Summon an immense Meteor that plummets from the sky, causing 180% weapon damage as Fire to all enemies it crashes into. The ground it hits is scorched with molten fire that deals 60% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds.
The current wording of meteor suggests that it will only do 180% wpn dmg upfront and another 60% weapon dmg over 3 seconds if they stay in the area.
Personally I think for the astounding price of 60 AP(Over half out entire resource system), this is outrageously pathetic dmg output, and laughable efficiency, even if you assume they stand in the AoE the entire duration.
Ok, I think its time to show you guys the proper math on efficiency, just to kind of get an idea just how terrible this skill actually is. Of course I am going to use arcane orb, ya I know its OP standard blah blah, but its the easiest to make a comparison with.
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec
1.5 Attack per second (APS)
By attacking faster we lose some benefit to AP/sec
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec = 10/1.5 = 6.666 AP/attack
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec = 2/1.5 = 1.333 AP/attack
Total = 8 AP/attack
That means assuming we have sufficient AP to continue casting, then the actual cost of our spells is 8 AP less.
(Of course this is chain casting, with no movement. If we throw movement into the mix, then our spells become even cheaper as we are doing less than 1.5 APS)
So why is this significant? Well the reduction in cost of a cheap spell has a much more drastic effect than on a high costing one. So Arcane orbs effective AP cost (EAP) is 35-8 = 27 AP, and meteors effective AP cost is 60-8 = 52 AP.
As you can see we have a 30% increase in efficiency after we consider the cost reduction via regen.
Meteor
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds (For arguments sake we will assume they take the full 60% over 3 seconds, though this seems terribly unlikely)
AP cost = 60
Effective AP cost = 52
%WD/AP = 240/60 = 4%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 240/52 = 4.6%WD/EAP
As you can see here even under the best of circumstances the %WD/AP of Meteor is just horrendous, a full 25% lower than Arcane Orb. Whats more is that the reduced cost via regen has very little impact compared to Arcane orb, only a gain of 15% gain. When you compare the %WD/EAP, arcane orb is over 40% more efficient, and again this is BEST case for meteor!
Also this is completely ignoring the +AP on crit affix, which is really just another means of regen, and effectively lowers the costs of the spells further. As the amount of AP regen'd gets closer to the cost of the spells the spells become more and more efficient until they become infinitely more efficient, and then start generating AP.
So why is all this important? Simple. Given that these spells hit for similar amounts in a similar area, the only other means to quantify them is with efficiency. Once we start looking at it from this perspective we clearly see that Arcane Orb wins hands down. To further illustrate I will do another example.
Arcane Orb- Obliteration
228% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 228/27 = 8.44%WD/EAP
Meteor- Star Pact
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds
AP cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 240/27 = 8.88%WD/EAP
If we use Star pact the price of meteor becomes the same as Arcane Orb, and by using Obliterate the dmg of the two becomes near identical as well. HOWEVER, you have to remember two things.
#1 We assumed the mobs would take the full 60% over 3 seconds. Chances are this won't happen very often, especially not without the use of some other ability to slow. The average dmg eould probably be closer to the 200-220 range.
#2 From an efficiency stand point this is really a best case comparison for meteor, as meteor is taking the efficiency rune. For example, Arcane orb with Tap the Source has an %WD/EAP of about 14.6, damn near double of star pact.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
EDIT: Now Everyone can go ahead, and change their votes to yes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Since none of us have used the skill, how can we possibly make predictions on how useful it is...
Despite this I voted no, purely out of faith that blizzard wouldn't bring back such an epic spell from d2, only to make it terrible.
We have the #s listed right there in the patch 14 notes....What more info do you need?
I think most people are like you and just voted no for the hell of it....It is totally gimp according to the patch 14 info.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
The overall radius of meteor is quite large.. given what we have seen.
