I feel like most of the threat in Inferno will come in the form of ranged. So knowing what we know about the classes at this moment in time I would have to go with the wizard as a great defense against ranged is slow time. Slow time slowing down projectiles is important as well as being used to help your kiting ability of melee creatures.
I could actually see Blizzard taking a simplistic route on this matter. Avoiding the gear and level gap problem areas.
- Step 1 - Act 5 only appears in Hell and Inferno difficulty.
...
Most people don't play past Normal. Not people on this forum, obviously... the more casual types that represent 98% of Blizzard's customers.
-Kardax
I am aware and is why I said it is not plausible yet I would not be shocked. The statistics of what difficulties players played through in D2 is not relevant. After ten years you cannot expect the same player base. Gaming has changed and I feel it is safe to say that D3 will sport a much larger one. If it is expected that only 2% of the buyers will play past normal then why not just cut out all other difficulties and skyrocket you to max level. Yet they are adding a further 4th difficulty and wasting development time to cater to 2%.
My post's point was that Blizzard has shown that they are willing to cut out portions of the potential buyers (online only) to pursue the path they want. D3 is much more casual friendly than D2 and because of that I think it is safe to assume the amount of players who continue to play it's content up till hell (Inferno may be a showstopper) will be much higher.
Ah thanks. So Inferno gear and runes will take us from being able to survive in Inferno to slightly comfortable but never out of harms way. Seems very nice.
I am actually a little confused on the "maximum 61" logic. I saw an interview with Jay saying that we would need to farm Hell in prep for entering Inferno. If their intent was a flat difficulty with a max mob level of 61 is it wise to drop gear in Inferno? Unless the Inferno gear is a very minimal upgrade from end of Hell gear then I can see Inferno getting easier as we acquire gear.
1) Inferno gear minimal upgrade from Hell - 61 max monster level - challenge maintained
2) Inferno gear normal upgrade from Hell - 61 max monster level - challenge lost eventually
3) Inferno gear normal upgrade from Hell - 61 min monster level - challenge maintained
I may be wrong but I thought Blizzard said that there would be a minimal difficulty curve but there would be a curve. Acquiring gear upgrades and 2 rune levels while keeping all monster level 61 max just seems to contradict itself in my opinion. But if they do have a very small curve, be it just a level, but same loot tables across all acts then players will flock to the lowest end for farming which is also a contradiction to Inferno's goal.
I am quite confused and may be misinformed so if I am someone please put me on a straight path if you would be so kind.
I could actually see Blizzard taking a simplistic route on this matter. Avoiding the gear and level gap problem areas.
- Step 1 - Act 5 only appears in Hell and Inferno difficulty.
- Step 2 - Adjust Inferno to the new level cap.
- Step 3 - Adjust Inferno visual gear tiers to drop at the front of Act 5 Hell.
- Step 4 - Add 1-2 new visual tiers to the end of Act 5 Hell.
- Step 5 - Insert new distinct Inferno visual gear tiers.
- Step 6 - Demote those who were taking part in Inferno at launch to Hell Act 4 complete state.
While it is not very plausible I certainly would not be surprised and not sure if I would hate it.
I actually agree partly with both sides on this discussion. I am in love with the concept of Inferno difficulty and think it was an awesome choice to toss it in. On the other hand I understand where Sixen was coming from on the podcast. Sixen opposes it not because it in no way "resembles an endgame structure" because it certainly does and I will love it. I believe his main beef with it is the rehashing for endgame. Let me explain a bit.
Inferno being the endgame would resemble WoW having Heroic 5 mans as endgame. Where you are repeating the same content yet just a bit harder instead of being a stepping stone. So a system that I believe Sixen would 100% agree with would be inferno mode being the final means of progression for a super challenge coming in the form of never before experienced content.
What I think all of us can certainly agree on is that we welcome ,with open arms, the challenge Inferno will bring to the table.
I enjoyed watching. I am afraid that I share opinion with other replies on the matter of hacks. They will show their face rather quickly I just hope that Blizzard opens the gates with guns cocked. Though I will not be taking part in the rmah I feel it will be great for the game and company. It could be the way for Diablo to become a star in Blizzard's eyes much like their mmo is now and I am certainly all for the series getting the focus it deserves.
Topic Suggestion: We do not know the confirmed state of MF yet in Diablo 3. What do you feel would be the best implementation with the rmah being a co-existing system. My personal opinion is that if it is inserted to the degree that it was in D2 it will force MF on players. If you want to sell items on the rmah MF is a must. If you never want to purchase items from the rmah then MF is also a must. I would like to hear your thoughts on it if future videos (before beta) are planned.
Side Note: I have been hearing the number 16 tied in with "tiers" a little too frequently lately while I have always heard 18. Has something changed or is there some misinformed source spreading this info?
Plus there were mf traits, i dont know if passive skills will offer the same thing.
but if you want to make some $$$$$ from selling stuff yeah mf is important
This is why I am hesitant when RMAH and MF are thrown together. MF will now be more important than ever. If you are looking to sell items for real money then MF is a must. If you are looking to never buy items with real money then MF is a must. The best items when sold will be sold strictly on the RMAH most likely. In my opinion this controls the way people play to an extent which I do not agree with.
I hope they keep the mindset of not trading power for MF where MF is only applicable in locations where the only choices are other boosts such as gold find.
I have a feeling that the 2010 Blizzcon demo being used at the event is unrelated. Blizzard will probably make adjustments to the beta build up until the moment they flip the switch for those able to download and get into the beta. I imagine they have to get the demo build installed on the computers and transported to the event which could take some time.
