Melee Splash?

Baharoth, this change is doing nothing to hurt your build or playstyle and you still have the option to play a completely different skill or continue to gem swap if you want to spend passive points on something else. It is very nice QoL for players like me that just want to play a strike skill starting in acts and actually league start as one (I'm a grown up, I can decide whether for myself I want to play a better skill or not and I unironically enjoy exploding packs with strike skills).

"

Baharoth15 wrote:

Yes, that change will make strike skills slightly better for leveling but they will still suck ass compared to other choices to the point where i wouldn't want to bother with it. Just use a different skill for leveling and then switch once you have the basic foundations needed for a strike build covered. Just like you'd do it with most spell builds.

(You're right, that was an unneeded amount of hyperboling. Sorry.)

I personally do not do that, when it can be avoided. If I want to play an X build, I'll use X as soon as I can. And I personally feel that when skill X is made available from level Y, it should be balanced to be "competitive" at that level. I do not like the idea of "league starters" and I do not like the idea of "leveling skills". I understand perfectly well that there has to be variances in skills for the game to be diverse, but that some skills can "easily" carry you through the campaign with close to no investment is stupid.

And the fact that you are "against" these changes seems very strange to me. When was the last time you played a strike skills that needs melee splash, like Double Strike, Heavy Strike or Dual Strike? I just have problem seeing how anyone can see these changes as "nothing", or even "not needed".

It's VERY hard to discuss balance with a standard player with hidden characters. We never know how high of a horse they're critiquing balance from. But that's a "me" problem, not a "you" problem.

Why do you people think i am against these changes? I don't think i said anything like that? It's just that i consider it irrelevant (for me) that's all.

I was just asking regarding gem swaps vs permanent tree investment because i prefer the latter since i don't have to do it often. The idea of having to gem swap for an AN rare never even crossed my mind, my mistake.

As for your question regarding me playing strike skills, i've got a dual striker at 96 that i play quite often because i like the playstyle a lot. The gem performs nicely once the build comes together but it's a pain before that point so as much as i like it for endgame, i wouldn't league start with it. But each their own so the change certainly isn't something bad by all means.

"

Baharoth15 wrote:

I was just asking regarding gem swaps vs permanent tree investment because i prefer the latter since i don't have to do it often. Didn't really think about leveling because frankly i hardly ever do that since it's a pain. My mistake.

Which sort of suggests (to me) that you've hardly ever been in a mapping/leveling/end game/whatever scenario with a strike skill + splash where your damage felt lacking, and you thought: "What if I didn't actually have to run a non-damage support in my setup".

But I'm beating a dead horse here. We disagree. Which is OK.

At work, does this apply to minions and totems or allies nearby mechanic or how is it worded?

It's on a tree but only for marauder and duelist, just why....

i agree totally

"

TorsteinTheFallen wrote:

It's on a tree but only for marauder and duelist, just why....

It is likely to be annointable onto an amulet.

"

Xyel wrote:

"

TorsteinTheFallen wrote:

It's on a tree but only for marauder and duelist, just why....

It is likely to be annointable onto an amulet.

Oh yeah, forgot. :)

"

Xyel wrote:

"

TorsteinTheFallen wrote:

It's on a tree but only for marauder and duelist, just why....

It is likely to be annointable onto an amulet.

Doubt it; isn't it a mastery?