yea, IF you can trade the respec stones that would also be like drug dealing 
and we âreal rpg gamersâ can trade it away and get rich by those addicts :v
totally nailed it there mate lol
Well said. Yeah, I do want to the game to control things, through rules and restrictions. That is a defining aspect of games. It has nothing to do with me controlling you.
It really isnt about being unique. Because as you say, that is likely not happening anyway. It is about having more viable builds to play. And more interesting builds to play.
More builds, by restricting how much you can optimize (the more you can optimize for a single task, the fewer top builds there will be, that is just how optimization works).
More interesting builds, by asking the player to pick both strengths and weaknesses in their build, and not just pick the strengths with no weaknesses for each activity.
That is a really good point. Blizzard could abandon the fairly bad lvling experience in D3, because it didnât matter anyway.
Indeed.
I like that too. But here is the thing; that could end up more limiting than a cooldown - what happens if your respec cost has skyrocketed, and you cant afford a new respec, with a build that doesnât work anymore. It shouldnât be possible to get completely stuck.
Part of the point with a weekly free respec would be to allow people to always be able to respec out of a bad situation.
But you could have both.
Like; respeccing cost goes up each time you respec. But maybe you get 1 free respec each month (longer time than a week, because the pay-to-respec option here is easier to get than in my own example).
The respec cost should never be gold though. There has never been, and likely never will be, an A-RPG with a healthy gold economy, so basing anything off gold costs, will fail.
The cost has to be something else. And there need to be a cap on how much of that resource you can keep at one time. So you cant end up with the ability to pay for respecs 10000 times in a row. Then we didnât solve the problem.
Not at the cost of depth. Making legendaries have few stats will give us fewer stats to play with => bad gameplay imo.
IF (and I dont really think it is an important goal) you want to make sure other rarities stay viable, then make them have higher caps on the affixes. Not more affixes.
It probably comes as no surprise for anyone, but I certainly dont think respec tokens should ever be tradeable. Or you defeat the whole purpose, if ârichâ players can circumvent the system and respec all the time anyway (making them only relatively richer and richer due to the higher efficiency).
Wouldnt be drug dealing in the sense of selling to addicted victims. It would be drug dealing in the sense of selling the few people performance-enhancing drugs.
you dont have fewer stats to choose from
just fewer to have on 1 item at the same time, which is simply just tuning down your power, which cant be such a bad idea because you already have things like mythicsâŚ
But the interaction of stats is what gives depth. Which affixes work well together with your skills, each other etc. That is not unlimited of course, at some point you get too many affixes, being able to get everything (kinda like skills - too few limits build depth, too many also limits build depth)
Especially with a system like the proposed Angelic/Demonic/whatever from Blizzard that hardcodes the affix interactions into the game.
Iâd again point to Grim Dawn as the best itemization system I have seen so far. Those items have a lot of affixes on them. Maybe slightly too many even. But not by much.
That game does not keep all item rarities relevant, but it keeps the second lowest item tier very relevant, potentially BIS, as well as the highest tier of course. The second highest stays relevant for a reasonably long time.
the interaction is not limited to 1 item
so you have f.e. the rares with a lot of stats and you can choose some of them over a legendary and then you have the trade off
im just explaining that in this threadâŚ
I get that, I just think it is bad trade-off to choose between less depth vs. more. You get very simplified characters then, if you run around with characters with full legendaries, and only 1-2 affixes on each of them.
If you go that route, then at least it should not be legendaries=2 affixes; rares=5, but rather something like legendaries=5 affixes, rares=8. (not counting the legendary affix)
well you decide it
i think, its pretty silly to run around with 13 legendary effects
so i would probably not only equip legendaries
i would equip some rares next to them and maybe even some magics to boost some stats and then it would be âdeepâ enough
too much is not always better
when you reach a point, where you can equip like 50% of all existing affixes, you dont really have to think about it anymore
D2 has ladders that are like seasons. I highly doubt that Blizz is trying to copy PoE. Sure they are wanting to do things that would be crazy and shake things up. But it is not like PoE where you can have a ton of things that didnât exist before.
Yeah sorry im on my phone wasnt you I meant to reply too so my apologies
When I get online later today Iâll pull up some of your comments about diablo 2 plsyers in general( not just the game) and Iâll go fuether on about what you think you said and what you actually said.
Yeah, but D2 ladder reset =/= new season with extra content like PoE.
Every new Season PoE releases extra cosmetics for MTX and Blizzard already claimed they want to introduce seasons and MTX, so yeahâŚ
So we make a provocative thread which gets huge response and then totally rename the title? Did you rewrite your tldr start post too?
Classy. Cries for a lock.
Now you are moving the goalposts. Your original comments were about how I love D3 so much and bash D2.
I think if anyone reads his replies to other users in this thread, theyâll infer that he was pushing for respecs to be completely disallowed, and if they donât read his posts, itâs unlikely theyâll read ours and take them out of context. I think itâs only fair to let it reflect the state of the discussion so new-comers are on the same page. He didnât change the quoted passage, ftr, and the first part is pretty much void of content.
Iâm not hardline âno respecs at all for anyoneâ. I was playing devils advocate on the other side of the fence to illustrate a few key points, and I think most of those merits can be kept with a limited respec system that allows for changing of stats/skills when patches come in, mistakes are made, or infrequently enough to keep build uniqueness intact.
I wouldnât even hate the game if there was free respeccing, but everything else was intact. The thing is Iâm not sure it will be, I hope the things D2 did right are build upon and expanded and not scrapped entirely again. I hope theres a deep choice of skills, talents, build options and cool itemization.
I also wanted to make the over-arching point that seemingly small features and details have large consequences on how the game is played.
No oneâs going to hold it against you if you change your mind, but rewriting history is exactly what Stu is telling you not to do. =/
I changed the thread title to reflect the changing conversation, not the OP
Yeah, we established that much. By saying you were playing devilâs advocate rather than earnestly arguing in favor of disallowing respecs outright, you proved that youâre at least motivated to rewrite history, because that post I quoted proves that you in fact believed what you were saying. And by doing that, youâve cast doubt on your intentions. In some circles, itâd be reason enough to start screencapping the whole thread in case you try to memory-hole it. Iâve already started with your posts.
1 Like
No worries when I get home Iâll respond in full. And you telling people to gtfo is hilarious first off you cant control anyone and secondly being a keyboard warrior doesnt do much for you. No worries I will respond in full to some of your absurdities.