This discussion seems a bit useless to me. I have a bit similar thoughts to Yoshida. Some people here say they want 0/20 and want to be able to invest lots of points to a skill. Well, why 20? Why is 20 perfect? Why not 5, 10, 100, 25, 45, 7? Only because diablo2 had it, doesn't mean it's the perfect number.
I don't even know if I should take this serious. Do you really think Blizzard will make the game so that you can max out all skills? So funny.
More people said that you will be able to max all skills, and chars won't be unique anymore. How can you say this? It got nothing to do with 0/5, 0/10, 0/100.
Because like Yoshida said, we don't know how many skills there are. We don't even know if we still get 1 point for each level, and if we do, then we don't know the level cap. So we don't know how many skill points we get.
I don't really know the reason to be honest to make a different cap for skills. But 90% of the posts I have seen here got nothing to do with it. But I guess they first think about what power they want a maxed skill to have, and then they give a cap according to that. Then 1 point in skill A(0/5) will have the same power as 1 point in skill B(0/10). But skill B will be more powerful then A once you get to 6 points spent. Skill A might become too unbalanced if it would also have a cap of 10.
What we don't want to see is that 1 point in a 0/5 skill is worth the same as 2 points in a 0/10 skill.
EDIT: Like some people pointed out, I also think the 0/5 skills could be some sort of 'utility skills'
While I try not to assume too much about what is under-development, these comments irk me.
You seem to think Blizzard could do no wrong, which is a lot of assuming on your end, as well. I think Blizzard could totally bomb D3 if left to their own devices. This is because no one at Blizzard Entertainment was remotely involved with the design of Diablo or Diablo II. This is the same team that made WoW, which is basically a bastardization and dumbing down of MMOs. WoW, while successful, has taken the MMO industry backwards another 4 years with it's heavy focus on raiding and required hours to get anything from the game.
So, yes, I am totally worried of what Blizzard could do to Diablo 3. However, from the video, the gameplay looks and feels like Diablo. I will not comment on the art direction, but everything else looks alright.
Still, input from the players will help D3 be the perfect game, not "trusting Blizzard". They do want our input.
we don't even know if there will be 99 levels in diablo2... though it does seem likely.
We can assume they will use trees, and I'm going to assume that they have indeed added a bunch of skills per tree.
I also think from my pure speculation of them having more skills, and maybe more trees per class, is that we will see an even wider variety of builds than D2.
If they keep with their current direction, I hope you're right.
Yea it totally sux how they aren't copying D2 skills into D3. I mean thats totally what they did with D1 to D2 right? Oh wait...
The game is in pre-alpha, stop freaking out.
Yes, we should all save our comments until release! This would be the most perfect time in which Blizzard could change their game.
Edit:
Also there were no skills in Diablo. Only spells.
The reason Diablo 2 has skill trees is because they didn't want every class being fundamentally the same. This was the case in Diablo, a rogue was just as efficient as a warrior in melee combat with the proper stat placement.
This is why I'm noting my opinion on trees with 1/1 skills or 5/5 skills or whatever they make the max on some of the skills. I enjoyed the class within a class approach to character design in Diablo 2. It's something I'd like to see in Diablo 3.
I agree, Enigma is utter bullshit! I hate class-crossing. It's utter bullshit! If you can't beat some one with your own skills then you don't deserve to PvP.
Ah, the despairing cry of the orb sorc finally being placed at the same level as every other class.
It's like a sweet siren's song. Alluring, drawing me in. But I must stay strong or I'll crash into this flamebait.
you are assuming that you will be able to max out a number of trees and the classes will fail to have original builds, yet we don't know:
a. the amount of skills available.
b. the number of trees available to each class.
c. the number of skills in a given tree.
d. if there will by synergies (which I'm almost certain there will be)
e. Anything about skills at all other than 5/5 seems to be the max.
I can assume there will be 98 skill points minimum, if not this game is heading down a path I'm not sure it would recover from. They may skip the skill point quests, but honestly the quests in Diablo 2 were worth doing because of the permanent rewards to you and not a piece of gear you would replace in 2 levels anyways. So I really hope they keep that system.
In order to keep the system of character customization in builds that D2 had, they would need to add a ton of skills per tree (if they use trees, which I assume they would) in order to keep people from maxing every skill in every tree.
I am pretty sure those little divisions (which I found pretty boring and not worth dividing) will still be available as well.
If you didn't find them worth dividing, you obviously didn't understand builds in the first place.
If my sin is pheonix user, I don't want to be bunked up with kickers because we use the same tree. Why? Because the playstyle is so completely different, and the stat allocation for every build is so different that one person using skills in the martial arts tree to the next can not possibly be the same.
This is the exact point i'm trying to make, if some skills are being brought down to 5, or 10, its obvious they're less for a reason, and everyone will end up getting them no matter which build they get because they are less of an investment.
And to the comments about telekinesis and Teleport, Did you ever max them, i know i didn't but the option was there. Just because the points are available doesn't mean they must be put there.
Yes, my lightning sorc does have telekinesis maxed due to the synergy with energy shield.
I've also had a fire sorc who had 15 devoted to tele so she could outduel orb sorcs who only placed 1 in tele.
It's not like DII permitted a lot of builds. For necro, it was poison, bone, and summon. That's it. I don't know where you saw "a lot of builds". Of course, you can interchange them but the basic point is still the same - most feasible DII builds are not numerous. Leaving all those pointless skill maxes only gives room for new people who don't read cookie cutter builds to make random mistakes because they don't know what a skill does and they can't respec. I don't see the point of that.
Eh, you're oversimplifying builds. There are skelemancers, golem mancers, revive necros, poison nova, bone spear necro, teeth necro, bone spirit necro.
Builds where more about what skill(s) you specialised in.
Yeah different builds that soon become a must build that is the only one that works and I can't imagine being asked what is your build everytime I join a game.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe you played D2.
But it's really hard, because.. I just ran 15 baal runs in a row with someone who didn't even have skill points placed and no one ever said a word about it.
The way Diablo gameplay works is that even the most ruined craptastic build can still be feasible, however you may just be making the game more difficult for yourself.
As to the topic, boo on less ability to customise skills. Half of the game was putting fore-thought into your build.
In D2 you can gain a total of 110 skill points by 99. That's a fairly decent amount. If just 4 skills per tree where converted to maxing at 10, you could easily grab all the super powerful stuff from every tree and have maxed synergies for them. That would basically turn everyone into the same class. Why be a smitadin when you could be a smitadin AND a hammerdin, or why be a minionmancer when you can be a poisonmancer at the same time.
I fail to see how this would be an improvement, unless you enjoy cookie-cutter classes.
They were used heavily in combat by the Greeks, as a frontline weapon that could be thrown if they wanted to. It was also short enough that they could use a shield, forming the famous Greek phalanx and keep their foes at spears length at the same time.
The OP clearly thinks that anything labeled as a javalin is purely for sport purposes. Also, go back to history class.
0
While I try not to assume too much about what is under-development, these comments irk me.
You seem to think Blizzard could do no wrong, which is a lot of assuming on your end, as well. I think Blizzard could totally bomb D3 if left to their own devices. This is because no one at Blizzard Entertainment was remotely involved with the design of Diablo or Diablo II. This is the same team that made WoW, which is basically a bastardization and dumbing down of MMOs. WoW, while successful, has taken the MMO industry backwards another 4 years with it's heavy focus on raiding and required hours to get anything from the game.
So, yes, I am totally worried of what Blizzard could do to Diablo 3. However, from the video, the gameplay looks and feels like Diablo. I will not comment on the art direction, but everything else looks alright.
Still, input from the players will help D3 be the perfect game, not "trusting Blizzard". They do want our input.
0
If they keep with their current direction, I hope you're right.
However the balancing job would be brutal.
0
Yes, we should all save our comments until release! This would be the most perfect time in which Blizzard could change their game.
Edit:
Also there were no skills in Diablo. Only spells.
The reason Diablo 2 has skill trees is because they didn't want every class being fundamentally the same. This was the case in Diablo, a rogue was just as efficient as a warrior in melee combat with the proper stat placement.
This is why I'm noting my opinion on trees with 1/1 skills or 5/5 skills or whatever they make the max on some of the skills. I enjoyed the class within a class approach to character design in Diablo 2. It's something I'd like to see in Diablo 3.
0
Ah, the despairing cry of the orb sorc finally being placed at the same level as every other class.
It's like a sweet siren's song. Alluring, drawing me in. But I must stay strong or I'll crash into this flamebait.
0
I can assume there will be 98 skill points minimum, if not this game is heading down a path I'm not sure it would recover from. They may skip the skill point quests, but honestly the quests in Diablo 2 were worth doing because of the permanent rewards to you and not a piece of gear you would replace in 2 levels anyways. So I really hope they keep that system.
In order to keep the system of character customization in builds that D2 had, they would need to add a ton of skills per tree (if they use trees, which I assume they would) in order to keep people from maxing every skill in every tree.
0
Then let's remove all classes and all skills. You get attack and fireball, now go out and be somebody.
0
If you didn't find them worth dividing, you obviously didn't understand builds in the first place.
If my sin is pheonix user, I don't want to be bunked up with kickers because we use the same tree. Why? Because the playstyle is so completely different, and the stat allocation for every build is so different that one person using skills in the martial arts tree to the next can not possibly be the same.
0
Yes, my lightning sorc does have telekinesis maxed due to the synergy with energy shield.
I've also had a fire sorc who had 15 devoted to tele so she could outduel orb sorcs who only placed 1 in tele.
0
Eh, you're oversimplifying builds. There are skelemancers, golem mancers, revive necros, poison nova, bone spear necro, teeth necro, bone spirit necro.
Builds where more about what skill(s) you specialised in.
0
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that maybe you played D2.
But it's really hard, because.. I just ran 15 baal runs in a row with someone who didn't even have skill points placed and no one ever said a word about it.
The way Diablo gameplay works is that even the most ruined craptastic build can still be feasible, however you may just be making the game more difficult for yourself.
As to the topic, boo on less ability to customise skills. Half of the game was putting fore-thought into your build.
In D2 you can gain a total of 110 skill points by 99. That's a fairly decent amount. If just 4 skills per tree where converted to maxing at 10, you could easily grab all the super powerful stuff from every tree and have maxed synergies for them. That would basically turn everyone into the same class. Why be a smitadin when you could be a smitadin AND a hammerdin, or why be a minionmancer when you can be a poisonmancer at the same time.
I fail to see how this would be an improvement, unless you enjoy cookie-cutter classes.
0
by your logic there should be no bow using characters
0
Because you try to say a weapon of war is ungainly in a combat situation.
The short spear was designed for killing.
There will be killing in D3, I say bring in the javalins.
Exploding potions too, even though no one used those.
0
They were used heavily in combat by the Greeks, as a frontline weapon that could be thrown if they wanted to. It was also short enough that they could use a shield, forming the famous Greek phalanx and keep their foes at spears length at the same time.
The OP clearly thinks that anything labeled as a javalin is purely for sport purposes. Also, go back to history class.