180% upfront damage to as many possible targets within radius and 60% over 3 seconds. And if this is the same damage % at launch there is a reason for it. Also almost all of meteor's runes add a significant bonus in damage and/or provide a CC/Slow.
180% upfront damage to as many possible targets within radius and 60% over 3 seconds. And if this is the same damage % at launch there is a reason for it. Also almost all of meteor's runes add a significant bonus in damage and/or provide a CC/Slow.
There is no such thing as perfect balance as you seem to be daydreaming about.
That doesn't exist. There will be skills at launch that are quite lackluster, and meteor will be one of them if something doesn't change.
Molten Impact Increases the damage of the Meteor impact to 234% weapon damage as Fire and the molten fire to 78% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
Well clearly if it's that weak in the current build it's somewhat of a gimp.
What I'm curious about is just how much does Arcane Orb currently do (it's really the basic AoE attack in my mind right now), comparing the cost and damage of the unruned skills should give more info for us to judge by.
Checked it out now thanks to a decent updated website
175% weapon damage on Arcane Orb, same for Torrent.
Meteor with this low damage can't even compare to firing controlled 175% weapon damage for 20 AP.
Checked it out now thanks to a decent updated website
175% weapon damage on Arcane Orb, same for Torrent.
Meteor with this low damage can't even compare to firing controlled 175% weapon damage for 20 AP.
Yah, Arcane Orb has the same radius and hits for the same upfront dmg for nearly half the cost. An extremeley weak Fire Dot, that the mobs wont just stand in is nowhere near worth the double cost. Such high costing spells also recieve far less support from regen and +ap on crit. Such spells have to hit like a truck to even be remotely worth using.
Arcane Orb will hit in a semi-cirlce, whislt meteor will dmg an entire cirlce. That gives meteor back some power, except that there is a delay when meteor lands. This means it will be difficult at best to be bullsyeye accurate, thus greatly diminishing this benefit.
I am starting to think that blizzard is nerfing anything that lobes atm, like fire bomb and meteor. Things that can hit the entire circle.
12 people either voted that it was fine, becasue they are fanboys who believe it will be fine in the future, which isn't even the question. Or they just don't know wtf they are talking about, as the Patch 14 version of meteor is totally worthless.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
One is never hurt by being given additional choices, only by taking them away. A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
Ok, I think its time to show you guys the proper math on efficiency, just to kind of get an idea just how terrible this skill actually is. Of course I am going to use arcane orb, ya I know its OP standard blah blah, but its the easiest to make a comparison with.
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec
1.5 Attack per second (APS)
By attacking faster we lose some benefit to AP/sec
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec = 10/1.5 = 6.666 AP/attack
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec = 2/1.5 = 1.333 AP/attack
Total = 8 AP/attack
That means assuming we have sufficient AP to continue casting, then the actual cost of our spells is 8 AP less.
(Of course this is chain casting, with no movement. If we throw movement into the mix, then our spells become even cheaper as we are doing less than 1.5 APS)
So why is this significant? Well the reduction in cost of a cheap spell has a much more drastic effect than on a high costing one. So Arcane orbs effective AP cost (EAP) is 35-8 = 27 AP, and meteors effective AP cost is 60-8 = 52 AP.
As you can see we have a 30% increase in efficiency after we consider the cost reduction via regen.
Meteor
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds (For arguments sake we will assume they take the full 60% over 3 seconds, though this seems terribly unlikely)
AP cost = 60
Effective AP cost = 52
%WD/AP = 240/60 = 4%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 240/52 = 4.6%WD/EAP
As you can see here even under the best of circumstances the %WD/AP of Meteor is just horrendous, a full 25% lower than Arcane Orb. Whats more is that the reduced cost via regen has very little impact compared to Arcane orb, only a gain of 15% gain. When you compare the %WD/EAP, arcane orb is over 40% more efficient, and again this is BEST case for meteor!
