Well, a lot of people seem to be against BoA on Transmog. Thinking it over more, I have to say I agree. Those kind of fun, aesthetic customizations, shouldn't tie the item to you permanently. It would be as simple as removing the transmog once it changes hands, as others have suggested.
Enchanting, on the other hand, I still say that should remain BoA. I could see taking the binding off if the enchant is reversed, but that could go either way.
Definitely have to agree to an extent with this, I mean, if some of those stats are clear-cut, then I like them. But even "Damage," that's clearly a reference to DPS, but when factoring in kiting, retreats, etc....it's not as clear. I like knowing that when I shoot an enemy or swing, I do X damage. Eh...then again, D2's damage was supposedly clear cut, and that still didn't seem accurate 100%, so...maybe I can get used to this.
Well, Damage (DPS) basically says how much damage you will do over time (on average) with your auto-attack. I think that's pretty easy to understand. The real problem is that nobody actually uses auto-attack and your actual dps is going to depend on a lot of other factors, like movement as you mentioned. But from the standpoint of "this is what your gear is doing for you", I think it's pretty basic.
No, you see, I prefer Armor, because that's a real stat. Items actually increase your Armor, and you can look at them and see they give you 400 Armor. Toughness is just a made up stat, that amalgamates a few different 'real' stats; the same with Healing - it's not a 'real' stat, it's mos likely composed of a few different stats. That's why I don't like them. Damage is fine.
How so? "Damage" isn't a real stat either, at least not the one listed on the main character page. It's a composite of weapon damage, attack speed, critical chance/damage,etc. And as I mentioned above, even that doesn't give you the whole story. You have to look at the details to get the whole story, and that will never change. But I think it's nice to have these composites to show you, in general, whether your offense or defense is going up or down.
Meh, I just never like these 'all-encompassing' categories, in any game; they're pretty meaningless. I guess I'll have to open the 'Details' tab more often, I suppose.
Well, I wouldn't say they are meaningless. If something increases your damage by 20000 and reduces your toughness by 100, I think that's a pretty good trade. People who want the exact are going to go look at that anyway, so I don't see the problem with having those "summary" stats there on the main tab for those who just want the short version.
Anyway, my point was that "Toughness" was better than just "Armor". If you mean that they just don't belong there at all, then I guess I can't argue.
Socket is there because it was the original property. The original property is always available as a choice.
It's entirely possible I'm still looking at these images wrong, apparently I just did it with Ignatius here, :-)
But when I look at the order...it seems like +430 Strength is one of the item's original stats (seen in the first image alongside damage modifiers, Intel and Vitality, fairly common for Echoing Furies, I believe). Strength gets replaced with a Socket, and then the last image is showing the option to switch it out for what was originally there, which to me seems like Strength.
Am I interpreting that wrong? :-)
No, you're absolutely right. I read it wrong.
If more people could do what you just did, Maka, the world would be a much better place.
Also, I must say I don't like the new character screen. That "Damage/Toughness/Healing" looks.......ugly, and not really AAA-ish.
I hadn't even noticed that, but it looks good to me. I'm assuming 'Toughness' is something like EHP (which, let's face it, makes a lot more sense if "Damage" is actually DPS), and healing is...what could that be? Some combination of life on hit or health globe bonus?
I remember suggesting something similar to that...
Being able to un-bind the item would kind of remove the point of binding in the first place.
No it wouldn't. It just means you can't enchant and transmog a bunch of stuff and hand it out and sell it to people. It also allows players to have their items protected, to an extent, so that they can't be taken or used by other people. Ya know...because the idea is that if a player cares enough about their items that they want to enchant or transmog them, they probably don't want them to get stolen or handled.
That's all. You want them to be allowed to be given to another player, just disenchant or remove the transmog. Simple.
I guess it depends on what the purpose of binding actually is, from Blizzard's perspective. If it's just about preventing the altered item from being tradeable, then removing the change to remove the binding would make sense. But if it's moreso about removing items from the economy or applying a more permanent 'penalty' for using the service, then they should stay bound.
Whether or not binding is actually necessary at all is another discussion outside the scope of this thread.
Awesome, I was so disappointed when the Mystic didn't make it into the game to begin with, so this is definitely good news.
However, am I the only one who thinks transmogrification, and the fact that it binds an item to your account, as counter productive? I mean, unless you have enough purchasing power to not worry about losses - and most of us don't - you'll never wanna bind your best gear to your account. I, at least, view my gear as currency. I need to be able to sell it off(or trade it come the expansion), and I can't afford to tie it down just for looks.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the transmogrification idea! It's one of the key upgrades in RoS, but this kinda wrecks it for me. Or am I missing something?
Well, binding is a good way of removing items from the economy so inflation doesn't set in. It's questionable whether that's really necessary with the AH being removed, but we have yet to see what Blizz's plans are for trading in the future. They may yet remove the binding restriction.
Nice sig, btw. Daft Punk rules.
Yeah, I don't think the details above stated it, but I think the devs said that when you enchant something, it binds it to your account, but when you return the item to normal, it kinda disenchants it and removes the binding.
I want to believe, if it works that way for enchanting, the same might work with transmog....?
Being able to un-bind the item would kind of remove the point of binding in the first place.
