By the way, what's the point in having two different battlenets for respecing or not?
Forgive me for quoting myself, but I feel like I've already made this point quite effectively.
"Just like the Cow level was abused to tediously but efficiently level characters in a way devoid of any challenge, skill resets would give players an incentive to play the game in an uninteresting, easy way. Why? Every character would use the same efficiency maximizing build to clear any potential speed bumps before speccing into something unique...
"... there would be no reason to level a character using anything but an efficient leveling build. No point farming bosses with anything but an efficient farming build. And so forth. Part of what made Diablo II interesting was that, with a few exceptions, no build was good at everything, and making a particular character was occasionally a challenge...
"Committing to, say, a Geomancer Druid took some gumption. The early levels were difficult, and the build never really blossomed until sometime in Nightmare. It was a fun, challenging experience that, had there been an option to fully respec, would not have been necessary. Making a Geomancer Druid would have been as simple as playing Feral for fifty levels and then respeccing. Diablo II would have been the worse for it."
My argument in a nutshell - being forced into a single build promotes challenge. Challenge is the lifeblood of any good computer game. If some players want more challenge than others, there is no reason not to segregate them. We already have Ladder and non-Ladder, Battle.net and Open Battle.net, and Hardcore and non-Hardcore, after all.
Quote:
IMO the value of a character is derived from the fun you have playing them, and if you wanted to use the same skills all the way through, then why not choose to ignore the respec option?
Because overcoming a self-imposed limitation isn't fun.|||I believe things shouldn't be too easy in diablo. It's not an easy childrens game. It's hardcore reality - or it wants to mimic reality. Therefore, total respecs or large respecs that allow you to change your build doesn't fit with the brutality of the game - goes for a lot of other things too.
So the respecs have to be limited. Yet limited respecs don't make any difference. If you can change 3 skill points out of a total of 110, it's unimportant. It's totally obsolete, there isn't a single mainstream DII build that is made unhellable with 3 wrong points. So you have to change to a total of 15-25 points to make a difference. Yet that many point means that people can change builds at higher levels, which doesn't fit with the brutality of the game IMHO.
Therefore, I believe that the best option is to make respecs as large as they need - lets say 15 points - yet make them totally level based. At any point in the game, you can change your last 5 points spend with a maximum of 15 points. This prevents people from changing builds at higher level - as 5 points are the max there - yet it allows people to change small mistakes as the venture through the game. Forinstance, you made a cold sorcerer with max orb, it's synergy and cold mastery. And you want to pick a second element. You try out of lightning yet feel that the spells don't fit you playing style. If you notice this soon enough, you can change 5 points - almost all points if you notice soon enough - to the fire tree.
That way, you allow people to correct mistakes, yet prevent them from changing builds drastically at higher levels while keeping leveling organic and encourging experimentation - as you can try a skills and if it isn't your thing, you can change it. Seems like the best combination of the two extremes.|||Cliffs at bottom
I'm against the idea of full respecs.
I believe you should be allowed to re-allocate one point every 10 levels.
When I was playing D2 I had alot of fun learning how to play the game. What's the big hassle over making a few fail characters, you still have fun making them and they better prepare you when you make the next. It also lets you know what's viable at certain stages of the game. Struggling through Normal with a long-term build is challenging and fun. Especially when you have the satisfaction of seeing your hard work pay off when you get into the harder difficulties.
Also, unless your just putting skills into everything just to see what is what, who really needs more than 1 skill point per 10 levels? Most people make a character with a basic plan covering the growth of that character. So since you already have a basic layout, you only need to beable to fix skills that you accidentally got.
I agree with Doctrinaire that being able to fully respec a character, even if you can only do it a few times will break the game.
Instead of working towards a build that will get you through Normal, Nightmare and Hell you can now respec and cruise through alot easier, then when your at the end just change everything up and make your character a gun at MF so you can feed any other chars you make.
No challenge.
I disagree with splitting up battle.net into Respec and Non-Respec factions as well. Simply because splitting up the gaming community when you don't need to is never any good. It develops rifts between the communities. I know it's split up into hardcore and softcore, but that's aimed at two different levels of players, not two different wants of players.
Also, telling half the gaming community to "don't use it if you don't want to" is not the best way to find a solution to a problem.
Cliffs:
- 1 respec point every 10 levels
- Basically planning of characters is common, so whole respecs arn't needed
- Further splitting Bnet just fractures the gaming community
- RPG = Questing, exploring and learning|||Quote:
Therefore, I believe that the best option is to make respecs as large as they need - lets say 15 points - yet make them totally level based. At any point in the game, you can change your last 5 points spend with a maximum of 15 points. This prevents people from changing builds at higher level - as 5 points are the max there - yet it allows people to change small mistakes as the venture through the game.
