DiabloFans

reposted from US D3 forums:
http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/5836874790#1

===========
Leveling multiple characters was a major part of the Diablo 2 gameplay experience. Most people will point to the fact that you couldn't re-spec without starting a new toon. However, leveling had tons of benefits totally unrelated to spec change. For each new character you rushed from Normal to Hell, you gained 3x Imbues, "add sockets", and vanity names. In addition, you had a chance to earn reasonably good items in the Act Boss first-kill drops (very high % Unique) and the Hellforge Rune drop. For all of the above reasons, everyone made tons of characters all the time. There was an entire skill in D2 (Enchant) that existed just to help rushing toons.

It seems that leveling new characters was intended to be a major part of D3 as well. There are more low level Legendaries than level 60 legendaries in the game. Blue posts have discussed multiple mechanics introduced to allow "twinking" of new characters. High-level Gems in low-level items, "reduced level requirement" and "experience on kill" gear, and leveling Legendaries all exist to speed leveling. There are even achievements for leveling multiples of each character. And Normal, Nightmare and Hell difficulties are very well balanced with a smooth difficulty curve.

Yet the leveling process in D3 feels dramatically less rewarding than in D2. I believe it is the sum of several factors, listed from most to least important (in my opinion):

1) No tangible perks for having multiples of the same character. In D2, not only do I get to try a different character spec, I get a full set of Imbues, Sockets, and vanity names. (which cannot be obtained in any way other than leveling new characters) In D3 all I get is an achievement.

2) Lack of Nephalem Valor during leveling. When you're used to seeing fountains of blue and yellow spurt out of every Elite kill, going back to one or two blues per pack feels like "culture shock". It is especially painful when you are level 58 and clearing Hell Act 3, a zone that many undergeared 60s farm for loot (with NV). Even though you're killing the same mobs and the same bosses, at level 58 you get far less loot.

3) Lack of first-kill bonuses on Act bosses in NM and Hell. I believe there was a blue post addressing this earlier, but I can't find it. Fixing this issue would be nice, but I feel like it is a minor quibble compared to #1 and #2.

4) Lack of ladder resets. Resets wouldn't work with D3's game mechanics of course.

=====
I think the leveling process would be dramatically better if:

1) New characters gained some limited-use abilities.

Stamping your name on an item D2-style would be a good start. It would also be very cool if there was some kind of "D3 Imbue". It might be "crafting a class-specific item with an affix of your choice", or re-rolling affixes on items you already have, or something else entirely.

2) Nephalem Valor starts at level 30.

No one wants to be stuck using Magic Missile and Ray of Frost at level 6 because you just killed two elite packs and you don't want to lose your stacks. However, considering that you get all basic class skills by level 30 it is entirely reasonable to have NV start at level 30.

Plus, you still lose all NV stacks when changing Acts, or logging off, so you have plenty of opportunities to change your skill build.

3) Bring back Act Boss first-kill rewards in NM/Hell

This one is obvious, and easy.

=========

It would be ideal to have things balanced where leveling multiple characters of the same class is viable, but not mandatory (as in pre-respec D2). In a world with free re-specs, character-rushing for Imbues and Runes is not necessarily better or worse than regular Hell runs, it is just another way to get loot in addition to Baal, Pindle, Chaos, Meph, Pit etc. I think it would be ideal if D3 character leveling was balanced similarly.

Quote from fulken

I know plenty of barbs who can farm act3/4 with no problems, and they aren't the best geared...

The amount of gear necessary to farm act 3/4 with a barb or monk is insanely higher than the gear needed for a ranged character to do the same thing.

A melee character has to stack a tremendous amount of Armor and Resist All before he can even think about stepping into Act 3. It has nothing to do with "facerolling" or being good or bad at the game. If elite monsters are hitting you for 20k white hits, you are not going to be able to melee them, period.

I don't see what the big deal is. Monks currently have a much easier time surviving on Inferno than Barbarians. We've got an invulnerability bubble (they don't), our Mantras are similar in strength to war cray, we have reasonable mobility with dashing strike and tempest rush. Babas complain all day long about the fact that they don't have Deadly Reach, which allows me to hit a Plagued champion from safely outside the poison pool. A baba can't do that. (weapon throw kinda sucks and ancient spear is a 15s CD)

Blizzard never said that dodge would work on absolutely EVERYTHING. As far as I can tell dodge works on everything except for persistent ground AoE. (Environmental fires, molten/plagued pools, desecration) That may be "working as intended" but it sure does make Monks squishier against molten/plagued.

Anyone have any information on these? Obviously both champions and bosses have enrage timers on inferno difficulty.

I heard someone say that enrage timers exist on hell difficulty (not just inferno), with stuff like the Butcher's room getting much more fires after X minutes, but I have not actually seen this in action. I suppose it would be easy to test, just stand there and dont attack him for 10 minutes. Any timer longer than that is essentially nonexistent.

Is there a good site (wiki?) showing the actual enrage times?

Lowest possible damage range is (115-227). Average damage = 171, * 1.3 APS = 222.3 DPS.
Highest possible damage range is (146-300). Average damage = 223, *1.3 APS = 289.9 DPS.