Awesome, I was so disappointed when the Mystic didn't make it into the game to begin with, so this is definitely good news.
However, am I the only one who thinks transmogrification, and the fact that it binds an item to your account, as counter productive? I mean, unless you have enough purchasing power to not worry about losses - and most of us don't - you'll never wanna bind your best gear to your account. I, at least, view my gear as currency. I need to be able to sell it off(or trade it come the expansion), and I can't afford to tie it down just for looks.
Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the transmogrification idea! It's one of the key upgrades in RoS, but this kinda wrecks it for me. Or am I missing something?
Well, binding is a good way of removing items from the economy so inflation doesn't set in. It's questionable whether that's really necessary with the AH being removed, but we have yet to see what Blizz's plans are for trading in the future. They may yet remove the binding restriction.
So basically you unlock the specific item tiers IE: Sovereign, Archon instead of specific item appearances.
That makes way more sense. The wording is a bit confusing..
Yes, you can make a shoulder look like any other shoulder or a glove look like any other glove, but you can only transmog an item into the appearance of an item of the same type. So, for shoulders, every tier appearance and every legendary appearance would be available. You don't have to keep the item you want to use in your stash or anything.
"All items with a visual appearance are currently planned to be eligible for Transmogrification, including Legendary and Set items. In order to use a specific visual appearance, you’ll first need to unlock it; once unlocked, however, that appearance will be available to all heroes on your account. Common, Magic, and Rare item appearances will unlock as you level up the Mystic, while Legendary and Set item appearances will unlock only after you’ve identified them."
So, does this mean that classes will be able to wear (visually) the armor sets belonging to other classes? For example, if I unlock an armor set on my barb, can I then use that set (visually) on my DH? That would mean I could transmog my DH helm to a WD mask. That seems a bit off to me.
As far as armor appearances go, each class has their own version of each piece, so I would assume that they will just keep that when you transmog the item. As for class specific items like voodoo masks and sources, I would think those would be inelligible. Remember that a "voodoo mask" is a specific type of "helm" so I would think you would not be able to transmog a non-voodoo mask helm into the appearance of a voodoo mask.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Please don't feed the trolls.
Enchanting, on the other hand, I still say that should remain BoA. I could see taking the binding off if the enchant is reversed, but that could go either way.
Well, if you define 'trade' as 'non-AH trade', then technically he's right.
Well, Damage (DPS) basically says how much damage you will do over time (on average) with your auto-attack. I think that's pretty easy to understand. The real problem is that nobody actually uses auto-attack and your actual dps is going to depend on a lot of other factors, like movement as you mentioned. But from the standpoint of "this is what your gear is doing for you", I think it's pretty basic.
How so? "Damage" isn't a real stat either, at least not the one listed on the main character page. It's a composite of weapon damage, attack speed, critical chance/damage,etc. And as I mentioned above, even that doesn't give you the whole story. You have to look at the details to get the whole story, and that will never change. But I think it's nice to have these composites to show you, in general, whether your offense or defense is going up or down.
Goodbye. See you after Blizzcon?
Well, I wouldn't say they are meaningless. If something increases your damage by 20000 and reduces your toughness by 100, I think that's a pretty good trade. People who want the exact are going to go look at that anyway, so I don't see the problem with having those "summary" stats there on the main tab for those who just want the short version.
Anyway, my point was that "Toughness" was better than just "Armor". If you mean that they just don't belong there at all, then I guess I can't argue.
If more people could do what you just did, Maka, the world would be a much better place.
I hadn't even noticed that, but it looks good to me. I'm assuming 'Toughness' is something like EHP (which, let's face it, makes a lot more sense if "Damage" is actually DPS), and healing is...what could that be? Some combination of life on hit or health globe bonus?
I remember suggesting something similar to that...
http://www.diablofans.com/topic/103517-healing-changes/
Anyway, could you elaborate on what you don't like about it?
They are likely for a lvl 70 EF. Or at least, higher level than 63.
I guess it depends on what the purpose of binding actually is, from Blizzard's perspective. If it's just about preventing the altered item from being tradeable, then removing the change to remove the binding would make sense. But if it's moreso about removing items from the economy or applying a more permanent 'penalty' for using the service, then they should stay bound.
Whether or not binding is actually necessary at all is another discussion outside the scope of this thread.
Being able to un-bind the item would kind of remove the point of binding in the first place.
Well, binding is a good way of removing items from the economy so inflation doesn't set in. It's questionable whether that's really necessary with the AH being removed, but we have yet to see what Blizz's plans are for trading in the future. They may yet remove the binding restriction.
Nice sig, btw. Daft Punk rules.
Yes, you can make a shoulder look like any other shoulder or a glove look like any other glove, but you can only transmog an item into the appearance of an item of the same type. So, for shoulders, every tier appearance and every legendary appearance would be available. You don't have to keep the item you want to use in your stash or anything.
Because that's how she was when they first announced her, back before* beta? Or have you never seen the mystic before today?
*Edit
As far as armor appearances go, each class has their own version of each piece, so I would assume that they will just keep that when you transmog the item. As for class specific items like voodoo masks and sources, I would think those would be inelligible. Remember that a "voodoo mask" is a specific type of "helm" so I would think you would not be able to transmog a non-voodoo mask helm into the appearance of a voodoo mask.