kingcomrade
Kingcomrade
Lilura uses the same avatar as that one chick from way back when. Change your avatar, do you not realize the damage you are doing to fragile psyches
Akara respec was introduced with the 1.13 patch, which was released in 2010. Diablo 2 came out in 2000, so for 10 years there was no respec.Ahem, respec with Akara once-per-difficulty after completing Den of Evil.
freedictionary:No, you didn't say "not as good" you said "hitting its stride"I didn't say sub-par shit, I said not as good as what comes after 20h --- which is exactly what you said.
Fair enough. I mostly played Paladin builds like the Zealot, and if I remember correctly those rely on one or two clvl 30 auras and a zeal skill that shouldn't be too high (around 5 or 6). So it might have been less of an issue with other classes that have a greater number of useful skills available early on (e.g. Barb passive skills?). But I admit this is also something that has been alleviated by the introduction of synergies in patch 1.10.You generally don't save skillpoints that often, and not in a degree that even mildly adversely effects your power progression.
yes, and then I have to start from Act I all over again, which isn't very appealing for somebody who doesn't enjoy the majority of acts. I'm fine with that in a party-based game where you can try four or six completlely different builds in each runthrough, but for a game with the build variety of D2 and the restriction to one build per game, it would be nice if there was a less time-consuming way to try builds. E.g. a mode where you start on clvl40 in nightmare right way.You can do that [i.e. try different builds] with other builds in other games
Your reply doesn't apply, it's mostly a list of dungeons while I explicitly separated dungeons and outdoor stuff in the post. So I'm only talking about outdoor areas here.This has already been refuted by me,Most of the time they're just plain fields with little use of the z-axis, which would have made things more interesting
That's very nice for you, others don't. That brings us back to the thing I said already a few days ago, your "proofs" rely on peculiar axioms, and when people don't accept those axioms, you should try to make arguments that don't hinge on them or just stop the discussion right there. The first route strikes me as more interesting, for both parties. I'm not free of guilt here since I can't really engage with your arguments if we adopt your axioms about what the game should do and how much time it has to get the job done. But I also never claimed that my arguments hold in that case, see the next point.I and many others I know consider Normal -> Nightmare -> Hell to be three parts of one game
I've stated several times that the only reason I'm interested in the discussion is because it looks like you know a lot about the game, its mechanics, and so on. More than the average codexer, including myself. So exposure as an ignoramus isn't a factor because I have already said multiple times that you're the expert. Hell, in my first few posts I've been slobbering all over your cock in an effort to get something juicy out of you. That doesn't mean I have to swallow it all, though. I have my own opinion and my own way of approaching the game (= different axioms), one that doesn't strike me as all that untypical if I think about how my friends played the game back in the days. That giant wall of text up there was a summary of how I think D2 fares against D1 in that case. So maybe what we can do is state explicitly what our criteria for a good hack-n-slash are, determine which design decisions gel well with that and which ones don't, use that to reach a conclusion about what our respective ideal version of Diablo would look like, and then turn that into actual advice for which mods or games to try? You know, something that's actually useful for posterity. Would that be agreeable?Contrary to your claims, you're not actually interested in deepening any discussion if that results in your exposure as an ignoramus.
Akara respec was introduced with the 1.13 patch, which was released in 2010. Diablo 2 came out in 2000, so for 10 years there was no respec.
Fair enough. I mostly played Paladin builds like the Zealot, and if I remember correctly those rely on one or two clvl 30 auras and a zeal skill that shouldn't be too high (around 5 or 6). So it might have been less of an issue with other classes that have a greater number of useful skills available early on (e.g. Barb passive skills?). But I admit this is also something that has been alleviated by the introduction of synergies in patch 1.10.
yes, and then I have to start from Act I all over again, which isn't very appealing for somebody who doesn't enjoy the majority of acts. I'm fine with that in a party-based game where you can try four or six completlely different builds in each runthrough, but for a game with the build variety of D2 and the restriction to one build per game, it would be nice if there was a less time-consuming way to try builds. E.g. a mode where you start on clvl40 in nightmare right way.
Your reply doesn't apply, it's mostly a list of dungeons while I explicitly separated dungeons and outdoor stuff in the post. So I'm only talking about outdoor areas here.
That's very nice for you, others don't.
I have my own opinion and my own way of approaching the game
What else should I add? MMO lite mechanics? Numerous but relatively impotent mobs you can cut your way through at lvl1?There's more than a dozen reasons Diablo II doesn't have as well of an atmosphere as it could have, and those are the reasons you come up with?
Woosh.No fix needed: normal, magical, rare and unique drop rates are generously increased in Ultimative, so their sell value has been nerfed for game balance reasons. For argument's sake, its something like 1-10gp for normals, 10-100 for magical and 100-500 for rare and unique on Hatred (Normal difficulty). Pretty reasonable seeing as Ultimative provides other sources of income, already cited by me.
