DiabloFans

lso what was very cool about D2, was the fact that the most expensive items were indeed yellow rare items, which could generate many different affixes that made this item godlike and very expensive. In D3 there is no depth in itemization. The only upgrade you can get is 20 main atribute or 10% more critical hit damage, which doesn't encourage you to further grinding/farming/exping whatever you feel like doing.

I really think people overestimate the itemization system in D2, especially when it came to rares. Sure it was nice that rares *could* be godly (ala rare circlets), but it was mostly getting +3 to your specialized skill tab. The other stats were no more interesting than All Res and other stats from D3. I loved D2, don't get me wrong, but it's itemization had tons of problems as well, and I know I mostly played it because I liked the repetition at that stage in my life.



I'm not at all saying that D3 doesn't need some itemization work, or that a suggestion like the one in the OP wouldn't be awesome and welcome. But when people try to analyze why D2 was successful, I often see more flaws that would bug me today than I see examples of how to move forward in D3. The thing I like about the proposed system is that it can also function as sort of a "rune word" type system, using existing items to combine into either something with the potential to be better (like better stats), or used to create a totally new item from the old ones (essentially the same as adding runes to a socketed white item). I do, however, hope they don't make the new items soooo OP (like enigma) that it overshadows the other items in the game. Powerful but not overly silly would be ideal.

[quote]o prevent people from abusing the system you just easily implement a rule that once you join a clan you cannot leave it for 30 days. This would prevent the loop hole of people joining just to trade items and leaving. You'd also want to gate people coming in. For instance, you cannot trade within the clan until you've been in the clan for some amount of time. A lot of the 3rd party selling sites or communities are based off of instant gratification. If i cannot leave a clan for 30 days, but can join one (assuming i haven't recently joined one) to get the item I want, I can always find other ways to find people to play with.

[quote]bsp;"Trading has the potential to wreck the reward loop, just like the auction house did"
While I agree that it has the potential to ruin the reward loop, directly tying items to builds can also create boredom. For instance, I've never found a Wand of Woh (despite quite a bit of Wizard play), and at this point I'm tired of standard firebirds builds. If I were to get a WOW, I'd have a reason to play my wizard, but since rare items generally have the most interesting affixes, my ability to create variety on a class is totally dependent on RNG.



I guess I can see both sides of the coin here. On one hand, it can give a reason to play, but after a certain point, it becomes demoralizing that there is a build I cannot do simply because RNG hasn't shined on me, despite putting the time in on a particular class. I certainly think that limiting trading is a good thing, as being able to trade to the entire player base is going to cause massive exploitation. The downside though, is that some builds only really become viable after 1-2 rare items are found. I feel like there has to be a middle ground there. Though, since they are buffing the chance to find the rarest tier of items, it could be that my argument is moot.

*edited for clarity*

Quote from Jaetch»

"We want a more complex, in-depth system!" vs. "A system like this must be simplified!"

For me this generally comes down to more of a, if a system like this were to be implemented, it would have to be simplified at least bit, because the developers goals tend to include avoiding too much complexity. It would, however, be nice if something was added that either made whites, blues, and yellows worth more than crafting mats in the late game, or at least (as the OP's system does), gives options for legendaries that aren't great for much besides breaking them down.

My guess is that some new such system will come along with the the next expansion, assuming they end up making one. In fact, if they are making one, they are probably already working on some new sort of system, and things like ancient items are just cheap ways to add something in the meantime. All speculation, of course.

n most cases, I don't think it'll be a huge issue. But then when you're stacking +10 Discipline on every piece of gear (let's say that brings you to around 170+ Discipline)... geez. Same with other classes. A wizard with 300 Arcane Power?!

For the Discipline, they'd have to completely change the function of that set from Blizzcon, because the damage you would be able to get would be pretty insane. So if they want to be able to have mechanics like that (and also Meteor: Star pact), you'd probably want to remove +resource from places it's not already allowed to roll.



