Get an Epic Experience with Premium
• posted a message on % Elemental damage question.
Quote from Flexy
Quote from TwirlingFern

Most damage categories are multiplicative.

Since elemental damage is multiplicative then you multiply your new sheet dps with elemental percent. Formula is (1+elemental dmg) * sheet dps = actual dps. So to break even, (1+elemental dmg) = new sheet dps/ old sheet dps. So to break even, your elemental % gain ALWAYS needs to be higher than your % dps lost.

Using the previous examples, if you lost 30% sheet dps then you need 1/0.7 = 43% elemental damage to break even. Since you gained 20% cold damage, then your overall actual dps is 0.7 * 1.2 = 84% of your original dps.

Next example: losing 18% damage for +25% cold does NOT increase dps by 7%. Let's see: 0.82 * 1.25 = 1.025 = 2.5% dps increase

Now if your weapon has cold damage and also has % cold damage buff, then my guess is that amount of cold damage on the weapon gets multiplied by the cold damage buff, for all spells. I'm not sure if the sheet dps already calculates the buff in.
May I ask where you got that formula? I'm asking because I want to transfer it to a spreadsheet for quick & easy calculation. Therefore the formula needs to be correct.

EDIT: Wait a minute, I'm not sure if I understand that Formula.
You say: (1+elemental damage) * sheet dps = actual dps
With "elemental damage", do you mean the % damage increase (like +15% Cold Damage)? And are you sure it gets multiplied like that? So if I say (1+15) * 250.000 =4.000.000 dps? That can't be right.
You are correct, this is wrong. What +% to element damage does, is adds that % to the end of the calculation vs your skills.

For instance, your dps is calculated with the standard formula, weapon average damage x attacks per second x mainstat in %, then x skill damage percent, PLUS element damage %. [Just keeping it simple, we aren't going to factor CC or CD, so we can see how it exactly works.]
It's not "multiplicative" it's additive, but it's being added to something that IS multiplicative.

I.E.

Your damage is 100k, your attacks per second are 2.0. Frozen orb does 393%. This means Frozen Orb does 393,000 every second or 196,500 per hit. [Assuming you don't crit.]
With 20% + To cold damage, frozen orb does 206,500 per hit. [still assuming you don't crit]

If you're using a weapon that does Cold Damage, you take the average damage in cold, and add 20%, then you do the base weapon calculation with the additional 20% and you'll get a higher base or flat damage, which is then multiplied by main stat, and then multiplied by skill damage %.

So the question is, is it ever worth it to drop damage % on the paper sheet for Element damage, the answer is still yes -- but it's not at all woth it if you're losing 20-30%, it's only worth it if you're losing 1-10%, depending on how much +Element damage you have, and what skills your using. +Element damage scales better vs skills that already do really high % weapon damage. An example is meteor. Meteor will get a bigger bonus out of +% weapon damage than Frozen Orb, since it's weapon damage % is nearly twice that of Frozen orb.

So no, that formula is made up and bunk and not at all how it works, if it was, people would be melting T6 with average crits of 5 million a pop, which would give you an eDPS of around 10 million if you had an attack speed of 2.0.

You can test this, you can do my calculation, and it will match the damage you get when you don't crit with damage numbers on. It is correct, this other formula does NOT match the damage numbers in the game, therefor -- it's wrong.

So now, the next question is, is stacking a single +% damage to skill x worth it?

Absolutely for the same reason. So you have +% 20 to cold damage, and +20% to magic missile, then using glacial spike that does 175% now does 215%, if you pair this with a mirror ball, it now does 430%. If you're also using a cold damage weapon, the average damage on the cold damage affix is increased also by 20% at the base, which gets multiplied by mainstat, increasing your effective damage multiplicative, before the 430% is factored against your weapon damage.

This essentially makes Glacial spike do more damage than Frozen Orb, frozen orb still has more damage potential against large groups, because it has a bigger AOE radius, hence hitting more people and doing more actual Damage Per Second, but it will take longer to kill a single target vs Glacial Spike. So at this point, you use frozen orb to melt whites, and glacial spike to murder elites.

If you have a pair of frost burns too... you're sitting pretty.

It's also important to note, that the DPS in your paper sheet, is ONLY for attacking WITHOUT a skill. All skills that are 100% weapon damage or more, will do incredibly higher damage per second than what you see on the sheet, since weapon damage is applied first, before the multiplicative increases from mainstat, and the proc rates of CC.
Posted in: Wizard: The Ancient Repositories
• posted a message on The definitive BoA Thread on Official D3 Boards.
So I've taken the time to explain the logic behind the original design of DIII and it's inclusion of the AH and what the removal of that means.

In this post I address why BoA does more harm than good, doesn't solve ANY of the problems it's attempting to fix, and what it ultimately means for the future of Diablo.

This is all merely logic, statistics, and probability.

http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/10972667249?page=1#1

Go there and support it, or hate it -- but read the whole thread first. Make an attempt to understand all the posts before you reply. Try to leave personal bias aside until the thread is read, before you reply.

P.S. Request it as sticky.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on Loot 2.0 Legendary and Set Item Compilation
Quote from Talyn_Rahl

Do we know if there's a cap on CDR? I mean 100% CDR would be stupidly OP on so many things, potions included.

100% cool down reduction on a 30 second cool down is 15 seconds.

200% is 7.5 seconds. 300% is 3.75, 400% is 1.8, 500% is 0.9.

So would 100% cool down reduction be op? Naw. The 8 second frost nova would take 4 seconds with no critical mass.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on RoS release date revealed?
Quote from Pherce

I can't imagine they would pull the AH the exact same time as loot 2.0 is patched. Since blizzard is a business, they want to make money. I would imagine they might try to get loot 2.0 out by Christmas time to generate income off the AH, although that time is approaching fast with no PTR in site.

Either way, it would seem silly to pull the AH at the same time as the loot patch release because there are bound to be some tweaks or bugs, even with a PTR.

Removing the AH is a bug free event. You just shut it down and remove the icon from the U.I.

It'd be no different than when the AH is down for maitenance (aka, shut down) and the game servers are still up.

Loot 2.0 is where the bugs come in, those bugs will be hashed out on PTR, some will likely slip through, but I'm at a loss as to how something not available in the game, being removed, affects the game, in terms of "Bugs."

What they'll do, is -- stop the posting of new items a few days before the removal -- which will force all gear not purchased to expire and be sent back to the sender. They will then probably give you a set amount of time to pull your items off the 50 AH slots.

As for blizzard balance, you probably won't get it back -- but even if they decide to give you a way to cash it out, this could all be handled post March 18th.

They could shut the AH down anytime they want -- they are making you wait until loot 2.0 and RoS are finished before that slides in, for revenue purposes -- I'm sure.

tl;dr
The game is broken without the AH because the loot sucks and is tuned for the inclusion of the AH. Take the AH away before Loot 2.0 goes live, you ruin the game completely.

Loot 2.0 is scheduled in proximity to RoS, within a narrow window.

So if the AH is closing, Loot 2.0 must be launched, if Loot 2.0 is launched, RoS is finished. [Since we were told we'd get loot 2.0 at the same time as RoS, at best, a few days early.]

All will be announced November 8/9th, y'all can call me nostradomous when all these predictions come true.

P.S.

Console version has "Loot 2.0" and it's awesome dudes. Vanilla D3 sucks, but RoS DIII is the sequel to DII we've all been waiting for.

It's as if, Diablo 3 comes out in March for \$89.98, and vanilla was just a buy in beta. [I'm assuming RoS will be \$29.99]

Josh Mosq & company saved the day.

Quote from Ashy_Larry

Quote from Dreathlock

I dont think they will wait half a year to implement loot 2.0. PC gamers are already pissed about loot 1.5 on consoles and how much better it is. Waiting another 6 months to fix D3 PC? Wont happen i think.

Loot 2.0 on Blizzcon with beta announcement for RoS in december. Followed by a march release with the execution of the AH.

Thats my guess.

spread the word, "stop buying the console version" so they don't let that milk continue to accumulate. i think as console sales diminish, we'll start to see more push on loot 2.0... as far as when RoS releases, we just gotta wait on word from the beta testing... whether it be internal or external... 1 of 2 things could happen as far as loot 2.0 though, it'll either be it's own release, or it'll be included in the AH shut down.. personally, i think just getting the loot 2.0 out would be easier for them to do, and then just work on an abolish the AH patch.. either way, not playing til loot 2.0 hits will be my plan

Most people playing the console version don't have PC's, or a PC good enough to play it similarly/have no desire to play PC games.

Xbox/Playstation versions are a super solid version to play... I'd encourage anybody who can't/won't play it on pc to play it on console.

Seriously, it's great. Telling people not to buy it, is counter-intuitive to being a fan of the game.... It's ultimately spiteful.

I was just at my friends house, he played D2, but doesn't have a gaming PC... he picked it up on xbox, hes level 31 and found over 10 legs already, including a 21% Leoric's Signet and a Legendary Belt Plan.

I played D3 from launch day, and got all the way to level 60 before finding one legendary item. And had over 600 hours before I found my first set item. I farmed for months in act 1/II normal MP10 hoping to find a leorics, never found one.

Console version is clearly hands down the best version to play right now until RoS and Loot 2.0 come out and the AH gets burned down.

Why would you tell people who won't play the pc version not to buy this? Selfish, eh?
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on RoS release date revealed?
6 months is the average window between anouncement and launch.

Games are released on Tuesday in the states.

March 18th is a tuesday.

They said the "loot 2.0 patch" would come out shortly before [as in days before to prime the launch of RoS, so RoS and non RoS players can cohabitate] or at the same time as RoS.

They said they are hoping to get PTR up this year. You think they are going to PTR test loot 2.0 from november/december all the way until march and not have RoS release??

This is illogical.

Loot 2.0 and the AH removal are timed in relation to each other.

Loot 2.0 and RoS are timed in relation to each other.

Since the AH removal and Loot 2.0 are timed in relation to each other, the AH removal and RoS are timed in relation to each other.

RoS in march.

Blizzard has all but said they'd announce the "big news" [aka release date] at blizzcon. If you watched the AH Removal video, they said they can't talk about the rest, but it'd be an exciting blizzcon.

The reason they told us about the AH before RoS, is because of legal reasons, dealing with real money.

RoS will be fleshed out, and dated at blizzcon, that date will be in march, the beta will start in december/january if all goes to plan.

The PTR will be the RoS Beta. They confirmed RoS would have a beta before launch. They aren't going to just PTR Loot 2.0 and then run in paralell the RoS beta, this is double the server space. Also, all the data mined info on RoS comes from THE PTR server. Which means they are already using the PTR server for RoS. So how could it be logical that they'd pull RoS off PTR to load up the vanilla D3 Loot patch?

[Obviously this is my educated guess.]
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• Quote from maka

^^Your argument has a lot of merits. I'd encourage you to post in the bnet forum, if you can take the heat

I have terrible luck on b.net dude.

I make posts all the time and they get fast tracked to page 5 and never really get going cuz they get buried instantly.

The only surefire solution to that I'm aware of, is to come to curse and get a following for an idea first, so we can hold page one and get some traction going first.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• Quote from KageKaze

I fully recognize I failed to see the two points being considered as one whole when I originally talked about it. I understand, however I still wanted to provide my rebuttal to that argument. It causes too many problems to be a workable solution. I think there are ways that can resolve the issue that won't resort to player base segregation.

It's a big topic and I rather enjoy the debate it brings. Personally I don't hate nor love the AH. It could be removed today (without item drop changes) and I'd be fine. I do think that some item drop changes need to happen either way.

You don't have to segregate players at all. Diablo III is built in such a way that a "No Auction House" character can play with auction house players just fine.

Why?

Everyone gets their own loot.

Simple.

So why do we have to play in different games because my loot table is different than yours? You can't see what drops for me anyway.

The simple solution is to BRING BACK LADDERS.

While in an active ladder NO A/H is enabled. When you fail the ladder or it expires you get bumped into the normal game.

Then add a new chat channel called [Ladder - Trade]. Problemo solved.

This would also add replayability to those that have exhausted the games content, too -- a nifty side bonus.

This also solves discern with the PS3 version being the "better" version of the game, since it has NO A/H of any kind.

[Blizzard knows the A/H was a bad idea NOW [hence it not being in the PS3/4 versions], it's just an undoable problem. People are used to it, so take it away and people will miss it. PS3/4 players will most probably be first time players, so they don't have a crutch to miss. Introducing ladders gives all players options to both.]

This is basically a "Soft Reset." Diablo III needs to be reset, Diablo II needed to be reset from time to time, that's why the ladder system existed.

Everyone gets to start all over, with all the changes and improvements that made it a better game, without losing their old characters, whilst still being able to play with their old characters with new ladder players.

It's the PERFECT solution.

People will play, they will craft, they will trade -- the old fashioned way, whilst enjoying the ability to find useful items and good drops [like PS3/4 players].

