Vote: Long Skill Cooldowns?

Feathers were ruffled, then partially-smoothed with an explanation, by the recent revelation that high level skills in Diablo III will have cooldowns as long as 120 seconds.

Some fans thought this was fine, since it meant that skills could be super-powerful, and would encourage more variety of character builds since players would have to mix and match spamable lower level skills with high level mega-skills that come with long cooldowns.

Others were unhappy about it, thinking that long cooldowns don’t belong in a quick clicking game like Diablo III, and that skills could be adequately modified by higher resource costs or other limitations. Or even by cooldowns, but ones that lasted a lot less than 2 minutes.

What do you think? Pick the answer closest to your opinion, and we’ll try to get some community consensus.

Vote: How do you feel about long skill cooldowns in Diablo III?

  • 5) Great design. Creates more variety and strategy. (29%, 1,183 Votes)
  • 4) I guess it's okay if the skills are super-powerful. (28%, 1,132 Votes)
  • 1) Hate it. Long cooldowns do not belong in Diablo 3. (20%, 825 Votes)
  • 2) Don't like it. Cooldowns should be much less than 2m. (17%, 702 Votes)
  • 3) No opinion/don't care. (7%, 269 Votes)

Total Voters: 4,111

Loading ... Loading ...

Last Vote Results:

Last time we followed up the revelations of D3Here, the alleged play-tester, and the bitter arguments that accompanied them, with a poll. Here are the results, which show no clear majorities for anything, but general support for the opportunity to at least read what he had to say.

Which we gave you guys.

The big question now is if he was legit, and that we’ll known fairly soon, as many statements as he made that can be directly proved or refuted by more game info. Which we’ll have as soon as August 1st.

What do you think about the D3here guy’s claims?

  • 2) I’m not sure. Could he really have made all that up? — 678 votes, 25.03% 
  • 5) I didn’t read. No opinion. SPOILERS. — 583 votes, 21.52%
  • 3) He was fake, but very interesting — 548 votes, 20.23%
  • 4) He was fake and should not have been given a podium. — 478 votes, 17.64%
  • 1) I believe that he is a D3 play tester. — 422 votes, 15.58%

Total Votes: 2709

Related to this article
You're not logged in. Register or login to post a comment.

36 thoughts on “Vote: Long Skill Cooldowns?

  1. Hard to say, depends on what those skills will have to offer. I can live with longer cooldowns if the skill gives my character some uber power.

    • i dont get this general attitude – alot people regard those cooldowns already as a “nerf”, as something that got taken away from them and as a personal attack to there Hero (class) for a game which is not even out yet.
      i mean ofc those skills have to be far more powerful if you put 2 minute cooldown penalty on them or it would just be a shitty ability. its not like diablo 3 is the first game they created ever. and if a ability is generally percieved as all around shitty balance changes will follow but that accounts for all skills anyway.

  2. I agree with the podcast guys on this, top tier skills should be strong and thus none spammed, as in D2 where many players where use to using one or 2 skill to beat it. Cooldowns on such power makes since and add the aspect of strategy to any game, thus it will force people out of their box more and make use of an array of the great skills blizzard provided for this game.

  3. As a wow player, 2 minutes is up before you know it. Its not that catastrophic, it just means you need to think before you use a skill.

    • If the cooldown is what makes me “think before you use a skill” then they’ve already failed. IMO.

        • I’ll rephrase – if any skill is so poorly balanced and poorly designed that I would be always mindlessly using if not for a timer, then they’ve already failed. What “system” would I have take its place? Good balanced and good design.

          • That didn’t answer the question at all.
            One reason why someone would spam something is aesthetics–they like the skill, so they use it.  Should skills all look terrible to prevent spamming?  Is being powerful not allowed?  If they make a game with no powerful attacks and everything looking terrible, they have failed.

  4. This really reminds me of an ongoing debate with Guild Wars 2. There are elite skills, which you can only have one of on your bar at a time. They all have a recharge time of 720 seconds, much longer than other skills. They’re meant to be “game changers”, but there’s still a lot of debate within the community, such as everyone waiting before they engage the big boss for the elite skill to recharge, and such.
    One interesting thing the developers have said is that in their PvP playtesting, it’s a bit of a game of chicken to see who uses their elite first, since if it misses, or doesn’t go as well as it could for some reason, than that person now has one less thing they can do, and their opponent has a trump card.

  5. Again, the poll did not reflect the real options.

    This site is not being given Blizzcon press passes or an invite to the press event at the end of the month. No one knows why Blizz did this, but Flux ventured that this is because the SC2 site published something that Blizz thought was data-mining.

