Back in the days of 8 minutes crucible used to need multiple people just to run it safe or you go for infinite mirror + mark of torment invincible broken build or you go for 0%chance hitting DA rocks.
Times were different then and stuff was ridiculously over-tuned to the point where you can have team wipes of fully geared party just because you run into 3 bullshit reapers and a Kuba on top on 170.
I agree 170 was not ment to be accessible but what is accessible? when builds have BIS gears they arent farming their own items anymore but items for the next char, so 6-7min to me is fairly healthy consider you actually have to spend tributes just to survive. You are playing with all the intended mechanics to get to that speed: the buffs, the banners, positioning, understand enemies or your own modifiers etc, so a reward like that would be pretty nice.
100-150 in comparison is a breeze and you can even run it without spending a single tribute with 99% builds out there. 170 is ment to be a sort of end game to test your builds so i’m not surprised if most builds can run it fairy fast, considering the amount of work you need to actually get there.
In addition to this, i actually find builds from forum deceptive in that most top tier are OP not because of broken single target damage but ridiculous AOEs. Nex, CT, Vindictator builds that can run under 6 minutes preciously because they have insane AOE that shred bosses without even looking in their general direction, but their single target on mad queen, megabosses or some of the nemesis is fairly tame if you see how they perform in main campaign.
I hope dev isn’t just looking for crucible for balance because i think it can be deceptive on how a build perform, considering you get free HP/OA/resist buffs and your build rely more on AOEs than single targets. Some of the build for example have 9k hp without crucible buffs, which usually means one shotted if you dont dodge some of the stuff in main campaign. You might even struggle with Lokarr if you are that squishy. This isn’t the same in crucible since a 9k hp becomes almost 14k after buffs, which means you will survive that Alek meteor and life-steal backup, which is impossible in campaign.
Glad crucible give you 4 buffs that up your HP (most important), OA, DA, resist, stun resist etc. A 9k hp character becomes quite tanky at 14k hp, enough to survive most stuff if you have lifesteal.
In main campaign you dont have this and Lokarr kills you with a shotgun or crit after building enough RR shreds.
Is not like that 9k hp char can actually run crucible without those buffs either, or he can by being lucky and kite forever.
I don’t mind clipping top builds, but the way Z. does is usually clipping a bunch of medium and weaker builds with it. Like nerfing Spellbinders (talking about mirror nerf) greatly affected Spellbreakers and Warlocks. Nerfing N and O just erased a bunch of great builds out of existense. Nerfing flat damage and ADCtH will make weaker melee characters like Tricksters and Spellbreakers
suffer.
I think you get the point.
Dude, I stopped replying to you long ago. I respect your way of approaching this game - playing self-found, but because of that you seem to know jack-shit about end-game and sometimes make most idiotic comments and remarks.
In case it wasn’t clear I was talking about Main Campaign from Forgotten Gods, Shattered Realm to be specific. Being able to faceroll Crucible 150-170 and not being able to faceroll Lokarr is indicative of nothing, really.
But from talking to other (a bit more knowledgeable and adequate) Praetorians who test Shards it was not hard to conclude that a lot of battles in Shards will require similiar (or higher) type of tankiness that Lokarr currently requires.
I was largely referring to Dying God - 40% Crit and 10% Speed is a great boost for every archetype; it was so good that melee builds would give up their damage specific T3 devotion and just go for Dying God just for that stat boost. Other times, it was get Flame Torrent even if your damage type had nothing in common just because of the Weapon Damage. There’s usually one devotion that stands out as THE devotion to get [At this point, it’s Bat] that regardless of what your build is, your build has to get it.
I could go on about the other points in the thread, but there’s too many factors that I would end up making circular arguments.
Regen is a slippery slope. If it gets too high you achieve passive immortality beyond that of the MoT/Mirror combo. Even before then, it’ll trivialize DoTs. Before then is where you have something that’s decent for kiting but insufficient for defending you from GD’s raw burst damage - see the DW/ADCTH section. This is where Regeneration, from a design perspective, ought to be reasonably attainable without too much sacrifice in kill potential in order for it to be a viable means of defense. To approach the bursty problem, perhaps some health-gating mechanics ought to be introduced, or some on-hit heals could be more prevalent on Regeneration items - see Touch of the Everliving Grove, for instance.