They will also retain limited/unlimited access to the auction house once characters are "retired" from the ladder in the event of a ladder reset or *failure of ladder conditions.

*Path of Exile has really cool ladder options, you can join a "Hardcore Ladder" which means if you die, you are kicked off the ladder [instead of losing your character forever, he just becomes a normal character.]

P.S.

I believe ladders should only be reset with game changing patches [like drastic loot table overhauls] or expansion packs.

I also believe there needs to be something to incentivize players into joining the ladder.

I feel like the new loot table should only apply to new ladder characters. [Once they are retired, they maintain this new loot table.]
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on Diablo 3 Post Mortem Discussion about Design Flaws
Quote from GalZohar

Sorry man, but those points you bring up, while valid, are only a drop in the sea comapred to what really makes this game not fun for extended periods of time.

As far as I can tell, the top reason for people quitting is that in order to be efficient they have to sit on the AH a significant portion of your play time, and those who went past that point by either screeching teeth or just liking spending time on the AH, are getting bored of being encouraged to just farm stuff they can kill with extreme ease and repeat over and over, preferably using the top-of-the-line build that involves lots of movement speed boosts (see: sprint/whirlwind barbs, which will remain by far the fastest post 1.0.5 because you will still be encouraged to farm easy stuff and the nerf wasn't severe enough to bring the build in line with other builds).

Lack of build diversity and boring items is a big one too, but not as important as what more directly causes the players to get bored and quit (too much time needed on AH and farming easy stuff repeatedly).

You are entitled to your opinion, but I spend 99.9% of my time playing in game, not the AH and I have 78 million sitting on my character right now, not bought for real money.

Also, the point about farming is a little silly, considering that farming in an ARPG always gets easy if you get strong. DII was even sillier in that reguard.

Diablo is about the loot.

I will give you the fact that it's boring to farm loot when you don't need it anymore, it was the same way in Diablo II, however, farming loot in Diablo II even when you were beast was usable in PvP, and the same will ring true in DIII once PvP is released.

I also don't think the items are that borked. They just need to make it so 7 affixes can roll on a rare instead of 6 and add in a bunch of % chance to cast based on "x".

I.E.

A chest armor with 15% chance to cast frost nova when hit.
Or, a weapon with 18% chance to cast diamond skin on crit.
Or a belt that has 13% chance to cast fan of knives on dodge.

This is the only thing that needs to be added to rares to make it cool, and remember we still have an expansion to come, where we will likely be able to add sockets for a fee [the jeweler could do this in the blizcon builds] and the third artisan that lets you add an affix to an existing item for a fee and crafting materials.

In the blizcon demo, you could add hatred regen to an axe if you wanted.

They have stuff planned for the future, it's just about getting the core game right now, and I think that lies within fixing the free roam, dueling, followers and legendary and set items that still suck. [They don't all suck, but there are a bunch that still are completely useless.]

With those fixes, combined with the new content they have planned for the expansion, I think DIII has a very good chance at surpassing DII as the greatest ARPG of all time, I sincerely mean that.

Especially with the introduction of Monster Power and the Infernal Machine and Paragon levels.

DII had 99 levels. DIII at launch had 60, it now has 160.

DII had ubers. DIII will now have Ubers.

DII had PvP, DIII will have PvP.

DIII's items aren't as bad as people make it sound, I'll admit getting them to roll with all the affixes necessary is a bit broken right now, but just like they are fixing everything else, I'm sure this will get better with time. We can already see an improvement with items rolling from monster level instead of item level.

So you need Mainstat + Vital, other than that, it's pretty much the same as DII, with the exception of + to skills.

In Diablo II, you had +1 to Bash.

In Diablo III you have +10% to bash damage.

They are the same thing, infact, the higher damage you do base, the bigger difference you get out of +10% to Bash damage.

And tbh, if they want to add an equivolent to +to all skills in diablo III, all they have to do is add an affix that adds "+10% weapon damage" "+20% weapon damage" and "+30% to weapon damage" since all skills are based on weapon damage, raising weapon damage raises the skills power. Really simple stuff.

We need more gems, we need charms, and maybe we could see the return of jewels -- but jewels could have affixes like +% to a skill on them instead of +Mainstat, and the item system is fixed.

P.S.

Diablo II was broken when it came out too. It also lacked runes and jewels and charms until LoD. And half of the cool uniques were added in LoD too, same with set items. Immortal King's was an LoD set, Ral Rasha's was an LoD set.

