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.
Alrighty then.
First of all, how many walls are you able to walk through?
Anyways, based on your interpretation of how the skill works. Making it wider (or longer) makes just as much sense as making it thicker (more rows). In the first scenario, a larger amount of monsters would take a while to pass through the "wall". In the second scenario, the same amount of monsters that would pass through the "wall" would take longer to do so. The definition is not very cut and dry.
If consider the definition of wall is, ya know, a wall. Then only 1 interpretation of width makes sense. Making the wall wider directly prevents more monsters from getting to you. The definition and the objective are very clear, and makes more intuitive sense. The video proves this (despite the one monster who manages to pass through but immediately dies). Making the wall thicker fundamentally serves no purpose if monsters can't pass through one row of zombies.
Also taking in to consideration your comment on inferno AI, if we assume monsters act the same way they always have in the diablo series, blood thirsty, ravaging beasts, their only objective is to rip you to shreds. They believe no wall can stand in their way, and therefore have no reason to step around the wall, because eventually they will get to you. The AI here is for monsters to use their skills available to them to kill you, they have little regard for their own life. If they did, then yes they should step around the wall, even if they were capable of passing through it, because going around the wall prevents extra damage from being done to them. Unless of course you're suggesting that zombies now perform trade studies by sacrificing their buddies to determine if they take more damage passing through a wall of zombies and taking damage for a shorter amount of time or taking the long route allowing the WD to abuse them with more spells. Also by this logic, no single monster would ever attack you after seeing it's enemies fall in groups to your most basic of spells, they would go save their own skin.
I hope I was as clear as can be, I will clarify more if you would like me too. But once again this is all speculation, the entire purpose of this topic, so I hope you're not so quick to belittle my opinion as you have everyone else's.
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.
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).
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
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?)
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 or is not true. Also, the reason they are called widescreen is because it reads much better than longscreen. :Thumbs Up:
Bottom line, wait a few more months, and then we can talk about this.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
If that made sense to you, Bravo! I think I even confused myself...
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?
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)
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
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
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.
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 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 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?
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
If by definition, you can break a wall and a barricade with an axe, then there serves no purpose in separating the two. So there is absolutely no merit in calling it either or. And once again, if your suggesting that imbuing the skill with the indigo rune changes the function of the skill, then we've come full circle, and you're point is mute.
Why does the skill have a time duration? If the zombie wall could be destroyed, this duration serves no purpose. If the Zombies could be destroyed, and it takes enemies of scaled level less than 5 seconds to destroy it, aren't you better served using a different skill that could buy you more time? If it takes the enemies longer than 5 seconds to destroy it, then the skill is OP since the wall would always last the full duration anyways. The only way to make this skill viable is to make it impenetrable for a short duration and deal a small amount of damage.
No rune extends the duration of the skill. Why? Because extending the duration prevents close-range physical monsters for longer thus probably making the skill OP.
huzzah this thread is still going! Wall of fire argument = stupid, fire isn't solid, zombies are. Barricade is simply a synonym of wall, how can we possibly determine what that name implies?
aaaaanyway, I was watching this again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GfOk1VtNI#t=01m00s again and I think we are all being thrown off a bit. Have you noticed that most of the skills showcased in the videos are runed? The mass confusion right before the wall showcase is definitely on a 4sec cooldown. And I'm looking at the length(lol see how I use that conversationally to mean whatever I need it to mean?) of the wall and I don't think doubling that would do anything, in fact, I think THAT IS the indigo version, look how wide that is, like 8 zombies! 16 zombies popping up on screen at a time for a single spellcast seems absurd whether it be one long row or 2 shorter rows.
Wall of fire argument = stupid, fire isn't solid, zombies are.
Damn, beat me to it.
D3maniac, throughout this thread, you've consistently argued each and every point with "lol, you're retarded, I can't believe I'm arguing with these kids, lol so stupid" while rarely addressing any actual arguments made against your point. We're over 170 posts now and you're still the only person who's called another poster a retarded child. Do you think that lends credence to your argument? If you want anyone to take your opinion seriously, try respecting theirs first. No one has a problem with the fact that you have your own opinion. We all think it's wrong and we're trying to present our opinions so that you can see why we disagree with yours, but no one has said you're stupid for having a differing opinion. You're still the only person who has resorted to name-calling. Think about it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
The premise of Wall Theory is that if your debate degrades to arguing over the dimensions of a wall, then your thread has become truly bad.
