So, that's how many builds that can be made with all characters. If you're trying to do the same calculation and come up with a different number, that's cool. It's probably because I calculated that there are 6 rune possibilities because there are 5 types of runes as well as unruned.
Each class also has different numbers of possible builds.
Barb: 8421580000000000
DH: 9257550000000000
Monk: 3128020000000000
WD: 10226200000000000
Wizard: 16241300000000000
I'm pretty sure this has been done before but I thought I'd put it up anyways. Hope you enjoy.
and that is one of them. my point is a substantial percentage are not viable. I am not saying there is not a huge amount of options and builds, I am just making the point that it doesn't matter how many are mathematically possible because only a certain percentage of those are practical and I don't know how that would be calculated.
and that is one of them. my point is a substantial percentage are not viable. I am not saying there is not a huge amount of options and builds, I am just making the point that it doesn't matter how many are mathematically possible because only a certain percentage of those are practical and I don't know how that would be calculated.
I dunno...I could see a comical use for this build (even though the passives don't go with the skills). You could use this as a distraction character in Inferno while letting the rest of your party destroy the mobs. The ultimate pacifist!
There are no skills that are in themselves not viable in the long run. And as long as your not using so much of your given resource that you aren't generating enough, there really isn't any combination of them that aren't viable. It's about play style, if you find a way to make even the oddest builds work for you, and you are successful, that is all that matters.
However, I do think that in the end, the viability does decerease as you go up in difficulty. I imagine in like a pyramid with four sections, the bottom being normal difficulty, it will have the largets amount of viable builds, as pretty much anything will work. But as you go up in difficulty you find fewer and fewer builds that will be viable. But the skills themselves don't loose their viability, you just have to use combinations of those skills that work. In Inferno, I see possibly a dozen different builds for each class that are still viable, many will have repeat skills, but in different combinations. It will still come down to play style, and if your in a group or solo, all those things are factors.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Tired of the same regurgitated blue posts? Want more in depth coverage of
the aspects of the game you want to know about? Check us out!
Also, Blizzard has already stated that there is absolutely no reason to leave a skill unruned. Therefore, you really should only count 5 variations per skill, not 6.
You want to find the number of Combination, not Permutations...
So it wouldn't be 6^5*(# of skills) like people are doing.
Just put this into your common graphing calculator (I would do it, but I don't know where mine is):
(# of skills^5) C (6) -- using nCr, that will give you the total number of combinations possible with the skill. It's raised to the 5th power because you won't use a skill unruned.
Then multiply it by the passive combinations if you want too:
(# of passive skills) C (3) -- using nCr
^^^Nvm all that, because that doesn't even take into account that you can't have 2 runed skills of the same base skill at the same time, so it will be less that that result, about 6 times less.
Soooo, I was reading this, and your numbers are rather unimportant. Disregarding the reason for posting them, lets assume this game is rediculously successful beyond their wildest dreams, and reaches the 50 million sales mark. If there is even 1 billion combinations, which even the lower estimate suggested above says every class will have much more than that each, then to reach even that 1 billion combinations each of those 50,000,000 players would have to create 20 completely unique characters, not one of them being alike, and ofcourse to have them all unique all 20 of each of their characters would have to max out in level.
Thats for 1,000,000 combinations.
It's safe to assume that there is technically more than that.
Is there a need to bicker over the specifics of how many billions/trillions/quadrillions there might be? It seems that any arguement can be made by assuming the number of combinations is sufficiently large, no?
There is a difference here. My numbers are not an estimate, they're correct. The OP is bullshit. Your point is completely meaningless in a world of easily swappable skills.
The important point being made here is that there are a significant number of builds to try in the game, and that it's non-trivial to determine the build to use. Compare to d2 where there were significantly *more* builds, but it was obvious what the best were, and your point wasn't meaningless because you *did* need to re-roll for *every minor difference.*
So, that's how many builds that can be made with all characters. If you're trying to do the same calculation and come up with a different number, that's cool. It's probably because I calculated that there are 6 rune possibilities because there are 5 types of runes as well as unruned.
