View Full Version : Diablo III as eSports
A large part of the Diablo II community plays the game purely to make PVP characters and duel with them. Several communities have an active playerbase with their own rules (since Diablo II isn't balanced for PVP) and participate in ranked ladders and special tournaments. Diablo as a game is quite good for a competitive game, because of the nice overview of the battle. But it has several problems in Diablo II.
I propose a Guild Wars PVP system to make Diablo III PVP eSports applicable where people can make maxed out characters and unlock items, prefixes etc on a specific realm. Diablo more than Guild Wars is suitable, because Guild Wars has less freedom to move. The problem with Diablo II is that items are too important and it makes it hard to just get into PVP, because you first need to make a PVP character with specific PVP items, sometimes very expensive items that new people just don't have. This makes it bad as an eSport.
World of Warcraft has the problem of mixed PVE and PVP, Blizzard balances something in PVP and it needs to be balanced in PVE at the same time, this is not very handy. Also, World of Warcraft is rock-paper-scissors based, which is not very smart, cause you in theory can never win as scissors playing versus rock. I'm very happy that Diablo III has only 5 classes, so balancing should be somewhat easy.
So, you make your maxed out character. Distribute your stats/skills and start with a basic equipment. While playing some matches you unlock credits that you can turn in at a NPC to unlock for example the King's prefix, or maybe you buy a Stone of Jordan for your character. Or maybe you want to be able to have another prefix on your item, so you can have 2 prefixes on that item instead of 1 (Rare instead of Magical). This way, while playing PVP you can get items not luck based, but skills (and time) based. You can have Random Team battles, or Arranged Team battles, Ranked Battles for ladder or just practice battles. Battle.net 2.0 will be able to do these things very handy. Also Blizzard can balance PVP and PVE separatly, so that if Fireball is to powerful in PVP they can just fix it for PVP. We need replays, live coverage, betting system (I bet 10.000 gold on this guy etc) and it will be very fun.
This way we can also have Diablo III tournaments at Blizzcon etc.
Maybe you guys think this looks too much like WoW Arena, and maybe it is. But I think Diablo's isometric view is far superior as a tactical action PVP system. Also the problems with WoW Arena (level new character to 70 or 80 in WOTKL, balancing in PVP changes gameplay in PVE and visa-versa, rock-paper-scissor model) make it less suitable. Blizzard can make a new fresh start at Diablo III and it will be a succes.
Sorry for the Wall of Text.
Tashohnie
02-09-2008, 14:27
I did not read it all to be honest but sounds ok... I dont like the r/p/s idea same as you I think its poor form in PvP. I once played a game. It had 3 classes... War/Wizard/Tao(healer with pets) any class could be any class. You would always hear people arguing one was better than the other, but the game was more skillful than any other I played (ok there were other factors but I am not getting in to this)
It depends how they do it, if its going to be arena based. I for one will be sad if they remove random PKing(not sure if they have said this) if they do I will more than likely play Mortal, full PvP and full looting rules on a U3 engine :thumbsup:
Sein Schatten
02-09-2008, 15:01
Go away with your eSport crap. The only sport here is the electron marathon inside the circuits.
No Kalgan in my D3. Kalgan can rock his S4 weapon within the first week in WoW all he wants.
Go away with your eSport crap. The only sport here is the electron marathon inside the circuits.
No Kalgan in my D3. Kalgan can rock his S4 weapon within the first week in WoW all he wants.
You sir sound very bitter. If you actually read my post you see that I don't force anything on you, because I suggest a different realm. See it as a different game within the Diablo III package, a game where people can go against each other in isometric view. You can stay slaying Lucifer, Beelzebub, Iblis or whatever with your friends, like I will the first couple of times I start a character. But when the random dungeons don't seem that random anymore, I will turn to PVP. And Diablo is actually a very good basic template for a competitive game.
Sein Schatten
02-09-2008, 16:12
I am not bitter. But the balance will fail. Diablo is in essence a PvE game, stated multiple times. You know, the "cooperative" word in a lot of posts Blue said. And then adding Arena so Blizzard can Kalganize the classes? No, thanks.
I am not bitter. But the balance will fail. Diablo is in essence a PvE game, stated multiple times. You know, the "cooperative" word in a lot of posts Blue said. And then adding Arena so Blizzard can Kalganize the classes? No, thanks.
What if he can only Kalganize the PVP characters like I said, he doesn't need to balance PVP and at the same time make sure PVE stays balanced and visa-versa if PVE and PVP happens in different realms. Frozen Orb too imba in PVP? Change it for PVP characters only.
Sein Schatten
03-09-2008, 15:18
What if he can only Kalganize the PVP characters like I said, he doesn't need to balance PVP and at the same time make sure PVE stays balanced and visa-versa if PVE and PVP happens in different realms. Frozen Orb too imba in PVP? Change it for PVP characters only.
Such things Blizzard won't do or they would already have done so in WoW. Trust me. Arena in WoW has a slightly different ruleset. Having two distinct rulesets is too much work to balance.
SnotSpill
07-09-2008, 18:47
leave it alone I say. its already perfect. the only thing they need to change in diablo regarding pvp is they need to patch the tp pk hack once and for all. I wouldnt mind the ability to change the resolution to say 1280x1024 however. and some new items would be appreciated. It would be ghey to have the ability to just buy a soj from gheed or whoever, items like that are special because they are so rare. So what if u dont have the GG gear? Boo Hoo! play the game and find it. or buy it online.
Anet started seperating pvp and pve skill properties shortly before the release of NF, with the addition of pve only skills, and completed the switch post EoTN by fixing many popular skills to have different effects in pvm and pvp. This isn't difficult; balance for pve, and make changes for pvp as necessary when in pvp areas. I think I've said everything I have to say on pvp only characters already elsewhere.
korialstraz
07-09-2008, 22:42
leave it alone I say. its already perfect. the only thing they need to change in diablo regarding pvp is they need to patch the tp pk hack once and for all. I wouldnt mind the ability to change the resolution to say 1280x1024 however. and some new items would be appreciated. It would be ghey to have the ability to just buy a soj from gheed or whoever, items like that are special because they are so rare. So what if u dont have the GG gear? Boo Hoo! play the game and find it. or buy it online.
You do realise that this is talk about D3 and not D2 right?
Btw buying items online is just a way to support dupers which help ruin the game (both lagwise and economicly). But that's not what this thread is about.
I don't think it's very good game design to have a complete different set of skill rules for both PvP and PvM. When I hover over a skill, I don't want to have to see both the damage and effects for monsters, and also the damage and effects for other players. Nor do I want to log into a specialized Arena character and come to find out that PvP balance there is entirely different than PvP balance on the main Play Realms.
No matter how you do it, there's a lot of inconsistency.
However, if you're hellbent on Arenas in DIII, I think it's a terrible idea to just let players magically create maxed out characters and equip them with anything they want. I think a better alternative would be to give the player the option to copy one of their players over from a Play Realm to an Arena Realm, and let them equip that character with whatever they've ever personally seen drop in the game world. This promotes still playing the game, and leveling characters, because you can constantly unlock new things to outfit your Arena character in.