Note that the damage range next to the portrait includes all sources of extra damage listed below. So if a weapon says:
100-200 Damage
1.00 Attacks per Second
+20-40 Poison Damage

That means it does 100-200 damage, of which 20-40 is poison and the rest is physical.

I'm surprised that they did not upload melee weapon range as one of the stats. Melee range was pretty freaking important in diablo 2. (for example, a war scythe has a range of 5 while a 2h sword or a regular scythe doesn't).

It is interesting to see the pattern of "+ skill" bonuses, such as "Reduces cooldown of Wall of Zombies by 1-3 seconds". These skill bonuses seem to appear only on class-specific items, and each class can equip a total of 3 class-specific items: MH, OH, and Armor. (for example, 2x Hand Crossbow + Cloak; Knife + Mojo + Mask, etc.)

So for example, the maximum "reduces cooldown of Wall of Zombies" seems to be 3 seconds. If you equipped 3 items with "reduces Wall of Zombies CD by 3sec", the CD would go from 25sec to 16sec. Or you could lower the mana cost of Firebats from 122 to 92. That's a pretty impressive difference for just 3 items' worth of stats. If I had an endgame build that used Firebats heavily, I'd definitely hunt for Firebats-specific "+skill" gear.

Anyone think that an Arcane Enchanted + Desecrator + Waller + Jailer will just kill you?

Tons of ground-targeted damage, and you can't run out of it!

I know I won't have the free time to compete with the "rush to 60" guys who get the first Inferno clears and first lv-63 legendaries and sell them for $200 apiece. So I am definitely planning to take my time, enjoy storyline and cinematics and clicking on NPCs, etc. Unless you plan to be one of the competitive gamers who will actually be pushing toward a world first, I don't see the point in rushing.

Quote from Haedrath

first of all the start of the leoric boss encounter seemed pretty scripted to me... I never got to test this as i never died against him... (le derp.. shoulda thought to test that) and.... never tested the town portal option... cause I'm pretty sure you could get away with a cast during that fight

I believe that Town Portal is completely disabled during "boss encounters". In Beta, this includes the Deckard Cain event and the SK. Once you start a boss fight, the only way out is to defeat the boss or die. Theoretically you could also disconnect, but I think that would just result in you dying.

Boss fights were incredibly lame in Diablo 2 - based on what we've heard so far it seems like d3 will be far superior.

The burst damage of 6 pre-laid traps is huge only if you can get all of the traps up ahead of time (for a cost of 180 Hatred) and then lure the enemy into the traps. With all of the Waller, Vortex, Jailer etc mobs in Inferno, it may be difficult to kite enemies backward into pre-laid traps. Still, if you can do it, it's a HUGE amount of burst damage. It's not quite "8910% to a whole group" though - in a large group you have to expect that a lot of traps will only hit 1-2 monsters on the edge of the group.

As a DPS ability used in the middle of a battle, Spike Trap is decent but not great. The 1.2sec delay is not that long, so you can cast it directly on top of enemy groups like a Meteor. (although its range is limited so it's not as safe) 275% base damage is very similar to the 200%+60% damage of Meteor, although Meteor appears to have a larger AoE radius.

It sounds like a really strong ability, but I don't think it'll be game-breaking like how the OP makes it sound.

I think it will be interesting to watch a game economy where you can buy things in Gold, you can buy things in $, and you can interconvert gold and $ at a fixed tax rate of 27.75%.

The total amount of Gold in the game will eventually level off as the rate of gold creation (drops from enemies) equals the rate of gold destruction (AH fees + repairs + other vendor fees). At this point it's likely that there will be a somewhat stable $-to-Gold exchange rate. The 27.75% tax rate represents a hard limit on how much the exchange rate can fluctuate.

If the real-money price of Gold were to transiently drop by more than 27.75%, it would be cheaper in $ to buy Gold and then purchase items on the Gold AH, and demand for Gold would skyrocket until Gold prices went back up.

Conversely, if the real-money price of Gold were to increase by more than 38.41%, it would be cheaper in Gold to sell all of your Gold for $, and then use the RMAH. The supply of Gold would skyrocket until Gold prices went back down.

It's plausible to believe that even very small fluctuations in the $-to-Gold exchange rate will dramatically change the supply and demand of Gold. This implies that the exchange rate will be quite stable, at least in the short term. Because this exchange-rate balancing mechanism is based entirely on the existence of the RMAH, I believe the Gold exchange rate will closely track the realmoney value of Diablo 3 items. If people are willing to pay more money for D3 gear, then people will also be willing to pay more $ for Gold, as it is a mechanism for acquiring gear. If people stop buying D3 gear then there will be greatly decreased demand for Gold as well.


=====
It's difficult to predict what prices will do beyond the first few months of the game. As in any nascent economy, prices will be sky-high at the very start because supply is so limited. The very first "Tier 18 Awesome Plate" to drop is likely to command a totally absurd price. The next ten will also be expensive. Once there are thousands of them circulating the price will stabilize to some extent.