Each class also has different numbers of possible builds.
Barb: 8421580000000000
DH: 9257550000000000
Monk: 3128020000000000
WD: 10226200000000000
Wizard: 16241300000000000
I'm pretty sure this has been done before but I thought I'd put it up anyways. Hope you enjoy.
not really fair to count unruned effects since blizz decided they would be strictly worse than runed ones.
Barb have 33.180.840.000.000 possible combinations of hes skills.
but i'm sure 33.000.000.000.000 of these are not viable at all
skills cant be selected twice or more.
runes are counted in as a possibility for each skill.
times passives and every combo there is without using same twice
i dare you to find any errors.
--edit--
added note about not using unruned skills
However, I think it should be:
([SkillCount] choose 6) * n^6 * ([PassiveCount] choose 3),
where n is either 5 or 6 depending on if you are counting unruned or not. It should be n^6 because you have six skills with n runes, that's n*n*n*n*n*n permutations. You use permutation and not combination here because order actually does matter in this case since skill5_rune3 and skill4_rune3 are different.
Reason for Edit: I realized that my opinion on Kyrenin's calculation being correct was premature.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
There is a difference here. My numbers are not an estimate, they're correct. The OP is bullshit. Your point is completely meaningless in a world of easily swappable skills.
The important point being made here is that there are a significant number of builds to try in the game, and that it's non-trivial to determine the build to use. Compare to d2 where there were significantly *more* builds, but it was obvious what the best were, and your point wasn't meaningless because you *did* need to re-roll for *every minor difference.*
Correct or not isn't really the point. You're saying theres 1.8 tril, hes saying a metric butt ton more. The applied difference to any logical argument concerning the game is.... Nothing. It wouldn't affect the discussion wether it was half as much, or that number to the nth degree. I just don't undestand arguing of the specifics of the number of possible builds. THAT is very trivial, especially as the number of possible builds has nothing to do with determining "the build to use". Does knowing how many houses there are for sale on the entire planet help me to determine which one to buy? Not in any way, wether it was 1.8 trillion houses, or however many quadrillion houses, the house I buy is not affected in any way by this knowledge, and there is no practical use provided by knowing the answer.
The only possible way it would truly affect me would be if I was going to examine all the possibilities. When there are that many possibilities, ( in either case, well beyond the realm of possibility for anyone to acknowledge and check all of them ), it is quite clear no one will be doing such a thing.
Incase it seems necessary for me to defend that point as well, if you were able to look at, and consider every one of those possible builds in a single second, and the next in the next second, with no down time between, so one per second, for consecutive seconds.... you would spend the next 57,843.49 years going over the possible builds.
If it offended you that I called your math an estimate then sure, I'm sorry. I couldn't be bothered to work up the math myself, and so I wasn't going to confirm or deny either conclusion. To add to the silliness of calculating an exact number at such an extreme, if any skill is removed and not replace, or one added and not removed, it will invalidate all previous absolutely correct large numbers.
So... To state the point I originally made, which was apparently dismissed, for what reason I don't know...
The number of builds is sufficiently large for any discussion of diversity or any such topic as it could possibly apply to any aspect of the game.
Theory crafting should be used to figure out mathematical problems and possibilities that actually have some applicable use...
You're correct tanis, I typo'd it while converting from 6^6 to see the non runed totals. 5^6 is approximately double 6^5, so it's not too difficult to estimate the correct values from the original, if I also had the typo when using google to calculate.
Nektel, you can dismiss the numbers all you want, but for proper theorycrafting to occur, researching all possible builds is what must be done. You cannot choose skills, or even runes, in a vacuum except when comparing two builds that differ by only those skills, which is an exceptionally small sample space to examine.
