My comments on the barricade argument are in my last post.
are you not reading what I'm saying? that video doesn't dispute anything or support anything because it can be viewed 100 different ways. therefor you don't have an argument, your argument is to try and dispute mine. you have no original thoughts of your own. you didn't dispute my barricade argument with reasoning, just a video that may or may not have something happening in it. lmao. thanks for playing kid
also my barricade argument was FOR if the monsters COULD attack it. holy shit your thick. my entire barricade argument was "stacking" "layers". and you disputed that... how? oh wait you didn't. lol
The AI doesn't have anything to do with the width argument, correct, but it does matter to the initial point of this topic.
And from everything you've said? Key word there being you said. I disagree with you, making it 10x more likely that the width increases. See what I did there? You can't quantify an opinion to make it fact, it's still just an opinion.
Also, the only thing we've seen is the original gameplay video in which only 1 of 20 or so enemies (including the second zombie wall cast) gets "through" the wall. However the monster immediately performs its death animation. This could be due to lag or clipping. Or it could be that the monsters can pass through the wall, the rest just died. But if you're asking for an observation based on that one video alone, I would say that is a solid wall with a glitch on the one monster.
Also, if the wall was capable of being broken, why wouldn't the animation have the section of the wall fall apart/get destroyed? As far as I can see in the video, the zombies flail around and the monster seems to just skip through them. This refutes your barricade argument. Things don't slowly move through a barricade, they break the barricade then move through it.
Would it kill you to treat another poster with respect?
the video doesn't confirm , deny, or support ANYTHING, because no one can tell exactly whats going on so its pure speculation on whats happening. you don't know, i don't know. like i said its far more likely that its able to be attacked considering "barricade" "width" and "bone wall" arguments. using a video that can take 5 different opinions and views on doesn't help your point. lol
MY opinion of the videos is the monsters didn't have time to attack it because they died too fast, and the monsters death animation made it glitch move through the wall. again this doesn't help my argument or yours. just an opinion on my perspective of that specific video. so again back to my original points, which you have yet to bring any true information to help your point other then a highly suspect video portrayal. you haven't commented on the barricade or bone wall arguments that i brought up. any thoughts on those?
Just like how you ignored my AI paragraph? You're arguing particulars with particulars. Once again you resort to insults because that some how makes your opinion better.
the AI has nothing to do with this argument. DUH. are u for real kid? the barricade argument makes my point 100% make sense and anything else doesn't. while your not saying anything to what i said. which just makes me know I'm right.
this argument is about wither the width increases or the length. and from everything we can see and I've said it seems 10x more likely that the layers increase. arguing AI doesn't effect that argument. we don't care what the monsters do, we care what the wall does. forget AI. if the monsters are genius's wither the wall can be attacked or slowly walked through or neither the monsters would just walk around it regardless of what the wall does. if they have a path. so it has zero baring on this argument.
the zombies are in the shape of a wall, wall is not a shape but they are in a wall FORMATION then. i love how you ignore all the facts i throw at your face and disproving what you say and you ignore it, take one minor detail and go off on a separate tangent avoiding admitting your wrong. nice moves kid
Although, look at it this way, the original skill is called wall, which doesn't allow objects to pass. So are you implying that applying the indigo rune thickens the wall but now allows objects to pass?
your putting your foot in your mouth. its called a WALL because thats the way the zombies are formed. somehow in your mind a wall is not passable? i could take an axe in real life and hack through a wall. or sledge hammer. just like the mobs will attack the zombie wall. wall does NOT mean invulnerable. where the hell are u getting that from?
bone WALL from D2... was attackable. again. you bring nothing new to the table. i said it being able to be walked through OR attacked is one of the two outcomes i believe is going to happen. I'm certain its attackable after thinking more. so its always able to be attacked
I wonder why you can walk through a wall of Fire if it is a wall? That doesn't make sense...
Seriously though I see a lot of speculation and distrust of Blizzard here and while some may use WoW to say that we are right to not have faith, I think we should give them the benefit of the doubt until the game comes out. Will we need pets? I don't think so, but I don't know. I will find out when I play. Does the Doc only have one survivability passive. No look at Blood Rights, It gives you 2% health regen. and since healing spells tend to give you over 3000 health we can speculate that health will be over 3000 meaning that it could easily cover the cost of light spell-casting assuming you don't go a Mana-less or nearly Mana-less build. Here we must also take into consideration that not all passives or even all skills have been revealed for each class (Fetish Sycophants anyone?) Bottom line, wait a few more months, and then we can talk about this
I think that the way the Kazraa act when they encounter the wall indicates that they can move through it and If you look at the whole game play preview the second wall shows more clearly that when they are in damage range of the wall they are slowed and they continue to move forward, even on the edges of the wall where they could quickly walk around. That, however, is still speculation.
As for the argument about width...the term is ambiguous and there is little to no indication of how they are using it. To me I understood it to be a two layer wall that can be passed through slowly, but there is no indication that this is true. Also, the reason they are called widescreen is because it reads much better than longscreen. :Thumbs Up:
+9000 for being the only person here with a brain and common sense (besides me :P)
The first gameplay video doesn't show monsters getting through. However this may be attributed to the fact that monster levels weren't scaled appropriately and the monsters were simply dying too quickly.
Also, are you saying that the definition of width is absolute but the definition of wall isn't? The definition of wall seems way more concrete to me (pun intended).
although, look at it this way. the indigo rune is called "barricade". barricading something such as a door or window is to make it stronger or add layers to it so things do not get through, NOT longer. so therefor thicker. ergo WIDTH (shortest distance) of the zombie wall. you think a wall of flesh and bone is going to be INVULNERABLE so mobs have to walk around? are u high? its going to be attackable of course(just like bone wall). common sense. so barricade zombie wall thats attackable only makes sense ONE way. to increase its layers. ergo. winning
yes that is speculation. what wasn't speculation was the word "width". and everyone keeps arguing like it can be multiple things for a wall when it isn't.
but regardless my theory of the "width" ONLY makes sense if the wall can be attacked OR slowly walked through. IF it is neither and we knew that, then i would assume that blizzard MEANT length and of course thought it would increase long ways. but like someone else said before its a "re vamped version of bone wall from D2" if THATS the case then monsters CAN attack it and can get through and the width makes 10x more sense.
we don't know the mechanics of the wall either, so theres no point in arguing about ANOTHER thing that we don't know for sure until release.
or unless they come out with another demo of skills and we get to see how it actually works. until then. no one is going to "win". and further arguing is pointless until someone comes back with indisputable proof.
No, it says increase physical damage by 20% and it only affects melee weapons. Your physical damage might carry over from your weapon, but that is not the same as a melee hit. Bows can do physical damage too, but those are not melee hits. What is illogical is to think that a spell is going to register as a melee hit. If you think that because you are using a melee weapon, your skill will register as a melee hit, then you have to apply that to all the spells, which is not going to happen. If you use a wand, you are no longer doing physical damage. You will be doing arcane damage from the wand (or whatever type of damage wands do) and you would not expect spectral blade to count as a melee hit because it doesn't say anything about melee. The other part of this is that if you allow the runes to affect other skills, you leave no incentive for actually using your weapon as an attack.
your incentive is if you get virtuoso to increase your wand attack by 100%. honestly if the life leech doesn't carry over then the entire build kind of falls apart. it needs very high crit to heal yourself so if you get mauled and you don't crit within a few seconds, your dead without the other life leech. also for the wizard to only use his melee regular attack to hit 1 target at a time for not that much dmg..., melee wizard WOULDNT be viable later in the game, at all. or viable period. so if that is the case then ANY wizard melee build will HAVE to get viruoso as a talent and spectral blade seems pretty pointless, which is why I'm banking on the melee hits life steal effecting spectral blade, in 3 months i will test this and post results.
considering blizzard said the melee wizard is viable end-game. this pretty much has to work for decent killing AND survivability.
well it being able to be attacked makes sense too. EITHER WAY my double width argument works for both of those. because why double the length if it can be beaten through? monsters would just nom nom through the first part they touch, "barricade" makes more sense for width as well.
So you are sticking with the assumption that the wall of zombies allows monsters to pass through?
most likely considering it would make the most sense. walking through would be better IMO, they slowly walk through the wall while being bombarded for a good amount of dmg.
no i don't have a wife and kids i left them? obviously. or did they leave me? i don't remember
from an architectural stand point of the length width and height of a wall in a structure. or height depth length are always the same. wither you are looking at architectural plans for building a wall or you are standing beside the wall, or in front of the wall. your view makes ZERO difference. your an architect and someone says increase the width, you increase the shortest side and double the depth of the wall, not the length.
if you want to say "the wall is a relative object and i can turn it any which way" then OF COURSE the sides can change, the zombie wall can't float off the ground and stand up on its side can it? no. architectural stand point is how I'm looking at this not arguing that "technically if you looked at it a way that it doesn't appear the sides change". sure you live in a world where walls float and flip on its side.
if you took that wall and layed it on its side, the sides would change. the depth would become the height. it would stop being a wall and become a platform.
if you flipped it sideways on its side, the depth would remain the same but length would become the height. it would still be a wall, just not how it was meant to be looked at.
so if the zombie wall never falls on its side and becomes a zombie platform. the depth will ALWAYS be the same. feel free to argue further in vein because i actually asked an architect to prove my point. because i needed to be sure i was right THAT badly. don't really care if you believe me, now I'm just all that much more confident. <3333
see you guys in 3 months when we find out I'm right. I've changed my mind to make a WD first now. just to get to act 2, find an indigo rune and post the results of what it does as soon as humanly possible.
yes changing 2 skills "fixed" the entire build. your just butt hurt because of the troll fail on my other thread, rofl. gtfo kid
Changing 30 percent of the build? Yah, that seems pretty massive.
Also, rating every post you start at 5 stars is pretty childish. That's there for other people to rate YOU, not for you to do yourself.
you can rate your own threads? lol why would that even be possible?
and theres 3 passive skills so thats 22% of the build actually. and in my original unedited post i asked for an arcane spender and was going to use meteor in the first place. so really it was only 1. and not even one, it was a rune for one. lol... bla bla people butt hurt bla bla. get over it.
I ignored that because it's irrelevant. Cube with equal sides does NOT equal the zombie wall shape. Anyone can clearly see that. And that makes his cube argument illogical to this considering the wall is not equal on all sides.
Lmfao?!?? Did u not read the posts about how a BOX can have interchangeable sides but NOT a rectangle? Like the WALL. Lmao wow dude you facepalmed yourself so epically with the box example when this was said at the beginning.
Winning still.
a wall... is not a rectangle, it is a rectangular prism. Fun fact: a CUBE(box lol) is also a rectangular prism
Wow. Box with equal sides somehow = rectangle without equal sides? With that logic how could I possibly argue? Most insane post so far.
Zombie wall shape does not = cube. All 3 sides are different. Unlike the cube. Holy moly you kids keep surprising me with the brainlessness
i bet sixen is the one picking the winners. after watching his annoying commentaries with force (he's annoying not force). its obvious he would pick something completely retarded and not as clever as the rest
0
are you not reading what I'm saying? that video doesn't dispute anything or support anything because it can be viewed 100 different ways. therefor you don't have an argument, your argument is to try and dispute mine. you have no original thoughts of your own. you didn't dispute my barricade argument with reasoning, just a video that may or may not have something happening in it. lmao. thanks for playing kid
also my barricade argument was FOR if the monsters COULD attack it. holy shit your thick. my entire barricade argument was "stacking" "layers". and you disputed that... how? oh wait you didn't. lol
0
the video doesn't confirm , deny, or support ANYTHING, because no one can tell exactly whats going on so its pure speculation on whats happening. you don't know, i don't know. like i said its far more likely that its able to be attacked considering "barricade" "width" and "bone wall" arguments. using a video that can take 5 different opinions and views on doesn't help your point. lol
MY opinion of the videos is the monsters didn't have time to attack it because they died too fast, and the monsters death animation made it glitch move through the wall. again this doesn't help my argument or yours. just an opinion on my perspective of that specific video. so again back to my original points, which you have yet to bring any true information to help your point other then a highly suspect video portrayal. you haven't commented on the barricade or bone wall arguments that i brought up. any thoughts on those?
0
the AI has nothing to do with this argument. DUH. are u for real kid? the barricade argument makes my point 100% make sense and anything else doesn't. while your not saying anything to what i said. which just makes me know I'm right.
this argument is about wither the width increases or the length. and from everything we can see and I've said it seems 10x more likely that the layers increase. arguing AI doesn't effect that argument. we don't care what the monsters do, we care what the wall does. forget AI. if the monsters are genius's wither the wall can be attacked or slowly walked through or neither the monsters would just walk around it regardless of what the wall does. if they have a path. so it has zero baring on this argument.
0
the zombies are in the shape of a wall, wall is not a shape but they are in a wall FORMATION then. i love how you ignore all the facts i throw at your face and disproving what you say and you ignore it, take one minor detail and go off on a separate tangent avoiding admitting your wrong. nice moves kid
0
your putting your foot in your mouth. its called a WALL because thats the way the zombies are formed. somehow in your mind a wall is not passable? i could take an axe in real life and hack through a wall. or sledge hammer. just like the mobs will attack the zombie wall. wall does NOT mean invulnerable. where the hell are u getting that from?
bone WALL from D2... was attackable. again. you bring nothing new to the table. i said it being able to be walked through OR attacked is one of the two outcomes i believe is going to happen. I'm certain its attackable after thinking more. so its always able to be attacked
0
+9000 for being the only person here with a brain and common sense (besides me :P)
0
although, look at it this way. the indigo rune is called "barricade". barricading something such as a door or window is to make it stronger or add layers to it so things do not get through, NOT longer. so therefor thicker. ergo WIDTH (shortest distance) of the zombie wall. you think a wall of flesh and bone is going to be INVULNERABLE so mobs have to walk around? are u high? its going to be attackable of course(just like bone wall). common sense. so barricade zombie wall thats attackable only makes sense ONE way. to increase its layers. ergo. winning
0
yes that is speculation. what wasn't speculation was the word "width". and everyone keeps arguing like it can be multiple things for a wall when it isn't.
but regardless my theory of the "width" ONLY makes sense if the wall can be attacked OR slowly walked through. IF it is neither and we knew that, then i would assume that blizzard MEANT length and of course thought it would increase long ways. but like someone else said before its a "re vamped version of bone wall from D2" if THATS the case then monsters CAN attack it and can get through and the width makes 10x more sense.
we don't know the mechanics of the wall either, so theres no point in arguing about ANOTHER thing that we don't know for sure until release.
or unless they come out with another demo of skills and we get to see how it actually works. until then. no one is going to "win". and further arguing is pointless until someone comes back with indisputable proof.
0
your incentive is if you get virtuoso to increase your wand attack by 100%. honestly if the life leech doesn't carry over then the entire build kind of falls apart. it needs very high crit to heal yourself so if you get mauled and you don't crit within a few seconds, your dead without the other life leech. also for the wizard to only use his melee regular attack to hit 1 target at a time for not that much dmg..., melee wizard WOULDNT be viable later in the game, at all. or viable period. so if that is the case then ANY wizard melee build will HAVE to get viruoso as a talent and spectral blade seems pretty pointless, which is why I'm banking on the melee hits life steal effecting spectral blade, in 3 months i will test this and post results.
considering blizzard said the melee wizard is viable end-game. this pretty much has to work for decent killing AND survivability.
0
0
most likely considering it would make the most sense. walking through would be better IMO, they slowly walk through the wall while being bombarded for a good amount of dmg.
0
from an architectural stand point of the length width and height of a wall in a structure. or height depth length are always the same. wither you are looking at architectural plans for building a wall or you are standing beside the wall, or in front of the wall. your view makes ZERO difference. your an architect and someone says increase the width, you increase the shortest side and double the depth of the wall, not the length.
if you want to say "the wall is a relative object and i can turn it any which way" then OF COURSE the sides can change, the zombie wall can't float off the ground and stand up on its side can it? no. architectural stand point is how I'm looking at this not arguing that "technically if you looked at it a way that it doesn't appear the sides change". sure you live in a world where walls float and flip on its side.
if you took that wall and layed it on its side, the sides would change. the depth would become the height. it would stop being a wall and become a platform.
if you flipped it sideways on its side, the depth would remain the same but length would become the height. it would still be a wall, just not how it was meant to be looked at.
so if the zombie wall never falls on its side and becomes a zombie platform. the depth will ALWAYS be the same. feel free to argue further in vein because i actually asked an architect to prove my point. because i needed to be sure i was right THAT badly. don't really care if you believe me, now I'm just all that much more confident.
see you guys in 3 months when we find out I'm right. I've changed my mind to make a WD first now. just to get to act 2, find an indigo rune and post the results of what it does as soon as humanly possible.
0
you can rate your own threads? lol why would that even be possible?
and theres 3 passive skills so thats 22% of the build actually. and in my original unedited post i asked for an arcane spender and was going to use meteor in the first place. so really it was only 1. and not even one, it was a rune for one. lol... bla bla people butt hurt bla bla. get over it.
0
0
Wow. Box with equal sides somehow = rectangle without equal sides? With that logic how could I possibly argue? Most insane post so far.
Zombie wall shape does not = cube. All 3 sides are different. Unlike the cube. Holy moly you kids keep surprising me with the brainlessness