We’ve already seen the slippery slope with High Armor + Censure Damage Reduction + flat damage absorption from Inquisitor Seal. At this stage, Inquisitor’s skills do much more for mitigating damage than any other class can do with Regen, and it would be nice for Regen to be buffed so that any non-Inquisitor class could reasonably build to have similar protection against DoTs.
I agree it’s insane AoE that seems to be a pressing issue. That’ll be addressed too. And I wasn’t saying that back when the best clear times were 8 minutes that things were perfect. I just thought the pacing was better but yes the restrictiveness of builds that could do it was a bit much. Your point about 100-150 is interesting. Maybe the scaling should be a bit better and 151-170 shouldn’t feel like such a huge leap from 100-150. Generally though people seem more or less pleased with what Crucible is now so huge changes seem unlikely. And in multiplayer it is sooooo much easier.
We’re all aware that some builds perform better in crucible than in campaign due to some buffs. However the builds doing sub 6 are all monstrous in campaign too. Particularly one must concede that before the bug was fixed and some stuff toned down, witching hour pet builds were nutso.
I’m not saying things should go back to how it was then. I’m saying some damage dealing builds have gone too far.
N n O are hopefully becoming something for sabos. Some OP builds vanish, some undersupported stuff gets support.
Spellbinder was faceroll immortal for all content in the game. If you weren’t immortal then Mark was reducing enough damage to make it so. If those builds were demolished by the changes (they’re ok when I still play them) then they can get defensive stats another way. Two button immortality just goes against the design intention I think.
Also they were ridiculous. Basically every variation of spellbinder was god tier. I know. I tried them all. I could carry four people in crucible effortlessly with any of them. CT. PRM. Krieg. Iskandra. Clairvoyant. Bone harvest. All of them.
Mad, I like your builds and often the core of your ideas/feedback but you sometimes act like you own a monopoly on what’s correct or good for the game.
“[Z’s nerfs are] usually clipping a bunch of medium and weaker builds with it.” I think this is your most fair and benevolent concern. But I ask you to understand that clipping any powerful item of an OP build will almost ALWAYS nerf all the other less synergetically strong builds that use the same item. That’s unavoidable.
I ask that you be patient and remember that whatever weaker class combos were hurt can be buffed in OTHER ways. And I ask that you point out which class combos could use the support and how’d you’d go about doing it without making some other build OP in the process.
Finally I’d like if we could try to be more kind, patient and understanding with each other. Call it a pipe dream but I will try.
Also the idea of don’t touch the best builds just buff the weak builds doesn’t work so well in practice. It tends to spiral out of control. Sometimes you need to clip the top builds which makes the problems with medium-weak builds more clear and let’s them be addressed in a more nuanced way.
Some changes are made knowing that further changes may be needed later. And ofc everybody can’t get what they want out of GD. We want different things.
Please tell me what’s happen when cdr abuse mechanic was removed from game?Spellbinders literally broke the speed record in Crucible.But lot of fragile casters that have not may other ways to survive,perished.Spellbinders will still be better than most of them cause they have synergy.Infiltrators also have crazy synergy,they can work with many sets even not design for them.By nerfing N&O you will kill just the fragile class combos.DW cold Reaper for example needs that kind of leverage to function.Infiltrator will still be one of the top classes for dw melee.So to keep diversity try to improve weaker classes like AAR warlock and don’t be shocked when good class like Spellbinder or Infiltrator is setting records,they are just build to be great.
You see that’s the thing though. That change to Nex and Ortus didn’t do much for Sabouters. Crate nerfed swords’ proc, added a bit of damage to Fire Strike and nerfed Elemental Harmony ring set, moving acid conversion to Flame Touched did nothing to N&O Sabouters. So Sabouters are basically more or less breakeven after 1.1. So same unstable melee class with very little item support and very weak melee skill. And I can’t see that changing any time soon.
Spellbinder remains the strongest class combination, Agrivix is still incredibly overpowered and godlike. But all those nerfs basically removed build diversity from Spellbinders making two out of their 4 sets useless. So there is that.
I don’t own a monopoly. In fact, my views basically coincide with views of other prominent builders. But our collective opinion constantly gets neglected. And I have no other choice but to repeat same things over and over hoping that some of it gets through.