Do you guys not remember DII's launch? It was rebalanced every patch, and what did that mean in DII, not only did you have to regear, but you had to re-roll and start over, because your build didn't work anymore and there was no respec.

DII didn't get really good until LoD, and even at that, not until 1.09. That's real talk.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on Diablo 3 Post Mortem Discussion about Design Flaws
Quote from luizdeh

Post mortem implies the game is dead. Good day to you sir, I'm still playing.

Indeed it does literally, but on the same page, it's also the industry standard term for talking about failed design in concurrent games as well as past games.

They did a post mortem on DX: Invisible War, Final Fantasy 11 before it died, they've done post mortems on games like "Rage" only a week after it came out.

I didn't make up the phrase, I just used it -- however, I'm still playing, and my thread is not a qq thread. There is no whining or complaining inside.

Also, Roll a new character, you won't find a public game to join until you are around level 50. Does this mean the influx of new players is gone?

Probably.

Could this mean that the people who do play, are not playing low level characters anymore, maybe.

Could this mean that the game is in actuality dying? Yes, it could.

All in all, I love Diablo, and I just wish to make it a more enjoying experience, I wish you would have read the thread instead of just reading it's title, you might have been left with a different taste in your mouth.

P.S.

People still play dead games. Quake III Arena is a dead game, but people play it. Tribes II is a dead game, but people still play it.

What determines whether or not a game is dead, is the amount of players playing it.

200 players is a dead game.

1 million players is a very much alive game.

I'm thinking Diablo III is leaning towards sub 1 million and declining. I had over 200 players on my friends list, and out of that 200, I'm down to about 10 that still play the game.

Out of the 200, about 25 were IRL friends that still play Diablo II to this day who no longer play Diablo III.

This by all means doesn't mean it's dead, but does provide insight into what is happening to the player base, albeit, on a small sample rate.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
• posted a message on Why can't we go From 1 act to another?
Quote from thundersteele

I can come up with a few reasons. None of them really compelling, but it's something:

1. Different acts have different difficulty. You could in principle get your 5 NV in act 1 (easier) and then farm A3 with full stacks. Right now nobody would be interested in doing this, but I guess a few month ago people would have done this.

2. Farming spots. The more areas are available, the more likely it is that one optimal route will emerge, with other areas remaining unplayed. With monster power, I could easily imagine starting in A2, VotA, then moving to festering woods and finally, if I was interested in exp also, continue in A3 keep lvl 2 and fields of slaughter, all with the same NV stacks.

3. The checkpoint system might be harder to implement.

4. Blizzard likes to have zero loading times between game regions, but this might be tough to achieve if all 4 acts should be available at the same time

5. It's weird when you hop from act to act, and in every city the same stash is standing around. Currently you have to travel, so it's easier to imagine that the stash is loaded on the caravan.

Imho I think that the loading times is the best reason why one might not want to allow players to switch acts within one game.

Monster power destroys point 1.

Point 2 is a non point, because there is already a most efficient farm spot, it's called the second sin heart, cydea azmodan runs, that's all the end game farmers run. That's all I run, because that's where I get the best loot drops, it's also where I get the most frequent loot drops.

Point 3 is a non issue too, as the checkpoints remain in the same places now. If you start at The second Sin heart but walk into the keeps, the checkpoint system works regardless of being out of order.

Point 4 is also a non point, the game loads an act in about 3 seconds.

Point 5 is also a non point, the stash is an entity built into each town, it doesn't move. Just like Diablo II.

The reality is, they made it this way in an attempt to stop boss farming, yet -- it didn't work. People still just farm Azmodan.

So rather than give us the choice to farm who ever we want, we are stuck farming one spot.

I.E.

There is no reason other than they thought it would stop boss farming when it actually didn't. It just made it so instead of being able to farm whatever boss you wanted, you now only have one choice -- Azmodan.

So in short, it was a design with a purpose, except in reality it doesn't serve the purpose, in fact, it counters the purpose by making people run the one boss ad infinitum.

This is the very reason it should be reverted back to DII classic. P.S. I'd be fine with only allowing those who beat the entire game on inferno access to free roam.

Anybody farming act 3 already beat diablo in inferno, so -- yeah -- free us up some places to go, cuz currently right now, and even in 1.05 unless you are farming hellfire ring, the only place to farm efficiently is Act III Second Sin heart.
Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion