10-10-2012, 06:22 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2012, 06:24 AM by MongoJerry.)
I get the points that you're trying to make, but I don't buy them. NV stacks aren't a disincentive to experimentation, because you start a game with no NV stacks. If you want to experiment with a different build, start the game with the new build and see how it goes. If you change your mind and want to shift things around after you've killed an elite pack or two, that's fine, go ahead and do it. You had planned from the beginning to change things around after all. A small investment in experimenting with builds will pay off in later farming runs when you settle on a build you like.
Similarly, I don't buy the argument that it forces players into "cookie cutter" builds. Players tend to play in "cookie cutter" no matter what, because they find the build to be the best overall or at least for their own play-style. That has nothing to do with NV stacks. If you get rid of NV stacks, you'd simply shift to the situation to one where people play cookie cutter builds that are designed for specific encounters rather than general purpose cookie cutter builds.
I do agree, however, that NV stacks should carry over from Act to Act. This is especially true when going from Act III to Act IV, since it would make Act IV more useful. However, I don't see a problem with building up Neph stacks in Act I and proceeding to Act II or building stacks in Act II and proceeding to Act III, either.
One key reason for NV stacks that you didn't mention is the fact that it encourages players to stay in a game and kill a wide variety of monsters. Without NV stacks, players would most likely figure out which base monster elites are easiest to kill in an Act and keep rerolling games after killing the same boss/elite pack over and over. Welcome to Dialbo III's version of Pindle runs. No thank-you.
Similarly, I don't buy the argument that it forces players into "cookie cutter" builds. Players tend to play in "cookie cutter" no matter what, because they find the build to be the best overall or at least for their own play-style. That has nothing to do with NV stacks. If you get rid of NV stacks, you'd simply shift to the situation to one where people play cookie cutter builds that are designed for specific encounters rather than general purpose cookie cutter builds.
I do agree, however, that NV stacks should carry over from Act to Act. This is especially true when going from Act III to Act IV, since it would make Act IV more useful. However, I don't see a problem with building up Neph stacks in Act I and proceeding to Act II or building stacks in Act II and proceeding to Act III, either.
One key reason for NV stacks that you didn't mention is the fact that it encourages players to stay in a game and kill a wide variety of monsters. Without NV stacks, players would most likely figure out which base monster elites are easiest to kill in an Act and keep rerolling games after killing the same boss/elite pack over and over. Welcome to Dialbo III's version of Pindle runs. No thank-you.