New Meta with Support Guardian 30k+ ES (Really GGG?)

"

Lazer_Death wrote:

"

chistor_ wrote:

Gifted maps and currency boosts by guildies is different. It gives bonus but doesn't make content easier. While supporting is a benefit without any loss, it's like flawless nobrainer since your chances of killing the character are ten times less.

I know u tried to find a good support for u but u couldnt.
This problem is yours if u dont have friends.

Working together gets the advantage in most life situations. Its normal ;-)

I found one but refused to farm in party, with support game becomes disgustingly easy. I just can't stand playing like that all the time.

"

Mannoth wrote:

Can only imagine what a 30k ES Vaal Righteous Fire explosion does to a boss ;)

Combine that with Vaal Clarity for fast-non-interruptable-ES-recovery like nothing happened.

Only problem I see with this is if GGG decides to balance the game assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30kes and they ramp up the damage to be on par with that.

"

edgewood wrote:

Only problem I see with this is if GGG decides to balance the game assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30kes and they ramp up the damage to be on par with that.

No. What GGG should do in their game code is IF it sees somebody or several players in a Party (or solo) is using certain known overpowered Support setups THEN scale monster damage off that ELSE do nothing.

Otherwise, if that is not a legit fix for what the OP is talking about, then just don't Party with other players running what you think are overpowered, ridiculous setups. Nobody is putting a gun to your head to join up with overpowered players, neither is it required to join them unless you choose to.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

No. What GGG should do in their game code is IF it sees somebody or several players in a Party (or solo) is using certain known overpowered Support setups THEN scale monster damage off that ELSE do nothing.

You want them to come up with some sort of algorithm that detects certain party setups ?

lol.

"

dyneol wrote:

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

No. What GGG should do in their game code is IF it sees somebody or several players in a Party (or solo) is using certain known overpowered Support setups THEN scale monster damage off that ELSE do nothing.

You want them to come up with some sort of algorithm that detects certain party setups ?

lol.

What is the difference with other things GGG has coded to run a 'check' on players' characters? You laugh like such a system is so beyond GGG's capabilities when you would be very wrong, especially when you consider the fact the engine itself is constantly being improved to unlock more possibilities.

So tell me, do you have a better idea? *listening*

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

"

dyneol wrote:

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

No. What GGG should do in their game code is IF it sees somebody or several players in a Party (or solo) is using certain known overpowered Support setups THEN scale monster damage off that ELSE do nothing.

You want them to come up with some sort of algorithm that detects certain party setups ?

lol.

What is the difference with other things GGG has coded to run a 'check' on players' characters? You laugh like such a system is so beyond GGG's capabilities when you would be very wrong, especially when you consider the fact the engine itself is constantly being improved to unlock more possibilities.

So tell me, do you have a better idea? *listening*

Keep listening ... that suggestion is so hilariously stupid on so many levels (note, I don't insult you, only your idea) that I don't even know where to start.

"

dyneol wrote:

Keep listening ... that suggestion is so hilariously stupid on so many levels (note, I don't insult you, only your idea) that I don't even know where to start.

Right, but since the idea came from me, you are therefore insulting my intelligence that is part of me. One does not call somebody's idea(s) stupid without also calling the person stupid. Not how it works.

That being said, it is actually not a bad idea since what GGG is doing now by buffing monsters globally no matter what players are running isn't jiving very well with many players, so yes, I believe I will keep listening until somebody comes up with something better, thank you very much ^^

The idea I propose zeroes in on only certain things when certain conditions are met (big difference).

When

"

edgewood wrote:

Only problem I see with this is if GGG decides to balance the game assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30kes and they ramp up the damage to be on par with that.

He made a pretty good point, because buffing monsters globally by 'assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30k ES' (just an example) is not a good idea since doing so will inadvertently affect weaker builds that are not quite as OP.

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

He made a pretty good point, because buffing monsters globally by 'assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30k ES' (just an example) is not a good idea since doing so will inadvertently affect weaker builds that are not quite as OP.

I pointed out the exact same thing earlier in the thread. Trying to dynamically balance around certain builds and build combinations would come with a whole chunk of new problems and is pretty backwards. I don't see why guardian should provide +100% (and more) defense in the first place.

"

dyneol wrote:

"

HeavyMetalGear wrote:

He made a pretty good point, because buffing monsters globally by 'assuming everyone is going to walk around with 30k ES' (just an example) is not a good idea since doing so will inadvertently affect weaker builds that are not quite as OP.

I pointed out the exact same thing earlier in the thread. Trying to dynamically balance around certain builds and build combinations would come with a whole chunk of new problems and is pretty backwards. I don't see why guardian should provide +100% (and more) defense in the first place.

If you think monsters getting buffed in such way so as to level out the field with what players are running when utilizizing certain know OP setups is 'backwards', then I have nothing else to add/say after this reply.

Furthermore, any type of balance, whether what I propose(d) is implemented or not does not come without its fair share of 'problems/bugs', so that part of your reply does absolutely nothing to support your end of this discussion since 'problems/bugs' are to be expected by default when any change is made to the game.

Problems... / bugs... They are learning experiences for game developers, some of which can lead to the discovery of new mechanics by accident that can be used in the future, no different from the process of invention itself with much trial and error, so what's the big deal?

Even the astute Albert Einstein himself said, and I quote, "A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new." end of quote, for a reason. He encourages people to try different things and make mistakes so that maybe new different things can be discovered and put to use. It may work, it may not, but how will GGG ever know if they do not give something different a try in the realm of balancing?