View Full Version : Other hardcore only rules?
With all this talk about things like Respecs, I was wondering what the HC community thinks.
I see respecs being a large possibility for SC. I imagine blizzard will put them in in some capacity. However I feel like they degrade the hardcore experience far far more than they effect the SC experience.
That being said, if there is respecs in SC I hope they limit them to SC and leave HC respec free (in all forms, well, most forms, I wouldn't mind de-leveling for respecs).
Are there any other SC rules that you foresee being implemented but would prefer left out of HC?
Mutual hostility, I'm the opinion that there is no PK in Softcore, since nobody ever dies and all forms of PvP are to a degree mutual on SC. If Blizzard wants to implement mutual hostility they should do it only on SC and leave HC alone as it is.
entranced
20-07-2008, 03:24
However I feel like they degrade the hardcore experience far far more than they effect the SC experience.
How so? Honest question.
I really don't know where i stand on the respec issue. It's hard for me to imagine D2 + respecs without actually experiencing it, so perhaps "i'll know when i see it". Yeah, once it's too late for Blizzard to change their mind. :/
FWIW i'm the type of player that basically never respecs in WoW. I do heavy research first and then pick one spec "for life". Rare situations that i do respec, and usually only minor changes at that:
-new max level (expansion pack releases);
-Blizzard changes or fixes a talent, or rearranges a talent tree;
-i level as dps when my max-level spec will be heal-spec (im a person that loves levelling way more than endgame, but levelling as a healer is just too painful because i level exclusively solo).
Hardly anything that seems game-breaking in D3 HC (since there's no healer classes), but i could be wrong.
I'm also the kind of person that doesn't like learning what talents are good and messing around with specs. I like to just use my own minor variant of proven specs that someone else figured out work well. I prefer focusing on other aspects of the game such as gameplay (with said good build) and items.
Another thing i'd like to mention is that i suspect that my above aversion to WoW respeccing may simply be a side-effect of my D2 upbringing. The "you only get one shot at your spec for life" breeds risk-aversion and complete lack of experimentation. Which leads me to believe that respeccing might actually be a good thing, even in D3. In WoW i'm more relaxed about spec experimentation and tailoring builds to my own tastes than D2, and that seems like a very good thing, for my playstyle anyway. Allows me to stray a little more from the cookie-cutter builds. That's good right? :)
One last thing i'd like to mention is that even if the option to respec is there, nothing will be forcing you to respec. If they put respecs in HC, you can always choose to play D2-style, respecs not allowed and retain your favored HC experience.
How so? Honest question.
Well let me preface this with the assumption that rushing a character to high level wont be possible or at least prevalent in D2.
In HC one of the draws for me was the the idea that you've made a character and reached a high level with it. Presumably in D3 some builds will be better at leveling than others, and some will be more difficult. With respecs, all of the 'prestige' or perceived accomplishment (From other people) will be diminished.
There's really a lot to be said about this because, for example, in D2 levling something like a LF Zon wasn't hard, but more just tedious. However I still think some characters actually were straight up more difficult, Martial arts assassin for example, vs pure trap assassin.
This is a common argument for normal play, but I think the 'no retries' makes it more potent in HC. In HC playing a difficult build to high level is actually a bit of an accomplishment, so having a high level MA Assassin sort of means something, not only to you but other people who see you and say "oh wow, you're MA". Not just because it may be seen as sub optimal, but because surviving to high level is difficult. If you can respec, surviving to high level just turns into a "level the fastest / safest build and change to whatever you want at the end" program, and all of the sudden you didn't level as an MA assassin without dying, but you leveled an assassin without dying.
On the other hand, in SC, even a monkey could level a sub optimal character to high level because it's impossible to lose your character. In HC actually getting to high level means a lot more.
One last thing i'd like to mention is that even if the option to respec is there, nothing will be forcing you to respec. If they put respecs in HC, you can always choose to play D2-style, respecs not allowed and retain your favored HC experience.
This is also a common argument for respecs, but it's not just about the fact that no one is forcing you to respec, it's about accomplishment in my eyes and meaning something.
In my opinion that's the same reason we're playing HC. We do it not only for the challenge or the community, but for the recognition (if only from our peers, other HC players).
If you introduce respecs into the game all of the sudden that dynamic changes, the recognition goes to zero, which is the major incentive to not respec.
Imagine if they removed HC from D3 and just said "hey, there's nothing stopping you from simply deleting your character when you died, so you could just do that and retain your preferred game experience." but I know that somehow that wouldn't float for me and I doubt it would to any other serious HC player.
It's the same argument with respecs. That kind of thing might fly for SP players who arent doing it at all for the recognition or what have you, but for multiplayer players I think it would really diminish the experience.
I really don't want repecs. I feel that there is more value on planning and strategy when there are no respecs. However, when balance changes are made, respecs should be granted.
My idea for making HC more Hardcore is a timer on health pot use. It doesn't have to be long, just a few seconds.
No, i'd rather not be able to respec. Screw up, build again. Transfer the gear and next time around you'll be more powerfull :D
Gigashadow
21-07-2008, 16:46
Hardcore just makes you die, the rest should be the same for both SC and HC. Including hostility configurations.
If there is one place I wouldn't want to have to restart the whole thing its HC. There is nothing wrong with limited respecing and if the game is not too unbalanced it may not even occur. But what does one do against:
- patches;
- not knowing what a skill does;
- useless skills / skills that max badly;
- not knowing what items benefit what skills later on in the game.
It would not be too great to get stuck with some immunity creep that you can't kill because this is your first time, and/or you did not realize his immunities beforehand. Or get stuck because your damage ended up being too low or something.
It takes a lot to survive in HC, compared to SC, and I'd rather play a lot of SC first to figure everything out, than start or mid-start with HC where I don't know anything AND I can't respec so I am bound to fail no matter what I do.
There is nothing wrong with limited respecing and if the game is not too unbalanced it may not even occur. But what does one do against:
- patches;
- not knowing what a skill does;
- useless skills / skills that max badly;
- not knowing what items benefit what skills later on in the game.
The same things we did in D2?
Gigashadow
22-07-2008, 01:21
The same things we did in D2?Go play something else? Do a different build? Restart? Those are not solutions.
It was a joke.
I was just saying that we've done fine in D2 in the past without respec'ing (just found out what that was today!) so those issues aren't a huge deal. It just sounded like you couldn't conceive playing without respec'ing. Sorry.
It was a joke.
I was just saying that we've done fine in D2 in the past without respec'ing (just found out what that was today!) so those issues aren't a huge deal. It just sounded like you couldn't conceive playing without respec'ing. Sorry.
Glad you said it for me Lothae...
The whole idea that blizz needs to give respecs for patches is a silly precedent, and they've since stopped doing it in wow.
I think it's also counter to the idea of hardcore to say "since it's harder to get to high level it should be unnecessary to level more than once, barring death." I mean why take the hard mode of the game and then make it easier.
Gigashadow
23-07-2008, 02:20
I was just saying that we've done fine in D2 in the past without respec'ing (just found out what that was today!) so those issues aren't a huge deal. It just sounded like you couldn't conceive playing without respec'ing. Sorry.What are you trying to say with that? There is always a group of people who are fine with losing their character. Then there is a group of people who aren't. Difference of opinions. Has nothing to do with anyone being worse or better than anyone else.
What are you trying to say with that? There is always a group of people who are fine with losing their character. Then there is a group of people who aren't. Difference of opinions. Has nothing to do with anyone being worse or better than anyone else.
That's the most absurd thing I have ever seen you write. NOBODY is fine with losing their character, NOBODY. People just accept it, that it was their choice to play on hardcore, which is a choice all hardcore players make, but don't make the baseless assumption that people are fine with their characters dying.
What are you trying to say with that? There is always a group of people who are fine with losing their character. Then there is a group of people who aren't. Difference of opinions. Has nothing to do with anyone being worse or better than anyone else.