That way, you allow people to correct mistakes, yet prevent them from changing builds drastically at higher levels while keeping leveling organic and encourging experimentation - as you can try a skills and if it isn't your thing, you can change it. Seems like the best combination of the two extremes.
Agree, nobody wants full respecs in D3 ( i.e full skill tree reset ), i think most people who want respecs want a limited form that allows controlled and limited changes in a certain build .. not changing builds completely.
Quote:
I disagree with splitting up battle.net into Respec and Non-Respec factions as well. Simply because splitting up the gaming community when you don't need to is never any good. It develops rifts between the communities. I know it's split up into hardcore and softcore, but that's aimed at two different levels of players, not two different wants of players.
Splitting the community for respecs is a bad idea indeed.
Quote:
I'm against the idea of full respecs.
I believe you should be allowed to re-allocate one point every 10 levels.
Cliffs:
- 1 respec point every 10 levels
- Basically planning of characters is common, so whole respecs arn't needed
- Further splitting Bnet just fractures the gaming community
- RPG = Questing, exploring and learning
Allow me to slightly disagree, that approach makes respecs obsolete (like NASE said), they need to be limited (i.e not full resets) but also need to allow enough changes and experimentation to give people a reason to use them.
Here my take on repecs:-
-1 respec = the ability to reallocate ONE skill point (not a full skill tree reset)
-Player gets 5 respec points every 10 charater level ups
-Respec points are unstockable --> they have to be used before the next level up.
-Allows for --> fixing mistakes / adapting to new items and game changes by shifting points from an undesired skill to a desired one / experimenting with some new skills temporarily
-Doesn't allow for --> changing builds on the fly / abuse of skill system
I see no serious flaws whatsoever with this system.
|||Only ONE full respec once you finish hell mode. After that nada. 
So if you make a mistake, suck it up, endure all the way.
Hey my first D2 paladin back in 1.09 had 15 pts into Energy, no big deal.
I still hit around 1k hp (no CTA's last time). My block was still max, strength was not too much needed (Gris armor + HOZ were pretty light on strength reqs) since I finish the game with Lightsabre ??! Oh I made a mistake and put 20 points into Concentration and then put another 20 into fana. As a result, I could not max zeal in time, only could max Holy Shield but luckily my weapon was ITD so I cruised through Hell pretty much all the time. Heck I even had 8 pts in Vengence and 10 in Conviction.
Biggest mistake in my diablo 2 bnet history.
And I still remember him fondly.
But most enjoyable ?
Definitely.|||Quote:
Only ONE full respec once you finish hell mode. After that nada.
So if you make a mistake, suck it up, endure all the way.
That makes the whole idea obsolete, i don't think that's how Blizz wants to implement the idea of respecs, sigh .. why are they torturing us like that .. i hope the reveal some new info already
|||Quote:Splitting the community for respecs is a bad idea indeed.
Probably, but I would rather have a split community than full respecs.
Quote:
Here my take on repecs:-
-1 respec = the ability to reallocate ONE skill point (not a full skill tree reset)
-Player gets 5 respec points every 10 charater level ups
-Respec points are unstockable --> they have to be used before the next level up.
-Allows for --> fixing mistakes / adapting to new items and game changes by shifting points from an undesired skill to a desired one / experimenting with some new skills temporarily
-Doesn't allow for --> changing builds on the fly / abuse of skill system
I see no serious flaws whatsoever with this system.
I don't either. This looks pretty good.|||Is everbody forgeting what a great goldsink a full respecc system would be?
Or one where you pay for each point you want to respecc?
Might actuly give gold alot more value|||I think a full respec is a must in one case: when a new patch is released.
Back to the days when sinergies were introduced, I had to restart a lot of characters, cause of the change in the skill system.
So, if a patch is released with a lot of changes in the skills, I think we could have a full respec to rethink our choices.|||It sounds like the casual players want the respec and the hard core gamers don't. Making the respec come after you beat the game or at great cost would do the opposite. Blizzard needs to come up with a cost that the casual gamer is willing to pay and the hardcore gamer is not.
To solve this dilemma, I think the respec should cost skill points. ie: at any level, you can choose to spend your skill point on a 5 point respec instead of putting it into a skill. Of course the numbers don't have to be exactly that, it could be 3 skill points for a 10 point respec, or something like that.
I think this would keep the hardcore group from using the respec because you can't make a perfect 110 point build with only 90 points. On the other hand, the casual gamer will be willing to lose a few points to change their skills around.
Just my 2 cents. The important part is finding a cost that the casual gamer is willing to pay and the hardcore gamer is not. Any ideas?
没有评论:
发表评论