Discuss Travis Day's comments on sets & build diversity

General Discussion
Prev 1 7 8 9 12 Next
04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
I never claimed anything about the design of synergies being good or bad.


you didn't?

04/07/2017 06:29 AMPosted by Dark
TLDR version. Balancing isn't necessary. More synergies FTW.


04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
We would have more fun with more choices(good ones) that included synergies that work.


there's already plenty of synergies in the game, like the Fulminator + PE + poison gem + Mad monarch's scepter combo, however, nobody uses those combos due to them being underpowered, that's a balance issue, not an issue of lacks of synergy.

04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
If you have gloves that made 10 Spike Tabs go out and enhanced the damage (tested of course), wouldn't you at least wanna try it?


even that i've played Spike traps from 1.00 to 2.4.1 , i won't use spike traps anymore, they aren't fun anymore since the rework.

04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
Maybe you only get to GR74 with it, but it's FUN and it provides an alternative.


and why not go the full mile and make it GR 100 capable?
04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
Poor design is a much bigger issue than power creep or balance.

I think that all of those are important, but why do you need items to make skills useful? You know, why can't skills be useful on their own in the first place? So if you wanna play Multishot as an example, why do you need to have an item that increases MS damage by 200% or even more to play your build efficiently?

Why not remove all these insane multipliers completely and let Multishot be good on its own without needing this one item that drastically increases its power? Instead of this one must pick item there could be several other items (rares and legendaries) that have nice effects and advantages and disadvantages over each other but aren't drastically overpowered...

04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
If you have gloves that made 10 Spike Tabs go out and enhanced the damage (tested of course), wouldn't you at least wanna try it? Maybe you only get to GR74 with it, but it's FUN and it provides an alternative.

It is just very frustrating that if you wanna play with your favorite skills/builds and these builds are drastically underpreforming. We are talking here about 2000% less damage than the top builds, which means that the best - set supported builds - are 20 times stronger than an average LoN build, and that is just ridiculous!

If the difference would only be 15-20%, then it definitely wouldn't be frustrating like it is now. But I hope we can a agree that the power difference right now in D3 is just waaaaay to big...
04/07/2017 12:41 PMPosted by Dark
We would have more fun with more choices(good ones) that included synergies that work.


there's already plenty of synergies in the game, like the Fulminator + PE + poison gem + Mad monarch's scepter combo, however, nobody uses those combos due to them being underpowered, that's a balance issue, not an issue of lacks of synergy.

^^this is what itemization should look like (or at least somehow similar), but instead of such interesting combos you have legendaries that simply increase the damage of skill x by 200-300% and then another items that does the same in one way or another and then you also get the set...
04/07/2017 01:01 PMPosted by clueso
It is just very frustrating that if you wanna play with your favorite skills/builds and these builds are drastically underpreforming. We are talking here about 2000% less damage than the top builds, which means that the best - set supported builds - are 20 times stronger than an average LoN build, and that is just ridiculous!


it's intended by the devs.
When Shadowset was introduced, i've been on the PTR and provided suggestions to have a LB viable spam-FoK and Spike Traps build (buffing S2 from 1000% to 2000% along with adding in 30% DR and nerfing LGF from 100% to 50%), but what did the devs do? they nerfed S2 from 1000% to 600% and buffed LGF from 100% to 200%...
To all, thanks for the responses.

I can't begin to tell you how I would love to play a frost Wizard, but the synergies suck for it. My whole point was not to say MORE synergies just for there to be more.

This goes back to skill design being poor. Skills that could be fun if given better synergies through itemization are not.

Let's put this another way, how can you modify damage in any game...
1)Plus skills items
2)CC, CHD, IAS
3)Skill synergies with other skills
4)Items and enhancements to those
5)Other players Auras or debuffs, or your own
6) Base skills being stronger than original iteration
7)Hirelings debuffs or buffs
8)Stats assigned to character
9)Difficulty levels
10) ...on and on

So your choices are to pick a current in game mechanic or create one to modify. Synergies for items already in game are perhaps the easiest to do but have failed on a large scale in some regards because of lack of thought. Not just on a competitive level, but from a practical point. Skill redesign, well thought out synergies, other creative methods through some of those items I listed are all possible.

