Deadeye Ascendancy & Farshot
|
How can GGG justify the existence of this talent given the general underperforming nature (and state) of melee gameplay?
IGN: Victory_Or_Sovngarde It's not a 13 week development cycle, it's a 13 week supporter-pack cycle. You can play any build you want, as long as it's the current meta. Last edited by Ashen_Shugar_IV#4253 on Feb 20, 2016, 7:55:05 PM
|
|
"Really, the state of melee has nothing to do with it. Long-ranged skills do tend to be much more powerful than short-ranged skills because long-ranged can hit things short-ranged can't, but that doesn't mean being able to hit things up close isn't important. I don't consider Far Shot to be ranged-vs-melee balance. At all. That's decided by things fit more global than w Projectile-specific Ascendancy. It's really Far Shot vs Point Blank as far as Deadeye balance goes. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted.
|
|
|
Sounds like a distinction without much difference. Point Blank ~ Melee range = more risk.
IGN: Victory_Or_Sovngarde
It's not a 13 week development cycle, it's a 13 week supporter-pack cycle. You can play any build you want, as long as it's the current meta. |
|
|
The point is, Deadeye certainly will not, and emphatically should not, be the only Ascendancy class using Projectile skills. GGG cannot balance melee vs ranged by how they design Far Shot. GGG could - and emphatically should - balance long-ranged projectiles vs short-ranged projectiles, within the Deadeye class itself, by how they design Far Shot.
By the way, kinda disappointed I haven't gotten any replies to my suggestions on page 1. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Feb 20, 2016, 9:37:42 PM
|
|
|
More range = more safety. There should never be additional benefits in play. Farshot for players is an abomination.
I don't understand how GGG can justify it. IGN: Victory_Or_Sovngarde It's not a 13 week development cycle, it's a 13 week supporter-pack cycle. You can play any build you want, as long as it's the current meta. Last edited by Ashen_Shugar_IV#4253 on Feb 20, 2016, 9:44:19 PM
|
|
|
At the end of the day, Far Shot is a damage node. And not even straight-up, it has strings attached. Saying it has too large of a bonus could be an understandable position, but saying there shouldn't be any conditional long-ranged damage bonus, regardless of its value, is downright nonsensical when there are unconditional bonuses to long-range damage in the game.
What's next, remove all bow damage passives from the tree? Or word all of them like Point Blank, so only "melee archers" exist? Far Shot is just fine on a conceptual level. In terms of numbers, might need tuning, might not. "30% more" does seem damn strong to me. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Feb 20, 2016, 10:02:28 PM
|
|
|
Right, I meant on top of what already exists.
Basically this node says "Oh you weren't winning enough offscreening already? Well now you can win MORE xD" When close-range gameplay is so unrewarding by comparison a talent like this is not healthy for the game. Should we get to a point where close-range & long-range gameplay are suitably balanced this talent will still be mostly inappropriate. IGN: Victory_Or_Sovngarde It's not a 13 week development cycle, it's a 13 week supporter-pack cycle. You can play any build you want, as long as it's the current meta. Last edited by Ashen_Shugar_IV#4253 on Feb 20, 2016, 10:30:03 PM
|
|
" So you want bonus damage for close range instead? So that you are even at melee-range stronger than melee? |
|
" Or how about no bonus damage for either? How about giving them some oddball utility to enable builds, like the pierce chance at close range in the tree? Or how about once, just one time, the ranged doesn't get the better of a new mechanic... give the ranged weaker ascendancy trees for a change while letting the melee ones be stronger, to help close the gap for once (though looking at how bad the melee trees are, that ship has already sailed). |
|
|
Am I interpreting Powerful precision correctly. If I'm a drillneck/pierce build does the passive effectively remove the need for critical strike chance in the tree, since my pierce percentage is at 100?
|
|