As for the original topic, I like the idea of synthesizing a bunch of the same item type to get a predefined legendary power + one from the reagents used (as long as the predefined one isn't too massively overpowered). I'd also like to see a feature that lets you take some number of the exact same item and combine them to get a fresh random roll. It's really annoying to get like, 5 of the same item and they are all total crap. If I could take them and combine them to get a 6th one that *could* be better, I'd totally do it. It still leaves you at the mercy of RNG, but if you have 3 Tall mans fingers that are basically the worst, what's the harm in getting another chance at a decent one.

till, you gotta keep in mind that people on the top of the PTR leaderboard are probably well-geared when it comes to ancient items by now. So it's two levels less with the help of ancient items.

I agree that on the first PTR build, they went way overboard with damage. But comparing current PTR to live, it just feels bad. The damage feels roughly the same (though it's hard to tell exactly, considering the changes to monster hp), provided you can use spenders indefinitely, which isn't always possible. On top of that, the necessity to stand still while attacking hurts a lot, even with the buff to vitality.

It is a change of mechanics, but right now it's also a nerf. It might be more active and engaging, but it feels like a damn chore when you have to spend forever between attacking and trying to stay alive on levels where there was no problem before. And yeah, it's PTR and everything is subject to change, but the devs haven't corrected it yet, so why would I say nothing about it? If no one says anything, why would they change it any further? I know it's going to far to say that they rely on feedback for everything, but it's better to be on the safe side.

That's certainly one way to look at.



The thing that seems to get left out here is that part of that "trying to stay alive on levels where there was no problem before" is tied into the change to NightStalker and Smoke Screen, since that was where the real survivability came from. If that stuff hadn't been changed, this wouldn't be an issue with the new M6 bonuses, since you'd want to shoot to get discipline back and you'd be able to stand relatively still because SS.



The other factor is the conduit change, which also makes a straight comparison of the newest PTR M6 to the live version difficult. If you just look at GR tier's completed between newest PTR and live, you're missing the other changes that contribute to the difference, one of which affects all classes (conduit).



The other thing is that... most other builds require a balance between doing damage and trying to avoid taking damage. The fact that the DH (on live) can basically negate that because it's damage is mostly passive (sentries fire spenders by themselves) and they can focus on trying to keep SS either 100% up, or dodging attacks in the small time it isn't, was an outlier that needed to be fixed. If they just made every class be able to do passive damage and be nearly invulnerable, they may as well remove elite affixes from the game.



I haven't had a ton of time to test the newest changes myself, but I did take a look at the PTR leaderboards, and saw bit of a stream with someone playing it while I was working, and it looks like the DH is still pretty competitive as far as both solo and group GR. That to me, makes the changes seem legit.



Now I just hope they can work to make a solo and group viable build available for every class, and then work to make more than 1 for each class. That'd be the dream.

Broken Crown also has an affix on the PTR, it's for gem farming.

span>I also think they did it because in its former form there was no downside to it, put sentrys down and then just run out of range for mechanics afking. Was too big of an advantage compared to other classes that has to be somewhat close in order to work. I really think this change is awesome and not just talking about the insane numbers that's been showcased. Now DH will have a more active gameplay while still maintaining a bit of the former, stay in the back and hide concept.

This is pretty much spot on. If they were to implement a completely new set and make it's damage similar to the live version of M6, M6 would still win out because their is inherent survivability in being able to do sustained damage while focusing entirely on not dying.

The other option (where M6 is left unchanged) is to make a new set that outdamages M6 enough to offset the survivability you get from focusing solely on not dying. In that case, I'm guessing they have lots of data that show that M6 would have very little use overall, and thus it would end up watering down the item pool for demon hunters. Some people who really like the drop and run style would still use it, but most people would opt for the more efficient set.

span>I liked the playstyle we have, they are always messing with things that worked well. i enjoyed M6 the way it was. they do this all the time to other classes as well, just mess with stuff to make you change or play something different, really irritating to me.

The problem is that most people (at least the most vocal of people) didn't really like that playstyle, myself included. I mained a DH for season 1, and actually made a monk and a crusader to try and find more involved playstyles. It was really fun when I first got M6 and got the massive power spike and the ability to deal a ton of damage from miles away, but eventually that wears off. I think a lot of people had similar experiences. This really left Blizzard with 2 options,

1) Give every class a set/build that allowed them to do a ton of damage from around a corner (for some attempt at balance)

2) Change M6 so that it requires more player interaction.

They chose option 2, and at least look to have made the set still high level viable. .

The one-shot issue is partially solved (at least in theory) by the reduction in damage in higher GRs. At some point, every build is going to start getting one-shot because GRs scale to infinity, and part of the increasing difficulty is more monster damage/life.

On a related note, I'm really glad that they have gone away from 2-piece bonuses being +mainstat, and have started giving a bonus that increases your power with a least a gimmick, if even if it's not completely build changing. Hopefully they will keep with that sentiment for future sets/changes.

If they do make changes to the M6 build, I hope they are careful. As has been stated, DH's currently suffer from being total garbage until they finish M6. If they make changes to sentries to "balance" M6, they risk making DH's completely irrelevant. For instance, if they give the sentries a life bar, it could make M6 DH's stronger solo in the early stages of progression (as the turrets would attract and tank enemies, keeping them away from the DH and in the line of fire of turrets), then some rapid falloff would happen once the turrets die before they do any DPS (much like how pet doctors currently feel).

I lean more towards the idea of trying to make other, different play styles available for all of the classes. M6 is powerful, but it's a very non-active play style to me, and it makes it less fun. If there was a more active play style that was at least 95% as effective as M6, that'd be close enough for me. It would mean that doing the highest GR possible would still require M6, but the current gap between M6 and all other builds is pretty damn huge. This problem isn't specific to DH either. While I understand that completely balancing multiple builds per class isn't feasible, it'd be nice if there were some that were within 5-10% efficiency with the current "cookie cutter builds". It's a shame that for every class, there is an exact path to success: start building whichever set is currently good -> get supporting items for the only build that works -> ? -> profit.

At least with crusader, there are a couple of viable builds to use with the one set.

It's not even that FB is OP, it's just that it's orders of magnitude better than other specs for the class. Same thing with M6 on the DH(though I'll get flamed for the not OP) comment. The problem is that neither class has anything else that's even remotely viable. The good news is that this is exactly what Greater Rifts are supposed to do from the Developer point of view. They can now see how each class performs in Grifts (there is still a ton of variance, but it's a decent measuring stick nonetheless) and they can see what players are doing to squeak out an extra tier. This allows them to look at base skills, legendaries powers, and sets, and find a way to bring things more in line, both between the classes and between builds for each class.

Obviously there will never be 100 top end builds for each class, but if they can get 3-6 close enough in viability, it'll open things up a bit. For instance, they are looking at pet survivability and are likely looking at what to do with DH sentries as well, to try and make things a bit more even. I'd imagine though, that most of the changes will not happen during the season, and are something that will happen with whatever patch precedes season 2.

It's really just a matter of personal preference. For instance, I don't care about leaderboards, but I do care about how high I (or my group) can get in Grifts. Not because I want to hit a leaderboard, but because, drops/shards are better, so the higher we climb, the better I feel about obtaining certain items.

It is a bit liberating to not worry about the leaderboards though. Just not really my bag.

I honestly think that the balance currently is pretty good. The only reason I have so many extra is because I played a bunch in season before the Torment buffs to caches, and I was trying to get a decent RROG. The current balance though is that a single act (which ever one you prefer) of bounties + the cache gives you enough to rift/grift for quite a while. Then you just do another run.

Are they a bit boring to do? sure. But it isn't very time consuming to get them compared to how much time you spend rifting.