I think the point was that characters survived patches in D2, the idea that respecs would be necessary in D3 is a little silly.
entranced
23-07-2008, 11:25
I think the point was that characters survived patches in D2, the idea that respecs would be necessary in D3 is a little silly.
It's not that they are necessary per se, it's that blizzard sees them as an improvement. The only reason there were no respecs in D2 is that they didn't think of the concept until they made WoW. I fully expect to see respecs in some reduced form in D3 regardless of how ape**** ppl go. Not saying i agree with the decision necessarily, but we might as well learn to live with it and adapt.
It's not that they are necessary per se, it's that blizzard sees them as an improvement. The only reason there were no respecs in D2 is that they didn't think of the concept until they made WoW. I fully expect to see respecs in some reduced form in D3 regardless of how ape**** ppl go. Not saying i agree with the decision necessarily, but we might as well learn to live with it and adapt.
I expect to see them too. But imo giving a hc character a respec is like giving people a resurrection, which is one of the reasons I made this thread.
I just also realized the underlying reason is that in HC there is a possibility of failure. That possibility of failure remains in SC in that you can fail to build your character correctly. I feel like removing any chance of failure undermines the point of HC.
MoUsE_WiZ
24-07-2008, 07:28
Agreed with the sentiment that respecs = silly.
They work in WoW because WoW is a game designed to keep you playing one character if you want to play at the top, so confining people to just one build with their one character would just be plain mean.
Even in a world with no power leveling in D2 though, it doesn't take that long to get to a playable level with your character... making many the dude is what D2 is all about, and making it so you can pick your "leveling spec", especially in hc, just seems dumb.
FSS only allowed respecs in Mythos in the ez mode of the game, I hope Blizzard follows suit. Course given FSS' current troubles I'm not sure they're the best reference any more ^^
Gigashadow
25-07-2008, 17:33
That's the most absurd thing I have ever seen you write. NOBODY is fine with losing their character, NOBODY."Absolute statements are a dangerous thing these days."
I kinda like losing my characters, because I can start over, and I like starting over, because beginning and thinking what are you going to do with your char's build this time is much funner than the rest of the game lol.
On a second note, some people get very angry when they are told they need to restart. Some don't. That's what I am saying.
Besides, if you say "nobody likes it" then why have it at all?
People just accept it, that it was their choice to play on hardcore, which is a choice all hardcore players make, but don't make the baseless assumption that people are fine with their characters dying.A person playing HC, especially for the first time, will eventually die. Every HC player understands this. It's just a game character. So, if they are not fine with dying, they are masochists.
I kinda like losing my characters, because I can start over, and I like starting over, because beginning and thinking what are you going to do with your char's build this time is much funner than the rest of the game lol.
If you like your chars dying that you are the masochist, you don't need your character to die to make a new one.
A person playing HC, especially for the first time, will eventually die. Every HC player understands this. It's just a game character. So, if they are not fine with dying, they are masochists.
I don't know about you, but I don't make my chars saying they will die. I know very well they might die, that doesn't mean I know they will or that I have to like it when they do.
My first character on Bnet was a firewall sorc, it managed lvl 93 and the only reason it died was because comp crashed while I was teleing to hell meph near some mobs with fana. If you think I was fine with it you're the one that has problems, not me.
I think respecs should be reserved for NL if they're included at all. NL SC and NL HC or just SC I don't mind either way, outside of ladder I only play SCNL (only because it's the realm best suited for duelling).
I'm against all the suggestions I've seen that propose making HC more different to SC in D3 than it currently is. But then I'm against respecs (as in pretty much anything other than giving people a chance to correct 1 misclicked skill point) too (other than for pvp-only chars) so I'd rather see no respecs in HC only than see respecs everywhere.
sneakytails
26-07-2008, 06:17
Those of you who have played this game from the very beginning know that there was a decent amount of time after each release where everything was new and there was a fairly large lag time before the community really got a grip on how things worked and built up a knowledge base.