Despite my suggestion, I really hate what Arenas did to WOW, and I fear the same could happen with Diablo if they aren't careful.
Sein Schatten
08-09-2008, 00:02
Despite my suggestion, I really hate what Arenas did to WOW, and I fear the same could happen with Diablo if they aren't careful.
Because Kalgan wants to rock his S4 axe and his GF who plays a rogue wants the S4 swords.
I just hope the D3 devs are more competent and at least try to leave out their personal issues with character classes.
IMO, BGs were enough for WoW. Arenas are useless esports. They only needed to tune the BGs and add rotating maps so each BG has a few maps to use. But nooo...
Mmmm nah... would be boring... I like to build a character, item by item, and then attack someone instead of simply pressing a few buttons. Where is the feeling of accomplishment in that?
Your whole idea of exchanging points for prefixes and such just seems futile. Considering people will just gather friends and find the fastest way to get the most uber items right away, it will just become a tedious aspect that will be rushed through just like we uber trist lvl pvp characters now.
Other than that, I see where you're coming from and a lot of people would probably enjoy this, but i personally wouldn't. I like having some flexibility in terms of gear to PvP with based on what you can afford. Otherwise, why don't I just go play some FPS?
And if these pvp-specific servers were implemented, I would just hope they were'nt the only way to pvp, because i honestly love the pvp system in D2. IMO dupers are what it boils down to as the only reason it's so unbalanced.
teh_Thrasher
25-09-2008, 06:58
bad idea imo ull just end up with a bunch of players with the same gear doing the same stuff. this is NOT guildwars so dont try and make it be that way.
building up ur character and finding kool loot is most of the fun. u know minus the whole farming for xp/loot that most ppl do. i hope their wont be some lame Baal run-esque part in d3. running the same thing over and over again is lame. PLUS finding ur own loot is more fullfilling than just making a maxed out char with all the pimped out gear u want... thats what those noobs in d2 that just JSP their gear do. (buy 80+char, buy leet gear)
It's always the same.
Some guy comes up and say what if we put "insert a thing another game already implemented in the gaming industry" in Diablo?
Diablo needs more Guild Wars or WoW Blah blah blah
The idea of eSport makes me want to bang my head on the keyboard.
IEqualsGood
11-10-2008, 21:26
As someone who's made fully geared d2 characters countless times, played in the highest tier of Guild Wars pvp, and been a gladiator in WoW, I fully agree with structuring a pvp system in diablo based off of Guild Wars. No question in my mind, it is the superior pvp game, and I'd love to see diablo follow in that direction. Keeping in mind that dialo is multiplayer co-op rpg game, and you don't want an 'arena' system to ruin your diablo experience, the GW system works best because it has no relation to pve whatsoever, you simply have the option to take part in it. I also fully support the hostile system diablo has right now, I think it's fun and I would be glad to see world pvp in diablo, however blizzard has made it clear they don't want it at all or it's going to be watered down. IMO a real pvp system is beyond a fair trade anyways.
I don't think it's very good game design to have a complete different set of skill rules for both PvP and PvM. When I hover over a skill, I don't want to have to see both the damage and effects for monsters, and also the damage and effects for other players.
This already exists in diablo, though most of it's hidden.
AcidReign
15-10-2008, 04:47
If they plan to have competitive PVP play for Diablo III, then I'm going to start recruiting players for a guild ASAP. And I don't mean recruiting as soon as the game ships, I'm talking about recruiting NOW. Gotta get a head start on something like that...
RogueJuggalo
23-12-2008, 12:15
I think that the best way to create a PvP realm would be to base it off 100% skill. To do that is simple, allow all players to have access to any legitimate item in the game and start them with a character at the maximum level with all skill and stat points available from levels and from quests. From here, allow players to customize their character however they choose to and then participate in 1v1 PvP or separate team ladders.
This method would eliminate the time requirement to be a competitive PvP player, and if the requirement of time/PvE in order to be viable in PvP appeals to you, then PvP on a normal realm. There can be ladders for them as well. This would allow for all types of PvP players to be satisfied.
The first system I propose which relies 100% on skill would be similar to StarCraft's balance if Blizzard balances the items and characters as well as they've balanced the races and units in StarCraft. In my opinion, having to unlock items or play PvE and magic find/trade forever in order to obtain the best items for PvP in a competitive ladder is like making a competitive StarCraft player have to play campaigns and challenges vs AI in order to unlock a unit or building. It would limit their potential based on the time that they have to play. On the other hand, when skill is the only determining factor the game will be incredibly competitive for a very long time, maybe even truly eSport viable at that point. People loved to watch Boxer and see his unbelievable micro because of the skill and finesse it took, not because he got it as a random drop because he beat the final level of the campaign 24830 times.
StarCraft is the epitome of eSports and it is a game based entirely upon skill. Just because Diablo 3 is and RPG doesn't mean that the same principals wouldn't apply. I'm sure an argument against my idea would be that someone would find the one perfect and best character build and then everyone would do it and everything would be 'even' and boring. Game and item balance would prevent this from occurring and allow for the game to change and evolve over time, just as StarCraft did and still to this day does.
esports for rpg? lol
esports are pretty much for rts and fps, pc. wcg so far doesnt even take a single rpg in dat genre.
if u want to play balance pvp, go play guildwar. in hack n slash game with different loots is impossible to make everything perfectly balanced.
RogueJuggalo
08-01-2009, 08:52
esports for rpg? lol
esports are pretty much for rts and fps, pc. wcg so far doesnt even take a single rpg in dat genre.
if u want to play balance pvp, go play guildwar. in hack n slash game with different loots is impossible to make everything perfectly balanced.
I found Guild Wars PvP to be very slow paced and drawn out, thus boring. There are actually broadcasted PvP tournaments for World of Warcraft so I wouldn't 'lol' at the notion of D3 being a candidate for a potential eSport.
http://www.gomtv.net/channel/
This site has some Korean gaming-related broadcasts commentated in both English and Korean (gomtv.com has the Korean versions of all the vods). You can even tune in and watch StarCraft matches and other events live.
wcg is the biggest esport event held every once a year. if a game is not in there, then it's not big enough that people actually care or it's not widely accpeted as "skills only game".
the site u show me is only in korea, and sure they can make any game as esport cuz it's korea. and i like that gw is not even in there but there is wow, considering that gw has a way better balance pvp system than wow.
the thing is for rpg, since each character has different items level setup, it's impossible to balance unless they do what guild war does. all classes use their best equipments with limit amount of skills, and which will kill the fun of diablo since it's not made for co-op.
i can see diablo pvp held as some ingame world event that held by blizzard on its own, just for the fun pvping. but as esport then the developers have to put serious thoughts into it. maybe they can do something like dota in wc3 with the up and down view feature but that custom game doesnt consider exactly balance either. it can definitely be better than having an arena though.
Rashiminos
08-01-2009, 15:11
For the love of the official Diablo III forums, I hope not...
