rebalancing crit
" For the first part, what do you think league transitions are? Nobody expects there to be a level 80 character waiting for them on the first day of a new league. If you're referring to Standard, that is something that was only kept around to satisfy the MMO players among us that are used to having "the one character to rule them all". GGG doesn't balance there, they don't care about legacies there, and wanting it to be otherwise is a pipe dream. As for the second part, that is an interesting parse of their words. They fold league content into the "main game" by making it available next league (or not, in the case of Rampage). " Without limits, checks and balances on characters, character design is virtually meaningless. This game is supposed to pride itself on its intricate and complex design. If good design means nothing, then you might as well just allocate skill points randomly and use random skills and "enjoy the experience". It's not enough to just have balance with no variation, nor is it enough to just have fucktons of content with no balance. The secret sauce is having something in between, where the balance is good enough and where there's enough content available that the amount of different ways someone can solve the game puzzle is huge. | |
" Been out of this thread for a couple days, so this is a little late, but let me address it. You have again misinterpreted my intent and misrepresented my stance, so you could argue against that new "idea." That is the textbook example of a "straw man" argument. I never said they should never nerf anything, that characters should last forever (esp. as someone who doesn't touch Standard), and it isn't a "disconnect" to say that GGG is making mistakes with certain design decisions--and wanting those mistakes to be fixed or not made in the first place. Having said all that, I do not believe crit is a problem, and that the people crying for nerfs are overstating how good it really is, or their own vision of "balance." The reason is pretty simple: It's not simple. There are many factors that come together to create an "OP" character, and the vast majority of them are expensive to assemble and time-consuming to level. This represents a time investment in grinding, farming, trading, research, trial & error, and practice to be skilled enough to use such a build. Such builds represent a focused effort by the player to get the most out of that character--and this is the ideal state for any build. The real issue isn't about how strong the build is, but that many other builds lack options to achieve that state. This is why I say that other builds would be better served with more options rather than taking them away from crit. Furthermore, the entire discussion is pointless, because it stems from one guy posting essentially the same "nerf crit" thread across several forums. It isn't "feedback," and it isn't needed. This is the kind of garbage that ruined WoW, LoL, D3 (worse than it was before the loot/AH overhaul), CoH 1 & 2, etc. Most forum whine boils down to some kid's vocal excrement getting poured out into a public cesspool of toxic filth. It's one thing to make a suggestion to improve the game, but another to cry about "power level" as if a random player would know more about it than the people who designed each skill, item, monster, and the passive tree. Feedback is only meant to be a pulse for the devs to feel out the players--not a place where self-entitled hypocrites dictate game design. |
|
" Just because someone made a thread that might be a bit odd in the start doesn't mean the topic off this thread is irrelevant. He actually used a non-offensive, non-baiting title for his thread, which is pretty much the best form of title you can choose. It is short, to the point and not biased and allows a discussion about the topic. And regardless how the thread started it actually lead towards a discussion on the crit-topic with valid arguments and some suggestions. That is how its meant to work. And his suggestion was actually very good. He basically said improve crit-multiplier and nerf crit-chance, to make a) critical strikes feel more impressive b) critical strikes don't automatically benefit from status-effects that much (although once applied they might be massiv) c) critical strikes don't trigger that much "on crit" stuff like CoC or Surgeons The damage in general would only slightly decrease for a build that uses crits for the actual damage, not for triggering other spells and CoC could easily be rebalanced by numbers on the gem. So he actually made a very good suggestion. And he also made another good suggestion, since he pointed at the base-chance for some weapons in terms of crit. Wands, Bows and Daggers are insane in this regards and you don't actually need that much crit-chance. My Harbinger gives me 50% Crit-Chance with my tree without any power-charges or crit-chance on rings/amulets/quiver. Getting those base-chances back in line with spells would solve a lot of issues, of course you need to get something in return, exspecially for wands. Right now Crit doesn't have any tradeoffs. It is cheap on the tree, provides a lot more safety then non-crit due to perma-freezes and surgeons and has awesome scaling. " Crit doesn't have options. Crit just basically gets everything. It isn't an option if you just get it. Using Hatred? Fine you get the benefit on basically freezing the screen. Using Flasks? Well at least technically you can avoid getting Surgeons. Oh you skilled King of the Hill? What a shame now you have knockback and most melees aren't even able to reach you. Crit just gets everything handed on a silver tablet. The ranger is likely the worst offender, although not that incredible powerful compared to some Wanders or CoC chars in terms of raw power he is safe and incredible cheap. Bows like these are all you need to basically do any map with any mod (although physical reflect is a bit tricky, but combining Physical to Lightning + LGoH makes it easy). I don't even care about resistances that much. Crit alone basically solves all the issues my char has. I just switch Flasks around and rely on knocking melees, exspecially leap-slammers back or freeze them... or they just die. Crit isn't strong because of the damage it provides, it is mainly strong because it gives such incredible defense, and thats what is wrong about crit, taking crit shouldn't provide that many or any defensive benefits basically for free. Last edited by Emphasy on Feb 12, 2015, 2:42:29 PM
| |
|
In response to:
"... I said: " Because a character does not span leagues (read: versions of the game), a character buff or nerf on a league boundary does not affect existing characters. It is thus impossible to be selfish or expect to gain power on existing characters by asking for buffs/nerfs on content in future leagues with future, not-yet-created characters. ... Which is ultimately counterfactual to this claim: " --- If your whole point is "crit is fine currently" then say exactly that. Once you say things like: "... it makes it painfully clear that you have a further agenda. If you want to explain how crit is perfectly fine, start by explaining how all of the top ladder positions are mixed crit/non-crit, or how it takes an equal amount of effort (or time or expense or knowledge) to create a character with a certain level of damage and defenses with crit/non-crit (e.g. "able to kill things in L76 maps and not risk death"). Because as far as I can tell, you know something that lots of other people do not, and everyone would love to hear your experiences. The OP brought up crit because, from his perspective, it was too good. It has too many benefits with not enough downsides and not enough effort required to get the great benefits. Lots of others have noted an agreement with that perspective, that the damage part is fine but getting elemental effects and flask charges (and knockback, or maybe the damage effects are a bit too high) just seems completely excessive and overly centralizing on character design. Your response to these have continued to be "crit is fine", so... do you have anything more to share? | |
|
Ultimately, it doesn't matter how other people build. Play how you want to.