In stock D2, certain normal items in the Bloodmoor had sell value of 400gp and some magical ones had sell value of first act merchant cap (10,000gp). The abundance of money could only really be used in SP for gambling, whereas Ultimative gives alternative incentives to burn cash, also already cited by me.
So really, you're just nit-picking.
Not in this type of game.About a dozen of those are exploratory/farming only, which is a reasonable amount.
What makes you think I haven't?Many others have, too.
Nonono. Let's get three things out of the way first.So Lrn2play, shit-stain.
(...)
Your taste is fixated on the games you happened to be playing when your tiny balls dropped
Anyone else is willing to treadmill through the same content over and over for fairly misguided reasons.So really, anyone who talks about D2 being "completed" on merely Normal is pretty much just a casual plodder with talent on par with a TES "gamer", imo.
Not even the futility of discussion with posturing morons?New things I learned in this thread: 0
Operative word being "into".Are you implying one doesn't simply step into the first level of the cathedral in D1 and see zombies/skeletons whateverthefuck?
What else should I add? MMO lite mechanics? Numerous but relatively impotent mobs you can cut your way through at lvl1?There's more than a dozen reasons Diablo II doesn't have as well of an atmosphere as it could have, and those are the reasons you come up with?
Thanks, that provides some interesting background. So does the change from one modder to the other imply that earlier versions of the mod play very differently and possibly still have their own little devoted following. Kinda like some JA2 players hold on to the last release of the 1.13 mod before the introduction of major changes like 100 AP, NIV, new CTH, HAM, etc.? Or is it really just the addition of pointless meta-derp that has little impact on the actual gameplay?History of MXL
Nah, I already knew that, I just can't help myself And Lilura's latest post is more on the constructive side.Not even the futility of discussion with posturing morons?New things I learned in this thread: 0
Not unmodded with patch 1.13 going beyond normal, no. I might have done so once, but I doubt it. Mostly because I just keep recycling my ancient Wine install with v1.10, which is what many mods need. It does raise an interesting question though that I didn't consider at all, and that's how one should evaluate a game like D2 that has been tweaked quite a bit over the years (including even increased drop rates and lowered difficulty if one of the earlier posters in this thread is to be believed). Many of the things I don't like about D2 aren't addressed by the patches, but some of the mechanical issues have been fixed. Should everybody have to play 1.13 before they are allowed to weigh in? Or do we identify patch-independent aspects that everybody can talk about irrespective of which version they played? I think for Troika games the average codexer would insist that you can't shit on the game just because you played it upon release and it was a buggy mess --- that stuff has been fixed by unofficial patches since then, and a lot of cut content has been restored.So for almost the last 5 years D2 has featured respec, and here you are presently complaining about its absence... ok, you haven't played in a while, obviously.
The issue is more one of convenience, imho, because it would shorten the time it takes to try different builds in SP. I really don't understand why they didn't include it in v1.00 right away, at least for SP (I suppose there might have been balancing reasons not to have it in Battlenet originally?). Basically, something like "you've grown bored of your Whirlwind Barbarian? Alright, do this quest and you can redistribute x skill points and try something new".But considering the relative ease with which one can lvl a build, respec is really just a luxury or welcome addition for veterans to more optimumly style stats and skills around newfound items. It isn't the difference between success and failure in SP, unless you make some completely bizarre allocations and you'd have to be trying to self-gimp in that case.
Yes, but if you have to level multiple clvl30 skills, saving up points means you can raise all these skills with every level up rather than just one. That gives you a linear speed-up in progression, which is noticeable. But it's a minor point in my overall evaluation of D2, so I'll let it go.Skill allocation is limited somewhat by player lvl.
It might be trivial, but it still takes time. Time that I don't really want to spend if the motivation is "wow, this Flashadin thing sounds really unusual, I wonder if the end result works as promised". Yeah, ultimately that's a matter of preference but keep in mind that a mode where you start at a higher level could have easily been added and would have improved the game. Why didn't they do it? Maybe lack of imagination, maybe lack of time (though it wasn't added with any of the later patches), or, most likely, because SP wasn't deemed as important as Battlenet, and leveling up can be done a lot quicker there, so it wasn't considered much of an issue.I prefer to feel the build grow as I play rather than just start off uber. And for someone like you who has an idea of how these games play, lvling to 40 should be a trivial matter. It is for me, anyway.
If I could have something better, why shouldn't I get something better? How would D2 be worse if more effort had been put into the overworld? More precisely:Sure, it isn't D1 lvl of corridorish limitation with extreme emphasis on positioning and so on, but so what? Serves the purpose. If you want D1, play D1.