Look good example- Mad Monarch- make a helm make any create killed by it cause a similar explosion. You could even make the secondary explosions be more powerful than original. OR you could make the explosion greater in area of effect but cause a debuff to enhance damage from other sources. Synergies.
Most aarpgs, leaderboards are based on getting MAX level. The GRs need to go, dieing on softcore needs to give experience loss. Hard cap on a difficulty. Homogonize the end game activities to all give great exp with some spots dropping certain items. Do NOT homogonize builds.
Challenge rifts add nothing
There was no reason for the attackspeed nerf in vanilla for nether tentacle dh when you had a spin to win barb emerge anyways
There was no reason for cm wiz nerf when now we have 2 classes in the meta to do what 1 was doing.
There's no reason for zdps classes in an aarpg....maybe....but not like what we have.
There's no reason to have x000% dmg multipliers on gear... 40,000% damage on impale gtfo here
Seasons should have different interesting items than non season.

If anything blizz has listened the playerbase at the wrong times...and ignored and done their own thing when good ideas emerged...rip d3
http://www.diablofans.com/news/48887-necromancer-influencer-summit-2017-new-information

All the information confirms the Necro patch will still be all about set bonuses and crutch legendaries.

So much for that tiny shred of hope.
04/07/2017 01:47 PMPosted by Borg
http://www.diablofans.com/news/48887-necromancer-influencer-summit-2017-new-information


So I watched bluddshed video in the link, few ideas I probably wouldn't like. two points per paragon level, why?... Another one to reforge primal items max stats to different max stats. I feel it would make it easier to get what you need, But I don't care either way cause I only used reforge four or five times since it's been out. But would you guys really want that? To be able to find a primal item that you want then reforge it to exactly the stats you desire?

I have mix thoughts about the red beam, Ya would be cool seeing a red beam and knowing its a primal right away. Reason why I have mix thoughts about this one, is cause I got more excited not knowing that it was a primal when Identifying AW.

But I did like one idea from bluddshed, It Would be pretty cool if the blood golem could pull enemies towards him before he explodes.

Glad they added revive to the nec, revived Mallet Lords does sound cool.

[edit]
24 times :-p
04/07/2017 12:06 PMPosted by clueso
So you are suggesting a mix of a skill point based system and a rune system?

Yes. The idea is to convey a strong sense of direction over your own progress without RNG screwing things up.

04/07/2017 12:06 PMPosted by clueso
However, I don't think that a skill point based system for active skills is really necessary, even if you combine it with runes. The reason for that is that you want your main skills to be at max anyways, so why not have every skill at max as it currently is in D3?

This really depends on what you want from the game. Having everything maxed out kills the aforementioned sense of direction a player-driven progression system delivers. It's also the main reason why loot frequency needs to be cranked up to ridiculous levels, since gear remains as the only relevant metric for progression in the game. Paragon could also be used to strengthen this, but in it's current iteration is completely meaningless if you don't have a geared character, as opposed to other games where you actually feel your point investment has real weight within your character's power curve even if RNG isn't very cooperative. Try killing anything on normal with just paragon and some vendor gear to see what I'm talking about here.

04/07/2017 12:06 PMPosted by clueso
However what definitely would fit more into the idea of progression is that your skills automatically get better with each level. For example Hammer of the Ancients could deal 200% weapon damage and 10 additional physical damage at level 1 and at level 30 it could deal 350% weapon damage and 1500 additional physical damage and at max level it could deal 500% weapon damage and 3500 additional physical damage (numbers are just examples).

Same for other skills like Ignore Pain: at level 1 it could reduce damage by 20% and have a base cooldown of 50 seconds, at level 30 it reduces damage taken by 35% and has a base cooldown of 35 seconds and so on...

You know, instead of progressing your skills via points, they all are improved upon level up, but not just one skill, but every skill - which would give your character level more meaning.

This still doesn't address the fact runes are just different flavors of the base skill, rather than a tool to build around that core skill for true customization. It's not much more relevant than the auto-stat system, especially considering monsters also level up with you.

04/07/2017 12:06 PMPosted by clueso
However, I am not against point based progression, I just don't think it is best suited for active skills. For passives skills and for an attribute system I think points are perfect. There already was the Trait System in DIII, which I thought was awesome, but sadly they removed it and replaced it with the boring passive skills we currently have. Same for the attribute system that was replaced by main stat on gear.

It really boils down to how strong these gear-based bonuses are relative to your point assignments. Using GD as an example again, your point investment vs. the benefits you get from gear is pretty well balanced. The static, player-driven portion of a skill's damage can be somewhat compared to the percentage driven by your weapon damage. This preserves the feeling of control over your own progression fairly well, while simultaneously allowing you to progress consistently even if RNG sucks. In D3, if RNG sucks you're basically met with a wall. However, if you'd get 50 damage from your point investment, but 2000%+ as a damage multiplier from gear, this sense of control will be greatly diminished. Stat-squishing would make this relation easier to digest, although, being a relative relation it doesn't really matter if things are tallied in the hundreds or the trillions.

The trait system was nice for that iteration of the game. It would need to be substantially updated in order to work with D3's current systems, especially, the infinite progression thing. Frankly, that crap should just burn in hell. It's a stupid idea considering how detrimental it becomes in the long run for diversity, and how hard it is to balance a system with so many variables. There will always be a best setup, but infinite scaling only exacerbates that fact by progressively eroding diversity.
@Blashyrkh
04/07/2017 12:06 PMPosted by clueso
However, I don't think that a skill point based system for active skills is really necessary, even if you combine it with runes. The reason for that is that you want your main skills to be at max anyways, so why not have every skill at max as it currently is in D3?

This really depends on what you want from the game. Having everything maxed out kills the aforementioned sense of direction a player-driven progression system delivers.

Not if you combine a rune system with Traits and a reasonable attribute system. You are right, there wouldn't be much player driven progression in the active skill system, but that instead would be focused on Traits and the attribute system were the players can make choices on how to customize their chars.

I am still not convinced why there should be a point based system for active skills, because I think it is redundant and that player driven progression can and should be achieved through point based passive skills and attribute systems.

This still doesn't address the fact runes are just different flavors of the base skill, rather than a tool to build around that core skill for true customization. It's not much more relevant than the auto-stat system, especially considering monsters also level up with you.

I wouldn't say they are *just* different flavors. It all depends on how you design them. Some runes can play very, very different than the original skill and (in theory) you could make a build around these altered playstyles that come from runes.

04/08/2017 08:35 AMPosted by Blashyrkh
It really boils down to how strong these gear-based bonuses are relative to your point assignments. Using GD as an example again, your point investment vs. the benefits you get from gear is pretty well balanced. The static, player-driven portion of a skill's damage can be somewhat compared to the percentage driven by your weapon damage. This preserves the feeling of control over your own progression fairly well, while simultaneously allowing you to progress consistently even if RNG sucks. In D3, if RNG sucks you're basically met with a wall. However, if you'd get 50 damage from your point investment, but 2000%+ as a damage multiplier from gear, this sense of control will be greatly diminished. Stat-squishing would make this relation easier to digest, although, being a relative relation it doesn't really matter if things are tallied in the hundreds or the trillions.

Agree. The best thing would be to have a reasonable balance between the power that comes from attributes, skills, passives and gear, be they offensive or defensive.
It is absolutely uncontroversial that gear in D3 is way too important.
04/08/2017 08:35 AMPosted by Blashyrkh
However, if you'd get 50 damage from your point investment, but 2000%+ as a damage multiplier from gear, this sense of control will be greatly diminished. Stat-squishing would make this relation easier to digest, although, being a relative relation it doesn't really matter if things are tallied in the hundreds or the trillions.


Not just damage multiplier stat squishing but also primary stat/CHD/CHC squishing, that way paragon points, the player driven progression, would get a higher value.

Like halfing the primary stat on gear, then at paragon 2000 it may look like this:
- 6000 primary stat from gear
- 6000 primary stat from paragon
- 5000 primary stat from augments
note: example values

this way only about 33% of the damage would be down to RNG.
<span class="truncated">...</span>

They are called Challenge Rifts and they were announced last Blizzcon. Blizzard takes a snapshot of a rift done by a player. The "challenge" for everyone else is to play that rift as that character (that exact build, map, gear, etc) and try to get the best time you can on it. There will be leaderboards associated with it. They plan to change these challenges frequently so it will be much different than Seasons. It also means that your RNG no longer has any impact on your ability to play this mode. Everyone plays the exact same gear/build/map which puts you on an even playing field.


