Blizzard ready to make Diablo 3?

[Fragbait]

Magic.  The hardest feature of a game to balance, IMO, is the tech/magic element.  I have no answers on this.  The key to success, IMO, in balance is how one crafts assymety, synergy, and counters.  The tendency toward cheese is extremely hard to overcome. 
[right][snapback]99653[/snapback][/right]

Hi,

On the relation between skills and patches
In Diablo I, everyone could learn the same spells (basically), and changes made to them over time (patches) affected all character classes.
In Diablo II, every character class had its own spells, and since the balancing has always been a difficult task, every patch changed the way certain spells work, and thereby changed the value of the character subclasses (“WW-Barb”,”Strafe-Bowama”). This was invigorating for long-time fun and annoying at the same time, since it rendered some of one’s hard-earned characters pretty inferior.
Now, how can this be improved? Do we want a universal spell system similar to the one in D I again? I don’t think so. While it is fun, one has to admit that there are only a handful of spells that are generally used – I’m thinking Fireball, Chain Lightning, Stone Curse, Mana Shield, Healing, Town Portal. Additionally I would take Fire Wall, Golem (Sorcerers sometimes), Lightning and Guardian in. This actually limits the different actions, and we see all “caster-like” classes use the same effective spells, and all “fighter-like” classes use the same defense spells and not much more.
The D II skill system has its advantages where eye-candy, diversion and plurality is concerned. What can be done to limit/abandon the drawbacks? If D III granted each character class some own spells, and some spells available to all classes, would that help? I’m thinking of 10 general spells, and maybe 2 skill trees with each 10 spells class-specific (or, for consistency's sake - 3 x 6). For example there could be a “sweeping blow” – barbarian [the main skill] with heavy focus on the “totem” tree [a bit like paladin auras / druid helpers], that would at the same time be able to cast “stone curse” and “mana shield” and “healing” like all other classes.

Let’s run through it:
Every class has access to the same vital spells: check.
There’s diversion and room for eye-candy: check.
Characters aren’t rendered useless via patches: no clear vote here. Patches could still nerf the major class specific spells and therefore significantly weaken the char.

How can this be avoided? 3 methods:
1. Abandon balance changes in patching.
2. Make balance changes in patching insignificant.
3. Let players alter their skill point setup when they see that a patch rendered their chars inferior.

Now, let’s face it: 1. is nearly impossible to implement. Programmers must have an option to nerf a class that seems to have passed by playtesting and got a clear advantage.
2. unfortunately is a contradiction in itself. If the balance change does alter next to nothing, why make it. Leaves us with 3. How can this be implemented?
In D II this was possible via cheat programs. Obviously this should not be promoted. An option could be to let players re-allocate all their skill-points whenever a new patch is released. Once allocated, however, these skill points can’t be altered again. Thereby players would be forced to inform themselves about the new patch, which skills / spells are strong now? Then they could make their new decisions.

The question is whether that’s desirable, or whether it doesn’t hurt to have patches crucially nerf certain chars. A patch just literally destroyed your char? So what! Make a new one, that’s more fun anyway!

I’m not sure to which side I’m leaning at the moment. I haven’t decided, yet.


Greetings, Fragbait