PTR Patch Notes Updated 9 April - Stash Change

General Discussion
Prev 1 42 43 44 65 Next
I've Played season since season 1. Mainly to unlock stash tabs. I've also completed the season journey for most if not all seasons. Am I going to have to complete the season journey again to unlock these extra pages or will the game know that I have already unlock the additional 5 stash pages that were added. The main reason for playing season is to find people to play with. Non-Season players are hard to find. lol. But I did find a group that does play non season. I played this season only cause i was gearing a class from scratch and figured it be easier to get the gear doing season journey and such. and having a bigger player base would also help.

I do have one more suggestion. Thanks again for bringing us the armory to save our builds. Now if we could make it so that it actually stores the gear separate from are stash or inventory. But allow us to share the items between builds, characters and other classes. This would free up a lot of space in our stash and our inventories.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
Q: Why can't we make stash space available to non-Seasonal players?

We explored options to make this happen, but it came down to a conflict in how Seasonal rewards roll into non-Seasonal permanence. Rewards would be earned twice, and we’d end up in the state of poor performance we’ve been trying to avoid.

We recognize not everyone prefers Seasons, but we do want to emphasize that any Stash earned in Season does roll into non-Seasonal characters.


If this is the case, can't you change it so it's easier to obtain in seasons, such as getting the stash at end of completing chapter 4 of the journey rather than all the way at Conqueror? That way, it'll be relatively easier for non seasonal players to obtain without jumping through all the hoops of seasons and you won't have the issue of having players being able to earn twice the stash space.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
Q: Why are we rolling out stash space with Seasons?

This was always our intent. The intended experience was to unlock tabs as part of the seasonal journey. We also now understand where the wheels fall off from too much load, and it can’t function the other way.


I still can't believe you are lying to the player base after all the constant mess ups this past year. Whether it be your own choice or force fed from someone higher up, these responses are a total joke.

How can a limit on stash space be a problem to just give us, vs. forcing us to earn it? We get the same total amount of space regardless if you let us just buy it with gold vs. if we earned it from seasons. Nothing here changed except how you are now forcing it behind seasons. This is a total joke of an answer, 'can't function the other way' when nothing is actually changing in the end.

04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
Q: Why can't we make stash space available to non-Seasonal players?

We explored options to make this happen, but it came down to a conflict in how Seasonal rewards roll into non-Seasonal permanence. Rewards would be earned twice, and we’d end up in the state of poor performance we’ve been trying to avoid.

We recognize not everyone prefers Seasons, but we do want to emphasize that any Stash earned in Season does roll into non-Seasonal characters.


Again, this is an absolute joke. A triple-A game development company can't code a simple if/else case for handling rewards and preventing duplicates? Are you for real? This is basically insulting to your entire development team, not only on Diablo but Blizzard as a whole.

I really hope people see through these lies and hold Blizzard responsible for this garbage.
@Nevalistis:
First of all, thanks for posting something here and actually interacting with the forum-goers. We need more of that (waaaay more).

Now, I'll play along and assume for a second that what you are telling is the truth. There are a few points that I would like you to clarify further. Note that, as a PC-only player, I'm only speaking for the PC version of the game.

  • From what you have written, it seems that the memory issue can only happen when 4 players play in a group and they all have more than the current maximum of 12 stash tabs, as all stash tabs from all players are for some reason loaded in each player memory.
    Why does the game do that? I get why you would load a player's stash in their own memory, but what would they need other players' stashes to be there when they can't interact with them in any way?
    Fix that issue and, by your own admission, you would be able to give each and every one of us up to 48 stash tabs to play with.
  • If it's a client-side memory problem, then what does gating stash tabs behind season accomplish? Some people will eventually unlock all of them and have the maximum of 17 stash tabs. Some of them will do it with a computer that barely meets minimal requirements to play the game. And some of them will play in a group game with 3 other players who also have 17 stash tabs unlocked. And then, supposedly, their game will crash.
    Why won't it be an issue then when it's an issue now? Is there some correlation we don't know of between a player's RAM and their willingness to finish the season journey?
  • If the issue is the number of stash tabs we can have in any given game, then did you guys consider the possibility of letting us turn some of the tabs we already have into character-specific tabs (or, even better imo, class-specific tabs)? That would allow us to store even more items than a few extra shared tabs, but wouldn't change anything as far as memory usage is concerned.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
There’s been a lot of conversation about stash tabs from PTR. We’d like to clarify the confusion and answer some questions regarding the changes and updates dealing with stash tabs.


Hello, and thanks for the additional feedback.
I'm glad to see that the game is still being worked on, and can't wait to play with the new content and tweaks that the patch will bring us.

About the stash tabs however, I'm still confused by some of your explanations, and I think that the community would be thankful if you could provide a little more. Maybe by going a bit deeper in the technical side if possible ?

Why was it tested on the PTR in the first place ?
Could you not have entirely tested it internally ? I mean, if that's primarily an engine constraint / a client side RAM problem, it should have been obvious, regardless of hardware specifications, to detect it on your side, no ?
I really don't understand why the community had to be involved - and ultimately disappointed - in that process...

Furthermore, like many others in this thread, I don't quite get the reasoning behind the time gate. Do you need that time to fix / circumvent the issues that the maximized stash will cause ? Are you planning some heavy behind the scene work on the engine ?
It would surprise me, and that's why some more tech oriented details would be really appreciated.

Have a nice day !
^^This. Well put Duke.

Yeah Nev has tried well to do something here but unfortunately so many of us see thru the spin.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
There’s been a lot of conversation about stash tabs from PTR. We’d like to clarify the confusion and answer some questions regarding the changes and updates dealing with stash tabs.

We use PTR to vet and test changes, and there were some unexpected, negative effects on gameplay from enabling more stash tabs – especially for players on consoles.

Unfortunately, we will be unable to provide any additional stash tabs to console players, and we are limiting the number for PC to keep Diablo III the fast paced, loot explosion we all love.

You’ll find a deeper dive into the why via the questions & answers below.

Q: What are the technical limitations preventing us from adding more stash tabs?

To explain this, we have to start with the foundation on which Diablo III is built.

Most objects in the games are actors: special effects, enemies, summons, followers, and items. Gems, weapons, armor, potions, pets, crafting materials, and more; all the things we love to horde. All players in a party sync on everything that every player has - in memory, all the time.

That doesn't sound like a lot at first, but it adds up very fast. The more actors active in a game (like enemies on screen AND items in your stash), the more the game will tax your system's memory. This issue on console is particularly difficult because there is a limit to how much system memory we can access. PC is more flexible in this manner, which is why we're able to add more stash space there.

On console, we tried lowering the number of tabs to be added, but there was still an unacceptable rise in latency and rubberbanding. As much as we'd all enjoy the additional stash space, it's not worth the cost to gameplay.

Q: Why are we rolling out stash space with Seasons?

This was always our intent. The intended experience was to unlock tabs as part of the seasonal journey. We also now understand where the wheels fall off from too much load, and it can’t function the other way.

Q: Why can't we make stash space available to non-Seasonal players?

We explored options to make this happen, but it came down to a conflict in how Seasonal rewards roll into non-Seasonal permanence. Rewards would be earned twice, and we’d end up in the state of poor performance we’ve been trying to avoid.

We recognize not everyone prefers Seasons, but we do want to emphasize that any Stash earned in Season does roll into non-Seasonal characters.


No, there's no confusion, you are confused. Let me make it crystal clear since you don't hear us.

Your idea is garbage, period. Tell the little turd chomper designers to change it, enough with the excuses.

"we have to start with the foundation on which Diablo III is built"

Yea you had since release to build a foundation, game is nearly dead now, chop chop.

Here is a solution for your inept developers, remember that little useless NPC peddler in act 2, yeah just give him a bunch of stash space we can buy for gold.

I literally solved your stupid problem in 2 minutes.
Its hilarious to even suggest that Blizz programmers cant code a "non season journey" for ns players to earn tabs and once this ns tab is earned, the ability to earn seasonal tab is switched off.

Interestingly enough, they CAN code a system where if one seasonal character earns Haerdrigs gift, the ability of other seasonal characters to earn the gift is switched off.

Go figure.
Btw why is the game syncing full stashes across all players in a party?

Why isnt it only syncing all equipped gear and recent unsalvaged /unrolled drops since everything else in our stashes is Account Bound?
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis
There’s been a lot of conversation about stash tabs from PTR. We’d like to clarify the confusion and answer some questions regarding the changes and updates dealing with stash tabs.

We use PTR to vet and test changes, and there were some unexpected, negative effects on gameplay from enabling more stash tabs – especially for players on consoles.

Unfortunately, we will be unable to provide any additional stash tabs to console players, and we are limiting the number for PC to keep Diablo III the fast paced, loot explosion we all love.

You’ll find a deeper dive into the why via the questions & answers below.

Q: What are the technical limitations preventing us from adding more stash tabs?

To explain this, we have to start with the foundation on which Diablo III is built.

Most objects in the games are actors: special effects, enemies, summons, followers, and items. Gems, weapons, armor, potions, pets, crafting materials, and more; all the things we love to horde. All players in a party sync on everything that every player has - in memory, all the time.

That doesn't sound like a lot at first, but it adds up very fast. The more actors active in a game (like enemies on screen AND items in your stash), the more the game will tax your system's memory. This issue on console is particularly difficult because there is a limit to how much system memory we can access. PC is more flexible in this manner, which is why we're able to add more stash space there.

On console, we tried lowering the number of tabs to be added, but there was still an unacceptable rise in latency and rubberbanding. As much as we'd all enjoy the additional stash space, it's not worth the cost to gameplay.

Q: Why are we rolling out stash space with Seasons?

This was always our intent. The intended experience was to unlock tabs as part of the seasonal journey. We also now understand where the wheels fall off from too much load, and it can’t function the other way.

Q: Why can't we make stash space available to non-Seasonal players?

We explored options to make this happen, but it came down to a conflict in how Seasonal rewards roll into non-Seasonal permanence. Rewards would be earned twice, and we’d end up in the state of poor performance we’ve been trying to avoid.

We recognize not everyone prefers Seasons, but we do want to emphasize that any Stash earned in Season does roll into non-Seasonal characters.


This can only mean three things about the current Blizzard: chaotic, unethical, and incomptent. Chaotic is for sure anyhow. Unethical and incomptent at least pick one.
04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis

Q: What are the technical limitations preventing us from adding more stash tabs?

To explain this, we have to start with the foundation on which Diablo III is built.

Most objects in the games are actors: special effects, enemies, summons, followers, and items. Gems, weapons, armor, potions, pets, crafting materials, and more; all the things we love to horde. All players in a party sync on everything that every player has - in memory, all the time.

That doesn't sound like a lot at first, but it adds up very fast. The more actors active in a game (like enemies on screen AND items in your stash), the more the game will tax your system's memory. This issue on console is particularly difficult because there is a limit to how much system memory we can access. PC is more flexible in this manner, which is why we're able to add more stash space there.

On console, we tried lowering the number of tabs to be added, but there was still an
unacceptable rise in latency and rubberbanding. As much as we'd all enjoy the
additional stash space, it's not worth the cost to gameplay.


I'm sorry, but as someone who is currently one of the main programmers in a community effort working to restore an old MMO, and a software developer by profession:

Unless you guys do a technical breakdown of this, which lol, that would be a first: This is either a complete load of crap, or your game is poorly made.

I recently re-wrote the character storage mechanics for this MMO. This excuse you give us makes no sense. The MMO I work on allows player owned apartments, as well as a mobile "stash" space type deal they can access from various worlds. We have no limit to how many player owned apartments they can own, and each apartment allows 20 cabinets. Each cabinet can hold a 40 items, not counting stacks (as in, construction components allow a stack of 255. You can have 40 stacks of 255 construction components per cabinet.) This game I'm working on, when we got it's source, was the software manifestation of a tire fire. It's over 15 years old, and you're sitting here telling me we, with this complete dumpster fire of a game, can do what a multi-billion-dollar AAA developer could not?

Please. Do a technical breakdown so this actually makes sense. Data in a stash should be nothing but the bytes representing it's stats. The stash data should not be actively involved in anything regarding combat, you can only access it in town! So how in the world is this causing degraded game play? Furthermore, each stash tab shouldn't be entirely loaded when you load the stash, just the one you're actively on, though to be fair I fail to see how loading the measly amount of stash space we get now should lag anything.

Furthermore, you could mod Diablo 2 into having effectively unlimited stash tabs. It worked fine! Oh, and PoE seems to work just fine with it vOv

04/26/2019 11:05 AMPosted by Nevalistis

Q: Why can't we make stash space available to non-Seasonal players?

We explored options to make this happen, but it came down to a conflict in how Seasonal rewards roll into non-Seasonal permanence. Rewards would be earned twice, and we’d end up in the state of poor performance we’ve been trying to avoid.

We recognize not everyone prefers Seasons, but we do want to emphasize that any Stash earned in Season does roll into non-Seasonal characters.


Sounds like another made up excuse stapled on top of an already sketchy technical limitation to me.

Frankly I'm about done with this game, and Blizzard as a company. I've already dropped my WoW account because the game sucks now, and I'm seriously considering dropping this too, and not buying your next Diablo game. I'm tired of you guys telling me how I need to have fun, and making up crap like this to support it.
5 extra bags wont even be close to fix bag issue we need atleast 4 bags per class that makes 28 bags of total to store the set items and gear from all classes.

i read developers say it will couse laggs whit more bags. Im pretty sure they can fix that. They probably have one of the better gaming programers out there and they cant fix a silly bag solution like that.

Im not a programmer but somting tells me why not just make 4-5 closed bags to every class witch u can only open on that class and have 1-2 shared bags where u can swith up and trade gear around to ur classes that means u gona just have 7 bags up in game when u play. Thats even less then todays u have 12 bags up.

Or just have it like today 12 bags and make maybe somting called "BANK" where u only can open in menus and lets say u put 100 bags there and i can switch up and trade my what and witch gear i want to have in game in my 12x bags
Let's assume everything that Nev says is true (I'm rather cynical and by extension, D3 was poorly designed).

Here is an alternate (albeit suboptimal solution): Please give everyone 5 extra character slots.

This would not affect in game performance and would liberate some stash space with the use of mules.
04/28/2019 08:57 AMPosted by MicroRNA
Let's assume everything that Nev says is true (I'm rather cynical and by extension, D3 was poorly designed).

Here is an alternate (albeit suboptimal solution): Please give everyone 5 extra character slots.

This would not affect in game performance and would liberate some stash space with the use of mules.


I would rather they:
- Instantly reward the remaining stash tabs at the end of this season
- Remove the stash tab from the season rewards going forward
- Then add more stash tabs to be bought for gold going forward

Personally, switching mule characters is just meh to me. I mean, it'd be nice to have more characters in general, but I don't care for mules. We shouldn't have to keep up with mules on a modern game. Fix the problems with this one, which I have a strong feeling aren't what Nevalistis said, and let us play the game how we want.
04/27/2019 12:06 PMPosted by PardalBR
Well i gave the solution. But players are whiners. They are baby whiners they want tabs on the main stash and they dont care about other player low pc gear/memory. So do nothing and let they whine just ignore forum again. Everything you say they whine so ignore them again :)


Again I am not buying it. Unless they are saying that in a team my stash is part of the problem. Even though I cannot trade a single item that is in my stash with the other players. Only what drops during the time I am with them in that two hour window. So my stash shouldn't be included. More so at the beginning of the time that I am spending with them.

Further what would prevent the very ones that would have the problem from jumping through their hoops for the stash space. Then the problem appears in that person's game because he is with others that have also gotten the tabs.

What do they expect in the next 5 seasons that players with those low end systems will have them upgraded. What will guarantee that will happen. The majority of those that would be affected by the stash tabs could very well be the ones getting them by playing seasons.

You have to also consider there are no doubt more solo players than teams. So unless the stash space of everyone in the same region loads into your personal game I don't see how 5 seasons will make that much of a difference if the person in question doesn't get a new computer.

04/27/2019 10:50 AMPosted by MissCheetah
The way I look at it - if Blizz really wanted our money like people say, they would be selling stash tabs. Not selling them means they likely can't get them working in a stable fashion - not to the extent we want anyway. They are counting on Seasons keeping the number of people with lots of stash tabs down.


IIRC they sell stash tabs in China. That means that the game engine in that region has to support it. So why not use that engine for the other regions. That shouldn't be too much of a problem and shouldn't cost a ton of money to do. That way they can sell us stash tabs and character slots. They would get more money from us and have more money for the game.
04/28/2019 10:13 AMPosted by ShadowAegis

04/27/2019 10:50 AMPosted by MissCheetah
The way I look at it - if Blizz really wanted our money like people say, they would be selling stash tabs. Not selling them means they likely can't get them working in a stable fashion - not to the extent we want anyway. They are counting on Seasons keeping the number of people with lots of stash tabs down.


IIRC they sell stash tabs in China. That means that the game engine in that region has to support it. So why not use that engine for the other regions. That shouldn't be too much of a problem and shouldn't cost a ton of money to do. That way they can sell us stash tabs and character slots. They would get more money from us and have more money for the game.


Let's be real, it's not an engine limitation, it's a "blizzard doesn't want to do it for some reason so they're making crap up" limitation.

- Memory usage? Please. Items are simple. They're an item ID, which would probably be a 4 byte integer type, the number of affixes on the item, some affix IDs with some related data (ie: affix ID for crit chance and how much crit chance it has.) So, a few more bytes. Multiplied by the number of affixes on the item. Plus I guess the suffix/prefix stuff for the title (which is most likely an ID referencing the string of the suffix/prefix.) Plus three gem sockets, which should just point to an ID of the gem inserted. They should be able to easily fit the entirety of an inventory/stash item in less than 1KB of ram without a problem. Even at 1KB per item, that puts you at 100,000 items in 100MB of ram. Memory should be a complete non-issue for this.

- Lag issues? I fail to see how items in your stash should have anything to do with performance outside of anything but actively having the stash tab up. My game shouldn't care what is in my stash while I'm doing a rift, I can't even access it. Not buying it, unless their client/server setup sucks and the server is dumping the entirety of my character specs, inventory, stash, and armory information on my client every update. If that's the case then yeah, that's extremely stupid, unnecessary, inefficient, and could cause bandwidth/lag issues. It should only be sending what I actively need, with proper client-side prediction where needed.

Peoples system specs have absolutely nothing to do with this, unless the game is very badly made. I just can't see it. Sorry blizzard, not buying it at all for a second.
04/27/2019 01:07 PMPosted by Pariahmonkey
04/27/2019 12:17 PMPosted by MissCheetah
The only part that is up to the D3 team, would be making the game engine work with the extra tabs. IF that worked, they could just essentially get cash in buckets full if they wanted by selling tabs.


Way to tow the company line in regards to stash causing performance issues. The tabs are gated for metrics over time, pure player manipulation. Nothing more.

The code for the auction house transactions exists within the codebase and could easily have been adapted to trigger additional tabs in the same manner that buying them for gold within the game itself. Players could buy sell in game items within the game at one point using real money across multiple currencies, and could be easily modified to sell in game items today such as stash tabs, pets, wings, banners, transmogs...etc.

The only thing causing Blizzard to not follow through on these things is blatant disrespect of it's playerbase and arrogance that it's playerbase will just hang around because of the franchise...despite how poorly it's aging and being ran by Activision.


Since they sell stash space in China region they can use that game engine. If it is the same as ours in America's region then there should be no problem for the extra stash space. I agree with you and it is just their for the MAU (monthly average user) numbers
04/28/2019 10:35 AMPosted by Coreinsanity
- Memory usage? Please. Items are simple. They're an item ID, which would probably be a 4 byte integer type, the number of affixes on the item, some affix IDs with some related data (ie: affix ID for crit chance and how much crit chance it has.) So, a few more bytes. Multiplied by the number of affixes on the item. Plus I guess the suffix/prefix stuff for the title (which is most likely an ID referencing the string of the suffix/prefix.) Plus three gem sockets, which should just point to an ID of the gem inserted. They should be able to easily fit the entirety of an inventory/stash item in less than 1KB of ram without a problem. Even at 1KB per item, that puts you at 100,000 items in 100MB of ram. Memory should be a complete non-issue for this.

I had a similar thought over on EU a couple of weeks ago...
https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/17626062483?page=1#post-12
04/28/2019 10:46 AMPosted by Meteorblade
04/28/2019 10:35 AMPosted by Coreinsanity
- Memory usage? Please. Items are simple. They're an item ID, which would probably be a 4 byte integer type, the number of affixes on the item, some affix IDs with some related data (ie: affix ID for crit chance and how much crit chance it has.) So, a few more bytes. Multiplied by the number of affixes on the item. Plus I guess the suffix/prefix stuff for the title (which is most likely an ID referencing the string of the suffix/prefix.) Plus three gem sockets, which should just point to an ID of the gem inserted. They should be able to easily fit the entirety of an inventory/stash item in less than 1KB of ram without a problem. Even at 1KB per item, that puts you at 100,000 items in 100MB of ram. Memory should be a complete non-issue for this.

I had a similar thought over on EU a couple of weeks ago...
https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/d3/topic/17626062483?page=1#post-12


Yup spot on.

To add to that, I'm fairly certain they use google protobuffers (based on some stuff I saw about saves with regards to the switch copy.) If that's the case, the actual at-rest storage is even less because it packs the bits to save space:

https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/encoding

But, could be wrong. Even without any kind of compression or packing, you're still looking at very little space.
04/28/2019 10:53 AMPosted by Coreinsanity
To add to that, I'm fairly certain they use google protobuffers (based on some stuff I saw about saves with regards to the switch copy.) If that's the case, the actual at-rest storage is even less because it packs the bits to save space:

https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/encoding

But, could be wrong. Even without any kind of compression or packing, you're still looking at very little space.


They wouldn't use compression in the live environment (i.e. the active app) because decompressing RAM is CPU intensive and eats significant amounts of CPU cycles. Apple's MacOS (OS X) does this when free RAM reaches a certain threshold. It will resort to compressing (and decompressing) RAM before it resorts to swap, and then will fall back to swap. And if both swap and compressed RAM are in use simultaneously, performance tanks. Massively.

D3 might use compression for an autosave slot that resides in RAM, but will not use it for actively cached items. Performance would bomb on the Switch if that were true as it's already running the game on a CPU bottlenecked SoC.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum