Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Almost 60 billion build possibilities isn't enough?
The biggest complaint I'm reading about the game is the skill system. I don't see how the arguments about the skill system not being complex enough can hold any water. Just looking at the Monk, you have 3 to 4 skills to choose from in each skill slot. Each skill has five different possible runes that affect the power in significantly-different ways. On top of that, you can choose three out of fourteen different passive skills.
Just in case my math is wrong, someone can double-check it.
(4 x 5) x (3 x 5) x (4 x 5) x (3 x 5) x (3 x 5) x (4 x 5) x (14 x 13 x 12) = 58.968 billion
Oh, and the Monk has the fewest choices of skills.
I understand that many do not like the change of the skill system from the original Diablo. Let's face it though, point allocation was a legacy system that needed to be replaced. It made the skill system far more complex and less immersive when you have to deal with micro-numbers every time you level. On top of that, you still ended up with cookie-cutter builds.
I like the new skill system after playing the open beta over the weekend. It makes the game more accessible to those who don't want to spend days over-analyzing numbers instead of playing the game. It also means I can play around with various skills until I find a build that works for me.
Comments
I only played in the open beta for enough to finish the story once so what I say may be wrong and if it is just ignore it. The reason I raged a little bit though after seeing the change to the skill system is because of cookie cutter builds. What use to take rerolling in order to at least use a build and releveling that character up now just takes a few clicks. That kind of aggrivates me because once the cookie cutter builds are determined your build that works for you is guess what that build and you didnt even have to spend a character or two finding out those character builds just a few clicks of trial and error that probly took u a hour.
This is the most frequent counter-argument I see, and it never makes any more sense than the first time it was made. Line 5 apples and an orange in a row. Now take that orange, and swap it's place with each apple. You've now created many different line-ups of the exact same thing.
Whether or not you're fine with that, I suppose, is a matter of taste. For me, that everyone has all their skills is near the bottom of a list of issues. I prefer systems that reward players for speccing into a particular tree, because to me that makes sense; someone who specializes in fire, I would think, is more likely to summon flaming comets than someone who uses ice. But that's a matter of taste, I recognise that, so whatever.
Others clearly aren't as forgiving, and nothing you can do is going to convince them otherwise, so ignore them and enjoy your game. It's Blizzard, people will buy it just like they'll buy the next Bioware game no matter how much they promise otherwise (in other words, they don't need you to go to war on their behalf). Besides, there are how many threads on this already?
"Forums aren't for intelligent discussion; they're for blow-hards with unwavering opinions."
Some can't seem to understand that 99% of those builds are actually valid where as in other games one cookie cutter is best build. It gets confusing I guess.
If you are interested in making a MMO maybe visit my page to get a free open source engine.
But how much difference is there between the builds? Does it make my offensive barbarian turn intoo a strictly defensive one? How much difference do the choices make, i think in the end a barbarian will allways play like a barbarian.
Dont get me wrong, i really love the rune system, and i would love to see MMO's that added such systems to every one of their spells. allowing people to have a meaningfull choice. But the way D3 addapted it, its in general just minor changes.
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
My impression of playing all last weekend with the monk class (beating the 'beta' half a dozen times until the monk was maxed out) was that the choices in skills was mostly cosmetic, and partially just desired playstyle. I didn't get the impression of any 'optimal build' which is exactly what got old in WoW and D2 for me. I wasn't choosing my spec back then. Elitist Jerks was choosing it for me, and I probably spent just as much time number-crunching and parsing details to verify optimal rotations and stats with different talents and gear than I was actually just playing the game. I like D3 a lot more with the system they implemented because I was having fun regardless of skill choice. It just seemed to give me a different way of fighting or change of effects that didn't really alter my survivability or overall strength.
I found that I could create a monk that excelled at dashing ahead or to the opposite side of the mob I wanted to attack, in essence leaving it no escape, or I could play more of a melee AOE monk that would bulldoze though large parties of enemies, or I could take the even easier route of teleporting to a mob in the distance ignoring anything in between. I could choose to have a group heal (for allies), or a group blind (for mobs). There was also a choice of doing an AOE snare that reduced the attack strength but was a good trade-off by debuffing the mobs considerably, and a couple other choices that I played with here and there. * And just to note, this was only in the playable first thirteen levels of the monk. That was the open beta limit.
