Horrify Frightening Aspect : Armor gain reduced to35%(down from 100%).
from the most recent PTR patch notes.
Where the HELL did this come from? I've never heard of anyone complaining about this spell. You took one of the only useful rune for horrify and basically made it, along with the entire spell, worthless. I understand you're trying to promote healing as a stat, but all this is going to do is force everyone to use Uhkapian serpent & dogs that isn't already using them. Which means that - all those changes to 2hes? Useless, because Uhkapian will become more or less mandatory for Jade WDs. In fact, there is literally 0 build diversity for Jades now, since the only variable we even had to play with was Totd+horrify vs dogs+Uhkapian.
Whatever the hell happened to buffing things to have more viable options? If the frightening aspect rune was too strong, give the entire spell a 50% armor base. I don't see anybody serious using a 35% armor buff when they could get 30% pure damage reduction from dogs.
Over the past two weeks I've been recording my clear times for T6 rifts with my Jade doctor. I've discovered a few things, but most interestingly I have repeatedly found IAS to be a very important contributor to my clear times. Trust me, I was puzzled when I discovered this too; after all, isn’t Jade’s damage output mostly a reflection of damage per hit, which IAS contributes nothing to at all?
So where's the evidence for this claim? Before you say the sample size is too small for each of these comparisons, look at how consistent and large the benefit is. These tests were done with Hwoj Wrap, Warzechian, TotD, and Horrify. Assume the weapon used was Sunkeeper unless otherwise stated.
5:58 avg for 1.57 IAS (Azurewrath); n = 8
7:00 avg for 1.45 IAS, -4.3% crit; n = 4
7:10 avg for 1.46 IAS, -10% CDR, n= 5
7:18 avg for 1.43 IAS, +50% crit (Witching hour), n = 3
7:19 avg for 1.34 IAS; n = 5
7:21 avg for 1.34 IAS, -50% area damage; n = 5
7:29 avg for 1.34 IAS, -10% CDR, n = 5
7:31 avg for 1.34 IAS, String of Ears instead of Hwoj; n = 5
Hereis my profile. I might not have my Sunkeeper up; but for reference it's 2050DPS with 24% elite damage and 700 int. My Azurewrath is max DPS with 9% CDR instead of Int, and 17% Cold.
I started thinking about why IAS might be more important than originally thought. My theory is that the ability to quickly group and CC enemies in a small area seems to be a key factor in clear times. IAS, which shortens animation times, contributes to this in a major way by decreasing the time to set up small patches of high-density mobs. By allowing you to more quickly cast your DOTS and Piranhado, which is probably one of the slowest animation spells, IAS decreases the window of time where mobs can run away from you after your CCs lose their effect. Like CDR, IAS also contributes to your survivability (by decreasing your animation time to let you move out of the way of attacks), as well as your movespeed. The importance of IAS diminishes at higher rift levels, where you can no longer one-shot even white mobs. However, IAS still plays an important role in higher rift levels by letting you proc Furnace more often, as well as making it easier to gain Taeguk or Gogok of Swiftness stacks.
What this means (does not apply for greater rifts):
Azurewrath, not sunkeeper, might be BIS for Jade
Paragon points into IAS is not a bad idea
You should keep IAS on Quetzacoatl unless you have severe mana issues (i'm looking at all you people who use PtV instead of Gruesome Feast)
IAS on Jade gloves is not a bad roll necessarily
The 2.1 Lacuni's (which give IAS as a 5th primary) are a good alternative to Warzechian/Strongarm
Gogok of Swiftness (20% IAS, 20% CDR) is likely going to be a viable gem choice
Witching Hour is better than originally thought since the IAS roll is not useless
As it stands, what floors you get in a greater rift greatly influence how far, probably too much so. Though obviously the best builds and similar gear levels still influence how far you get, what matters more is the density of the rifts you get as well as the kinds of monsters you face.
I've had consistent trouble clearing lower level maps when the first map is a long, windy map with lots of Act 4 or 5 mobs. Yet when I get a reasonable density map with Act 1 or 3 mobs, I progress significantly further.
A suggestion might be to have a more or less fixed rotation of maps, with increasing difficulty of mob types and maps. For example:
* Dense Act 1 map, 1.0x HP and damage scaling factor
* Normal Act 3 map, 1.0x scaling factor; no pylons
* Sparse Act 5 map, 1.0x scaling factor; no pylons, shrines, or health pools
* Dense Act 1 map, 1.2x scaling factor
* Normal Act 3 map, 1.2x scaling factor; no pylons
* Sparse Act 5 map, 1.2x scaling factor; no pylons, shrines, or health pools
and so on.
There are several possible benefits to this system, such as:
* Making greater rift leaderboards less dependent on map RNG
* Reducing the steep exponential HP & damage scaling that everyone complains about
* Adding complexity to the meta by having to think about the mob types you're facing (e.g. you need 2 element types to kill the annoying Act 5 elemental shield mobs; knockback immunity helps against Act 4 mobs)
Has anyone found this legendary gem? Supposedly it causes monsters to explode with gold on kill. How much gold is dropped? Is there any other effect on explosion?
The core of diablo is grind. I don't understand what kind of game diversity you're looking for, because at the end of the day all there is to do is kill monsters. I think you're playing the wrong game if you find repeatedly killing monsters boring. As Bagstone said, there's already a little bit of diversity now and coming in 2.1, but at the end of the day it's all still just killing monsters.
I agree (as do most) that bounties should be buffed in rewards. But it's not as if that suggestion is anything new.
Paragon adds because it makes sense. It doesn't make one bit of sense to CONSOLIDATE items from different seasons. It's just completely non-sequitur.
The only reason that gems are "separate" items is just because that's how blizzard implemented them in their current form. If they had thought of the problem that gems might need to be combined (for example, having redundant gems across alts, which is a problem irrespective of the issues I'm bringing up here), maybe they would have changed how they work.
For example, I could easily have also seen a system where there are literal "points" to assign for each gem, and having these "points" apply to the gems across all characters. This makes a lot more sense to me than what we have now, where if you have two separate characters that use the same gem type, you have to unsocket and resocket (because one copy of the gem might be level 50 while the other is level 0).
The higher your gems are the more time you've invested in season play and, therefore, the less time you have to worry about your standard characters.
I don't see why this has to be the case. What's wrong with being able to play seasons yet still benefitting your main account? That's the whole point of having paragon xp and loot roll over (which Blizzard is already doing!)
Does anyone have a figure for this number? If not, and you're curious, for a few rifts, you could keep track of your profile elite kills, as well as your number of rifts, and post that information and I can aggregate it and return with the results.
Quote fromwhyjesse I guess we'll just come back to this argument after season 2 or 3 ends and everyone has 3 redundant level 200 bane of the trapped gems and starts complaining about it. For any serious min max player I dont see why they would ever want duplicates of the same gem like this.
Why would they complain? They have 3 extra gems they can use for other shit now.
Out of curiosity, if you're continually playing seasons, why the hell does it matter what gems your non season characters might have?
Why the hell would you use 3 different gems when you can just go to the jeweler and unsocket... I would gladly go through the trouble of unsocketing and pay 200K every time I switch playing chars if it means having a level 600 gem vs a level 200 gem. Also, under your logic, why would blizzard care at all to have items and paragon xp roll over after seasons anyway? Clearly they're trying to have season play still benefit your non-season char.
I guess we'll just come back to this argument after season 2 or 3 ends and everyone has 3 redundant level 200 bane of the trapped gems and starts complaining about it. For any serious min max player I dont see why they would ever want duplicates of the same gem like this.
0
Also, is it confirmed RoRG is not changed?
0
Where the HELL did this come from? I've never heard of anyone complaining about this spell. You took one of the only useful rune for horrify and basically made it, along with the entire spell, worthless. I understand you're trying to promote healing as a stat, but all this is going to do is force everyone to use Uhkapian serpent & dogs that isn't already using them. Which means that - all those changes to 2hes? Useless, because Uhkapian will become more or less mandatory for Jade WDs. In fact, there is literally 0 build diversity for Jades now, since the only variable we even had to play with was Totd+horrify vs dogs+Uhkapian.
Whatever the hell happened to buffing things to have more viable options? If the frightening aspect rune was too strong, give the entire spell a 50% armor base. I don't see anybody serious using a 35% armor buff when they could get 30% pure damage reduction from dogs.
