Much much better than Blizzards attempt. Looks really good.
Personally I would mix up the different dmg types a bit more, not completely, just more overlapping. And maybe have skill mods that works for multiple skills. You already have some of those in the tree, if I read it correctly, like between Meteor and Blizzard, or between Frostbolt and Lightning Spear.
More of that! That is part of what makes the “one big tree” different from having individual modification trees for each skill.
And, more branches crossing between each skill.
So you could go 5 points into Skill A, then jump into skill Bs mods in the middle of its path, and continue down that.
Why would you do that? For some specific builds, it might be due to wanting those exact modifications, without spending points in all the pre-reqs in skill B.
But, in most cases, it would be for hunting the passive points in the branches close to your main skills. Making those choices more interesting. Like, you might pick an upgrade for Skill A, even though you dont necessarily want that upgrade, but it brings you closer to a passive point.
i also tried to not make it too easy to become op^^
thats why i put very basic modifiers in the beginning of every skill and if you want to become powerful with that skill, you gotta spend points into it
now you could still add the possibility to just spend several points in the base skill itself or mods that you like to increase their stats and level the tree like that to be able to skip ones that you dont like
thats also what i tried to achieve in this tree
just that there are more than one skill changing effects and that you can choose which one you want to have or even have both if you want to invest that many points
The question is should we go through so many “mandatory nodes” or not? It makes sense to have mandatory nodes when the tree is small, but it doesn’t when the tree is big and you aim the most diversity.
as i said
i tried to make the nodes make sense in the way they are placed^^
you could say the same thing about passive trees
you can say the same thing about everything and just have D3 skill selection
the one thing that i wanted to make sure is that you dont have prerequisites for active skills
thats one big no no for me
I mean to get increased attack range of Hydra I have to go always through increased duration. With a pyramid these would be on the same first tier allowing the player to choose only one (or some of the other in the tier) for example.
This tree is not remotely complex.
Dont make players more stupid than they are
It offers people more interesting choices, but people can basically still see each skill by itself, and focus on picking (fairly linear) skill upgrades for each of the skills they are using.
Yeah.
Im kinda more interesting in the “crossing paths between skills” than merely being able to skip pre-reqs. The former sounds like it could offer more interesting choices. If you merely make it easy to skip upgrades within a single skills branches, then it might as well not be a tree anymore, and just a list of potential upgrades (Which is fine too, just different. Should always try to play to the strength of the the chosen layout. For a tree/web, that is branches that links all kinds of different nodes together).
This can both be considered a downside and an upside. Yeah, pre-reqs means less freedom in choosing your upgrades.
But less freedom can also mean more interesting and harder choices, because you have to factor in the opportunity cost of going down one path, spending pre-reqs, to get where you want. That imo is a great strength of tree/web design.
When you have complete freedom, it might become too easy to just always pick the best combinations of upgrades. The tree/web (and also pyramid for that matter) allows the designers to make some upgrades harder to get.
This can happen no matter what you do. But tbh the risk is overrated. These days, if people are unsure about the choices in a game, they spend 5 minutes looking at youtube, a fansite or whatever. After a while, they might not even do that, because they have learned themselves.
Games should be less afraid of challenging its players, less afraid of confusing them (as long as it isn’t due to a bad UI)
If you make your players unsure what to choose, that to me, is a sign that you have added good choices to the game. Choosing should feel difficult, that is the whole point of having choices.
sure
but why wouldn’t you want to have your hydra stay active longer?
thats what i mean with they make sense
there’s no build hindering node in the way of something (at least i hope so)
the point you have to spend is just part of the system that just doesnt let you get to the candy right away
Because my Hydras would annihilate everything in a second and I won’t need that increased duration for them.
With a pyramid you have pre-requirements too. The number depends on how high the pyramid is. The idea is on each tier each of the nodes to be balanced with the others on that tier and the player to have the freedom to choose which of these to pick in order to go to the higher tier.
There would still be situations when the player would have to spend points on nodes he wouldn’t with a pyramid structure. The tree structure constraints too much the skill combos which is only good if we want a more easier skill system for the players.
Yeah, as said, a pyramid can offer something similar, but there is a lot of strength in having to go through X if you want to get to Y. In most cases there should be multiple paths, but maybe not always. And even with multiple paths, you might have to pick stuff you dont want. Like with 2 paths for hydra, you might still need to pick either Longer Duration or Lower mana cost or whatever, even if you wanted neither, just because you want the stuff that comes further into the branch. That is not a problem imo.
Limiting players freedom sometimes, is not necessarily bad. Gaming is very much about having constrains on your actions.
Btw, I have assumed that you could go downward on the tree as well.
Like if you start with Firebolt, then pick the two passive nodes, and then “instead of the explosion creates three firebolts”, after which you can no go back down the tree, to pick 2 more passive points, evn though you have not picked Fireball. As in, pre-reqs should work both when moving up the tree, and when moving downward.
Which again makes crossing branches even more useful.
(now, in this example, being able to get 4 passive points for 6 active points might be a bit too strong, and those passive should be spread out more, but that is not important for the point).
This might for example also allow you do get the later points in Hydra, without picking the middle points, as in the ones you did not want, at all. But of course, at a different cost instead, of going down a completely separate branch in another skill instead.
hm
i dont really see this being an upside down pyramid tho
like if you have an upside down pyramid, you would have like 20 different ends to choose and a lot of powerful gameplay changing modifiers to choose from
that would be awesome
but my tree is kinda straight with 2-3 different ways you can go for each skill
while a pyramid would only lead to 1 end point
and then you would need to have 10-20 different start points which is also hard to achieve and then if you want to pick 2 of the more basic nodes in the middle, you would have to go all the way to the middle from 2 start points and pick A LOT MORE prerequisites
It is. It constraints skill combos in an unneeded way.
Yes, that’s the idea. You have for example 9 skills at lowest tier and -2 at next tiers. So you are free to choose whatever path you want to the top (if you want to reach the top at all).
The non-white is your build for that skill for example.
Yeah, I dont like that at all. Literally funneling players into the same upgrades the further up you go, reducing the choices being made.
Seems like it will make all builds more similar, with (exaggerating) the only difference being whether your hands are red or blue (fireball or frostbolt).
Why is it unneeded though?
As said, both systems (pre-reqs and no pre-reqs) can work fine, but having to choose a path to your goal, becomes part of the cost of reaching that goal. It is not unneeded.
I just gave the picture as an example. I mean a 2D pyramid.
The requirements for each tier would be specified and would depend on how much points you spend in previous tier independently of where these are.
Lowest Tier: A B C D E F G H I
Next Tier: J K L M N O P
To pick any from [J - P] you’ll need to choose 2 nodes from the lower tier [A - I].
But if you have item X granting you 2 points in lowest tier you’d be able to completely skip investing points in [A - I].
And the point won’t be to go to the highest tier with lowest amount of points invested. You could have strong builds with pyramid fulled at 80% in the mid tiers for example (without climbing above).
The difference with the tree is that you always have to pick [A] there in order to open [B] or [C].
It is since it puts artificial constraints on the player. The pyramid doesn’t constraint the player in any way besides having defined pre-requirements, which are there for balancing purposes.
Game design is all about putting artificial constraints on the players. That is not a flaw in itself. As long as the constraints the make the gameplay and choices more interesting.
and then if you want to pick 2 of the more basic nodes in the middle, you would have to go all the way to the middle from 2 start points and pick A LOT MORE prerequisites 