- Registered User
Member for 13 years, 6 months, and 25 days
Last active Thu, Dec, 1 2016 18:16:48
- 19 Followers
- 4,359 Total Posts
- 66 Thanks
Sep 30, 2011Exalted Soul (increases spirit by 100) and Chant of Resonance (1 Spirit per second while a mantra is active) could both be used offensively. Also, Mantra of Conviction is essentially an offensive passive, and when combined with the Golden Rune (heals players when they use melee attacks on a enemy effected by MoC), it makes it so you wouldn't have to refresh Guiding Light.Posted in: Monk: The Inner Sanctuary
Also, @Diablo said that the amount of skills is likely to change before release, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Monk got some passives we haven't seen yet. Especially since he has 2 less than the Barb. That being said, passives across all classes seem to be more for utility/defense/regen than offense.
Sep 27, 2011Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
I'm pretty sure the SC2 beta ended something like a month before release. And they've said that they don't want the D3 beta to be anywhere near the size of the SC2 beta.Quote from Sinke
Quote from Jackzor
Yea I don't know what you meant by that but there's never going to be an open beta. Its always going to be invite only. As unfortunate as that is, it's true.
didnt they opened the beta for SC2 just before the actual release date of the game? like, a week before?
imo, think they will do that with D3 beta...
Sep 26, 2011Well judging by the software bugs that have been reported they're at least something of an issue. Not to mention that they probably want to test the AH extensively before release. And beyond that they seem to just be rolling out a major overhaul of the runestones system (which, at the earliest, started right after the press event and we all know how Blizzard is with iterations).Posted in: News & Announcements
Lets not forget that the earliest realistic estimate for release was around Christmas, so delaying to early 2012 really isn't a big deal. It doesn't really need any explanation beyond something like, I don't know, the new runestone system. This is Blizzard we're talking about, they delay games all the time. The idea that some 'higher power' or WoW influenced a Blizzard delay is more than a bit ridiculous. Did we all forget about SoonTM or something? They're notorious for this. IMO its pretty clearly a result of their development process, nothing more.
Sep 26, 2011Its most certainly not established what the falling star is. Although there are some hints through artwork that it could be an angel, we really don't know. And @phranx, only the Sin War books are canon, the other books aren't. That being said I think the civil war between Azmodan and Belial does play a role in D3.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Sep 24, 2011Apparently Hatred generation was also decreased.Posted in: News & Announcements
Official Blizzard Quote:
Yes, but the rate at which it regenerates is about half of what it was previously. By using a skill that generates Hatred you can get it back faster, though.
About a year ago we began to realize that the way we were making people depend on their resource for some classes just wasn't very fun, and so we began to roll out a new skill cost philosophy. Essentially the overall idea is that at any given time (within reason) you should have some option to use a skill and be able to do something, even if you're out of resource. What that means is we can't just have skills that depend on resources to use, but there needs to be a mix of skills that do cost resources, potentially resource generator skills, and some free-to-cast skills (maybe with a cooldown).
The witch doctor has had mana recovery skills since forever, the monk has almost always had spirit generators, so it was really just a matter of rolling that philosophy out to the other classes, and demon hunter was the most recent (and visible now that beta is live and we're exposing all that data).
Bonus! It makes demon hunter build diversity explode like woah.
Sep 22, 2011Yea the people who got in through beta opt-in are certainly few and far between. It seems as though most of the people who got in this wave are press and the like and not much else, although there certainly were a few lucky people who got in randomly. As Winged said its the first and (probably) the smallest wave of invites we'll see. Obviously you'll here it from us if suddenly a bunch more people start to get invited, but as of right now its still a very limited beta.Posted in: News & Announcements
It should be noted, though, that this is going to remain very small throughout its duration. Its never going to get up to the size of, say, the SC2 beta. So although future waves of invites will hopefully be larger, that doesn't mean its ever going to get all that big. Hopefully, because of the limited content, Blizzard will have to send out many waves of invites in order to maintain the amount of active people they are aiming for. That's just something we're going to have to find out about as time passes.
Sep 21, 2011Posted in: News & Announcements
I think it works well for the DH, but we're just not getting a good look at any real Discipline skills. It makes sense that traps and damage would be separated into two resources, and as Force points out in his DH Let's Play, it makes it so that it doesn't need as many cooldowns for things like Vault since they can allow you to run out of one resource. I guess it could make sense for the Monk, but Spirit is just exactly what works for him. Combos to build up spirit, and big finishing attacks to spend it.Quote from TheDFO
1) Does it strike anyone else that the whole hatred/discipline split energy would make more sense with the Monk? He could used Discipline to close distances quick, hatred to deal a lot of damage, and then discipline out again to avoid damage. It just doesn't strike me as that useful for the class that had ranged attacks...that let it attack...at range, from mostly melee monsters.
From what I saw there was definitely a decrease in other stats if an item had MF or exp gain on it. Like you'll find a belt with +4 Attack and another with +2 Attack +2% MF. If thats what you have a problem with, then just forget I said that2) Did Blizz just give up with the idea of not making anyone choose between damage and MF? I mean, sure, maybe MF no longer takes the place of damage dealing attributes, but you still have the choice of "Do I want the MF attack belt of fire, or the Super attack belt of fire?" Unless it is on an item that NEVER affects damage (charms?), or one that someone can jump to your newest item, then it will always factor in which item to use, alongside damage. And that means...we're right back where we started?
What they said about MF is that they didn't want it to be something people stacked to the negligence of power. And in places (ie gems) that only carry one stat, they didn't want gem slots that give power to overlap with the ones that give MF. But obviously that doesn't mean they can just have an item with +4 Attack be the same level/value as +4 Attack +4 MF. Obviously there has to be a trade off, or everyone would just always take the one that has MF as well.
Sep 21, 2011From what I can tell there haven't been (m)any invites from opt-in. I think that even though technically the closed beta has started, its still mainly F&F and press.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Also, the only sensible way to do a stress test is to ramp it up over time. If what you're testing is server stability, you're clearly not 100% confident in it, and as such you can't just immediately push it to its limits. So I'm sure the beta will grow over time, but never to something on the scale of the SC2 beta unfortunately.
Sep 21, 2011I've gotten complaints from people for including the looks of items in articles I write. As such, it would make a lot more sense to have a lore video. Spoilers piss a lot of people off (granted, those probably aren't the same people who are watching beta streams/videos). Lets not forget that Force's Diablo Lore series is one of the better ways to get caught up on the lore behind the game, so you can hardly say he doesn't care about lore. He's going to have another four videos on the beta (one for each class) and was talking about how he was going to have a rundown of the crafting available in the beta. I'm sure you'll be able to hear the conversations at some point.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Also, as other people have pointed out, him not showing exactly what you wanted to see doesn't mean it isn't good. He still paused for most of the lore books, and video and audio quality like his was extremely hard to find up until now. Obviously you want to see what you want to see, but understand that your views aren't always the same as everyone else's.
Sep 21, 2011Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Yea I don't think these are at all finalized. For example we saw the WD 'tentacles' armor set at BlizzCon, and the tendrils looked black and more snake-like, as opposed to the weird green they show in these pictures. Theres also a few sets with absurd amounts of clipping going on, although I guess thats a possibility even on finalized sets. Overall, the textures and such just don't look like they're done.Quote from Punch you in the Jeans
I don't know... are these mock ups or the real in-game look? I'm confused because in another post on battle net they were saying these weren't the real thing. I was sort of expecting the tiers to have a higher quality texture or something (see character pages such as this - http://us.battle.net/d3/en/class/barbarian/, animated barb beside the lore that has a nice deal of lustre and sharp detail) That tier 17 Barb armour looks like something you'd see on archlord :/ jus' sayin <_<
As a side question - One of the pics is a DH with blue/silver armor, with the helm having 2 tusks. Is this a set? Because it sure isn't a tier from what I've seen! And it looks sweet
Seeing as a lot of the datamined stuff that was revealed early on during the beta ended up seeming like it was from a build or two ago when compared to the skill calculator, I wouldn't be surprised if these armor sets are also from a similar amount of time ago.
Sep 21, 2011Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Sure, but from what I see most people don't really even notice them until they've killed the monsters. Most traps I've seen have maybe 5, mostly less, monsters below them. And I feel like it could even seem less reasonable. Right now its 'oh, they've obviously done that for gameplay reasons' whereas if they added some puny effect, it would be 'oh, this effects me in an entirely different way than the monsters around me.'Quote from Zero(pS)
Wouldn't it involve an interesting decision, then?If there was any penalty, I'd literally never use the falling walls as a Barb or Monk. Ever.
Isn't it a still good tradeoff 95% of the time? 200 area of effect damage on 5-8 monsters, killing them in 2-3 seconds, for a 2 second 30% slow (for instance).
And the main point of my last post was that the effect would only apply to Barbs and Monks, even if the trade off is worth it, that just doesn't sit well with me.
But the problem is that for melee characters its not 'getting caught.' Its using the trap and not leaping/dashing away from it (and, most likely, the combat in the area as well).They added the destruction in to help immersion and I cheered, it looks great and is a lovely extra touch. I do really feel that they need to add some kind of repercussion to the player that gets caught by them too though.
Also, we have no idea what traps in other areas will be. Its extremely likely that there will be traps that the only 'realistic' way to punish the player for being in the area is by damaging them. Even if its a minuscule amount, I guarantee plenty of people will die as a result of them. Even if the trap doesn't land the killing blow, some griefer could simply trigger them any time they see a player in the area, and especially if that player is the tank, it could get them killed.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Jun 9, 2011Exactly. And once you get it working for the PS3 (as in get a good console control scheme, etc) then its even easier to get it on the 360. If they're going to have it on both platforms (which is probably what's going to happen) then they would start on the PS3, so a job posting for PS3 positions doesn't disqualify the 360 at all.Posted in: News
Jun 9, 2011Posted in: News
Clearly thats not the case if you already own a PS3.Quote from Xerlane
Having a mouse and keyboard connected to a PS3 seems kinda silly and ruins the "console" feel of the system. Also why don't you just buy a better computer if your old one can't handle it. I'm sure you can get a better computer for less money than that of a PS3
And the most likely reason they only have PS3 job listings on the site is because they're probably going to end up putting it on the PS3 and 360, but they, like most developers nowadays, are going to make it for the PS3 and bring it over to the 360. Apparently doing it the other way around is considerably more complicated.
I very much doubt D3 would end up being a PS3 exclusive considering Blizzard has never been a company that limits what platforms they release games on (just look at how long they've been putting games on Macs) and Activision rarely, if ever, releases PS3 exclusives.
May 22, 2011All of the effects of the Worldstone, including its suppression of the Nephalem's power, are gone now that the stone is destroyed. However, that probably doesn't mean that all humans will suddenly have the power of the Nephalem, or otherwise there would be no reason for only five heroes, seeing as humanity would be able to more than defend itself.Posted in: News
May 21, 2011Posted in: News
Well I figured that if you thought they were too cheap, that also means they are reasonable for what you get. Or well I guess more than reasonable.Quote from Eso
There needs to be an option for too cheap.
Tickets sell for around $300 on ebay, so the price doesn't match demand. Most people that reach checkout buy the maximum number of tickets because even if they can't use them all, they know they call sell them for a profit.
May 20, 2011Posted in: News
Well at Comic-Con, the people have to pay to set up booths, so the 'weight' of the cost to put on the event isn't entirely on the customer. At BlizzCon, tickets and the gift store are really the only way Blizzard makes back any of their money. That being said, you do bring up a legitimate point.Quote from Eldius
Blizzcon tickets are more expensive than Comic-Con tickets...there is something truly wrong with that.
May 19, 2011Ok fine, lets go back 5 pages to discuss why Blizzard shouldn't include options for the sake of options. Sorry that I thought you were actually talking about what I was referring to, but thats fine, you can just apply it to something I wasn't even talking about.Posted in: News
Why should they include something thats entirely unbalanced? Even though the option obviously makes it non-essential, it would still lead to a scenario where some people have builds that rely on them, and therefore would only be able to play in games where that checkmark is checked.
They're not going to include something, even as a checkmark, unless its well balanced. And its simply nearly impossible to balance for reasons I've explained before, and as evidenced by the fact that Blizzard decided it wasn't worth it even though there were probably iterations where followers were available in co-op and higher difficulties.
And on a separate note, you can't honestly accuse me of misinformation. Not only is it impossible for my opinion to even be misleading, seeing as it is, after all, an opinion and not fact, but nearly everything I've said is based on something from Bashiok's posts after the followers were announced. I'm simply presenting what I interpret as Blizzard's reasoning behind the limited follower system because some people seem to have not even read what Bashiok said in direct response to questions like theirs. And lets not forget that you're the only one claiming I'm being misleading, and clearly it hasn't convinced you, so obviously its not a problem either way.
May 19, 2011Posted in: News
Sure, there's no scenario like that. But theres also no scenario where an option is both non-essential AND useful. Either way theres going to be people who are mad that its essential, or mad that its useless. Thats my point, if you actually bothered reading. Which you didn't.
Well again jack you can't post without lying. There is no scenario where where an OPTION is somehow essential.
Again, I never said this was the case. I only said it would be EXTREMELY hard work for a balance that could be destroyed the moment someone finds a build that works really well with followers. And theres 97 billion builds, so chances are one would tip the scales in that kind of way.I'll say it again; there is NO REASON this can't be balanced. There is no reason any feature can't be balanced and again I'm not even going to start discussing options until you stop lying and ironically start calling everyone else childish.
For the last time, either start reading posts and intelligently contributing to conversations, or leave. Those are your options. Stop being a troll.
May 19, 2011Posted in: News
Now you're just being childish. I clearly laid out reasons why its considerably more complex than just a checkmark, and why no matter how much they balance it, followers will either end up being essential or useless based on the builds people find. You can go look at my previous posts. I'm not going to write all of that up again.
It IS as simple as a checkbox. And there ISN'T a reason why bliz can't nerf/buff/modify until it is balanced and works if they wanted to take the time.
Until you accept this simple fact and talk some truth your entire argument is pointless.
Here's how most adults handle conflicting opinions:
Person A: My way is the best.
Person B: I disagree, I like my way better.
Both: OK, we'll come up with a compromise.
Jackzor: My way is the best.
Person B: I disagree, I like my way better.
Jackzor: NO! I want it MY way. You're just a big stupid-head.
What is wrong in this scenario?
And, for the record, this current system is a compromise. If you've been paying any attention to the controversy surrounding the followers, you would know that when the video was leaked, everyone (or a large, loud group) was outraged that they would be essential for MFing, or other purposes, in the endgame. Once it was announced that they're only usable in Normal, everyone (as in an equally large, loud group) has since been pissed off that they're apparently useless. So Blizzard chose something of an in between scenario where they are available in Normal for anyone who wants to have a follower, and to promote online play.
The thing is, as any person whose had to make compromises before knows, nobody ends up happy in a compromise. So now we have the current scenario.
Also, the reason Blizz isn't nerfing/buffing/modifying the system until it works is because the game's design mentality doesn't fit well with a follower. The idea is for you to feel as powerful as possible, and if you're allowed to use a follower to fill in the blanks of your build that doesn't correspond to you feeling powerful.
Not to mention that its not just a matter of buffing/nerfing it. Because of the insane amounts of builds in the game (97 billion), it would be impossible to take into account all the possibilities. Which means that they could come up with a system that works perfectly in internal testing, only to have it fall apart on Day 3 of the beta because someone discovered an insane build that compliments followers. It would be something they would have to constantly worry about, for a system that not everyone even wants.
Unless you have something to say that actually applies to the followers system (ie something thats not just a troll/personal attack), don't post here again. Take note of all the other people who want followers that I've had legitimate conversations with about the reasons for and against followers, and learn from them.
May 18, 2011Posted in: News
Well, for starters, I'm not telling Blizz to do anything. Their own playtesting and iterations led them to the current conclusion to the follower 'problem,' and I'm simply pointing out the reasoning behind it.
A good place for you to start in this debate would be saying something that is true.
And I dont really care if mercs or followers can be used in pvp, but again I'd prefer having the option. If they aren't balanced in pvp, don't use them in pvp.
And I'm honestly sick and tired of everyone saying 'I just want the option.' Of course you do. That doesn't mean that Blizzard should sacrifice quality just so that you have more options. We all know that its not a realistic solution to just have it be a checkmark. If it doesn't work or isn't balanced, it shouldn't be in the game. Period. There are plenty of other options in D3, we don't need more that don't meet Blizz's quality standards.
May 18, 2011If (with an emphasis on if) there was a way to actually make it optional across the board, then sure, it should be implemented. But theres just not. So its not in the endgame.Posted in: News
And as for the number of people disappointed, there was an equally large crowd complaining that followers would be essential.
Did you even read my posts? I pointed out multiple different ways that followers would be almost impossible to balance in a way that makes them both useful and non-essential. If you can't see a valid reason in there its your own fault.Because you still haven't provided a valid reason that I can see; all I see is you telling everyone else you don't care what they get because you want it your way. And that is pissing me off to be honest.
Consider other people please.
May 17, 2011Posted in: News
And? You can actually make that argument for everything ever excluded from anything. That doesn't mean that they should be present.
Look nobody is saying you guys are wrong for not wanting mercs or endgame followers. We're just saying there are lots of us who wanted them, and won't have them. And -I- am saying you have no justification in your argument, since you've always had the option of not using it. And you still have that option now. We, on the other hand, no longer have any option at all. They took it from us.
Which is worse? Having the option or not having the option? That's the question you need to answer here, not "how much do i hate stupid mercs". There are other ways of getting people to go online, clear screen space, and balance the game, without taking away our options.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.