A respectful discussion with reasoned arguments and counter-arguments, an acknowledgement and correction of errors, and no "you're stupid lol wat a noob" pointless insults? What sort of madness is this?
Anonymously posting unsupported claims on an internet forum is #1 on the list of how not to effectively bring about any meaningful change.
So I should risk my money to give you proof? Is this a serious statement because I think me speaking out is proof enough. To ruin my sells/income to prove some child on the internet wrong would be dumb.
You have absolutely no idea what constitutes "proof" or even "evidence." If some random anonymous nobody posting completely unsupported claims is "proof enough" for said claims, then be prepared to believe in Fairies as I, a random anonymous nobody, am now making the unsupported claim that Fairies are in fact real.
Given that my mere assertion is proof enough, I have just now proven that Fairies are real and also that you're an idiot.
I've never understood this myself - practically every other online game in existence has updates and maintenance with little to no impact on server downtime and on varying days of the week, but for some reason Blizzard updates/maintenance require long down-times and only ever occur on Tuesdays.
I assume there's a good reason for this, I just don't know what that reason would be.
I hope it's taking a bit more time actually, so we can have a proper "balance" between the classes.
I wouldn't count on it. No RPG with multiple classes is ever perfectly balanced, but as WoW and now D3 have amply demonstrated over the years, Blizzard in particular is pretty terrible at balancing classes. It will always be the case that at least one class is terrible, at least one is overpowered, and at least a few buffs/nerfs/general changes to skills, items, stats, etc. will defy all reason and logic. It's kind of something you just have to get used to when it comes to a Blizzard RPG.
I thought Blizzard was terrible at balancing classes too, until I played other games. Compared to the other companies out there Blizzard isn't even close to the worst at balancing their classes. I played FFXI for over 7 years and I played FFXIV when it was released, if you want to rant about terrible class balancing take a look at those classes. Atleast Wizard can still do T6. I can't say the same for monk since I haven't played it much in RoS but, atleast Blizzard is trying to remedy the issues at hand.
Blizzard is a pretty big company by this point with thousands of people working for them. If the decisions of a class were up to only 1 person we would have an Indie game. Multiple groups need to approve an idea before its even set in motion. I really hope Blizzard takes its time with this patch and doesn't rush it through.
With regards to FF online: good point; class balance in both FF online games wwas terrible. This is generally true of most Japanese and Korean MMO's, sadly.
As for the second paragraph, I have no doubt that decisions are not left to one person and are not made lightly. This is why it's all the more perplexing and frustrating when they make some very obviously bad decisions.
Something that comes to mind for me was playing a WD at release and discovering very quickly that no competent play tester ever laid a hand on the class. You had things like Zombie Dogs being completely worthless once you reached Hell (and forget about Inferno)... and I don't just mean underpowered, but completely, glaringly, obviously useless. They did effectively no damage and they would all be dead in a couple of seconds. Same with the Garg.
Then there were runes like Wave of Zombies: 3 Zombie Chargers that rushed forward and dealt 71% weapon damage each... compared to 3 Zombie Bears that functioned in the exact same way (and cost the same amount of mana), but dealt 236% weapon damage instead of 71%, had a larger AoE radius, and could hit targets behind you. It was so obvious that Wave of Zombies was a useless piece of garbage and that Zombie Bears was hands-down better in every way.
It still confuses me today how a group of people working for a company like Blizzard (with all it's resources and experience) could have tested these (and many other) things and collectively thought after (presumably) careful consideration "yep, all good here."
Thankfully Blizzard has gotten better, but there's still a long ways to go...
I hope it's taking a bit more time actually, so we can have a proper "balance" between the classes.
I wouldn't count on it. No RPG with multiple classes is ever perfectly balanced, but as WoW and now D3 have amply demonstrated over the years, Blizzard in particular is pretty terrible at balancing classes. It will always be the case that at least one class is terrible, at least one is overpowered, and at least a few buffs/nerfs/general changes to skills, items, stats, etc. will defy all reason and logic. It's kind of something you just have to get used to when it comes to a Blizzard RPG.
Overbuffing would be acceptable considering how long Monks have sucked.
It's probably going to happen. Warlocks in WoW sucked for quite awhile after release, and when Blizzard finally got around to doing something about it, they became absolute beasts. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if all of sudden Monks receive some massive buffs that make them amazing (probably too amazing, but that's just the way of it).
I hope it's taking a bit more time actually, so we can have a proper "balance" between the classes.
I wouldn't count on it. No RPG with multiple classes is ever perfectly balanced, but as WoW and now D3 have amply demonstrated over the years, Blizzard in particular is pretty terrible at balancing classes. It will always be the case that at least one class is terrible, at least one is overpowered, and at least a few buffs/nerfs/general changes to skills, items, stats, etc. will defy all reason and logic. It's kind of something you just have to get used to when it comes to a Blizzard RPG.
Quote from Okakeri
116k damage? Unless you are going for 100% support (healer/tank/CC), you are holding yourself and your group back by doing that and entering high torment lvls (You are basically getting carried). Of course, if you are a healer/tank/CC, then thats all well and good.
I am going 100% CC/support with my WD. I've got high toughness and lots of CD reduction.
I've been tweaking it regularly and trying different variations out, but last night, for example, I used:
Fear (Face of Death)
Frozen Piranhas
Mass Confusion (Paranoia)
Big Bad Voodoo (Slam Dance)
Hex (Jinx)
Spirit Barrage (Phantasm)
with Tiklandian Visage and Frostburn as my main items. With this I can keep enemies Feared/Frozen almost indefinitely while buffing ally damage considerably. With high CD reduction from items, the right passives and Last Breath I can spam MC frequently and keep BBV up with little downtime.
So PP is the new GS, huh? How sad. I've been doing T5 Rift's in public games since PP160 (I just hit 200 today) and I only have 116k DPS. There's more to being successful than mere PP and DPS and whether you have the "approved" end-game set gear.
01. If you cast Haunt/Locus Swarm or the like on a target, and THEN use a damage-increasing ability like Mass Confusion (Paranoia), Piranhas, Hex, or Big Bad Voodoo (Slam Dance), will the DoT damage automatically increase, or does Haunt/Locust Swarm need to be reapplied for the increased damage to take effect?
02. How is Crit Chance/Crit Damage factored when it comes to Haunt/DoT damage? Without knowing how they factor into the overall damage it's hard to tell sometimes which items are better (as far as raw damage is concerned). For instance, I've got two gloves:
526 int, 10% crit chance, 35% crit damage
vs
695 int, no crit chance, 48% crit damage and 10% cold damage
I'm guessing the latter is probably better damage wise, but I'm sure how big of a hit the lack of 10% crit chance really is.
0
0
0
Given that my mere assertion is proof enough, I have just now proven that Fairies are real and also that you're an idiot.
0
0
I assume there's a good reason for this, I just don't know what that reason would be.
0
As for the second paragraph, I have no doubt that decisions are not left to one person and are not made lightly. This is why it's all the more perplexing and frustrating when they make some very obviously bad decisions.
Something that comes to mind for me was playing a WD at release and discovering very quickly that no competent play tester ever laid a hand on the class. You had things like Zombie Dogs being completely worthless once you reached Hell (and forget about Inferno)... and I don't just mean underpowered, but completely, glaringly, obviously useless. They did effectively no damage and they would all be dead in a couple of seconds. Same with the Garg.
Then there were runes like Wave of Zombies: 3 Zombie Chargers that rushed forward and dealt 71% weapon damage each... compared to 3 Zombie Bears that functioned in the exact same way (and cost the same amount of mana), but dealt 236% weapon damage instead of 71%, had a larger AoE radius, and could hit targets behind you. It was so obvious that Wave of Zombies was a useless piece of garbage and that Zombie Bears was hands-down better in every way.
It still confuses me today how a group of people working for a company like Blizzard (with all it's resources and experience) could have tested these (and many other) things and collectively thought after (presumably) careful consideration "yep, all good here."
Thankfully Blizzard has gotten better, but there's still a long ways to go...
0
0
0
I've been tweaking it regularly and trying different variations out, but last night, for example, I used:
Fear (Face of Death)
Frozen Piranhas
Mass Confusion (Paranoia)
Big Bad Voodoo (Slam Dance)
Hex (Jinx)
Spirit Barrage (Phantasm)
with Tiklandian Visage and Frostburn as my main items. With this I can keep enemies Feared/Frozen almost indefinitely while buffing ally damage considerably. With high CD reduction from items, the right passives and Last Breath I can spam MC frequently and keep BBV up with little downtime.
0
0
02. How is Crit Chance/Crit Damage factored when it comes to Haunt/DoT damage? Without knowing how they factor into the overall damage it's hard to tell sometimes which items are better (as far as raw damage is concerned). For instance, I've got two gloves:
526 int, 10% crit chance, 35% crit damage
vs
695 int, no crit chance, 48% crit damage and 10% cold damage
I'm guessing the latter is probably better damage wise, but I'm sure how big of a hit the lack of 10% crit chance really is.
0
0