Perhaps it's just me, but I really hope now that they've buffed the cache leg chance, that they don't rebalance the rate of keystones. There is less reason to do extended bounty runs now, which means that if they rebalance it, there really will be an issue with having to spend a bunch of time doing bounties just so you can rift.

With the introduction of legendary gems, that already happens quite frequently. Since I can't seem to find a SOJ, to only elemental damage on both of my seasonal characters comes from the bracers. I know that I don't represent the majority, but from what I've seen from leaderboards and such, that seems to be a fairly common theme (some builds still use cinder coat, but that's usually more about the 30% RCR as far as I've seen).

As far as a Tal's bonus, I've constantly thought that it should have something more like harmony for the monk. You get x% of each +elemental to all other elements. So you can do a build where the element of your hardest hitting skill is the one you stack, but other skills get a damage boost as well. If you couple that with a decent 6p passive, it could be competitive with firebirds and give a multi-elemental feel, and a really nice reason to use EE as a passive. The utility of a multi-elemental build would be really nice in team Grifts as well. Wizards are under represented in the current best teams because DH's can out damage them in a safe manner, and WD/monk have better support type skills for speeding up grifts.

So, the issue I see with something like this is that it reintroduces a couple of undesirable consequences (at least in my opinion, for what that's worth).

It creates the potential for it to be better to sell off the unwanted legs you find early in characters life, and then grants the opportunity to sit at the new vendor, and wait for something to pop up that is far better than your current gear and try to grab it. This creates a situation where an extremely effective way (if not the best way) to acquire gear early on is to play a little, get you some PP, and then try to snipe a really rare item, or just an item that you really need.

I hope that doesn't sound harsh, as I didn't intend to to be mean, just thought I'd share a concern with a system such as the one you described. It could easily be argued that there's nothing wrong with sitting at a vendor for some of your items, should you choose to. I guess at that point it comes down to personal preference.

While I generally agree with your take on trading, there are a couple of important things to note.

1) Tweaking the drop rates because of the AH was part of the problem. I know this is anecdotal and maybe not representative of the player base as a whole, but the only reason I used the AH was because as soon as I hit Inferno, I felt some serious stagnation in gearing, and it became boring. I used the AH to increase my power enough to be effective and have some fun. So I don't agree that if trading were to be opened slightly (such as clan trading) that drop rates would have to adjusted to compensate (which is how all of the botting affects players like you and I). If they were to adjust the drop rates to compensate, it would just create the cycle of needing to exploit via clan to have reasonable power curve. I personally like the current power curve.

2) I think that trade exploits might be a bigger problem in seasons, as being in an active Clan would allow that clan to distribute items and empower each other. So maybe, since seasons are meant to be competitive, Seasonal characters should continue to have the current BOA restrictions.

3) This one is again more of a personal opinion, but I have a few close friends that I play with, and with the current restrictions, it feels pointless to play without them, should I have an hour to kill when they aren't on. If I were to find something that one of those friends could use during that play session, it just infuriates me. For instance, when we first started playing ROS, everyone but 1 guy in our group found a SOJ that they could use (even though he played far more often than we did), and one day playing by myself I found a really good one that would have worked for that friend, but sadly I could not give it to him. He has still yet to find a SOJ for that character, despite like 200 hours of play time on it. Sometimes RNG stings a ton, and opening trading up a little bit could decrease that.

I know this is tired argument, but for the most part, if people want to ruin the game for themselves, let them. This goes back to adjusting drop rates to compensate for potential exploits. As you said, BOA has hindered 3rd party trading, but it still exists. Opening up trading to clans (or some other non-global trading system) does increase the likelihood for exploitation, but is it really worth the cost? Is stopping those who would join a clan (which they can only be in one) simply to bypass the games intended grind, worth punishing other players for bad luck with more restrictive rules? Obviously the full extreme of that statement (the AH) didn't work, but is the polar opposite really necessary?