Chop Finale .... ROLL DAY~

"

lazyman75 wrote:

About the idea - it's very simple and was implemented in many D2 mods to great success.
On top of the random chance orbs there would be number of vendor recipes, where you'd trade the item you want modified + other ingredients (orbs, quality gems, specific rares, uniques, ... ) and as a result, you'd get your item back with "something" specific to the recipes done to the item.
For example:
trade your weapon + 20% quality red gem -> you weapon (same mods, everything the same) + guaranteed +1%-2% ED added.
This would allow improving your existing gear and if the recipes are done correctly, at high levels you won't use low orbs (alch/chaos) directly, but for the recipes or for creating ingredients for recipes.

"

lazyman75 wrote:

About the idea - it's very simple and was implemented in many D2 mods to great success.
On top of the random chance orbs there would be number of vendor recipes, where you'd trade the item you want modified + other ingredients (orbs, quality gems, specific rares, uniques, ... ) and as a result, you'd get your item back with "something" specific to the recipes done to the item.
For example:
trade your weapon + 20% quality red gem -> you weapon (same mods, everything the same) + guaranteed +1%-2% ED added.
This would allow improving your existing gear and if the recipes are done correctly, at high levels you won't use low orbs (alch/chaos) directly, but for the recipes or for creating ingredients for recipes.

Of course, this system would ultimately lead to really godly items in the end, but .. that's the goal of every ARPG, isn't it?
Such system would allow almost unlimited tweaking, limited only by creativity of GGG devs.

"

Mailius wrote:

Generally I agree that the item balance issues are primarily important in the mid-range, since that's where the balance concerns are now (I think the rarity of uniques is a different issue, but I'm not going to make a big deal about it in this thread which seems to be more currency-based). I mean, part of the reason the game is so easy (HC players seem to die to lag and crashes more than all natural causes combined), is because items are so unreliable, that they can't really tune the monsters up enough that for an average character it would be challenge, but also a zero stash HC character would be able to progress. ie. characters are maybe 25-30% as effective as they could be without items stashed for them, and even characters with decent weapons stashed away are likely to be more along the lines of 50-60%.

For instance, my Mara spent ~10-15 levels never seeing a 2h weapon better than the blue I was using, then suddenly a 1h weapon drops that does something like 70% more DPS than my 2h weapon, and was one handed.

"

Amarena wrote:

I just wonder if they will make Quality have a bigger importance in game. Quality influence like

- Higher quality = better mod
- Add quality on item with mod = chance of rising 1 point or 1% of the mod ammount

and such would make it worth more, as the already announced

- higher quality = higher chance of link with fuses

by devs

"

Xine wrote:

Re: Scour 3.0

1) You could have the "capture" portion downgrade the damage 1-2 tiers. So if you choose to build an item by specifically picking and choosing then you're going to have to settle for numbers 1-2 tiers lower.

Then make it so that you can only apply these scours to existing items if the mod doesn't exist to limit the number of customizations you can do.

This would allow "decent" items to be crafted with some effort. It would make some think about if they really wanted to destroy an item for 1-2 tiers lower. And prevent any Godly items from ever being hand crafted.


2) Mixing some above ideas: You could have a simple recipe to get an orb for a specific mod. IE - 10 scours + 3-5 rare items with the same mod = 1 "infuser" with that mod.

That "infuser" can then be applied to any rare but it will roll for it's tier with a low chance for godly tier.

You could then repeat that for a different mod.

If you add 2 mods to an item at a 1/500 chance for top tier you're looking at a 1/250,000 chance to craft a top tier item. But you'll at least get the stats you want, just not the highest modifiers. So you get "decent"

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

I think theres some very interesting discussion going on here, and I'm not trying to quash that, but you seem to be overlooking one factor which makes the potential orb that you're discussing break the mod balance in half.

Certain mods can only exist on certain types of items. In some cases this is for purely practical reasons, such as not getting local damage increase on flasks, because they'd have no effect, but a big part of that is balance. We've very carefully built a system so that a witch, for example, can't have spell damage mods on every gear slot (NOTE: I don't actually know for sure if that specifically is the case, although I strongly suspect it is - this is just an example).

If there is a way to remove a mod from one item, and then put it on a different item then so far as I can work out, one of two things happens:

• You can use it to store a mod from item A, and put that mob on item B of a type that can't usually get that mod. All our balancing work here becomes meaningless and serves only to make dropped items inferior to crafted ones because they can't get those mods. Unacceptable (to me at least, your opinions may differ :P)
• You can only put mods on the same kind of item you got them from, or at least a type of item on which that mod could spawn normally (This might still make crafted items better than dropped ones because mods can be much rarer to spawn on one type of item than another). This requires players to know which mods area available on which items in order to use the orb, and for anyone who doesn't spend the time looking up all that information, the function of the item is unintuitive, and possibly leads them into making mistakes and ruining their gear (removing mods thinking they could put them elsewhere, and then finding they can't).

Personally, I would not be at all happy with either situation.

That doesn't mean there aren't ways that similar functionality could be achieved, but I thought I'd point this out so you can keep it in mind as you discuss possibilities here, as this aspect seems to have been largely ignored in the conversation so far.