For proper theory crafting to occur, you should disregard the differences between the large majority of the possible builds as an overwhelming percent of those possible will be far from optimal just for the fact that they're being thrown together randomly and examined, and then meaningless to the fact that the skills may NOT be useful together, you're suggesting that same build should be considerd again with a different rune in x skill.
No, for proper theory crafting to occur one must logically take the first steps and hypothosise which skills could or should work together and compare from there, making only the changes the make sense, thus substantially limiting the number of possible comparisons needed/wasted. This would get the amount of time spent down to a reasonable value and thus allow people to play in this century.
Look, again I'm not arguing that the numbers are wrong, or whatever the case, but can you possibly tell me how the knowledge that there are 1.8 trillion builds or if I were to tell you there were 1.8 quadrillion builds would have any real affect on what you did to come up with a build?
What's the reason in going so far as to avoid knowing it is the better question.
Regardless of the process, which I'm not disagreeing with, it is of interest to know the % of all possible builds that are deemed "viable" as that will indicate Blizzard's success in their implementation, as stated by them. It's also of interest when naysayers claim d3 isn't complex enough in its pure # of builds. It's also of interest when companies claim there are ____ions of ____, to know just how accurate their claims are.
I also disagree with the idea that a single rune change isn't worth investigating. Numerous runes change the functionality of a skill so drastically, that they are separate skills. Disregarding at the skill level is premature.
Barb have 33.180.840.000.000 possible combinations of hes skills.
but i'm sure 33.000.000.000.000 of these are not viable at all
skills cant be selected twice or more.
runes are counted in as a possibility for each skill.
times passives and every combo there is without using same twice
i dare you to find any errors.
--edit--
added note about not using unruned skills
You're wrong because it doesn't matter what order you have the skills. The way you did your math it would matter. Having bash as your left click slot vs it being in the #1 slot doesn't matter. Same with the passives.. it doesn't matter which slot each passive is in -- you're math is way off. Look up the words "permutation" then "combination" in terms of statistics; you'll know what I mean.
I'm not saying it matters - 10000000 builds vs 100000000000 builds - I'm not going to notice a difference, both are huge numbers. But it's not *simple* math like what you're doing.
What's the reason in going so far as to avoid knowing it is the better question.
Regardless of the process, which I'm not disagreeing with, it is of interest to know the % of all possible builds that are deemed "viable" as that will indicate Blizzard's success in their implementation, as stated by them. It's also of interest when naysayers claim d3 isn't complex enough in its pure # of builds. It's also of interest when companies claim there are ____ions of ____, to know just how accurate their claims are.
I also disagree with the idea that a single rune change isn't worth investigating. Numerous runes change the functionality of a skill so drastically, that they are separate skills. Disregarding at the skill level is premature.
In fairness though, I don't know that it's helpful to consider each skill-rune combination as unique. Most runes don't really change the character of the skill enough to warrant that imho. The realistic difference between two otherwise identical builds with a single rune difference where one does +10% damage and the other does +10% movement debuff is pretty small. Is it fair to consider them entirely separate builds in the context you're talking about? Certainly if one is viable, the other is as well simply because there is about a hair's width of difference between them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
...and if you disagree with me, you're probably <insert random ad hominem attack here>.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Each class also has different numbers of possible builds.
Barb: 8421580000000000
DH: 9257550000000000
Monk: 3128020000000000
WD: 10226200000000000
Wizard: 16241300000000000
I'm pretty sure this has been done before but I thought I'd put it up anyways. Hope you enjoy.
Yeah, & you're really bright.
and that is one of them. my point is a substantial percentage are not viable. I am not saying there is not a huge amount of options and builds, I am just making the point that it doesn't matter how many are mathematically possible because only a certain percentage of those are practical and I don't know how that would be calculated.
I dunno...I could see a comical use for this build (even though the passives don't go with the skills). You could use this as a distraction character in Inferno while letting the rest of your party destroy the mobs. The ultimate pacifist!