    If this guy says he got a cease and desist order, then either he is telling the truth, in which case publishing his rather uninformative text jeopardising the site’s opportunity for future invites and passes and, therefore, access to real information, or he is lying, in which case who cares if he is not published?

    Other sites are going to go to these press events, but most of their administrators are derps who don’t follow the game well. Flux’s questions are always informed and well thought out, so we get to learn new, usually significant stuff. Publishing stuff like this likely means Flux doesn’t get to ask question. So the poll options should be:

    Which do you prefer:
    Uncorroborated or fake news more frequently?
    Real news less often?

    • Better nip this one because unchecked they can become accepted truth “but Flux ventured that this is because the SC2 site published something that Blizz thought was data-mining.” I think that’s a bit of a punt on Flux’s part because it’s not the case.

    • On the play testing event, thanks for the confidence in my reportage. I’m not going to be there, barring a last minute change of heart/return to sanity on the part of Bliz PR, but I will be interviewing at least a couple of the attendees upon their return.

      Not as good as viewing the presentation and writing up a play report from my own experience, but we will be presenting a lot of first hand information here.

  6. I support the skill cooldowns system. This will make fights much more involving and interesting

  7. Personally I think 2 minutes is a little extreme in fast-paced games like the Diablo series… I guess if the skills are a good deal more powerful than the lower tier ones then it makes up for it, but it could also lead to a similar situation to the long cooldown abilities in WoW (although long cooldowns in WoW are like 5-15 minutes) where people end up saving them for certain situations and can end up either purposefully waiting even longer than the cooldown time to use them for fear of wasting them or they forget to use them when they come off cooldown because they are in the habit of using their shorter cooldowns over and over…

  8. I think a longer cooldown can be a useful game mechanic. Take a look at Diablo 2’s beserk for example, with +skills invested it could reduce the cooldown and make it a skill in its own right. I’ve heard/read that item modifiers in D3 may be able to reduce cooldowns too, not sure but it might have been in one of the podcasts.


  9. If a skill is that powerful that it needs a 2 min cooldown then perhaps they can make the skill less powerful and less of a cooldown ? On the other hand, sometimes there is nothing like being surrounded by mobs and laying the smackdown with a powerful skill.

    • Exactly the last part.  If it’s meant to be a game changer (AKA, OH SH*T button), then it needs to be restricted.  If all you use is a nuke, what use is having other skills? 😉

  10. Im finde with cooldowns, but dont you think the poll options are a bit to negative (even though most people seem to love the ideas of cooldowns).

    5) Great design. Creates more variety and strategy. (34%, 184 Votes)
    4) I guess it’s okay if the skills are super-powerful. (31%, 170 Votes)
    2) Don’t like it. Cooldowns should be much less than 2m. (16%, 88 Votes)
    1) Hate it. Long cooldowns do not belong in Diablo 3. (14%, 78 Votes)
    3) No opinion/don’t care. (5%, 26 Votes)

    ++ Great design.
    o I guess its ok
    – dont like it
    — hate it
    / no opinion
    the “+”-answer is missing. I had to choose the neutral (“o”) answer. So: yes, I like the idea as long as not all high levels must have cooldowns.

    • Ironically, I switched the order of questions, since I almost always have the negative ones first, and then the positive ones last. I figured someone would complain that was leading or biasing or something. And yet…

  11. If they make the monsters hard enough, 2mins is not too long. We shouldn’t be scorching an entire level in under a minute. Make the fights harder, and that 2mins is up pretty quickly.

  12. Edit: Holy crap wall of text. Stupid thing removed my carriage returns.

    I think people are jumping the gun a lot.  Because bashiok said that the 3 top tier barbarian skills all had 2 minute cooldowns it seems they are jumping the gun and saying that high tier skills are so powerful that they need the cooldown to balance it and vary it.

    In reality, if you look at the skills and Bashiok’s followup you should see that it seems like they are applying the philosophy of:

    Each character will get a set of skills that fits their character.  It’s resource mechanics will be used to balance it.  Depending on the skill it will have many ways to balance it, being anywhere from damage, effect, range, to resource cost and even cooldown.

    Apply the logic of that to Call of the Ancients Bashiok mentions here:

    If you make it low mana cost and spammable, the ancients would obviously be OP if they weren’t anything but fodder.  If you make it high mana cost and spammable you lose the ability to use your skills when summoning, making the times you choose to use it times where you cannot do anything meaningful.  Or designing it with the cooldown in mind, then it can be lower mana cost, and powerful enough to be useful because you can attack along side them, and they won’t be JUST cannon fodder.