Heh... Let me predict how "Challenge" Rifts are going to be at the "top" level.

First, some people are going to run around, without really killing anything. They will check how the density is and where the density is. Then, they will make a map of it, alongside where pylons can spawn. Then, they will have an optimal route with details like this: "Kill group A, skip B, go south for Pylon, rush to C, go to next level".

At that point, it is posted on Dfans, Reddit or whatever site. Anyone will be able to see the most optimal route and follow it.

I don't know what kind of reward they will attach to it, but I'll probably just do it once to get it (if it's a 1-time reward) and stay as far as possible from it.


There's a lot of truth to this. Also, within 2-3 months (generous) there will probably be a shift to just living in challenge rifts and the rest of the game will be trivialized even more.

How is this possible? It's like virtually every single change the devs have made to this game has further reduced possibilities. Is this whole thing an experiment, to see how far a genre can be dumbed down? Maybe it'll even fit inside the Horadric Cube when they're finally done shrinking it down.

I really hope the D4 team is 90 percent new blood, or at least has some new guys calling shots, because dear god we need new people. Leave the pride, arrogance, stubbornness, control, casualitis, WoW-itis and more at the door.

I am optimistic though - someone up there must realize what is wrong with D3 by now. They have had plenty of time to learn, because when trying to extend its lifespan (several content releases were put out for this purpose) they have likely run into issues because of their own !@#$ty framework. I've never seen anything like this before, and probably never will again.
04/07/2017 01:47 PMPosted by Borg
http://www.diablofans.com/news/48887-necromancer-influencer-summit-2017-new-information

All the information confirms the Necro patch will still be all about set bonuses and crutch legendaries.

That should surprise absolutely no one.

It's a symptom of their ineptitude.
I'd like to see less reliance on CoE.
04/06/2017 10:58 AMPosted by Zeddicuus
I'd love to see a stat squish. The numbers are stupidly high and not necessary to be so huge. instead of +1000 to (Mainstat) they could go the route Diablo 1 did and make the smaller numbers much more meaningful as D1 went to about +20 instead. It wouldn't make a difference in terms of gameplay, but instead make it a bit easier at a glance to tell if an item is better or not.


We like big numbers.
-actual quote from one of the devs a while back.

if that doesn't tell you what kind of BS you're dealing with idk what does.

See these kind of forums get made fun of for all the constant complaining and whining. But the thing is - if something like this goes on long enough, it might actually (gasp) be because the ones complaining are onto something. Blizz has always had this high and mighty, our way or the highway approach, as if they aren't human beings like all of us.

The big numbers do nothing but make things harder to process accurately. Hell, that may even be their intention at this point, given what all we've seen them do over the years. And then they do their streams with an overly fake-happy atmosphere as if the state is not in utter shambles. Sad when the priority is to save face rather than MAKE THE GAME BETTER!
i wrote it before and i can do it again : if u want diversity then all skills must do same dmg /give or take / and maybe few choosen one can be increased for few % by items /not sets/ ....this is base math .

sets by my opinion must give u abilities to not find in your skill tree /or chart/ not just flat increase dmg .....you know its only green rare items but only itself when it put together will become powerfull due special properties it will have . /alternation your skills or bring brand new skill into skill chart ....
I am still not convinced why there should be a point based system for active skills, because I think it is redundant and that player driven progression can and should be achieved through point based passive skills and attribute systems.

Because points driven active skill systems allows you to invest in a skill.

If you take 2 attacks like Bash and Hammer of the Ancients, they can't just have the same damage, but with "investments" in a point system you can create at that. Now the tricky part is to create as many investment systems as possible that allows you to customize and create in a freely manor with a non clear direction
04/09/2017 03:13 AMPosted by KiWeN
I am still not convinced why there should be a point based system for active skills, because I think it is redundant and that player driven progression can and should be achieved through point based passive skills and attribute systems.