For sure as long Praetorians stop trying to teach me about how end-game builds work.
If it is the AoE that is the pressing issue, then why is Rune of Haggarad re-designed the say it is? It deals 30% less damage at the center and full damage at the edge. Should’t it be the other way around if it is the AoE dmg aspect that “needs” nerf?
I think it needs more phrasing. It’s not just the AoE, or just the single target. It’s that the OP single target builds get enough AoE to shred trash mobs to bits easily (i.e. NO + Balance, pets), and OP AoE builds have enough single target to burst down bosses in a flash (see binder, runes).
This way, the nerfs are justified (imo) where balance rings lost AoE clearing potency, same with NO. Rune lost a lot of single target damage, and the agrivix weapon damage removal hurt binder single target damage.
Perhaps they are afraid of “power creep” :rolleyes:
I just hope the game will be finalized soon in terms of balancing. With each patch it feels like its a new game so I have to remake all previous chars which hinders me to make new ones (which is the point of the game -> having/making many chars?)
Talking about balance here feels impossible at times. I say some extreme single target/small aoe dps was a problem you say AoE is a problem. I agree that now (see changes 1.0.7-1.1) that a lot of flat dmg stuff/single target stuff was tuned down, and lifesteal tuned down, single/low target dps is more in line so yes now some ridiculous AoE remains to be tuned, then I get snarked on the fair Rune of Hag nerf.
A lot of you are operating under the delusion that classes can be even close to equally good and yet also diverse in mechanics and playstyle. This is just not going to happen. Nobody likes to be told to lower their expectations but a lot of you would have a more reasonable view of all the “build diversity” attention we already have been given if you did. If the classes are going to be non-homogeneous, and the other systems that give player-side stats are going to be non-homogeneous then there will be a non-trivial range of in-game performance.
Some here seem hellbent on being “correct” just about how “wrong” someone else is and get “gotcha” moments to the point that the commentary ends up being entirely nonconstructive to solving the actual issue. If you want to actually point out specific overtuned and undertuned things, take up a cause in ideas and feedback. Make good coherent argument. Provide a list of potential solutions. Make youtube videos displaying your case if you’re convinced the devs are skeptical (chances are they’re just busy!) and just keep. at. it. Eventually you might see some of your bigger changes. Also the more people you can get agreeing in your thread helps, for better or worse.
An alternative solution is just to invest a bit less energy into the state of the game.
You’re generalizing. Which casters. Which builds? Perished where? The Crucible 150-170? All nerfs that hurt one really good build are obviously going to also push down lesser variations that use other classes. That shouldn’t be used as an argument against a nerf.
The CDR abuse wasn’t removed to clip spellbinder damage. It was to remove near immortality cheese that they got on top of their dmg. Every single spellbinder I played I could play half asleep and 0 death everything every time. Now other weaker spell casters using the same nerfed sets/skills are hurt. That’s inevitable.
Again, sometimes things are done to try to just buff weaker combos. Sometimes it fails and instead buffs something else more. It’s hard in the current stage of the game to buff weaker combos WITHOUT adding more items which would require more art, thought etc. Good ideas for spellscourge and clairvoyant would be great!
If there’s a way to buff warlocks without making a god tier spellbinder that’d be fantastic. Through conversion modifiers it just might be possible but the set certainly needs more work. N&O are hopefully being reworked for a weaker class combo. Frankly, just the fact that all class combos are viable through campaign and MOST of them can be pretty darn good is quite impressive? A few lesser combos (that still clear campaign fine) out of how many good ones?
Sometimes it’s a question of whether it’s even doable.
Other times it’s a question of if it’s reasonably doable.
Other times the devs might just have more important aspects of the game to work on. Like a whole new expansion. Running a business… etc.
I’d like to see every combo good too. But what I tend to see is people point out OP shit, people complain OP shit gets nerfed, and then AFTER it’s all said and done do people start piping up about how they would have toned the OP shit down. And often they say they wouldn’t touch it, they’d just buff all the other things more. Or just disagree with the nerf but offer no alternative.
Warlock, Defiler, Battlemage, Elementalist are all on my list now. I can add Reaper too if you like. I think we all agree some class combos still lack support (and that’s okay but it would be nice to get it).
