Difference between melee and range builds.

None of this is making sense to me. I don't want to derail this thread, but I'm struggling to see how you can draw reliable conclusions from this data set.

Either I must be missing something here, or this dataset is being skewed in some way regarding the keystones.

From what I can determine from the heatmaps: hardly anyone takes AR nodes, and hardly anyone takes EV nodes. K.

You cannot look at Acro in isolation and say this is a popular node - so range is popular! Even within Acro there could be a good % of builds that are melee. And what about block - an important mechanic that is not being captured here because there is no Block KEYSTONE in the game. People who are building block are getting it on gear and flasks.

I don't think you should even be looking at the passive tree. If there is a way to make the query analyse what active non-support skill gem is socketed in the highest linked gear for a public character - that will give you an idea of the most popular skills and sort and see what the top 10 most used skills are ranged and which are melee (if any lol).

ill do my analysis but ill rather not share it nor the queries used for it

however, someone was so nice that he produced (also to be found via reddit) top items from the same users group

http://drac69.github.io/?league=talisman&type=items

draw your own conclusions but try to not undermine the data validity as that source is pretty much universally regarded as as-accurate-as-non-ggg-can-get

much more is available on reddit, one just has to look for it

"

goetzjam wrote:

"

Snorkle_uk wrote:

well you see there you go, my opinion, absolutely not representative of everyones opinion.

My take is that if Im ranged, I can kite projectiles, when Im forced into melee range with fast mobs is when Im most in danger. For me evasion itself is better for melee than ranged because ranged chars who maintain range can manually evade almost everything, its only in melee range or for characters forced to hold ground like melee where you have to really eat damage and need substantial mathematical evasion.

Scrot expects to find phase acro not worth taking. My opinion in taking acro but not phase acro? Dansgame, basically. 10% dodge and 30% spell dodge for 4 points after youve already eaten the downside of acro? Seriously? Theres people out there passing that up?

Yes seriously, there are probably tons of people doing that, and I think all of them are insane.

Well my binos character is already stretched out on terms of points investment, being a HC character makes it even harder to put more points into that instead of something like life, which you absolutely need. I'm sure if I had better rings\jewelry I would be able to drop one of the crit wheel nodes for daggers and move those points around perhaps to finish the acro wheel.

"

I agree with you, 4 nodes are quite small price for that. But some top HC players think otherwise and a lot of community blindly follows them.

Basically answered this, at least from my perspective with my statement above ^

again, 2 points in a row, 2 players that I know are knowledgeable about the game and whos opinions I have a lot of respect for are not on side.

Its that sort of game, it really is.

Im not at all surprised that people arnt taking armour or evasion nodes if thats true. Look at the amount of QQ on the forums about how hard the game is, theres something theyre not doing, seems as likely a place as any to find the problem.

"

sidtherat wrote:

from reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/43zszd/initial_report_skilltree_analysis_for_the_top/

heat map of passives used by top 15k players in hc and sc talisman

mara side of the tree is pretty much empty. the shadow/witch one on the other hand.. and crit bow nodes are almost as popular as life clusters.

perfect isnt it? it mirrors Berserk vs Assassin perfectly

For years people have been right in saying how bad Marauder, Duelist, CI, armor and most aspects of melee are, and here is further indisputable proof of how nothings changed... they are still as weak, unpopular and problematic as ever.

All GGG does is just laugh at those who play melee and not range.

"

Dark_Chicken wrote:

"

sidtherat wrote:

from reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/pathofexile/comments/43zszd/initial_report_skilltree_analysis_for_the_top/

heat map of passives used by top 15k players in hc and sc talisman

mara side of the tree is pretty much empty. the shadow/witch one on the other hand.. and crit bow nodes are almost as popular as life clusters.

perfect isnt it? it mirrors Berserk vs Assassin perfectly

For years people have been right in saying how bad Marauder, Duelist, CI, armor and most aspects of melee are, and here is further indisputable proof of how nothings changed... they are still as weak, unpopular and problematic as ever.

All GGG does is just laugh at those who play melee and not range.

+100 mate, agree.

RT got no synergy, no jewels (unique) that adds good amount of damage or support gems to increase dmg for NON crit builds.

Btw spells non crit got TON, HUGE FC TON of support gems to setup multiple builds.

And ranged got more than melee gems to build up.

As a player who started very recently, I feel compelled to say my opinion on this matter. My friends and I started this game three weeks ago as a group of 6, each starting a different class/build. Since we all had a relatively similar schedule we played as a group. The players who took a range build, myself included, had a extremely easy time playing; this includes leveling, not dying a lot, getting upgrades, more options. We also started to magic find by ourselves at level 60. The only item I got from trading was a 5link mantle and now I'm clearing tier 6-7 maps. My friend who choose a better build can clear tier 10 already. Another guy who took a ranger is clearing content with 6 link tabula and a bow he got for 2c.

What are the melee guys doing? Following us around while we kill and they act like they are tanking. In reality, they make things bloody, harder, they die much more, and they don't do damage. They clear very slow and are more gear dependent. We found a guy who claimed to have been a guy who originally worked on POe development and he gave them items. Even with pretty insane items they can't do things we can, they actually ask to farm together because they have a much harder time.

I read through this thread and I'm a bit shocked how some people can claim a ranged characters has no advantage. Coming from a guy who played Diablo 2, there is a reason why everyone would start a new season as a Sorc. It was the best class to MF with the least amount of items needed, you can glitch a act 3 boss and kite the act 1 boss. In this game, the melee builds have the same problem as those in Diablo 2, you sacrifice damage to survive, the lack of damage affects the clear speed; the abilities too, not being huge AOE attacks also affect the clear speed.