Edit: There's a lot of math to back it up, which I will not go into here.
-Thomas Jefferson
Alrighty then.
First of all, how many walls are you able to walk through?
Anyways, based on your interpretation of how the skill works. Making it wider (or longer) makes just as much sense as making it thicker (more rows). In the first scenario, a larger amount of monsters would take a while to pass through the "wall". In the second scenario, the same amount of monsters that would pass through the "wall" would take longer to do so. The definition is not very cut and dry.
If consider the definition of wall is, ya know, a wall. Then only 1 interpretation of width makes sense. Making the wall wider directly prevents more monsters from getting to you. The definition and the objective are very clear, and makes more intuitive sense. The video proves this (despite the one monster who manages to pass through but immediately dies). Making the wall thicker fundamentally serves no purpose if monsters can't pass through one row of zombies.
Also taking in to consideration your comment on inferno AI, if we assume monsters act the same way they always have in the diablo series, blood thirsty, ravaging beasts, their only objective is to rip you to shreds. They believe no wall can stand in their way, and therefore have no reason to step around the wall, because eventually they will get to you. The AI here is for monsters to use their skills available to them to kill you, they have little regard for their own life. If they did, then yes they should step around the wall, even if they were capable of passing through it, because going around the wall prevents extra damage from being done to them. Unless of course you're suggesting that zombies now perform trade studies by sacrificing their buddies to determine if they take more damage passing through a wall of zombies and taking damage for a shorter amount of time or taking the long route allowing the WD to abuse them with more spells. Also by this logic, no single monster would ever attack you after seeing it's enemies fall in groups to your most basic of spells, they would go save their own skin.
I hope I was as clear as can be, I will clarify more if you would like me too. But once again this is all speculation, the entire purpose of this topic, so I hope you're not so quick to belittle my opinion as you have everyone else's.
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.
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
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?)
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 or is not true. Also, the reason they are called widescreen is because it reads much better than longscreen. :Thumbs Up:
Bottom line, wait a few more months, and then we can talk about this.
+9000 for being the only person here with a brain and common sense (besides me :P)
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
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
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.
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?
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
If by definition, you can break a wall and a barricade with an axe, then there serves no purpose in separating the two. So there is absolutely no merit in calling it either or. And once again, if your suggesting that imbuing the skill with the indigo rune changes the function of the skill, then we've come full circle, and you're point is mute.
Why does the skill have a time duration? If the zombie wall could be destroyed, this duration serves no purpose. If the Zombies could be destroyed, and it takes enemies of scaled level less than 5 seconds to destroy it, aren't you better served using a different skill that could buy you more time? If it takes the enemies longer than 5 seconds to destroy it, then the skill is OP since the wall would always last the full duration anyways. The only way to make this skill viable is to make it impenetrable for a short duration and deal a small amount of damage.
No rune extends the duration of the skill. Why? Because extending the duration prevents close-range physical monsters for longer thus probably making the skill OP.
aaaaanyway, I was watching this again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-GfOk1VtNI#t=01m00s again and I think we are all being thrown off a bit. Have you noticed that most of the skills showcased in the videos are runed? The mass confusion right before the wall showcase is definitely on a 4sec cooldown. And I'm looking at the length(lol see how I use that conversationally to mean whatever I need it to mean?) of the wall and I don't think doubling that would do anything, in fact, I think THAT IS the indigo version, look how wide that is, like 8 zombies! 16 zombies popping up on screen at a time for a single spellcast seems absurd whether it be one long row or 2 shorter rows.
Damn, beat me to it.
D3maniac, throughout this thread, you've consistently argued each and every point with "lol, you're retarded, I can't believe I'm arguing with these kids, lol so stupid" while rarely addressing any actual arguments made against your point. We're over 170 posts now and you're still the only person who's called another poster a retarded child. Do you think that lends credence to your argument? If you want anyone to take your opinion seriously, try respecting theirs first. No one has a problem with the fact that you have your own opinion. We all think it's wrong and we're trying to present our opinions so that you can see why we disagree with yours, but no one has said you're stupid for having a differing opinion. You're still the only person who has resorted to name-calling. Think about it.