Also this is completely ignoring the +AP on crit affix, which is really just another means of regen, and effectively lowers the costs of the spells further. As the amount of AP regen'd gets closer to the cost of the spells the spells become more and more efficient until they become infinitely more efficient, and then start generating AP.
So why is all this important? Simple. Given that these spells hit for similar amounts in a similar area, the only other means to quantify them is with efficiency. Once we start looking at it from this perspective we clearly see that Arcane Orb wins hands down. To further illustrate I will do another example.
Arcane Orb- Obliteration
228% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 228/27 = 8.44%WD/EAP
Meteor- Star Pact
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds
AP cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 240/27 = 8.88%WD/EAP
If we use Star pact the price of meteor becomes the same as Arcane Orb, and by using Obliterate the dmg of the two becomes near identical as well. HOWEVER, you have to remember two things.
#1 We assumed the mobs would take the full 60% over 3 seconds. Chances are this won't happen very often, especially not without the use of some other ability to slow. The average dmg eould probably be closer to the 200-220 range.
#2 From an efficiency stand point this is really a best case comparison for meteor, as meteor is taking the efficiency rune. For example, Arcane orb with Tap the Source has an %WD/EAP of about 14.6, damn near double of star pact.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
EDIT: Now Everyone can go ahead, and change their votes to yes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
I'm pretty sure any decent theory-crafting gamer already knew the basics of that thought process Antirepublican.
The calculation itself is good to see either way, of course, but the logic was there for most of us.
I don't think spells should be worked up like this though in D3 or many spells seem not on par with others and I believe it's not the case.
You're assuming every Arcane Orb will hit as many targets as Meteor will, not sure about the range but I recall meteor being a bit wider.
You're also assuming every AO will hit at all while Meteor might have better controlled-location (didn't test it so can't say for myself).
Meteor seems, to me at least, built around the assumption of a One Shot skill, in the builds I take it (Frost/Fire style mostly, if not only) I take it as a "cast-to-kill" and not as an effective AP user. When it comes to effective AP use you'll find Arcane Torrent to be the best AoE a Wizard has, if I'm not mistaken. That being said each spell has it's benefits and it's shortcomings (same AP cost as AO, same damage, but runed for 15% increased Arcane damage after it hits).
Don't get me wrong, I totally think Arcane Orb and Disintegrate are the 2 most useful spells when comparing both cost and effective damage output for the most part.
Meteor needs a buff, a base damage around 220% weapon damage + 60% over 3 sec, or so, to become a valid nuke spell in my opinion. You clearly wouldn't want to combine it with other heavy-AP using spells, but with more utility-damage style or cheap spells.
Just a thought to compare them in favor of meteor:
Picking up a pack with 200% of your weapon damage or so would lead you to only need to cast 1x Meteor but 2x Arcane Orbs.
I know it's situation-based but I think that's the whole point of Blizz's design, to make many viable situation-based builds and let you fit them to your own style of gaming. Meteor DOES need a buff to be considered really viable in my opinion, but I bet I'll give it a try even as it is right now.
Sempai I don't see why it bothers you to theorycraft before the game is live.
Even when it's live you can expect changes and tweaks, so it's all the same
It's fun to keep ourselves busy thinking of pros and cons of certain elements of our chosen class.
As is I don't think this will be great as a main nuke unless it has synergies. For me, I use comet for a synergy with both Frost Nova and Cold Blooded. On top of that, I chose it for the 60% aoe slow feature (my build is built around a lot of slows). I chose it as a utility spell that did nuke damage with the ability to attack targets over the heads of the melee if I wanted. If your taking it for utility/synergy reasons it can be worth it, but if you are taking it on a relatively stand alone basis I think that it is too weak as is.
EDIT: Now Everyone can go ahead, and change their votes to yes.
Yes, or we could wait until the polishing and tweaking has been done and the game is live. Then I'll be glad to vote Yes if it turns out gimped.
Seriously....SERIOUSLY?!?
