DiabloFans

Actually, I just replaced my bow with a hand crossbow, and it does seem to stack. The confusing part is if you use a slow firing bow/crossbow, then you're fire rate is very close to the fuse timer of 1 second. When you get closer to two aps, then it seems to be come clearer.

So, how come the explosions don't go off at my attack rate (if each explodes individually, then the explosions should start 2 seconds after the first shot, and explode at the rate of fire), and how come I'm not seeing damage numbers that would reflect 2-3 shots going off at once (unless normal MP10 monsters have tremendously high damage reduction)?

Quote from overneathe

Quote from Hiderius

Because users shouldn't have to resort to third party applications. They could use an ingame mechanic where the world becomes darker with higher difficulty modes.

Tampering with the dll files to get darker graphics is against the user agreement.

Tampering with Diablo's dll files is against the user agreement. Tampering with Windows .dll files might screw your machine (not in this case), but is not against the Diablo user agreement. Jay Wilson gave green light to this "mod" a while back. It's a Windows mod, not a Diablo mod. Works with a few other games as well.

At any rate. Companies can always change their policies. Right now it should not be bannable.

Quote from Cobearz

Quote from TheDFO

This has bugged me since the game came out. Lots of people seem to think Leah is stupid when she doesn't believe Cain when he talks about the end of the world, and about Heaven and Hell, because she's surrounded by monsters.

Here's how I saw it, and hopefully someone can point out where I went wrong (or maybe I can help someone else straighten out a bit).

The way I see it, she wasn't denying the fact that they're surrounded by skeletons, zombies, and other monsters. She was denying that the end of the world was coming, and that events were being orchestrated by some set of powerful beings with an agenda. Basically, she thought it was natural phenomena, and/or human agents causing trouble for their own ends.

I mean, I recognize that sometimes wild animals (wild dogs, coyotes, wolves) mangle live stock or pets, but I don't believe in the chupcabra. I accept that someone blew up the World Trade Center, but I don't accept that it was a US gov't conspiracy.

What does the last sentences have anything to do with this....and btw

Don't believe every conspiracy you hear, but don't believe you are told either.

I'll go back and make that clear. My bad.

Well? I know for awhile we did this in D2, and I figured it'd be fun in D3 to. The basic rules are:

We all start with a lvl 1 HC character.
Can only uses drops.
No twinking from other characters.
No buying from vendors. Only allowed to talk to them if you have to progress the story.
If an item breaks, (unlikely, given how slowly things wear in D3)
At the end of the session, whoever is left brawls to see who has the best character.

As to changing this to Diablo 3, I would suggest MP10 only. Also, in D2 we dueled as soon as we hit 12 (I think) cause that was the first time you could. Not sure when we'd dual in D3. I'd suggest when Cain dies or maybe after the SK, if people don't want to play so long.

Well? Anyone up for it? Also, I'm willing to change the rules if you want.

I'd be willing to play, but I don't have any lvl 60 HC yet. I'm spending too much time leveling (trying to get all 5 up at once). If you want to do lower level play, I'm TheDFO#1665.

This has bugged me since the game came out. Lots of people seem to think Leah is stupid when she doesn't believe Cain when he talks about the end of the world, and about Heaven and Hell, because she's surrounded by monsters.

Here's how I saw it, and hopefully someone can point out where I went wrong (or maybe I can help someone else straighten out a bit).

The way I see it, she wasn't denying the fact that they're surrounded by skeletons, zombies, and other monsters. She was denying that the end of the world was coming, and that events were being orchestrated by some set of powerful beings with an agenda. Basically, she thought it was natural phenomena, and/or human agents causing trouble for their own ends.

I mean, I recognize that sometimes wild animals (wild dogs, coyotes, wolves) mangle live stock or pets, but I don't believe in the chupcabra. I accept that someone blew up the World Trade Center, but I don't accept that it was a US gov't conspiracy.

Edit: The above paragraph is supposed to illustrate examples of how someone can believe things are happening (monsters vs wild animals) but not attribute it to some wild conspiracy theory (angels/demons vs gov't conspiracies).

Quote from maka

Quote from LordPoekel

Quote from maka

Quote from brx

http://imageshack.us...1552484168.jpg/

WAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

as far as I am concerned they can have it LOL

Hmm....where the hell is the WD's mana orb in the PS version?

I'd say it's the blue bar (looks like they would use the space for others players. You might be able to squeeze in 4 players healths/button/resource icons there.

Hot damn, totally missed that. Thanks. Thanks to TheDFO as well.

Btw, TheDFO, regarding your #4: sure, those D3 places where you can look down and see valleys and things, they look great......the first few times you see them. After you run those areas 1000000 times, you don't care. Well, at least I know I don't, and I'm sure there's plenty of people that also don't care. That's why I think there's some truth in what some people are saying. A lot of things in the game seem to be built under the assumption that you'll use them 10, 20, 30 (whatever) times, and not the 498324739847 times that is the staple of hardcore grinding ARPG's, namely D2. Like the graphic features you mentioned. Things like that are great in games that you play through a handful of times, but become almost meaningless (in my opinion, of course) when you grind those areas to no end. At the same time, things that might seem 'clunky', 'cumbersome' or 'not streamlined' when you play through the game a few times actually add to the longevity of the game, because they end up adding complexity to the game (and yes, maybe some complication as well, but that comes with the territory).

All this is my opinion.

Yeah, after seeing it hundreds of times it gets boring. BUT, at least IMHO, I'd rather have that first few times of "that's awesome" than 1000 times of "boy, I sure am lost cause this level is completely random." Basically, I don't think the randomness brings all that much in an ARPG, because the "platforming" doesn't mean much. If it were a game like Prince of Persia, good randomness would be AMAZING! In an ARPG, I'd much rather have environments that work well. And while streamlining may not have improved the game when you take a long view of playing, my point was there's no evidence that they did that SOLELY for consoles, which is what people are implying. They were trying to fix a problem. Whether or not it was a problem, or how successful they were, seems to depend on the person.

Quote from Indimix

There is a fact that no one cant deny, everything that is going to be implemented in the PC version, has to work in the console version as well. And that, is a limitation per se.

And, it is true, that the console games are more casual friendly than the PC games, despite the interface limitation.

I can deny that. You haven't presented any facts that I've seen, just conjecture, mostly based on the idea that if it is simple, it was designed for consoles, because simple is only on consoles. You haven;t said anything (at least that I've seen) to the idea that many of the skills will not work, as is, on the console (area target skills, like Blizzard). Nor have you said anything to why consoles are necessarily limited to four players now, what with every shooter under the sun doing more than that online. You also haven't shown how the inventory, or even picking up items, will work on the console.

I think the prophet is going to be more along the lines of Malthael then Inarius. For one, I got the impression the Enchantress is from after the Sin War (and Inarius has been in Hell since then). For two, it just wouldn't have been his style, from what we saw in the Sin War Trilogy (you know, aside from the name "Prophet").

Quote from Irixian

The writing for Diablo III was pathetic, but if the black soulstone just "happened to go overlooked as it was kicked through the gutters of heaven by many a sandal-clad foot," that would be the biggest load of horseshit known to writing. That's like a preemptive deus ex machina coupled with a spell of multi-dimensional global amnesia.

I took it as when Diablo died, he fell off the spire, and they weren't able to retrieve the BS. Also, it's been pretty clear that the Angels aren't exactly genre savy, I think it's pretty consistent if they think the threat is over, at least for now.

Quote from Irixian

At least one of the expansions should center around Imperius going rogue and waging a war of extermination on anyone with the slightest hint of Nephilim blood. Your character could travel to the origin places of all the characters from D2 and D3, both protecting and avenging those who would fall within harm's way. Imperius could use his powers to summon other creatures of heaven, but twisted to his own ends. It would be like starting the game series over with heaven as the enemy and no convoluted and implausible retconning.

I really hope it's not primarily about Imperius. I feel he's boring and one dimensional. Also, we already clobbered Diablo, who clobbered Inarius (twice). It'd be a bit of a stretch to say that he's actually tougher to beat then Diablo (united with the other evils).

I think we have more than enough with closing up the Templar's, Scoundrel's, and Shen's story lines, not to mention what they've already said about Adria. And Maltheal.

That said, I wouldn't mind if we do fight Imperius, but he ends up being a mini-boss for Adria/Lillith/whomever ends up being the big bad(s) of the expansion.

And to whoever was talking about Andariel/Duriel still being around, they aren't. They got pulled into the soulstone along with Baal, Diablo, and Mephisto. Otherwise Diablo wouldn't have been THE prime evil, cause he'd have been missing those two.

Quote from cmagik

Quote from Mormolyce

Ever think that maybe "Lord of Lies", "Lord of Destruction" and so on might just be largely meaningless titles? I mean, Diablo is the Lord of Terror and he's just a big red dinosaur... not that terrifying really

Because technically we (humans) cannot reproduce how terrific he really is by any mean. Same thing for the.. "perfection" of the angels/heaven.
When you read the Sin War trilogy, you have a lot of description of some art made by human that would represent heavens. However for Inarius thus are pal copy that do not represent the real might of this place, even if they're exactly how he had described the place to the artist. Basically, a picture could never represent the ... "might" of the heaven, even if you'd take a camera.
Same goes for the lord of hell. In the same trilogy the main nephalem at some point creates a wall of water that acts as a mirror to actually scare Diablo (it's Diablo if I'm right, but it's kinda far in my memories... anyway if I'm wrong someone will correct me.)