    Same goes for the barbarian buff skill.  If you make the skill boost by a large amount, and it’s spammable, it’s overpowered and every barbarian would get it.  If you make the resource cost too high then you can’t make use any skills in combination with the buff, basically making your basic attacks powerful.  If you have a cooldown, you can make it meaningful to have and also use it with your skills.

    In Diablo II they added cooldowns on high-graphically intensive skills actually for the purpose of the fact that if they were spammable they would lag up machines.  I remember dropping tons of mana in dropping out tons of frozen orbs w/ fast cast in succession, and while my machine could handle it, it lagged everyone else up.  When they changed it w/ cooldowns, they made it more strategic and more powerful, but it couldn’t benefit as much from fast cast gear.

    I do believe they’ve learned their lesson this time around in using all of the balancing factors they can to balance skills.  By utilizing resource costs, damage per cast, casting speed etc and cooldowns to individually balance each skill on their own.   What I mean by this is they are NOT doing what most people jumped on the bandwagon for and said higher tier skills have cooldowns and are more powerful.  Sure they may have cooldowns, but being high tier does not MAKE them have cooldowns.  The nature of the skill and how it plays with the character necessitates the need for cooldowns.

    For example we could have a hypothetical (Assuming Arcane power is still capped at 100 and regens quickly for this example): Meteor costs 40 AP, no cooldown.  You can call down 2 right away, and in a short moment cast a third.  Then you need to wait for the 4th or switch to some other skill.  This has no cooldown, but can be quite powerful balanced by the fact that it has a high resource cost so you can’t just spam meteors all day.

    I’m 100% for making an awesome game that uses all balancing mechanics to balance the game and make it fun, rather than creating an arbitrary hard to balance skillset because you refuse to use every mechanic available to balance them.

    I would be upset if they DID remove the cooldowns because of everyone being upset over hearing about them and then having terrible skills that aren’t worth taking because they balance everything around being spammable.  I likewise would be upset if they would use cooldowns as a crutch to balance ALL high level skills by making them non-spammable even when they can be balanced other ways as in my example.

    I’d prefer all the skills to be balanced by ways that make sense for that skill to be balanced.  Some have high resource cost, some have short cooldowns, some have long cooldowns, or even having the concept of longer cast times and shorter cast times.

    • ” If you make it high mana cost and spammable you lose the ability to use your skills when summoning, making the times you choose to use it times where you cannot do anything meaningful.”

      One of my enormous frustrations with this debate is that people talk as if the only options are skills are either so cheap their infinitely spammable without thought or worry, or skills so expensive that you can’t use anything else afterward. There are middle grounds, people. Imagine (in D2 terms) your character has 500 mana and you have a massive super-skill that costs 300 – does that mean after you use that skil that you can’t “do anything meaningful”? Of course not, it just means you’ll have to use more mana-efficient skills for a little bit until you build your mana back up. IE. you have to play intelligently and thoughtfully for a little while. This is a good thing, IMO, far better than simply waiting for a boring timer.

  13. I think a cooldown would be no problem in a game where the amount of skills you can choose is not limited.
    Let’s put it this way: If I choose 3 skills with these long cooldowns, I have 4 (assuming you can choose 7 skills max) skills left to use. One inevitably will be a movement skill so that makes that i have 3 slots left for ‘spammable’ skills. I though they’d rather get rid of that?

    • Yup, another big issue I have with this that no one’s talking about. Really, even if you only pick one + movement skill, 5 other skills sounds so paltry to me.

  14. I personally like the long cooldowns. I play wow and the moves my characters have that hit the hardest also have a 2-3 min cd or longer, and that i think is great. For one it gives for a smoother design than 1 spam/2 spam moves. Don’t get me wrong when i played d2 i got my two main skills and then used them along with the fkeys to swap when the situation required me to change skills.

  15. This is complete and utter bull!! Real Diablo fans would never vote like that! This poll shows only one thing…that Diablo fan base has a bigg MMO add coming its way from wow or other parts..I am dissapointed about this decision…
    As I said in my previous post that (quote) “didn’t make it” across, cooldowns have nothing to do with Diablo type of gameplay – one of the things that made Diablo different from other gamnes and for which people loved it was the fact that action was made easy and fun – not having to worry about strategising except doing some simple synergies. Action is all fun and clicking while strategy and slow pace where definitory for towns – these 2 sides made perfect equilibrium for the previous Diablo games and Diablo 1 was perfect in this matter.

    Cooldowns is a MMO type of gameplay feature – Diablo is more action. I like to play Diablo not wow with another hat. This is my opinion.

    • i’d say in all honestly any “real” diablo fans would prefer uber powerful skills to be obtainable only through scrolls as drops being completely rare based on the scroll availabiliy (nova and apocalypse) 😉 no innovation is innovation, right?