That makes no sense...THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION IN THE POLL!
no =/= maybe they will fix it later!
no = the current implementation of meteor is not gimp.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
I'm pretty sure any decent theory-crafting gamer already knew the basics of that thought process Antirepublican.
The calculation itself is good to see either way, of course, but the logic was there for most of us.
True, but apparently thats not the majority here...
Heck the other day someone was doing theorycrafting on haunt and came up with the idea that %weapon dmg per duration time per mana was indicative of efficiency. With that he claimed that resentful spirit was more efficient.
I don't think spells should be worked up like this though in D3 or many spells seem not on par with others and I believe it's not the case.
You're assuming every Arcane Orb will hit as many targets as Meteor will, not sure about the range but I recall meteor being a bit wider.
You're also assuming every AO will hit at all while Meteor might have better controlled-location (didn't test it so can't say for myself).
Most spells no, but this spell in particular is fairly significant.
I posted a couple videos up above that illustrates the radius of meteor being ~10 yards, maybe 12 tops.
There is about a 1 second delay before meteor hits, which would obviously make it far more tricky to aim. However, as I said earlier it stikes an entire area, while arcane orb will on average explode in a semicircle. So there is a good chance meteor will hit a few extra mobs assuming you have good timing/aiming with both skills.
Meteor seems, to me at least, built around the assumption of a One Shot skill, in the builds I take it (Frost/Fire style mostly, if not only) I take it as a "cast-to-kill" and not as an effective AP user. When it comes to effective AP use you'll find Arcane Torrent to be the best AoE a Wizard has, if I'm not mistaken. That being said each spell has it's benefits and it's shortcomings (same AP cost as AO, same damage, but runed for 15% increased Arcane damage after it hits).
Don't get me wrong, I totally think Arcane Orb and Disintegrate are the 2 most useful spells when comparing both cost and effective damage output for the most part.
Meteor needs a buff, a base damage around 220% weapon damage + 60% over 3 sec, or so, to become a valid nuke spell in my opinion. You clearly wouldn't want to combine it with other heavy-AP using spells, but with more utility-damage style or cheap spells.
I agree, its meant to be a nuke that you drop and stuff dies. Problem is it doesnt fulfill that role anymore, thus its worthless.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
First off, it looks like the site you're referencing is out of date. This is the text on the official diablo 3 site.
Meteor does 250% weapon damage as Fire to all enemies it crashes into. The ground it hits is scorched with molten fire that deals 100% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds. And Arcane Orb does 250% weapon damage.
More over your calculations are completely illogical to me. You quote calculations of "%WD/EAP" which you're right Arcane Orb is more AP efficient. An instant dmg spell vs a instant dmg + DOT spell. We're not counting the potential larger radius of Meteor, and the advantages of kiting mobs in that fire. I just don't believe that "%WD/EAP" is a good indication of a spell's usefulness.
You use Arcane Orb- Obliteration / Meteor- Star Pact for comparison. Errrrr.... Obliteration increases the damage of Arcane Orb to 325%. Star Pact reduces the casting cost of Meteor to 42 AP. The 2 runes are in no way shape or form comparable. If you're going to use a decrease AP rune on one spell, use it on the other as well. Otherwise the comparison is apples to oranges.
Final point, chances are if you choose to use Meteor, you'll want to also take Conflagration as a passive to maximize your damage and possibly Temporal Flux for Arcane Orb. It makes comparisons very difficult if not impossible I'm sure but they are logical choices that have to be considered for every build and if you want to do comparisons.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
Base spell to base spell, you're probably right, Meteor does not seem (on paper) impressive. But with runes and passives added, I think it's very appealing. I'm thinking Comet and Black Ice.
Also why put up a poll when you're just going to reject everyone elses opinions?
First off, it looks like the site you're referencing is out of date. This is the text on the official diablo 3 site.
Summon an immense Meteor that plummets from the sky, causing 250% weapon damage as Fire to all enemies it crashes into. The ground it hits is scorched with molten fire that deals 100% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds.
And Arcane Orb does 250% weapon damage.
More over your calculations are completely illogical to me. You quote calculations of "%WD/EAP" which you're right Arcane Orb is more AP efficient, but it is a instant damage spell. Meteor continues to dmg over 3 sec over the radius of the spell.
Then you use Arcane Orb- Obliteration / Meteor- Star Pact for comparison. Errrrr.... Obliteration increases the damage of Arcane Orb to 325%. Star Pact reduces the casting cost of Meteor to 42 AP. The 2 runes are in no way shape or form comparable. If you're going to use a decrease AP rune on one spell, use it on the other as well. Otherwise the comparison is apples to oranges.
Final point, chances are if you choose to use Meteor, you'll want to also take Conflagration as a passive to maximize your damage and possibly Temporal Flux for Arcane Orb. It makes comparisons very difficult if not impossible I'm sure but they are logical choices that have to be considered for every build and if you want to do comparisons.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
Nope I see nothing in your calculations that convince me in any way that meteor is gimp. A spell that does instant + DOT dmg should cost more than a spell with only is only instant dmg. Also why put up a poll when you're just going to reject everyone elses opinions?
I think you need to get your facts straight before making an argument. The numbers on the official site are out of date.
Cost: 60 Arcane Power
Summon an immense Meteor that plummets from the sky, causing 180% weapon damage as Fire to all enemies it crashes into. The ground it hits is scorched with molten fire that deals 60% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds.
http://d3db.com/skill/i/meteor
The current wording of meteor suggests that it will only do 180% wpn dmg upfront and another 60% weapon dmg over 3 seconds if they stay in the area.
Personally I think for the astounding price of 60 AP(Over half out entire resource system), this is outrageously pathetic dmg output, and laughable efficiency, even if you assume they stand in the AoE the entire duration.
Ok, I think its time to show you guys the proper math on efficiency, just to kind of get an idea just how terrible this skill actually is. Of course I am going to use arcane orb, ya I know its OP standard blah blah, but its the easiest to make a comparison with.
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec
1.5 Attack per second (APS)
By attacking faster we lose some benefit to AP/sec
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec = 10/1.5 = 6.666 AP/attack
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec = 2/1.5 = 1.333 AP/attack
Total = 8 AP/attack
That means assuming we have sufficient AP to continue casting, then the actual cost of our spells is 8 AP less.
(Of course this is chain casting, with no movement. If we throw movement into the mix, then our spells become even cheaper as we are doing less than 1.5 APS)
So why is this significant? Well the reduction in cost of a cheap spell has a much more drastic effect than on a high costing one. So Arcane orbs effective AP cost (EAP) is 35-8 = 27 AP, and meteors effective AP cost is 60-8 = 52 AP.
Arcane Orb
175% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost (EAP) = 27
%WD/AP = 175/35 = 5%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 175/27 = 6.48%WD/EAP
As you can see we have a 30% increase in efficiency after we consider the cost reduction via regen.
Meteor
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds (For arguments sake we will assume they take the full 60% over 3 seconds, though this seems terribly unlikely)
AP cost = 60
Effective AP cost = 52
%WD/AP = 240/60 = 4%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 240/52 = 4.6%WD/EAP
As you can see here even under the best of circumstances the %WD/AP of Meteor is just horrendous, a full 25% lower than Arcane Orb. Whats more is that the reduced cost via regen has very little impact compared to Arcane orb, only a gain of 15% gain. When you compare the %WD/EAP, arcane orb is over 40% more efficient, and again this is BEST case for meteor!
Also this is completely ignoring the +AP on crit affix, which is really just another means of regen, and effectively lowers the costs of the spells further. As the amount of AP regen'd gets closer to the cost of the spells the spells become more and more efficient until they become infinitely more efficient, and then start generating AP.