By saying Melee builds are more gear reliant, you by default claim that ranged are at an advantage. By agreeing that melee don't have huge AOE attacks, you by default claim that ranged have an advantage. My second character I made is a lazy pally. 21k damage, despite being able to one hit eveything I can't clear remotely as fast as my friend who is 10 levels bellow me and still only invest about 15c in his character. It's only when we go past tier one maps that his damage isn't enough anymore. Thought that's another story

To conclude, ranged characters clearly have an advantage in this game. By default, the game definitely benefits them. There are clear solutions but by doing it, you do kill diversity to make balance.

"

xjlxmchammer wrote:

To conclude, ranged characters clearly have an advantage in this game. By default, the game definitely benefits them. There are clear solutions but by doing it, you do kill diversity to make balance.

Pretty good feedback, I don't think people are trying to say ranged doesn't have an advantage, obviously they do, but if you've played this game for a while you would understand the systems and things put in place to try and make melee better.

My question to you is what you view as a clear solution and how you think that it will kill diversity, as much as I enjoy reading actual experiences, leaving it on this cliff hanger of a thing without explaining what you mean is just teasing IMO.

"

xjlxmchammer wrote:

There are clear solutions but by doing it, you do kill diversity to make balance.

Making more builds competive IS diversity, actually. And leaving just few builds dominate the game - that's what "killing diversity" is.

If melee isnt supposed to be viable at all - then just remove all melee skills from the game. Leave only "melee-ranged" skills like Reave, Ground Slam, Lightning Strike, etc).

When it comes to diversity, the biggest problem for those types of game is what players consider as the end game goal. Is it PVP, being able to beat the game, clearing maps..Etc. I find that in this game, it's all from PVE that is scaled as the player levels. The PVE content in this game does not require different approaches, you just get more damage and make sure you have enough defense to not die. Quite honestly, I think that's the problem.

Let's look at Diablo 2 as an example. Most veterans will tell you to start as a sorc because it's cheap and safe to farm with. You will never beat the safety that a sorc has with any other build in Diablo 2. Yet, people continue to play and gear for another character, why is that? It's because the end game for players was not solely in PVE but pvp as well. In addition, at the very end game, a sorc will not clear any faster than a end game Amazon, pally, or necro. That's when people branched out to builds that gave them better farming play styles, a sorc unless having the best gear just can not clear act 4. No one but a smite pally can clear über. Certain content like act 5 prevent a lot of builds from clearing it because there were a lot of immune to X damage type of monsters. I'm not saying D2 had no imbalance but it had enough incentive for players to build different builds that were not just ranged. A werewolf Druid might not clear quick but in a pvp environment it would destroy players.

In this game, the design is different. Every PVE content as you approach high end content has more dmg and more health. In response a player only has to increase his damage and defense with the same build. In that type of design, the player has no incentive to get a melee build when a ranged build will also do it.

So in my opinion, the easy fix is to stop trying to one up the content by increasing monster damage/Hp. Add something to their abilities that makes it for hard for certain classes to damage or beat it. What good is Huge AOE damage when the content only has 1-3 mobs? What good is X type damage when monster is immune to it? What good is long range when the monster is immune from damage unless you are inside the circle? Adding bigger restriction or requirements to abilities would help. It may sound bad but it can solidify a playstyle

"

xjlxmchammer wrote:

When it comes to diversity, the biggest problem for those types of game is what players consider as the end game goal. Is it PVP, being able to beat the game, clearing maps..Etc. I find that in this game, it's all from PVE that is scaled as the player levels. The PVE content in this game does not require different approaches, you just get more damage and make sure you have enough defense to not die. Quite honestly, I think that's the problem.

Let's look at Diablo 2 as an example. Most veterans will tell you to start as a sorc because it's cheap and safe to farm with. You will never beat the safety that a sorc has with any other build in Diablo 2. Yet, people continue to play and gear for another character, why is that? It's because the end game for players was not solely in PVE but pvp as well. In addition, at the very end game, a sorc will not clear any faster than a end game Amazon, pally, or necro. That's when people branched out to builds that gave them better farming play styles, a sorc unless having the best gear just can not clear act 4. No one but a smite pally can clear über. Certain content like act 5 prevent a lot of builds from clearing it because there were a lot of immune to X damage type of monsters. I'm not saying D2 had no imbalance but it had enough incentive for players to build different builds that were not just ranged. A werewolf Druid might not clear quick but in a pvp environment it would destroy players.

In this game, the design is different. Every PVE content as you approach high end content has more dmg and more health. In response a player only has to increase his damage and defense with the same build. In that type of design, the player has no incentive to get a melee build when a ranged build will also do it.

So in my opinion, the easy fix is to stop trying to one up the content by increasing monster damage/Hp. Add something to their abilities that makes it for hard for certain classes to damage or beat it. What good is Huge AOE damage when the content only has 1-3 mobs? What good is X type damage when monster is immune to it? What good is long range when the monster is immune from damage unless you are inside the circle? Adding bigger restriction or requirements to abilities would help. It may sound bad but it can solidify a playstyle

In D2, balance was just way too poor.
Sorceress was great not just for a low-cost MF farming character. When geared properly, her clear speed can compete with others too. She also makes a great PVP character.

A lot of players find it boring to play the same class for everything. A lot of them played suboptimal characters/builds (that require tons of investment with not so great outcome), just "for fun".

Does it means developers should balance things? HELL NO!


You proposals about balance seem solid. Indeed, PoE farming ATM is just all about killing HUGE packs of EFFORTLESS creeps. Obviosuly, rangeds builds with high movespeed, huge AoE and DPS will win there. Even if there was better balance between ranged and melee.