I’m strictly talking about the army focused builds. I’d say the Necromancer would still have a greater sense of energy meaning due to CE and Curses, but it’s still not enough to do the concept of energy justice.
As for the Druid, trying to push other aspects in to this picture I claim is unnecessary because the classification of the entire Necromancer and Druid identities would be properly labeled as “Individually Limited Collective Expanders”. Meaning that if they didn’t have their aspect of collective expansion(summons), then they would be reduced to individually limited heroes which then reveals that they are missing the other critical half to their entire identity.
In other words, if they had their summons disabled, then they would exclusively be “individually limited” which is a gentle way of saying “dependent” in a game where the other heroes can be viewed to dominate the alternative roles of soloist and support. Although the Druid the only real hybrid in this perspective. And when I mean dependent, I mean psuedo dependant like comrade or opponent dependent.
What I’m ultimately saying is that the Necromancer almost couldn’t be called a Necromancer and a Druid almost couldn’t be called a Druid without being able to summon. It would be crippling to any and all of their builds.
With this fair way of perceiving the game being such an obvious problem for the Druid and the Necromancer exclusively, why not look at the game in terms of being a family with some interesting yet proper members that balances the amount of females to males as I provided in the second image which justifies how the Druid and the Necromancer fit in with the rest of the heroes?
20 hrs later:
I needed to work out some kinks in the last diagram in order to achieve a more accurate comparison to the Path of Exile model. Once I did this, the balance of the sexes no longer represented something purely natural so long as a new archetype could be considered for filling the spot of pure dexterity which has apparently always been missing because neither the Necromancer or the Druid would be able to entirely fulfill the spot.
The consideration for a natural beauty where greater feminine end up female and greater masculine end up male still stands as a consideration for what Diablo 2 aimed at.
https://ibb.co/99TdZcPz
At this point, if Blizzard can’t see the big picture of what these diagrams are revealing then we have a failed to “meet the minds”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goyIu1qcStw
3 days later:
Incase B really couldn’t see the big picture of what these diagrams were amounting to, I will provide the final diagram and make the final points.
https://ibb.co/LXwjRf5M
So in that diagram we consider that Dexterity could advanced to a sophisticated example where we consider that if we can have masculine females and feminine males, then why couldn’t we have an individual that was intergender where the male aspect was feminine and the female aspect was masculine? I say, if you’re going to be open minded then why not do it right?
In the second diagram on the right, we see the intergender Amazon in the Mothers section. I think this makes more sense than placing the feminine male phantom in this position. Why? Because let’s assume that to qualify in the mother role, all you would have to have is the potential to breast feed. Although the phantom could be put in to the position, since according to research males have supposedly successfully breast-fed, the Amazon makes more sense since they clearly have breasts with more potential for the job.
This draws my conclusion and achieves the merging of two types of beauty by linking the imaginative child with the impulsive animal.
But the final point is that the Druid and the Necromancer as energy oriented “individually limited collective expanders” were blocking what should have been in their positions in the “natural beauty” model. But can still properly fit in to the “family beauty” model.
4 Days later:
It seems that I’ve made it to the grand finale perspective that integrates both sides of the previous diagram.
https://ibb.co/7dGWXWym
I realized that the Assassin on the right side could be brought to the middle and expanded to include her shadow, aligning with the Nagis. This allowed for the phantom on the left and as an individual hero to replace the Assassin on the right in the Mothers section and as a viable candidate.
-Now we can establish that the diagram on the left represents archetypes and the right represents heroes.
-Now we see how the spirit walker(unarmored 2 handed attacking bovine) could have been specifically excluded from being the only hero not part of the archetype model.
-Now we see that as the Assassin only fits in to 2 positions at center that symmetry group Su3 could have been legitimately comparable as the two examples I’ve seen have either had 2 or 3 points at the center(see upper left)
Later that day:
Just wanted to say that I’ve fiddled around with the arrangements in these diagrams to try and figure out a competing perspective and it seems the main reason why I wasn’t able to do achieve that is because of the lore of the Amazon and the Valkyrie which implies that either the Amazon or the Valkyrie are always suppose to be female. The only thing to break this problem would be to lump the Amazon and Valkyrie in to one position as a reversion of ultimately the same archetype and describe them both as masculine females. Then this would seem to open up an opportunity for a new archetype position which might be something for a new ability or hero.