So why is all this important? Simple. Given that these spells hit for similar amounts in a similar area, the only other means to quantify them is with efficiency. Once we start looking at it from this perspective we clearly see that Arcane Orb wins hands down. To further illustrate I will do another example.
Arcane Orb- Obliteration
228% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 228/27 = 8.44%WD/EAP
Meteor- Star Pact
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds
AP cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 240/27 = 8.88%WD/EAP
If we use Star pact the price of meteor becomes the same as Arcane Orb, and by using Obliterate the dmg of the two becomes near identical as well. HOWEVER, you have to remember two things.
#1 We assumed the mobs would take the full 60% over 3 seconds. Chances are this won't happen very often, especially not without the use of some other ability to slow. The average dmg eould probably be closer to the 200-220 range.
#2 From an efficiency stand point this is really a best case comparison for meteor, as meteor is taking the efficiency rune. For example, Arcane orb with Tap the Source has an %WD/EAP of about 14.6, damn near double of star pact.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
EDIT: Now Everyone can go ahead, and change their votes to yes.
Epicurus
Despite this I voted no, purely out of faith that blizzard wouldn't bring back such an epic spell from d2, only to make it terrible.
We have the #s listed right there in the patch 14 notes....What more info do you need?
I think most people are like you and just voted no for the hell of it....It is totally gimp according to the patch 14 info.
Epicurus
180% upfront damage to as many possible targets within radius and 60% over 3 seconds. And if this is the same damage % at launch there is a reason for it. Also almost all of meteor's runes add a significant bonus in damage and/or provide a CC/Slow.
Molten impact : 325%/130% over 3 seconds.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICYlIR4q_oE
Explosive Blast = 12 yards
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSQ0t43PEIw
Yah, not that large...maybe 10 yards, at most 12 yards.
There is no such thing as perfect balance as you seem to be daydreaming about.
That doesn't exist. There will be skills at launch that are quite lackluster, and meteor will be one of them if something doesn't change.
Molten Impact Increases the damage of the Meteor impact to 234% weapon damage as Fire and the molten fire to 78% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds.
Epicurus
What I'm curious about is just how much does Arcane Orb currently do (it's really the basic AoE attack in my mind right now), comparing the cost and damage of the unruned skills should give more info for us to judge by.
http://www.d3unlimited.com
175% weapon damage on Arcane Orb, same for Torrent.
Meteor with this low damage can't even compare to firing controlled 175% weapon damage for 20 AP.
http://www.d3unlimited.com
Yah, Arcane Orb has the same radius and hits for the same upfront dmg for nearly half the cost. An extremeley weak Fire Dot, that the mobs wont just stand in is nowhere near worth the double cost. Such high costing spells also recieve far less support from regen and +ap on crit. Such spells have to hit like a truck to even be remotely worth using.
Arcane Orb will hit in a semi-cirlce, whislt meteor will dmg an entire cirlce. That gives meteor back some power, except that there is a delay when meteor lands. This means it will be difficult at best to be bullsyeye accurate, thus greatly diminishing this benefit.
I am starting to think that blizzard is nerfing anything that lobes atm, like fire bomb and meteor. Things that can hit the entire circle.
12 people either voted that it was fine, becasue they are fanboys who believe it will be fine in the future, which isn't even the question. Or they just don't know wtf they are talking about, as the Patch 14 version of meteor is totally worthless.
A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
Why make a poll then state the results dont matter?
It's not gimp, chill out.
The results of polls never matter. Usually it just tells you how stupid people taking them are.
http://www.funnyordie.com/lists/ef02e86313/stupid-things-americans-believe
Ohh and it is very much gimp...What evidence do you have to the contrary?
We have videos and #s.
A QUADRILLION MAGIC FIND is worthless if you can't kill shit!
