CI and Low Life -- totally inconsistent, Please rethink this!!!!
|
Kaoms RF is being used in pvp now and its still really good.
Standard Forever
|
|
" Lol. Epic. |
|
|
Conceptually, I agree with you: CI should be "low life," and get all the benefits of that. I'm not sure that would be very balanced, however.
|
|
" lol, if you think you're soloing Necropolis Merveil with fire trap, I'm going to have to see a video. More likely you're hiding behind obstacles and you toss the occasional fire trap while the rest of your party facetanks and destroys her. |
|
" You vastly underestimate the dmg of fire trap. Edit. Or molten shell Last edited by SL4Y3R#7487 on May 19, 2013, 4:39:05 PM
|
|
|
Nice video there.
|
|
"There is no inconsistency there. CI means you have only a small life pool, and thus comes with the drawbacks of a small life pool (easier to freeze, shock and stun) in exchange for it's benefits (immune to chaos damage). In addition, you're always on full life (or dead) so get the benefits of being on full life (sucha s the melee damage on full life support gem). It does not put you on low life, and you do not get the benefits, or drawbacks of being on low life, because you aren't. Being easier to stun and freeze have nothing to do with being on low life. You current life is completely irrelevant to these things. Having a small life pool is a very different thing from being on low life, and the two are not related. | |
|
That's the thing, Mark. There's a ton of different passives, items, and skills that benefit from being low life, and there's about 2 of them for full life, one of those being a melee gem.
If you want CI's to be as competitive as low life builds, you're going to need to introduce more "full life" mechanics. |
|
" Have you ever tried to run a low-life build? |
|
"i agree... ci should lose the 20% more es notable (more blue life... how boring) and get some flavorful low-life bonuses instead |
|