Unless the beta was ready a week ago and they do not plan on making adjustments before it goes live then i could have seen them putting that on the machines for the event. Beta being their main focus creating a new demo build outside of the beta would have been manpower pulled from it and that would have been a bad choice in my opinion.
If we do hear anything I imagine it will be a more detailed timeframe for the beta start as starting a beta while key personnel are busy at an event would be odd.
I find it odd also that Blizzard would intentionally bring it to light as being a rumor. Yet most places where discussion has taken place over if Blizzard would announce beta at Gamescom is filled with most saying they believe they will not for logical reasons.
Yet on the flip side as seen with the rumored RMAH before the press event NDA lifted Blizzard kept quiet. With another Blizzard rep responding I would say it means just what it says. Though if Blizzard brought it to light on purpose would that change the standard of them replying to false rumors and keeping quiet on true ones?
Not sure what to think yet I will not get my hopes up.
I do look forward to the beta coverage. Knowing the fact that it will become DiabloDaily brings up an issue with turning it into something elaborate now. Maybe you could do the cast under another name and have it not be daily so you can keep it up with beta stealing your time.
On another note I somehow missed that it was revamped and watched the first seven dailies regarding D2. I was enjoying them and was slightly disappointed in not getting to see your Act 5 pass. So I will surely check in when you start beta coverage. You intend on doing beta gameplay footage right? Will it be a side project under another title or also a part of DiabloDaily?
Having "variety items" is an interesting idea. Though I would expect that we would have all those choices at release and not that Blizzard would hold out items that support unusual builds for the sole purpose of releasing them in content updates.
My pleasure. I know that a big part of creating content and having the encouragement to move forward with it is others enjoying it. I hope that I can watch yours as I watch Force's soon.
0
0
I am aware and is why I said it is not plausible yet I would not be shocked. The statistics of what difficulties players played through in D2 is not relevant. After ten years you cannot expect the same player base. Gaming has changed and I feel it is safe to say that D3 will sport a much larger one. If it is expected that only 2% of the buyers will play past normal then why not just cut out all other difficulties and skyrocket you to max level. Yet they are adding a further 4th difficulty and wasting development time to cater to 2%.
My post's point was that Blizzard has shown that they are willing to cut out portions of the potential buyers (online only) to pursue the path they want. D3 is much more casual friendly than D2 and because of that I think it is safe to assume the amount of players who continue to play it's content up till hell (Inferno may be a showstopper) will be much higher.
0
0
1) Inferno gear minimal upgrade from Hell - 61 max monster level - challenge maintained
2) Inferno gear normal upgrade from Hell - 61 max monster level - challenge lost eventually
3) Inferno gear normal upgrade from Hell - 61 min monster level - challenge maintained
I may be wrong but I thought Blizzard said that there would be a minimal difficulty curve but there would be a curve. Acquiring gear upgrades and 2 rune levels while keeping all monster level 61 max just seems to contradict itself in my opinion. But if they do have a very small curve, be it just a level, but same loot tables across all acts then players will flock to the lowest end for farming which is also a contradiction to Inferno's goal.
I am quite confused and may be misinformed so if I am someone please put me on a straight path if you would be so kind.
0
- Step 1 - Act 5 only appears in Hell and Inferno difficulty.
- Step 2 - Adjust Inferno to the new level cap.
- Step 3 - Adjust Inferno visual gear tiers to drop at the front of Act 5 Hell.
- Step 4 - Add 1-2 new visual tiers to the end of Act 5 Hell.
- Step 5 - Insert new distinct Inferno visual gear tiers.
- Step 6 - Demote those who were taking part in Inferno at launch to Hell Act 4 complete state.
While it is not very plausible I certainly would not be surprised and not sure if I would hate it.
0
Inferno being the endgame would resemble WoW having Heroic 5 mans as endgame. Where you are repeating the same content yet just a bit harder instead of being a stepping stone. So a system that I believe Sixen would 100% agree with would be inferno mode being the final means of progression for a super challenge coming in the form of never before experienced content.
What I think all of us can certainly agree on is that we welcome ,with open arms, the challenge Inferno will bring to the table.
0
Topic Suggestion: We do not know the confirmed state of MF yet in Diablo 3. What do you feel would be the best implementation with the rmah being a co-existing system. My personal opinion is that if it is inserted to the degree that it was in D2 it will force MF on players. If you want to sell items on the rmah MF is a must. If you never want to purchase items from the rmah then MF is also a must. I would like to hear your thoughts on it if future videos (before beta) are planned.
Side Note: I have been hearing the number 16 tied in with "tiers" a little too frequently lately while I have always heard 18. Has something changed or is there some misinformed source spreading this info?
0
This is why I am hesitant when RMAH and MF are thrown together. MF will now be more important than ever. If you are looking to sell items for real money then MF is a must. If you are looking to never buy items with real money then MF is a must. The best items when sold will be sold strictly on the RMAH most likely. In my opinion this controls the way people play to an extent which I do not agree with.
I hope they keep the mindset of not trading power for MF where MF is only applicable in locations where the only choices are other boosts such as gold find.
0
Unless the beta was ready a week ago and they do not plan on making adjustments before it goes live then i could have seen them putting that on the machines for the event. Beta being their main focus creating a new demo build outside of the beta would have been manpower pulled from it and that would have been a bad choice in my opinion.
If we do hear anything I imagine it will be a more detailed timeframe for the beta start as starting a beta while key personnel are busy at an event would be odd.
0
Yet on the flip side as seen with the rumored RMAH before the press event NDA lifted Blizzard kept quiet. With another Blizzard rep responding I would say it means just what it says. Though if Blizzard brought it to light on purpose would that change the standard of them replying to false rumors and keeping quiet on true ones?
Not sure what to think yet I will not get my hopes up.
0
0
0
0
0