Nothing there felt like a clearly better ability. I changed skills multiple times during each playthrough just because I felt like it, and each one was fun in it's own way. I loved this new design, but I guess it's not for everyone. The beta sold me on a game I had no interest in buying before playing it since I was not a previous fan of Diablo 1 or 2. I can see how veterans wouldn't like it, but I think Blizzard is making a good choice towards trying to make it fun regardless of build. They've been saying that for a long time as their intentions but this is the first time I think I've seen it in effect. It'd be nice if they could pull that off in MoP too, but I don't see it from what I've read and seen. I just hope D3 stays as I interpreted it, because I really enjoyed my last few days playing it.
60 billion builds eh?
well how different from each other can those be when there are just so many?
I mean your eyes can discern 16 million colours & that's a much smaller number than 60 billion & I bet nobody would know the right name for each of that 16 million, they'd still use the basic 7 colours of the rainbow to describe them.
Theoretical differences & recognisable differences are not the same thing, infinite varieties of chicken will still taste like chicken no?
thats what runes are for
Also in replay to IrishChai. Newsflash, you only played the first 13 levels. i really shouldnt have to say anything else but since you cant understand that, you were playing something that you have to have been retarded to have any trouble with. WE know no matter what skill you used you could still faceroll through, thats obvious cause its the first part of the first act on NORMAL difficulty. Say that when playing on Nightmare.
You can already tell which skills are gonna be used for certain reasons. Like the Barbarian skill Frenzy. Obviously is a boss killer skill whereas Cleave is for clearing waves and waves of demons. The last main attack skill monks get(the one that slows them and slows their attack speed) is obviously going to be well loved in the harder and later difficulties when you need to prioritize damage reduction.
Stop freaking using the same old (idiotic) arguments based off the first 13 levels of gameplay on NORMAL mode. Jesus educate these poor folk.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
This concept of "choice" really amuses me, especially when it comes to MMOs and online RPGs.
In Diablo 2 there were cookie cutter specs. Orb Sorc comes to mind. There were a few of them per class, but if you weren't using a cookie cutter spec, you were probably a little bit special. The non-cookie cutter builds worked in normal and - to a degree - hell, but if you were playing ladder or hardcore... you were using one of the few well documented cookie cutter build because, in reality, there was no choice.
What Blizzard decided to do with Diablo 3 was interesting for two reasons: firstly they decided to remove the large feigned "choice-based" skill tree systems. They did this for a number of reasons, but the really big one was simple: there wasn't actually any choice anyway. Players would - for the most part - drift to variants of the main-stay builds and that was the end of it. So Blizzard decided to do away with the fakery of the skill tree system and move to something more dynamic. The second reason interesting is because the new system, whilst appearing more limited, actually offers far more choice than ever before.
I played through the Monk and the Barbarian.
For comparison I will draw on WoWs skill tree sytem, and D3s talent system. In WoW, each tree has 2-3 variant specs that are viable. That's a roundabout 6-9 spec options per class. That's a very basic way of looking at it. On my Priest, for example, I can tell you that there are around 6 cookie cutter builds that everyone uses and the only real choice comes in the fact that you can decide to throw one or two spare points in one of two different talents that result in basically the same ends.
In Diablo 3 there are 6 skill slots representing 6 different types of skill. Within each skill slot there are 3-4 skills. Each skill offers something unique to cater to different playstyels. For example, on the Monk there are 4 Primary skills. 3 of the skills offer distinct benefits: AoE damage proc, extended range, CC or greater flat damage. Whilst the difference is subtle, the skills are highly distinct (using Fists of Thunder, for example, feels quite different from using Deadly Reach). For each skill there are 5 runes, which can be added to the skills as you unlock them. Each rune achieves a different effect; for Fists of Thunder the five runes (in no particular order) grant either a teleport with AoE damage, increased dodge, proxy damage tick, increased spirit generation, or AoE proc every third hit. Each rune achieves something unique. What this means is that for your primary skill you can choose from 4 spells with 5 variants each. That's 20 unique choices you are making.
It's NOT like swapping oranges and apples around, and more like swapping different citrus fruit around. A lime is not a lemon is not an orange, even if they do share the same fundamental traits.
The interesting thing is that the skill system is set up in such a way where you can tailor your build in certain ways. Because each skill slot serves a different purpose, you can build a defense or dodge Monk flat (taking all dodge or defense skills) or you can balance things, or take only the dodge benefits from particulr skillsets, etc etc.
Now that isn't to say that on Inferno difficulty or hardcore there won't be "go to specs" for certain purposes. That's always going to happen. HOWEVER because of the way the talent system is set up, the number of go to specs per class is going to be greater than it would be under a skill tree system.
At the very least the current talent system achieves as much as any skill tree system, but from what I can tell it is actually better and ACTUALLY offers you choice when it comes to how you are playing, and what you are playing with.
60 billion builds is unreasonable, surely? And proposing it like the OP does is madness.
From what I can tell there will be cookie cutter builds, that will just be more of them than there are in standard talent tree systems. "Best in roll" builds will appear, however... the game doesn't penalise you for playing something different. You can for example go for a dodge monk, but take one skill in one tree and another skill in another tree for a variety or reasons: "I like the knockback, it gives me room to breathe." "I like the snare, as it allows me greater control." "I like the teleport/AOE, as it allows me to get in the action faster."
That's nice, tbh, regardless of what the elitists say.
Newsflash? I clearly stated how far I got and what my level/skills were limited by so people would know that, clearly aware of such limitations as I said I hope that impression stays accurate, and now you're acting like I am the one that didn't realize this? Maybe turn off the douche dial in your brain and reply like a sensible human so I don't block out everything else you say as plain toolery. ****in people on this site, it's like taking WoW kiddies and graduating them from ahole university upon joining mmorpg.com.
edit: hey cool, almost forgot about that old block button. One less douche/fool/tool/fail to listen to like Sephiroso.
I'm all in favour of having enough choices to allow player to build a class in such a way that it suits their personal playstyle better, I also like classes feeling different to each other, so such a thing as "too much choice" can be very bad if it delineates too much & ends up making things all feel rather bleh & samey.
cool story bro, and for the record even if you dont/cant read this, if anyone who's of like mind to yours does, works for me all the same.
the fact that you say the current skill choice system in place is mostly cosmetic shows your low intelligence. The fact that i tried to explain the error of your thinking by saying how easy Normal mode of the first part of the first act is and you still did not understand just reinforces how little you use your brain.
The reason i jumped on your post was because of that one little comment, about how the skill choices are just cosmetic. You couldn't be further from the truth. You pick your skills based on the situation you find yourself in, or going into. If you know(by the quests) that you're about to kill the big bad boss, you teleport back to town and change your skills accordingly. If you know you're just up for some good ole demon massacring fun, you're probably gonna want an aoe or two in your aresenal.
How ANYONE can say that the skill choice is mostly cosmetic is beyond me. So excuse me if you can't understand simple common sense.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
seems light...100 billion would be better
I'm not too sure if you're criticising or praising D3.
The entire point of the D3 skill system is that for each skill slot the basic abilities are uniform, but peripheral mechanics attached to them are not. So one skill may do 110% damage to all monster in front of you and proc an AoE stun every third hit, where another skill will do 75% damage as a 360 degree AoE and apply a DoT that does 35% damage over 5 seconds to every mob it hits. Whilst the basic result is the same - they both do comparable damage - the way in which they effect mobs is different, and the way you run your set up will be different. For example, you're not going to spam an ability that does a large part of its damage as DoT so you'll be doing something else for 5 seconds, whereas with the first skill you're likely to be using it far more often.
At face value you may be able to come to the conclusion that there is too much choice, but because of the way the game is set up there really isn't too much choice. When picking a skill you chose 1 of 4 or 3 base abilities, and then 1 of 5 runes. It's actually spoon fed quite effectively.
I can tell you that, having played a Monk, Barb and Sorc in the beta, none of the skills ever felt "samey". The Sorcerer's 2 primary skills couldn't be more different in effect and use tbh. The Monk and the Barb were "samey" in the sense that they were close range, but they felt very different in the way they were used. Even if the end result is roughly the same, the way you get there is different between each skill... and it's noticeable.
I agree with you but do you perhaps think you could be more diplomatic about it?
+1
i could have, and i suppose i should apologize. but i've grown hardened with idiots cause i read to much of the same stupid non-sensical complaints that people shouldn't even have to think twice on to understand.
i blame mmorpg.com for the way i am. the forums section anyway. minus the computer hardware section, those guys are amazing, always helpful.
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
Kinda confused how you agreed with him but somehow I agree with you and he obviously disagreed with me (as offensively childish as he could be), but I'll let you figure that one out since I have no interest in knowing what that idiot had to say. I'll admit you said it better than I did though.
Didn't matter whether I played the first 13 levels or every class to 50, I still had the impression all along that it was balanced a specific way so that regardless of what your favorite skill or style was, the level of damage and general strength remained comparable as my character grew. I hope Blizzard figured out how to differentiate the feel of a class spec without skewing the strength one way or another so drastically as to cause one or two viable builds and everything else as a waste of time, but we'll have to wait and see.
I liked what I saw of the witch doctor too but didn't get very far. That might be my 1st main just because I usually opt for the ranged/summoner type classes, especially if they have another cow level. I was almost sold on D2 the night I played my friend's necro rezzing dozens of cows to fight armies of other cows. Other players with slower computers weren't very happy with me though. lol
Hmm, I think you got that formula wrong.
The following is just based on what you wrote. I didn't play D3, so I can't be sure if your values are correct.
- 3 to 4 skills
Ok, lets take the higher value : 4 skills
- Each skill has five different runes
So that makes 4 skills with 5 runes. That makes: 5^4 = 5 * 5 * 5 * 5
- On top of that you got 3 passive skills out of 14. Thats: 14! - (14-3)! = 14 * 13 * 12
All in all:
(5^4) * (14! - 11!) = 1.365.000
This is only true if you don't have actually more than 4 skills where you select your skills from. Or more than 5 runes to select from. Than it would be more.
Anyway, just bored at work, please continue your discussion.
Number of mathematical different builds is not the same as builds that really are different. For example a build that does +1% more damage than another build, but identical in other aspects, would be a mathematicaly different build but that does not make it truly different.
Example of this is Mortal Online where you can define an infinite number of different builds but only a very small fraction of those are viable and actually different from another.
My gaming blog
I never had to use any s c cookie cutter builds when playing D2. There was a lot of strange and fun builds that was good enough to finish hell. At least if you had good enough gear to support them. There was no reason to min max or pressure to be as efficient as possible. Of course if that was your goal you would perhaps use one of the popular builds. But a lot of people played the game with friends for fun without any competition.
I believe people that used cookie cutter builds in D2 will continue doing that in D3. If they think being 10% less efficient is the end of the world they will not drop the cookie cutter habit. They will continue to min max and go to websites to find "the best build".
I doubt its true that most players used cookie cutter in D2. You dont know how many played solo or with a few friends just for fun. People that wanted to compete in some way(ladder PvP) certainly used cookie cutter builds. Of course people like that will be recognized and are more vocal. But are they really the majority? Or perhaps there is a majority that never visit forums and that never discuss the game at all. That just play. That dont think competition, min maxing or the best build is all that important. Or fun...
The min maxers will not think there are 60 billion build possibilitys. For them there will be a few builds for each class that number crunching elitists tell them is the best. I think no skill system can prevent that.
I like the flexibility of the new system. Often in D2 you'd have a build which seemed to work well until you got to hell difficulty, at which point you'd realize that it was completely worthless, like a fire sorceress. Back before the current version allowed for respeccing, you were pretty much screwed and had to start over, losing many hours worth of work (for lack of better term). Even with the current version allowing respecs, you'd still have to redo all your gear, which is more time lost/spent.
The new system allows quite a bit of flexibility, without the possibility of gimping yourself at later stages. Even if you do find a 'build' which doesn't work very well, you can simply zip back to town and change things up, or even change in the field!
I hated the idea of it at first, but once I actually got to play it, I realized that it really is superior to what we got in D2, as is the new way stats work, and other game functions.
This, 100%.
Not only are cookie cutter builds inevitably going to happen (it always happens), I surmise that it will possibly be even worse due to how easy it is to switch everything out. I can already imagine a group of min/maxing barbs (for example) with nearly identical builds (whichever is the most efficient for the area they're killing mobs in). Then, as soon as they get close to a boss, it's time for everyone to go back to town and switch to whatever is optimum for boss killing.
Without any kind of restriction on build swapping (having to be out of combat first isn't really a restriction...), I fear this will be a rampant occurrence in the game. D2 may have made it fairly difficult to respec, but I think it was a good compromise for giving players a chance to rectify mistakes, while not trivilizing the entire aspect of actually having a build.
He is saying that different skills clearly favour different situations, and people will use them to that effect. Others will simply build to their overall playstyle, without really considering swapping out skills as per encounter.
I agree with both notions. I think the latter will be more numerous, and the former will be largely reserved for Hell and Inferno/Hardcore playthroughs. Once PvP is added... yeah... PvP will bring out the cookie cutter builds. It always does.
I don't think it matters at all.
At the end of the day you can CHOSE not to swap out your skills if you wish to restrict yourself in that regard, whereas others can chose to swap out as often and as flagrantly as they want. You can apply the same restrictions that Diablo 2 had to yourself and, if your friends are willing, the group of people you play with.
What other people are doing doesn't effect you, so why should you care? How other people play the game and how you play the game are two distinctly unrelated ideas in this regard.