IEqualsGood
08-01-2009, 16:10
wcg is the biggest esport event held every once a year.
Sorry, but your credibility sort of ended there. :/
mywrisoicy
08-01-2009, 16:54
I think this is a fine idea... hey you dont like... you dont have to play it! His idea seems totally balanced just the way of earning items should be looked at a little more... I dont think everyone would end up with same gear since their building different types of characters! 2 sorceress could play totally different and that will depend on heavily on customisation from items. There would be many builds and much excitement. Too bad blizzard probably wont do this since it would take away too much from the core game, this is like a whole new game inside d3. But i really hope they do something like this sometime... the cool thing is that its another way to play and get items than from the normal d3 experience!! very cool!! and offers variety to play.
mixritpitlik
08-01-2009, 17:45
I really hope they don't try to put some kind of esports pvp into it. This should be an RPG that is fun to play with others. Some kind of pvp is fine but don't take it too seriously as developer. Blizz has already an MMO with a PvP part to it ( WoW ) and since that has been introduced i really didn't like the game anymore.
Please make this a back to basics RPG which can be enjoyed in co-op play. Focused and balanced around PvE. The world needs a game like that :)
Uhm I'm not sure I got what you're trying to say allright. You want there to be a pvpsystem where you can get "maxed out characters" including maxed eq "instantly" for pvpmatters only? that it will be totally seperate from the PVE/game otherwise?
I don't think I like that tbh... What makes d2 pvp fun is basically that it's a RPG, which rocks, but it also is very viable for pvp, you got the best from both worlds. Like counter-strike, is an obv. pvpgame with no pve material, WoW is like, a rpg.. more pure rpg then d2, the pvp is reeeaaaally slow paced compared to d2 and the rpgpart of the pvp outcomes the amount of skill you actually get from "pvping" (my own opinion). I know cs is a rts and wow is a rpg, but still, d2 is like a golden game for us who loves both beating your friends and playing an rpg.
I rather see some kind of pvpleague but that there should be no seperate pvprealm or anything like it, just like in d2. There will be enough intrest imo, idc if it's an eSport or not
RogueJuggalo
06-02-2009, 21:46
the site u show me is only in korea
Wrong. You went to the .com version. The .net that I linked to you is the English version of the site. They have large corporate sponsorships, even some from outside of Korea (namely Intel).
Also, to rehash my reasoning for having two PvP ladders is to satisfy both types of gamers, the ladder on the PvE-ish realms will be for the people who put in the time to get the best of the best gear through the random drops and PvP whereas the separate ladder will be for the more casual player who just wants to PvP without investing the majority of their gameplay into PvE. This second system would also be 100% skill based since gear would not skew a players chances of winning.
I am not bitter. But the balance will fail. Diablo is in essence a PvE game, stated multiple times. You know, the "cooperative" word in a lot of posts Blue said. And then adding Arena so Blizzard can Kalganize the classes? No, thanks.
...always keep talking about D2 while it's clear D3 is going to be developed by Blizz-south - NOT Blizz-north. Sure D2 was PvE, lets see why it isn't the case now.
Blizz already said that D3 classes will be balanced because they don't like D2 pvp design, so there will be no "1-hit = enemy player dead", you will have to hit other players at least 20 times in D3 before you can celebrate. They also said that they want to balance it as much as they do with SC2, so I'm pretty sure they are not doing it for PvE :}
[cK]Extreme
22-02-2009, 02:18
I am not bitter. But the balance will fail. Diablo is in essence a PvE game, stated multiple times. You know, the "cooperative" word in a lot of posts Blue said. And then adding Arena so Blizzard can Kalganize the classes? No, thanks.
Diablo 2 was largely a PvP game. If you think the majority of players were building character after character so they could run baal 1000 times you're fooling yourself. Some people may do that, but the majority of people we're building duelers.
And you talk about WoW balance like the days of Guided Arrow never existed in Diablo. Give me a break, it doesn't have to be perfectly balanced to be fun. And it certainly doesn't have to be perfectly balanced to be competitive.
No offense, but you're quite possibly the most ignorant anti-WoW fanboy I've ever seen on these forums.
Extreme;7009431']Diablo 2 was largely a PvP game. If you think the majority of players were building character after character so they could run baal 1000 times you're fooling yourself. Some people may do that, but the majority of people we're building duelers.
And you talk about WoW balance like the days of Guided Arrow never existed in Diablo. Give me a break, it doesn't have to be perfectly balanced to be fun. And it certainly doesn't have to be perfectly balanced to be competitive.
No offense, but you're quite possibly the most ignorant anti-WoW fanboy I've ever seen on these forums.
D3 has to be perfectly balanced and it will be, as Jay Wilson already stated.
You can't have fair competitive play if there is unbalance, unbalanced games never make it on WCG. That is why Starcraft is the oldest game still active on WCG.
IEqualsGood
23-02-2009, 01:57
unbalanced games never make it on WCG.
lol... ummm ok
im sorry but the majority are pure PvE...pvp in D is a very very small part,its so freaking unbalanced,WoW did a good job at PvP until basicly everyone wanted easy pvp gear,it was balanced on both PvP and PvE if you include that some build actually arent meant for pvp and gear play a big part of it like alots of PvP rpg
and yes good PvP require balance and a good amount of it,WoW player base ruined it by whinning wayyy to much about stuff that was balanced already then at that point it just went downhill in both pvp and pve,everything is easymode even a chimp can play this game,there is also no reward(gear is way to easy to get) or any real good skill required anymore,also you've got pre-made that farm a system that make it totally unfair for solo PvPer so you're stuck having to go get a team if you want to compete with the best because of the stupidly easy to get gear reward system,arena was actually a BIG step back in term of PvP evolution
but seriously in D2 i dont see much pvp game other then the "hidden" one and you actually have to look for these,compared to people playing for PvE element of the game its a seriously really small part of the game that get played
I hope that D3 will have PvP just so you can have a choice...but i really rather see them working on more PvE stuff then this that probly wont evolve more then what D2 as already and balancing that many skill for both pvp and pve would just hinder the game imo
[cK]Extreme
25-02-2009, 07:46
im sorry but the majority are pure PvE...pvp in D is a very very small part,its so freaking unbalanced,WoW did a good job at PvP until basicly everyone wanted easy pvp gear,it was balanced on both PvP and PvE if you include that some build actually arent meant for pvp and gear play a big part of it like alots of PvP rpg
and yes good PvP require balance and a good amount of it,WoW player base ruined it by whinning wayyy to much about stuff that was balanced already then at that point it just went downhill in both pvp and pve,everything is easymode even a chimp can play this game,there is also no reward(gear is way to easy to get) or any real good skill required anymore,also you've got pre-made that farm a system that make it totally unfair for solo PvPer so you're stuck having to go get a team if you want to compete with the best because of the stupidly easy to get gear reward system,arena was actually a BIG step back in term of PvP evolution
but seriously in D2 i dont see much pvp game other then the "hidden" one and you actually have to look for these,compared to people playing for PvE element of the game its a seriously really small part of the game that get played
I hope that D3 will have PvP just so you can have a choice...but i really rather see them working on more PvE stuff then this that probly wont evolve more then what D2 as already and balancing that many skill for both pvp and pve would just hinder the game imo
Sorry, but no. Diablo 2's focus was PvE as well, but that doesn't mean PvP wasn't the driving force that kept the game going. This isn't an MMO, there wont be many downloadable content patches to keep adding depth to the PvE. You get whats in the box, and then you get an expansion. For the most part, that's it.
