I agree that a build doesn’t have to be good at both. But when Z nerfs somth according to it’s cruci results, it affects SR performance too. So both of cruci and SR performances suffer
0.01 * 0.01* 1000 000 = 100 players can do 6 min cruci run, assuming 1 000 000 GD players
My only deception is when I see nerfs to skills instead of the bonuses from the set that performs too well.
An exemple would be Dust Devils.
While I could voice some complaints on the current trend of nerfs it would be that some are mildly too cautious and will necessitate a follow on next patch. Let the easily accessible shake and bake builds hover around 6 minutes while more exotic approaches are allowed to push for better times to leave an option for extremely dedicated players to pursue rare items.
SR has developed much like what the developers told us it would be, “anything goes” past 60 with variance blessing you with cakewalks or crippling a run well before its prime. Long gone are my hopes for SR rewarding builds that could clear portions of the map efficiently, we’re just stuck with kiting/staring matches with the merry go round of bosses in the fourth chunk while the first three amount to an introduction cutscene.
what is nerf trend?
I guess as new people join, some things bear worth repeating periodically…
Our responsibility to the game is balance at all levels of play. This is something many people forget/don’t seem to realize. The vast majority of the playerbase does not play at the level that concerns forum goers, and any concerns about build viability at SR9000 and Gladiator Crucible 3x clear times are effectively irrelevant to them.
This is also why some things that certain users consider to be “big issues” or “desperately in need of redesign” are often not actually all that problematic because for the average player they are not only viable, but they also enable alternatives to min-maxed playstyles.
Obviously, the prospect of a game balanced at all levels of play is a very complex one. One could argue that it’s not even feasible with all of the moving parts intertwining in an ARPG, but it is one worth striving for nonetheless.
When it comes to balancing build performance, we have our own standards of what we believe is healthy for the overall game, even if those standards don’t align with what some builds consider “crap” or “fine”. When we observe outliers, we look into bringing them back into the middle.
Now that is going to happen whether the community works with us or not, which is why I like to remind builders that you really have two options: work with us to improve the game’s balance or accept whatever changes come your way.
Some have accepted (and benefited from) this over the years, while others feel that they need to treat us like some enemy to resist. Don’t forget that the devs have really high -%RR against Nerf Resist.
At the end of the day, we all want the same things…more viable builds and more ways to enjoy the game. This can only be achieved by finding a happy middle-ground between the overachievers and the underachievers.
This begets the question: Where do you usually get detailed info about other levels of play? These forums are mostly for stashers and the odd faction builder. Discord is the same.
I guess you still have reddit, but that’s hardly as detailed as the crucible and sr run videos here. Youtube/streams take more time to watch than Heaph’s walls of text.
And that’s fine.
Not to be hostile but I see some ridiculous arguments in this thread.
Just because one person believes that a set should perform as well as they want doesn’t mean they’re right. Not every set was meant to reach SR60. Not every set is meant to do sub 7 minute crucible. Some sets are allowed to do well for both.
Any attempt to make all sets perform equally generally just homogenizes them. Some homogenization can be good but surely a line must be drawn?
And the argument that it’s nerfed around the best pilots’ clear times. If you do 6:00 on the high skilled players’ 5:00 builds then you’ll probably do 7:00 on their 6:00 builds. Therefore the fastest build is still a gross outlier in performance for you.
As for players caring about stability in SR. Then play a slower tank build. That should be the cost of easiness. Efficiency lost. Otherwise what’s the point of tanks at all?
It has been a slippery slope for years. Crucible times got faster and faster and the game got more and more trivialized. That’s not a terrible thing. The current pace of the game is certainly fun for some. But the developers have their principles too, and surely their sense of game balance will be good for some audiences and not others. If you’re in the party that dislikes the limitations the devs put on performance that doesn’t make the devs wrong. It just means it’s not what you want.
They can’t please everyone, and have already compromised on difficulty time and time again. It’d be nice if people could keep in mind that the same things you don’t like about the game someone else probably loves.
In playtesting I don’t even give feedback toward my tastes since I know I want things a decent amount harder than our general consumer. I keep in mind what Z thinks is reasonable vs what the community wants and try to make suggestions that accommodate both.
Like in my item feedback threads I like for stuff that’s underused or not used at all and get them buffed without making them create crazy sub 7 minute builds.
So many people whine when deathmark gets barely nerfed while my heart goes out to the players who find legendaries that are clunky and not very good and have their expectations disappointed when the items don’t pan out well in actual performance.
