Remove Aurabots ?

#% increased effect of Non-Curse Auras from your Skills
to
#% increased effect of Non-Curse Auras from your Skills on you

"

zVisior wrote:

#% increased effect of Non-Curse Auras from your Skills
to
#% increased effect of Non-Curse Auras from your Skills on you

that would also be a pretty good solution imho

"

r34_Angryi wrote:

"

impulze3 wrote:

"

r34_Angryi wrote:

My solution would be that sharing auras with other people would also affect their mana reservation, either in full effect or 50%+.

wouldn't that make all players avoid party play because it would fuck up their mana pool ?

Fucking up their mana pool is the point, so groups with aurabots would actually have to build around it a develop a more complex strategy than "lets throw in an aurabot".
I take back full/50% mana reserved effect, it should be a couple of % with a multiplier that would depend on how many auras is one recieveing by other players.

one example would be:

two players join party, they dont use the same auras.
when they get close to eachother they completely fill eachothers mana reservation.

what if one player uses blood magic, he instantly reserves his lifepool and dies.

i dont think this is a good solution.

How about not fucking up the game by changing random ass shit?

You could make auras have a significantly lesser effect on others, but allow auras to stack for party members if they don't have the aura up for themselves.

That way you could get a heavy benefit if many people had auras up, but a single player couldn't carry a whole party.

The problem is not with the auras. The problem is with those who have an obsession on how other people play the game , trying to change the rules so they can bring them down to their ******** level.

"

iuiulitza wrote:

The problem is not with the auras. The problem is with those who have an obsession on how other people play the game , trying to change the rules so they can bring them down to their ******** level.

No, the problem is with the auras and how imbalanced it is that one use case yields a 25x increase in power and the common use case yields 1.3x

POE should focus on making the game more about active skills, than passive skills. Solves a lot of this. Be it Aura's or Autobombers or Minions. Refine out the auto anything, replace the gem with a new half active skill version, with less duration if summoned or set. For POE 2 anyhow.

"

PrairieTutanka wrote:

POE should focus on making the game more about active skills, than passive skills. Solves a lot of this. Be it Aura's or Autobombers or Minions. Refine out the auto anything, replace the gem with a new half active skill version, with less duration if summoned or set. For POE 2 anyhow.

This. It would not feel particularly bad if summoner priest builds would join parties and spend all their time buffing/healing their minions and fellow party members, because we acknowledge that buffing is what priests do, and while they were doing that, they're not attacking. Aurabots, however, do not feel like priests. You get a buff from a priest because that's what priests are doing with their time; you get a buff from an aurabot because they're just nearby, no other reason.

But GGG is certainly not interested in having summoners feel like priests, or for having melee warriors feel like melee for that matter. Every character is of the same core design:
- no limit on action rate, even if casting devastating, visually impressive spells;
- no limit on area of effect, even if the character is supposed to be a sniper;
- no limit on range, even if holding a "melee" weapon.
Casters don't feel any different from archers in PoE really. The only differences in playstyle between the classic medieval fantasy archetypes are the trivialities of physical appearance, or self-imposed masochism. Every character, archer or axe-swinger, pyromancer or necromancer, can be a Mathil hit-the-entire-screen clear speed build, and thus should be. There is nothing set aside as "melee can't do this" or "casters can't do that" so everything is terribly samey in terms of piloting, such that the best builds tend to simply be those that get the most efficiency from the passive tree. The same playstyle goal for every build, with the best version simply the solution to a complicated spreadsheet calculation with notables and tree pathing as inputs.

If you want to make the best ARPG ever, simply follow these simple rules:
- wizards spells can hit wide, and at range, and can and should be visually impressive enough to make a grown man cry, but simply cannot be allowed to be cast quickly.
- archers can hit things far away, and hit them rapidly like firing a machine gun, but arrows simply cannot be allowed to gain powerful area of effect coverage.
- melee weapons can swing in a satisfyingly large cleave, and swing fast with berserker abandon, but simply cannot be allowed to be used at range.
- powerful buffs can be cast on minion and allied player alike, but such buffs simply cannot be allowed to apply if the priest isn't actively channeling them.

Aurabots have the same solution as almost all of GGG's other balance problems. A solution that won't harm most of the players:

Diminishing returns.

Don't make it some convoluted mechanistic thing, just a diminishing return on total yields.

Movement speed could ramp up easily and than past a point the curve means a very serious investment for minimal increase.

DPS - the same thing. Auras - the same thing.

Diminishing returns is how the real world works. It is why we don't see 450 mph cars for sale. It isn't a lack of funding, engineering expertise or desire to build such cars - it just gets harder and harder to get more speed.

Olympic sprinters - same thing.

Why GGG bangs their head against the wall on this, instead of stepping back and seeing how easy it can be, I don't know.

The one big challenge they would have is determining what level of power they want players to have without pissing off too many players. There would be NO exploits allowing uber builds with properly set up diminishing returns .