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec
1.5 Attack per second (APS)
By attacking faster we lose some benefit to AP/sec
Base Regen = 10 AP/sec = 10/1.5 = 6.666 AP/attack
Astral Pres = 2 AP/sec = 2/1.5 = 1.333 AP/attack
Total = 8 AP/attack
That means assuming we have sufficient AP to continue casting, then the actual cost of our spells is 8 AP less.
(Of course this is chain casting, with no movement. If we throw movement into the mix, then our spells become even cheaper as we are doing less than 1.5 APS)
So why is this significant? Well the reduction in cost of a cheap spell has a much more drastic effect than on a high costing one. So Arcane orbs effective AP cost (EAP) is 35-8 = 27 AP, and meteors effective AP cost is 60-8 = 52 AP.
Arcane Orb
175% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost (EAP) = 27
%WD/AP = 175/35 = 5%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 175/27 = 6.48%WD/EAP
As you can see we have a 30% increase in efficiency after we consider the cost reduction via regen.
Meteor
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds (For arguments sake we will assume they take the full 60% over 3 seconds, though this seems terribly unlikely)
AP cost = 60
Effective AP cost = 52
%WD/AP = 240/60 = 4%WD/AP
%WD/EAP = 240/52 = 4.6%WD/EAP
As you can see here even under the best of circumstances the %WD/AP of Meteor is just horrendous, a full 25% lower than Arcane Orb. Whats more is that the reduced cost via regen has very little impact compared to Arcane orb, only a gain of 15% gain. When you compare the %WD/EAP, arcane orb is over 40% more efficient, and again this is BEST case for meteor!
Also this is completely ignoring the +AP on crit affix, which is really just another means of regen, and effectively lowers the costs of the spells further. As the amount of AP regen'd gets closer to the cost of the spells the spells become more and more efficient until they become infinitely more efficient, and then start generating AP.
So why is all this important? Simple. Given that these spells hit for similar amounts in a similar area, the only other means to quantify them is with efficiency. Once we start looking at it from this perspective we clearly see that Arcane Orb wins hands down. To further illustrate I will do another example.
Arcane Orb- Obliteration
228% weapon dmg
AP Cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 228/27 = 8.44%WD/EAP
Meteor- Star Pact
180% wpn dmg + 60% wpn dmg over 3 seconds
AP cost = 35
Effective AP cost = 27
%WD/EAP = 240/27 = 8.88%WD/EAP
If we use Star pact the price of meteor becomes the same as Arcane Orb, and by using Obliterate the dmg of the two becomes near identical as well. HOWEVER, you have to remember two things.
#1 We assumed the mobs would take the full 60% over 3 seconds. Chances are this won't happen very often, especially not without the use of some other ability to slow. The average dmg eould probably be closer to the 200-220 range.
#2 From an efficiency stand point this is really a best case comparison for meteor, as meteor is taking the efficiency rune. For example, Arcane orb with Tap the Source has an %WD/EAP of about 14.6, damn near double of star pact.
Once these 2 factors are considered, you can clearly see that Arcane Orb is by far the better spell. This in turn dictates that either meteor is gimp, or arcane orb is OP. Though when comparing to the numbers of other skills, it does not appear that Arcane Orb is really anything extraordinary. Which leads us to but one conclusion, meteor is gimp.
EDIT: Now Everyone can go ahead, and change their votes to yes.
Epicurus
The calculation itself is good to see either way, of course, but the logic was there for most of us.
I don't think spells should be worked up like this though in D3 or many spells seem not on par with others and I believe it's not the case.
You're assuming every Arcane Orb will hit as many targets as Meteor will, not sure about the range but I recall meteor being a bit wider.
You're also assuming every AO will hit at all while Meteor might have better controlled-location (didn't test it so can't say for myself).
Meteor seems, to me at least, built around the assumption of a One Shot skill, in the builds I take it (Frost/Fire style mostly, if not only) I take it as a "cast-to-kill" and not as an effective AP user. When it comes to effective AP use you'll find Arcane Torrent to be the best AoE a Wizard has, if I'm not mistaken. That being said each spell has it's benefits and it's shortcomings (same AP cost as AO, same damage, but runed for 15% increased Arcane damage after it hits).