I agree with DraQ here:Beating non-Hardcore Normal = beating D2 <- casual plodder claim to fame. Reasons have been given, if you don't agree then whatevs.
I don't understand how anyone could consider the "play the game 3 times" approach good design. You mention two reasons: 1) hell's increased difficulty means the standard tactics fail, and 2) the three difficulties feel different. I'm not quite sure what to make of these claims. Of course different difficulty levels won't feel the same, otherwise they would be pointless. But we don't go around saying that "Piece of Cake", "Let's Rock", "Come Get Some" and "Damn I'm Good" are the four parts of Duke Nukem 3d and one has to play all of them for the true Duke Nukem 3D experience. Many RPGs have difficulty settings, with quite an effect on what tactics are viable, e.g. size of enemy groups, resistances, how often the AI uses buffs and debuffs, etc. Why is that not a viable system for D2? You want hell, play hell, without having to go through normal and nightmare first.Anyone else is willing to treadmill through the same content over and over for fairly misguided reasons.
I won't challenge the skills part, it depends on what kind of aptitude one takes as the baseline, and that baseline will be higher than usual for somebody who regularly plays in hell. No idea how I meausre up in that respect. But I think my criticisism is consistent if you buy into my initial assumptions about what the game should deliver and what makes for fun gameplay (modulo the issue of patch changes for some of the mechanics, which I did indeed fail to take into account). The assumptions part is clearly where we disagree, and that's what I've been saying from the very beginning, though I didn't articulate it as well as I could have in hindsight. That doesn't mean that the discussion has to end with agree to disagree, though. As long as both parties know what the respective assumptions are, intersubjectivity is guaranteed, and that's all you need for a discussion.But I think maybe your overall criticism of D2 SP isn't as well thought out as you think, and maybe rooted in lack of skill to a degree.
The mod itself stands out with a higher difficulty than vanilla, more drop variety, some weird tier system, rather amateurish animations (at least he tried), invulnerable insta-death mobs that will fuck up your hardcore characters if you get close, new character builds and that's about it.
If you're into the lore and atmosphere/coherence aspects, you'll find this not very amusing.
If someone wants to make a mod that brings the crowd away from D3 and back into D2,
make magic/rare items the theoretical best for any given build instead of dull runewords,
rework the synergies to avoid funneling people into a few basic viable builds,
make sure each stat serves more than just requirement-food (energy could affect skill damage etc.),
make hirelings grow a brain,
remove the best drops from the final bosses and just spread them across all mobs (to avoid the trillion Baal runs)
and possibly sprite a new monster or two (actual original art, instead of just ripping wholesale from other games).
Median doesn't aim for the above, it has its own niche and goal (to make the screen give you plenty of seizures perhaps).
i did play this game for a decade.
Yes, but if you have to level multiple clvl30 skills, saving up points means you can raise all these skills with every level up rather than just one. That gives you a linear speed-up in progression, which is noticeable.
That is the one that i've played for a decade and there's nothing that you can drive me into a corner with regards to.
too harshly by fucking minigun arrows, robots (in D2 of all places)
Invulnerables screwing you over - i meant the pouncing purple witches that you can do jack shit about, not the uber challenges. Those add nothing to the experience if they can't be killed.
If you're going to mod, then you know how to code. If you know how to code, then you should probably pick up basic spriting skills to compliment your setup.
The D3 folks?
I think they went to that camp partly due to the horribly pixelated by modern standards graphics and resolution, the immunities just slapping you as a hard counter and the game forcing you into Baal runs to be efficient.
That and the teleport on Enigma, nothing was a bigger fuckup than letting every character teleport indefinitely.
Charges are far more limiting and acceptable,
Mount and Blade could require skill, Diablo only requires patience.
Oh and you still act like an absolute twat and i wonder what you get out of this thread really. Codex terminology aside, you could be far more neutral if you want people to give the mod a try.
I know you're sick of this already, but what about the other points? That stuff is completely independent of which patch one picks.Reply to the one point in my post that I said didn't matter all that much
imposible
Operative word being "into".ne doesn't simply step into the first level of the cathedral in D1 and see zombies/skeletons whateverthefuck?
Before you enter the desecrated cathedral with weird and macabre shit going in it the exact count of demons, undead and otherwise unnatural things seen by you is zero. In D2 you'd first spend about 25% of the game killing zombies playing on the lawn outside before even stepping in.
You really are ignorant.
He said it was impossible to fit in more "rainbow shit" in a single trailer. And i agree, perhaps it is enjoyable if you are into the metagame of diablo 2, but for anyone else, at all, it looks like shit.I wasn't laughing at your Spanish spelling on an English-speaking forum, I was laughing cuz you think MXL:U is "impossible".
No need to get your panties in a twist.
I wasn't laughing at your Spanish spelling on an English-speaking forum, I was laughing cuz you think MXL:U is "impossible".