Thanks for the visualizations. Options (1) and (2) appear to have the same features as FrostNova and Nova (although I recognize that (2) would be standing flames and not an expanding ring), option (3) seems almost identical to Meteor, option (4) looks similar to Armageddon. I can see the value behind (1) and (2), since these ideas are similar to making a fire option for already existing ice and lightning options, but keep in mind that (2) can already be implemented by using Blaze while running in a circle. It might be more interesting to consider this fire skill on a Druid because he has no skills that function like Nova currently. I think (3) does not contribute anything new to the sorc fire tree, so would not recommend it. I think (4) is worth discussing from the viewpoint of, "The fire Druid has skills with FeatureSet_1, so let's make the fire sorc have a clone of Armageddon but using synergy skills with features that do not match FeatureSet_1. This way we have two distinct fire builds that essentially share one skill."
What are the main reasons for replacing FireWall? If the change is only for the sake of changing things, then people should seek novel ideas. If the change is to correct a flaw in FWall, then state the flaw clearly so that people can agree on a solution.
It's a good idea to review the features of FWall, Inferno, and Blaze, since those skills currently synergize together, and are designed to overcome the weaknesses of each other. Considering this is a good way to ensure the current balance of skills in the sorc Fire tree is not broken.
FireWall 1) Can be placed anywhere, but extends only until a non-walkable tile is hit (or range is reached). 2) Extends in a line perpendicular to the player and placement point (i.e. if the player is the center of a circle, and the point of FWall placement is on the edge of the circle, then the line of FWall is tangent to the circle). 3) Damage is not terrible, but nothing exciting. 4) Does not follow a moving target (this is fine when playing with a Tank-style party member, or enemy archers). 5) Takes only a moment to place (i.e. you can cast and then immediately run away). 6) High mana cost.
Inferno 1) Can be placed anywhere. 2) Extends from the player to the point of placement (i.e. the line of Inferno is always perpendicular to the line of FWall). 3) Damage is not terrible, but nothing exciting. 4) Does not follow a moving target moving tangentially relative to the player, but does "follow" a target that is approaching the player (this is the normal case when playing solo). 5) Player must be locked into position while casting (i.e. if you run away then the spell stops). 6) Medium mana cost. 7) Is only blocked by walls.
Blaze 1) Can only be placed at positions where the player moves through (it is placed at the feet). 2) Damage stacks with itself, FWall, and other fire-patch DPS spells (i.e. running over the same spot again and again will create the highest damage in D2), so the damage is excellent. 3) Takes time (about 30 seconds) to build up the damage. 4) Takes no time to place (once cast, you can run for a while (about 30 seconds) without recasting). 5) Very low mana cost.
Given the features above, the main benefit of FWall is it's ability to be placed anywhere while on the run (unlike Blaze's placement at the feet, or Inferno's locking the player's moves). It's main penalty is the high mana cost for damage that isn't very exciting.
Since your options all appear to be placed only at the player, rather than anywhere, I would not recommend them in place of FWall because then this build loses the main benefit of FWall. If your option (4) were more like a fire-element Blizzard clone, then it could replace FWall easily, but it would not be much different from Meteor (so it would be easier to just add Meteor as a synergy to Blaze and Inferno, rather than make a new skill).
Summary 1) The options in your visualization do not appear to be a good replacement for FWall, so people should first discuss changing the dependance of Blaze and Inferno from FWall to Meteor. This releases FWall for editing. 2) There needs to be more discussion about why any changes are being proposed. Is there a problem with FWall that is best solved by replacement? 3) If people feel that there is value in discussing a fire-nova sorc (or druid) build, then I could see that discussion being productive. Personally, I'd go with option (1) then, since it's pretty. 4) If people feel that there is value in discussing an armageddon-sorc build meant to be different from the armageddon-druid build, then I could see that discussion being productive.
|