Apparently even just 5% increased radius is considered 'going all-in on aoe' to GGG.

After all, by Rory's words 'builds that don't go all-in on aoe are generally helped somewhat' by the area changes, but even the lowest amount of investment you can make into aoe, a single 5% radius node, is getting worse (turned into 8% increased area, equivalent to ~3.9% increased radius). Therefore, even picking up 5% increased radius must be considered 'all-in' by GGG.





addendum:

Nerfing extreme area stacking is fine, but there should have been a threshold (above 0%) where a certain 'reasonable' amount of investment breaks even from the changes, and below that even benefits (which is what Rory's words implied, but the numbers didn't live up to).

Like, around 25-35% increased radius seems like reasonable investment to me, where you're not going out of your way much at all... maybe a cluster and some gem quality, or a couple clusters, or just an inc aoe gem, etc. That should be a break-even threshold... adjust the numbers to where anything above that amount gets nerfed, anything below breaks even or is slightly buffed, i.e. multiply existing 'increased radius' values by about 2.25~2.35 when they're converted to 'increased area'.

Instead GGG's multiplied all the existing numbers by 2 or less, which NEVER breaks even, even at the most minor of investments. The only exception is Deadeye's "Endless Munitions" getting multiplied by 2.5, which is kinda funny when you consider these sweeping aoe nerfs everywhere else are already gonna push projectile builds even more to the forefront.

"

Shppy wrote:

After all, by Rory's words 'builds that don't go all-in on aoe are generally helped somewhat' by the area changes, but even the lowest amount of investment you can make into aoe, a single 5% radius node, is getting worse (turned into 8% increased area, equivalent to ~3.9% increased radius). Therefore, even picking up 5% increased radius must be considered 'all-in' by GGG.

I think you misunderstood what he meant. I thought the message was "while before they were helped in meaningful amount(old 5%), now they will only be helped somewhat(new 3.9%)"

"

JohnNamikaze wrote:

The manifesto literally says that GGG is doing a house sweep for AoE builds.

...while at the same time they aren't going to do anything with reasons why people stack so much AoE. GGG balancing at its finest, as always.

You need like x1.3 moe aoe to be the same as before from what i understand by what they said for maps

Wasnt this ment to be some type of small buff?

"

silumit wrote:

I think you misunderstood what he meant. I thought the message was "while before they were helped in meaningful amount(old 5%), now they will only be helped somewhat(new 3.9%)"

What he meant was pretty clear, I dunno how it could be interpreted otherwise. He said extreme aoe will get nerfed, while builds that don't go so far will generally be better.

"

Rory wrote:

Extreme min-max AoE builds are nerfed by these changes. Builds that didn't go all-in on AoE are generally helped somewhat.

If he meant anything close to what you thought, he would have said 'builds that didn't go all-in on aoe aren't nerfed as much' after saying that the extreme is nerfed already, rather than using any word even remotely resembling a positive direction like 'helped'.

Sounds like GGG is being sneaky on these changes just to reduce the radius because they have severe performance issues on the server side game simulation with too many mob damage calculations per second overloading the poor game servers and lagging us out.

They buffed Ball Lightning AoE and reduced Arctic Breath AoE (by not increasing it radius). Well, it seems GGG solved my problem, I couldn't decide which one to use ^ ^