And what happened before this was a lot of screwed up characters. Those who played alot and in parties rebuilt quickly, those who soloed and played less struggled. Many a patch came and brought this situation on even more characters/peeps. Many times out of the blue.
limited respecing would help with both problems and even the playing field for the not so obsessive gamer.
Do I like this?
I am not entirely sure yet. It seems as though blizzard has made up their mind on this. We will see how they implement it. I'm sure it has something to do with a whole new group of players coming into D3 from "other" titles.
But maybe i am wrong on this.
Those of you who have played this game from the very beginning know that there was a decent amount of time after each release where everything was new and there was a fairly large lag time before the community really got a grip on how things worked and built up a knowledge base.
And what happened before this was a lot of screwed up characters. Those who played alot and in parties rebuilt quickly, those who soloed and played less struggled. Many a patch came and brought this situation on even more characters/peeps. Many times out of the blue.
I don't think having to remake your character when you screw it up is a bad thing.
There is only 2 situations where I would consider respecs important. If they implement BoE or BoP items primarily, or, if they make it take excessively long to level.
I can get an untwinked character to level 60 in D2 in a matter of a couple days of playing non obsessively. I can get a twinked character to level 60 in a single night playing.
It's already so fast, are respecs REALLY that important? It would take all of the fun out of progressive learning also, not just learning what builds worked well, but learning effective playstyles for different skills.
If you allow respecs, people wont be forced to learn how to use certain skills for them to be effective, they will simply chose the easiest / most powerful skills and run with that. I know people would say that's true with or without respecs, but I think with respecs, there's no real incentive for people to really give a build a chance. If a build isn't as strong, they'll just respec to the strong build. Without respecs, there's a chance they will learn how to play the build better by leveling with the build, and as a result will find out that said sup optimal build is more fun or even more effective once they know how to use it. You kill that kind of experimentation with respecs.
Course I'm sort of off course going from why I don't like it in HC to why I don't like respecs in general.
I would be willing to make small respec consolations, Say, if respeccing required sacrificing a character level for x number of points (not full), or as mentioned earlier if all items are BoP or BoE I think respeccing becomes necessary, additionally if leveling to a softcap takes significantly long (over 100 PLAYED hours).
Though I still think it would undermine HC somewhat.
sneakytails
28-07-2008, 05:26
In two hours single player I cannot reach level 60 in a single night. And thats twinked. Maybe I just suck, or maybe its something else.This is entirely possible on bnet. Even half that time would be feasible. I have done this when I did play bnet, and I am sure faster levelers exist.
Respecing would help those slower leveling peeps who cannot rebuild quickly retool for later acts/quests. What about the occasional player who plays other games? Can they level as fast as you or I who will be playing D3 like banshee's?
Do they even want to?
Why should I have to mow through the game grinding a new peep after a skill was broken on my old char post patch?
D3 is looking so awesome, I will be taking my time through the game. Its hard to say how the play style will be, but the experience is going to be meatier and more substantial for those that want it.
Sorry but I am not going to be rushing it like in D2. Therefore respecing fits this mentality. It also appears that skills will be used is combinations and at earlier levels and not just in the form of a uber powerfull single skill. Its this mentality that makes rushing so predominant. Get the main skill ASAP!
Blizzard is going to have a huge number of players coming into the game fresh from other titles and I believe that reason among others is why they are looking at respecing.
Its so hard to make a judgment right now without trying it out. But I agree that limited respecing is the way to go. And I like you enjoy playing through various builds and even making plan sheets on builds.
If implemented in a fair way such as trading some xp or even char levels as you suggested for a smaller respec then this could work and would add some flexibility to building. And flexibility seems to be on the devs minds these days.
In two hours single player I cannot reach level 60 in a single night. And thats twinked. Maybe I just suck, or maybe its something else.This is entirely possible on bnet. Even half that time would be feasible. I have done this when I did play bnet, and I am sure faster levelers exist.
