PVP.

Brawling
Prev 1 5 6 7 Next
[/quote]How was it poorly balanced? What was strong? What was weak? Speaking in cliches makes it sound like you don’t know what you’re talking about.[/quote]

Sigh...explain why its well balanced. Your the one saying it is. Its not on me too prove it.


Exactly what I thought... you have no idea.
While it may not have been completely balanced; established rules made by the community helped forge it (the actual pvp, not the pking) into the social battlefield that some of us still think fond of to this day.
11/27/2018 01:12 PMPosted by RasaQ
Exactly what I thought... you have no idea.
Dude what makes the game balanced. What's the build diversity,why are there specal rules,is the pvp really that fun. Was the game designed with pvp in mind? These things are importain.
PvP is broken promise by Blizzard.
D2 non ladder USWEST clan gimmeitam and 76legit checking in... any takers? no? ahh shucks...

Just one person's opinion but PVP and the community associated with it was a huuuge part of D2's greatness for me.
11/27/2018 01:12 PMPosted by RasaQ
Exactly what I thought... you have no idea.

Here's the thing, if your response to someone consistently getting steamrolled because they weren't wearing all the damage reduction gear despite doing just fine in PvE is that they've built their character wrong, it's not balanced. Change gear to invested skills/synergies. Heck, some classes were just innately better than others (usually ranged). People bringing up player enforced rules further asserts discrepancies. It simply wasn't balanced or even really strove to be.

And just consistently poking through this thread, my own philosophy of never giving anyone who flings the term snowflake around as an insult is further validated. Bluntly, more devs across the industry need to take a similar approach. There's a right way and a wrong way to ask for things. Skipping past valid counterpoints and going right for the personal attacks isn't one of them. Honorable mention for victim blaming people who dare make unrestricted public games or that they're more than free to just drop what they were doing and start over because a bully wants to bully. Yeah, no.
Some of my best memories of Diablo 2 were from hunting down the player killers and killing them
11/27/2018 03:40 PMPosted by HBEEZY
D2 non ladder USWEST clan gimmeitam and 76legit checking in... any takers? no? ahh shucks...

Just one person's opinion but PVP and the community associated with it was a huuuge part of D2's greatness for me.

Funny, I got downvoted for same opinion! D2 for lyfe tho
Sorry dude D2 PvP was poorly balanced and unfun. If you want real PvP game that's someone balanced try the souls games.


How was it poorly balanced? What was strong? What was weak? Speaking in cliches makes it sound like you don’t know what you’re talking about.


Okay, first - learn to use quote tags.

Second, the mere fact that most of the rules of engagement had to be arbitrarily created and enforced by the players proves poor balance.
11/27/2018 06:19 PMPosted by Orrion
...

How was it poorly balanced? What was strong? What was weak? Speaking in cliches makes it sound like you don’t know what you’re talking about.


Okay, first - learn to use quote tags.

Second, the mere fact that most of the rules of engagement had to be arbitrarily created and enforced by the players proves poor balance.


Failing to quote properly on a gaming forum has no bearing on the validity of my opinion. Public pk games thrived with no rules whatsoever. The true down fall of balance we’re hackers using aa and auto tp/s&e
11/27/2018 03:57 PMPosted by Saidosha
11/27/2018 01:12 PMPosted by RasaQ
Exactly what I thought... you have no idea.

Here's the thing, if your response to someone consistently getting steamrolled because they weren't wearing all the damage reduction gear despite doing just fine in PvE is that they've built their character wrong, it's not balanced. Change gear to invested skills/synergies. Heck, some classes were just innately better than others (usually ranged). People bringing up player enforced rules further asserts discrepancies. It simply wasn't balanced or even really strove to be.

And just consistently poking through this thread, my own philosophy of never giving anyone who flings the term snowflake around as an insult is further validated. Bluntly, more devs across the industry need to take a similar approach. There's a right way and a wrong way to ask for things. Skipping past valid counterpoints and going right for the personal attacks isn't one of them. Honorable mention for victim blaming people who dare make unrestricted public games or that they're more than free to just drop what they were doing and start over because a bully wants to bully. Yeah, no.


The word snowflake hasn’t come out my mouth. No ad hominem attacks have come from me in this thread. I asked one person who was throwing out cliches to cite a real example of said cliche and they were unable to do it.

According to you a pve character should be able to do just as well as a pvp character in pvp in a game that encourages min/maxing or its not balanced? That doesn’t make sense to me.
11/27/2018 01:45 PMPosted by SirSmokes
11/27/2018 01:12 PMPosted by RasaQ
Exactly what I thought... you have no idea.
Dude what makes the game balanced. What's the build diversity,why are there specal rules,is the pvp really that fun. Was the game designed with pvp in mind? These things are importain.


