The title says it all, I'm curious as to what the community of Crusader players think about the subject. Do we just not fish rifts as often as DH/Barb, or is there a glass ceiling for this class as far as solo greater rift progression?
This isn't a whine thread, or an excuse to bring up class/rift balance.
I think saders have the same problem with other classes as regards to resource management hence why Akkhan's is basically essential.
spenders are too weak damage/resource, resource generation is too low/slow, plus it's meelee.
Valid points, as anyone who's played a Roland's build knows we are married to the Akkhan set for reliable wrath re gen, as well as toughness.
One thing that really stands out to me as well is the Heavenly Strength debuff. We are as of present designed around 2h weapons, BOP, Furnace,FOTF etc. I shouldn't have to say it, but each build has its own place in terms of T6 farming speed/GR viability. Considering this the 20% damage penalty makes no sense to me what so ever, as 2h weps were buffed for every class that could use them not just Crusaders.
This isn't a keep us where we are type of thread, if you can't contribute an actual idea about where we can improve in solo gr/class design please don't post.
"Or change the bonuses on Akkhan set so that the (2) with +500 Strength gets changed into that some of the spenders you use gets +100%/+200% damage increase depending on the skill, this might allow various builds to be used.."
Totally agree with this. The +500, or +base stat for any class for that matter, is a waste. This can easily be made up with paragon. And changing this to a skill instead would be way better to open up build options.
I agree with the 500 str being a waste beyond a certain point, and lets be honest that 500 str won't be missed by any T6 farmers. Of course if Phalanx wasn't damage capped on top of the 20% HS debuff and we had a set bonus that added damage to spenders that would go a long way to fixing up the class.
Gonna take the time to point out that it's possible (though require's specific gear) to get around resource costs on Sader's. In fact I'm working ona set of gear for a full on Shield Basher in Roland's without need for a generator or akkan. It's going to work, but it's also going to need gear that is generally considered "weak" (ie Piro Mirella to half Shield Bash Cost)
I would also like to point out that it is probably Blizz's intention (to some degree) that classes not just spam spender's constantly and actually have to rely to some degree on generator's.
If Sader spender's hit harder the slower ramp up would be less annoying. Or if sader generation was higher the lower damage would be less annoying. I'd rather see the former as a solution than the latter, if only because monks have seemed to have been intended for the latter and it feels bad for many players as far as I can tell.
Really the only thing holding current best geared saders back is being melee. Some of the stuff coming up on the PTR will change that significantly. Once some of the 1H crusader options get tweaked we'll probably see them more, but from a raw DPS perspective HS is equivalent to its 1H counterpart. It's just the damage support on legendaries that is significantly lacking (though not entirely across the board *stares at thunderfury)
[quote=yuhanz;/members/206924-yuhanz;/forums/diablo-iii-class-forums/crusader-the-church-of-zakarum/97515-what-holds-this-class-back-from-gr-50?comment=2]I think saders have the same problem with other classes as regards to resource management hence why Akkhan's is basically essential.
spenders are too weak damage/resource, resource generation is too low/slow, plus it's meelee.
Pretty sure the reason why Akkhan's is so essential is due to the perma 150% armor and cheat death mechanic from the prophet rune, ofc resource management is important. Not trying to say your wrong, I just think you make it sound like it is only taken for resource. =)
@OP: The main reason's I see that are holding back crusaders atm are the dmg scaling of GR. The majority of the high GR builds provide a way of you avoiding more or less all dmg. As a crusader we have very limited ways for this, we can't perma cc like a raekor barb and we can't deal dmg to mobs off screen standing in safety like DH and wiz.
Crusaders, like most melee builds really, take a shit ton of dmg which translate into our builds and gearing having to focus alot more on defensives that what we imo have to. We are more or less forced into taking AC-prophet in order to have any hopes of staying alive, and gear is so locked in terms of what stats we need, CDR f
Ofc our resource is also a problem, our generation is just so slow. Furthermore our spenders are actually rather expensive, which makes the akkhan set even more desireable. If we don't take that set we are usually spending far too much time trying to gather wrath than spend it. We do have a passive to buff our generation, but imo our passives are slightly too locked in place leaving very limited options.
Our dmg is actually rather strong, depending on build ST may be too low. But since our viable builds are so CDR dependant, we lose out on alot of offense since we also need to focus alot of defensive stats due to being melee.
Valid points, as anyone who's played a Roland's build knows we are married to the Akkhan set for reliable wrath re gen, as well as toughness.
One thing that really stands out to me as well is the Heavenly Strength debuff. We are as of present designed around 2h weapons, BOP, Furnace,FOTF etc. I shouldn't have to say it, but each build has its own place in terms of T6 farming speed/GR viability. Considering this the 20% damage penalty makes no sense to me what so ever, as 2h weps were buffed for every class that could use them not just Crusaders.
I may be wrong on this one, but I think blizzard stated that the reason why we didn't get the real 2h buff, was because they were satisfied with how our 1h dmg compared to 2h dmg. After that they just failed to put a 1h worth using apart from darklight in the game, but that's a different story.
------My entire point is that it makes no sense to force us into the 2h route and then punish us for it. I do not care about one handers and I'm sure most people going for 40+ progression don't either, and here's why: The higher base damage on the 2h, especially one like The Furnace destroy's any one hander regardless of attack speed, so no matter what that 1h will never compete with a Furnace or BoP, even Maximus is better than any 1h weapon currently.
Also as an adult I can't wrap my head around this concpt that something works great, its just missing something. If something is shit, its shit. One handers fall into this catagory. There isn't a proc/effet/ability that is even going to come close to a potential 50% damage boost to elites.
The dev team normalizing 2h to lousy 1h for..reasons wasn't a good move for us.
Gonna take the time to point out that it's possible (though require's specific gear) to get around resource costs on Sader's. In fact I'm working ona set of gear for a full on Shield Basher in Roland's without need for a generator or akkan. It's going to work, but it's also going to need gear that is generally considered "weak" (ie Piro Mirella to half Shield Bash Cost)
I would also like to point out that it is probably Blizz's intention (to some degree) that classes not just spam spender's constantly and actually have to rely to some degree on generator's.
If Sader spender's hit harder the slower ramp up would be less annoying. Or if sader generation was higher the lower damage would be less annoying. I'd rather see the former as a solution than the latter, if only because monks have seemed to have been intended for the latter and it feels bad for many players as far as I can tell.
Really the only thing holding current best geared saders back is being melee. Some of the stuff coming up on the PTR will change that significantly. Once some of the 1H crusader options get tweaked we'll probably see them more, but from a raw DPS perspective HS is equivalent to its 1H counterpart. It's just the damage support on legendaries that is significantly lacking (though not entirely across the board *stares at thunderfury)
--------I'd like to point out that Stampede is a ranged build, and should be used as such unless you have a rift full of zombies or other weak mobs you don't look to be in the middle of them. Steed charging through for a re position is about the most you can get away with otherwise you begin taking large amounts of damage.
I hope I was clear that this isn't a discussion about T6 farming, while I welcome your posts I disagree with both, and here's why. One handers are awful. As it stands that's not changing, so making 2h's slightly less bad but still bad to gloss over how poor 1h are wasn't an answer.
On the topic of Rolands I can't see any reason for the set's introduction other than to make the Akkhan set seem really good in comparison, when in point of fact it is dating itself very quickly. As far as energy management for roland's goes, again you're fine running no generator in T6. Try that set in gr41 and 42 and feel free to share results. That's why this thread is here. I like the set but its pure trash and a smoke screen.
I don't mean to offer any insult, but seeing the class as it is intended to work in high progression is the point of the thread, and there isn't a one hander in the game that's going to end up on a curz with a 50+ rift.
I hope I was clear that this isn't a discussion about T6 farming, while I welcome your posts I disagree with both, and here's why. One handers are awful. As it stands that's not changing, so making 2h's slightly less bad but still bad to gloss over how poor 1h are wasn't an answer.
On the topic of Rolands I can't see any reason for the set's introduction other than to make the Akkhan set seem really good in comparison, when in point of fact it is dating itself very quickly. As far as energy management for roland's goes, again you're fine running no generator in T6. Try that set in gr41 and 42 and feel free to share results. That's why this thread is here. I like the set but its pure trash and a smoke screen.
I don't mean to offer any insult, but seeing the class as it is intended to work in high progression is the point of the thread, and there isn't a one hander in the game that's going to end up on a curz with a 50+ rift.
Yes stampede is ranged. That's why it's the build that gets used, and that's why Roland's is "bad" (not ranged). It's why Akkan is premier (ranged synergy) etc
On the topic of Roland's: It's a set that ramps up to 4x DPS. It's basically +300% damage, which FYI is better than basically all other damage options on non-weapon gear, with the caveat that you have to melee and you have to stand your ground. As an offensive option it's far and away better at multiplying damage than Akkan is. It's just not good at keeping you alive without making gear concessions (that nobody is willing to make, despite the fact that you've still got a DPS lead after the concessions relative to akkan). That isn't Roland's fault, that's a design issue with GRifts and with akkan paving the way for a 20s CD cheat death, and the way rifts scale that's worth more than doubling relative DPS.
And I maintain: 1H damage (ignoring legend affixes) is fine more or less in comparison to HS. It's just predicated on a stand-and-fight mentality mixed with CD skills. Which is the problem, followed marginally closely by the lack of good offensive affixes for skills compared to 2H sader weapons (or Furnace). With the upcoming changes to health and defensive options melee should be much more viable than it was/is in S1, which will by extension make 1H more viable. It won't be the weapon loadout that gets used for high level rifts, but that will be more because 1H offensive options are mediocre than because 1H raw damage output is bad. If there was, for instance, a 1H flail that said "Phalanx deals 100% increased damage" you can be sure that it would be BiS as a weapon. Unfortunately every 1H weapon is focused on more or less utility bonuses, which would be fine if there were some options to make those utility bonuses useful for clearspeed.
The damage gained from the Roland's set is another smoke and mirror show, there isn't a set up you could use that would give Rolands swing for swing the damage of stampede, even after all the debuff/damage capping.
You can maintain that 1h damage is fine all you wish, math and testing to the complete contrary over rule conjecture.
Let me paint a very very basic picture. When something is bad about a class in a Blizzard game, the typical M.O. is to make something else WORSE to gloss over or change public opinion about the original under performer. I give you 2h v 1h, Akkhan v Rolands. I'll repeat myself one last time, somthing that is shit, predicated on shit mechanics (1h) doesn't become less shit by nerfing something else (2h dmg). All it does is fool simple minded people. When I say shit damage I'm saying that in context to gr 40+, not T6. You can face roll T6 with l25 leg gems and decent gear with nearly any weapon.
One last thing, how long do you think it would take to go through 50 billion hp with a 1h, any 1h vs a Furnace? The guy using a Furnace will have killed the rg, gone for a smoke break and started the next rift before you got through that 50B rg with a 1h. I'm not knocking people who like 1h or the builds around them. However those are casual builds, not ment for endgame content.
A 1h that increased Phalanx by 100%? Too bad a Furnace applied Pain Enhancer tick from my 45 gem would likley do more damage, not to mention the actual cast as elite damage is on a different dr table than items/skills that boost another skill, a 1h that buffed Phalanx dmg would likley dr with Lord Commander passive, making something like that far from optimal. Also, base damage from a Furnace or 2h flail being so much higher would crush Pain Enhancer, which ends up being a good portion of damage.
The damage gained from the Roland's set is another smoke and mirror show, there isn't a set up you could use that would give Rolands swing for swing the damage of stampede, even after all the debuff/damage capping.
Unless I've forgotten a legendary weapon Stampede is a 490% weapon damage skill + bonuses, vs the 1500% weapon damage of phys shield bash build. Swing for Swing without Roland's +100% skill damage shield Bash crushes stampede for single target attack spam. It's the AoE that roland's loses out on, not damage dealt to a specific target.
You can maintain that 1h damage is fine all you wish, math and testing to the complete contrary over rule conjecture.
The raw sustained DPS on 1H weapons is absolutely fine when supported by Fervor compared to HS. There's a minor DPS gap, but it's not some cripplingly huge amount.
Let me paint a very very basic picture. When something is bad about a class in a Blizzard game, the typical M.O. is to make something else WORSE to gloss over or change public opinion about the original under performer. I give you 2h v 1h, Akkhan v Rolands. I'll repeat myself one last time, somthing that is shit, predicated on shit mechanics (1h) doesn't become less shit by nerfing something else (2h dmg). All it does is fool simple minded people. When I say shit damage I'm saying that in context to gr 40+, not T6. You can face roll T6 with l25 leg gems and decent gear with nearly any weapon.
The HS damage debuff was and is because of the massive 2H weapon damage boost that happened going into RoS. It has nothing to do with trying to make 1H weapons attractive and everything to do with making sure 2H crusaders don't absolutely crush the DPS of any other class by virtue of the effective +50% DPS offered by HS before the damage penalty.
One last thing, how long do you think it would take to go through 50 billion hp with a 1h, any 1h vs a Furnace? The guy using a Furnace will have killed the rg, gone for a smoke break and started the next rift before you got through that 50B rg with a 1h. I'm not knocking people who like 1h or the builds around them. However those are casual builds, not ment for endgame content.A 1h that increased Phalanx by 100%? Too bad a Furnace applied Pain Enhancer tick from my 45 gem would likley do more damage, not to mention the actual cast as elite damage is on a different dr table than items/skills that boost another skill, a 1h that buffed Phalanx dmg would likley dr with Lord Commander passive, making something like that far from optimal. Also, base damage from a Furnace or 2h flail being so much higher would crush Pain Enhancer, which ends up being a good portion of damage.
You're confusing poor design with bad weapon class balance. If you sat and compared a "vanilla" 1H weapon with a "vanilla" 2H weapon on a crusader and just timed how long it took to stampede a target to death without a bunch of procs they'd take about the same time, favoring 2H slightly. Why? Because the two weapon types have very similar base DPS.
The difference that you're seeing is because a weapon that already has a 50% damage lead is getting another 50% damage lead (well, closer to 35% after SoJ) and then tick based procs don;t compensate for AS in any way. Should they compensate? Probably not.
Now. If that 100% Phalanx damage bonus 1H weapon was stacked against anything that WASN'T a furnace? The difference would be much less noticeable, and rather than running all Toxin all the time you'd parley the large AS difference into point-cast procs (that 2H weapons are weaker with). that further muddy the actual difference.
You're sitting here trying to compare 1H weapons to the single most powerful per-hit damage weapon in the game, and then assuming that you'll be approaching the use of the weapon types exactly the same. Furnace has been brokenly powerful for a long time, it's not a particularly good comparison point. If (for instance) Sun Keeper had the same legend effect and you were comparing "1H Furnace" to "2H Furnace" the difference would be pretty small, and something that is compensated for by making use of better suited mechanics rather than just approaching the problem the same way.
The issue with Roland's is that it lacks two things: resource management and defense. We can make up for one of these things through skill and gear choice but not both. Roland's has to make up for one of these things. The damage from Roland's is there, its not an issue.
"You're confusing poor design with bad weapon class balance. If you sat and compared a "vanilla" 1H weapon with a "vanilla" 2H weapon on a crusader and just timed how long it took to stampede a target to death without a bunch of procs they'd take about the same time, favoring 2H slightly. Why? Because the two weapon types have very similar base DPS.
The difference that you're seeing is because a weapon that already has a 50% damage lead is getting another 50% damage lead (well, closer to 35% after SoJ) and then tick based procs don;t compensate for AS in any way. Should they compensate? Probably not.
Now. If that 100% Phalanx damage bonus 1H weapon was stacked against anything that WASN'T a furnace? The difference would be much less noticeable, and rather than running all Toxin all the time you'd parley the large AS difference into point-cast procs (that 2H weapons are weaker with). that further muddy the actual difference.
You're sitting here trying to compare 1H weapons to the single most powerful per-hit damage weapon in the game, and then assuming that you'll be approaching the use of the weapon types exactly the same. Furnace has been brokenly powerful for a long time, it's not a particularly good comparison point. If (for instance) Sun Keeper had the same legend effect and you were comparing "1H Furnace" to "2H Furnace" the difference would be pretty small, and something that is compensated for by making use of better suited mechanics rather than just approaching the problem the same way."
What I actually did was use a real scenario to prove the fault of your logic. Because in game Furnace is the end game weapon, nothing else comes close. Daydreaming and using abstract and invalid points of measure doesn't change the fact that its a poor design to punish people for using the necessary tools to do endgame content. Saying poor weapon optimization is just plain wrong, and saying that you'd be more or less right if we just ignore things like leg. affixes is even more wrong. Those are the defining attributes of weapons that set them apart from others, and I refuse to ignore something like that because someone feels like arguing an abstract point. In truth the passive Heavenly Strength punishes the end game player on this class, it bites right into the bonus granted by AC, for no real reason.
One final point, the actual topic in this thread is improvements necessary to the class to be able to hit gr 50. Since that's not happening with a 1h, can we forgo any further digression on this moot point?
I agree about the survival issues with rolands as well, but I have doubts that it would match Phalanx in terms of output. I'd have to see actual testing where someone would be able to run a grift 40 against a stampede or condemn build.
]What I actually did was use a real scenario to prove the fault of your logic. Because in game Furnace is the end game weapon, nothing else comes close. Daydreaming and using abstract and invalid points of measure doesn't change the fact that its a poor design to punish people for using the necessary tools to do endgame content. Saying poor weapon optimization is just plain wrong, and saying that you'd be more or less right if we just ignore things like leg. affixes is even more wrong. Those are the defining attributes of weapons that set them apart from others, and I refuse to ignore something like that because someone feels like arguing an abstract point. In truth the passive Heavenly Strength punishes the end game player on this class, it bites right into the bonus granted by AC, for no real reason.
One final point, the actual topic in this thread is improvements necessary to the class to be able to hit gr 50. Since that's not happening with a 1h, can we forgo any further digression on this moot point?
I agree about the survival issues with rolands as well, but I have doubts that it would match Phalanx in terms of output. I'd have to see actual testing where someone would be able to run a grift 40 against a stampede or condemn build.
My point is that 1H weapons are not bad mechanically. They're bad because they have no mechanical support.
There's no reason improvements cannot be made that make 1H able to do GR50. None at all. The only thing preventing such a thing is thinking like you. Confusing "This has no current mechanical support" with "this has no potential mechanical support that can make it viable"
They could release a 1H weapon with "all your skills deal quadruple damage"
Boom 1H is now only weapon type worth using. They're not going to because it's bad design, much in the same way that furnace is bad design (though that one snuck through because it looks reasonable on paper). Nothing is precluding a reasonable attempt at making 1H weapons interesting other than lack of creativity both among developers and among players.
Now. Heavenly Strength is in no way a punishment in endgame. Without the penalty the passive would be a greater than 50% damage passive, far and away more powerful than any passive for any other class. With the penalty it's a 30% damage bonus with no important conditional clauses and no significant drawbacks other than "You have to use a weapon type that's already better than the alternatives". It's not punishment, it's balance.
It is punishment 100%, if you knew anything about any other class at all you would realize that that far greater multiplier mechanics are already in game. Barbarians have several to pair with Raekor's/Vial Ward, Mask of Jeram OR Sacrafice PTP stacked with Pierce the Veil and/or Gruesome Feast, attack speed breakpoints for demon hunters combined with passives like Steady Aim/Cull, all of which provide massive damage upgrades far in excess of 20%. Not to mention that each class has at minimum on use bonus 20% dmg, and some higher.
What we have is a penalty stroke 20% while using 2h, again a unique mechanic to this class. Jade doc's don't do 20% less damage for use of a 2h as opposed to a 1h/mojo, Raekor barbs don't lose 20% dmg for not using 2x1h weps. What we have is nothing even close to what I've mentioned above, those things that I've listed are just there, regardless of weapon used, and as every class except dh that I listed uses Furnace in an end game build I'm having a difficulty grasping how/where the imbalance would be with the removal of this debuff. As others point out we lack damage, HS is not balance it is a piss poor penalty stroke for people using 2h a weapon that was the endgame design to begin with.
Also, the debuff from HS is 20%, not 50%. You're confusing the difference in base weapon damage with how the HS skill interacts with the class.No other class loses 20% off of its major damage boosting skill for the sake of "balance." I'm not interested in any imaginary fantasy land math either, I've done enough in game testing between the two to know that's accurate.
That debuff is applied to the bonus granted by AC, so that's why I say its punishment, and it is. It is not balance in the slighest, as the group of people who'd be using one handers on a steady basis won't be pushing a gr 50, you wouldn't likley make 40. So what we come to is the corner that you've argued yourself into. This season one handers are not viable end game. Where they are viable is t6, where you wouldn't notice the damage difference thanks to the relatively low hp of mobs compared to grift 40+. HS punishes the player looking for next level progression for the sake of a group of people who as you're so aptly demonstrating have not a clue as to how damage is fully applied or the content level we're trying to apply it to.
Shitty quality of life choices for the sake of balance, and most ironic the people who this balance is there for have 0 idea what they're missing anyway.
What I would like to see is a set of passives that reward both styles of play, like a barb or dh, instead of one that punishes the player who uses the 2h for the sake of people like yourself who believe that there needs to by this type of balance for us, when it exists no where else that I've experienced.
Valid points, as anyone who's played a Roland's build knows we are married to the Akkhan set for reliable wrath re gen, as well as toughness.
One thing that really stands out to me as well is the Heavenly Strength debuff. We are as of present designed around 2h weapons, BOP, Furnace,FOTF etc. I shouldn't have to say it, but each build has its own place in terms of T6 farming speed/GR viability. Considering this the 20% damage penalty makes no sense to me what so ever, as 2h weps were buffed for every class that could use them not just Crusaders.
Wow, just wow. You didnt notice that crus can use 2h AND shield? >.>
You misread that, yes I'm 100% aware that crusaders can use both a 2h and a shield.
So why crus should have 10% cc, 750 str/vit/8cdr/15% skill dmg/leg affix for FREE over barb? It doesnt make sense to me whatsoever. (not "what so ever" btw.)
Crusaders don't get this "for free", it comes with a 20% damage decrease from the talent "Heavenly Strength". What they get "for free" is ~250 main stat and a bit extra damage more (1h weapon vs 2h weapon), and the 20% damage decrease of the talent makes up for that.
Note that barbarians also can wear shields - people just have forgotten about it because the game is all about damage, damage, damage and there's no interesting affix for barb on any shield. Your comparison is flawed.
Anyways, everyone please stay on topic... some interesting points being brought up here. I too wonder why Crusaders perform so weak in comparison (and have no answer), so interesting to read everyone's thoughts.
It is punishment 100%, if you knew anything about any other class at all you would realize that that far greater multiplier mechanics are already in game. Barbarians have several to pair with Raekor's/Vial Ward, Mask of Jeram OR Sacrafice PTP stacked with Pierce the Veil and/or Gruesome Feast, attack speed breakpoints for demon hunters combined with passives like Steady Aim/Cull, all of which provide massive damage upgrades far in excess of 20%. Not to mention that each class has at minimum on use bonus 20% dmg, and some higher.
What we have is a penalty stroke 20% while using 2h, again a unique mechanic to this class. Jade doc's don't do 20% less damage for use of a 2h as opposed to a 1h/mojo, Raekor barbs don't lose 20% dmg for not using 2x1h weps. What we have is nothing even close to what I've mentioned above, those things that I've listed are just there, regardless of weapon used, and as every class except dh that I listed uses Furnace in an end game build I'm having a difficulty grasping how/where the imbalance would be with the removal of this debuff. As others point out we lack damage, HS is not balance it is a piss poor penalty stroke for people using 2h a weapon that was the endgame design to begin with.
Also, the debuff from HS is 20%, not 50%. You're confusing the difference in base weapon damage with how the HS skill interacts with the class.No other class loses 20% off of its major damage boosting skill for the sake of "balance." I'm not interested in any imaginary fantasy land math either, I've done enough in game testing between the two to know that's accurate.
That debuff is applied to the bonus granted by AC, so that's why I say its punishment, and it is. It is not balance in the slighest, as the group of people who'd be using one handers on a steady basis won't be pushing a gr 50, you wouldn't likley make 40. So what we come to is the corner that you've argued yourself into. This season one handers are not viable end game. Where they are viable is t6, where you wouldn't notice the damage difference thanks to the relatively low hp of mobs compared to grift 40+. HS punishes the player looking for next level progression for the sake of a group of people who as you're so aptly demonstrating have not a clue as to how damage is fully applied or the content level we're trying to apply it to.
Shitty quality of life choices for the sake of balance, and most ironic the people who this balance is there for have 0 idea what they're missing anyway.
What I would like to see is a set of passives that reward both styles of play, like a barb or dh, instead of one that punishes the player who uses the 2h for the sake of people like yourself who believe that there needs to by this type of balance for us, when it exists no where else that I've experienced.
I'll go down by paragraph
Paragraphs 1+2 - You're comparing a passive to powerful item affixes. That is completely incomparable. Stack HS versus any single damage passive on any class and it's a fair comparison (and HS is better than 90% of other damage passives). There are a handful of damage passives that beat HS in terms of the damage multiplier they provide (Gruesome Feast), and those passives have conditional clauses that have significant effect on their use. As it is HS is a non-conditional +20-30% damage bonus as a passive, comparable with (as I've said multiple times) all other damage passives. Without the penalty HS would be a +50% damage passive. It's not punishment to ensure a mechanic is comparable to its peers. You're sitting there doing fantasyland comparisons ignoring the actual math and the actual facts.
Paragraph 3+4 - I at no point anywhere have said HS had any debuff value other than 20%. And if you sat and actually did the math you'd know that the relative DPS gains from AC's damage bonus while using HS are HIGHER than if you don't use it. AC without HS is + 35% damage, AC with HS is a relative +43% damage. AC is actually IMPROVED in effect by having that debuff, not weakened.
Paragraph 5 - Mechanics that retain DPS parity are needed. These aren't shitty QoL choices (they aren't even QoL choices) they're balancing mechanics to make sure a passive isn't brokenly out of line with all other passives. If HS did not have the damage penalty the issues with 1H weapons would be even further magnified, and even after 1H was "fixed" for other classes Fervor would need buffing on the order of "While wielding a 1H weapon 50% increased damage" just to compete with HS. And I repeat that's assuming 1H is viable for every other class.
Paragraph 6 - Fervor is the sister passive meant to represent 1H play. It's currently mildly undertuned, it wouldn't hurt to be buffed up to +20 or +30% AS with 1H weapons. All other passives are balanced with their competition in all other classes, HS is too. It;s not some special case. Just because it has a penalty doesn't mean it's somehow out of line with how passives work. It just means that if it didn't have the penalty it would be TOO GOOD compared to its competition (and would be a better damage amplifer than any other passive).
Here's I'll take your "punishment" point of view and just run with it for a second.
Gruesome Feast "punishes" WDs who don't stack pickup radius or don't have access to health globes.
Ruthless "punishes" barbarians when they'e fighting enemies above 30% health. (Also only works out to +12% damage hahaha suckers)
Berserker Rage "punishes" barbarians who spend fury (which they're supposed to want to do aren't they???)
Brawler "punishes" barbarians who use any kind of ranged attack
Elemental Attunement "punishes" wizards who don't have multiple element types
Glass Cannon "punishes" wizards by reducing their defenses (and it's still only +15%, when even after "punishment" HS is +20-30% damage)
Audacity "punishes" wizards who fight at range
Sharpshooter "punishes" DHs with high crit chance (also it's a pretty bad damage bonus if you do the math)
Ambush "punishes" DHs fighting enemies with less than 75% health (and it's an even worse damage bonus than Ruthless, at 10%)
Single Out "punishes" demon hunters who are fighting groups
Many passives "punish" the user when they're not using them correctly. Some just plain suck (Ruthless, Ambush), with big awesome numbers that work out to not much of a bonus. HS doesn't have that problem. It has a big "punishing" penalty that still leaves the user with a substantial bonus, that's still better than almost all of its peers among other classes, and still better than all the other damage passives for saders. And that's crazy when you realize it's competing with multiple +20% damage passives (most classes have only one or two of those, several don't even have 1).
The greater issue is not "HS punishes you" (because it doesn't, and hasn't since the MS penalty was removed) the greater issue is that there are almost no supporting core mechanics in the game that reward using any weapon that isn't 1H+(source/Mojo) or 2H. And even if there were there are no mechanics that reward sustained DPS melee play (where 90% of Crusader's power is), every mechanic pushes raw weapon damage and ranged play. Remember in Vanilla when DW>>>>>>>>>>>>>EVERYTHING? That's what's going on now, just in the opposite direction. The 1H-2H disparity is completely unrelated to Crusaders (who have a far more balanced DPS between the two than most other classes).
@Bagstone: Crusaders perform weakly in comparison because they have almost no "free damage" affix support on gear and their "premier" build spams a 490% weapon damage skill and otherwise relies on mechanics available to all other classes for damage. Even factoring a free 35% damage from Champion they're trying to compete against even the WEAKEST other builds spamming a 1000+% AoE weapon damage skill with no cost and no cooldown. While they flail away wit ha laughable 490% AoE with exorbitant cost and little to no mobility.
This isn't a whine thread, or an excuse to bring up class/rift balance.
spenders are too weak damage/resource, resource generation is too low/slow, plus it's meelee.
One thing that really stands out to me as well is the Heavenly Strength debuff. We are as of present designed around 2h weapons, BOP, Furnace,FOTF etc. I shouldn't have to say it, but each build has its own place in terms of T6 farming speed/GR viability. Considering this the 20% damage penalty makes no sense to me what so ever, as 2h weps were buffed for every class that could use them not just Crusaders.
Totally agree with this. The +500, or +base stat for any class for that matter, is a waste. This can easily be made up with paragon. And changing this to a skill instead would be way better to open up build options.
I would also like to point out that it is probably Blizz's intention (to some degree) that classes not just spam spender's constantly and actually have to rely to some degree on generator's.
If Sader spender's hit harder the slower ramp up would be less annoying. Or if sader generation was higher the lower damage would be less annoying. I'd rather see the former as a solution than the latter, if only because monks have seemed to have been intended for the latter and it feels bad for many players as far as I can tell.
Really the only thing holding current best geared saders back is being melee. Some of the stuff coming up on the PTR will change that significantly. Once some of the 1H crusader options get tweaked we'll probably see them more, but from a raw DPS perspective HS is equivalent to its 1H counterpart. It's just the damage support on legendaries that is significantly lacking (though not entirely across the board *stares at thunderfury)
@OP: The main reason's I see that are holding back crusaders atm are the dmg scaling of GR. The majority of the high GR builds provide a way of you avoiding more or less all dmg. As a crusader we have very limited ways for this, we can't perma cc like a raekor barb and we can't deal dmg to mobs off screen standing in safety like DH and wiz.
Crusaders, like most melee builds really, take a shit ton of dmg which translate into our builds and gearing having to focus alot more on defensives that what we imo have to. We are more or less forced into taking AC-prophet in order to have any hopes of staying alive, and gear is so locked in terms of what stats we need, CDR f
Ofc our resource is also a problem, our generation is just so slow. Furthermore our spenders are actually rather expensive, which makes the akkhan set even more desireable. If we don't take that set we are usually spending far too much time trying to gather wrath than spend it. We do have a passive to buff our generation, but imo our passives are slightly too locked in place leaving very limited options.
Our dmg is actually rather strong, depending on build ST may be too low. But since our viable builds are so CDR dependant, we lose out on alot of offense since we also need to focus alot of defensive stats due to being melee.
I may be wrong on this one, but I think blizzard stated that the reason why we didn't get the real 2h buff, was because they were satisfied with how our 1h dmg compared to 2h dmg. After that they just failed to put a 1h worth using apart from darklight in the game, but that's a different story.
------My entire point is that it makes no sense to force us into the 2h route and then punish us for it. I do not care about one handers and I'm sure most people going for 40+ progression don't either, and here's why: The higher base damage on the 2h, especially one like The Furnace destroy's any one hander regardless of attack speed, so no matter what that 1h will never compete with a Furnace or BoP, even Maximus is better than any 1h weapon currently.
Also as an adult I can't wrap my head around this concpt that something works great, its just missing something. If something is shit, its shit. One handers fall into this catagory. There isn't a proc/effet/ability that is even going to come close to a potential 50% damage boost to elites.
The dev team normalizing 2h to lousy 1h for..reasons wasn't a good move for us.
--------I'd like to point out that Stampede is a ranged build, and should be used as such unless you have a rift full of zombies or other weak mobs you don't look to be in the middle of them. Steed charging through for a re position is about the most you can get away with otherwise you begin taking large amounts of damage.
I hope I was clear that this isn't a discussion about T6 farming, while I welcome your posts I disagree with both, and here's why. One handers are awful. As it stands that's not changing, so making 2h's slightly less bad but still bad to gloss over how poor 1h are wasn't an answer.
On the topic of Rolands I can't see any reason for the set's introduction other than to make the Akkhan set seem really good in comparison, when in point of fact it is dating itself very quickly. As far as energy management for roland's goes, again you're fine running no generator in T6. Try that set in gr41 and 42 and feel free to share results. That's why this thread is here. I like the set but its pure trash and a smoke screen.
I don't mean to offer any insult, but seeing the class as it is intended to work in high progression is the point of the thread, and there isn't a one hander in the game that's going to end up on a curz with a 50+ rift.
Yes stampede is ranged. That's why it's the build that gets used, and that's why Roland's is "bad" (not ranged). It's why Akkan is premier (ranged synergy) etc
On the topic of Roland's: It's a set that ramps up to 4x DPS. It's basically +300% damage, which FYI is better than basically all other damage options on non-weapon gear, with the caveat that you have to melee and you have to stand your ground. As an offensive option it's far and away better at multiplying damage than Akkan is. It's just not good at keeping you alive without making gear concessions (that nobody is willing to make, despite the fact that you've still got a DPS lead after the concessions relative to akkan). That isn't Roland's fault, that's a design issue with GRifts and with akkan paving the way for a 20s CD cheat death, and the way rifts scale that's worth more than doubling relative DPS.
And I maintain: 1H damage (ignoring legend affixes) is fine more or less in comparison to HS. It's just predicated on a stand-and-fight mentality mixed with CD skills. Which is the problem, followed marginally closely by the lack of good offensive affixes for skills compared to 2H sader weapons (or Furnace). With the upcoming changes to health and defensive options melee should be much more viable than it was/is in S1, which will by extension make 1H more viable. It won't be the weapon loadout that gets used for high level rifts, but that will be more because 1H offensive options are mediocre than because 1H raw damage output is bad. If there was, for instance, a 1H flail that said "Phalanx deals 100% increased damage" you can be sure that it would be BiS as a weapon. Unfortunately every 1H weapon is focused on more or less utility bonuses, which would be fine if there were some options to make those utility bonuses useful for clearspeed.
You can maintain that 1h damage is fine all you wish, math and testing to the complete contrary over rule conjecture.
Let me paint a very very basic picture. When something is bad about a class in a Blizzard game, the typical M.O. is to make something else WORSE to gloss over or change public opinion about the original under performer. I give you 2h v 1h, Akkhan v Rolands. I'll repeat myself one last time, somthing that is shit, predicated on shit mechanics (1h) doesn't become less shit by nerfing something else (2h dmg). All it does is fool simple minded people. When I say shit damage I'm saying that in context to gr 40+, not T6. You can face roll T6 with l25 leg gems and decent gear with nearly any weapon.
One last thing, how long do you think it would take to go through 50 billion hp with a 1h, any 1h vs a Furnace? The guy using a Furnace will have killed the rg, gone for a smoke break and started the next rift before you got through that 50B rg with a 1h. I'm not knocking people who like 1h or the builds around them. However those are casual builds, not ment for endgame content.
A 1h that increased Phalanx by 100%? Too bad a Furnace applied Pain Enhancer tick from my 45 gem would likley do more damage, not to mention the actual cast as elite damage is on a different dr table than items/skills that boost another skill, a 1h that buffed Phalanx dmg would likley dr with Lord Commander passive, making something like that far from optimal. Also, base damage from a Furnace or 2h flail being so much higher would crush Pain Enhancer, which ends up being a good portion of damage.
The raw sustained DPS on 1H weapons is absolutely fine when supported by Fervor compared to HS. There's a minor DPS gap, but it's not some cripplingly huge amount.
The HS damage debuff was and is because of the massive 2H weapon damage boost that happened going into RoS. It has nothing to do with trying to make 1H weapons attractive and everything to do with making sure 2H crusaders don't absolutely crush the DPS of any other class by virtue of the effective +50% DPS offered by HS before the damage penalty.
You're confusing poor design with bad weapon class balance. If you sat and compared a "vanilla" 1H weapon with a "vanilla" 2H weapon on a crusader and just timed how long it took to stampede a target to death without a bunch of procs they'd take about the same time, favoring 2H slightly. Why? Because the two weapon types have very similar base DPS.
The difference that you're seeing is because a weapon that already has a 50% damage lead is getting another 50% damage lead (well, closer to 35% after SoJ) and then tick based procs don;t compensate for AS in any way. Should they compensate? Probably not.
Now. If that 100% Phalanx damage bonus 1H weapon was stacked against anything that WASN'T a furnace? The difference would be much less noticeable, and rather than running all Toxin all the time you'd parley the large AS difference into point-cast procs (that 2H weapons are weaker with). that further muddy the actual difference.
You're sitting here trying to compare 1H weapons to the single most powerful per-hit damage weapon in the game, and then assuming that you'll be approaching the use of the weapon types exactly the same. Furnace has been brokenly powerful for a long time, it's not a particularly good comparison point. If (for instance) Sun Keeper had the same legend effect and you were comparing "1H Furnace" to "2H Furnace" the difference would be pretty small, and something that is compensated for by making use of better suited mechanics rather than just approaching the problem the same way.
The difference that you're seeing is because a weapon that already has a 50% damage lead is getting another 50% damage lead (well, closer to 35% after SoJ) and then tick based procs don;t compensate for AS in any way. Should they compensate? Probably not.
Now. If that 100% Phalanx damage bonus 1H weapon was stacked against anything that WASN'T a furnace? The difference would be much less noticeable, and rather than running all Toxin all the time you'd parley the large AS difference into point-cast procs (that 2H weapons are weaker with). that further muddy the actual difference.
You're sitting here trying to compare 1H weapons to the single most powerful per-hit damage weapon in the game, and then assuming that you'll be approaching the use of the weapon types exactly the same. Furnace has been brokenly powerful for a long time, it's not a particularly good comparison point. If (for instance) Sun Keeper had the same legend effect and you were comparing "1H Furnace" to "2H Furnace" the difference would be pretty small, and something that is compensated for by making use of better suited mechanics rather than just approaching the problem the same way."
What I actually did was use a real scenario to prove the fault of your logic. Because in game Furnace is the end game weapon, nothing else comes close. Daydreaming and using abstract and invalid points of measure doesn't change the fact that its a poor design to punish people for using the necessary tools to do endgame content. Saying poor weapon optimization is just plain wrong, and saying that you'd be more or less right if we just ignore things like leg. affixes is even more wrong. Those are the defining attributes of weapons that set them apart from others, and I refuse to ignore something like that because someone feels like arguing an abstract point. In truth the passive Heavenly Strength punishes the end game player on this class, it bites right into the bonus granted by AC, for no real reason.
One final point, the actual topic in this thread is improvements necessary to the class to be able to hit gr 50. Since that's not happening with a 1h, can we forgo any further digression on this moot point?
I agree about the survival issues with rolands as well, but I have doubts that it would match Phalanx in terms of output. I'd have to see actual testing where someone would be able to run a grift 40 against a stampede or condemn build.
There's no reason improvements cannot be made that make 1H able to do GR50. None at all. The only thing preventing such a thing is thinking like you. Confusing "This has no current mechanical support" with "this has no potential mechanical support that can make it viable"
They could release a 1H weapon with "all your skills deal quadruple damage"
Boom 1H is now only weapon type worth using. They're not going to because it's bad design, much in the same way that furnace is bad design (though that one snuck through because it looks reasonable on paper). Nothing is precluding a reasonable attempt at making 1H weapons interesting other than lack of creativity both among developers and among players.
Now. Heavenly Strength is in no way a punishment in endgame. Without the penalty the passive would be a greater than 50% damage passive, far and away more powerful than any passive for any other class. With the penalty it's a 30% damage bonus with no important conditional clauses and no significant drawbacks other than "You have to use a weapon type that's already better than the alternatives". It's not punishment, it's balance.
What we have is a penalty stroke 20% while using 2h, again a unique mechanic to this class. Jade doc's don't do 20% less damage for use of a 2h as opposed to a 1h/mojo, Raekor barbs don't lose 20% dmg for not using 2x1h weps. What we have is nothing even close to what I've mentioned above, those things that I've listed are just there, regardless of weapon used, and as every class except dh that I listed uses Furnace in an end game build I'm having a difficulty grasping how/where the imbalance would be with the removal of this debuff. As others point out we lack damage, HS is not balance it is a piss poor penalty stroke for people using 2h a weapon that was the endgame design to begin with.
Also, the debuff from HS is 20%, not 50%. You're confusing the difference in base weapon damage with how the HS skill interacts with the class.No other class loses 20% off of its major damage boosting skill for the sake of "balance." I'm not interested in any imaginary fantasy land math either, I've done enough in game testing between the two to know that's accurate.
That debuff is applied to the bonus granted by AC, so that's why I say its punishment, and it is. It is not balance in the slighest, as the group of people who'd be using one handers on a steady basis won't be pushing a gr 50, you wouldn't likley make 40. So what we come to is the corner that you've argued yourself into. This season one handers are not viable end game. Where they are viable is t6, where you wouldn't notice the damage difference thanks to the relatively low hp of mobs compared to grift 40+. HS punishes the player looking for next level progression for the sake of a group of people who as you're so aptly demonstrating have not a clue as to how damage is fully applied or the content level we're trying to apply it to.
Shitty quality of life choices for the sake of balance, and most ironic the people who this balance is there for have 0 idea what they're missing anyway.
What I would like to see is a set of passives that reward both styles of play, like a barb or dh, instead of one that punishes the player who uses the 2h for the sake of people like yourself who believe that there needs to by this type of balance for us, when it exists no where else that I've experienced.
Note that barbarians also can wear shields - people just have forgotten about it because the game is all about damage, damage, damage and there's no interesting affix for barb on any shield. Your comparison is flawed.
Anyways, everyone please stay on topic... some interesting points being brought up here. I too wonder why Crusaders perform so weak in comparison (and have no answer), so interesting to read everyone's thoughts.
Paragraphs 1+2 - You're comparing a passive to powerful item affixes. That is completely incomparable. Stack HS versus any single damage passive on any class and it's a fair comparison (and HS is better than 90% of other damage passives). There are a handful of damage passives that beat HS in terms of the damage multiplier they provide (Gruesome Feast), and those passives have conditional clauses that have significant effect on their use. As it is HS is a non-conditional +20-30% damage bonus as a passive, comparable with (as I've said multiple times) all other damage passives. Without the penalty HS would be a +50% damage passive. It's not punishment to ensure a mechanic is comparable to its peers. You're sitting there doing fantasyland comparisons ignoring the actual math and the actual facts.
Paragraph 3+4 - I at no point anywhere have said HS had any debuff value other than 20%. And if you sat and actually did the math you'd know that the relative DPS gains from AC's damage bonus while using HS are HIGHER than if you don't use it. AC without HS is + 35% damage, AC with HS is a relative +43% damage. AC is actually IMPROVED in effect by having that debuff, not weakened.
Paragraph 5 - Mechanics that retain DPS parity are needed. These aren't shitty QoL choices (they aren't even QoL choices) they're balancing mechanics to make sure a passive isn't brokenly out of line with all other passives. If HS did not have the damage penalty the issues with 1H weapons would be even further magnified, and even after 1H was "fixed" for other classes Fervor would need buffing on the order of "While wielding a 1H weapon 50% increased damage" just to compete with HS. And I repeat that's assuming 1H is viable for every other class.
Paragraph 6 - Fervor is the sister passive meant to represent 1H play. It's currently mildly undertuned, it wouldn't hurt to be buffed up to +20 or +30% AS with 1H weapons. All other passives are balanced with their competition in all other classes, HS is too. It;s not some special case. Just because it has a penalty doesn't mean it's somehow out of line with how passives work. It just means that if it didn't have the penalty it would be TOO GOOD compared to its competition (and would be a better damage amplifer than any other passive).
Here's I'll take your "punishment" point of view and just run with it for a second.
Gruesome Feast "punishes" WDs who don't stack pickup radius or don't have access to health globes.
Ruthless "punishes" barbarians when they'e fighting enemies above 30% health. (Also only works out to +12% damage hahaha suckers)
Berserker Rage "punishes" barbarians who spend fury (which they're supposed to want to do aren't they???)
Brawler "punishes" barbarians who use any kind of ranged attack
Elemental Attunement "punishes" wizards who don't have multiple element types
Glass Cannon "punishes" wizards by reducing their defenses (and it's still only +15%, when even after "punishment" HS is +20-30% damage)
Audacity "punishes" wizards who fight at range
Sharpshooter "punishes" DHs with high crit chance (also it's a pretty bad damage bonus if you do the math)
Ambush "punishes" DHs fighting enemies with less than 75% health (and it's an even worse damage bonus than Ruthless, at 10%)
Single Out "punishes" demon hunters who are fighting groups
Many passives "punish" the user when they're not using them correctly. Some just plain suck (Ruthless, Ambush), with big awesome numbers that work out to not much of a bonus. HS doesn't have that problem. It has a big "punishing" penalty that still leaves the user with a substantial bonus, that's still better than almost all of its peers among other classes, and still better than all the other damage passives for saders. And that's crazy when you realize it's competing with multiple +20% damage passives (most classes have only one or two of those, several don't even have 1).
The greater issue is not "HS punishes you" (because it doesn't, and hasn't since the MS penalty was removed) the greater issue is that there are almost no supporting core mechanics in the game that reward using any weapon that isn't 1H+(source/Mojo) or 2H. And even if there were there are no mechanics that reward sustained DPS melee play (where 90% of Crusader's power is), every mechanic pushes raw weapon damage and ranged play. Remember in Vanilla when DW>>>>>>>>>>>>>EVERYTHING? That's what's going on now, just in the opposite direction. The 1H-2H disparity is completely unrelated to Crusaders (who have a far more balanced DPS between the two than most other classes).
@Bagstone: Crusaders perform weakly in comparison because they have almost no "free damage" affix support on gear and their "premier" build spams a 490% weapon damage skill and otherwise relies on mechanics available to all other classes for damage. Even factoring a free 35% damage from Champion they're trying to compete against even the WEAKEST other builds spamming a 1000+% AoE weapon damage skill with no cost and no cooldown. While they flail away wit ha laughable 490% AoE with exorbitant cost and little to no mobility.