Primaries are not covering anything, They don't deal too much dmg, They don't generate the resource builds need, They don't give anything more than wasting time casting them.
You've pretty much covered what I think is the main issue with them, and I agree with you on this - the fact that many players think they're just a waste of time.
I think that's exactly the problem I have with them, at the moment. For a skill that's called 'primary', they don't feel like it, and at higher levels of play, they seem extraneous. Now, I might be wrong, but judging from your reply you're completely okay with this state of things, apart from maybe tweaking the resource generation they produce. Which is perfectly valid - I'm not saying my opinion is better than yours in any way.
My take is that fixing resource generation doesn't really help much - that between passives and legendaries, a primary skill can always be replaced with either a dps buff or a damage mitigation skill. If, say, Bolas suddenly generated 10 Hatred a pop tomorrow, I sincerely doubt that Demon Hunters will suddenly replace their Kridershots, remove Prep from their hotbar, or stop using Bats. Because you can't hit with a primary and a spender at the same time, and in the current state of play, the spender will typically win out.
If you view primaries as simply something to be left behind as gear improves, it's certainly a valid argument. However, Blizzard seems to keep trying to find ways to elevate primary skills to higher relevance - see Simplicity's Strength, Depth Diggers, or the recently revamped Thousand Storms. Somewhere, someone in the dev team certainly thinks that primaries should at least be an option at late game play.
Having them generate defense effects is a pretty good idea that I could get behind. Punish is a key example of this, and we haven't even gotten to its built-in synergy with Shield Bash and Blessed Shield. I doubt that people would choose to use primaries simply for this, though, because again, you can replace it with a better and real defense buff. But at the same time, a primary that could realistically compete with, say, Ignore Pain while still dealing damage would be untenable. I keep going back to the spender synergies idea because at the end of the day, everyone has a damage spell (except maybe for ZDps builds, but even Piranhas deal a pretty good chunk of AoE).
Maybe you just don't care for primary skills, and that's all right. I for one though, think they can still be changed to become more interesting and fun to play with. Damage might not be the solution, but I still believe the key to doing that are synergies that occur with spender interaction.
I respectfully disagree and no matter what your post hoc comments are, it is right there in plain English. I think you need to think through and analyze a little more coherently, with a much more open mind. Adding new items is not as much of a drain as changing something that affects all of the current items. I don't think you even read thoroughly what I suggested. I wonder if this close mindedness is a product of the newly 'educated' youths that universities and colleges are producing these years. Everyone thinks they're correct 100% of the time without allowing any new ideas or thoughts to be introduced into their thinking. Makes me sad, really.
Having been involved in the development of multiple video games, I can say that your analysis of the development process is quite off. Since there definitely seems to be a problem with reading everything, I won't bore you with details you don't care to read. So, I could go on and try to point out the miscellaneous mistakes, but the conversation is very clearly not open and with that said I wish you gl on your thoughts and you'll see what is being talked about happen in the future.
Ps: I wouldn't say relatively limited development team. It is literally a limited development team by definition
I have no problem reading actually. At no point do you make a statement suggesting anything but agreement with the OP's general design idea (change the skills themselves). However the math of actually making large changes is very simple.
You have X developers who have to get Y done. If we assume they all have to work together for balance than any changes to one system need crosstalk to communicate and test for balance in all other systems. You could argue that the team working on skill balance is different form the team working on item balance (and they could be) but when it comes to actually implementing a large scale change (a complete rework of the design intent and purpose of primary skills) you not only have to get "Skill team" working on the actual rework of the skills but "Balance team" has to go and check every change made by "skill team" to make sure nothing breaks. Then since there will definitely be something broken (any change similar to the OP's suggestion is a massive net buff for builds that already use primary skills) then either "Skill team" needs to compensate by making changes to skills or "Item team" needs to address item issues.
On the other hand everything in the OP could be added through the itemization system in utility/defense item slots. "Skill team" more or less gets a pass unless "Balance team" finds a problem and the biggest difference is "Art team" has to do visuals. However there's a lot of empty real estate in the legendary item pool and that real estate can be co-opted by "Item team" during their already planned design cycles.
It's literally the difference between using an already planned cycle system and already allocated development focus and refocusing manpower on a completely new development focus. There's a huge difference in how much effort it takes to retask an ongoing effort (updating old legendaries) vs starting an entirely new rework of part of the skill system. Unless Blizz is internally looking at reworking large portions of the skill system I feel it's highly unlikely we'll see a primary skill rework. On the other hand since Blizz is already updating items with legendary affects it's much more likely they will respond to requests for new legendary effects making primary skills more fun. Hell look at the seasonal patches so far. Triumvirate, Delsere's, Omnislash, Blessed of Haull, Leonine Bow, Spirit Guards, Raiment, Depth Diggers, etc.