1. Build diversity: Every class had at least 2 viable pvp builds, some even more.

2. Special rules: were created for many different reasons. Because of the Rock Paper Scissors nature of the game, melees like zealers and barbs would create their own leagues because rock vs rock can allow for a more competitive environment than rock vs scissors constantly. Certain matchups were just more fun than others. Nec vs Nec and Sorc vs Sorc for example. Certain game mechanics like absorb could be abused, which is what mostly separated good mannered games from bad mannered (gm or bm)

3. Is pvp really that fun? Fun is obviously subjective so I can only speak for myself even though the d2 pvp community was LARGE. D2 pvp is probably the most fun I’ve had in a video game. If it’s not the best it’s certainly up there for me personally.

4. Was the game developed with pvp in mind? I think the game was developed to be a great game and both pve and pvp were a part of that. They had a symbiotic relationship.
11/27/2018 10:34 PMPosted by RasaQ
11/27/2018 01:45 PMPosted by SirSmokes
...Dude what makes the game balanced. What's the build diversity,why are there specal rules,is the pvp really that fun. Was the game designed with pvp in mind? These things are importain.


1. Build diversity: Every class had at least 2 viable pvp builds, some even more.

2. Special rules: were created for many different reasons. Because of the Rock Paper Scissors nature of the game, melees like zealers and barbs would create their own leagues because rock vs rock can allow for a more competitive environment than rock vs scissors constantly. Certain matchups were just more fun than others. Nec vs Nec and Sorc vs Sorc for example. Certain game mechanics like absorb could be abused, which is what mostly separated good mannered games from bad mannered (gm or bm)

3. Is pvp really that fun? Fun is obviously subjective so I can only speak for myself even though the d2 pvp community was LARGE. D2 pvp is probably the most fun I’ve had in a video game. If it’s not the best it’s certainly up there for me personally.

4. Was the game developed with pvp in mind? I think the game was developed to be a great game and both pve and pvp were a part of that. They had a symbiotic relationship.
So no it's not balanced.
<span class="truncated">...</span>

1. Build diversity: Every class had at least 2 viable pvp builds, some even more.

2. Special rules: were created for many different reasons. Because of the Rock Paper Scissors nature of the game, melees like zealers and barbs would create their own leagues because rock vs rock can allow for a more competitive environment than rock vs scissors constantly. Certain matchups were just more fun than others. Nec vs Nec and Sorc vs Sorc for example. Certain game mechanics like absorb could be abused, which is what mostly separated good mannered games from bad mannered (gm or bm)

3. Is pvp really that fun? Fun is obviously subjective so I can only speak for myself even though the d2 pvp community was LARGE. D2 pvp is probably the most fun I’ve had in a video game. If it’s not the best it’s certainly up there for me personally.

4. Was the game developed with pvp in mind? I think the game was developed to be a great game and both pve and pvp were a part of that. They had a symbiotic relationship.
So no it's not balanced.


That’s what you took from that? Balance does not equal great. No game that has had pvp and had to factor in more than just the player has been “balanced.” Btw, Rock Paper Scissors is a form of balance.

Edit: I answered your questions, why don’t you answer mine?
<span class="truncated">...</span> So no it's not balanced.


That’s what you took from that? Balance does not equal great. No game that has had pvp and had to factor in more than just the player has been “balanced.” Btw, Rock Paper Scissors is a form of balance.

Edit: I answered your questions, why don’t you answer mine?
Dude Street Fighter V made from ground up for head to head competitive gaming. Still needs balancing changes. http://shoryuken.com/2018/04/02/capcom-announces-a-new-round-of-balance-changes-for-street-fighter-v-arcade-edition-to-be-applied-on-tuesday-april-3rd/ So you think a game made mostly for PvE with PvP added for fun is going to be fun and balanced?
11/27/2018 11:26 PMPosted by SirSmokes
...

That’s what you took from that? Balance does not equal great. No game that has had pvp and had to factor in more than just the player has been “balanced.” Btw, Rock Paper Scissors is a form of balance.

Edit: I answered your questions, why don’t you answer mine?
Dude Street Fighter V made from ground up for head to head competitive gaming. Still needs balancing changes. http://shoryuken.com/2018/04/02/capcom-announces-a-new-round-of-balance-changes-for-street-fighter-v-arcade-edition-to-be-applied-on-tuesday-april-3rd/ So you think a game made mostly for PvE with PvP added for fun is going to be fun and balanced.


D2 is very fun so yes, i do think it will be fun. If you actually played d2 please answer my questions as it is only fair since I answered yours. Not sure there is a clear answer to number 1, but if you can’t answer 2, 3, and 4 then I can only assume you never played d2 for any meaningful period of time.

1. How was d2 imbalanced?
2. What was strong in d2? (classes/builds)
3. What was weak in d2? (classes/builds)
4. And lastly what was desynch in d2?
<span class="truncated">...</span>Dude Street Fighter V made from ground up for head to head competitive gaming. Still needs balancing changes. http://shoryuken.com/2018/04/02/capcom-announces-a-new-round-of-balance-changes-for-street-fighter-v-arcade-edition-to-be-applied-on-tuesday-april-3rd/ So you think a game made mostly for PvE with PvP added for fun is going to be fun and balanced.


D2 is very fun so yes, i do think it will be fun. If you actually played d2 please answer my questions as it is only fair since I answered yours. Not sure there is a clear answer to number 1, but if you can’t answer 2, 3, and 4 then I can only assume you never played d2 for any meaningful period of time. [ul][/ul]

1. How was d2 imbalanced?
2. What was strong in d2? (classes/builds)
3. What was weak in d2? (classes/builds)
4. And lastly what was desynch in d2?
I play D2 plenty I just turned 38 the other day 27 of November. But that game came out almost 18 year ago and I have moved on to other things. Still not wrong about PvP in D2 being tacked on and not a really balanced fun experience
11/27/2018 10:19 PMPosted by RasaQ
The word snowflake hasn’t come out my mouth. No ad hominem attacks have come from me in this thread. I asked one person who was throwing out cliches to cite a real example of said cliche and they were unable to do it.

That part wasn't aimed at you specifically, nor can I say it limited to this game/thread when it comes to PvP. It's simply a common tactic when those of the PvE focus question PvP things that their skill level gets called into question or insults get lobbed (care bear and cry baby being other common slurs), or what you did actually do later on, pitch queries not related to their concerns.

But to answer your question aimed at me, yes, it is imbalanced to be playing through your game, minding your own business and otherwise doing fine for a sudden difficulty spike to present itself where you either have to wait it out or start a new game. I'd also say the same if it was a mob that suddenly appeared with 90% all resists/damage reduction while still being able to kill you in a hit or two.

People asking for game creation checkboxes also don't realize there are other ways to grief than PKing. I have no doubt those of more... aggressive personalities would join disabled games taunt and trash talk, further challenging people to duels. And if that doesn't work, they'll then skip ahead and kill bosses or key quest progression objectives to ruin the day of the people that don't humor them. And I will continue to stand behind the fact that people should not have to put level restrictions, assuming more a D2-style lobby, because that prevents more well-meaning people from joining in an helping out.

Otherwise, you can't say balancing PvP hasn't affected PvE in other games. You can't say making completely separate PvP skills/areas/modes doesn't take funding that could have gone back into the PvE the silent and unseen majority signed up for. You also can't say there aren't people exactly like we're warning about who don't actually want competition, but to just make the lives other players hell. Cheats and exploits are also still a valid concern. In the end, it's not really a sleight when myself or others tell you you would be better served finding games where PvP was the focus from the ground up. You may say you see potential, and I also see potential, too, but I'm also being dreadfully realistic in what it takes to both work and maintain. It most definitely is not as simple as adding a hostile button and letting players figure out, which was how D2 did it.
11/28/2018 01:07 AMPosted by Saidosha
11/27/2018 10:19 PMPosted by RasaQ
The word snowflake hasn’t come out my mouth. No ad hominem attacks have come from me in this thread. I asked one person who was throwing out cliches to cite a real example of said cliche and they were unable to do it.

That part wasn't aimed at you specifically, nor can I say it limited to this game/thread when it comes to PvP. It's simply a common tactic when those of the PvE focus question PvP things that their skill level gets called into question or insults get lobbed (care bear and cry baby being other common slurs), or what you did actually do later on, pitch queries not related to their concerns.

But to answer your question aimed at me, yes, it is imbalanced to be playing through your game, minding your own business and otherwise doing fine for a sudden difficulty spike to present itself where you either have to wait it out or start a new game. I'd also say the same if it was a mob that suddenly appeared with 90% all resists/damage reduction while still being able to kill you in a hit or two.

People asking for game creation checkboxes also don't realize there are other ways to grief than PKing. I have no doubt those of more... aggressive personalities would join disabled games taunt and trash talk, further challenging people to duels. And if that doesn't work, they'll then skip ahead and kill bosses or key quest progression objectives to ruin the day of the people that don't humor them. And I will continue to stand behind the fact that people should not have to put level restrictions, assuming more a D2-style lobby, because that prevents more well-meaning people from joining in an helping out.

Otherwise, you can't say balancing PvP hasn't affected PvE in other games. You can't say making completely separate PvP skills/areas/modes doesn't take funding that could have gone back into the PvE the silent and unseen majority signed up for. You also can't say there aren't people exactly like we're warning about who don't actually want competition, but to just make the lives other players hell. Cheats and exploits are also still a valid concern. In the end, it's not really a sleight when myself or others tell you you would be better served finding games where PvP was the focus from the ground up. You may say you see potential, and I also see potential, too, but I'm also being dreadfully realistic in what it takes to both work and maintain. It most definitely is not as simple as adding a hostile button and letting players figure out, which was how D2 did it.
Well said sure they can put PvP in easy but is it any good? I am not saying they can't make PvE/PvP game that's good no but it is harder to do both well. If they want to make a system that works for PvE and PvP it can be done. But there going have build it from ground up for it. Even then still not might work.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum