Warborn + Siegebreaker will have something to say about that:)
Well, as long as it doesn’t go to D3’s level where specific sets define everything, i’m happy. At least GD doesn’t have 6 part sets like d3 has. 4 is enough, still leaves you lot of options for twinking the rest of your gear even if you use a full set.
That’s freaking sexy – brand new set. What does the warborn proc do exactly?
But we are talking about potentially replacing one set with another which kind of defeats what I was hoping to see. 
I guess if there are so many awesome sets that it’s no longer clear which one is best for a particular build, that would mitigate the issue and really spark some diversity and variation for gear at the whole costume level (though not per-slot level). But that’s actually harder for the developers since they would need to introduce so, so many sets. When individual items can compete with sets, that leads to near-infinite combinations people can try out in every single individual slot.
Also the more sets exist, because drops are random, the more and more difficult it becomes for anyone to complete a single set without a heavy trading economy going on.
I do like the smaller sets! They definitely mitigate the issue of sets dominating lots of slots for many people using similar skills and masteries and seeking the most optimal builds and leave far more room for rich variations.
You could think of what I’m ultimately hoping as like “1-piece sets” competing with sets that require more than one piece. A single, standalone, independent legendary can be considered like a “1-piece set” – there are no bonuses granted automatically for wearing it with anything else, taking away the temptation to coordinate the exact same outfit developers have already designed in advance. But a 2-piece or 3-piece set that everyone is wearing is still better than a 4 or 5-piece set.
The new warborn set wrecks S#it as far as I can see. MAssive physical damage. And that Gavel is “fast” which is pretty insane. This set with Siegebreaker ,Dreegs blood, Oleron constelation, pants, golemborn boots, could also potentially acheive ~45% physical resist easily. Can push it to 50% with autumn boar and sailors Guide.
Posted by Safarel:
[/QUOTE]
I’d be lying if I wasn’t incredibly excited, but if it’s clearly better than Markovian, then that’s kind of sad too – it’s diversity I was hoping to see more of, so if it’s just going to boil down to set vs. set for a lot of endgame builds, then I like them more if it’s really hard to decide which one is better.
That collection issue bugs me. Imagine a game with a whopping 1000 different sets and random drops – and how nearly-impossible it would be to complete a single set if that was the case. You might have one or two pieces and lots of duplicates out of each of the 1000 sets but not a single complete set even after playing for years. That was another issue on my mind when the game introduces more and more sets. I haven’t completed enough yet after about a thousand hours already!
Each time a new set is introduced the harder and harder it becomes to completely collect any existing set unless the drop rates for them multiply and multiply and multiply as the number of sets expand and geez – stash space. I already thought it was too small (I have like 28 mule characters – thankfully Crucible doesn’t require me to do any quests to instantly get a stash mule – one of the top reasons I like it).
Markovian still has loads of flat phys also, more life Far more shieldblock and lack of phys resist is compensated by perma overguard. And last but not least that proc is amazing, Offensively You can semi-spam Blitz which wrecks.
Warborn is made more for cadence. Both have theyr pros and cons. You can combine them. MArkovian with Gavel etc.
Sweet – that makes me happy at least when the choice isn’t so clear.
I too am missing one piece on many of my sets (Trozan and Iskandara stand out), even then i agree with nine here. The drop rates are very good. In fact i don’t even feel like complaining since i got an Incorruptible Gollus’ Ring recently 
I was just talking in terms of set expansion independent of drop rates. The more sets a game has the more your probability of collecting those precise set pieces required to complete a set diminish. So if a trend arises to introduce more and more sets, then so too do the odds of any player completing a set diminish unless the drop rates multiply.
It might sound awesome when the game has a new set but each new one diminishes the probability of completing any existing set let alone the new one. The introduction of this new Warborn set will actually now make it slightly more difficult for you to complete Trozan and Isakandra, because you will have a probability now of picking up more Warborn pieces when you want Isakandra or Trozan.
A game with a million different sets might sound awesome initially, but it’d be one where the odds of any individual completing one (especially with a limited stash) would be extremely low. You might need to collect several hundred million set pieces from the million sets available and so many duplicates before you complete even a small number of sets. You’d also probably need the most epic amount of stash space that leaves room for millions of items unless you throw away the sets you don’t need.
Each new set is like cramming in a new place to land on for the wheel of fortune. You can allow the player to spin the wheel more times with expanded drop rates but at some point it becomes unwieldy with too many sets to ever hope to keep landing on exactly the place you want to land on as each individual space on the wheel gets crammed and smaller with each new set.
I don’t actually want to see drop rates multiply. It’s just an issue apparent to me from a probability standpoint that more and more sets means fewer and fewer players, especially new ones, can have a decent hope of completing one they need for the character they play.
AW you lucky bastard. And yes drop rates are almost too goos. LAst night I did BOC twice. On my first run got 3 legendaries Ulzuin Flamespreader and Ulzuin’s Shoulderguard (two items from the seame set) and Sigil of the Bear king. I already had these items but still it’s almost too good. On my second run I got a Codex of Argivix, totally new item.
Not bad for two runs i’d say.
Edit: Oleronion. You worry too much:P. Try these sets/items first and you will see that there will always be room for improvement.
Yeah, I’m thinking just kind of meta level not as a player – a bit nerdy and mathematically. The drop rates could be good but even then, the more and more sets the game has, the more items from sets you already own and sets you don’t desire will drop that you have to sift through before you find the exact set piece you need to complete the set you were seeking for your build.
It’s like looking for a needle in a haystack – but the haystack gets bigger and bigger and bigger as more sets and unique items are added to the game.
It’s just interesting theoretically. A game that has sets doesn’t actually want too big of a database of unique items, since the bigger the database gets, the more difficult it becomes to encounter that exact drop that will allow you to complete any given set. It actually benefits from keeping the database reasonably small – you don’t want to introduce too many items to a game that focuses a lot on sets. Even with super generous drop rates it’s too unwieldy if too many items exist for players to sift through with too much undesirable loot dropping that doesn’t match exactly what they wanted.
A game that benefits from a massive item database is one where individual drops can be interesting on their own without players farming for anything exact. Sets tend to squeeze people into looking for a very exact item, and there you don’t want a massive item database. At some point GD will want to stop introducing new items, maybe even take some existing ones out if it gets excessive. Multiplying the drop rates gets too unwieldy at some point if the item database gets too big when lots of players are looking for some exact item to drop.
I get wha you tare saying. I’ve been playing since march and I have almost all legendaries but uncompleted sets, no trade. It’s great for a new starter because you find lots of legendaries in the begining and you can start building stuff off them. But at the poit where I am it’s hard to get the items I need. It’s hard in general when you are looking for a specific item you almost never get it. You will when you least expect it. Amulets for me are rare drops. I have some. Since I’ve been playng only ever dropped 2 peerless eyes but, no Ultros, Dawnbreaker, Markovian, Avenger of Cairn, Iskandra’s focus. They just don’t drop for me and I need them all really:rolleyes:
I’m sure they will at some point but not when you need them.
Cheers. Sorry, I tend to confuse players because I’m never coming at these things 100% as a player. I used to work in the game development industry decades ago (now in films) but I look at things kind of in a different way.
I have no desire from a player standpoint to make sets easier to collect or see changes that help my builds become more powerful. I like working towards that goal within the constraints so far.
I’m not even really complaining about Grim Dawn’s sets so much really, it’s kind of just working out how design decisions will impact the game in the long run. It’s all interesting to me – decisions and trends and their long-term impacts. Every design decision has pros and cons – design is a tightrope walk of balancing pros and cons.
There were always things that never quite agreed with me from a design standpoint with a heavy focus on item sets in any game, let alone GD. I’ve been kind of trying to explore why – one of them besides stifling player creativity when pre-coordinated outfits are handed to them as sets is this fact that they make players hunt for very specific items, which means you don’t want a big item database for the game to randomly choose from – but I like a huge and epic item database in a game like this, and that’s incompatible with the idea of sets.
Massive item databases combined with random drops are most rewarding when players get surprised and discover things they can immediately use that they weren’t even seeking. They become more punishing the more players are looking for something specific as they get bigger and bigger, as the probability of the game’s RNG choosing exactly the item they want gets smaller and smaller with more items in the mix. Sets make people go on a puzzle piece treasure hunt to collect exactly a particular set of pieces.
On the flip side this game encourages creating and replaying lots and lots of characters and builds in the most brilliant way. So that mitigates some of this. Even if you pick up lots of undesirable loot from a rather large (but not too large with sets involved) database, then even if your immediate character can’t use it, your other ones might (or you might stash the item and consider creating a new one some day). So that definitely helps.
But at some point too big of an item database will become too unwieldy if people start set-piece hunting no matter how high drop rates are. As long as the drops are randomly chosen, there will be too many unwanted items dropping long, long before the desirable one drops for all but the luckiest people. Even if every single trash mob enemy dropped a legendary with 100% chance, if there are a million legendaries in the item database, your chance of collecting exactly the one you need to complete your set is one in a million. Of course no game would ever have a million legendaries, but using exaggerated scenarios like these helps highlight why, in a game with sets, it is actually undesirable to expand the item database too much.
But on a positive note this game’s design is absolutely brilliant and I’m completely addicted. I wouldn’t bother to analyze anything to this level if it wasn’t.
You have got to love being surprised by a sweet mi.
this was my Sab, but with the Justice set, in 1.0.0.5.
Sets in any ARPG only make sense when people are having a reasonable chance to complete them without spending thousands of hours. (Especially considering that the vast majority of sets is inferior to some collection of handpicked single items anyway.) What’s so bad about sacrificing some randomness for a tiny bit of playability? Sometimes I get the feeling that people insisting on as much pure randomness as possible simply want to penalize people for spending only 500 or 1000 hours (instead of 5000 or more) with their favorite game.
Why not simply track which items a player is collecting and then, for each part of a certain set you’ve found, slightly increase the drop probability for all missing parts (and lower the probabilites for all already collected parts)? Only slightly, so complete sets still aren’t too easy to get, but at least a tiny bit higher than the other drop rates.
A game should still be a game, and not a grindfest, and “RNG” should be no sacred cow, that no one is allowed to even touch, but a tool that can be used in many ways.
Agreed. I wish that there was a way to tell the game “hey I am trying to get this, help me out” and have some manner of better odds. Like say if I have two pieces of Set A in my bag, then we tack an extra 10% onto the odds of the remaining pieces of the set. Or some way to consume items with prefix X or suffix Y and put them onto the MI that never ever has the prefix/suffix desired because there’s over a thousand fucking possibilities and the one you want/need is only one of those thousand.
I’m okay with & expect some randomness, and I can tolerate a substantial amount of it, but at a certain point it just becomes tiring to the point of “why even bother”.
I think set bonuses should modify skills rather than plain bonuses. For example a complete set bonus would increase the radius of spell or second shadow strike to mob with lower damage. Doom bolt would strike additional enemies with lower damage etc.