Don't get me wrong, I totally think Arcane Orb and Disintegrate are the 2 most useful spells when comparing both cost and effective damage output for the most part.
Meteor needs a buff, a base damage around 220% weapon damage + 60% over 3 sec, or so, to become a valid nuke spell in my opinion. You clearly wouldn't want to combine it with other heavy-AP using spells, but with more utility-damage style or cheap spells.
http://www.d3unlimited.com
Picking up a pack with 200% of your weapon damage or so would lead you to only need to cast 1x Meteor but 2x Arcane Orbs.
I know it's situation-based but I think that's the whole point of Blizz's design, to make many viable situation-based builds and let you fit them to your own style of gaming. Meteor DOES need a buff to be considered really viable in my opinion, but I bet I'll give it a try even as it is right now.
http://www.d3unlimited.com
Yes, or we could wait until the polishing and tweaking has been done and the game is live. Then I'll be glad to vote Yes if it turns out gimped.
Even when it's live you can expect changes and tweaks, so it's all the same
It's fun to keep ourselves busy thinking of pros and cons of certain elements of our chosen class.
http://www.d3unlimited.com
That makes no sense...THAT IS NOT THE QUESTION IN THE POLL!
no =/= maybe they will fix it later!
no = the current implementation of meteor is not gimp.
Epicurus
Heck the other day someone was doing theorycrafting on haunt and came up with the idea that %weapon dmg per duration time per mana was indicative of efficiency. With that he claimed that resentful spirit was more efficient.
Most spells no, but this spell in particular is fairly significant.
I posted a couple videos up above that illustrates the radius of meteor being ~10 yards, maybe 12 tops.
There is about a 1 second delay before meteor hits, which would obviously make it far more tricky to aim. However, as I said earlier it stikes an entire area, while arcane orb will on average explode in a semicircle. So there is a good chance meteor will hit a few extra mobs assuming you have good timing/aiming with both skills.
I agree, its meant to be a nuke that you drop and stuff dies. Problem is it doesnt fulfill that role anymore, thus its worthless.
Epicurus
First off, it looks like the site you're referencing is out of date. This is the text on the official diablo 3 site.
Meteor does 250% weapon damage as Fire to all enemies it crashes into. The ground it hits is scorched with molten fire that deals 100% weapon damage as Fire over 3 seconds. And Arcane Orb does 250% weapon damage.
More over your calculations are completely illogical to me. You quote calculations of "%WD/EAP" which you're right Arcane Orb is more AP efficient. An instant dmg spell vs a instant dmg + DOT spell. We're not counting the potential larger radius of Meteor, and the advantages of kiting mobs in that fire. I just don't believe that "%WD/EAP" is a good indication of a spell's usefulness.
You use Arcane Orb- Obliteration / Meteor- Star Pact for comparison. Errrrr.... Obliteration increases the damage of Arcane Orb to 325%. Star Pact reduces the casting cost of Meteor to 42 AP. The 2 runes are in no way shape or form comparable. If you're going to use a decrease AP rune on one spell, use it on the other as well. Otherwise the comparison is apples to oranges.
Final point, chances are if you choose to use Meteor, you'll want to also take Conflagration as a passive to maximize your damage and possibly Temporal Flux for Arcane Orb. It makes comparisons very difficult if not impossible I'm sure but they are logical choices that have to be considered for every build and if you want to do comparisons.
Base spell to base spell, you're probably right, Meteor does not seem (on paper) impressive. But with runes and passives added, I think it's very appealing. I'm thinking Comet and Black Ice.
Also why put up a poll when you're just going to reject everyone elses opinions?
I think you need to get your facts straight before making an argument. The numbers on the official site are out of date.
These are the correct, current numbers. http://d3db.com/tool/calculator/wizard