Unset Rings should have their own Affixes.

"

Amiag wrote:

"

Zerrien wrote:

OP

wouldnt make sense to me to have affixes for just one subtype of items, I think a better way to implements those bonuses would be on more unique unset rings like Voideye

If you did that you would simply end up with more voideyes..... do you SERIOUSLY want that lol? I believe you're supposed to learn from previous mistakes.... not end up with the same exact mistake just colored differently....

"

Amiag wrote:

wouldnt make sense to me to have affixes for just one subtype of items

I agree, this is actually one of the major design flaws with this idea. You EXPECT all rings to have the same set of Affixes... However, I feel that Unset Ring's implicit is just... an addition to a ring's Affixes. I currently am wearing an Unset Ring, however, it's going to be the first item I replace once I start gear shopping. You cannot beat +25%-30% Elemental resist implicits. (For defense, just like some people may want Coral or Crit, etc.) It has a very niche use, currently.

"

Amiag wrote:

I think a better way to implements those bonuses would be on more unique unset rings like Voideye

And, I think, Unset Rings are a wonderful canvas for a variety of uniques. While Voideye is... slightly... lackluster, I feel the existence of the idea to be quite interesting.

"

Deimos1337 wrote:

"

Amiag wrote:

"

Zerrien wrote:

OP

wouldnt make sense to me to have affixes for just one subtype of items, I think a better way to implements those bonuses would be on more unique unset rings like Voideye

If you did that you would simply end up with more voideyes..... do you SERIOUSLY want that lol? I believe you're supposed to learn from previous mistakes.... not end up with the same exact mistake just colored differently....

whats the problem with voideye ? its a really cool unique and is perfect for arctic armour or fire trap leveling

"

Amiag wrote:

whats the problem with voideye ? its a really cool unique and is perfect for arctic armour or fire trap leveling

Yes, but all it does is +5 levels. It takes away the chance of having tri-res, which does about 90% total.

"

Natharias wrote:

"

Amiag wrote:

whats the problem with voideye ? its a really cool unique and is perfect for arctic armour or fire trap leveling

Yes, but all it does is +5 levels. It takes away the chance of having tri-res, which does about 90% total.

It's the one unique that i was truelly happy to see go with the season. I thank not having to watch that vile vile garbage ever drop again.

Why not give Unset rings an implicit mod of The gem socketed in it having a + to its level? (Ranging from +0 to as high as +3, randomly rolled). Allow gems socketed in rings to go to a super high level to compensate for having no links.


This might make it actually worthwhile to socket some abilities into the rings.

"

aleksandor wrote:

Why not give Unset rings an implicit mod of The gem socketed in it having a + to its level? (Ranging from +0 to as high as +3, randomly rolled). Allow gems socketed in rings to go to a super high level to compensate for having no links.


This might make it actually worthwhile to socket some abilities into the rings.

So the socket in and of itself is not valuable?

You must not have used all of your non-ring sockets.

"

Natharias wrote:

"

aleksandor wrote:

Why not give Unset rings an implicit mod of The gem socketed in it having a + to its level? (Ranging from +0 to as high as +3, randomly rolled). Allow gems socketed in rings to go to a super high level to compensate for having no links.


This might make it actually worthwhile to socket some abilities into the rings.

So the socket in and of itself is not valuable?

You must not have used all of your non-ring sockets.

Spoiler

No, unset rings do not require a buff to be valuable.

Compared to 30% res/health, yes, that socket is infinitely useless and i wouldn't even need to consider the choice between those two. Unless you corrupt it and get something valuable(%cast speed for example) no one would actually use them even if the explicit rolls were godlike. The point being >unset rings are fucking disgusting lol

This is actually one of the best idea's I've heard in a while. Yes, the implicit is the socket. And yes, he's talking about the other affixes.

I'd make it the following pool of affixes:

~ + 1-2 levels to Cold gems (similar for other Fire, Lighting, Melee, Bow)
~ + 1 gem level
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 added chaos damage
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 added fire damage
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Increased Duration
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Decreased Duration
...
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Faster Casting
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Faster Attacks
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Blind
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Fork
~ + Gems Supported by level 12-27 Chain
~ + Gems Supported by level 2-3 Enlighten
~ + Gems Supported by level 2-3 Enhance
~ + Gems Supported by level 2-3 Power Charge on Crit
...
(and more)

You could even actually put some of these in the prefix pool, and some of these in the suffix pool. The most GG ones could go in prefixes and compete with other GG things. More subtle things (like blind, reduced mana) could go in the suffix pool.

This would be OP, but only with the perfectly rolled item. And if there are many affixes, the chance of getting the right usable pair is very very low.

People forget that the goal is for the perfect rare to be better than uniques.

Why is this such a good idea? Because it makes exciting what's currently a pretty boring base type to most people.

+1

"

Deimos1337 wrote:

"

Natharias wrote:

"

aleksandor wrote:

Why not give Unset rings an implicit mod of The gem socketed in it having a + to its level? (Ranging from +0 to as high as +3, randomly rolled). Allow gems socketed in rings to go to a super high level to compensate for having no links.


This might make it actually worthwhile to socket some abilities into the rings.

So the socket in and of itself is not valuable?

You must not have used all of your non-ring sockets.

Spoiler

No, unset rings do not require a buff to be valuable.

Compared to 30% res/health, yes, that socket is infinitely useless and i wouldn't even need to consider the choice between those two. Unless you corrupt it and get something valuable(%cast speed for example) no one would actually use them even if the explicit rolls were godlike. The point being >unset rings are fucking disgusting lol

Then don't use them. People who understand how to use items in this game, like me, will take advantage of that socket.

Just because you find it useless or don't like it doesn't make it bad.