I was never referring to rushing. I was talking about running twinked. and if you play twinked you should be able to hit 60 pretty easy if you do players 8 in sp
Respecing would help those slower leveling peeps who cannot rebuild quickly retool for later acts/quests. What about the occasional player who plays other games? Can they level as fast as you or I who will be playing D3 like banshee's?
Do they even want to?
Does that matter? Since they suck, should the game also be made infinitely easy and hell mode removed from the game? It's not a subjective argument. Why should the game be dumbed down for people who are unwilling to put any effort into learning how to play it?
Why should I have to mow through the game grinding a new peep after a skill was broken on my old char post patch?
Because they've never intentionally "broken" a skill. And if a skill was broken, it would have been broken through a bug, which means they couldn't really anticipate breaking your class. They've rebalanced skills, but asking for repsecs in that situation is basically saying you only want to use the broken overpowered builds, which seems a bit whiney to me.
Sorry but I am not going to be rushing it like in D2. Therefore respecing fits this mentality. It also appears that skills will be used is combinations and at earlier levels and not just in the form of a uber powerfull single skill. Its this mentality that makes rushing so predominant. Get the main skill ASAP!
Um actually respeccing doesn't fit this mentality. If D3 is so awesome and whatnot, why are you refusing to play it again if you want to change your character? Basically what you're saying is that you dont want to play through the content more than once. That's way more potent and telling than rushing.
Blizzard is going to have a huge number of players coming into the game fresh from other titles and I believe that reason among others is why they are looking at respecing.
And this is why I don't think it should be implemented into HC. Because basically it's making the achievement of HC (ultimately what HC is all about) less of an achievement, and easier, to accommodate a lower brow of players.
Its so hard to make a judgment right now without trying it out. But I agree that limited respecing is the way to go. And I like you enjoy playing through various builds and even making plan sheets on builds.
If implemented in a fair way such as trading some xp or even char levels as you suggested for a smaller respec then this could work and would add some flexibility to building. And flexibility seems to be on the devs minds these days.
Well you have to be clear, limited respecs means a finite number of respecs, like 3, which could be full respecs which would essentially be like allowing unlimited respecs, only 3 times. Basically saying theres no consequence for not making your character correctly.
Partial respecs (which I don't oppose) are things like refunding 1 level worth of points, but for a significant sacrifice and my proposition of trading experience was more along the lines of "remove 1 level of experience and get 1 level worth of points back" Because that's the only balanced way of doing it, if you want a fully respecced character, start over, if you want to change your character slightly, take the level hit.
Gigashadow
30-07-2008, 21:00
Does that matter? Since they suck, should the game also be made infinitely easy and hell mode removed from the game? It's not a subjective argument. Why should the game be dumbed down for people who are unwilling to put any effort into learning how to play it?There is a huge difference between knowing how to play a game, and being an expert to it. Diablo only accepts experts. That's a pretty serious problem. You have to know everything for people not to be rude and assholish telling you "you suck", like you just did.
Dumbed down? Diablo is a dumb game already. It's not a question of intelligence. It's a question of broken, unintuitive mechanics where people use various exploits and strange tactics aka rushing-runs in special sequences to accomplish whatever it is they are trying to accomplish.
A normal game should support the casual side as well as the professional side. StarCraft is able to do that. Diablo, on the other hand, fails miserably.
And this is why I don't think it should be implemented into HC. Because basically it's making the achievement of HC (ultimately what HC is all about) less of an achievement, and easier, to accommodate a lower brow of players.What achievement, please. After maybe a few months after the game is out, there are going to be huge databases of cookie cutter builds for Diablo III. The absence of respecing is not going to save you - it will only anger those that detest cookie cutter crap and try to make their own builds.
The only thing respecing will do is make people figure out the best builds a bit faster. But, it will also allow people to experiment without replaying the game 300 times. Yes, I don't want to replay the game 300 times with the same char with the same build. I may replay it about 5 times for every build I try with tweaks, but no more. 300 times is too much, and if anyone can do that there is something wrong with them.
Basically saying theres no consequence for not making your character correctly. What does "making a character incorrectly" even ****ing mean? How can you do anything incorrectly if you go online and read a cookie cutter build and follow it? If someone does this kind of a thing, they would never need respecs since people don't make mistakes in that department.
On the other hand, perhaps some guy wanted to try a build of his own, and he put a skill point somewhere, and he saw that that skill works totally different from what he expected (because the descriptions are usually way too blurry). But he can't change anything.
What do we get? People who try to experiment, do funky stuff, are in a worse situation than those that are cowardly to do that and just follow the cookie cutter road.
If you like your chars dying that you are the masochist, you don't need your character to die to make a new one.No, I'm not a masochist, I'm just not close minded as some people, and I don't imagine that my character is more than a few pixels. What's the point of restarting without losing my character? That's the whole fun part there... you made him, you grow him, he dies. You start over.
I don't know about you, but I don't make my chars saying they will die. I know very well they might die, that doesn't mean I know they will or that I have to like it when they do.You play HC for your own reasons, I play for mine.
My first character on Bnet was a firewall sorc, it managed lvl 93 and the only reason it died was because comp crashed while I was teleing to hell meph near some mobs with fana. If you think I was fine with it you're the one that has problems, not me.I would be fine with it. I am fine with losing characters. I just avoid putting too much time into them in the first place, because that's where the real masochism lies.
stillman
31-07-2008, 01:49
Actually, I'd like to see things added to HC to make it even more different from SC. For instance, poison can kill your chr, instead of just taking his/her life down to 1. Poison can kill in town, chrs can get frozen, not just chilled, etc, anything that adds to the reality of getting killed.
Idk, just having the death rule and a different title tacked on like in d2 seems too simple for a d3 design.
Actually, I'd like to see things added to HC to make it even more different from SC. For instance, poison can kill your chr, instead of just taking his/her life down to 1. Poison can kill in town, chrs can get frozen, not just chilled, etc, anything that adds to the reality of getting killed.
Idk, just having the death rule and a different title tacked on like in d2 seems too simple for a d3 design.
How about not being able to instantly leave the area for hc players :P
There is a huge difference between knowing how to play a game, and being an expert to it. Diablo only accepts experts. That's a pretty serious problem. You have to know everything for people not to be rude and assholish telling you "you suck", like you just did.
Dumbed down? Diablo is a dumb game already. It's not a question of intelligence. It's a question of broken, unintuitive mechanics where people use various exploits and strange tactics aka rushing-runs in special sequences to accomplish whatever it is they are trying to accomplish.
So you're arguing that its easy, but people that suck at it don't actually suck, it's because the game is not intuitive? Seems like a fairly bad string of logic there. You don't have to be expert to beat diablo 3, you don't even have to be an expert to beat hell difficulty. You have to have a minimal understanding of the game mechanics: I.E. one skill at level 20 is better than 5 skills at level 4, and that stamina is the most useful stat.
Sorry, but some people suck at the game. I know it pains you to hear me say that. Perhaps it's because I'm an arrogant prick. Perhaps it's because you feel like I'm telling you you suck. I don't know, but spending 15 minutes on bnet in sc, I can tell you this. People suck. Lots of people suck. It has notshing to do with the game. People suck in EVERY game. That said, in D2 the game was "beatable" by any terrible player. Getting through normal mode in SC was so incredibly easy. And really, that's all the content. Beyond that you're arguing that anyone should be able to do everything in the game, namely, hell mode on HC.
Making the game so that everything is doable by the lowest bracket of players isn't a recipie for a long lived game. It's a recepie for a boring, shallow game.
A normal game should support the casual side as well as the professional side. StarCraft is able to do that. Diablo, on the other hand, fails miserably.
diablo 2 caters to casuals extremely well. You don't have to play constantly to progress your character, you can play whenever you want, it's fairly short to level. Casual gamers don't, by deffinition, suck.
