Consumables? What are those?
Maybe unpopular decision, but:
Sure I use them. They are ingame and I use other temporary buffs, too.
Yeah, I thought so. Was just wondering if we should establish what it means to be ‘viable’ in crucible/SR.
Like I saw some of the disapproval on John’s build (which let’s be honest, consumables or not, it was amazing) and it got me wondering as to what the actual benchmark is.
If a build makes it to 75 using say hoarfrost ointment - is it SR+?
Well, if Hp/Mana pots aren’t looked down upon, don’t see why other consumables should be either, imo.
I think the reason why it’s frowned upon is because it allows the crafter to bypass a lot of things. Like I don’t need to focus on say aether overcaps if I’m chugging aetherward potions.
Which allows a lot more flexibility in both theorycrafting, and piloting
That same disapporval won’t last long. Courageous tincture on cruci when you’re on a pinch was a thing a few months ago amongst some users. No one hated them for that. I mean there were few but it was a very minor thing.
Still pots are lame 
Still, it is a part of the game. And don’t pretty much every non-pet builds use them against superbosses like Ravager?
Maybe a special Tag for consumables used?
Just playing the devil’s advocate - why are buffs/banners/shrines okay then?
Are you arguing against yourself?
People use shrines? I think they suck unless you find more than one which is far from guaranteed. Except Vire. I like Vire.
I’m not. I’m actually curious as to what the consensus on pots are.
I personally dislike using them, just like how I dislike buffs/banners, but on the other hand, I also recognise that not all birbs…I mean builds are inherently as strong as others.
So say an octavius warlord is obviously going to be able to get away with much more than my bootlegged/weird-af mortar blightlord build.
Just given the current mechanics of GD’s end game content, most builds will lose out to these select few.
And if we start saying that consumable usage immediately disqualifies a build from being SR+, then we’re only gonna see shield-&-birb builds.
@x1x2: I’ll almost always take the CC-res shrine. It’s too difficult getting CC res without greens
It’s less RNG GDstashing greens than waiting for shrines
I also like to play without using any pots or shrines or blessings or banners, but if I had to vote, I’d say that my vote goes to “I don’t mind”.
Btw, as GoG patch is still not up, I must ask you. Have you tried the Birbs post patch?
On one hand, their aggro wasn’t increased. On the other, I can see AoE dropping them like flies. Sig said they were fine, but his and my definitions of fine are entirely different.
Atm, I am doing a SR run with my Birb occultist to see how far I can take it as a sort of One Last Dance kind of thing. Will see you at SR 100
Tags for SR apparently have been fixed to sr - for Shard 50, sr for Shard 65, and sr+ for Shard 75, which I find a shame because it is already an even more limiting classification than cr-/cr/cr+. Talking about rough equivalent, it’s like we have a new cr++ tag, if sr- is roughly equivalent to cr.
I understand that SR allow a finer classification than Crucible, shard numbers being more “visual” than Crucibale timers, but I find it a missed opportunity to create broader categories, like SR 25 for all skill and attribute points, SR 50 for finishing the last quest in Ultimate, and SR 75+ for the best of SR builds, but I guess it’s the nature of the beast that the most prominent theorycrafters focus on, well, the better performing builds.
He, back to my janky builds. 
Hail GDstash and it’s lord and creator, Mamba.
But of all the non-pet, and non-shield SR builds posted thus far, we’ve got:
> 2 DoT’s: x1x2 + john’s
> 3 player-scaled summoners: Spanks + lee’s (edited)
And then there’s John’s cyclone build which is in this weird, nebulous spot
I’m not sure if I understand your point.
Talking about rough equivalent, it’s like we have a new cr++ tag, if sr- is roughly equivalent to cr.
but I guess it’s the nature of the beast that the most prominent theorycrafters focus on, well, the better performing builds.
Could you please elaborate?
I think he wants to say, that the qualification marks for SR are a bit harsh.
50 is sr- which means, a build which is struggling to get there or could not farm it, is really subpar. SR only means 65, which is hard for a lot of builds. And SR+…well, a chosen few…
I see. So you reckon a broader categorisation is needed to more holistically encapsulate build diversity?
Is my understanding correct?
Yeah, like he said e. g. Or you make 4 categories for SR.
Hmm…makes sense to me, but I feel that the compendium keeper should have the final say on it. It’s not a very fun job, and he might have to edit a lot of builds.