However, I do think that in the end, the viability does decerease as you go up in difficulty. I imagine in like a pyramid with four sections, the bottom being normal difficulty, it will have the largets amount of viable builds, as pretty much anything will work. But as you go up in difficulty you find fewer and fewer builds that will be viable. But the skills themselves don't loose their viability, you just have to use combinations of those skills that work. In Inferno, I see possibly a dozen different builds for each class that are still viable, many will have repeat skills, but in different combinations. It will still come down to play style, and if your in a group or solo, all those things are factors.
Tired of the same regurgitated blue posts? Want more in depth coverage of
the aspects of the game you want to know about? Check us out!
([SkillCount] choose 6) * 5^6 * ([PassiveCount] choose 3)
Barb = 22 & 16 = 652,863,750,000
DH = 23 & 15 = 717,670,078,125
Monk = 21 & 13 = 242,492,250,000
WD = 22 & 17 = 792,763,125,000
Wiz = 25 & 15 = 1,259,070,312,500
Edit: Corrected typo and resulting values.
Snap
So it wouldn't be 6^5*(# of skills) like people are doing.
Just put this into your common graphing calculator (I would do it, but I don't know where mine is):
(# of skills^5) C (6) -- using nCr, that will give you the total number of combinations possible with the skill. It's raised to the 5th power because you won't use a skill unruned.
Then multiply it by the passive combinations if you want too:
(# of passive skills) C (3) -- using nCr
^^^Nvm all that, because that doesn't even take into account that you can't have 2 runed skills of the same base skill at the same time, so it will be less that that result, about 6 times less.
Thats for 1,000,000 combinations.
It's safe to assume that there is technically more than that.
Is there a need to bicker over the specifics of how many billions/trillions/quadrillions there might be? It seems that any arguement can be made by assuming the number of combinations is sufficiently large, no?
The important point being made here is that there are a significant number of builds to try in the game, and that it's non-trivial to determine the build to use. Compare to d2 where there were significantly *more* builds, but it was obvious what the best were, and your point wasn't meaningless because you *did* need to re-roll for *every minor difference.*
not really fair to count unruned effects since blizz decided they would be strictly worse than runed ones.
Example:
BARB: 22 skills 5 runes each + 16 passives in 3 diffrent slots
you cant have same skill whit different rune
NOT counting unruned skills
(22*5)*(21*5)*(20*5)*(19*5)*(18*5)
(skill*runes)*(remaining skills*runes)*(remaining skills*runes)*(remaining skills*runes)*(remaining skills*runes)
(22*5)*(21*5)*(20*5)*(19*5)*(18*5) = 9.875.250.000
9.875.250.000*16=158.004.000.000 (passives)
158.004.000.000*15=2.370.060.000.000 (remaining passives)
2.370.060.000.000*14=33.180.840.000.000 (remaining passives)
Barb have 33.180.840.000.000 possible combinations of hes skills.
but i'm sure 33.000.000.000.000 of these are not viable at all
skills cant be selected twice or more.
runes are counted in as a possibility for each skill.
times passives and every combo there is without using same twice
i dare you to find any errors.
--edit--
added note about not using unruned skills
How about that you're counting skill1_rune1 + skill2_rune1 and skill2_rune1 + skill1_rune1 as two different setups?
Kyrenin is correct to use combination, which is described here: http://en.wikipedia....iki/Combination
However, I think it should be:
([SkillCount] choose 6) * n^6 * ([PassiveCount] choose 3),
where n is either 5 or 6 depending on if you are counting unruned or not. It should be n^6 because you have six skills with n runes, that's n*n*n*n*n*n permutations. You use permutation and not combination here because order actually does matter in this case since skill5_rune3 and skill4_rune3 are different.
Reason for Edit: I realized that my opinion on Kyrenin's calculation being correct was premature.