I'm not saying there's no benefit to be gained form working on primaries. I'm saying that there's already development time devoted to creating new legendary effects which make primary skills useful/fun. I am saying that the OP's "rework" would be just as effective as a collection of legendary affixes. And as a bonus if implemented as itemization it creates an opt-in situation (choices are healthy) as well as creating an itemization moment "I just found this set of pauldrons that does X for Y skill time to test it".
You're welcome to actually talk about my general PoV on the design process. I actually do read everything you say and think about it. Obviously far more than you think about what I say because obviously you're completely right and I'm completely wrong, why else would nothing I say have any affect on your stance.
I'm willing to change my stance if you can come up with an actually compelling reason to do so. I have yet to see such a reason.
No problem reading, eh? "Now if you think having utility on primaries would get them a slot in "spender" builds then actually suggest some utility effects (rather than free damage, which is what every one of the suggestions I read are)." Your response: oh, all the passives are just free damage because it does this which is a damage thing...." Or my personal favourite "that loh? lol means nothing" <- this point is particularly hilarious simply because 1000 LoH number could be anything (you even made a comment about this, then did a 180 in another response :/). 130% WD is practically worthless, especially at the top end. You were originally referring to the effects of the runes, the English is pretty plain here as much as you spew forth post hoc.
"You're welcome to actually talk about my general PoV on the design process. I actually do read everything you say and think about it. Obviously far more than you think about what I say because obviously you're completely right and I'm completely wrong, why else would nothing I say have any affect on your stance."
^ this is a very childish response. I have talked about your pov on the design process and it is different from the reality, which you are acting as if you know when you say: "You have X developers who have to get Y done. If we assume they all have to work together for balance than any changes to one system need crosstalk to communicate and test for balance in all other systems..." <- you talk about a process you do not know about and then oversimplify it. I just spent time explaining to you that it's different coming from someone who has worked in the industry. Then your next post is literally trying to counteract that. Obviously you're not reading, thinking and obviously no reason would compel you to do anything/think anything different unless it was your own and this is how you come off. It is not this simple. I hope you can learn this one singular point from this, since we have failed to do anything more :/ "It's literally the difference between using an already planned cycle system and already allocated development focus and refocusing manpower on a completely new development focus. There's a huge difference in how much effort it takes to retask an ongoing effort (updating old legendaries) vs starting an entirely new rework of part of the skill system." <- It is comments like these where I am amazed that someone who has never worked in the field, somehow understands the entire process without a doubt. You really amaze me with your insight into a field you've never worked, seen operating or participated in. Golly, I wish I worked in an environment where creating a game and seeing it progress was so easily changeable as you have suggested here. It's just a matter of reallocating resources, nbd! I also never once suggested an entire new rework of the system, that was what the op said. Which furthers my point about a lack of reading....
I simply don't respect the opinions of people who do not respect the opinions of others. I never once said you're completely wrong and I'm completely right, I said you're closed minded and the more you respond, the further you prove this point. You keep repeating yourself and the points show no deviation towards anything other than your own thoughts. As I said before, no reason would compel you to do anything unless it was your own and this is how you come off.
I was really hoping to come into this thread and see some interesting responses. Unfortunate, I've been put off by this thread and have probably put off others with useless ramblings and a redundant argument with no real teeth or meat. I really hope, as you grow up, that you open your mind and allow points/thoughts other than your own to come into your thinking, even if you later disagree with them.
I won't be continuing in this thread and I hope the OP can pull it back somehow. Gl to you all. T.T
No problem reading, eh? "Now if you think having utility on primaries would get them a slot in "spender" builds then actually suggest some utility effects (rather than free damage, which is what every one of the suggestions I read are)." Your response: oh, all the passives are just free damage because it does this which is a damage thing...." Or my personal favourite "that loh? lol means nothing" <- this point is particularly hilarious simply because 1000 LoH number could be anything (you even made a comment about this, then did a 180 in another response :/). 130% WD is practically worthless, especially at the top end. You were originally referring to the effects of the runes, the English is pretty plain here as much as you spew forth post hoc.
Almost every core bonus provided by the listed changes is just free damage. The WD primaries have probably the most utility room. Whether or not the LoH is worth it is, yes, dependent on how much LoH you get. However LoH is not a compelling stat for almost every build, especially for a class predicated on total lockdown or complete damage avoidance. The uptune would have to be massive. As far as the damage added being good or not, the upper damage values are 190% or 245% weapon damage. For non-harvester builds that's a significant damage bonus. You could go look at the Crusader pitch to see the worst of the "here's damage, grats" bonuses where the primaries are offering almost no actual personal utility and converting utility stats to damage stats (not terrible but not particularly amazing or utility oriented). If the central theme of the skillset is going to be utility then it should be utility. Almost every primary proposal for Crusader, Barbarian and Monk is just damage buffing.
With regards to oversimplification of the design process: I am well aware it's more complicated than assign X to Y. My central point is they've already focused development in a certain way. As someone who's had to switch development focus midstream it is in my experience not a particularly smooth change. It would be smoother in a software environment because changing which ideas you spitball is relatively easy, but given that as you've so kindly underscore the "development team is limited by definition" the most effective use of manpower and resources is the one that produces the most balanced content quickest.
If you have a compelling reason as to why a total overhaul of the primary system would be faster and easier than updating old legends that are already being updated I'm all ears. But you haven't given a compelling reason. So far though you haven't actually enlightened me as to how my position is wrong with regards to development only stated what amounts to "you're ignorant". Which is, I suppose, true form the perspective of an actually developer but I'm far more enlightened than the average person.
With regards to an actual primary rework: Scrap inherent damage bonuses, focus on bonuses to utility or defensive effects. Add items that provide the damage if its needed. If it was a total rework I'd clean up the functionality of a number of the skills (Shock Pulse, Firebomb, Cleave). Delineate primaries along functional purposes. If there are spender synergies they also be utility or defensive. Good design areas here are +Melee DR, +Resistances, +Crowd Control, RCR, CDR. Significant mechanical functional changes are also good. An interesting idea would be (rather than buffing spender damage) receiving a bonus to your primary skill after spending. Free damage bonus is a relatively boring incentive. If primaries are going to be used they need functional tuning more than anything else.
"After X uses of this skill your next spender has no attack animation"
Would be an example of a way to make the primary compelling in damage without actually buffing your damage. The best primary to put this on would be one like Electrocute or Frenzy. This allows the "gotta keep attacking" nature of the primary to translate into a more fluid playstyle which will attract more players. Placed on a pseudo-channel like electrocute it allows for an uninterrupted stream of lightning unbroken by other casts. On a mobile skill like Frenzy it becomes all about enabling "long" animation skills without interrupting the fluidity of your motion.
I'm on board with making primaries more compelling. I'm just not on board with a rework focused on "more damage" in (napkin math) like 2/3 of the bonuses.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You've pretty much covered what I think is the main issue with them, and I agree with you on this - the fact that many players think they're just a waste of time.
I think that's exactly the problem I have with them, at the moment. For a skill that's called 'primary', they don't feel like it, and at higher levels of play, they seem extraneous. Now, I might be wrong, but judging from your reply you're completely okay with this state of things, apart from maybe tweaking the resource generation they produce. Which is perfectly valid - I'm not saying my opinion is better than yours in any way.
My take is that fixing resource generation doesn't really help much - that between passives and legendaries, a primary skill can always be replaced with either a dps buff or a damage mitigation skill. If, say, Bolas suddenly generated 10 Hatred a pop tomorrow, I sincerely doubt that Demon Hunters will suddenly replace their Kridershots, remove Prep from their hotbar, or stop using Bats. Because you can't hit with a primary and a spender at the same time, and in the current state of play, the spender will typically win out.
If you view primaries as simply something to be left behind as gear improves, it's certainly a valid argument. However, Blizzard seems to keep trying to find ways to elevate primary skills to higher relevance - see Simplicity's Strength, Depth Diggers, or the recently revamped Thousand Storms. Somewhere, someone in the dev team certainly thinks that primaries should at least be an option at late game play.
Having them generate defense effects is a pretty good idea that I could get behind. Punish is a key example of this, and we haven't even gotten to its built-in synergy with Shield Bash and Blessed Shield. I doubt that people would choose to use primaries simply for this, though, because again, you can replace it with a better and real defense buff. But at the same time, a primary that could realistically compete with, say, Ignore Pain while still dealing damage would be untenable. I keep going back to the spender synergies idea because at the end of the day, everyone has a damage spell (except maybe for ZDps builds, but even Piranhas deal a pretty good chunk of AoE).
Maybe you just don't care for primary skills, and that's all right. I for one though, think they can still be changed to become more interesting and fun to play with. Damage might not be the solution, but I still believe the key to doing that are synergies that occur with spender interaction.