What's to keep you playing? What's to keep you rerolling characters, and in D2, running Meph/Baal/Pit/etc? Shinies. What are you going to do with these shinies, keep killing the same things you killed to get them? Not likely. That'd be terrible.
PvE ends. PvP is persistent.
RogueJuggalo
27-02-2009, 19:09
Extreme;7014239']
PvE ends. PvP is persistent.
Best quote in this thread. Well put.
Silverfang
28-02-2009, 12:28
Anyone remembering emphasis on strategic situations? I kinda remember something like this from the one or other interview/comment. Also there are different grades of Runes out there. Letting the player choose maxed Items (thus also maxed runes) would only lead into everyone using the best equipment, not changing his own strategies to compensate for the flaws one's build has.
As to esports-pvp: I would like different PvP-Modes integrated into the game. First and most important a mode, where not the first PvP-Kill decides the match, but 3 Wins out of 5 (or even more). This would only be realiseable by an arena or special PvP games. I would prefere the latter, cause the 2nd PvP-thingy I'd like to see would be the "Hunter-Prey"-situation, whereas a "Prey" gets a headon, then is getting chased by one to 3 hunters.
That are only two ideas out of a dozen I could think of, but all of them would need a special PvP-script aside from PvE. Also PvP as esports doesn't necessarily means killing one's enemy. In the 2nd Scenario above measuring the time the Prey can save himself from the hunters would be an adequate esportscount, at least I think so...
spengelbeiser
29-04-2009, 00:53
I don't think it's very good game design to have a complete different set of skill rules for both PvP and PvM. When I hover over a skill, I don't want to have to see both the damage and effects for monsters, and also the damage and effects for other players. Nor do I want to log into a specialized Arena character and come to find out that PvP balance there is entirely different than PvP balance on the main Play Realms.
No matter how you do it, there's a lot of inconsistency. ...
I think that last part is the problem with your argument. Inconsistency isn't necessarily bad. I actually think it's a very good idea for them to separate PvP and PvM mechanics. In a game like WoW, there's a borderline distinction -- individual characters are meant to have relatively sane strength. In a game like Diablo, where character mechanics are geared towards the wholesale slaying of mobs of weaker creatures, I think it's a bad idea to expect PvM mechanics to ever be balanced in such a way that PvP works.
Plainly put, you NEED a separate ruleset, at least for some things -- damage, health regen, probably even skill effects. In my experience, WoW ran into more problems trying to keep mechanics "consistent" between PvE and PvP while facing the reality that the two are ENTIRELY DIFFERENT areas of play.
If you are over the age of let's say, fifteen, and are using the term "E-sports" please do me a favor and whack yourself in the face; repeatedly. There is no such ******* thing as an E-Sport. Go outside. Play some baseball in your backyard. Internet gaming. It's not a sport. Grow up. To this day is it is still the single dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire 28 years on this planet.
Absolutely can not stand that term at all. And no, I did not read this thread. No matter which way you try to sugar coat it: IT'S NOT A G'DAMN SPORT.
EDIT: I'm not directing this towards anyone in particular unless you have the mindset of the thing that is called "E-sports"
Kiroptus
06-05-2009, 03:46
Yeah E-sport is a tricky term. And even more for Diablo's PVP which has been very unbalanced and was not even the focus of the game.
RogueJuggalo
11-05-2009, 22:16
If you are over the age of let's say, fifteen, and are using the term "E-sports" please do me a favor and whack yourself in the face; repeatedly. There is no such ******* thing as an E-Sport. Go outside. Play some baseball in your backyard. Internet gaming. It's not a sport. Grow up. To this day is it is still the single dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire 28 years on this planet.
Absolutely can not stand that term at all. And no, I did not read this thread. No matter which way you try to sugar coat it: IT'S NOT A G'DAMN SPORT.
EDIT: I'm not directing this towards anyone in particular unless you have the mindset of the thing that is called "E-sports"
There's actually a lot of money in e-Sports. Look at Starcraft in South Korea. There are players who participate ranging in ages 15 to nearly 30 and the most successful players are banking as high as six figure salaries. Players your own age (such as Lim Yo Hwan aka Slayers Boxer) are set for life thanks to 'dumb, non-existant e-Sports.'
Extreme;7009431']Diablo 2 was largely a PvP game. If you think the majority of players were building character after character so they could run baal 1000 times you're fooling yourself. Some people may do that, but the majority of people we're building duelers.
Not Diablo 2 .. LOD is probably a PvP game because blizzard ****ed up with the PvE part of the game when they released LOD.
There was a lot of PVP before LOD too but the PvE part was so much better. Well now that I post I have to say, even the pvp was better.
FreshMeat
01-06-2009, 19:06
reading this older thread.... guildwars is changing so that the game in version 2 will have many more levels and you cant just auto-unlock skills for pvp as easily. more rpg, less micro managed unlocking.
so it failed even there
hello
diablo wi fi sharing works only in local area network, not in internet
so, you can share only if you have a card at your home to another receiver in the same home
lazylink
22-06-2009, 19:34
reading this older thread.... guildwars is changing so that the game in version 2 will have many more levels and you cant just auto-unlock skills for pvp as easily. more rpg, less micro managed unlocking.
so it failed even there
No, there isn't a "version 2" of Guild Wars, there's a new MMO called Guild Wars 2. The reason why Guild Wars 2 will be different from Guild Wars is the same reason why D3 will have autostat distribution... because its Diablo 3 not Diablo 2-the revision! The unlocking system in Guild Wars worked very well, you could unlock all the items you wanted for a certain build in about one day (3 hours of gameplay), and with the recent changes, it's even faster. The Guild Wars system certainly did not fail, it's just that Guild Wars 2 is not Guild Wars.
Risingred
24-06-2009, 21:45
JW has been quoted as saying that Diablo 3 is not intended and never will be an e-sport game, but that doesn't mean that the potential isn't there or it won't evolve on its own. You never really know.
People talk about it being balanced...no matter how well they balance Diablo 3, one side will suffer. You cannot have a PVE game and a PVP game perfectly balanced and in harmony with each other. Especially in this genre.
A large part of the Diablo II community plays the game purely to make PVP characters and duel with them. Several communities have an active playerbase with their own rules (since Diablo II isn't balanced for PVP) and participate in ranked ladders and special tournaments. Diablo as a game is quite good for a competitive game, because of the nice overview of the battle. But it has several problems in Diablo II.