What achievement, please. After maybe a few months after the game is out, there are going to be huge databases of cookie cutter builds for Diablo III. The absence of respecing is not going to save you - it will only anger those that detest cookie cutter crap and try to make their own builds.
Tell me, How many hardcore sorceresses on the ladder are there? And how many of them are Fireball/Charged bolt sorceresses? How many ladder paladins are not hammerdins? How many spear amazons are there (spear, not javelin)? How many mageazons remain post 1.10? How many pheonix strike assassins are there post level 90?
Getting a high level on a particularly difficult build without dying is an accomplishment. It's not so much an accomplishment in softcore so in that case I don't care. That's why this thread is about hardcore and respecs.
This goes further to refute your previous point that d2 needs to be easier. We're talking about hardcore here. Hardcore shouldn't be something that is catered to people who are bad.
The only thing respecing will do is make people figure out the best builds a bit faster. But, it will also allow people to experiment without replaying the game 300 times. Yes, I don't want to replay the game 300 times with the same char with the same build. I may replay it about 5 times for every build I try with tweaks, but no more. 300 times is too much, and if anyone can do that there is something wrong with them.
I think this is a pretty blatant strawman. You're exaggerating a number to further your point. You should be able to figure out a working build in less than 300 tries. In fact, if you can't I'd say there is something wrong with you. I don't think any of my builds were ever cookie cutters, but beyond the first 5 of them, all of them made it through hell. I doub't I made over 100 characters, across all of the different classes. You do the math.
What does "making a character incorrectly" even ****ing mean? How can you do anything incorrectly if you go online and read a cookie cutter build and follow it? If someone does this kind of a thing, they would never need respecs since people don't make mistakes in that department.
it ****ing[sic] means that you have to have some knowledge of the dynamic of the game to make a successful character. For someone who's saying that cookie cutter builds are all evil, there's one thing you've forgotten to take into account. Games with respecs use cookie cutter builds also, to an even higher extent than D2 ever has.
The thing is, people like to experiment, but they also like their character to be uniquely theirs. There is all of the sudden a higher number of cookie cutter characters because when people try anything that isn't cookie cutter, and see that it isn't as good as the cookie cutter builds, they'll just switch back. Sorry but your "it promotes cookie cutterness" argument is bad, because the argument for cookie cutter builds goes both ways. If all it takes to have a high level character of the best high level build is a respec, there may be short term experimentation, but it wont alter the dynamic of the game anyway, as people will see their build isn't as good and simply respec back to that build.
Short term experimentation isn't the same as having long term character diversity. I happen to value the short term experimentation much more than I care that people can try skill c with no time investment.
On the other hand, perhaps some guy wanted to try a build of his own, and he put a skill point somewhere, and he saw that that skill works totally different from what he expected (because the descriptions are usually way too blurry). But he can't change anything.
What do we get? People who try to experiment, do funky stuff, are in a worse situation than those that are cowardly to do that and just follow the cookie cutter road.
So basically what you're saying is that you want people to experiment, but you want them to be all the same in the end. See the former argument about the difference between short term experimentation and actual character diversity. It seems to me that your argument here with light of your previous paragraph pretty blatantly contradicts itself.
fatwisconsinguy
08-10-2008, 03:18
Hardcore just makes you die, the rest should be the same for both SC and HC. Including hostility configurations.
QFT. :thumbup:
Master Zap
08-10-2008, 17:57
Tell me, How many hardcore sorceresses on the ladder are there? And how many of them are Fireball/Charged bolt sorceresses? How many ladder paladins are not hammerdins? How many spear amazons are there (spear, not javelin)? How many mageazons remain post 1.10? How many pheonix strike assassins are there post level 90?
Getting a high level on a particularly difficult build without dying is an accomplishment. It's not so much an accomplishment in softcore so in that case I don't care. That's why this thread is about hardcore and respecs.
This goes further to refute your previous point that d2 needs to be easier. We're talking about hardcore here. Hardcore shouldn't be something that is catered to people who are bad.
