deadeye not being played at all.
|
The problem is really that Raider and Pathfinder are too sick in comparison.
|
|
"That is my point. It is so obvious at this point they might as well remove deadeye from the game. Literally everyone goes raider or pathfinder, it is just flat out better in all cases. I don't understand why ggg can't look at the obviously underpowered ascendancies and thus least played and do something to them. And i think most people will agree with me here that it is not affected by the current meta that scion and deadeye don't have a place in the game - it is just how much weaker they are. |
|
|
CAUTION: Opinions on Deadeye changes below.
Spoiler
MAKE PATHFINDER GREAT AGAIN 101:
Change all "Projectile Attack" wordings to generic "Projectile" wordings. Problem solved. POWERFUL PRECISION: Instead of giving you a niche Tora master craft now your projectile spells return to you! Global pierce chance increases critical strike chance for projectile spells (or silly attacks like molten strike/lightning strike)! Melee casters (like Ethereal Knives) now have 100% pierce chance on EK at the start of casting position! FAST AND DEADLY: Barely more than some notables on the tree. Also, not that fast or that deadly. Let's make it a generic speed improvement: 10% increased attack speed, 10% increased cast speed, 10% increased movement speed, and double the projectile speed/damage modifiers. Suddenly becomes a lot more attractive. If that's too out of line for GGG's power budget (which doesn't make sense to me, given some of the other stuff we've seen), they can make the projectile speed/damage modifiers depend on movement: "60% Increased Projectile Speed after moving Recently, 60% Increased Projectile Damage after moving Recently". RICOCHET: Only +1 chain, which is negated by going pierce route. Needs a full rework or a huge buff to contest with pierce builds. It'd be simpler to solidify Deadeye as either a chain, a fork, or a pierce character. And since the Scion Ascendant class has pierce chance, I believe it's fair to say the Ranger Deadeye class is pierce based. FAR SHOT: Grant it more damage to projectile hits, not just attacks. Suddenly this becomes a lot more appealing for a variety of builds (sorry, Caustic Arrow, it still doesn't apply to you). ENDLESS MUNITIONS: Fine as is. RUPTURE: Fine as is. Bring back race seasons. Last edited by AbdulAlhazred on May 12, 2017, 5:48:04 AM
|
|
" Awwwww yis! Also, if they change the wording of "projectile attacks" to global "projectile" just imagine the spark possibilities with returning projectiles. Impossubre. Neden yaşıyorsun? Last edited by Jideament on May 12, 2017, 6:12:52 AM
| |
" Heirophant is the worst ascendancy, scions are fantastic for ED heirophant is just flat bad at everything, yes you get 4 totems but your being way too generous of your damage + coverage are way higher, 2 totems do 168% damage, 3 do 228, 4 do 272 and all that negatively double dips if you were using any kind of dot to scale your damage up. The mana > ES scaler is additive with ES bonuses so provides a ludicrously small bonus even with 4k mana and the fact your spells cost nothing is also completely irrelevant when you get 4k mana for free. The ascendancy is just a mess and i genuinely believe that everyone who runs it doesn't actually know how much better they'd be as one of the other two :p (including myself i made 3 or 4 until i really studied the mechanics and found out how bad it was) On topic my current best character is a deadeye caster using arctic breath, but the aoe changes really damaged small aoe abilities and the shotgun potential has plummeted as a result, if I was making a bow character I can't see why you'd run a deadeye instead of a raider, free easy extra effectiveness frenzy charges + either status immunity or onslaught vs the ability to chain (nobody chains with a bow as you need more than 1 chain really) 20% radius and/or some meh bleed/poison rubbish that would be 10x better as pathfinder. Its gonna be better in 3.0 just because poisons going to be so much worse which means in the 2nd scenario you might genuinely play a bleed bow build, or bleed/poison etc but I still think raider will be the more popular. Last edited by Draegnarrr on May 12, 2017, 6:30:02 AM
|
|
|
It's not that Deadeye is weak, Deadeye is pretty powerful.
But it offers no utility or survivability (when compared to Raider or Pathfinder). Pathfinder offers a cornucopia of abilities, provided you have decent flasks and are willing to manage them. Raider offers phasing and endless Frenzy charges, and functions largely passively. That isn't to say that Deadeye doesn't have a similar passive function, but it doesn't offer the survivability boost that Raider does. " I don't think that's entirely fair. Do EV/Life folks complain? Probably, but they're not the only ones. The various ES/CI folks are quick to disparage EV/Life builds too. Sure, people play up weakness and play down strengths. In this case however, GGG should actually have metrics to draw on to determine how an EV/Life build fairs when compared to an ES/CI build. 'A Balrog,' muttered Gandalf. 'Now I understand.' He faltered and leaned heavily on his staff. 'What an evil fortune! And I am already weary.'
|
|
|
I don't think lesser played builds should neccesarily be balanced around popularity.Some people like to play more niche builds.
| |
"It's not about balancing it around popularity, but balancing it around the other ascendancies. If the only reason to play deadeye is to play deadeye despite it just being strictly worse with all skills than raider / pathfinder that's just bad game design imo. And lets face it, there are currently 2 ascendancies for ranger and one which is just disregarded because it offers nothing compared to the power of the other 2. So yea you either let it rot and say hey man some ascendancies just have to be garbage for the others to shine or you try to balance it to a point where it can it least be considered for SOME builds. Last edited by theoneandonly33 on May 12, 2017, 8:01:43 AM
|
|
|
Deadeye is good for some niche builds only. This is due to a combination of the strong focus on "projectile attack" with Deadeye and there being other good Ascendancies for projectile attacks.
The very low popularity is IMO more a result of the "tipping point" group mentality. If it is no more than competitive in some cases then it gets "downweighted" to "totally sucks". " You go for MoM on CI Hierophant? Am playing one now and dissed MoM with the switch to CI as "mathing" indicated that its more profitable to use %es passives. " No, it was blatantly obvious. But not necessarily to any newcomers stumbling upon this thread. So with a (clearly visible to said newcomers) "Valued poster" you may want to be more careful. " Have a CA Deadeye (in SSF HC). I dont think Raider/Pathfinder are superior for CA. There are probably other skills (KB wander, Split Arrow + Chain, ...) for which Deadeye is good. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
| |
" 272 is 36% more damage. Which is ~= 1 extra link. And very important in practice: I can spam totems. Which means its easier to play == less concentration required. I also get better coverage == fewer stragglers left. " Which makes it niche. Not bad for all cases. " With 1200 base mana this bonus is >=300 base ES. 300 base ES is not what I would consider "a ludicrously small bonus" " Not sure what you are referring here to. But the 50% reduced skill cost allows me to reserve more mana or spend less on "reduced reserved mana cost" passives. So it can be useful. " Sort of agree. Its complicated/"tricky". " I have really studied the mechanics before picking it - instead of Guardian which I was aiming for before that - when I still wanted to play FNM. No wonder it's lost, it's in the middle of the jungle!
|
