn't new.

The problem with introducing say... "Fire Immune" monsters is that certain classes that are dispositioned towards Fire would be at a SEVERE disadvantage. Believe it or not, this was a chief complaint in the Diablo 2 system - "the character I built is useless against Lightning/Fire/Magic immune mobs!"

So I agree from a tactical standpoint that it would be cool to have mobs immune or resistant to elements, but this isn't an element game. You can't freely choose your element. You just bought a 1400 dps 1h weapon that's Fire? Oh, so sorry, everything in Act 3 is immune to Fire! Joke's on you!!! lololol. In other RPGs, you can easily swap from Fire to Ice to Lightning at a button press. Here? Not so much.

So in the end; elemental resistant/immune monsters do not make sense for Diablo.


Easy. First, don't make mobs immune. Second, switch up the resistances so that not all mobs in one act/area are severely immune.

You are also forgetting that even resistant mobs should still suffer damage from melee dmg on the toon's weapon as well as melee based skill dmg. To even provide MORE depth, it would be a great way for classes to use under utilized skills/runes, as they would have to switch up their build depending on the enemy (what a crazy idea!). Also, if would provide greater use of gear as characters could even use, dare I say, more than one weapon while leveling/farming. That is, after all, one of the main reasons why characters could switch between weapons with the "W" hotkey.

If you don't like any of the above, there is another option that actually fits directly with the dev's vision of D3 as a more social game...play with a friend who does an different type of damage that compliments your build.

I don't understand why you pick an argument that limits the game so much. It's pretty obvious that if such changes were made in the game, that corresponding mechanics to work within the system would be implemented as well. Your example is actually a terrific example of a formal fallacy, "denying the antecedent" or "fallacy of the inverse"
Reply Quote
@CyberGoat: You also take a quote that only discusses monster weakness against specific elements and propose a counterargument that only refers to monster immunities. That, for the record, is a red herring.
Reply Quote
01/21/2013 01:10 PMPosted by Vanguardian
What I don't understand is why it was removed from the final version, it was already working on ''official'' beta.


they said something along the lines of "the players would just go straight to the best one and only ever use that one"

ie. "oh most monsters in act 3 are weak to lightning damage, better use a lightning damage weapon and nothing else"

their design philosophy in this game was retarded. "Oh every player needed a TP scroll/Identify Scroll anyway so we took those out and made them part of the UI instead" "Oh every player wants to run at the maximum move speed anyway so lets take stamina and stamina potions out" "Oh every player is going to use a full belt of potions anyway so lets take those out and just make a single potion type and single potion button"

l0l you really miss stamina?
Reply Quote
Wait for dueling. Elemental damages will play a role. Though not in the form of weapon elemental damage but rather skill elements.

Like:

-Witch doctor uses poison
-Wizard uses ice, fire
-Barbarian goes physical (lol)

Still, it is a weak thing as many people just stack All resistance gear anyway.
Reply Quote
The problem with elemental resistances is that if you have a fire weapon or a mainly fire build and meet a monster immune to fire, you are screwed if you don't have an alternate build, weapon or gear set.

In DII, while other classes could just switch weapon set and mostly be fine, and some builds in other classes where fine no matter the damage of their weapons as they hit mostly with magic or holy damage, Sorceresses where in a pinch if they didn't spec to at least 2 elements, or player in group with other people.

That's not a problem easy to solve...

Oh, wait. It is. Alternate weapon sets, and a gear property that chances one type of damage to another, so you can set a build to full fire and switch to a weapon that changes your fire damage to some other damage if you find an highly resistant or immune monster.
Or just an alternate build you can switch to, with a cooldown for the switch, so it's not like you have 2 builds.

But well, I guess you have to THINK of it first. If no one thinks of that, then the problem stays, and the only other solution is scrapping elemental resistances in monsters altogether.
Edited by Mithrán#2507 on 1/22/2013 6:23 AM PST
Reply Quote
diablo 2 elemantal damage makes more sense
Edited by Blodhemn#2951 on 1/22/2013 6:42 AM PST
Reply Quote
so ive been using lighting experiments to no avail ahhghghgh
Reply Quote
Fine tuning elemental damage was cut, just like the Mystic, item enchanting, Act IV content, Inferno testing, and many other things to make Bobby Kotick's announced ship target of Q2 2012. Once he said that in an earnings call, the trimming knives came out to get D3 out the door.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)

Reported!

[Close]