DiabloFans

i gave it a try, played till 48 (b4 BC)
not my style.
takes a lot of time to get to the mobs, to kill them, to retrieve your body...

i found out i've spent most of my time riding a horse or running than playing, i know though many like it. I love the concept, not the execution. hope blizz next MMO will be more Chaotic, fast paced, put your foot off the city and just get rushed by demons and etc...

or maybe i just stick with other games.

Try registering your cd-key on a new battle.net account, you can download the latest install (already patched) for mac OS X, maybe that will solve your problems (or maybe not)

also, try doc. google

i want to act 4+ to be "MY Little Pony's World" and i would kill them all.

with hugs. tight hugs

right after cow level.

Quote from "deathMars" »

Oh you mean that you miss seeing that huge crack that says "to hell". Lol.

I'm glad that we're going back to Tristram and seeing how it's slowly rotting away. But I don't want Diablo 3 to have the exact time of pattern as Diablo 2.

LOL

pretty much it!

but i never said that we should only be running in known grounds...

we really need new fantastic stuff.

Quote from "Number1SuperGuy" »

I do agree that spamming MF games is a problem, but again it's just a mistake that was made in Diablo 2. First and foremost, teleporting has to go. It was bad enough that Sorceresses could traverse a map in a matter of seconds, but then enigmas came out and everyone could do it. On top of that you have a ton of waypoints, with one very close to each boss. These 2 factors combined results in people making a game, teleporting to a boss, killing it, and then making another game. It's gotten so familiar and refined that people do it in under a minute. You're right, that's no way to play the game.

How do we fix it in Diablo 3? NO TELEPORT PLZKTHX! That right there solves most of the problems with Diablo 2's farming atmosphere. Additionally, throw in a lot of obstacles in front of bosses to slow the player down, so that you can't open a game and kill a boss and get phat lewt in less than a minute. Last but not least, have a lot of minibosses throughout each act that drop pretty good items, that way you're rewarded for playing through entire sections rather than just skipping straight through to the boss.

right there a good idea.

or maybe, ok to teleport, but dunno, imagine that you can't teleport within CS, that would already slow it enough.
(but then tele would be kinda useless..)

minibosses would also be fun. make it so we enjoy walking to the boss, instead of crippling the game. the best way to solve something and make everyone happy.

i was also thinking, do +xp means you leech MORE from others, or it just means some more xp drops from heaven for you coz you use them.

coz if you leech MORE because of that, it's messed up, but if someone with or without +xp itens, get the same amount in a co-op game, but just get's it multiplied, than i think it's ok.

you are not "stealing anything MORE then you would"

Quote from "Valtonis" »

No.
i want to revisit areas and see how they have changed

that's totally what i think.

when played d2 i was very happy to find tristan, and actually sad that it was so small and only "that part"

i think Mf is kinda broken in d2.

really, having to do a particular meteorb sorc, just for mfing, feels pretty sad.
Any big d2 player on bnet, when starting a new account will think about doing an MF SORC as it's first char. and that idea will probably carry over d3, so don't let it happen, gets boring.
and when you go farming and there is you, barb, and 7 mf sorcs? very sad.

also, running just to get to baal, meph or another, repeatedly, gets kinda boring, but there are times that there is no other way to get good gear, and i get bored easily. doesn't work very good with me.

maybe, MAYBE, they could bring some high yield end-game chapter, dunno. that is fun and challenging all the way up to boss.

wow players love so much their end-game... not saying that we need naxx dungeon or something like that, but the guys at blizz can certainly come up with some idea.

+gold you said it all, there is not much use in gold, and actually, mfing yields more gold than +gold.

+xp i don't agree without changing. and i think the way xp is handled in d2 is good. if you are not cool sharing your xp with someone just don't play with them.
Sure, if you make it related to level and dmg dealt, your will hit big time the "rushing" part of d2... but i think that's a great part of it. imagine in wow, you could choose, to go for it and get fast to the end-game. or just take your time and go level to level.

i played wow only for 6 months and hated it, but i guess there are some good ideas we can bring up to d3. as they used many ideas from diablo series in wow.

i have fun both ways, playing single player, by myself till hell, and being rushed, farming xp, and getting fast to end game.

my 2 cents.

Quote from "Airandius" »

I'm not one of those ranged players, but it's selfish to assume they are not needed. There are people that like to play with these ranged class and while you might never even consider one, there are people that never consider playing as a melee using class.

After all this, Blizzard is not just going to exclude a whole group of people.
It is mainly lame if you want to play ranged classes only, so just to have more buyers for the game is a reason to put them in the game.
We also have seen proof in the form of ranged weapons.

You also said that it's not needed for these kind of games, well I've seen plenty of Diablo like games that had a ranged class.
They worked fine and were fun.

Also don;t forget that mages are in a way, ranged classes. This other class just uses bows and arrows. Enhanced with maybe magic and melee weapons. Blizzard is going for unique classes and not the standard thing we would expect a class to do.

I said enough.;)

It's not being selfish, but it seems i didn't really wrote clearly what i wanted to say.
of course i know wizard are ranged(have you really read what i wrote with attention?), and even WD, in their own way. Sorcs always were.

I never said also, that i hate ranged classes, i used to play locks and hunters on wow. but that's wow. for some reason i'm not a fan of warriors/rogues/paladins in wow. Hate being in the middle in wow.

i know many people likes ranged classes. but just gettin on top of d2:LOD 1.12 ... how many bowazons are there? now? (yeah i remember when everything started... )

I don't even see a ZON as a mainly ranged class now, in the forum i see people talking about rangers, pets/hunters, and even some saying about chars with precise bows, almost a sniper. i think it's pretty much a "no no"

Anyway, if blizzard is solely worried about what people like to play, they still need a shapeshifter class, a class that controls' nature, a class with aura...

i haven't played d3, but won't it be really hard to a "bowazon" on d3 who can't rely only on potions, i mean, it has to shoot, and run, get orbs, come back, shoot ? that is what seems to me.

if you are saying it's selfish to not have a BOW based character, it's also selfish to say that Paladins are not needed, that auras are not needed, that shapeshifters are a no no, that now that they have WD there is no need for a necro...

not the point here to put a finger and saying what is better or what is worse, what is funnier or not.

if you could read it right, i stated that it appears to me that, blizzard is working with it's classes to be more and more "in" the battle, in the middle of the confusion, chaos and that stuff. So based on this assumption, also from what i understand about health orbs, and the clear perception that d3 is not just a redraw of d1/d2 (in a meaning that they cleary intend to change quite the gameplay... we already have health orbs! that's a huge impact on how it plays... and automatic status! in d1 i could have a warrior that could read the BOOK OF FIREWALL lvl 18 because of that)

based on all that, i don't see the need for the 5th class to be ranged. although nothing goes against it being able to use bows sometimes (as i many times used with a necro... on d2) i can also see blizzard going in another way, and i read the possibility of a path without a ranged class.

it's my opinion on top of what i sense diablo 3's shape appears to be defining. not just "hey i hate archers, let's flunk them"

it was all an analytical exercise, a path of thinking that found out that ranged may be ditched. there is even no place to you to use the word "selfish" on me. I' just sorry if the line-of-thought wasn't clearly explicit when i wrote.

Quote from "Elight" »

I too agree there needs to be a "knightly" class, and I was actually hoping the one previously revealed would have been that, but with a different twist than the Paladin. To me the "shiny armor class" is just as important to the series in being a contrast to the D man himself. I guess this new blizz team doesn't agree. It would seem that they've bumped the Barb into that armored tank role now, but he's always seemed more like a bulldozer of muscle rather than a tanking machine to me.

On topic, this last class is not going to be an exclusively ranged attacker but will definitely be PRIMARILY ranged in its attacks. Even with the promise of being innovative with class design (though the previous games didn't follow that philosophy), the devs still have to cater to an audience in which ranged classes are very popular with. In the end it's not about making a game to fit them, it's about making a game that supplies the playerbases wants, and a large portion of them want a PRIMARILY ranged class.

do you really think there is this almost sick need for a ranged class on d3?

i do understand that in Wow and other games, but i'm not sure about diablo's need for a primarily ranged class.

specially if there is going to be a more number of monsters on screen, and you won't have time to use potions and you have to run into health orbs...

I really think d3 is lacking a heavy armored guy with a shield, like a Paladin, a knight, something like that.

I don't see why the last class has to be ranged based either, as i think bowazons are too "hit and run" for the game play style like diablo has.

i can see them concentrating on that "heck just jump in the middle and kill the guys" point of view for the most chars, even the wizard on the game play is quite a "forward" class related to d2 sorc. the Wizard although using many spells, she runs, get on the middle of the battle and handles itself well without HIDING behind the magic.

The whole MONK concept couldn't be a better signal of that philosophy.

and, when i see the stereotypes, it really lacks a full armored knight/paladin. the Warrior on d1 was much more a knight than a barb... And this stereotype is very much in all Diablo Lore.

we need something that contrasts with the monk. The barb by itself is the brute force tank, no need to contrast.

the WD kinda contrasts with the wizard now. the WD seems to be more like "sit and watch" because of the summons.

the monk has this great deal of speed but very fragile.
what contrasts with it ? a heavier armored, slower guy,?
or a ranged guy ?

putting a rogue would be to put another fragile class, d2 had two resistant classes (barb pala) a half way (amazon) and 2 weaker (sorc, necro). because that influences a lot the play style. some people prefer resistant classes and others not.

WD seems to be a good half way. i really see him doing the job of the amazon's role as a fairly resistant class.


so in my opinion, some knight type of thing.

but from another point of view...

we have a brute force (barb)
a "death commander" (WD)
an element shaper (wizard)
a holy guy (monk)
and where are the forces of the nature?

but i think that would be just overkill, need another more resistant class. is a very different deal to play a barb/pala and to play a sorc/necro, everybody knows.
and some people just plays one type, not having a knight-type would be a turn off to many guys