      • he lost all my attention at the moment   “Real Diablo fans would never” ; claiming to be the one and only true diablo fan for entirely made up reasons. herpa derpa.
        when you cant even begin a conversation without accusation for reasons you cannot even reasonably define you maybe should reflect upon your arguments and upon wheter or not they are even arguments in the literal sense.

  16. If a skill has long cooldown, it would proportionally has much more powerful effects.  So for the designer, how does he balance the game difficulty?   One setting may be too easy when you have that cooldown but too hard when you don’t have that cool down?  So then the obvious approach is to make sure abilities never be that powerful and thus proportionally the cooldown will never be that long…  then we end up with the relatively “short” cd for all the main skills.

    The only long cooldown skill I see is a get-out-of-jail-free skill that has a long cooldown to help you recover from mistakes, like a resurrection skill to save a trip from town.

  17. Don’t forget that mechanics that force the player to make decisions while they kill monsters is a good thing


  18. Yeah, that explains another balancing method like i mentioned in the following part of my post:

    “For example we could have a hypothetical (Assuming Arcane power is still capped at 100 and regens quickly for this example): Meteor costs 40 AP, no cooldown.  You can call down 2 right away, and in a short moment cast a third.  Then you need to wait for the 4th or switch to some other skill.  This has no cooldown, but can be quite powerful balanced by the fact that it has a high resource cost so you can’t just spam meteors all day.”

    But meteor is a damage spell.  It fits well with this mechanic.  A buff that gives you ultra high stats for a short period of time might not be ideal for this mechanic.

    Fury is a mechanic that you gain fury as you do certain skills/attacks and other skills cost fury.  By example we know cleave is one skill that you gain fury off of given the post by bashiok.  If it takes, say 60% of your fury, given your example, then you have to either: Build up 60% of your fury to use it, and then get a buff and use only your spammable fury building skills, or build up 100% of your fury and you get to use your bonus on 40% of the rest of your fury.

    Contrast this with a skill that you can blow every 2 minutes and buff you for say… 20 seconds.  You can blow it when you want when you want and combine it with any skill with the cooldown.  The other alternative is building upto it, using it, but not getting to use as many of your other high fury skills because it’s such a high time investment to build upto that amount of fury.

    Which one is more FUN and balanced?  Well, I would assume they tested both, and found the cooldown version to be more fun than the other – otherwise they wouldn’t have done it.

    There’s multiple balancing tools.  If you cut yourself off the benefit of one then you start nerfing the fun of the whole class because you have a more restrictive set of how you can design the character.

    Waiting for a boring timer has nothing to do with it.  Is it even worth taking the skill if you can’t use it in the first place without nerfing your character because it takes so many resources to use it? Cleave, cleave, cleave, cleave cleave, cleave, Berserker rage, cleave cleave bash sounds a lot more boring than cleave, bash, leap attack, berzerker rage, whirlwind, cleave, bash.  Then when you’re on cooldown, it’s cleave bash, leap attack, whirlwind, whirlwind, cleave bash.  Still a lot more varied than constantly building up resources to use a skill that costs too much.

  19. Sorry, D2 was all about fast pacing, I expected a boss every 30s, if a skill is on a two minute recharge I wouldn’t even put points in it.  If the game is so different from that where I don’t need a powerful skill inside of a 10-20s I don’t know as it’s what I will be looking to replace D2 with.  I had serious problems with this in Titan Quest where recharges could run quite long and I just didn’t use those skills.

  20. Go past that part and see some arguments below 🙂

    I am honest in my feelings towards this matter hence the burst in  expressing my thoughts. I may have been a bit accusative but lets drop the politically correct kind of discussion for the moment. I have not claimed for a moment that I may be the only real diablo fan or something similar of any sort. I am not beginning a conversation I just stated my opinion.

    What i forgot to add is that such long cooldowns may have only the effect of skills not even being used anymore by players, it proving not to be efficient in any way in the middle of the action, and action is primer in Diablo, strategy falling on a second place. If it only comes as a solution for countering an effect of powerfull skills then my opinion is it may not be the best solution. Introducing long cooldowns just to calm an effect is just like trying to solve a problem adding some other tons of problems above it – covering an effect will not take care of a problem like if one would consider solving the cause. On the other hand developers are trying to add new things to the game. Well I am in favor of that, but just borrowing mechanics from WOW is not the way I would have expected it to happen. Taking what Diablo 1 and 2 had and making those things better would have been great. HP and mana system + skill synergy would have sufficed.

    Bottom line being I think cooldowns have nothing to do with Diablos action type of game system. That is MY opinion 🙂

    PS: Defenestrate, the scroll idea would be great 🙂

Comments are closed.