Dear Rory

"

Aim_Deep написал:

"

vangrandson написал:

Aura change is fine so stop that whining, just run 1-2 less auras.

Problem solved

Problem not solved. many build dont even run offensive aura and run purities only to prevent one shots on reflect. It breaks many of those builds. I posted two example a few pages back.


Everyone know DPS auras are a luxury and one can be left off w/o issues thats not the issue with this change.

Issue is completely breaking builds and killing diversity. Sorta like thier max block fuck up no one plays anymore.

Unless you think its a problem their are too many options for end game. Then i guess yeah problem is solved. Less end game builds.

+1

I think they are helping max block builds with jewels or at least I hope. But they still need to keep the cost factor and balance there so you can't stack multiple forms of insane defenses to achieve immortality, like you know max block (and spell block), phase, acro, high level AA, CoD, EB that was from a while ago.

"

Rory написал:

I agree, builds that get a large bonus from a couple of auras that bring them on-par with other builds but can't afford the cost now will suffer from this change. Ideally, they can sustain the cost with minor investment, but sometimes that option isn't available to core build paths. We're working on granting these builds more low cost mana investment. If there are specific 50% auras that you're considering mandatory, please let me know, as we can introduce lower cost alternatives or give builds ways to easily compensate for the loss.

Dear developers, while balancing reduced mana, please don't forget about elemental aura builds (as for me - i'm speaking about windripper or ele-buzzsaw) - this builds already have to invest many points into reserve nodes, and are able to keep 4 auras (anger, wrath, HoI, Hot) only with lvl18+ RM gem. Dropping one aura will lead to great change in DPS and survivability (leech), which isn't great even now. I hope that testing will cover such builds in beta.

"

geradon написал:

"

MrTremere написал:

This whole story brings another question : why was the Enlighten bonus so dramatically low?

If you do the maths, you directly understand that it's a really bad choice.

you sacrifice the leveling of 6 gems in favour of leveling 5 gems faster, if you play alot and have a highly linked secondary weapon with "+gem level" affixes.

Also, it gives you the option of leveling specific gems that you want leveled faster.

"

goetzjam написал:

EB needed to be changed in a way to it isn't automatically picked up for every caster ever and used with CoD and AA to achieve insane defenses. That is the whole point of the change, is the current beta version worst then life, of freaking course and it must remain something you need to think about picking up over just automatically doing it. That being said I think it needs more behind it if they want more then .00000000001% of whoever thinks its good to use it.

There's a big problem with that mindset. There will always be one version of something that is superior to another, so by removing/nerfing something simply because it is superior isn't a good way of doing so, because it only limits your options. Adding another option would be a much better way of dealing with the lack of an alternative. I'm playing as an armour/es hybrid witch in beta and it's rather lackluster. Sure, I can pull of running mid 70s maps, but it's sketchy at best. I joined a public party for an Untainted Paradise map and watched the entire party rip within the first 2 minutes to a pack of devourers.

"

goetzjam написал:

Its not a strait move to enlighten, they want to make reduced mana a gem not everyone needs, even enlighten won't be depending on builds as they reduced the base cost of all auras to somewhat compensate for it. I've made a separate thread on this issue suggesting they change quality auras to be the remaining difference in using reduced mana instead of its current "shitty" aoe.

They are already changing so much about PoE, a few more things doesn't hurt.

Unfortunately it is a straight move to Enlighten for some builds, as Rory himself acknowledged when he stated that some builds will still require it for that last aura (read dedicated aura builds) and being that there are only a dozen or so level 4 Enlighten gems on the market...do the math. Terrible solution to a mediocre problem. Again, cutting options because there's an "obvious best/preferrred method" is foolish. All you do is play a metaphorical game of 'hot potato' in which everyone gets burned in the end. Add a feasible, accessible option that doesn't run off everyone who's not a dedicated, elite trading simulator player who runs a mirror service. Why should everyone who plays a dedicated aura build require a gem that runs 50+ exalted simply because auras are good? What happens once the meta shifts again to something else that is "the obvious best choice"? Does that get obliterated as well and then the meta shifts to something else, repeating the vicious cycle? I don't understand how people defend such a short-sighted strategy.

"

vangrandson написал:

Aura change is fine so stop that whining, just run 1-2 less auras.

Problem solved

I would wager that you've never played a dedicated low life aura build. You don't realize how detrimental losing 1 aura could be when you have to invest so much in the passive tree/gear to run such a build costs. You sacrifice quite a lot to stretch across the tree to grab every mana reserve node (save for nodes down by the Duelist section in the tree).

"

There's a big problem with that mindset. There will always be one version of something that is superior to another, so by removing/nerfing something simply because it is superior isn't a good way of doing so, because it only limits your options. Adding another option would be a much better way of dealing with the lack of an alternative. I'm playing as an armour/es hybrid witch in beta and it's rather lackluster. Sure, I can pull of running mid 70s maps, but it's sketchy at best. I joined a public party for an Untainted Paradise map and watched the entire party rip within the first 2 minutes to a pack of devourers.

By removing it or changing it so it isn't a no brainier actually forces players into looking at other options. You can seriously tell me with a strait face that there were spell caster builds that either A) didnt use eb or B) werent CI those were your options before the EB changes as a spellcaster. I think some tuning is needed in order to make spell casters a bit safer then they are now, but I think GGG wants them to have a weakness.

Melee has a range weakness.
Spell casters have defensive issues.
Ranged has reflect issues.

I am not jumping up and down with joy on the change, but they are changing so many other aspects of the game to the point of why not change this clearly overused keystone into something people should build around instead of auto pickup.

One of my issues with the top side of the tree is a lack of defensive nodes (i'm not talking life\es) I am talking about armor or evasion, IMO thats the biggest problem with trying to make a spell caster in beta.

"

Unfortunately it is a straight move to Enlighten for some builds, as Rory himself acknowledged when he stated that some builds will still require it for that last aura (read dedicated aura builds) and being that there are only a dozen or so level 4 Enlighten gems on the market...do the math. Terrible solution to a mediocre problem. Again, cutting options because there's an "obvious best/preferrred method" is foolish. All you do is play a metaphorical game of 'hot potato' in which everyone gets burned in the end. Add a feasible, accessible option that doesn't run off everyone who's not a dedicated, elite trading simulator player who runs a mirror service. Why should everyone who plays a dedicated aura build require a gem that runs 50+ exalted simply because auras are good? What happens once the meta shifts again to something else that is "the obvious best choice"? Does that get obliterated as well and then the meta shifts to something else, repeating the vicious cycle? I don't understand how people defend such a short-sighted strategy.

Of course for some builds it is, those that refuse to or don't want to use 1 less aura. If you think I am happy with the change you are so wrong. I have a thread specifically calling them out for using enlighten as the solution to removing reduced mana use with auras instead of the IMO better solution of quality auras.

"

goetzjam написал:

By removing it or changing it so it isn't a non brainier actually forces players into looking at other options. You can seriously tell me with a strait face that there were spell caster builds that either A) didnt use eb or B) werent CI those were your options before the EB changes as a spellcaster. I think some tuning is needed in order to make spell casters a bit safer then they are now, but I think GGG wants them to have a weakness.

But you reiterated my point. The meta shifts to CI for survivability, then push comes to shove and CI becomes the next up on the chopping block, because it's "the no-brainer" (instead of looking at it from the perspective of it being "the last resort"). It's a vicious cycle and once the guillotine drops, there's no going back. I stand by my point that removing an option, whilst not adding another, is a bad trend.

I am currently level 84 on my triple cursing, Ball Lightning witch and my defense consists of less than 1k armour without a granite flask or endurance charges, goes up to about 12k armour with a granite active (I took the flask nodes above the witch start coupled with %armour/es nodes in the templar's area), and then rely on Warlord's Mark/Enduring Cry to keep my endurance charges up while Immortal Call linked with Cast When Damage Taken and Increased Duration keep me alive between flask charges. It's not the best solution because it's sketchy with the current server/client de-synchronization that's still ever lurking. I'm always pre-emptively spamming flasks to prevent that glitched physical damage dealing monster from having its way with my witch. I think that the deterministic lockstep could improve the playstyle greatly by not having to spam my flasks way in advance of an invisible mob, but then again it's still depending on flask charges that are unreliable despite having "increased flask charges gained" on my belt and the benefit of increased flask charges gained from Warlord's Mark.

"

goetzjam написал:

I am not jumping up and down with joy on the change, but they are changing so many other aspects of the game to the point of why not change this clearly overused keystone into something people should build around instead of auto pickup.

One of my issues with the top side of the tree is a lack of defensive nodes (i'm not talking life\es) I am talking about armor or evasion, IMO thats the biggest problem with trying to make a spell caster in beta.

Change simply for the sake of change, while not adding alternatives, limits diversity and options, which is what a lot of people flock to this 'Diablo-esque' arpg for in the first place. I left Diablo 3 for that reason, along with numerous others, because it lacked options.

"

goetzjam написал:

Of course for some builds it is, those that refuse to or don't want to use 1 less aura. If you think I am happy with the change you are so wrong. I have a thread specifically calling them out for using enlighten as the solution to removing reduced mana use with auras instead of the IMO better solution of quality auras.

Quality makes the option of dedicated aura builds a more feasible option for the common individual, but again, why is it necessary to hurt build diversity for the sake of shifting the meta? Why can't an alternative be presented, rather than simply destroy builds that don't require you to dedicate every waking moment to the rng gods? I have a dedicated low life, IIQ/IIR summoner in the live realm that already lost 1 aura due to the change to Mortal Conviction when that was "way op". Fine, so be it. Now I'm down to 6 auras and you're telling me that is "way op"? I don't think people realize how much a build sacrifices to get the minion nodes, aura nodes, and then get whatever else is remaining for %es. The clear speed isn't anywhere close to that of the builds that use top tier uniques like a Mjolner or Windripper, but it's at least viable. Cutting the auras down further (6 down to 5) would essentially kill the build. It would not be worth it to run 5 auras on a low life summoner any more (particularly with the change to summoner aggro). Just another example of build diversity going down the drain in an effort to "shift the meta". The logic makes absolutely zero sense.

"

Change simply for the sake of change, while not adding alternatives, limits diversity and options, which is what a lot of people flock to this 'Diablo-esque' arpg for in the first place. I left Diablo 3 for that reason, along with numerous others, because it lacked options.

Like I said before I think they need to add something in the witch or spell caster aura for defensive purposes because as it stands now as a witch you pretty much now just go CI and hope you can get high enough ES to live.

IDK how many times I and other can say EB in the live realm limited options because of how it worked, if they redid it or reworked it and added another option (maybe by the templar\witch area) then we could see competition between them, but if you think EB was not overpowered you must not understand how it works and how every single spellcaster ever got it (basically) How is that options or diversity?

"

Quality makes the option of dedicated aura builds a more feasible option for the common individual, but again, why is it necessary to hurt build diversity for the sake of shifting the meta? Why can't an alternative be presented, rather than simply destroy builds that don't require you to dedicate every waking moment to the rng gods?

They don't want every single build to have to use 1 or multiple reduced mana gems, now is as good as time as any to make this change. They aren't calling it PoE 2.0 for no reason.

Quality makes it appealing to common and group players, its necessary to move the cost of the remaining 8% for large auras to something instead of giving it for free so that you must invest into running the additional auras from a gear (gem in this case) standpoint, not just a tree standpoint. Its so much better idea then the purposed enlighten idea IMO.

I don't think every single low life summoner build is overpowered, but I do believe quite a few low life builds are very strong, not only that builds like ele spectral throw are super popular and do great damage as well, its because of this that I think GGG wants to make it not so easy to stack auras and heralds.

The meta will shift constantly in PoE with every 3-4 month league they nerf unqiues, add more and add skill gems, if you are one of those people that play a build for a long time you will be affected regardless if yours was FoTM or not, its how you adapt to the changes that makes you a better player.

"

goetzjam написал:

...
The meta will shift constantly in PoE with every 3-4 month league they nerf unqiues, add more and add skill gems, if you are one of those people that play a build for a long time you will be affected regardless if yours was FoTM or not, its how you adapt to the changes that makes you a better player.

Except if you go bow, you never have to worry about changing meta. TS and now SA, all they do is get buffed.

"

Dark_Chicken написал:

Except if you go bow, you never have to worry about changing meta. TS and now SA, all they do is get buffed.

Except you know they nerfed crit....

Does no one else remember the metas of past when bows were the least powerful things ever, now that they are somewhat good everyones like they've buffed it constantly. I dont even play a bow character but I can tell you its annoying as fuck to hear people cry about TS\SA\bow characters getting buffed constantly.

Well i did play a bow character in bloodlines, but that was bloodlines....

relative speaking, whats changed?