Thank you. Yes. Writing here I feel like I have to be sooooo damned perfectly nuanced because everyone wants a snippet to argue about instead of trying to focus on specific implementable solutions. Each OP build should be looked at differently. A lot of arguing here borders on philosophy. A combination of insane AoE dps, Insane single target, and insane sustain probably aren’t meant to go together. Do people actually disagree with this?
You’re much nicer to me on your youtube channel. Here you get rude and pretend to be obtuse by responding to a general statement and then pointing out obvious specifics where they don’t apply. Rune of Hag was OP because of its shotgun. Its AoE was fine and not even that spammable compared to other powerful AoE (Callidor’s Tempest for example) The further out the spikes spread the more spaces there are between the spikes to not hit anything. Unlike radial AoE which hits everything in a big circle. There’s also just the delay on its activation.
Also again… Rune of Hag is still good. If you’re sub 10 minutes there’s probably nothing worth complaining about. If you’re sub 8 with 100% consistency there’s certainly nothing to complain about.
Separate post to talk about this unfortunate us vs. them thing I see going on sometimes between community and praetorian, or community vs dev.
I said it before but it was buried: The playtesters do not control the game gets balanced. We are not keeping you from getting what you want balance-wise. PLENTY of people were saying how OP spellbinders were and how out of control they were on the forum. And this stuff is more an after thought to us anyway since our primary focus is testing the new content to try and reduce issues it has as much as possible for release.
Generally the vast majority of balance stuff we advocate for are buffs that are well received anyway, since everyone seems to like buffs lol.
See this ^^^^ link? This is what governs a lot of the game’s balance. That and the developer’s intentions/desires ofc.
I think I can discuss generally what playtesters do without getting in trouble.
This is what playtesters mainly contribute:
“I found this list of bugs.”
“I found this list of multiplayer bugs.”
“This boss felt too easy on this difficulty.”
“Graphical error screenshot”
“This boss felt too hard on this difficulty.”
“This skill feels terrible to level with.”
“This skill feels amazing and I love it.”
“This enemy type is really cool.”
“There’s a hole in the lore that would be cool if fleshed out.”
“Here is a list of typos.”
“This feels wayyyyyy too strong.”
“This feels wayyyyyy too weak.”
And ofc we give feedback on the new gear.
I am of course generalizing and not being specific/including the detail we add to go with the above feedback, since I am not supposed to talk about that stuff yet. But that’s mainly it. Yes we also come up with changes for legendaries we like but it’s probably no more effective for us to mention it than anything written in ideas and feedback.
We’re gamers too. I still play the game religiously.
The process to get changes you want into GD is simple:
Bring up something you’d like to see changed and make a good argument for it. Or seriously just something simple you’d like to see in the game can be enough lol.
Then others will chime in about whether they agree it’s a good idea or that a problem you outlined is actually a problem or not.
Then if it’s extremely contentious there might be no change since the community is split, or the devs might pick a side. Otherwise if a reasoned consensus is reached, the community can start debating on how to solve the problem/best implement a generally liked idea for change. Or the dev will see an obvious way to implement it well and just do so. Or won’t due to development constraints.
Then, finally, if something simple to implement is met with a consensus and the devs agree, it makes it in. If there is a huge divide, the devs may pick a side again or not touch it. OR (and this is the big one again) it may simply not make it into the game for a GOOD laundry list of reasons/priorities of their time. Or it just fell through the cracks (looking at you spellscourge) etc.
We all love this game, we all want it to be as good and fun as it can be, and open up its ability to allow tinkerers to make creative builds (despite being a tiny tiny fraction of the people playing the game) etc. If we can focus less on trying to make someone else wrong or convince others to think like us, we can just flesh out our case for a change and let the process take its course.
You don’t need to try and fight to make other members agree with you or not. I’m not against debate but when it’s subjective it’s best to let people feel whatever they want. If there’s disagreement and conflict that’s what it’s gonna be. Discovering that your idea is just under-spoken about and that there’s actually a community consensus with you is one thing, but the only people you need to agree with you are those at Crate. Heck, arguments tend to just distract from the ideas themselves and probably make one devoted developer feel it’s more of a chore to read
I am not rude? I asked a question and I got a good answer from x1x1x1x1x1x1x1 and now also from you. I am not 100% knowledgeable when it comes to how RoH works in detail, that is why I asked. Are people who ask questions rude? (also my YT channel is devoted to newer/casual player who want to step-up and start doing end-game stuff. My intentions in this thread serves a completely different purpose - but no way I am rude, at least not on purpose)
And regarding the comment on “power creep”, is just something I have seen ruin other games like Diablo III, so idk perhaps buffs are something that Crate are careful about?
I don’t care about cruci time clears, I do care that my builds can complete it all and can also tank hard stuff in main campaign like MQ and Lokarr. If they can’t even do say cruci sub 10 min with 100% success, Lokarr sub 1 min, what is the point that I even try to play them in the new Shattered Realm?
What defensive improvements have been taken to make CT spellbinders and DW chars able to balance out their loss in dmg and thus survival against hard-hitting single targets?
When you do think that the “final” patch is done? How would you respond to someone like me who thinks that each new patch is like a new game and makes me even less motivated to keep playing?
You and the entire crate team are doing a great job trying to make the game as good as it can become, I am no way “complaining” or so. If it seems like it, it is not intentional. I appreciate that you take your time replying.
My mistake. I misread the tone of your question as mocking instead of sincere. I apologize. Power creep comes from card games actually but the concept translates here as:
Constantly buffing things or adding new powerful things for the player’s side will always somewhat displace or make obsolete other existing player side things. Then people will get used to the new level of power, but also point out those old obsolete things are now “weak” and need buffing. Then those get buffed and some stuff that was fine becomes weaker by comparison and this can repeat endlessly, in an unhealthy cycle and tends to hurt some joy for the game. It can even contribute to what you described as each patch feeling like a new game. Though I disagree with that statement and I address it later.
If you find a set can’t do crucible sub 10 then it very likely has a problem I agree. (cough spellscourge). But even then it might not because maybe it’s super low AoE but tanky. But yeah I don’t enjoy builds thaaaat much slower. If it can’t do sub 12 the I agree something is definitely wrong.
“What defensive improvements have been taken to make CT spellbinders and DW chars able to balance out their loss in dmg and thus survival against hard-hitting single targets?”
Too broad a question I think. In a builds game like GD I don’t think we should compensate a broad dps nerf (really the lifesteal) with a broad buff to defense. I think when they enact a broad nerf when there are signs calling for it, then they hopefully will next enact individual buffs for the fringe and average builds knocked too hard by it. Pick a DW build so we can see if the community even agrees whether or not it’s clear speed or consistency was over nerfed, whether it could just opt for less DMG and more tanky choices and clear crucible consistently etc. But the answer is currently not much. The broad dmg reduction and survival reduction needs to be documented and the those sets/classes/items can receive individualized attention on their defensive side if need be. At least, I personally believe a build by build approach is the best way to go about this. So it’s not an answer I think people want to hear but I think patch 1.1 needs to be digested, and gotten used to before specific nerfed dual wield melee will see more defensive shoring up.
“When you do think that the “final” patch is done? How would you respond to someone like me who thinks that each new patch is like a new game and makes me even less motivated to keep playing?”
I don’t know. Only Crate knows. But FG will VERY probably be the last expansion for GD. Probably a post release free content update. Maybe a small dlc if we are lucky. But the end of GD sweeping balance changes is coming if that’s what you want.
However I think your stance is a little unreasonable. Not the way you feel. You’re entitled to feel however you want about it. But… It’s an expansion. With new devotion, class, items augments etc. Ofc the Meta will shift. And things will feel newer. I mean we are getting mobility runes for medals. That will change the way combat feels a lot.
The same thing that demotivates you is what keeps a lot of people motivated to keep playing. The shifts in balance.
Overall if more build possibilities are added than hurt in a patch I think it’s generally great.
But fundamentally I disagree with you. I have 130ish characters now I think. Of many different combinations. Of them the vast majority are only marginally affected by the changes. Many of my weaker characters became good or even very good. Only a minority of my characters were nerfed. Given this being the result, I don’t feel like it’s a new game every patch. I find overall undertuned stuff gets brought up to a nice healthy average range and some over tuned stuff gets clipped. But I tend to play builds min maxed on the forums or by my friends or other playtesters. Still it covers a wide range.
I probably forget that not everyone has the movement runes tho and it might have biased my view. I think a lot of builds will feel much more powerful in the crucible after they gain some mobility that let’s them escape sticky situations. So to all the people hurting in crucible I say, hang on until March 27. And to potential arguments that perhaps some feel it’s a bit unfair that this power spike in defensive mobility requires the expansion, I’d disagree too.
I’d say this somewhat more restrictive crucible is closer to the original intention. It’s really only 150-170 that provides any of my characters challenge. I don’t think it’s meant to be easily approached by so many builds. But I’m pretty sure for each class tree (not each dual class combos) I can get through crucible fine. I mean whether I focus on soldier or arcanists or Necro or demo etc. I can beat crucible without movement runes.
Neither am I. I think this is a good time to point out that rather than nerfing N&O to such a large degree it would have been best for Dying God to be rebalanced first.
Dying God has become too common a find on numerous builds (not just dw melee) that are not even vit and chaos because unlike other T3 it increases global damage rather than simply giving one more damage proc. Given how powerful this constellation is I find it counter-intuitive that it is the cheapest T3 constellation; it should really be the most expensive (and even then it is still made up of mostly blue). Putting it in it’s appropriate place would be a start to achieve better devotion diversity I think; powerful combinations like Ultos+rumor+amatok+dying god would not be possible anymore.
Beyond this maybe DG’s side-affect of increasing life steal sustain should be dealt with also and DG given a “~-3-4% attack damage converted to Health” debuff as well as the existing degen atm?
I get that Dying God changes will affect quite a lot of builds, so I understand if it won’t happen. I just don’t like how balance changes brought about because of “x non-vit/chaos build using Dying God is OP” will also nerf everyone who is not using Dying God for max dps
I feel the same with Malawiglenn, each patch become like a new game. But that is not necessarily a bad thing for me, as I play this game to mess around with builds, not torturing myself by doing Port Valbury or SoT over and over again.
Personally I don’t care if my build got nerf or not, as long as crate gives me something more to play with, preferably something that support my offensive playstyle.
However, I agree with the opinion of some of the builders here. The nerf on the top mastery and builds gone too far that spellbinder is actually become quite a mess right now. Spellbinder only got nerf and more nerf, nothing more for them to play with.
Yeah I should have mentioned that it is not an entire bad thing either with new patch feeling like a new game. One could see these “phases” as “Ladder/Season” restarts. In with the new out with the old, perhaps I will just try to “update” 3-4 builds instead of all my 13 or so
I think once the last “big” patch is out, I will restart my entire Grim Dawn adventure, delete all old chars, stashes, blueprints learned etc.
I do like to write build guides and such, and since those takes a while to do - I am often not finished with them until a new patch is released and thus changes a lot of what I have prepared… Thus the constant re-patching is also confusing for newer players since it is gonna be a jungle for them finding correct and relevant information.
Sure, other games that have constant ladder resets like D3, PoE, this is a part of the game and players are prepared for that. Also those games have a much larger and active community so information about the new league is spread much quicker. Grim Dawn is supposed (?) to be a Single Player focused game where you play at your own pace and goals. I think constantly patching can make some players loose the “flow” and can thus be detrimental to continue. Not all of us have +10 builds and makes one or two new each month. For a more casual player making one lvl 100 build can be a large task and they need much support and guidance. I know quite many who started their latest char in the middle of 1.0.6 and are still not “done”. Basically all of them had a specific build in mind to level up towards. No idea if they have read the patch notes but hey I hope they will not get disappoined to the degree that they quit Grim dawn.
I personally am totally okay with having builds that are specialized in different things. I do not “need” to have all my char being able to do cruci 150-170, shattered realm +100 and killing lokarr sub 20 seconds. But I do want each build to have at least something meaningful end-game content that they can do pretty easy.
Like I totally get the need of a new patch before the new expansion since FG will add so much new stuff.
Btw, how many patches did Ashes of Malmouth have? Was e.g. the 1.0.7 patch really necessary? To me it just felt totally unnecessary to make a pretty big patch 3 months prior to expansion.
I just hope that the final FG patch can be launched asap after FG release. Yeah I know they will add some more dungeons and sets and crap, but still I hope 1.1.2 will be the last patch and that it is done around end of summer this year.
Anyway, I think I am ready to let this go now. Let’s continue with the main theme of the thread - how offence vs defense should be balanced.