Because points driven active skill systems allows you to invest in a skill.

If you take 2 attacks like Bash and Hammer of the Ancients, they can't just have the same damage, but with "investments" in a point system you can create at that. Now the tricky part is to create as many investment systems as possible that allows you to customize and create in a freely manor with a non clear direction

This doesn't make sense to me to be honest...
If I put 20 points into Bash it probably will be stronger than a 1 point HotA, sure, but if I then put these 20 points into HotA, it will be significantly stronger than a lvl 20 Bash...

Also you could have a rune effect on Bash that drastically increases its damage, but instead of generating resource, it not costs x resource.

So no need for a point system for active skills. If you want that your char deals more damage, then spend more points into the attribute that increases damage or spend points in a passive skills that increases damage or focus on gear that lets you deal more damage. In any cases you had to sacrifice defense or something else, because the points that you spend for increased damage are no longer available for defense or something else.
04/09/2017 03:29 AMPosted by clueso
This doesn't make sense to me to be honest...
If I put 20 points into Bash it probably will be stronger than a 1 point HotA, sure, but if I then put these 20 points into HotA, it will be significantly stronger than a lvl 20 Bash...

Also you could have a rune effect on Bash that drastically increases its damage, but instead of generating resource, it not costs x resource.

So no need for a point system for active skills. If you want that your char deals more damage, then spend more points into the attribute that increases damage or spend points in a passive skills that increases damage or focus on gear that lets you deal more damage. In any cases you had to sacrifice defense or something else, because the points that you spend for increased damage are no longer available for defense or something else.


you are correct you could just implement a rune system that is basically the same as adding points. It's a necessary logical conclusion that people must arrive at, that investing "points" on a "layer" of character customization, either by clicking points or clicking runes, or clicking anything to buff a skill or buff an item or buff a stat, or buff anything is essentially the same idea being put to practices.

once the players understand that, which I think some forum goers do understand,

The devs must understand that, as Kiwen said, that they have to expand that idea into as many potentially interesting aspects as they can, to really give the players a big hazy thing to explore, which they do not understand overall as an entire organization delivering and entire product, if D3 is the measuring stick.

if their other games are the measuring sticks of their understanding of this concept, well that is why blizzard is one of the most prominent video game studios on earth. They basically taught the idea, through one game after another to a generation of us fans as we were growing up.
04/09/2017 03:13 AMPosted by KiWeN
...
Because points driven active skill systems allows you to invest in a skill.

If you take 2 attacks like Bash and Hammer of the Ancients, they can't just have the same damage, but with "investments" in a point system you can create at that. Now the tricky part is to create as many investment systems as possible that allows you to customize and create in a freely manor with a non clear direction

This doesn't make sense to me to be honest...
If I put 20 points into Bash it probably will be stronger than a 1 point HotA, sure, but if I then put these 20 points into HotA, it will be significantly stronger than a lvl 20 Bash...

Also you could have a rune effect on Bash that drastically increases its damage, but instead of generating resource, it not costs x resource.

So no need for a point system for active skills. If you want that your char deals more damage, then spend more points into the attribute that increases damage or spend points in a passive skills that increases damage or focus on gear that lets you deal more damage. In any cases you had to sacrifice defense or something else, because the points that you spend for increased damage are no longer available for defense or something else.

Just because Diablo 2 evolved around a 20 point scale, doesn't mean you have to.

Secondly there's the skill synergy effect, stating that you may put 40 points towards build Bash, but only 20 towards HotA because Cleave points affects Bash aswell.

Another way is HotA may require x amounts of points being invested before getting a single point (that was actually the original talent system of D3). So If you want both Wrath of the Berserker and HotA, you could not maximize both of them. That is what skill points do, how you create the system depends entirely on how or what limitations you want.

If all skills works at maximum potential always, then you need a "non-skill" boosting certain skills to balance them out, because if they are equal all the time, there's no progression or reason behind them.

There's a free ORPG called Blade and Soul, which uses Skill Points entirely different. You still get 1 per level, but you may put it in any of all of your skills to change that skill. One skill may get more damage, another Lifesteal, a Third larger area, and so on. You could totally do that with a skill system in Diablo 3

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum