5 GREAT IMPROVEMENTS that take 5 mins to code

General Discussion
Prev 1 18 19 20 26 Next
This is still a thread for people asking to be spoon fed. Sigh...
so ..

crit dmg per XXX str for non barb

ias per xxx dex for non dh and monk

anything suggested for intelligence ??

crit chance perhaps ??

however, on all of these, i think its fair to suggest that they need to be diminishing returns somehow.

10%, 5%, 2.5%, 1.25%, 1.25%, 1.25% per hundred after the first 200

so 300 would get the first 10%

something like that sound reasonable ??


Without knowing how all the systems interact or what cascading affect these changes would have on the rest of the game, it's rather naive to suggest that these are "5-minutes changes".

The problem is not so much the suggestions themselves -- which may or may not improve the game -- but that the OP has all the smugness of someone who declares himself an expert after completing his entry level coursework.


I read the OP as being non-literal for the purpose of making a point.

i.e. These are relatively simple fixes that don't involve changing animations etc

With the obvious implication being that if Blizzard doesn't implement it in the very next hotfix then they're lazy and ignorant, because he, in his infinite wisdom as a "software engineer", has deemed these fixes to be "easy".

Problem is, this is the kind of game where the smallest change in one part can have a significant impact on the whole, so without thinking about what the broader impact will be and what other game systems will have to be changed, balanced, and tested to compensate, it is absurd to declare these are "5 minutes" fixes, even in the non-literal sense. Someone who claims to be a software engineer should know better.

:)
As a software engineer, you should know that nothing takes 5 minutes to code and release. Testing is essential and takes way longer than 5 minutes for a project this big even if it is automated.

For legendary weapons, the argument is not consistent. Why not add an affix to every weapon? My 5-affix rare sucks, let's add another affix so it doesn't suck. There has to be a ladder of item quality. Some stuff has to suck so that other stuff can be good.

For monster density, I see no problems. You should only be concerned with the elite and champion packs and the density of these is approximately equal throughout the acts. With the MP introduction in last patch, this problem is solved.

For the non-primary stats, I do like this. Really like this. The current bonuses from non-Vit and non-primary stats are just way too low to be worth anything.

For removing duplicates, while it is a simple change in code, it is a huge change in performance. While checking for any individual item may be easy, doing this millions of times a day could be quite taxing and it is only fixing a symptom and not addressing the cause. Having two identical items is possible due to the random number generator, but it is just highly unlikely. As several people and videos have shown, duplicate items are being produced either through cheating the game or a faulty random number generator. Either way it is up to Blizzard to fix this problem correctly.
I personally would prefer the stats for DH going more to armor or resist which are both severely lacking and hard to accommodate into a decent build. Especially resist since I almost always require my equip to have resist all in order to give him a fighting chance if he gets walled etc. In either case I agree, these are not ridiculous bonuses but would certainly help AH items move more and allow greater options in order to fill secondary gaps our characters might have such as Attack Speed or Low Resists...even if this was restricted to say 500 points after which the bonuses would not be added would certainly help! Good post...
Problem is, this is the kind of game where the smallest change in one part can have a significant impact on the whole, so without thinking about what the broader impact will be and what other game systems will have to be changed, balanced, and tested to compensate, it is absurd to declare these are "5 minutes" fixes, even in the non-literal sense. Someone who claims to be a software engineer should know better.


Dude, the whole ecosystem is whack right now -- balance issues all over the place.

There are only two swords (EF and Skorn) that most people use, and one class (Barbarian) that people feel good about right now.

These will help the situation, not worsen it.
For removing duplicates, while it is a simple change in code, it is a huge change in performance. While checking for any individual item may be easy, doing this millions of times a day could be quite taxing and it is only fixing a symptom and not addressing the cause.


Not sure that the AH gets "millions" of new items a day... but it definitely gets millions of highly-targeted searches, which theoretically run similar queries to this fix I'm requesting.
I love your suggestions, and as a fellow programmer I also agree that these are simple changes that would take little time to code and very little testing.

fixing dead legendaries and duped items need to be addressed if this game is to continue with the current population.

We need something. It doesn't need to be much... just something to break the hatred when that 63 item drops and you realize its not worth the time picking it up to vendor.


Lol what web site did you guys by you're degrees from? Adding a socket to the legendaries would throw a wrench into what little balance we have now. You trivialize the basic chore of balancing the game in regards to both classes and damage. A socket is easy, but the effect it would have when players start plugging in various gems ect is a little more complex than adding a socket. How many variables do you think the coding for damage do you think there are? Now take these and throw in the number of possible affects random socketing would add. Now factor in that some already have sockets in them, what happens then? Some roll with sockets some roll without all you are asking is they all have sockets. Some items don't support any socketsand I'd guess there is a reason for this.

Then as density in act one, it was basically a training level to start with. All you want is an easier path to items by adding more mobs to the easiest level in the game.
You are basically a joke.


You're completely wrong. Making Inferno quality legendary items able to compete with rares is not going to break the game.

As for density, you are right in that the monster types are easier I suppose, so it doesn't have to be equal to A3 but close enough to actually be worth peoples time. Change of scenery is nice but efficiency will win for the majority of gamers every time.

You seem to forget that finding items is a large component of the game.



I did start my own business, and recently sold it for a lot of money :)


Same here, I have my business but that doesn't mean you know how my business works or vice versa. It would be easy for you to say to change things in my business that will help me improve it but then will it be that easy to do.

Going back to the topic, you don't personally know how they make things work, how they organise data and such. You are only looking at what players can see but not what the dev's see. A small amount of data that you mentioned does not mean it does not affect all the data it is attached to.

And just like an iceberg, you see what is above the water but do not see what's underneath.


How could increasing the random number of affixes for a handfull of items be hard? It could be as simple as changing a single number, since unlike before, the random affixes on legendary items is no different than any other (every subsequent affix used to get progressively smaller).

By your own logic, you can't see what is underneath either, so perhaps it really is that easy.
11/01/2012 10:43 AMPosted by Brygo
And mine would increase gameplay enjoyment much more...

How do you know?

That's the other problem, you're assuming your suggestions will only have a positive effect on the game when you can't possibly know that. For one thing, you don't know how all the underlying systems interconnect and how a change in one part of the game might affect another part -- or even the whole. People have brought up some legitimate criticisms of your ideas which you scoff at and dismiss with the wave of the hand (so much for being able to accept feedback).
11/01/2012 12:47 PMPosted by UndeadFred
By your own logic, you can't see what is underneath either, so perhaps it really is that easy.


By my logic, I know 1/8 of the iceberg can be seen on top of the water and the rest is below the water.

And that is why im saying:

You are only looking at what players can see but not what the dev's see. A small amount of data that you mentioned does not mean it does not affect all the data it is attached to.
I like all your ideas However except one,

You eliminate a user created economy by dis-allowing people to offer the same exact item for less
10/31/2012 02:18 AMPosted by brotatoes
I heard Blizzard is hiring, submit your resume and they'll review it as soon as possible.


He would never get hired as his ideas make sense.
10/31/2012 05:55 PMPosted by MasterDavid
Your and idiot


You may want to check your spelling and grammar before you call people an idiot.
4) Make the sorceress shut up.

Seriously. For the love of God. Make it an option menu check box or something. I literally can't play when my girlfriend is home because if she hears the enchantress she will think less of me.


That one made me laugh out loud, she does get a bit annoying doesn't she? That's why I just play with no sound and crank up my music now.

I like all your ideas though. I have farmed act 3 and act 1 equally over my time but I won't definitely like more density in some parts of act 1.

I like the idea for number 3, it would fix the whole Achilles's Heel of a useless stat to an otherwise God-Like item problem that comes up so much. Though I do see how this could take a lot of effort.

Oh yeah, and a fix to all the unusable legendaries would be sweet.
And mine would increase gameplay enjoyment much more...

How do you know?

That's the other problem, you're assuming your suggestions will only have a positive effect on the game when you can't possibly know that. For one thing, you don't know how all the underlying systems interconnect and how a change in one part of the game might affect another part -- or even the whole. People have brought up some legitimate criticisms of your ideas which you scoff at and dismiss with the wave of the hand (so much for being able to accept feedback).


I honestly, after reading through some of it ( no desire to read 19 pages of bleh bleh bleh ), feel that regardless of his supposed software engineer skills, that he totally lost me on point #4, as to me it makes all his other points, which might be decent, and while several others are ridiculous , seem highly suspect and really strange.

I don't deny #4 can get repetitive at the very least, it can be turned off, but to me it adds some levity and dynamics to a game , which adds a level of immersion and life to it.

Apparently, to each his own; but really..and this one totally blew it for me,- consider alternatives if you were serious about the whole girlfriend thing, as that is just pitiful and laughable. If that's what it takes, you're in serious trouble dude. At the end of the day, maybe turn down your sensitivities , or ya as others have clearly stated,,mute the thing if its that troublesome ;) You do yourself no credit on that one, on any level.

Oh and not that it matters, but +1 to last thing MountainMan said.

cu
caJAI
11/01/2012 12:46 PMPosted by Brygo
Problem is, this is the kind of game where the smallest change in one part can have a significant impact on the whole, so without thinking about what the broader impact will be and what other game systems will have to be changed, balanced, and tested to compensate, it is absurd to declare these are "5 minutes" fixes, even in the non-literal sense. Someone who claims to be a software engineer should know better.

Dude, the whole ecosystem is whack right now -- balance issues all over the place.

There are only two swords (EF and Skorn) that most people use, and one class (Barbarian) that people feel good about right now.

These will help the situation, not worsen it.

Really? So you've asked every single person who plays Diablo 3, and they all agree with you on these points? You're being rather myopic, I'm afraid.

What if we start from the opposite side and assume that the majority of people are generally happy with how Diablo 3 stands at the moment. Now what do you think of the considerable time and effort it would take to implement your suggestions? (And this is assuming they would have the positive benefits you think they will, which is in no way guaranteed.)
I would like the AH search updated with all the Legendary stats. Right now it's impossible to filter legendaries by affixes that won't normally appear on that item type (ex: Spectral Blade damage on rings).
i love this thread, great suggestions

str reduce CC duration
int increase resource regen
dex increase move and atk speed
vit increase life regen
i dont anything about code but i agree with the changes you are suggesting
I agree with monster density. I litterally avoid 4-6 monsters pack jus so I can get to the ''meaty'' ones. The satisfaction of plowing through 30+ monsters is what Diablo is all about imo.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum