My 2 cents: I believe Blizzard's goal is to head towards a more gear oriented skill system where what you are currently wearing helps determine the power of your skills. For example Equipping gear with high cold resistance and high defense gives you a more powerful Frost Armor skill.
I believe Jay phrased it as they would like their skill system to be like Borderlands, ironically I believe borderlands said their game was like Diablo and their gear gave "+ 1" to X skill- and this such feature Jay foolishly already said was removed.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Blizzard used to care about releasing Diablo III, then they all took an arrow in the knee...
You get one point, pick a skill. You get another point, pick a new skill or improve your previous one. Actually you are in a way forced to spend your points on one skill, cause if you pick too many skills, you'll spread yourself thin and make them useless, so pushing few skills becomes more viable, while with other skills it's useless to put too many points in. See, you have little options in reality. That is what I mean it's linear. You don't even need a tree or progression, you can have 50 skills to choose from, and this approach pf focusing on only a few skills would still be viable, mandatory even.
Thank you for a good reply that had well put out thoughts.
If you assume that all skills are simple then yes, it does push for you to max out few skills because the value of upgrading is worth every point for what you're trying to do. you're forced to max at least 4 anyway so that's not exactly a number that's really far from 6 (skill slots).
I think you're over simplifying the system a little too much, likely from d2 experience. Lets say sometimes it would be enough to invest just less than 15 points (assuming 15 is max) into a skill. For example, teleport, you may just *need* one point, you may need a few, likely you will not need 15...maybe you will i don't know, but my point is, it likely is a viable skill at couple points. Let me give another example, lets say as you leveled slow time, it increased duration, but didn't really increase the rate of slow. You would have a choice to put less points into slow time. The reason why you would even decide to put less is that you want to maximize your 'focus' skills... like lets say blizzard and ray of frost. Yes, in a way you are using maximizing 2 skills as your attack, and maybe the rest of you're points are going into support skills like diamond skin etc... to maximize your game play for being a wizard that focused on blizzard and ray of frost. the question is if you will be using skills like diamond skin, slow time and whatever even if they weren't your focus... and i strongly feel that you will. this is why i'm not sure why people say, skill points force people to choose one skill.
Lets ignore runes for now, because in both systems you will be using runes.. and really the customization argument just cancels out on both sides, and if we include runes it will over complicate our points.
with the current system. you don't invest in anything. It will unlock as you level your character. There is no more focus, no more choice in investing less into a skill or more into another skill, however i do agree that you still can decide whether or not you want to be a blizzard and ray of frost wizard, just as easily as if you had the point system in the first place. You're teleport just leveled with you, you're diamond skin as well, so did you're so called blizzard and ray of frost focus. (except i guess it's not really a focus cause everything else is the same level.
Let me use a quick rune example to show how skill points are limiting.
Skill point system:
You put all your points into Magic Missile, when you get Arcane Orb and respec all your points into it and give it a burning rune. A bit later you get a rune that can split Magic Missile into more projectiles, but since it has no points, its useless and you're better off spamming Arcane Orb, so you sell the rune.
The new system:
You get Arcane Orb and give it a burning rune. A bit later you get a rune that can split Magic Missile into more projectiles, so you put it in because it can be a good mass enemy spell. Now you use Arcane Orb on single enemies or clusters, and cast Magic Missile on multiple targets.
You see? This system allows more flexibility and chances for you to test your skills, while the points system limited your options. I used only two skills as an example here, now imagine 22 skills filled into 6 slots, the options are huge.
Plus, 6 skill slots is the perfect amount for you to equip all the skills you'll need to approach different scenarios. So in light of that logical conclusion, I'd say a system without skill points would actually allow for more combos for you to use in different situations.
by burning rune, you mean crimson? anyway, i think you misread the current rune system. basically you don't find runes that are specifically "tuned" to a skill. you find grey "unattuned" runes. You slot them in a skill and poof, they get a color, a random attribute and they can no longer be put into any other skill but the one you just put it in. So your scenario would only work if you bought the rune or was given the rune... in either case i reiterated that i love the respecing, the old way they had, you can respec. so if you had that magic missle splitting rune and you want to give it a go, just respec with some gold cost or whatever cost. I'm not sure where the trouble is here? if you can respec, you can always test and try, and test some more.....
And no, respec isn't really freedom. Its a system of punishment, where your choices and options have monetary restrictions. It actually supports a type grind gameplay, which isn't fun at all.
well no one said repecing had to be expensive either... in fact, i wouldn't be too surprised if blizzard limited you from respecing even with the current skill system.
You keep on speaking about 'western audiences', but why is that? Are you more interested in JRPGs or what exactly?
I'm sorry, but I have to ask. Why are you following this game then if you're not a fan?
Until recently Diablo 3 was basically Diablo 2 with a new coat of paint and many small additions. Finally it's coming more and more into its own, and the progress is looking good. So, if you didn't like D2, why did you follow D3's development, especially since it was so close in design to D2?
It's true i haven't been following d3 for that long compared to most people, in fact just january this year, when a guildmate posted some cool stuff for d3. I think I kinda explained why i'm following d3. Before, ie. sometime before 8/1 and after 1/1 i thought d3 was cool shit. no skill tree, a fucking awesome idea with runes, good ways to balance MF, salvaging items to help prevent overflow of equips and i can go on, but i think we will agree on pretty much everything. If you think that d3 during this time was d2 with a coat of paint...i will be very confused.
when i have an opinion for a game, i don't allow a dev's prior success to cloud my judgement (at least i try). If a game is new, it's fresh, it only receives praise for cool innovations compared to it's contemporary not it's predecessor.
I'm not addicted to the point of fanboism for JRPG or KRPG. I acknowledge that they have their faults, but i also acknowledge their strengths. tbh, i think western games do better in general than eastern ones when it comes to story telling. d2's plot wasn't epic spectacular shit, but the way they tell it... i can say i'm addicted to that.
My 2 cents: I believe Blizzard's goal is to head towards a more gear oriented skill system where what you are currently wearing helps determine the power of your skills. For example Equipping gear with high cold resistance and high defense gives you a more powerful Frost Armor skill.
I guess i can agree with you here, if it's the dev's goal there's not much you can do. Funny how i think that's the defining decision that makes it the sequel to d2.
I like the idea of skills leveling with you, i hated the skill point system in diablo 2, you basically only used a few of them, and the rest you just put in skills that had synergy with the one you used.
I like the idea of skills leveling with you, i hated the skill point system in diablo 2, you basically only used a few of them, and the rest you just put in skills that had synergy with the one you used.
but but, i be suggesting so that all points are important and that you don't stack all in one skill ;D
it'll make them pesky people use all they skills like they is supposed to too!!
but but, i be suggesting so that all points are important and that you don't stack all in one skill ;D
it'll make them pesky people use all they skills like they is supposed to too!!
silver bullet.
.
.
.
So... if people are forced not to dump in a couple skills, what's the difference between your system and the current one?
obviously the fact that you get to choose which one to increase more and which one to decrease =]. read my teleport/slow time example like 3 posts up, yes, that wall of text post that's hideous.
so basically in stead of having 6 equally strong skills that you use equally, you have two skills that are strong enough to be useful and 4 skills that suck but hey! You put a few points into them so they suck slightly less than your friend's version of the same spell when he put no points into them!
No thanks... in fact Blizzard I beg you do NOT go along with this guy's suggestion, it will take SO much meaningful customization out of the game and replace it with boring skin-deep customization like that which we had in d2.
but but, i be suggesting so that all points are important and that you don't stack all in one skill ;D
it'll make them pesky people use all they skills like they is supposed to too!!
silver bullet.
.
.
.
So... if people are forced not to dump in a couple skills, what's the difference between your system and the current one?
obviously the fact that you get to choose which one to increase more and which one to decrease =]. read my teleport/slow time example like 3 posts up, yes, that wall of text post that's hideous.
I read it, but I'm unconvinced. It's a suggestion that assumes that some moves will naturally be more useful to level than others, meaning that the potential skill point distribution is essentially predetermined, which is the same as the current system in many ways, but worse in that it means the game was built with inherently sub-useful skills.
Even if it's not a matter of skills being "built to suck," if you will, and all skills are potentially equally good for adding points to, the fact of the matter is that player psychology will take over, and whatever skill(s) they decided not to level on will become after-thoughts in their gameplay. It's easy to say that people will still use their skills that are less leveled, but if leveling one or two other skills helped to alleviate the need for those under-leveled skills, those under-leveled skills will naturally be dropped bit by bit out of play. At that point, one or more of the players six chosen skills becomes, to some degree, nullified. Suddenly, the player is not identified by his use of these 6 skills, but by his use of these 2 or 3 skills. This will prevail even if he uses the under-leveled skills at all. Because the character is no longer desperately using his 6 in perfect unison... he's using his 2-3, and only using his other 3-4 when he has to.
In my opinion, the better game would be the one where 6 equally useful skills were being used in conjunction with one another. This makes the game feel more 'whole,' it makes the character feel more real, and it makes the gameplay more rewarding. A game where any of the skills were allowed to trump others by pure merit of being "better" would make every skill, including the strong one, feel a bit cheap and shoddy. But what do we know, we haven't even played it.
I read it, but I'm unconvinced. It's a suggestion that assumes that some moves will naturally be more useful to level than others, meaning that the potential skill point distribution is essentially predetermined, which is the same as the current system in many ways, but worse in that it means the game was built with inherently sub-useful skills.
Even if it's not a matter of skills being "built to suck," if you will, and all skills are potentially equally good for adding points to, the fact of the matter is that player psychology will take over, and whatever skill(s) they decided not to level on will become after-thoughts in their gameplay. It's easy to say that people will still use their skills that are less leveled, but if leveling one or two other skills helped to alleviate the need for those under-leveled skills, those under-leveled skills will naturally be dropped bit by bit out of play. At that point, one or more of the players six chosen skills becomes, to some degree, nullified. Suddenly, the player is not identified by his use of these 6 skills, but by his use of these 2 or 3 skills. This will prevail even if he uses the under-leveled skills at all. Because the character is no longer desperately using his 6 in perfect unison... he's using his 2-3, and only using his other 3-4 when he has to.
In my opinion, the better game would be the one where 6 equally useful skills were being used in conjunction with one another. This makes the game feel more 'whole,' it makes the character feel more real, and it makes the gameplay more rewarding. A game where any of the skills were allowed to trump others by pure merit of being "better" would make every skill, including the strong one, feel a bit cheap and shoddy. But what do we know, we haven't even played it.
I can see where you're coming from, and you're point on the psychology of max leveled and under leveled skills. Thank you for your reply.
I think the difference is that I genuinely think that those under leveled skills will be used very frequently, if not as frequent as their maxed leveled counterparts. Rather the right usage between under leveled and max leveled skills will define the player. Or I guess another way you can say it is the under leveled skills will complement the higher ones (like in my hydra example in another topic) and how you utilize both makes you a better player.
And yeah I guess it's impossible to attest your point on player psychology.
so basically in stead of having 6 equally strong skills that you use equally, you have two skills that are strong enough to be useful and 4 skills that suck but hey! You put a few points into them so they suck slightly less than your friend's version of the same spell when he put no points into them!
No thanks... in fact Blizzard I beg you do NOT go along with this guy's suggestion, it will take SO much meaningful customization out of the game and replace it with boring skin-deep customization like that which we had in d2.
hmm i can't tell if you have poor reading skills or if you're being sarcastic...
Actually Simpy7, you're still very confused about my point and you're bringing up weird points that don't prove/show anything else new... and you're talking about d2 and WoW... again...
but i guess it's a non-issue, someone else brought up a legit reason of why point system has it's flaws. Read up 3 posts if you want to know. I'm done, i have a legit answer that i can't refute.
If you assume that all skills are simple then yes, it does push for you to max out few skills because the value of upgrading is worth every point for what you're trying to do. you're forced to max at least 4 anyway so that's not exactly a number that's really far from 6 (skill slots).
I think you're over simplifying the system a little too much, likely from d2 experience. Lets say sometimes it would be enough to invest just less than 15 points (assuming 15 is max) into a skill. For example, teleport, you may just *need* one point, you may need a few, likely you will not need 15...maybe you will i don't know, but my point is, it likely is a viable skill at couple points. Let me give another example, lets say as you leveled slow time, it increased duration, but didn't really increase the rate of slow. You would have a choice to put less points into slow time. The reason why you would even decide to put less is that you want to maximize your 'focus' skills... like lets say blizzard and ray of frost. Yes, in a way you are using maximizing 2 skills as your attack, and maybe the rest of you're points are going into support skills like diamond skin etc... to maximize your game play for being a wizard that focused on blizzard and ray of frost. the question is if you will be using skills like diamond skin, slow time and whatever even if they weren't your focus... and i strongly feel that you will. this is why i'm not sure why people say, skill points force people to choose one skill.
Lets ignore runes for now, because in both systems you will be using runes.. and really the customization argument just cancels out on both sides, and if we include runes it will over complicate our points.
with the current system. you don't invest in anything. It will unlock as you level your character. There is no more focus, no more choice in investing less into a skill or more into another skill, however i do agree that you still can decide whether or not you want to be a blizzard and ray of frost wizard, just as easily as if you had the point system in the first place. You're teleport just leveled with you, you're diamond skin as well, so did you're so called blizzard and ray of frost focus. (except i guess it's not really a focus cause everything else is the same level.
Well, you will use three, maybe four runes in a skill point system, whereas in the current system you are motivated to use six runes for all your skills, and try new combos out. There is definitely more incentive in that fact there.
The skill system is rather simple already, point system or otherwise, it's the skills and way they are used that makes up for that.
Bu in the point system you only get so few points and like we both said, some skills use little -- more than one point in teleport was a waste. While some skills have to be maxed fast. The reason for that is, if you made a blizzard sorc, then blizzard is your main source of damage. So, not pumping it would be stupid, because it's your only source of damage. And that goes the same for all other builds. If you don't push the two or three (or four) you need then you will do piddling damage, and you will need to backtrack just to level.
And at this point it is hard to ignore runes, it is everything the new system is about. That is why they forfeited the skill point system, because runes are THE customization options in the game, it is THE primary functioning behind skills. And it's still early, but give it time, after they saw it in action, the first expansion will really push runes and they will allow even more options than before.
If that's not enough for now, though. Itemization is the main driving point behind the game. Gems and adding sockets, as well as enchantments will drive gear unlike ever before in any game.
by burning rune, you mean crimson? anyway, i think you misread the current rune system. basically you don't find runes that are specifically "tuned" to a skill. you find grey "unattuned" runes. You slot them in a skill and poof, they get a color, a random attribute and they can no longer be put into any other skill but the one you just put it in. So your scenario would only work if you bought the rune or was given the rune... in either case i reiterated that i love the respecing, the old way they had, you can respec. so if you had that magic missle splitting rune and you want to give it a go, just respec with some gold cost or whatever cost. I'm not sure where the trouble is here? if you can respec, you can always test and try, and test some more.....
Actually, Jay Wilson said it's a new system they are testing, and they would probably go back to the old one if it works. I don't see how runes that lock onto skills would work. Just to show I'm not a mindless 'fanboy', I'll prove it by saying skill locking is a bad design choice. I'm not going into detail on that now, there are other threads where we have gone into detail on the topic.
I used 'burning' as an example because we don't know what effects runes have on Arcane Orb yet. I may just as well have used golden as an example, which from prior knowledge of the system we could guess that it lessens the arcane power cost.
That would prove my example even better, but until they finalize the system, the same example sticks. So, let's say you get the right runes from AH instead of drops then. But if you have points in say Arcane Orb and Disintegrate, and maybe one in Diamond skin, then that's all the available options to add runes to, because, damage skills not maxed out for your level are in effect useless, they just don't cut it in a damage to arcane power cost ratio.
But in the current system, you can test your skills better. In fact, you will have a set of six skills to play around with, and not just 3 (or 4).
The point I tried to makes was, that it does hamper you, big time. Because respeccing is terrible design:
well no one said repecing had to be expensive either... in fact, i wouldn't be too surprised if blizzard limited you from respecing even with the current skill system.
Yes, but that does not change the fact that it is a punishment. Even at one gold cost, you still need to go to a vendor, and respend your points. It's a back tracking, trail and error nightmare. With Diablo 3 they encourage downtime, to such an extent actually that they even added the CoJ, eliminating item runs. They are trying to give you as little reason as possible to run back to town.
And why have it in the first place. By practically saying 'remove the punishment in respeccing', you effectively make it redundant. It feels to me like you just want it there, just so it can be there, just so skill points can be there. The reason behind respeccing in a game such as WoW is that the game is all about raiding and extreme build testing. If you raid and something bothers you, then the game dictates that you need a slap on the wrist.
Diablo, on the other hand, is all about speed and constants, constant fighting, constant looting, constant gearing. The new system fits it like a glove. With respeccing there is the constant need to stunt your gameplay, even with minor costs, which will break your flow, especially if you'd want to quickly try out a new skill, just to see if it viably fits in your build. Respeccing effective hampers gameplay.
It's true i haven't been following d3 for that long compared to most people, in fact just january this year, when a guildmate posted some cool stuff for d3. I think I kinda explained why i'm following d3. Before, ie. sometime before 8/1 and after 1/1 i thought d3 was cool shit. no skill tree, a fucking awesome idea with runes, good ways to balance MF, salvaging items to help prevent overflow of equips and i can go on, but i think we will agree on pretty much everything. If you think that d3 during this time was d2 with a coat of paint...i will be very confused.
when i have an opinion for a game, i don't allow a dev's prior success to cloud my judgement (at least i try). If a game is new, it's fresh, it only receives praise for cool innovations compared to it's contemporary not it's predecessor.
I'm not addicted to the point of fanboism for JRPG or KRPG. I acknowledge that they have their faults, but i also acknowledge their strengths. tbh, i think western games do better in general than eastern ones when it comes to story telling. d2's plot wasn't epic spectacular shit, but the way they tell it... i can say i'm addicted to that.
I'm not the best of JRPG fans, I tried a few here and there, mostly played Final Fantasy, played 1 to 10 and enjoyed them, but from there it lost it's luster, fast.
I have always enjoyed the more western RPG genre, like the Fallout series, Baldur's gate, Vampire the Masquerade:Redemption, Kotor, Planescape:Torment,Borderlands, Arcanum, etc.
But the ARPG genre has always been something special to me. The whole range from the old forerunners like Golden Axe, Gauntlet, Wasteland, to the good games like Torchlight, Diablo, Dungeon Siege, Sacred, Titan's Quest, and to the not so good games like Revenant, Divine Divinity, Darkstone, Fate, and Lionheart and I've been around MMOs as well.
I have played both Diablo games during their heyday, and well after. Believe me, this system is the natural evolution of the Diablo system, it fits perfectly into what the game is trying to achieve.
Well, you will use three, maybe four runes in a skill point system, whereas in the current system you are motivated to use six runes for all your skills, and try new combos out. There is definitely more incentive in that fact there.
well i guess if you assume that in a skill point system, everyone wants to max out only 3 skills, (20 pt skill cap, if it's 15, then obviously you're going to use 4 runes) then yeah, it will use only 3. But i doubt people would even want to walk that path, seeing as blizzard implemented things like cooldowns this time around, not to mention that if you use only 3 skills, you're going to find yourself gimped. The point being, if you found a miraculous 3 skill build that was awesome shit, then that's perfectly fine in a game like diablo. JW's quote paraphrased "if you found a DH build that only used hatred and it worked, then good for you"
The skill system is rather simple already, point system or otherwise, it's the skills and way they are used that makes up for that.
Bu in the point system you only get so few points and like we both said, some skills use little -- more than one point in teleport was a waste. While some skills have to be maxed fast. The reason for that is, if you made a blizzard sorc, then blizzard is your main source of damage. So, not pumping it would be stupid, because it's your only source of damage. And that goes the same for all other builds. If you don't push the two or three (or four) you need then you will do piddling damage, and you will need to backtrack just to level.
the teleport comment might not be accurate, as you do not know if teleport at higher levels would do things like... decrease cooldowns a significant amount. Then sure, some players want to be able to spam that shit, because from d2 and enigmas, we all know how valueable teleport is/was.
While it's true that your focus does usually imply that you need to max it, it's not the only thing that defines your character. Lets say you wanted to make a build that was pretty supportive for team coop.
Example build:
- you get 1 pt in hydra for getting the arcane hydra (runed) because you mainly want to use the hydra for slowing enemies
- you get 10 pt into slow time, because after some testing, you found that slow time at that level + temporal flux (passive skill) your enemies became REALLY REALLY slow after getting hit by arcane and if they're inside the slow time bubble. your enemies will be screwed (like in that pvp video where the barb makes a leap out of slow time, but that bitch moved slow as fuck. maybe lv 10 isn't the sweet spot for this combination, maybe it is, you'll have to test to find out.
- you get 5 points into teleport, because you find that with your play style with slowing opponents, you're not spamming teleport every 5 seconds or something anyway, but maybe you use teleport pretty frequent, like every 10 seconds, so your sweet spot for teleport is lv 5. It could be 5, it could be 1, it could be 15, the point is you have to test your play style for this.
- maybe you decide on getting 10 ray of frost, although it's not arcane, it fits the "slowing enemies" play style you're going for, and you plan to use this as a support skill along with your arcane hydra to help slow enemies for your allies.
You don't decide on 15 for this skill because you don't need it's damage, just it's slowing attribute, maybe you want to put less, maybe you want to put more, but it's up to you to find your sweet spot.
-you get 15 points into arcane torrent, because well it's arcane, so it fits with your slow time+temporal flux, and it's probably going to be your main source of damage +AoE. however, since arcane torrent has long cooldown, and you have no other offensive skill, you decide to take on another dmging skill!
-So then you decide 15 magic missile (with the homing rune) because, 1) it's spammable, 2) it's a very good support skill for slowing down enemies in pvp. 3) apparently blizzard says low tiered skills WILL BE VIABLE <- i loved them for this.
I applaud anyone if they have read this far, this is seriously an example of what you can do. Maybe it won't be a build that works because blizzard will put in clauses like "temporal flux does not stack with slow time or slowing status from ice spells. But I still think it would be a good example of a skill set where people will use every skill frequently to be considered pro, and if you're just one of those people that only will spam one of these skills, you are bad. period. Even in this example, you have 4 skill points left over to put into where ever you want. I do admit that there will be builds that are not viable with the point system, but that's also true for the current system. I know i didn't use that many runes in the example, simply cause we don't know all the rune effects, but i did include them where i knew. The main take home point is you WILL be using runes for all these skills anyway. So i guess that's blizzard's old system encouraging us to use 6 runes for 6 skills?
And at this point it is hard to ignore runes, it is everything the new system is about. That is why they forfeited the skill point system, because runes are THE customization options in the game, it is THE primary functioning behind skills. And it's still early, but give it time, after they saw it in action, the first expansion will really push runes and they will allow even more options than before.
Yes, I can see why it's hard for the current system to ignore runes, because that's the ONLY customization you get in the current system, where as the other one, like in my above example, you do get to choose how much, and which skills to get, and the max and underleveled skills will complement each other. Just don't forget that the old system too had runes, and had potential builds that utilized 6 runes at a time, exactly like the new system.
If that's not enough for now, though. Itemization is the main driving point behind the game. Gems and adding sockets, as well as enchantments will drive gear unlike ever before in any game.
Um, d2 was driven mainly by items, gems and sockets, etc. So... d3 probably became more like d2 with that decision, just saying. For the record, I'm half okay with that, items=diablo series, if it weren't we wouldn't see so many randomized gear drops etc.
Actually, Jay Wilson said it's a new system they are testing, and they would probably go back to the old one if it works. I don't see how runes that lock onto skills would work. Just to show I'm not a mindless 'fanboy', I'll prove it by saying skill locking is a bad design choice. I'm not going into detail on that now, there are other threads where we have gone into detail on the topic.
Yes, I know that runes aren't set in stone right now, but why would you use an example where you had obtained a "magic missle splitting rune" but then since you don't have MM you can't use that rune?
But if you have points in say Arcane Orb and Disintegrate, and maybe one in Diamond skin, then that's all the available options to add runes to, because, damage skills not maxed out for your level are in effect useless, they just don't cut it in a damage to arcane power cost ratio.
But in the current system, you can test your skills better. In fact, you will have a set of six skills to play around with, and not just 3 (or 4).
your argument is pretty unfair considering even when you max out arcane orb and disintegrate, and 1 pt in diamond armor that's only 31 points used. Also assuming that you read my compromise (which is the whole point of this thread) my system prevents you from even maxing out those skills in the first place unless you were at a higher level. i.e. you had to be 15 levels higher than when you unlocked a given skill example: disintegrate unlock=12, you need to be lv 27 to max it. AND at level 27 in the current system, you only have 3 skill slots unlocked anyway... tbh you're only argument is that you can switch skills on the fly, and we're not even sure if blizzard is going to limit that in some way.
Yes, but that does not change the fact that it is a punishment. Even at one gold cost, you still need to go to a vendor, and respend your points. It's a back tracking, trail and error nightmare. With Diablo 3 they encourage downtime, to such an extent actually that they even added the CoJ, eliminating item runs. They are trying to give you as little reason as possible to run back to town.
That's not even a problem of the skill pt system though. What if you had a portible item like "bottle of memories" it allows you to reset your points where ever.
And why have it in the first place. By practically saying 'remove the punishment in respeccing', you effectively make it redundant. It feels to me like you just want it there, just so it can be there, just so skill points can be there. The reason behind respeccing in a game such as WoW is that the game is all about raiding and extreme build testing. If you raid and something bothers you, then the game dictates that you need a slap on the wrist.
Hmm, I think you're arguing for me now =]
With the current drag and drop system, shoot why does it even have to be there? why can't it just lock when you drag your skills to your skill bar, if you want to reset you can run all the way back to town, pay 1 gold just to reset, so you can drag and drop other skills.
Your argument doesn't fit with what we're talking about, which is, a system that has people using all skills and has the best customization. (best to me means most, to you it's just some)
Diablo, on the other hand, is all about speed and constants, constant fighting, constant looting, constant gearing. The new system fits it like a glove. With respeccing there is the constant need to stunt your gameplay, even with minor costs, which will break your flow, especially if you'd want to quickly try out a new skill, just to see if it viably fits in your build. Respeccing effective hampers gameplay.
I guess, but I think I already put that as a con for my skill point system. If you look on the first page it says something like "takes away from the action" If you consider putting a point after you level a hamper on game play then sure. Just remember that when you level and you want to try a new skill, you WILL need to break your flow to drag and drop your new skill anyway. To me that small 1 point allocation per level is worth it, maybe not to you.
I have played both Diablo games during their heyday, and well after. Believe me, this system is the natural evolution of the Diablo system, it fits perfectly into what the game is trying to achieve.
for the record, if you think FF is iconic of JRPGs, you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But i won't get into that.
I can't argue against any opinions that are backed with "faith" or "belief". That's why theSkaBoss presented an argument that I can't refute. But his argument was still legit because it had some logic on player psychology.
well i guess if you assume that in a skill point system, everyone wants to max out only 3 skills, (20 pt skill cap, if it's 15, then obviously you're going to use 4 runes) then yeah, it will use only 3. But i doubt people would even want to walk that path, seeing as blizzard implemented things like cooldowns this time around, not to mention that if you use only 3 skills, you're going to find yourself gimped. The point being, if you found a miraculous 3 skill build that was awesome shit, then that's perfectly fine in a game like diablo. JW's quote paraphrased "if you found a DH build that only used hatred and it worked, then good for you"
Not, wants to, needs to. Like theSkaBoss said, its built into you psychologically, but actually it also just makes pure sense. If you max a skill, you maximize its potential, and through skill points it kinda makes it difficult for the designers. Think about it, balancing for a person with 3 maxed level 20 skills versus another player with a player with 6 level 10 skills. The player with maxed skills WILL perform better over all, while the other player will be a jack of all trades. That is the limitations of a skill point system.
the teleport comment might not be accurate, as you do not know if teleport at higher levels would do things like... decrease cooldowns a significant amount. Then sure, some players want to be able to spam that shit, because from d2 and enigmas, we all know how valueable teleport is/was.
While it's true that your focus does usually imply that you need to max it, it's not the only thing that defines your character. Lets say you wanted to make a build that was pretty supportive for team coop...
What you describe is a method of spreading your points thinly, again, which a point system limits as maxing is much more viable in the end. I have tried these methods overall throughout many games, not just D2 and it always holds true.
Yes, I can see why it's hard for the current system to ignore runes, because that's the ONLY customization you get in the current system, where as the other one, like in my above example, you do get to choose how much, and which skills to get, and the max and underleveled skills will complement each other. Just don't forget that the old system too had runes, and had potential builds that utilized 6 runes at a time, exactly like the new system.
No, under leveled skills with runes and maxed skills with runes wont complement one another. For example, let's talk damage range. Magic Missile level 1 does 1-2 damage, level 2 3-4, lvl 3 5-6, etc. so at level 15 it does 29-30 damage and costs 10 arcane power through all levels. Arcane Orb does 2-4 damage at level 1, 4-8 at lvl 2, 6-12 at 3, etc. to 30-60 at level 15, costing 15 arcane power.
Now, if you choose to take both with only 30 points to spare, MM will do 13-14 damage and Arcane Orb will do 14-28. Effectively you have cut your damage potential by half, while your costs still limit your casting amount. Lets say you slot a rune to split MM into two projectiles. With 100 arcane power you can cast it 10 times, with 2 projectiles, which means 20 projectiles. With a level 7 MM you would get 260-280, while level 15 MM have a damage potential of 580-600. Twice the amount with the same cost.
And most players think like this, theorycraft their builds, which is why they squeeze between builds, or else you will never complete the toughest difficulties, or hope to survive hardcore.
Um, d2 was driven mainly by items, gems and sockets, etc. So... d3 probably became more like d2 with that decision, just saying. For the record, I'm half okay with that, items=diablo series, if it weren't we wouldn't see so many randomized gear drops etc.
Oh, but D2 was only the tip of the iceberg. D2 runes, well D3 has full blown recipes, which you can use to even craft sets.
D2 had gems with 5 levels and you can slot only one into equipment and then it stays there. Well D3 you can add sockets to items, you can remove gems, you can even upgrade gems at your artisan, and then put it back. As if that's not enough, you now have 15 levels worth of gems.
And no, that's not all, you can now even enchant your items, something totally unique to the Diable series.
Yes, I know that runes aren't set in stone right now, but why would you use an example where you had obtained a "magic missle splitting rune" but then since you don't have MM you can't use that rune?
Umm, because they have told us that there is a rune that splits magic missiles, which means, we don't know which of the five has this effect, but logic would dictate that there is definitely a rune that splits magic missiles. I use this example cause common sense told me to.
your argument is pretty unfair considering even when you max out arcane orb and disintegrate, and 1 pt in diamond armor that's only 31 points used. Also assuming that you read my compromise (which is the whole point of this thread) my system prevents you from even maxing out those skills in the first place unless you were at a higher level. i.e. you had to be 15 levels higher than when you unlocked a given skill example: disintegrate unlock=12, you need to be lv 27 to max it. AND at level 27 in the current system, you only have 3 skill slots unlocked anyway... tbh you're only argument is that you can switch skills on the fly, and we're not even sure if blizzard is going to limit that in some way.
Where did you get your info that there are only 15 levels to the skills, last I checked the number was still at 20, but even if it were at 15, then you'd still find your options tough if there are 6 slots and you can only max 4 skills.
See my above example as to why maxing skills are more efficient cost and usage wise vs spreading yourself thin.
That's not even a problem of the skill pt system though. What if you had a portible item like "bottle of memories" it allows you to reset your points where ever.
Then why add it at all then, it would cost almost noting to respec, you can do it anywhere. The only problem then is that you've added a redundant item that requires more clicking. Basically the system as it is now is exactly the same, just remove the bottle and there you go.
You know, you are fighting very hard here, drawing straws just to keep the skills point system. I mean, if repeccing has no stupid monetary slap on the wrist, and you can do it anywhere, then what is the point of it, other than just to be there and require something else to click on just to keep skill points. And you will then just add remove, add remove, skills all the time, which the system has now removed.
Hmm, I think you're arguing for me now =]
With the current drag and drop system, shoot why does it even have to be there? why can't it just lock when you drag your skills to your skill bar, if you want to reset you can run all the way back to town, pay 1 gold just to reset, so you can drag and drop other skills.
Your argument doesn't fit with what we're talking about, which is, a system that has people using all skills and has the best customization. (best to me means most, to you it's just some)
I fail to see that. I called skill points a redundant system, which you just want there to needlessly click points around.
Alright, I think the new system is actually very much the same as your system. Hear me out for a second.
What you want is a system where you spend points equilateral. You basically build it from the ground up, you spend points on equal terms and all skills raise level by level. You don't want them to be dumped into one skill, which is why you propose restrictions and that way you build your skills on equal footing. Am I right?
Well, the current D3 system works the same way, except you don't spend points.
The skills level up alongside your character, they are essentially assigned points, but I think you want the choice involved there. I think you'd like the system more if it worked like this:
At levels 1, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 you get to choose a skill, then that skill gets locked onto your skill bar, you can't remove it. The only way to do that is if you pay a small fee to free up your slots again and then get to choose your skill set again. Am I right?
I guess, but I think I already put that as a con for my skill point system. If you look on the first page it says something like "takes away from the action" If you consider putting a point after you level a hamper on game play then sure. Just remember that when you level and you want to try a new skill, you WILL need to break your flow to drag and drop your new skill anyway. To me that small 1 point allocation per level is worth it, maybe not to you.
Not so much, you open tab, drag it down, and go and if you don't like it, just quickly swop the two skills around again.
Whereas in your system, you need to click a bottle, decide where you don't want points, drag out the points, add it into the new skill. Then you cast it three times and hate it, so you open the bottle again, drag out the points, reallocate them where they were, and off you go again.
It's much more of a schlep, if you ask me.
for the record, if you think FF is iconic of JRPGs, you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But i won't get into that.
I can't argue against any opinions that are backed with "faith" or "belief". That's why theSkaBoss presented an argument that I can't refute. But his argument was still legit because it had some logic on player psychology.
Well, not just me, I really enjoyed them, but apparently FF is the quintessential JRPG and that is according to my Asian friends as well, and many others over the net(reviews included). I have played some others like the Mana series and some rom games, but they just don't stick for me. And I find no appeal in them.
The RPG games I mentioned to you that I've played are what RPG represents to me.
And no, trust me when I say that if you bring "faith" and "belief" to the conversation to me, then you have the wrong impression of how I work. Logic and knowledge is what dictates my choices, and I don't believe an ass worth of anything in Blizzard, their actions with other games are proof of this. But I know their choices with D3 are sound, and very logical.
Yeah, thanks theSkaBoss, you had a good response. I have been trying to tell you the same thing, but only in a protracted sense. I try to give you examples of why it works better for this game, and hopefully in some of my statements above I have done so.
Not, wants to, needs to. Like theSkaBoss said, its built into you psychologically, but actually it also just makes pure sense. If you max a skill, you maximize its potential, and through skill points it kinda makes it difficult for the designers. Think about it, balancing for a person with 3 maxed level 20 skills versus another player with a player with 6 level 10 skills. The player with maxed skills WILL perform better over all, while the other player will be a jack of all trades. That is the limitations of a skill point system.
Lol this is getting long. But the way you're explaining it, i have to disagree with, because at least in theSkaBoss's argument he acknowledged that there will be builds using max and underleveled builds, he just said that we're more prone to forget our underleveled skills. I got 15 from a thread in bnet which is probably buried away long ago. they were hinting in JW's interview on skill pts that they tried to limit the "respec to higher skills" by limiting how many points you can have in one skill per difficulty. i think the numbers were 5=normal, 10=nightmare, 15=hell. Apparently that system didn't work out all too well, so they removed it completely.
What you describe is a method of spreading your points thinly, again, which a point system limits as maxing is much more viable in the end. I have tried these methods overall throughout many games, not just D2 and it always holds true.
Yes, i suppose something that is absolute about skill system is that if you want to use more skills, you must sacrifice some points somewhere else. ie not be given everything to the max. It's highly subjective, i tend to like that model more because it allows for more tougher choices..like "hmm where will i take out points and if i wanted to increase this skill". It's already clear to me that you prefer the other one where you get all skills. where as in the current system, the only real analogous situation is. hm i have a lv 7 rune, which skill shall i put it in. Do note that the lv 7 rune situation also will exist in both my system and the current one.
No, under leveled skills with runes and maxed skills with runes wont complement one another. For example, let's talk damage range. Magic Missile level 1 does 1-2 damage, level 2 3-4, lvl 3 5-6, etc. so at level 15 it does 29-30 damage and costs 10 arcane power through all levels. Arcane Orb does 2-4 damage at level 1, 4-8 at lvl 2, 6-12 at 3, etc. to 30-60 at level 15, costing 15 arcane power.
Now, if you choose to take both with only 30 points to spare, MM will do 13-14 damage and Arcane Orb will do 14-28. Effectively you have cut your damage potential by half, while your costs still limit your casting amount. Lets say you slot a rune to split MM into two projectiles. With 100 arcane power you can cast it 10 times, with 2 projectiles, which means 20 projectiles. With a level 7 MM you would get 260-280, while level 15 MM have a damage potential of 580-600. Twice the amount with the same cost.
Perhaps that's where we disagree the most. I think they will complement each other. If they do, it just means that blizzard made a really good game. If you don't think my example with temporal flux (with arcane skills) and slow time is not complementing then i'm not sure how i can convince you otherwise. Complementing skills do not equate to pure damage.
And most players think like this, theorycraft their builds, which is why they squeeze between builds, or else you will never complete the toughest difficulties, or hope to survive hardcore.
not sure what you mean by squeeze between builds.
Oh, but D2 was only the tip of the iceberg. D2 runes, well D3 has full blown recipes, which you can use to even craft sets.
D2 had gems with 5 levels and you can slot only one into equipment and then it stays there. Well D3 you can add sockets to items, you can remove gems, you can even upgrade gems at your artisan, and then put it back. As if that's not enough, you now have 15 levels worth of gems.
And no, that's not all, you can now even enchant your items, something totally unique to the Diable series.
Okay, they brought in some new ideas, and I agree with you. But it doesn't change the fact that diablo = item reliant series, therefore if D3 is item reliant, it makes it truly a successor to d2 in my eyes. Which, i'll reiterate is not necessarily a completely bad thing. That was the only thing i was saying, and if you agree with my statement here, then you agree with my previous statement.
Umm, because they have told us that there is a rune that splits magic missiles, which means, we don't know which of the five has this effect, but logic would dictate that there is definitely a rune that splits magic missiles. I use this example cause common sense told me to.
actually i think at one of the blizcon conventions when they were showing off runes and their interaction with skills, we saw that indigo made the runes split. obviously this could change.
Where did you get your info that there are only 15 levels to the skills, last I checked the number was still at 20, but even if it were at 15, then you'd still find your options tough if there are 6 slots and you can only max 4 skills.
See my above example as to why maxing skills are more efficient cost and usage wise vs spreading yourself thin.
and that's what i'm saying with my system you cannot max skills out just like that, players are still forced to invest in other skills just like in the current system. the only difference is that you can invest slightly more in one skill over another. it's almost like saying, hey lv 5 rune dropped, should i put it into arcane orb or shall i put it into diamond skin. (when at the moment you're using only lv 3 runes)
Then why add it at all then, it would cost almost noting to respec, you can do it anywhere. The only problem then is that you've added a redundant item that requires more clicking. Basically the system as it is now is exactly the same, just remove the bottle and there you go.
You know, you are fighting very hard here, drawing straws just to keep the skills point system. I mean, if repeccing has no stupid monetary slap on the wrist, and you can do it anywhere, then what is the point of it, other than just to be there and require something else to click on just to keep skill points. And you will then just add remove, add remove, skills all the time, which the system has now removed.
I'm not fighting that hard. i'm just saying your argument with respec is silly. There is no monetary slap on the wrist even with the current system (as far as we know) and it's easily true for skill system.
I gave you a silly example because you gave me a silly example with your character having to run all the way back to town just to pay 1 gold then respec....
I guess I like limits, skill points limits you, and forces you to choose what to max, what to not max and still have it be useful. It doesn't mean that it's a system that forces you to use 2 skills only, it just means that if you make a 2 skill build, that works, then good for you.
I fail to see that. I called skill points a redundant system, which you just want there to needlessly click points around.
Alright, I think the new system is actually very much the same as your system. Hear me out for a second.
What you want is a system where you spend points equilateral. You basically build it from the ground up, you spend points on equal terms and all skills raise level by level. You don't want them to be dumped into one skill, which is why you propose restrictions and that way you build your skills on equal footing. Am I right?
Well, the current D3 system works the same way, except you don't spend points.
The skills level up alongside your character, they are essentially assigned points, but I think you want the choice involved there. I think you'd like the system more if it worked like this:
At levels 1, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 you get to choose a skill, then that skill gets locked onto your skill bar, you can't remove it. The only way to do that is if you pay a small fee to free up your slots again and then get to choose your skill set again. Am I right?
And you're wrong; that is not what i'm proposing. I understand very well that current system = auto-skill. It doesn't have a focus, there isn't something that tells a person "hey i made a blizzard wizard (lol.)" where this wizard utilizes blizzard like a boss, and HOW they use it like a boss is determined by their OTHER skills that complement this combination. Like I said earlier, if you disagree that underleveled and max leveled skills cannot complement each other, like my slow time + temporal flux (with arcane skills) combo, it would be very difficult to even see eye to eye. By definition a combination is something that works well together, complements each other.
I don't really care for the fee, but the fee would make it less casual and a little more challenging imo. I don't care for the unlocking much, i'm lenient and it works both ways for me. what i dislike greatly is auto-skill: your skill levels with you. (and auto-stat but i can let that one slide so lets not discuss about stats)
Not so much, you open tab, drag it down, and go and if you don't like it, just quickly swop the two skills around again.
Whereas in your system, you need to click a bottle, decide where you don't want points, drag out the points, add it into the new skill. Then you cast it three times and hate it, so you open the bottle again, drag out the points, reallocate them where they were, and off you go again.
It's much more of a schlep, if you ask me.
Yeah, you see this is where UI design takes precedence which is not a problem about the skill system in the first place. Yes, you will have to click a minimum... yes a MINIMUM of 9 times for respecing 6 skills. then drag and drop.
1) open skill window (i guess you can even make this window a hotkey lol.)
2) click once for each skill you wish to use. yes, only ONCE, no lie. (refer to bottom of my first post)
3) click to confirm
4) drag drop skills
And no, trust me when I say that if you bring "faith" and "belief" to the conversation to me, then you have the wrong impression of how I work. Logic and knowledge is what dictates my choices, and I don't believe an ass worth of anything in Blizzard, their actions with other games are proof of this. But I know their choices with D3 are sound, and very logical.
Yeah, thanks theSkaBoss, you had a good response. I have been trying to tell you the same thing, but only in a protracted sense. I try to give you examples of why it works better for this game, and hopefully in some of my statements above I have done so.
Except your examples don't make sense to me. I addressed this in the earlier part of this post so just scroll up if you forgot. To me, this is your argument:
-respecing is lame, a punishing feature
-we're going to have plenty of combinations with runes and other new d3 features anyway
-people are forced to use 3-4 skill builds, always, period, otherwise they will be gimped
-character builds will be balanced now that skills will be balanced and level with you. By balanced you also mean, not one skill spammy as well because they're forced to take 6 skills at lv 30+
To reiterate for the 3rd time. I think that min skills/max skills will complement each other, you will have to find the right skill point amount in each skill to maximize this complement and your build. If we cannot agree here, then I don't think we can agree anywhere pertaining to skill pt removal.
Lol this is getting long. But the way you're explaining it, i have to disagree with, because at least in theSkaBoss's argument he acknowledged that there will be builds using max and underleveled builds, he just said that we're more prone to forget our underleveled skills. I got 15 from a thread in bnet which is probably buried away long ago. they were hinting in JW's interview on skill pts that they tried to limit the "respec to higher skills" by limiting how many points you can have in one skill per difficulty. i think the numbers were 5=normal, 10=nightmare, 15=hell. Apparently that system didn't work out all too well, so they removed it completely.
He was referring to psychology and I'm referring to the benefits of different designs, but mine is invalid? Oookay. You're making it sound like there is one valid explanation.
My argument is that a point system inherently favors focused builds, while with D3 they are going for a more loose fitting build system. And this will make for a tighter late game, I might add.
In the end they removed the skill points because even the escalating caps didn't work out, and that has to tell you something.
Yes, i suppose something that is absolute about skill system is that if you want to use more skills, you must sacrifice some points somewhere else. ie not be given everything to the max. It's highly subjective, i tend to like that model more because it allows for more tougher choices..like "hmm where will i take out points and if i wanted to increase this skill". It's already clear to me that you prefer the other one where you get all skills. where as in the current system, the only real analogous situation is. hm i have a lv 7 rune, which skill shall i put it in. Do note that the lv 7 rune situation also will exist in both my system and the current one.
Alright, again with the level 7 rune. What you are forgetting is that there are at least 22 skills and 5 different runes, which means there are effectively 110 skill choices open to you. Yeah, runes change it that much.
Perhaps that's where we disagree the most. I think they will complement each other. If they do, it just means that blizzard made a really good game. If you don't think my example with temporal flux (with arcane skills) and slow time is not complementing then i'm not sure how i can convince you otherwise. Complementing skills do not equate to pure damage.
No, because let's say you are fighting a boss with 12'000 HP, for your level 7 MM it would take at least 42 shots to take him down, while a level 15 MM would take at least 20. That is the huge difference. Your character will be damn frustrating to play, because his output will lag behind. Let's say a group of skeletons with 1'000 HP attack you, with level 15 MM you will kill them in 2 shots while level 7 will take 4 shots, meaning you will keep running out of arcane power way too fast. And MM is supposed to be your crowd control skill, but 4 shots would require way too much firing against say 15 skeletons. With a level 7 MM by the time you kill 6, you'd be out of arcane power.
Even with just a few points, a skill will be lacking. In your example, you said you put 1 point in hydra, alright, but let's say level 1 hydra does 8-12 damage. How effective will that be against enemies with 10'000+ HP. Yes, it's to slow, but it will still be an arcane power cost sink, which you will feel when you cast it. And that is what it suffered from, some skills you maxed (MM and Torrent), while others weren't useful to max like teleport. Doesn't that tell you something, what's even the point of giving such skills levels if they aren't viable later on. Options only go so far, if they aren't useful beyond a point.
And you know you only used to get 1 skill point every second level, which meant a max of 30 skill points, right?
Oh, and I doubt slow will be stacking, it would probably boil down to a 33% flat movement speed.
not sure what you mean by squeeze between builds.
See my comment above. Most people don't enjoy struggling like that. People will try to force the maximum efficiency out of their builds to get it 100% right. Many people don't even like to do that, which is why they go to guides to look at what builds work, and then spend the allotted amount of points where needed.
Okay, they brought in some new ideas, and I agree with you. But it doesn't change the fact that diablo = item reliant series, therefore if D3 is item reliant, it makes it truly a successor to d2 in my eyes. Which, i'll reiterate is not necessarily a completely bad thing. That was the only thing i was saying, and if you agree with my statement here, then you agree with my previous statement.
I'm not sure which statement, but yeah, D3 (any Diablo for that matter) is item based. They've even changed it that most skills now rely on your weapons for their damage.
I'm not fighting that hard. i'm just saying your argument with respec is silly. There is no monetary slap on the wrist even with the current system (as far as we know) and it's easily true for skill system.
I gave you a silly example because you gave me a silly example with your character having to run all the way back to town just to pay 1 gold then respec....
I guess I like limits, skill points limits you, and forces you to choose what to max, what to not max and still have it be useful. It doesn't mean that it's a system that forces you to use 2 skills only, it just means that if you make a 2 skill build, that works, then good for you.
It's not really a silly example. When you wanted to respec, you needed to go to an NPC in the town. That was a huge time waster, just to see if you like a new skill or not. And I'm glad there is no monetary restraint on the current system. I don't like being punished by a game, it's not fun, that's why the monsters are there. I'd rather feel challenged and struggle with a boss than struggle with the game mechanics, and respec and points feels like restraints. It punishes you for mistakes and hinders your speed and progress.
I wont lie to you, I've enjoyed skill point systems, but times go on and to be honest, I like Sacred's skill system a lot more than Diablo or Titan Quest's skill system.
And you're wrong; that is not what i'm proposing. I understand very well that current system = auto-skill. It doesn't have a focus, there isn't something that tells a person "hey i made a blizzard wizard (lol.)" where this wizard utilizes blizzard like a boss, and HOW they use it like a boss is determined by their OTHER skills that complement this combination. Like I said earlier, if you disagree that underleveled and max leveled skills cannot complement each other, like my slow time + temporal flux (with arcane skills) combo, it would be very difficult to even see eye to eye. By definition a combination is something that works well together, complements each other.
I don't really care for the fee, but the fee would make it less casual and a little more challenging imo. I don't care for the unlocking much, i'm lenient and it works both ways for me. what i dislike greatly is auto-skill: your skill levels with you. (and auto-stat but i can let that one slide so lets not discuss about stats)
Oh, thought I understood you for a second, my bad.
Just want to know. Have you played Guild Wars, or a card game called Magic the Gathering. Well, the current skill system is a lot like that. You now have a hand of 6 cards and a side board of 16 skills (cards if you will), and your potential deck size is 110 skills (cards) with which you can optimize your build.
The old skill system was more of a racing game (for numbers), while the new one is more of a card game.
Once again, removing a fee makes it casual? How exaclty? Hmmm, funny how skills are lately associated with difficulty and not the damn hard monsters. Like I said, I'd rather have a flowing system and struggle against difficult enemies than struggle with the skill system that's fight back against me every step of the way.
Except your examples don't make sense to me. I addressed this in the earlier part of this post so just scroll up if you forgot. To me, this is your argument:
-respecing is lame, a punishing feature
-we're going to have plenty of combinations with runes and other new d3 features anyway
-people are forced to use 3-4 skill builds, always, period, otherwise they will be gimped
-character builds will be balanced now that skills will be balanced and level with you. By balanced you also mean, not one skill spammy as well because they're forced to take 6 skills at lv 30+
To reiterate for the 3rd time. I think that min skills/max skills will complement each other, you will have to find the right skill point amount in each skill to maximize this complement and your build. If we cannot agree here, then I don't think we can agree anywhere pertaining to skill pt removal.
I don't know how to help you there, I'm growing more verbose by the second, and I'm feeling long winded to explain how it logically fits together.
-No, respec work under certain context's, but in the system of D3 it feels redundant.
-We will have more options with only runes and escalating skills. People have gone over these points before. No limitations=more opportunities.
-That's the gist of it. Like my above examples with the skeletons, maxed skills=better efficiency, while with other skills more points becomes redundant. And that is not options it is carrot on a stick play. Carrot or stick?
-Actually all skills are now spammy. And that's better, because the more skills you try out, the more options you have.
To reiterate my point. min skills become obscure and inefficient. And skill point system allow for only so many good builds, it's not a design flaw, that is just the strength of the system and how it works.
I can see I'm jumping into this discussion way late but:
Correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't it stated that skills will have a cooldown? Meaning higher tier skills will have a longer recharge time than lower tier skills. This requires a player to choose 1 or 2 lower tier skills to use in between their massive higher tier skills (unless they want to get beaten to death by a horde of monsters while they wait for their 6 high tier skills to recharge).
Also considering most players will want at least 2 utility skills... that begins to look something like 2 low tier damage skills, 2 high tier damage skills, and 2 utility skills (obviously everyone's preference will be different but that's part of the fun). That to me looks like a lot of interesting decisions on what skills to use. Throw in runes and it looks like plenty of options/planning/customization/uniqueness for each player.
The one thing I do not like is being able to switch the 6 active skills slots whenever, I think it should be limited to towns at least. Even if at no cost, I dont like the idea of having 22ish skills at your disposal at all times, that basically encourages you never to make any decisions.
-That's the gist of it. Like my above examples with the skeletons, maxed skills=better efficiency
that's the kind of linear thinking that probably made blizzard remove it in the first place. Obviously there is no such thing as a good enough skill level, always strive for max amirite?
Weird thought. In plenty of games, I don't max skills and they still serve their uses just fine. I wonder why that is. It made my overall build even better than people that only maxed. I wonder why that is too.
Azjenco, you're being perfectly clear - I'm shocked you had to get THAT verbose in fact.
The basics of my thought is this:
The idea of using less than full points in a skill to find a 'sweet spot' works for support skills because they ARE a 'find your sweet spot and be happy' type thing. But for damaging skills, as Azjenco said, you NEED to max them or else they just don't do enough damage to be efficient. And if they DO then if you max them you'll be even MORE efficient so the game will be easy. Blizzard would have to balance with one in mind: Either they balance around full skill points, in which case any less than that in an attack skill makes that skill too weak to be usable or they balance around some middle ground in which case full skill points would be ridiculously OP.
Blizzard can't balance both - it's not possible. Especially not if they also have to factor runes and rune levels in.
I believe Jay phrased it as they would like their skill system to be like Borderlands, ironically I believe borderlands said their game was like Diablo and their gear gave "+ 1" to X skill- and this such feature Jay foolishly already said was removed.
If you assume that all skills are simple then yes, it does push for you to max out few skills because the value of upgrading is worth every point for what you're trying to do. you're forced to max at least 4 anyway so that's not exactly a number that's really far from 6 (skill slots).
I think you're over simplifying the system a little too much, likely from d2 experience. Lets say sometimes it would be enough to invest just less than 15 points (assuming 15 is max) into a skill. For example, teleport, you may just *need* one point, you may need a few, likely you will not need 15...maybe you will i don't know, but my point is, it likely is a viable skill at couple points. Let me give another example, lets say as you leveled slow time, it increased duration, but didn't really increase the rate of slow. You would have a choice to put less points into slow time. The reason why you would even decide to put less is that you want to maximize your 'focus' skills... like lets say blizzard and ray of frost. Yes, in a way you are using maximizing 2 skills as your attack, and maybe the rest of you're points are going into support skills like diamond skin etc... to maximize your game play for being a wizard that focused on blizzard and ray of frost. the question is if you will be using skills like diamond skin, slow time and whatever even if they weren't your focus... and i strongly feel that you will. this is why i'm not sure why people say, skill points force people to choose one skill.
Lets ignore runes for now, because in both systems you will be using runes.. and really the customization argument just cancels out on both sides, and if we include runes it will over complicate our points.
with the current system. you don't invest in anything. It will unlock as you level your character. There is no more focus, no more choice in investing less into a skill or more into another skill, however i do agree that you still can decide whether or not you want to be a blizzard and ray of frost wizard, just as easily as if you had the point system in the first place. You're teleport just leveled with you, you're diamond skin as well, so did you're so called blizzard and ray of frost focus. (except i guess it's not really a focus cause everything else is the same level.
by burning rune, you mean crimson? anyway, i think you misread the current rune system. basically you don't find runes that are specifically "tuned" to a skill. you find grey "unattuned" runes. You slot them in a skill and poof, they get a color, a random attribute and they can no longer be put into any other skill but the one you just put it in. So your scenario would only work if you bought the rune or was given the rune... in either case i reiterated that i love the respecing, the old way they had, you can respec. so if you had that magic missle splitting rune and you want to give it a go, just respec with some gold cost or whatever cost. I'm not sure where the trouble is here? if you can respec, you can always test and try, and test some more.....
well no one said repecing had to be expensive either... in fact, i wouldn't be too surprised if blizzard limited you from respecing even with the current skill system.
It's true i haven't been following d3 for that long compared to most people, in fact just january this year, when a guildmate posted some cool stuff for d3. I think I kinda explained why i'm following d3. Before, ie. sometime before 8/1 and after 1/1 i thought d3 was cool shit. no skill tree, a fucking awesome idea with runes, good ways to balance MF, salvaging items to help prevent overflow of equips and i can go on, but i think we will agree on pretty much everything. If you think that d3 during this time was d2 with a coat of paint...i will be very confused.
when i have an opinion for a game, i don't allow a dev's prior success to cloud my judgement (at least i try). If a game is new, it's fresh, it only receives praise for cool innovations compared to it's contemporary not it's predecessor.
I'm not addicted to the point of fanboism for JRPG or KRPG. I acknowledge that they have their faults, but i also acknowledge their strengths. tbh, i think western games do better in general than eastern ones when it comes to story telling. d2's plot wasn't epic spectacular shit, but the way they tell it... i can say i'm addicted to that.
I guess i can agree with you here, if it's the dev's goal there's not much you can do. Funny how i think that's the defining decision that makes it the sequel to d2.
it'll make them pesky people use all they skills like they is supposed to too!!
silver bullet.
.
.
.
So... if people are forced not to dump in a couple skills, what's the difference between your system and the current one?
No thanks... in fact Blizzard I beg you do NOT go along with this guy's suggestion, it will take SO much meaningful customization out of the game and replace it with boring skin-deep customization like that which we had in d2.
I read it, but I'm unconvinced. It's a suggestion that assumes that some moves will naturally be more useful to level than others, meaning that the potential skill point distribution is essentially predetermined, which is the same as the current system in many ways, but worse in that it means the game was built with inherently sub-useful skills.
Even if it's not a matter of skills being "built to suck," if you will, and all skills are potentially equally good for adding points to, the fact of the matter is that player psychology will take over, and whatever skill(s) they decided not to level on will become after-thoughts in their gameplay. It's easy to say that people will still use their skills that are less leveled, but if leveling one or two other skills helped to alleviate the need for those under-leveled skills, those under-leveled skills will naturally be dropped bit by bit out of play. At that point, one or more of the players six chosen skills becomes, to some degree, nullified. Suddenly, the player is not identified by his use of these 6 skills, but by his use of these 2 or 3 skills. This will prevail even if he uses the under-leveled skills at all. Because the character is no longer desperately using his 6 in perfect unison... he's using his 2-3, and only using his other 3-4 when he has to.
In my opinion, the better game would be the one where 6 equally useful skills were being used in conjunction with one another. This makes the game feel more 'whole,' it makes the character feel more real, and it makes the gameplay more rewarding. A game where any of the skills were allowed to trump others by pure merit of being "better" would make every skill, including the strong one, feel a bit cheap and shoddy. But what do we know, we haven't even played it.
I think the difference is that I genuinely think that those under leveled skills will be used very frequently, if not as frequent as their maxed leveled counterparts. Rather the right usage between under leveled and max leveled skills will define the player. Or I guess another way you can say it is the under leveled skills will complement the higher ones (like in my hydra example in another topic) and how you utilize both makes you a better player.
And yeah I guess it's impossible to attest your point on player psychology.
Thanks.
probably the former.
but i guess it's a non-issue, someone else brought up a legit reason of why point system has it's flaws. Read up 3 posts if you want to know. I'm done, i have a legit answer that i can't refute.
The skill system is rather simple already, point system or otherwise, it's the skills and way they are used that makes up for that.
Bu in the point system you only get so few points and like we both said, some skills use little -- more than one point in teleport was a waste. While some skills have to be maxed fast. The reason for that is, if you made a blizzard sorc, then blizzard is your main source of damage. So, not pumping it would be stupid, because it's your only source of damage. And that goes the same for all other builds. If you don't push the two or three (or four) you need then you will do piddling damage, and you will need to backtrack just to level.
And at this point it is hard to ignore runes, it is everything the new system is about. That is why they forfeited the skill point system, because runes are THE customization options in the game, it is THE primary functioning behind skills. And it's still early, but give it time, after they saw it in action, the first expansion will really push runes and they will allow even more options than before.
If that's not enough for now, though. Itemization is the main driving point behind the game. Gems and adding sockets, as well as enchantments will drive gear unlike ever before in any game.
Actually, Jay Wilson said it's a new system they are testing, and they would probably go back to the old one if it works. I don't see how runes that lock onto skills would work. Just to show I'm not a mindless 'fanboy', I'll prove it by saying skill locking is a bad design choice. I'm not going into detail on that now, there are other threads where we have gone into detail on the topic.
I used 'burning' as an example because we don't know what effects runes have on Arcane Orb yet. I may just as well have used golden as an example, which from prior knowledge of the system we could guess that it lessens the arcane power cost.
That would prove my example even better, but until they finalize the system, the same example sticks. So, let's say you get the right runes from AH instead of drops then. But if you have points in say Arcane Orb and Disintegrate, and maybe one in Diamond skin, then that's all the available options to add runes to, because, damage skills not maxed out for your level are in effect useless, they just don't cut it in a damage to arcane power cost ratio.
But in the current system, you can test your skills better. In fact, you will have a set of six skills to play around with, and not just 3 (or 4).
The point I tried to makes was, that it does hamper you, big time. Because respeccing is terrible design:
Yes, but that does not change the fact that it is a punishment. Even at one gold cost, you still need to go to a vendor, and respend your points. It's a back tracking, trail and error nightmare. With Diablo 3 they encourage downtime, to such an extent actually that they even added the CoJ, eliminating item runs. They are trying to give you as little reason as possible to run back to town.