0
0
So where's the evidence for this claim? Before you say the sample size is too small for each of these comparisons, look at how consistent and large the benefit is. These tests were done with Hwoj Wrap, Warzechian, TotD, and Horrify. Assume the weapon used was Sunkeeper unless otherwise stated.
- 5:58 avg for 1.57 IAS (Azurewrath); n = 8
- 7:00 avg for 1.45 IAS, -4.3% crit; n = 4
- 7:10 avg for 1.46 IAS, -10% CDR, n= 5
- 7:18 avg for 1.43 IAS, +50% crit (Witching hour), n = 3
- 7:19 avg for 1.34 IAS; n = 5
- 7:21 avg for 1.34 IAS, -50% area damage; n = 5
- 7:29 avg for 1.34 IAS, -10% CDR, n = 5
- 7:31 avg for 1.34 IAS, String of Ears instead of Hwoj; n = 5
Hereis my profile. I might not have my Sunkeeper up; but for reference it's 2050DPS with 24% elite damage and 700 int. My Azurewrath is max DPS with 9% CDR instead of Int, and 17% Cold.I started thinking about why IAS might be more important than originally thought. My theory is that the ability to quickly group and CC enemies in a small area seems to be a key factor in clear times. IAS, which shortens animation times, contributes to this in a major way by decreasing the time to set up small patches of high-density mobs. By allowing you to more quickly cast your DOTS and Piranhado, which is probably one of the slowest animation spells, IAS decreases the window of time where mobs can run away from you after your CCs lose their effect. Like CDR, IAS also contributes to your survivability (by decreasing your animation time to let you move out of the way of attacks), as well as your movespeed. The importance of IAS diminishes at higher rift levels, where you can no longer one-shot even white mobs. However, IAS still plays an important role in higher rift levels by letting you proc Furnace more often, as well as making it easier to gain Taeguk or Gogok of Swiftness stacks.
What this means (does not apply for greater rifts):
0
I've had consistent trouble clearing lower level maps when the first map is a long, windy map with lots of Act 4 or 5 mobs. Yet when I get a reasonable density map with Act 1 or 3 mobs, I progress significantly further.
A suggestion might be to have a more or less fixed rotation of maps, with increasing difficulty of mob types and maps. For example:
* Dense Act 1 map, 1.0x HP and damage scaling factor
* Normal Act 3 map, 1.0x scaling factor; no pylons
* Sparse Act 5 map, 1.0x scaling factor; no pylons, shrines, or health pools
* Dense Act 1 map, 1.2x scaling factor
* Normal Act 3 map, 1.2x scaling factor; no pylons
* Sparse Act 5 map, 1.2x scaling factor; no pylons, shrines, or health pools
and so on.
There are several possible benefits to this system, such as:
* Making greater rift leaderboards less dependent on map RNG
* Reducing the steep exponential HP & damage scaling that everyone complains about
* Adding complexity to the meta by having to think about the mob types you're facing (e.g. you need 2 element types to kill the annoying Act 5 elemental shield mobs; knockback immunity helps against Act 4 mobs)
1
0
0
1
0
I agree (as do most) that bounties should be buffed in rewards. But it's not as if that suggestion is anything new.
0
New seasonal movement speed belt is BIS.
Then Vigilante belt (CDR).
Then String of ears.
Hwoj + bane of trapped is always a possibility too.
0
For example, I could easily have also seen a system where there are literal "points" to assign for each gem, and having these "points" apply to the gems across all characters. This makes a lot more sense to me than what we have now, where if you have two separate characters that use the same gem type, you have to unsocket and resocket (because one copy of the gem might be level 50 while the other is level 0).
I don't see why this has to be the case. What's wrong with being able to play seasons yet still benefitting your main account? That's the whole point of having paragon xp and loot roll over (which Blizzard is already doing!)
0
0
Why the hell would you use 3 different gems when you can just go to the jeweler and unsocket... I would gladly go through the trouble of unsocketing and pay 200K every time I switch playing chars if it means having a level 600 gem vs a level 200 gem. Also, under your logic, why would blizzard care at all to have items and paragon xp roll over after seasons anyway? Clearly they're trying to have season play still benefit your non-season char.
0