Correct or not isn't really the point. You're saying theres 1.8 tril, hes saying a metric butt ton more. The applied difference to any logical argument concerning the game is.... Nothing. It wouldn't affect the discussion wether it was half as much, or that number to the nth degree. I just don't undestand arguing of the specifics of the number of possible builds. THAT is very trivial, especially as the number of possible builds has nothing to do with determining "the build to use". Does knowing how many houses there are for sale on the entire planet help me to determine which one to buy? Not in any way, wether it was 1.8 trillion houses, or however many quadrillion houses, the house I buy is not affected in any way by this knowledge, and there is no practical use provided by knowing the answer.
The only possible way it would truly affect me would be if I was going to examine all the possibilities. When there are that many possibilities, ( in either case, well beyond the realm of possibility for anyone to acknowledge and check all of them ), it is quite clear no one will be doing such a thing.
Incase it seems necessary for me to defend that point as well, if you were able to look at, and consider every one of those possible builds in a single second, and the next in the next second, with no down time between, so one per second, for consecutive seconds.... you would spend the next 57,843.49 years going over the possible builds.
If it offended you that I called your math an estimate then sure, I'm sorry. I couldn't be bothered to work up the math myself, and so I wasn't going to confirm or deny either conclusion. To add to the silliness of calculating an exact number at such an extreme, if any skill is removed and not replace, or one added and not removed, it will invalidate all previous absolutely correct large numbers.
So... To state the point I originally made, which was apparently dismissed, for what reason I don't know...
The number of builds is sufficiently large for any discussion of diversity or any such topic as it could possibly apply to any aspect of the game.
Theory crafting should be used to figure out mathematical problems and possibilities that actually have some applicable use...
USE YOUR POWERS FOR GOOD!
Nektel, you can dismiss the numbers all you want, but for proper theorycrafting to occur, researching all possible builds is what must be done. You cannot choose skills, or even runes, in a vacuum except when comparing two builds that differ by only those skills, which is an exceptionally small sample space to examine.
No, for proper theory crafting to occur one must logically take the first steps and hypothosise which skills could or should work together and compare from there, making only the changes the make sense, thus substantially limiting the number of possible comparisons needed/wasted. This would get the amount of time spent down to a reasonable value and thus allow people to play in this century.
Look, again I'm not arguing that the numbers are wrong, or whatever the case, but can you possibly tell me how the knowledge that there are 1.8 trillion builds or if I were to tell you there were 1.8 quadrillion builds would have any real affect on what you did to come up with a build?
Regardless of the process, which I'm not disagreeing with, it is of interest to know the % of all possible builds that are deemed "viable" as that will indicate Blizzard's success in their implementation, as stated by them. It's also of interest when naysayers claim d3 isn't complex enough in its pure # of builds. It's also of interest when companies claim there are ____ions of ____, to know just how accurate their claims are.
I also disagree with the idea that a single rune change isn't worth investigating. Numerous runes change the functionality of a skill so drastically, that they are separate skills. Disregarding at the skill level is premature.
You're wrong because it doesn't matter what order you have the skills. The way you did your math it would matter. Having bash as your left click slot vs it being in the #1 slot doesn't matter. Same with the passives.. it doesn't matter which slot each passive is in -- you're math is way off. Look up the words "permutation" then "combination" in terms of statistics; you'll know what I mean.
I'm not saying it matters - 10000000 builds vs 100000000000 builds - I'm not going to notice a difference, both are huge numbers. But it's not *simple* math like what you're doing.
In fairness though, I don't know that it's helpful to consider each skill-rune combination as unique. Most runes don't really change the character of the skill enough to warrant that imho. The realistic difference between two otherwise identical builds with a single rune difference where one does +10% damage and the other does +10% movement debuff is pretty small. Is it fair to consider them entirely separate builds in the context you're talking about? Certainly if one is viable, the other is as well simply because there is about a hair's width of difference between them.