No problem reading, eh? "Now if you think having utility on primaries would get them a slot in "spender" builds then actually suggest some utility effects (rather than free damage, which is what every one of the suggestions I read are)." Your response: oh, all the passives are just free damage because it does this which is a damage thing...." Or my personal favourite "that loh? lol means nothing" <- this point is particularly hilarious simply because 1000 LoH number could be anything (you even made a comment about this, then did a 180 in another response :/). 130% WD is practically worthless, especially at the top end. You were originally referring to the effects of the runes, the English is pretty plain here as much as you spew forth post hoc.
"You're welcome to actually talk about my general PoV on the design process. I actually do read everything you say and think about it. Obviously far more than you think about what I say because obviously you're completely right and I'm completely wrong, why else would nothing I say have any affect on your stance."
^ this is a very childish response. I have talked about your pov on the design process and it is different from the reality, which you are acting as if you know when you say: "You have X developers who have to get Y done. If we assume they all have to work together for balance than any changes to one system need crosstalk to communicate and test for balance in all other systems..." <- you talk about a process you do not know about and then oversimplify it. I just spent time explaining to you that it's different coming from someone who has worked in the industry. Then your next post is literally trying to counteract that. Obviously you're not reading, thinking and obviously no reason would compel you to do anything/think anything different unless it was your own and this is how you come off. It is not this simple. I hope you can learn this one singular point from this, since we have failed to do anything more :/ "It's literally the difference between using an already planned cycle system and already allocated development focus and refocusing manpower on a completely new development focus. There's a huge difference in how much effort it takes to retask an ongoing effort (updating old legendaries) vs starting an entirely new rework of part of the skill system." <- It is comments like these where I am amazed that someone who has never worked in the field, somehow understands the entire process without a doubt. You really amaze me with your insight into a field you've never worked, seen operating or participated in. Golly, I wish I worked in an environment where creating a game and seeing it progress was so easily changeable as you have suggested here. It's just a matter of reallocating resources, nbd! I also never once suggested an entire new rework of the system, that was what the op said. Which furthers my point about a lack of reading....
I simply don't respect the opinions of people who do not respect the opinions of others. I never once said you're completely wrong and I'm completely right, I said you're closed minded and the more you respond, the further you prove this point. You keep repeating yourself and the points show no deviation towards anything other than your own thoughts. As I said before, no reason would compel you to do anything unless it was your own and this is how you come off.
I was really hoping to come into this thread and see some interesting responses. Unfortunate, I've been put off by this thread and have probably put off others with useless ramblings and a redundant argument with no real teeth or meat. I really hope, as you grow up, that you open your mind and allow points/thoughts other than your own to come into your thinking, even if you later disagree with them.
I won't be continuing in this thread and I hope the OP can pull it back somehow. Gl to you all. T.T
With regards to oversimplification of the design process: I am well aware it's more complicated than assign X to Y. My central point is they've already focused development in a certain way. As someone who's had to switch development focus midstream it is in my experience not a particularly smooth change. It would be smoother in a software environment because changing which ideas you spitball is relatively easy, but given that as you've so kindly underscore the "development team is limited by definition" the most effective use of manpower and resources is the one that produces the most balanced content quickest.
If you have a compelling reason as to why a total overhaul of the primary system would be faster and easier than updating old legends that are already being updated I'm all ears. But you haven't given a compelling reason. So far though you haven't actually enlightened me as to how my position is wrong with regards to development only stated what amounts to "you're ignorant". Which is, I suppose, true form the perspective of an actually developer but I'm far more enlightened than the average person.
With regards to an actual primary rework: Scrap inherent damage bonuses, focus on bonuses to utility or defensive effects. Add items that provide the damage if its needed. If it was a total rework I'd clean up the functionality of a number of the skills (Shock Pulse, Firebomb, Cleave). Delineate primaries along functional purposes. If there are spender synergies they also be utility or defensive. Good design areas here are +Melee DR, +Resistances, +Crowd Control, RCR, CDR. Significant mechanical functional changes are also good. An interesting idea would be (rather than buffing spender damage) receiving a bonus to your primary skill after spending. Free damage bonus is a relatively boring incentive. If primaries are going to be used they need functional tuning more than anything else.
"After X uses of this skill your next spender has no attack animation"
Would be an example of a way to make the primary compelling in damage without actually buffing your damage. The best primary to put this on would be one like Electrocute or Frenzy. This allows the "gotta keep attacking" nature of the primary to translate into a more fluid playstyle which will attract more players. Placed on a pseudo-channel like electrocute it allows for an uninterrupted stream of lightning unbroken by other casts. On a mobile skill like Frenzy it becomes all about enabling "long" animation skills without interrupting the fluidity of your motion.
I'm on board with making primaries more compelling. I'm just not on board with a rework focused on "more damage" in (napkin math) like 2/3 of the bonuses.