I propose a Guild Wars PVP system to make Diablo III PVP eSports applicable where people can make maxed out characters and unlock items, prefixes etc on a specific realm. Diablo more than Guild Wars is suitable, because Guild Wars has less freedom to move. The problem with Diablo II is that items are too important and it makes it hard to just get into PVP, because you first need to make a PVP character with specific PVP items, sometimes very expensive items that new people just don't have. This makes it bad as an eSport.
World of Warcraft has the problem of mixed PVE and PVP, Blizzard balances something in PVP and it needs to be balanced in PVE at the same time, this is not very handy. Also, World of Warcraft is rock-paper-scissors based, which is not very smart, cause you in theory can never win as scissors playing versus rock. I'm very happy that Diablo III has only 5 classes, so balancing should be somewhat easy.
So, you make your maxed out character. Distribute your stats/skills and start with a basic equipment. While playing some matches you unlock credits that you can turn in at a NPC to unlock for example the King's prefix, or maybe you buy a Stone of Jordan for your character. Or maybe you want to be able to have another prefix on your item, so you can have 2 prefixes on that item instead of 1 (Rare instead of Magical). This way, while playing PVP you can get items not luck based, but skills (and time) based. You can have Random Team battles, or Arranged Team battles, Ranked Battles for ladder or just practice battles. Battle.net 2.0 will be able to do these things very handy. Also Blizzard can balance PVP and PVE separatly, so that if Fireball is to powerful in PVP they can just fix it for PVP. We need replays, live coverage, betting system (I bet 10.000 gold on this guy etc) and it will be very fun.
This way we can also have Diablo III tournaments at Blizzcon etc.
Maybe you guys think this looks too much like WoW Arena, and maybe it is. But I think Diablo's isometric view is far superior as a tactical action PVP system. Also the problems with WoW Arena (level new character to 70 or 80 in WOTKL, balancing in PVP changes gameplay in PVE and visa-versa, rock-paper-scissor model) make it less suitable. Blizzard can make a new fresh start at Diablo III and it will be a succes.
Sorry for the Wall of Text.
It could definitely happen. But you gotta' remember, this game is a hack-n-slash. The term hack-n-slash automatically removes it from the big boys in esports. Like WoW arena, a hack and slash PVP battle can never get as complex as a WoW arena fight, or a StarCraft 2 match. It's a hack-n-slash down to its roots, though there is some skill required, it wouldn't be treated like an RTS.
But you know, it's too early to say even then. For all we know they could add a whole new twist in the game and skills, and make it viable for esports.
If it's anythign like Diablo II's pvp, you can bet your ****ing marbles it won't be an esport.
It could definitely happen. But you gotta' remember, this game is a hack-n-slash. The term hack-n-slash automatically removes it from the big boys in esports. Like WoW arena, a hack and slash PVP battle can never get as complex as a WoW arena fight, or a StarCraft 2 match. It's a hack-n-slash down to its roots, though there is some skill required, it wouldn't be treated like an RTS.
But you know, it's too early to say even then. For all we know they could add a whole new twist in the game and skills, and make it viable for esports.
If it's anythign like Diablo II's pvp, you can bet your ****ing marbles it won't be an esport.
I don't think they will make pvp in hack n' slash manner. Year ago D3 team said they want fully balanced pvp, and they also talked about how they care for e-sport and how they want to stabilize "dmg vs hp" in order to avoid 1-2 hits = dead. Maybe they changed their mind, but I doubt it.
wizAdept
13-07-2009, 19:59
I don't think they will make pvp in hack n' slash manner. Year ago D3 team said they want fully balanced pvp, and they also talked about how they care for e-sport and how they want to stabilize "dmg vs hp" in order to avoid 1-2 hits = dead. Maybe they changed their mind, but I doubt it.
Personally I think this was one of the merits of d2 pvp, that characters die so fast.
Even capped out characters with perfect charms can get knocked out in a few hits from most pvp builds. ~2-4 hit pks are not uncommon in d2 pvp. This allows for comebacks and very quick turnovers in duels, the focus becomes getting those unanswered hits and avoiding your opponents hits through gameplay. I really hope d3 is more of the same, with builds being able to kill each other very very quickly if one player slips up for just a few frames.
RogueJuggalo
13-07-2009, 22:37
Personally I think this was one of the merits of d2 pvp, that characters die so fast.
Even capped out characters with perfect charms can get knocked out in a few hits from most pvp builds. ~2-4 hit pks are not uncommon in d2 pvp. This allows for comebacks and very quick turnovers in duels, the focus becomes getting those unanswered hits and avoiding your opponents hits through gameplay. I really hope d3 is more of the same, with builds being able to kill each other very very quickly if one player slips up for just a few frames.
I agree with this completely. The only thing I would like to see change about PvP in D3 is to have the classes balanced better so that some builds don't have huge advantages over others in PvP. That would make the focus be more on skill rather than 'dammit that barb just killed my sorc, I'll bring my hammerdin now' and 'oh man he's bringing his hammerdin, let me get on my trapper'
If that problem was fixed then players would be forced to reflect on their performance and their choices made during the duel and then determine where they went wrong and how to improve in order to win as opposed to just switching characters like in the example I gave above. If somehow D3 was able to have PvP balanced near-perfectly (or perfectly, maybe we'll get lucky like in Starcraft!) then the level of play and competition in PvP would progressively get higher and higher; maybe to the point where it would actually be interesting to watch.
wizAdept
13-07-2009, 23:25
I agree with this completely. The only thing I would like to see change about PvP in D3 is to have the classes balanced better so that some builds don't have huge advantages over others in PvP. That would make the focus be more on skill rather than 'dammit that barb just killed my sorc, I'll bring my hammerdin now' and 'oh man he's bringing his hammerdin, let me get on my trapper'
If that problem was fixed then players would be forced to reflect on their performance and their choices made during the duel and then determine where they went wrong and how to improve in order to win as opposed to just switching characters like in the example I gave above. If somehow D3 was able to have PvP balanced near-perfectly (or perfectly, maybe we'll get lucky like in Starcraft!) then the level of play and competition in PvP would progressively get higher and higher; maybe to the point where it would actually be interesting to watch.
Ya. The problem with d2 1v1 pvp is there are too many hard counters, most classes will have some matchup where its 1:9 or 0:10 in class balance and there is just nothing they can do for that matchup but bring in another character. Hopefully d3 will have less of these hard counters for specific classes and have very limited absorbing skills/items which act as a hard counter to any elemental class in d2.
One redeeming thing about d2 class balance however is in team duels a few team members can make up for the hard counters to one of teammates may have vs an opposing team member. Trappers can function fine in teams while being absorbed. A smiter may think twice about charging at a zon when she is trying to lure him into a hammer/leap field.
A lot of classes you would see more in 1v1 or pub duels struggle with teams however.
Im hoping that d3 is a bit more organized pvp and duels with more thought on class balance and perhaps a hard-code enforced ruleset for pvp that would be different than the pvm game? With d2 gm dueling it's based on so many soft rules players just follow, like not spamming juvs or carrying tp scrolls. Kinda nice on one hand how d2 is an open ended sandbox pvp for players to just mess around with and do whatever makes them happy, but makes more competitive play difficult to organize since every pvp community has it's own spin on the ruleset.
This is one of the reasons Im really sad to hear there will be no pk in d3. I would really like for that open ended sandbox pvp to exist as well as arena type duels in d3, both have their merits. Thats getting a bit off topic though. Back to looking forward to d3 having more organized and balanced pvp.
Death_of_Angels
15-07-2009, 06:14
So far i've seen a couple issues in this thread.
issue no 1: the haters
screw the haters, they're worthless anyways. If you guys (and you know who you are) have something against pvp, why are you even in the pvp forum? Go baal running or something.
issue number 2: the items
ok, so for the first real issue, the items are obviously imbalanced based on how hard they are to obtain, as they should be. I think the easiest way to solve this from a dev standpoint would be to assign a numerical value to all of the items, or to various prefixes etc. that add up in a way so that the player could easily tell whether or not another player is significantly better or worse than them. this would obviously be pretty hard, but if blizzard was seroius about competitive pvp, i think they'd do something like this.
also, the separate pvp mode in the game i think is a great idea, where you get access to every weapon in the game and a maxed out char to do with what you like. obviously it would have to be more fleshed out, but it's a good concept nonetheless.
issue no. 3: builds
so a lot of people are saying that certain builds are just inherently better than others, which is true, but this can be overcome. In starcraft aka the most balanced game ever created, certain build orders have been considered inferior to others since the game came out. What has happened though through time is that the best players analyze those build orders and figure out how to beat them. then the players using the previously unbeatable BO are no screwed, find a way to beat the now unbeatable build order. low and behold, this new build order is easily countered by another standard BO, so now it comes full circle. that's called meta-game.
also, contrary to popular belief *cough* 1.13 *cough*, blizzard is actually capable of making patches and balance fixes when there are glaring deficiencies that can't be fixed via good play. these will come.
the last issue is purely player preference. some people don't like pvp, some people don't like pve, just like some people don't like rpgs or rts and so on. Just play what you like for god sake and stop griefing the people who aren't your goddamn clones.
Fackelare
15-07-2009, 07:58
the last issue is purely player preference. some people don't like pvp, some people don't like pve, just like some people don't like rpgs or rts and so on. Just play what you like for god sake and stop griefing the people who aren't your goddamn clones.
The big issue is ofcourse what Blizzard did to WoW. A lot of changes had to be made in order to balance PvP fighting (for which the original was not intended). This is what many people fear will happen to diablo III.
But both games are in essence completely different, will the same balance issues that plague WoW also have an effect on Diablo III if they were to implement a real PvP mode?
What you ofcourse could do is make sure that the balancing of PvP is seperated from the balancing of PvM, this will ensure that skills such as confusion and fear will work in PvM, but not (or less well) in a PvP setting. If the balance would revolve around both PvM and PvP skills such as the necromancers Cripple and Clay Golem would need to be altered (since we all know that they are pretty good in PvP), but this would allow a build less in PvM setting. A lot (okay not a lot, but at least some) builds would not be possible if they were to balance the game for PvP. Seeing as you people here like PvP, you wouldn't see it as a problem, but the diehard PvM people will want to have the most possible builds to explore (since this is what diablo II made good, in my mind at least, the possibilities are endless).
So either you balance around the total, which would in some ways limit PvM, or you could have two seperate balance systems. Although the last is pretty elite, since the skills would in essence work differently in PvP than they do in PvM (so you need the knowledge of all the skills and balance to compete), rather than you can test them in PvM and use them in PvP. Although I would not see a big problem with this. Since diablo is primarily a cooperative ARPG, PvM should be central with no comprimises. So a seperate PvP balance system could and should be implemented.
But this does mean that you will have two systems that need to be balanced (with the PvP needing the best balance). This will mean more work for the balancing teams, but as opposed to WoW, we do not have the steady influx of new gear and skills, so the balance should be maintainable once it is in place. The only problem is, although we only have 5 classes, the number of builds are endless. Either all builds should be balanced, or some builds should be made better for PvP than others, so each class has two or three competative builds, which would be easier to balance. But this goes against the Diablo feel, where we have so much choice in buildstyle.
Another way of trying to balance the system would be, not to do it manually, but automate it. Since all the balance in WoW is being done manually (at least I assume) it needs a lot of attention, maintainance and manhours. You could implement a system that, by collecting data from battlenet2, could assess which builds are doing better than other, where the primairy damage source lies, and why they are winning. The system could dynamically change the percentages of damage, skill bonus, or item bonus. This would probably be less easy to implement than I make it sound, but it should be possible and even feasable (assuming you could make a system that increases the strength of non-played specs, since there is no data on specs that are not made, but doesn't promote non-specs through the balancing (non-specs being random point distributions in the skill tree that no one uses)).
However that leads us to the following problem (if it is truly a problem...). People will have made some cookiecutter build to be better than the rest, but when their build is automatically toned down, they will not be happy. Since they cannot change their skills (assumption). Is this a problem that blizzard has to acknowledge, or should the whiners just be ignored (probably bad business).
And some further notes to people who think that the balance could and should be there once the game comes out, it is impossible to think of all the specs people will make and explore, thus it is impossible to balance every spec manually before the game even comes out. The only thing they could do is wait for people to find new specs and kill them off (sounds unpleasant indeed).
All in all, if anyone could pull it off, it is blizzard, but should they? (The majority of players are PvM and PvP did work (to some degree) in diablo II, thus will also work in diablo III if they ignore it completely again...)
RogueJuggalo
15-07-2009, 21:16
Ya. The problem with d2 1v1 pvp is there are too many hard counters, most classes will have some matchup where its 1:9 or 0:10 in class balance and there is just nothing they can do for that matchup but bring in another character. Hopefully d3 will have less of these hard counters for specific classes and have very limited absorbing skills/items which act as a hard counter to any elemental class in d2.
One redeeming thing about d2 class balance however is in team duels a few team members can make up for the hard counters to one of teammates may have vs an opposing team member. Trappers can function fine in teams while being absorbed. A smiter may think twice about charging at a zon when she is trying to lure him into a hammer/leap field.
A lot of classes you would see more in 1v1 or pub duels struggle with teams however.
Im hoping that d3 is a bit more organized pvp and duels with more thought on class balance and perhaps a hard-code enforced ruleset for pvp that would be different than the pvm game? With d2 gm dueling it's based on so many soft rules players just follow, like not spamming juvs or carrying tp scrolls. Kinda nice on one hand how d2 is an open ended sandbox pvp for players to just mess around with and do whatever makes them happy, but makes more competitive play difficult to organize since every pvp community has it's own spin on the ruleset.
This is one of the reasons Im really sad to hear there will be no pk in d3. I would really like for that open ended sandbox pvp to exist as well as arena type duels in d3, both have their merits. Thats getting a bit off topic though. Back to looking forward to d3 having more organized and balanced pvp.
Again, I completely 100% agree. It's awesome to see someone on the same wavelength here.
As for balance between PvP and PvM, I'd say to balance PvP first and then PvM. If characters are outputting enough damage to kill each other in one hit all the time, then tone down their damage until various classes/builds have a balanced damage:life ratio. Once that is set, the monsters hp/dmg could be set and adjusted so that with the set stats for players, the monsters could be strengthened/weakened accordingly.
It makes sense to me, someone please point out any flaws with this logic. It seems like it would be relatively easy to balance PvM after PvP was balanced as opposed to balancing PvP after PvM. There are too many factors and variables in PvM that, once established, cannot be easily tweaked while balancing PvP. For example, if a character is doing ideal damage vs a monster but too much vs a player, then the characters damage cannot be reduced because it would disrupt pvm (without significant changes there).
However, if PvP was balanced first, then PvM would be relatively easy because if the character is doing too much damage to a monster then the monsters hp could be given a boost and the fix would not interfere with PvP balance.
Does this make sense? It seems to obvious to me, there's gotta be some flaw that is going to make me look dumb, haha. :crazyeyes:
Death_of_Angels
16-07-2009, 00:43
@ Fackelare; ya i agree that what happened in WoW is a big issue, i just don't play WoW and thus have no idea what is so bad about the pvp in WoW. I would have to agree with roguejuggalo in that the best way to implement pvp would be to build the characters with the intention of pvp, and then balance the monsters for the character designs.
I disagree with the notion of automating pvp though, because a big part of any sort of pvp is figuring out how to make superior builds, and then figuring out how to beat superior builds. If you constantly nerf superior builds, then that element is completley taken out of the game.
Thaquitz
16-07-2009, 01:18
There's actually a lot of money in e-Sports. Look at Starcraft in South Korea. There are players who participate ranging in ages 15 to nearly 30 and the most successful players are banking as high as six figure salaries. Players your own age (such as Lim Yo Hwan aka Slayers Boxer) are set for life thanks to 'dumb, non-existant e-Sports.'
He never said that it wasn't lucrative or profitable. He said its not a sport. I agree. Is it an activity? Yes, and its a real, tangible one that no one tried to dispute. Is it a sport? Come on, get real.
RogueJuggalo
16-07-2009, 02:03
He never said that it wasn't lucrative or profitable. He said its not a sport. I agree. Is it an activity? Yes, and its a real, tangible one that no one tried to dispute. Is it a sport? Come on, get real.
Starcraft is a eSport. Starcraft is competitive and it requires skill. Starcraft is athletic because it requires participants to be in strong mental and physical strength. Playing a series of games at a constant 300+ APM (actions per minute) requires a great deal of dexterity, endurance, and precision. Players must also maintain the proper physical posture and form. Progamers have very strong hands and considerable physical endurance.
If a competitive activity (such as Starcraft) that requires skill and physical strength/endurance is not a sport, then would you be as so kind as to enlighten me as to what the true definition of 'sport' is?
Thaquitz
16-07-2009, 03:01
Way to hype up skills used for many, many things that will never be called sports. And way to over hype the physical aspect of computer gaming. With the generally accepted definitions, I must give in and say sure it can be called a sport. Does it take a unique set of skills and thinking? Sure it does. But to say its athletic is just going to far. Physical Strength? The same "strength" that's needed to perform basic activities in life? Get real man.
Fackelare
16-07-2009, 07:48
Do not let this thread derail into the discussion of the semantic meaning of the word sport...
If a competitive activity (such as Starcraft) that requires skill and physical strength/endurance is not a sport, then would you be as so kind as to enlighten me as to what the true definition of 'sport' is?
"1 a: a source of diversion " is the main defenition webster gives you, and words can be used for something different than the original meaning was. (Language changes!) If people want to call it eSports because there are great similarities between what meaning they believe sport has and the activity they describe here as PvP, let them call it an esport, sport, or wimblenumble for all I care.
This discussion is not about what constitutes a sport in your minds, so try to keep it that way!
As for balance between PvP and PvM, I'd say to balance PvP first and then PvM. If characters are outputting enough damage to kill each other in one hit all the time, then tone down their damage until various classes/builds have a balanced damage:life ratio. Once that is set, the monsters hp/dmg could be set and adjusted so that with the set stats for players, the monsters could be strengthened/weakened accordingly.
This assumes too much, namely that PvP can be balanced around a game with that much freedom as diablo. (Specs, items, anything could be varied, and you yourself say that finding out what specs there are and how to counter them is fun, but if the game is balanced Blizzard should have already done it!)
Another big flaw in your logic is that you assume when people are balanced for PvP, you can balance PvM solely with changes to the monsters! This is not always the case, some things might work better in PvP than in PvM, and thus there will be some difference in the killing speed of the players, either they will not be as effective against the same monsters, or you need to adjust the health and damage of the monsters to each possible build there can be, which of course is not an option!
Also, as I already stated, balancing PvP (which I don't think is possible without the data of millions of players finding things out, brute force style) will limit the skills needlessly. Things that could well work for PvM (and be fun too) could not even be possible in PvP, thus limiting the PvM aspect of a game that is first and foremost a cooperative ARPG (not PvP).
I disagree with the notion of automating pvp though, because a big part of any sort of pvp is figuring out how to make superior builds, and then figuring out how to beat superior builds. If you constantly nerf superior builds, then that element is completley taken out of the game.
I still think that such an automated system could work (and may be even the best solution), but perhaps in a more thought out version. It could take an arbitrary amount of time before changes are made, they need not be instantanious, you could also let people decide which changes need to be made when and they use the system only for guidance. There are numerous benefits to an automated system (as long as you can root out any abuse to try and influence it), it is just, fair, makes no wrong decisions, and no one can argue that they do not know the classes (since it has all the data).
But it is indeed a valid concern that you do not want to overbalance it, since people will need to come up with strategies before they can beat people.
(another concern would be how do you balance a class which is very bad when played bad, but very good when played well (not only for an automated system), does it need to be toned down, because good players perform too well, or improved because bad players can't do well enough (the bad could also be good players, with the good players being the ultimate I-have-no-life diablo-er, don't just dismiss it with the mention of casuals and such...))
GuardianHadriel
16-07-2009, 12:04
yeah, buying items online destroys some of the game...some 12 y/o gets to borrow his mothers credit card and suddenly he has the best items in the game...baah
RogueJuggalo
16-07-2009, 16:21
Way to hype up skills used for many, many things that will never be called sports. And way to over hype the physical aspect of computer gaming. With the generally accepted definitions, I must give in and say sure it can be called a sport. Does it take a unique set of skills and thinking? Sure it does. But to say its athletic is just going to far. Physical Strength? The same "strength" that's needed to perform basic activities in life? Get real man.
Few people can play at 300-400 APM, let alone for hours on end. Just like how few people can dunk like Jordan or run like Emmit Smith.Hand-eye coordination is a part of sports and everyday life. Lifting things and movements are also a part of everyday life.
Jumping over a puddle is not considered a sport but jumping to block a shot is part of a sport. This is because not everyone can jump like that because of physical limitations, just as 300+ APM is part of the sport Starcraft. Not everyone has the physical capability to do what progamers do.
You cannot prove your claim that Starcraft is not a sport by attacking my claim. You're making me provide more specific examples and elaborate more on my claim. I have more evidence and logical explanations to argue that Starcraft is a sport. This will be my last post on this topic unless you can elevate your debate beyond 'get real man.'
Zanbato--Sui Ryu
17-07-2009, 06:01
Again, I completely 100% agree. It's awesome to see someone on the same wavelength here.
As for balance between PvP and PvM, I'd say to balance PvP first and then PvM. If characters are outputting enough damage to kill each other in one hit all the time, then tone down their damage until various classes/builds have a balanced damage:life ratio. Once that is set, the monsters hp/dmg could be set and adjusted so that with the set stats for players, the monsters could be strengthened/weakened accordingly.
It makes sense to me, someone please point out any flaws with this logic. It seems like it would be relatively easy to balance PvM after PvP was balanced as opposed to balancing PvP after PvM. There are too many factors and variables in PvM that, once established, cannot be easily tweaked while balancing PvP. For example, if a character is doing ideal damage vs a monster but too much vs a player, then the characters damage cannot be reduced because it would disrupt pvm (without significant changes there).
However, if PvP was balanced first, then PvM would be relatively easy because if the character is doing too much damage to a monster then the monsters hp could be given a boost and the fix would not interfere with PvP balance.
Does this make sense? It seems to obvious to me, there's gotta be some flaw that is going to make me look dumb, haha. :crazyeyes:
Homogenization of gear in a gear based game? To truly balance pvp in a game like this the gear choices will suffer. WoW used to have crazy cool rng gear (read:flavor) for example. Now every upgrade is just +2 stat here, +2 crit there. Its boring.
RogueJuggalo
17-07-2009, 13:36
Another big flaw in your logic is that you assume when people are balanced for PvP, you can balance PvM solely with changes to the monsters! This is not always the case, some things might work better in PvP than in PvM, and thus there will be some difference in the killing speed of the players, either they will not be as effective against the same monsters, or you need to adjust the health and damage of the monsters to each possible build there can be, which of course is not an option!
I agree that some things would work better in PvP and not as well in PvM. That is a choice that the player should make when starting the character. If characters could be incredibly effective at both PvM and PvP then builds would be extremely limited.
As for balancing PvM via tweaking the monsters stats, I still think it's feasible. Let's say Frozen Orb is too strong versus Fallens but Fireball and Chain Lightning are both balanced . The Cold Resistance of the Fallens could be raised to compensate. The same idea could be used by tweaking defense, attack rating, damage, etc.
Also, as I already stated, balancing PvP (which I don't think is possible without the data of millions of players finding things out, brute force style) will limit the skills needlessly. Things that could well work for PvM (and be fun too) could not even be possible in PvP, thus limiting the PvM aspect of a game that is first and foremost a cooperative ARPG (not PvP).
Hopefully in-house testing and the alpha/beta would provide a solid starting point for balance. Any issues that arise could be addressed with patches.
Homogenization of gear in a gear based game? To truly balance pvp in a game like this the gear choices will suffer. WoW used to have crazy cool rng gear (read:flavor) for example. Now every upgrade is just +2 stat here, +2 crit there. Its boring.
I was thinking along the lines of skills and character builds. I didn't even mention gear. I think most everyone can agree that players with superior gear should have an edge over players with inferior gear.
Zanbato--Sui Ryu
17-07-2009, 14:27
I think most everyone can agree that players with superior gear should have an edge over players with inferior gear.
I totally agree with this. The thing is, it wouldnt be balanced for "esport" pvp.
There is a reason WoW arena uses premade chars on a separate realm for esport play. To take away all the gear variables. D3 would have to do the same.
I didn't even mention gear.
It makes sense to me, someone please point out any flaws with this logic.
Gear balance for eport play is HUGE. :D
RogueJuggalo
17-07-2009, 22:24
I totally agree with this. The thing is, it wouldnt be balanced for "esport" pvp.
There is a reason WoW arena uses premade chars on a separate realm for esport play. To take away all the gear variables. D3 would have to do the same.
Gear balance for eport play is HUGE. :D
I recognize this, I actually proposed an idea to address that earlier in this thread with this post:
I think that the best way to create a PvP realm would be to base it off 100% skill. To do that is simple, allow all players to have access to any legitimate item in the game and start them with a character at the maximum level with all skill and stat points available from levels and from quests. From here, allow players to customize their character however they choose to and then participate in 1v1 PvP or separate team ladders.
This method would eliminate the time requirement to be a competitive PvP player, and if the requirement of time/PvE in order to be viable in PvP appeals to you, then PvP on a normal realm. There can be ladders for them as well. This would allow for all types of PvP players to be satisfied.
The first system I propose which relies 100% on skill would be similar to StarCraft's balance if Blizzard balances the items and characters as well as they've balanced the races and units in StarCraft. In my opinion, having to unlock items or play PvE and magic find/trade forever in order to obtain the best items for PvP in a competitive ladder is like making a competitive StarCraft player have to play campaigns and challenges vs AI in order to unlock a unit or building. It would limit their potential based on the time that they have to play. On the other hand, when skill is the only determining factor the game will be incredibly competitive for a very long time, maybe even truly eSport viable at that point. People loved to watch Boxer and see his unbelievable micro because of the skill and finesse it took, not because he got it as a random drop because he beat the final level of the campaign 24830 times.
When I asked if there were any obvious flaws with my logic I was referring to my idea that it would be easier to balance PvP first and then PvM rather than PvM and then PvP.
AeroGear
14-09-2009, 16:48
The last thing I want is a throng of nerds complaining about PvP imbalances when the game (D3) is clearly released and developped as a PvM Solo/coop game, ergo a dungeon crawler.
It happened to WoW, it pretty much created 2 distinct communities that fight constantly on the forums, and it shifts the balance and gameplay around to the point of being annoying.
Feel free to roam around in the starter area, sporting your uber geared char with a pvp mindset (optimal hp, cast rate etc.) but dont expect or ask for talents and items specifically built around pvp.
Comparing competitive play from an RTS to competitive play in a RPG is invalid is so many ways...
sunkenfaith
14-09-2009, 18:02
i really hope this does not happen... unless they really make the pvp and arena extremely good.
HappyAssassin
16-09-2009, 03:38
I hope Diablo 3 doesn't become an "eSport." More balanced, competitive PvP, that's great. PvP gaming takes on an inflated importance all on its own without people trying to designate it a sport.
By the way, video games are not sports. eSports are just like chess or competitive scrabble- a competitive game played at a very high level. If gamers want to consider themselves athletes because they have great thumb speed on an Xbox controller, they can go ahead. I guess there's a self-esteem boost associated with it. No one outside of South Korea takes the idea seriously.
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.