I agree with this. I dont have a problem with respeccing on SC mode. But on HC it takes away a major part of that game mode. This is coming from the HC player who patiently and calculatingly has taken chantless/bo-less Titan melee sorc's and barbs through the game. Stuff like this would be lost if you allow respeccing.
Hardcore should remain Hard. No respeccing, no free passes. If you have a problem with this go back to sc mode and play there to your hearts content. Feels kinda shallow in comparison doesn't it? (softcore mode).
giga, are you even a HC mode player? So far all the usual HC players I see commenting here are against it.
I'm just wondering if blizzard is doing it so we can level up with a build that works, then we have the option to respec for say pvp or Drop runs. I mean i played D2 for years and then wow... I'm sick of wow and i miss a game like D2. In D2 it was dont die, see what drops.. in wow its dont ninja loot and welp that drop goes to the others.
I just think its thier way of covering themselves.. I mean we all had that one toon we mapped out.. Got them leveled had the items for them.. and at the end of a few sleepless days of leveling them up flubbed that one point either due to sleepy or lag. Sc it was no biggy but in HC, i'd have had to hit my first alert button lol.
MoUsE_WiZ
17-10-2008, 09:54
I'm just wondering if blizzard is doing it so we can level up with a build that works
They're doing it for a few reasons:
1) A goldsink. They want gold to be valuable, they need things players will want to spend on. This is a fairly easy thing for them to implement, and in doing so they save themselves the trouble of trying to think up something else.
2) It also helps with the rush/power level issue. Obviously at the expense of the co-op leveling/odd build styles of play, but ignoring the negatives try to be honest about the positive.
For many of us, myself included, when building the characters that are intended to be overpowered, the faster I get through the leveling the better. I'll often have a sorc rushing/leveling a new sorc, soon as the new sorc is up I strip the old sorc to gear the new sorc. And I'll do this rather frequently. Respecs are definitely a positive here for a lot of people... rushing or even leveling a new character for the sake of being overpowered in a different way is just tedious, it can be done in a couple hours, but blah is it ever boring.
3) What you said. No need for tedium up to level 30 to play an orber. No need for tedium attempting to level a PvP character if rushes aren't in the game.
This comes at expense to co-op leveling and odd builds as well, but with an extra quirk. While eliminating tedium they promote cookie-cutterness, not just compared to people playing powerful builds vs people playing odd ones, but even to the point where every single powerful build is the same, especially at low levels. Why? Because again, people often want to get through the game asap and don't care about the part inbetween character creation and end game, and the absolute most powerful build for getting through that part will eventually be discovered, and using it will become widespread as hell.
Yeah it gets rid of tedium for some builds, but it also gets rid of forcing people to learn game mechanics if they want to play those builds.
4) It's an expected feature at this point. It's not just something that exists in WoW, it's something that exists in a whole lot of games out on the market. I suspect the people who would be upset over the lack of respecs outweigh those who would be upset with them.
5) Less characters on realms.
I believe I heard them mention that characters wouldn't expire as well... if people only need 4 characters to be able to at least *try* every build in the game it cuts down on storage space. It also *might* cutdown on bandwidth at character select screens.
Both of those should be rather trivial costs though.
6) Edit, oops forgot this one. Nerfs! Having your character nerfed sucks. Having your character nerfed to a point where it's completely inviable and not being able to do anything at all with that character ever again sucks even more.
Those are the reasons I can think of off-hand.
I'm still cheering for no-respecs in HC because making the game easier, even if that only means "easier to get to the point where the system is broken via rushing and once at that point there is no difference", is just not something I agree with. FSS had no respecs for E/HCE characters in its beta, so I can dream.
One thing I wouldn't mind... introduce the game with no respecs, then after a good chunk of the population is at the point where they think the entire middle of the game is worthless, and after the good builds have mostly been found out (that's another way it makes the game easier btw), and after people have rushing down to a science, implement them. At that point the whole "I leveled my titan sorc and he just speced into it!" argument kind of goes away because at that point he could just powerlevel one anyways.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.