Btw,these topics and feedback makes sense and have role to play,because Zantai and Crate in general care about community opinion and that reflects on patch changes.
Once Z said,that even if 1% of people reach and play end game and Crucible,the changes are 50-50 split towards base/end game.But community in the forum is consisting mostly from veteran players,so the opinions will look from that perspective.
But.like Z said,we all want same thing.And that’s good performance and build diversity,really one of the symbols of the game.That’s why we write and have in the forum ideas&feedback section.
Crucible and SR are in good state,I would say.But some builds are good only in Crucible,so why take that from them,unless they’re overachieving a lot.So peace
I pmed you with idea about Venomblade’s nerf with all the details as wel as mad_lee made his thread about Deathmarked. Community is ready to cooperate. The problem is that nerfs come faster then Marvel makes new movies. On the other hand we asked sometimes for several months to buff weak sets.
Personally, I feel like if builds are over-performing in the Crucible, the balance changes should be attempted to made in a way that only affects the crucible.
Hence why my post here: Pets and Crucible
But that was about pets, so it is easier to nerf the power of blessings/banners on pets and call it a day if their crucible performance needed to be nerfed.
I don’t know how hard it will be with non-pet builds but personally, looking into blessings and banners first before touching the masteries and items seems like a good idea to me. Unless ofcourse the same builds boast insane times in naked crucible runs and such.
Once I said something like “Nerfs are just new opportunities”. And I still believe it.
Like Adoomgod says:
I think for very nerf on items/masteries we saw there are two positive changes to others. And for me, this should be a main goal: To make as much masteries/items viable to use. Not every combination will fit, not every item will be a build-enabler. So seldom taken items/skills/… should be made better…and sometimes some have to be nerfed. This might be frustrating when a build performs worse and you are the player of these build.
But one of the USP of Grim Dawn is build diversity. If these changes wouldn´t be made it would perhaps stagnate. So look at the buffs which are made to items/… and see the chances.
(That said, I will write something about an item which needs changes imho).
My thoughts are best summarized by pinning this everytime adoomgod unpins it
I don’t know why you act like this is an argument against me. I care about crucible times because Z cares about crucible times because a die-hard section of the fanbase cares about crucible times. Convince one of those two and I wouldn’t care if builds hit 4 minutes.
It’s not an argument against you, it’s an argument against Zantai. Crucible was advertised as being a separate game mode that would never be related to the main campaign. That was an assumption that held up for years and only recently (the last 6-8 months?) it seems there has been an internal Crate-decision to renege upon that “trust” and begin prioritizing Crucible balance over anything else. That you’re OK with this is and can adhere to their new metric of balancing is fine - it’s commendable, actually, to have adapted so well. But I’m a little grumpier about the whole situation and I am very well aware that I’m not alone in my disgruntlement. (TIL ‘disgruntlement’ is a word)
I may be “old guard” in this respect, but any and all feedback I make is done without the slightest nod or thought about Crucible and that is unlikely to change in the near future.
Grabs popcorn for Z’s flames
But i thought Crucible was the place to test builds, what does it matter if it can’t do SR? I swear some people just change their arguments to suit their needs. (it wasn’t the OP that said this, but someone from their community).
Ah. Fair enough. Yeah I mean I don’t think Crucible is a useless metric when it comes to extreme disparities in performance but I would be content to ignore Crucible forever if told that it is no longer relevant to balance.
Balancing around SR and campaign alone would be neat to me. I do actually see pros as well we cons to keeping crucible relevant to balance decisions. But overall I’m biased because I find SR sooooo much more enjoyable. I suppose we must not forget the people who love and even prefer crucible.
I also love SR so much. But it seems we (or Z) sometimes forget about such people (no offence )
It become clear very early on that the philosophy of ignoring Crucible performance was not going to work. Nor has Crucible balance been a priority…ever.
As I said: Change the meta of Crucible.
When I started Grim Dawn, Crucible was about finishing 170. A build which could do this without any sweat was nerfed. Mechanics which allowed to do that were obliterated (Chinese DA Stacking Meta anyone?). So why not bring it back again and make it harder?
Some will say: “But the loot to equip my toons.” Nope, I personally can´t accept this argument anymore. There are so much possibilities to get decent items…and even if this was the “problem”…well, give the loot to 150 and no extra loot for 160/170 (as example).
There are a lot of possibilities to make Crucible “harder”. The only thing I don´t want to see is more RNG.