And why have it in the first place. By practically saying 'remove the punishment in respeccing', you effectively make it redundant. It feels to me like you just want it there, just so it can be there, just so skill points can be there. The reason behind respeccing in a game such as WoW is that the game is all about raiding and extreme build testing. If you raid and something bothers you, then the game dictates that you need a slap on the wrist.
Diablo, on the other hand, is all about speed and constants, constant fighting, constant looting, constant gearing. The new system fits it like a glove. With respeccing there is the constant need to stunt your gameplay, even with minor costs, which will break your flow, especially if you'd want to quickly try out a new skill, just to see if it viably fits in your build. Respeccing effective hampers gameplay.
I'm not the best of JRPG fans, I tried a few here and there, mostly played Final Fantasy, played 1 to 10 and enjoyed them, but from there it lost it's luster, fast.
I have always enjoyed the more western RPG genre, like the Fallout series, Baldur's gate, Vampire the Masquerade:Redemption, Kotor, Planescape:Torment,Borderlands, Arcanum, etc.
But the ARPG genre has always been something special to me. The whole range from the old forerunners like Golden Axe, Gauntlet, Wasteland, to the good games like Torchlight, Diablo, Dungeon Siege, Sacred, Titan's Quest, and to the not so good games like Revenant, Divine Divinity, Darkstone, Fate, and Lionheart and I've been around MMOs as well.
I have played both Diablo games during their heyday, and well after. Believe me, this system is the natural evolution of the Diablo system, it fits perfectly into what the game is trying to achieve.
the teleport comment might not be accurate, as you do not know if teleport at higher levels would do things like... decrease cooldowns a significant amount. Then sure, some players want to be able to spam that shit, because from d2 and enigmas, we all know how valueable teleport is/was.
While it's true that your focus does usually imply that you need to max it, it's not the only thing that defines your character. Lets say you wanted to make a build that was pretty supportive for team coop.
Example build:
- you get 1 pt in hydra for getting the arcane hydra (runed) because you mainly want to use the hydra for slowing enemies
- you get 10 pt into slow time, because after some testing, you found that slow time at that level + temporal flux (passive skill) your enemies became REALLY REALLY slow after getting hit by arcane and if they're inside the slow time bubble. your enemies will be screwed (like in that pvp video where the barb makes a leap out of slow time, but that bitch moved slow as fuck. maybe lv 10 isn't the sweet spot for this combination, maybe it is, you'll have to test to find out.
- you get 5 points into teleport, because you find that with your play style with slowing opponents, you're not spamming teleport every 5 seconds or something anyway, but maybe you use teleport pretty frequent, like every 10 seconds, so your sweet spot for teleport is lv 5. It could be 5, it could be 1, it could be 15, the point is you have to test your play style for this.
- maybe you decide on getting 10 ray of frost, although it's not arcane, it fits the "slowing enemies" play style you're going for, and you plan to use this as a support skill along with your arcane hydra to help slow enemies for your allies.
You don't decide on 15 for this skill because you don't need it's damage, just it's slowing attribute, maybe you want to put less, maybe you want to put more, but it's up to you to find your sweet spot.
-you get 15 points into arcane torrent, because well it's arcane, so it fits with your slow time+temporal flux, and it's probably going to be your main source of damage +AoE. however, since arcane torrent has long cooldown, and you have no other offensive skill, you decide to take on another dmging skill!
-So then you decide 15 magic missile (with the homing rune) because, 1) it's spammable, 2) it's a very good support skill for slowing down enemies in pvp. 3) apparently blizzard says low tiered skills WILL BE VIABLE <- i loved them for this.
I applaud anyone if they have read this far, this is seriously an example of what you can do. Maybe it won't be a build that works because blizzard will put in clauses like "temporal flux does not stack with slow time or slowing status from ice spells. But I still think it would be a good example of a skill set where people will use every skill frequently to be considered pro, and if you're just one of those people that only will spam one of these skills, you are bad. period. Even in this example, you have 4 skill points left over to put into where ever you want. I do admit that there will be builds that are not viable with the point system, but that's also true for the current system. I know i didn't use that many runes in the example, simply cause we don't know all the rune effects, but i did include them where i knew. The main take home point is you WILL be using runes for all these skills anyway. So i guess that's blizzard's old system encouraging us to use 6 runes for 6 skills?
Yes, I can see why it's hard for the current system to ignore runes, because that's the ONLY customization you get in the current system, where as the other one, like in my above example, you do get to choose how much, and which skills to get, and the max and underleveled skills will complement each other. Just don't forget that the old system too had runes, and had potential builds that utilized 6 runes at a time, exactly like the new system.
Um, d2 was driven mainly by items, gems and sockets, etc. So... d3 probably became more like d2 with that decision, just saying. For the record, I'm half okay with that, items=diablo series, if it weren't we wouldn't see so many randomized gear drops etc.
Yes, I know that runes aren't set in stone right now, but why would you use an example where you had obtained a "magic missle splitting rune" but then since you don't have MM you can't use that rune?
your argument is pretty unfair considering even when you max out arcane orb and disintegrate, and 1 pt in diamond armor that's only 31 points used. Also assuming that you read my compromise (which is the whole point of this thread) my system prevents you from even maxing out those skills in the first place unless you were at a higher level. i.e. you had to be 15 levels higher than when you unlocked a given skill example: disintegrate unlock=12, you need to be lv 27 to max it. AND at level 27 in the current system, you only have 3 skill slots unlocked anyway... tbh you're only argument is that you can switch skills on the fly, and we're not even sure if blizzard is going to limit that in some way.
That's not even a problem of the skill pt system though. What if you had a portible item like "bottle of memories" it allows you to reset your points where ever.
Hmm, I think you're arguing for me now =]
With the current drag and drop system, shoot why does it even have to be there? why can't it just lock when you drag your skills to your skill bar, if you want to reset you can run all the way back to town, pay 1 gold just to reset, so you can drag and drop other skills.
Your argument doesn't fit with what we're talking about, which is, a system that has people using all skills and has the best customization. (best to me means most, to you it's just some)
I guess, but I think I already put that as a con for my skill point system. If you look on the first page it says something like "takes away from the action" If you consider putting a point after you level a hamper on game play then sure. Just remember that when you level and you want to try a new skill, you WILL need to break your flow to drag and drop your new skill anyway. To me that small 1 point allocation per level is worth it, maybe not to you.
for the record, if you think FF is iconic of JRPGs, you've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But i won't get into that.
I can't argue against any opinions that are backed with "faith" or "belief". That's why theSkaBoss presented an argument that I can't refute. But his argument was still legit because it had some logic on player psychology.
Not, wants to, needs to. Like theSkaBoss said, its built into you psychologically, but actually it also just makes pure sense. If you max a skill, you maximize its potential, and through skill points it kinda makes it difficult for the designers. Think about it, balancing for a person with 3 maxed level 20 skills versus another player with a player with 6 level 10 skills. The player with maxed skills WILL perform better over all, while the other player will be a jack of all trades. That is the limitations of a skill point system.
What you describe is a method of spreading your points thinly, again, which a point system limits as maxing is much more viable in the end. I have tried these methods overall throughout many games, not just D2 and it always holds true.
No, under leveled skills with runes and maxed skills with runes wont complement one another. For example, let's talk damage range. Magic Missile level 1 does 1-2 damage, level 2 3-4, lvl 3 5-6, etc. so at level 15 it does 29-30 damage and costs 10 arcane power through all levels. Arcane Orb does 2-4 damage at level 1, 4-8 at lvl 2, 6-12 at 3, etc. to 30-60 at level 15, costing 15 arcane power.
Now, if you choose to take both with only 30 points to spare, MM will do 13-14 damage and Arcane Orb will do 14-28. Effectively you have cut your damage potential by half, while your costs still limit your casting amount. Lets say you slot a rune to split MM into two projectiles. With 100 arcane power you can cast it 10 times, with 2 projectiles, which means 20 projectiles. With a level 7 MM you would get 260-280, while level 15 MM have a damage potential of 580-600. Twice the amount with the same cost.
And most players think like this, theorycraft their builds, which is why they squeeze between builds, or else you will never complete the toughest difficulties, or hope to survive hardcore.
Oh, but D2 was only the tip of the iceberg. D2 runes, well D3 has full blown recipes, which you can use to even craft sets.
D2 had gems with 5 levels and you can slot only one into equipment and then it stays there. Well D3 you can add sockets to items, you can remove gems, you can even upgrade gems at your artisan, and then put it back. As if that's not enough, you now have 15 levels worth of gems.
And no, that's not all, you can now even enchant your items, something totally unique to the Diable series.
Umm, because they have told us that there is a rune that splits magic missiles, which means, we don't know which of the five has this effect, but logic would dictate that there is definitely a rune that splits magic missiles. I use this example cause common sense told me to.
Where did you get your info that there are only 15 levels to the skills, last I checked the number was still at 20, but even if it were at 15, then you'd still find your options tough if there are 6 slots and you can only max 4 skills.
See my above example as to why maxing skills are more efficient cost and usage wise vs spreading yourself thin.
Then why add it at all then, it would cost almost noting to respec, you can do it anywhere. The only problem then is that you've added a redundant item that requires more clicking. Basically the system as it is now is exactly the same, just remove the bottle and there you go.
You know, you are fighting very hard here, drawing straws just to keep the skills point system. I mean, if repeccing has no stupid monetary slap on the wrist, and you can do it anywhere, then what is the point of it, other than just to be there and require something else to click on just to keep skill points. And you will then just add remove, add remove, skills all the time, which the system has now removed.
I fail to see that. I called skill points a redundant system, which you just want there to needlessly click points around.
Alright, I think the new system is actually very much the same as your system. Hear me out for a second.
What you want is a system where you spend points equilateral. You basically build it from the ground up, you spend points on equal terms and all skills raise level by level. You don't want them to be dumped into one skill, which is why you propose restrictions and that way you build your skills on equal footing. Am I right?
Well, the current D3 system works the same way, except you don't spend points.
The skills level up alongside your character, they are essentially assigned points, but I think you want the choice involved there. I think you'd like the system more if it worked like this:
At levels 1, 2, 6, 12, 18, and 24 you get to choose a skill, then that skill gets locked onto your skill bar, you can't remove it. The only way to do that is if you pay a small fee to free up your slots again and then get to choose your skill set again. Am I right?
Not so much, you open tab, drag it down, and go and if you don't like it, just quickly swop the two skills around again.
Whereas in your system, you need to click a bottle, decide where you don't want points, drag out the points, add it into the new skill. Then you cast it three times and hate it, so you open the bottle again, drag out the points, reallocate them where they were, and off you go again.
