Let’s be real here - the thread was never destined for greatness anyway. If it got locked right now noone is going to shed any tears.
At 200 posts deep, we are firmly in circular territory. Nothing much of value is going to happen here anymore.
for the sake of this thread ? the whole thing is one giant off topic amalgamation of things already 
2 Likes
…because it was never intended to be a separate thread?..
and it then became sort of a meta-discussion?
UPD: ugh, this comment doesn’t make any sense now.
2 Likes
You started out with a false equivalency and then admittedly take unreasonable positions in an effort to highlight that someone who did not take those positions was unreasonable… so you are that dense after all…
Point taken, I will not continue arguing with you then, waste of everyone’s time
2 Likes
I might tell you that I would rather walk over broken glass barefoot rather than torture myself playing a glassy piano build in GD. Does not mean that I would literally do that.
Exaggerations to make a point or to point out the flaws in one is perfectly reasonable in my book. But you do you.
2 Likes
This… kind of needs this:
5 Likes
Hold up, I have seen this one before…
Maya really decided to tilt at windmills 
11 Likes
I am still you though, Mayska 
3 Likes
To be honest, I am losing faith in that 
2 Likes
2 Likes
The Problem with that Argument, and that’s where your “Argument” is flawed, is that you tend to believe that you can pin down everything in a Videogame down to “flawed” for a Fact, and not keep in mind that the majority of Videogames is based on personal Opinion / Taste / Subjective, and not a objective fact. You can go objective about Technical Stuff, like how well does a Game perform and stuff, is the Voice-Acting low-Quality and stuff, but if it comes down to game-design which goes at stuff like Narrative / Story, Gameplay or even Balancing, it’s a pretty subjective topic… so you can’t trow in and generalize it with “but it’s flawed for a fact”. Another Aspect of your flawed logic goes towards this argument “try to please as many as possible”. You have to many different “target audiences” which have a certain idea of how a game should work, to please them all. That’s why Genres, Clones and Alternatives exist, because one particular Game can’t please everyone. And sure there might be some Games which are able to please a wider range of different target audience, but they tend than again to not please fully specific target audiences. That’s why also Indie-Games and the Niche-Segment exists, because they aren’t too focused on the mainstreamarket with too many different tastes and stuff, which please specific people only halfheartly, but rather can work with having a smaller community and only a specific target audience, which loves their focus.
2 Likes
Yeah, context be damned. Also, I believe this should go here instead: Maya Balance Thread
Regardless, considering that the “flaw” in question is related to balance and was “fixed”, I hope you won’t mind too much when I keep my pin exactly where I put it down.
And why would you presume that the "try to please as many as possible” can’t simply be in the context of the “target audience” in question and not the general populace?
Edit: Ty for moving it 
:3
1 Like
> using the meme incorrectly
3 Likes
I’m glad Crate is one of those companies who are interested in making a good game, more so than
making “good” money.
Seldom I find a video game developer with that approach.
The games at E3 are about money. Your money. They dont give a fuck about what they created.
2 Likes
Well I do agree somewhat with Maya. It’s OK for Crate to have their own vision; but why leave certain things so obscure/unintuitive? Prime example is WPS. For example AQC having slower frames and still being a questionable investment (but the skill description is still misleading).
Ill omen with its spreading cooldown issue.
Agree with Hybrid pet builds. TQ is much better in that department. I have not yet reached endgame in TQ, but I generally find pets are much more flexible in that game (large flat damage from accessories, pet bonus from higher difficulty, less skill point starvation, other useful stats like RR that scale with investment etc.).
it’s not questionable, it’s just lowers your DPS regardless of how many points/mods you have invested in it.
Yeah. I was being polite and giving Crate the benefit of doubt that the WPS patch fixed the problem.
I don’t expect Crate to implement all feedback, but it would be nice for issues or good feedback to at least be acknowledged. So I just don’t post as much anymore.
1 Like
Belgothian’s Shears and Amarasta’s Quick Cut have the same animation speed for some time now.
BS rank 1: 110% wpn dmg (220% from both hands hitting), 14-19 Physical dmg (33 average from both hands)
BS rank 18: 144% wpn dmg (288% from both hands hitting), 140-218 Physical dmg (358 average from both hands, 250% Pierce damage (~8-10% at endgame)
AQC rank 1: 70% wpn dmg (210% from three hits), 19 Pierce dmg (57 total)
AQC rank 18: 115% wpn dmg (345% from three hits), 170 Pierce dmg (510 total), +55 Crit dmg
Not sure who mathed that out as a dps loss.
I mean, a noble thought, but at some point in the day we have to get some work done and not just chat on the forums.
Responding to every single suggestion or idea across multiple social platforms is simply unrealistic.
ok, i’ll just record some tests on dummy, comparing AQC and absence of it, and BB and absence of it.
The reduced animation speed invokes very significant losses, AQC is single target as well (no reason to make it slow/dps loss), the point-per-point value is extremely low and starts negative.
Of course, I get that, which is why I stated only “good” feedback. Like others said, only a minority of players realistically suggest reasonable or useful things.