Maybe it’s possible for the left side diagram to only reference the version of Su3 that only has 2 figures at center instead of 3 as seen on the right, which would just cut that extra space out. Then, if there was only ever a ranged sea witch as a hero in warcraft 3, comparable to Medusa in DOTA 2 for example, then maybe the secondary melee aspect of this hero could be male and like the character Slardar, also from DOTA 2.
The only problem at that point would be that I could see how the ranged sea witch would be like a masculine female, but I don’t understand how a character like Slardar comes off as a feminine male, which is essentially what would be necessary to complete the beauty of the perspective.
And so, based on the history of that hero which originally made him a glass cannon melee archetype, taking 10% more damage with his “slithering speed boost”, I don’t see why he’s such a “male brute” as a strength hero in that case. It seems like being vulnerable to more damage would make him petite and/or precious. And that’s what he comes off as, especially now that they’ve removed the 10% amplified damage against him in his speed boost.
5 days later:
And now, the diagram taking it’s final form with the following changes
-now it’s archetypes from a stat perspective vs archetypes from a family perspective
-now the double Nagi aspect includes a masculine female and feminine male
-if the Amazon really does narrow down to an intergender hero, her and the Druid would still fall in to the children category. This means that the Amazon, even though suppose to look somewhere between male and female is still suppose to be young looking like the Sorceress and Assassin. This now also includes that the Druid was also suppose to be young looking. Answers to the controversy are here.
https://ibb.co/nh1f5KP
conclusion: now we go back and look at what Diablo 2 design accomplished from the start…
https://ibb.co/23vqf1C8
I think now is the time to call for investigation of how and why this all unfolded and whether it was by chance, intention, or impulse.
Later that day:
The accomplished complexity, or sophistication or whatever, motivated me to go back and update my poetry and compare to a set a values.
https://ibb.co/Z1fcqWmr
https://ibb.co/1YX70ysX
6 days later:
Went back and updated this one as well…
https://ibb.co/xSRTshbC
7 days later:
Because of being convinced that the Amazon had to have more energy and less strength than I thought, and that I was mostly confusing her with the Valkyrie, I had to go back and re-adjust my entire diagram of differing statistical symmetry types. I had to change hero positions and terms. At this point it might feel like I’m spinning my wheels but one interesting step forward it seems, was that in the row of “radial translational” symmetry, the superior and inferior stat moved against each other through out each stage of translation. Almost made it seem more radial.
I have recently updated this diagram again to remove primary stat consideration. But I think one thing that seems true is that a hero that would fall in to a dexterity category would never have an extremely high or low amount of dex. But heroes that are outside of the category such as the Necromancer as an energy oriented mage, can have an extreme amount of starting dex. I changed the Nagi aspects back to extreme dexterity and I’m thinking about the cold arrow from warcraft 3 which slowed enemy’s attack speed. This also reminds me of the enchantress skill “untouchable” from Dota 2. This might make more sense than associating an extreme amount of evasion with extreme dex. Maybe it’s the energy shield combined with the slowing of enemy attack speed that captures the necessary defensive manner for a hero that would be squishier than an amazon?
https://ibb.co/gLxbyCKh
It was this next diagram that I updated that convinced me that the Amazon must lead more towards energy than strength. Plus, she would at least partially classify as an “individually limited collective expander” comparable to Druid, Necromancer, Assassin and should be Sorceress. And what I’ve now finally realized is the sense of overall balance of Diablo 2. It has, what seems to be like mostly warrior heroes by far. And in terms of style, it’s true. But most of these heroes/archetypes lean more towards energy association rather than strength or dexterity.
https://ibb.co/z11ZwCY