It's much more of a schlep, if you ask me.
Well, not just me, I really enjoyed them, but apparently FF is the quintessential JRPG and that is according to my Asian friends as well, and many others over the net(reviews included). I have played some others like the Mana series and some rom games, but they just don't stick for me. And I find no appeal in them.
The RPG games I mentioned to you that I've played are what RPG represents to me.
And no, trust me when I say that if you bring "faith" and "belief" to the conversation to me, then you have the wrong impression of how I work. Logic and knowledge is what dictates my choices, and I don't believe an ass worth of anything in Blizzard, their actions with other games are proof of this. But I know their choices with D3 are sound, and very logical.
Yeah, thanks theSkaBoss, you had a good response. I have been trying to tell you the same thing, but only in a protracted sense. I try to give you examples of why it works better for this game, and hopefully in some of my statements above I have done so.
Yes, i suppose something that is absolute about skill system is that if you want to use more skills, you must sacrifice some points somewhere else. ie not be given everything to the max. It's highly subjective, i tend to like that model more because it allows for more tougher choices..like "hmm where will i take out points and if i wanted to increase this skill". It's already clear to me that you prefer the other one where you get all skills. where as in the current system, the only real analogous situation is. hm i have a lv 7 rune, which skill shall i put it in. Do note that the lv 7 rune situation also will exist in both my system and the current one.
Perhaps that's where we disagree the most. I think they will complement each other. If they do, it just means that blizzard made a really good game. If you don't think my example with temporal flux (with arcane skills) and slow time is not complementing then i'm not sure how i can convince you otherwise. Complementing skills do not equate to pure damage.
not sure what you mean by squeeze between builds.
Okay, they brought in some new ideas, and I agree with you. But it doesn't change the fact that diablo = item reliant series, therefore if D3 is item reliant, it makes it truly a successor to d2 in my eyes. Which, i'll reiterate is not necessarily a completely bad thing. That was the only thing i was saying, and if you agree with my statement here, then you agree with my previous statement.
actually i think at one of the blizcon conventions when they were showing off runes and their interaction with skills, we saw that indigo made the runes split. obviously this could change.
and that's what i'm saying with my system you cannot max skills out just like that, players are still forced to invest in other skills just like in the current system. the only difference is that you can invest slightly more in one skill over another. it's almost like saying, hey lv 5 rune dropped, should i put it into arcane orb or shall i put it into diamond skin. (when at the moment you're using only lv 3 runes)
I'm not fighting that hard. i'm just saying your argument with respec is silly. There is no monetary slap on the wrist even with the current system (as far as we know) and it's easily true for skill system.
I gave you a silly example because you gave me a silly example with your character having to run all the way back to town just to pay 1 gold then respec....
I guess I like limits, skill points limits you, and forces you to choose what to max, what to not max and still have it be useful. It doesn't mean that it's a system that forces you to use 2 skills only, it just means that if you make a 2 skill build, that works, then good for you.
And you're wrong; that is not what i'm proposing. I understand very well that current system = auto-skill. It doesn't have a focus, there isn't something that tells a person "hey i made a blizzard wizard (lol.)" where this wizard utilizes blizzard like a boss, and HOW they use it like a boss is determined by their OTHER skills that complement this combination. Like I said earlier, if you disagree that underleveled and max leveled skills cannot complement each other, like my slow time + temporal flux (with arcane skills) combo, it would be very difficult to even see eye to eye. By definition a combination is something that works well together, complements each other.
I don't really care for the fee, but the fee would make it less casual and a little more challenging imo. I don't care for the unlocking much, i'm lenient and it works both ways for me. what i dislike greatly is auto-skill: your skill levels with you. (and auto-stat but i can let that one slide so lets not discuss about stats)
Yeah, you see this is where UI design takes precedence which is not a problem about the skill system in the first place. Yes, you will have to click a minimum... yes a MINIMUM of 9 times for respecing 6 skills. then drag and drop.
1) open skill window (i guess you can even make this window a hotkey lol.)
2) click once for each skill you wish to use. yes, only ONCE, no lie. (refer to bottom of my first post)
3) click to confirm
4) drag drop skills
Except your examples don't make sense to me. I addressed this in the earlier part of this post so just scroll up if you forgot. To me, this is your argument:
-respecing is lame, a punishing feature
-we're going to have plenty of combinations with runes and other new d3 features anyway
-people are forced to use 3-4 skill builds, always, period, otherwise they will be gimped
-character builds will be balanced now that skills will be balanced and level with you. By balanced you also mean, not one skill spammy as well because they're forced to take 6 skills at lv 30+
To reiterate for the 3rd time. I think that min skills/max skills will complement each other, you will have to find the right skill point amount in each skill to maximize this complement and your build. If we cannot agree here, then I don't think we can agree anywhere pertaining to skill pt removal.
My argument is that a point system inherently favors focused builds, while with D3 they are going for a more loose fitting build system. And this will make for a tighter late game, I might add.
In the end they removed the skill points because even the escalating caps didn't work out, and that has to tell you something.
Alright, again with the level 7 rune. What you are forgetting is that there are at least 22 skills and 5 different runes, which means there are effectively 110 skill choices open to you. Yeah, runes change it that much.
No, because let's say you are fighting a boss with 12'000 HP, for your level 7 MM it would take at least 42 shots to take him down, while a level 15 MM would take at least 20. That is the huge difference. Your character will be damn frustrating to play, because his output will lag behind. Let's say a group of skeletons with 1'000 HP attack you, with level 15 MM you will kill them in 2 shots while level 7 will take 4 shots, meaning you will keep running out of arcane power way too fast. And MM is supposed to be your crowd control skill, but 4 shots would require way too much firing against say 15 skeletons. With a level 7 MM by the time you kill 6, you'd be out of arcane power.
Even with just a few points, a skill will be lacking. In your example, you said you put 1 point in hydra, alright, but let's say level 1 hydra does 8-12 damage. How effective will that be against enemies with 10'000+ HP. Yes, it's to slow, but it will still be an arcane power cost sink, which you will feel when you cast it. And that is what it suffered from, some skills you maxed (MM and Torrent), while others weren't useful to max like teleport. Doesn't that tell you something, what's even the point of giving such skills levels if they aren't viable later on. Options only go so far, if they aren't useful beyond a point.
And you know you only used to get 1 skill point every second level, which meant a max of 30 skill points, right?
Oh, and I doubt slow will be stacking, it would probably boil down to a 33% flat movement speed.
See my comment above. Most people don't enjoy struggling like that. People will try to force the maximum efficiency out of their builds to get it 100% right. Many people don't even like to do that, which is why they go to guides to look at what builds work, and then spend the allotted amount of points where needed.
I'm not sure which statement, but yeah, D3 (any Diablo for that matter) is item based. They've even changed it that most skills now rely on your weapons for their damage.
It's not really a silly example. When you wanted to respec, you needed to go to an NPC in the town. That was a huge time waster, just to see if you like a new skill or not. And I'm glad there is no monetary restraint on the current system. I don't like being punished by a game, it's not fun, that's why the monsters are there. I'd rather feel challenged and struggle with a boss than struggle with the game mechanics, and respec and points feels like restraints. It punishes you for mistakes and hinders your speed and progress.
I wont lie to you, I've enjoyed skill point systems, but times go on and to be honest, I like Sacred's skill system a lot more than Diablo or Titan Quest's skill system.
Oh, thought I understood you for a second, my bad.
Just want to know. Have you played Guild Wars, or a card game called Magic the Gathering. Well, the current skill system is a lot like that. You now have a hand of 6 cards and a side board of 16 skills (cards if you will), and your potential deck size is 110 skills (cards) with which you can optimize your build.
The old skill system was more of a racing game (for numbers), while the new one is more of a card game.
Once again, removing a fee makes it casual? How exaclty? Hmmm, funny how skills are lately associated with difficulty and not the damn hard monsters. Like I said, I'd rather have a flowing system and struggle against difficult enemies than struggle with the skill system that's fight back against me every step of the way.
I don't know how to help you there, I'm growing more verbose by the second, and I'm feeling long winded to explain how it logically fits together.
-No, respec work under certain context's, but in the system of D3 it feels redundant.
-We will have more options with only runes and escalating skills. People have gone over these points before. No limitations=more opportunities.
-That's the gist of it. Like my above examples with the skeletons, maxed skills=better efficiency, while with other skills more points becomes redundant. And that is not options it is carrot on a stick play. Carrot or stick?
-Actually all skills are now spammy. And that's better, because the more skills you try out, the more options you have.
To reiterate my point. min skills become obscure and inefficient. And skill point system allow for only so many good builds, it's not a design flaw, that is just the strength of the system and how it works.
Correct me if I'm wrong... but wasn't it stated that skills will have a cooldown? Meaning higher tier skills will have a longer recharge time than lower tier skills. This requires a player to choose 1 or 2 lower tier skills to use in between their massive higher tier skills (unless they want to get beaten to death by a horde of monsters while they wait for their 6 high tier skills to recharge).
Also considering most players will want at least 2 utility skills... that begins to look something like 2 low tier damage skills, 2 high tier damage skills, and 2 utility skills (obviously everyone's preference will be different but that's part of the fun). That to me looks like a lot of interesting decisions on what skills to use. Throw in runes and it looks like plenty of options/planning/customization/uniqueness for each player.
The one thing I do not like is being able to switch the 6 active skills slots whenever, I think it should be limited to towns at least. Even if at no cost, I dont like the idea of having 22ish skills at your disposal at all times, that basically encourages you never to make any decisions.
Weird thought. In plenty of games, I don't max skills and they still serve their uses just fine. I wonder why that is. It made my overall build even better than people that only maxed. I wonder why that is too.
lol
The basics of my thought is this:
The idea of using less than full points in a skill to find a 'sweet spot' works for support skills because they ARE a 'find your sweet spot and be happy' type thing. But for damaging skills, as Azjenco said, you NEED to max them or else they just don't do enough damage to be efficient. And if they DO then if you max them you'll be even MORE efficient so the game will be easy. Blizzard would have to balance with one in mind: Either they balance around full skill points, in which case any less than that in an attack skill makes that skill too weak to be usable or they balance around some middle ground in which case full skill points would be ridiculously OP.
Blizzard can't balance both - it's not possible. Especially not if they also have to factor runes and rune levels in.