As usual, you have concentrated your efforts on trying to misrepresent what I actually said, but I think it's pretty obvious by now to anyone with any sense of reading comprehension what it actually is. To that end, I do say, "crit is fine," and I feel no need to go into those details any more than I have in this thread and others. Especially for you, when you clearly lack the aforementioned skills and will seek to twist the words again. Trolls don't deserve that kind of respect from me. |
|
|
honestly crit doesn't need nerfed.
also RT build's shouldn't get any form of damage increase it should build on the strength of such builds which is tankyness. i mean whats the point of RT? to be able to ignore all the accuracy and crit nodes and be able to invest all those points into defenses. which have been pointed out are quite the joke most of the time. take armor for example. on its own it sucks take 7 endurance charges on their own while running around naked and the effects are always the same you ignore a certain amount of damage. take acrobatic's and phase acrobatics and run around naked the effects will be the same always and very good that that too. not saying these need to be nerfed even more but the passive defenses definitely need to be looked at. that would go a long way in making RT builds good again. also monster damage should go up more melee minions need more gapclosers/ more speed to put ranged characters on their toes. | |
" I was with you up to here. But... " 1. Defensive nodes work more or less as intended, I think. Some minor tweaking of numbers may be worth a look, but they function properly. The question is only about efficacy. 2. It's really offensive nodes that seem lacking, imo. You need a ton of them to really feel like they do much, and usually that means you aren't tanky enough to survive the high level stuff (assuming you build something other than "ranged aoe"). 3. I don't think more monster damage would solve anything, and giving them more ways to desync will just piss people off about the subject more than they already are. 4. I agree that there needs to be a way to close the gap between the range advantage and the beatings melee takes, but I'm not sure how you would go about that. Referring back to point 3, gap-closers will cause more issues than they solve. It's a tough question because just buffing armor doesn't close the gap. Ranger can easily access as much armor as she needs; indeed, she can actually access any type of defense she wants with less opportunity cost than most others (depending on which class and defense you are specifically talking about). So I don't know that buffing defenses can be meaningful. Most people just say "buff melee" but everyone seems to have a different idea how, or why it needs it. My impressions lead me to the opportunity cost approach. For the safety that range provides, their offensive nodes are too similar to melee. You could think about ways of raising the opportunity cost of using ranged... maybe have melee specific offensive nodes substantially more powerful than ranged ones? I'd have to think about it, but maybe that's a start. |
|
|
Today i had fun mapping in a full party doing lvl 78 maps, with my NON crit 19k dps arcer (invested 18ex on the char, cant get much much higher dps without crit). It was very exciting reducing mobs resistances by 70% and shock prolifing them and still needing 6 hits to kill white mobs yay.
And meanwhile the CRIT tornado shot and kinetic blast dudes one shotted blue mobs, this experience remembered me, why I stopped playing my arcer and played my CRIT windripper char instead. Yes, crit is in a good spot currently and it doesnt have to be rebalanced. Edit: Maybe GGG should buff crit chance because there are still some crit builds, mostly spells, who cannot get capped crit chance. And it is really a shame that most builds only have around 500-600% crit multi, double it!! Last edited by vangrandson on Feb 14, 2015, 10:53:12 AM
|
|
|
1. Arc was nerfed in the past.
2. One anecdotal experience proves nothing. 3. I don't recall anyone asking for crit buffs, so that's a stupid/pointless exaggeration to make. 4. Non-crit builds could use some love, but you act like going crit has no trade-offs. Don't forget the meta before all this crit QQ came out: Only put points into defensive nodes. Is that really more fun to you? |
|
|
You are right i was just a bit annoyed/angry because the insufficency of my build regarding party play was shoved down my throad. And the reason why isnt because i didnt invest in offensive nodes because i took all cast speed and elemental/spell damage nodes, it was rather that i decided to not go with the meta.
And the arc nerf you mentioned isnt really a nerf, due to the fact that GGG nerfed the base damage of the spell but buffed the crit chance of it. This is really a slap in the face for all thr people who prefer non crit spells. This change resulted in all arc builds being bsed on crit, beside one or two hc variations, which took 200% + life but have only little dps. I still do not understand why GGG insists on making crit the only more multipler beside attack damage/attack speed (lets ignore rf for spell builds because you have to invest so much for regen/max fire resistance that your damage wont be much better than without it). Maybe enhance the resolution technique keystone by slapping an 20% more damage multipler onto it and introduce a similar keystone in the witch area ie cannot crit, 20% more spell damage for non channeling spells. Last edited by vangrandson on Feb 15, 2015, 1:11:49 PM
|
|