Because items are non-perishable, the supply can only increase over time. An item that is super awesome in October 2012 is likely to be mediocre in October 2013. (even ignoring expansion packs) This builds in a certain amount of depreciation into the economy - even though the actual stats on a piece of gear don't change over time, its value can only decrease. (Unless a patch causes it to become a super-rare "pre-nerf item" - this is not too different from real-life economic phenomena like "pre-ban assault rifles")

However, it is worth noting that, if you are actually buying items that you can use, those items can make it easier for you to find more items. Even though equipping an item for a prolonged time exposes you to depreciation, it also can increase your kill rate, help you get through Inferno, and increase the chances that you find better items. In addition, it's just plain fun to have good gear. For this reason, the inherent "depreciation" of D3 gear does not make it a bad investment. This can be paralleled to the real life phenomenon of how having a cell phone increases your chances of getting a job and is therefore (generally) a good investment despite the cost.

Of course, the Diablo 3 version of this phenomenon is unlikely to be cost effective, because it is primarily for entertainment. In other words, the free-market price of a D3 item will include a certain "usefulness value" and a certain "entertainment value". As D3 is primarily a game and not a job, I'm certain the vast majority of the price will be "entertainment". You would get better gear faster by working more hours in real life, getting real money, and purchasing gear. Of course, then you might not have as many hours to play your geared out D3 character.

=====
This all begs the question of what happens to the D3 economy once third-world farmers enter the mix. If spending an hour playing a level 60 character generates $0.50 of real-money economic value, that's not a whole lot in the US but will far exceed the hourly wages in many poorer countries. Should gold/item farming be considered a legitimate economic activity?

This also begs the question of what happens when someone finds a horrifically overpowered combination of gear and character build (possibly a combination of several characters). If the average max-level Diablo 3 player generates $0.50 of real-money value per hour, and a "really good" Diablo 3 player generates $3.00, what happens when someone finds something game-breaking and is now making $30 per hour playing D3? When Blizzard nerfs them, they've suffered a significant economic harm. But if Blizzard doesn't nerf them, everyone else in the game suffers an economic harm as all of their items and characters depreciate rapidly and severely.

The real money considerations are really quite interesting.

Using a faster weapon definitely decreases the amount of time you can spend channeling a Ray of Frost or Disintegrate... but keep in mind that you have Signature spells that are not AP dependent (or in some cases even restore AP or proc additional effects).

If you are concerned about purely maximizing a single high-AP cost spell like Meteor or Disintegrate then it may make sense to wield a slow 2her... otherwise you're probably okay with a wand or a 2h.

Quote from sooru

Quote from PiousFlea »

However, 2H has one MAJOR advantage over DW for melee characters, and that's superior reach. The reason that Cleaving with a big sword is so much more effective than cleaving with two 1hs is that the Cleave area of effect is much larger. Even with non-AoE melee abilities, the 2h's longer melee reach can be a significant advantage for fighting other melee creatures.

I don't think there's been any evidence of this so far in beta. At least there's been no discussion about it, which I take as a proof of inexistence. I would really like this mechanic myself, but it probably to fell into Blizzard's category of "not a fun thing to manage".

Quote from Zero(pS)

I really haven't noticed that as well.

I mean, obviously a Flamberge apparently (graphically) reaches "longer" than a pair of Hand Axes, but the actual skill range feels pretty much the same.

Any videos/screenshots or links to a discussion on this?

Equip Cleave with a 1her versus a 2her and it is pretty obvious - even with equal DPS, the 2her feels significantly more effective. That's because it has a longer reach so you are cleaving more enemies at once.

Every melee weapon in Diablo 2 had a Range statistic. For example, a spear has a dramatically longer reach than a sword. There is no reason to believe that they would remove the Range statistic from Diablo 3.
http://diablo.wikia....%28Diablo_II%29
http://diablo.wikia.com/wiki/Scythe
http://diablo.wikia....wiki/War_Scythe

This is a REALLY old debate. Faster weapons consume proportionally more AP than slower weapons. Slower weapons hit harder on "on death" procs (ie runed Shock Pulse). However, faster weapons also gain more from flat +Damage affixes (which are very common in D3) and give more chances to activate "on hit" or "on crit" procs.

Overall it's a wash. Some skills are stronger on faster weapons while other skills are stronger on slower weapons. The large amount of Wizard-focused affixes on Orbs may skew things in favor of Wand/Orb, and all known Wands have a fast attack speed.


The "resource efficiency" phenomenon doesn't exist for a Barbarian, Monk, or DH. Because they rely heavily upon "generator" abilities to replenish their Fury/Spirit/Hatred, having a faster attack speed both generates and consumes resources proportionally faster. They are therefore neither more or less resource-efficient. However, because faster weapons have a huge advantage in +Damage affixes and "on hit" procs, melee classes will generally do more singletarget DPS with dual wield than with a 2H. This is counterbalanced by the longer reach of a 2H, which greatly increases the effectiveness of melee-AoEs like Cleave and Whirlwind (and arguably makes it slightly easier to hit singletargets too).