Yes, Uldyssian uses his ill described nephlim powers to mirror Diablo's powers (because at the moment he was trying to appear as what would scare his target the most) and something (we're not told what) actually scares him.

Anyway, on topic, I think it's far more likely that if someone is behind Adria (other than Diablo), it'd be Lillith. For one, she was the first one who wanted to use the Nephilim as an army (against heaven and hell). For two, she's also been know to use females as fronts, and for three, she's one of the few demons/angels to be shown to constantly work against EVERYONE else. The evils tend to work together (except for the civil war, but even then they were in teams). They also tend to be focused on defeating the other side, and don't really care about Sanctuary, i believe Lillith wanted to rule Sanctuary.

As for the Belial, I think he really was defeated because 1) he's over confident, like just about every other Evil (Lillith is less so, because she knows she's not the biggest fish in the pond), and 2) The evils (at least in D3, cause they didn't have as much personality in D2) tend to fall prey to their own "trait." Baal basically just destroyed everything, Diablo focused on Terror, and both were weaker for it. This shows up the most with Belial and Azmodan. Azmodan is supposed to be a great battlefield commander. His assault on Bastion's Keep WAS set up well, he just failed to modify his plan when the heroes show up. Why? Cause he's overwhelmed by pride, and is overconfident. His minions act similiarly, like how Ghom was in the keep for several days, but just tooled around in the lower levels eating people, Cydaea tries to toy with you, instead of just up and finishing you off, as one would think she would trying to protect the FIRST heart, instead of just bailing. Anyway, everytime you take out one of Azmodans plans, all he does is say "HA! I didn't NEED that plan, I have THIS plan! Belial isn't overcome with pride, but he's lied to himself. He's convinced that he's fulled you, when he clearly hasn't (look, if you're trying to be human, don't be a suspicously competent, and creepy, human child. Didn't Belial ever watch MiB?). Of course, I could just be reading too much into the fact that Blizzard didn't write the story that well, and oversold the villians and didn't give them a reasonable pay off.

Also, Lillith being the "big bag" fits her modus operandi - manipulating someone else to do her dirty work. All the other major Demons did their own dirty work (as far as we know). Finally, the journal where Maghda talks about the "other" witch seems to me to be implying the split was not...amicable.

Edit: I forgot to mention, another thing against the Belial theory is that Azmodan claims he can here his brothers "from down here" (aka Hell). I doubt Belial would actually be able to full him (as well as Diablo later on). Someone along the line would have noticed that Belial was missing.

Honestly I think this is one of the best things about PoE. Instead of letting the super hardcore minority direct all effort towards "end game" by whining (I've played 1000 hours and have nothing to do! This game has no end game and sucks!), they are actively trying to keep people playing through the game. Also, they kinda have to since it's f2p.

Hrm, the US server seems to have been working just fine. Hope you get your problem straightened out.

It's down, but it's not gone, at least on HC. I run into more people on the "big" quests (mini-bosses, bosses), but I've still seen a decent number, especially considering that I've played almost exclusivly in Normal (trying to lvl 5 characters at once to share drops).

I can't speak to SC, nor can I talk about the global chat, cause I never use them, but those peopel I do play with tend to be on a lot (which, you know, makes sense).

So, I have been using Bola Shot lately, and I'm wondering, does it stack? I tried focusing on one enemy, and even with constant firing, the explosions seemed about a second or two apart, not the ~3/4 apart that my fire rate is. The damage numbers coming out did not seem to be anyhire than would be expect with my dps and a monsters reduction.

Does anyone know for sure?

Quote from Indimix

IIRC, Diablo 2 was first released in PS2, then in PC. I could be wrong, I just have a vague memory of that.

However, it doesn't matter, what matters is that Diablo 3 is limited, because every single feature they add in the future, has to have a compatibility with consoles. That is if they are not making 2 different versions of the game, one dumbed down, and one for PC.

As opposed to streamlining to make it less cumbersome? I disagree with this statement almost completely, because so many of the things that people claim are limited for consoles either doesn't make sense, or only makes sense if you assume that the only people who buy games on consoles are low brow morons who can't handle more than two buttons.

Some things:
1) Look at Skyrim's inventory/skills/map UI. That's what a UI made for consoles looks like. Lists, generally not square box that you have to sort through in 2 dimensions.

2) 4 players - cause consoles haven't been able to play multiplayer games with more than 4 players since 2001. If it was for one console, then they'd just say "only 4 people in local multiplayer" like same games limit local to two, but online multi to more. Heck, some don't even ALLOW local. Also, I think the reason that more than 4 would be just insane visually (since everything is very effects heavy).

3) Skyrim had perks (instead of skills) that totally had a tree structure, just like D2. FO3 had a list of perks that you could pick. Both of these worked totally fine on console. They could have kept Diablo 2's style skill tree for consoles very easily, they just didn't want to, cause they were try to fix the various flaws in that concept (it's debatable how succesful they were, I will grant you).

4) There are plenty of non-linear games on console, and there are plenty of linear games on PC. When we look at other games that tried to create completely random environments, we see that they sacrifices things visually. In my limited time with PoE, everything was just bland browns and grey, and the edges of the maps were boring things like "a wall" or "the surf." Compare that to Diablo 3 where you look down in the valley behind the Highlands and can see the cathedral. Further, there are many areas in D3 that are nearly as random as anything in D2. Generally, the exception is that the entrance and exit are in similiar locations, as opposed to D2, where they could be anywhere (and I will grant you, IMO they should have had several different entrance/exit tiles so they could have made that more varied). Anyway, my point is there is little to no evidence that the less randomness in D3 has anything to do with consoles, aside from general prejudice against consoles (Oh! It's simple! Therefore, it MUST have been made for consoles! No way at all they were trying to improve a clunky system where many many people cheated or abused items to avoid).

Quote from maka

Quote from brx

http://imageshack.us...1552484168.jpg/

WAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

as far as I am concerned they can have it LOL

Hmm....where the hell is the WD's mana orb in the PS version?

I think it's that blue bar. Not sure why they'd change it.

Quote from Indimix

First, you don't know if the hypothetical new system would be faster or not, it all depends on how balanced it would be. So, stating as a fact that it's faster, is a wrong assumption.

Okay, walk me through logic and point out the flaw in how this can be built to be worthwhile, and not speed up the process of getting better gear.

Okay, you pick an affix that the item needs, as in, you ignore it otherwise. Right now, every item that drops, the internal screening goes - correct item type? Yes. Correct base stat (damage/armor)? Yes. Correct 1st Affix? Yes. Correct Amount? Yes. Correct Second affix? Yes. And on and on. Oh sure, somtimes you'll take a reduction in one of those if it gives you a good enough upgrade in another, but that is the general thinking, right?

You're Suggestion goes like this: Correct Affix? correct item type? Yes. Correct base stat (damage/armor)? Yes.Correct Amount of first affix? Yes. Correct Second affix? Yes. And on and on. I'll point out the difference - You're not screening for the presence of the correct affix. You know it's there. That increases the chances you get what you want considerably. If that affix you fixed is +int, then right now it's a small chance that it's even present. Let's say there are only 16 possible affixes (low, but we'll go with it), and lets say you ONLY find 8 affix items. As it is now, you have a 50% chance of getting the correct item with the correct affix. Guaranteeing that affix happens is doubling your feasible items, right off the bat.

A direct ancedote, I just crafted 15 shoulders for my low level Wiz (he's low enough to not get shoulder drops, but high enough to craft them, plus I have plenty of mats). The most important affix there is clearly +int given he's only lvl 13. I got THREE of those with +int. Yeah, that doesn't prove any percentage, and I could have just been incredibly unlucky, but you're idea would have given me a MUCH better selection. So, unless they balance this out so as it's all but worthless (incredibly gimping your kill rate, which gimps your drop rate, or gimping your MF, which gimps your drop rate), then this idea will speed up the item find.

Quote from Indimix

Secondly, if it happened or not in another game, it's not related to this game, and to this idea. Please, not only you, but other users here, stop saying: "but, it was the same in X game".. who cares. We are talking about this game, Diablo 3.

My idea doesn't make the game easier, but finding the gear more enjoyable, because you can actually farm for something in particular. I'd rather choose my idea even if it takes me twice the time to find what I'm looking for, because I know that the items that drop now have a solid chance of being decent, maybe not upgrades, but not trash either.

Okay, maybe it's not related. My point was A) many people here who serially complain about D3 seem to have the attitude "it just should have been D2 in HD). I guess you weren't one of them, Because this happens in most other games, you're point the lack of itemization was damaging the build viability was not a result of your complaints, but more of an issue with ARPGs (or at least one heavily gear based) in general. Which would mean your solution shouldn't have anything to do with ID time, item drops, or changing what affixes you get, but should have something to do with the fact that all skills are directly depedent on items, and C) never saw anyone complain about it before, so what gives?