Matt516

I don't think this is actually affecting gameplay - the inherent accuracy boni of accurate weapons still appears to allow for stacking with quality enchantments (like Fine, Damaging I/II, Accurate I/II, etc). But some of them (for the club and dagger, I believe) show up as "Accurate I" instead of "Accurate" in the item info sheet, which is confusing a lot of people as well as not allowing stacking with Accurate I.

Just so long as we get warscythes on Adventurer. LETSGO You've already got Estoc/Poleaxe, what more could you want? Warscythes. ..... Fair enough.

That link is posted on, like... the post right above mine.

Just so long as we get warscythes on Adventurer. LETSGO You've already got Estoc/Poleaxe, what more could you want?

I don't have incredibly detailed math to back these answers up, mostly because "solid" (as in completely definitive) math on this kind of thing is dubious at best since there are tons of things that can vary (namely enemy Deflection and DR) that will change things. That said, I am familiar enough with the game mechanics and maths to give you some decent (I think) advice anyhow, with some ballpark calculations that I'm pretty comfortable with. Re: weapon focus - Accuracy isn't that important, but if you're minmaxing for DPS you definitely want a weapon focus. You'll have room for it eventually. Re: Might - You want to max Might (or close) - 20 Might is the same damage bonus you get from an Exceptional weapon. Not colossally important (especially as the series goes on and the weapon quality gets higher while Might stays the same, hopefully they fix that) but nothing to ignore either. Re: Savage Attack - Absolutely yes. The most Accuracy can ever get you is ~1.5% average damage per point when it's converting misses to crits, though it usually gives you ~1% average damage per point when it's converting grazes to crits or misses to hits. That's ~7.5% max increased average damage from that 5 Accuracy. Whereas Savage Attack is 15%. So yeah - Savage Attack is absolutely worth it pretty much always. Re: Vulnerable attack - My hunch (and it's a strong hunch) is yes. That will generally translate to a flat +5 damage against everything on each hit (few enemies have <5 DR), which is anywhere between ~45% of your weapon damage (fast weapons have mean damage of 11) to ~30% of your weapon damage (2H weapons have mean damage of 17). Or, in other words - 5 DR pen is about as good a bonus as having an Exceptional or Superb weapon in terms of damage. See why the Estoc is hideously OP now? It's a little more complicated than the Accuracy<->Damage tradeoff due to an attack speed loss actually being a multiplicative loss (i.e. all your damage is multiplied by 0.8 or so) instead of an additive loss like Accuracy is (since graze/crit modifiers are additive). But my hunch is still that it's a good decision. Only one I'd be iffy about using it on is 2H weapons. Re: Heavy armor - don't use heavy armor on a dps. Use the lightest armor you can put them in while still having them survive. That last part is important. Lots of people put glass cannon Rogues in clothes and then get all confused when they die when someone sneezes on them. Armor up as needed. My Barbarian wears Hide.

This. This is it. Let there be no confusion here. G2Revelation is right, everyone that says otherwise is factually wrong. Also, one small note: the differences in DR between the base DR of the armour and the specific DR is actually a percentage, "under the hood". So let's say that an Armour has DR 6. But it only has Slash 3. And Corrode 12. That means that, mechanically, it actually has DR 6, and Slash 50%. But Corrode 200%. Why is this relevant to know? Because the numbers you see are deceptive, and the game actually does calculate everything with fractions and decimals. It is just that everything that is reported in the combat log and on the sheets (well, most of it) are rounded numbers. If you increase the DR of the Armour through any means, that Slash and Corrode resistance goes with it. You increased the DR to 7 (from 6)? Well the SlashiDR is now actually 3.5 (but will probably show 4), and the Corrode DR is 14. And then when it calculates damage.. if you are hit by Slash Damage, it's not going to use 4. It's going to use 3.5. Unless I've misunderstood it or if they've changed it, but w/e. Another voice chiming in to say yes, this is how it works. Basic DR shown applies to all damage.... unless DR for another type of damage is shown. Then that DR applies instead. And as Luckmann said, the non-basic DRs for each armor are indeed percentages behind the scenes. This is why when you increase the Plate DR from 10 to 12 with a Fine enchantment, the Slash/Pierce DRs go up from 15 to 18 - not to 17. Because it's really Plate = 10 DR, and 150% Slash/Pierce. This is how it works. If a damage type is not listed, use the basic armor DR. If a damage type is listed specifically, use that DR instead. Pretty straightforward. EDIT: Extra DR boni outside of armor enchants are just additive AFAIK. They don't interact with the armor percentages or anything.

As long as one of them (sledgehammer, PLEASE) goes on the Soldier specialization so I can have a complement for my Greatsword as I destroy the legions of Estoc infidels... sure!

There are a few quite nice unique Hunting Bows in the game - deck her out with one and enchant it as needed to keep up. My main advice is to take the two modal talents that decrease attack speed (both) while increasing damage (one of them) and DR penetration (the other). I don't recall the names, but one is a Ranger talent and the other is a general talent. Keep them both on at all times. Hunting Bows attack fast enough for you not to miss the attack speed, and the +20% damage and +5 DR pen is great. Put her in clothes since Bows have ridiculously long range and she should only be getting targeted by one ranged enemy at a time at most. Mark a priority target at the beginning of the fight and just let her go to town. She doesn't have a lot of flashy abilities, but she does very nice damage. And Itumaak serves as a decent blocker to keep stray enemies from harassing your squishies (or as a damage amplifier for Sagani depending what talents you take). Hunting Bows aren't optimal, but they can get the job done. If you wanted to play optimally you wouldn't be using Sagani in the first place. Personally, I like her VO and character, so I use her and enjoy the decent physical damage she brings to the table. The fox should be patched soon - having 0 athletics and 10 in all stats is surely not intended behavior. So for now deal with it, and look forward to it being fixed.

It can also make sense to remove/nerf obvious exploits, since they will reduce options for players that don't want to cheese their way through the game or make other abilities seem useless and weak in comparison. I agree with you. And that's exactly what Lord Vicious was arguing against - he'd prefer (unless I misunderstand) that OP tools on the player's side not ever be nerfed because that's "not fun". I disagree with him for the exact reason you stated - obviously dominant strategies make the game boring by removing interesting choices for the player.

Again, and for the millionth time - "don't use it" is not an appropriate response to the existence of an overpowered/dominant strategy. If chess had a rule where I could trade my pawns for queens on the first turn, I could surely decide to "not use it" to make the game more fun... but the game would still be poorly designed.

We are looking into releasing it tomorrow, but it may not go out until Wednesday or Thursday. Still coming out today, or is Friday more likely at this point? This is tantamount to saying "balance in single player games is bad". Or "balance in single player games should only ever be accomplished by making the game easier", which is the exact same thing as saying "balance is bad" because you cannot balance a scale by adding weight only to one side. That's ridiculous. Either you want a balanced game, in which case buffs and nerfs have to be on the table - or you hate balance in single player games. Which is an opinion you're welcome to hold, but I (and many others) will fundamentally disagree with you. I want to play a well-crafted game with interesting choices and challenges, thanks. Not a game in which the "best" class and the "best" build and the "best" strategy are very quickly figured out and the only way to have a challenge is to self-impose it.

I have observed enemy AI bugging out and just standing still. Often for me it's after knocking them away with Kana's Fus Roh Dah or my Monk's Kick of Being Really Far Away. I think everyone would agree that needs to be fixed, period.

As I said, I think this will eventually come down to a difference of opinion/preference. I have no issue whatsoever with classes having different base Accuracy and Deflection scores. I like it. It makes sense to me that a wizard and a fighter will have differing natural levels of ability to deflect attacks. That's what the fighter class is - a person who has trained to be able to fight better than others. Why in the world would a wizard have a better natural ability to deflect attacks? And it's not like wizards can't make up for it with abilities - fighters may get Defender, but both classes have access to Improved Deflection, and wizards have a whole host of spells that improve their own survivability. In fact, I'd venture to say that wizards have more abilities that provide Deflection than fighters. Many, many more. The different base Deflection scores is part of what differentiates the classes. If fighters and wizards had the same base Deflection, wizards would probably be better tanks (at least from a Deflection standpoint, they still have crap Health). Speaking of Health.. I could actually sort of see an argument for flattening the differences in Endurance/Health before flattening the Deflection differences. It makes more sense. Although I'm not a fan of either tbh. The classes are distinct, and this is a good thing. You can build a tanky wizard if you want - there are tons of defensive wizard spells available to help with that. But I see no reason whatsoever that a wizard should be naturally as good at blocking blows as a fighter. It's nonsensical to me.

Ignoring collision is a very, very bad idea. There's already a limited amount of it with friendly party members to avoid some of the pathing problems, which is fine - but eliminating collision entirely is silly. I don't want it to work like it works in WoW.

Hopefully OSA will be fixed soon, so Barbarian players won't be forced into dual wielding as a way to be optimal. :/

@Zwie, I think we have a difference of opinion - which is fine. I personally don't want tanking potential to be equalized across the classes. It's not that I hate the idea, I just see absolutely no reason for it. I'd agree with you somewhat if I saw Deflection as being an "evasion-type stat". But I don't... it's clearly implemented in such a way as to represent a hybrid of evasiveness and, well... ability to deflect. Case in point: shields. Shields don't help you dodge anything in real life. The very idea is absurd. Instead, they help you turn mortal blows into wounding ones, wounding blows into glancing ones, and glancing ones into blows that do no damage at all. The fact that the primary stat of shields in PoE is Deflection (as opposed to DR), then, leads me to believe that Deflection does not simply represent being "dodgy", but a combination of being "dodgy" and "deflect-y". I suppose I could still see the sense in heavy armor imposing some sort of Deflection penalty (which is basically equivalent to your suggestion of giving light armor a Deflection bonus)... but I'd personally rather that Deflection be derived primarily from stats and talents, not gear (other than shields). A small penalty to Deflection for the heavier armors (maybe -4 for medium and -8 for heavy, or something like that) would be fine though. What should not happen is that this penalty to Deflection attempt to be "equivalent" to the DR difference. As I said, I don't want it to just be a numbers game as to which armor has the optimal survivability. If you're going to build in trade-offs, make the trade-offs between distinct things like speed and survivability. So IMO, a small Deflection penalty on heavier armors would be fine. A Deflection penalty "equivalent" to (or even close to equivalent to) the DR difference between the heavier and lighter armors would be silliness though. Like it or not, "dodgy" tanks are simply not as tough as "tanky" tanks. I know dodgy tanks are a common RPG trope, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily realistic or need to be in every RPG. I have no problem whatsoever with the best tanks needing to wear armor. Tankiness is what armor is for.

Monks are great. Not OP due to the knife-edge nature of playing them (high risk-reward), but when played right they are so fun and do crazy damage. Obsidian did a good job with Monks.

I get the impression that this particular book is more of a sacred text for the group that uses it - that you're finding reprinted versions, not the original journal.

Awesome, man! (or woman) Glad to see that A) IE mod will still be updated and B) that it's now venturing into the realm of improving the AI. Have you given any thought to tweaking the scripts to make some enemies (as in, the ones who are smart enough to know better) not rush into chokepoint killzones and beat their heads fruitlessly against Eder's plated abs any more? As in, to actually hang back and force the player to come to them in some cases (no reason the player should get to benefit from what are admittedly very good defensive tactics in every fight)? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/76242-how-to-fix-the-doorway-chokepoint-dominant-strategy/

Have been reading a lot of the responses, and although some ideas certainly seem viable (more enemy AoE, possible friendly fire from ranged), I still think making the AI smarter is the best solution. Because as some have mentioned, it's not a bad strategy - it's a very good and smart strategy, and one that people use in real life. There's a reason we speak fondly of and make movies about battles like Thermopylae - chokepoints are awesome! But you don't use chokepoints in every battle in real life because A) Terrain doesn't always support it and B) you're not always on the defense. B in particular is the big problem for PoE right now - the fact that enemies just blindly attack you when aggroed means you can always benefit from defensive tactics whenever they're applicable. Which is why the AI needs to be modified to sometimes play in a defensive manner, not blindly rushing you but forcing you to come to them. That alone would make combat tactics a little more varied and interesting. No need to screw with basic mechanics like engagement (which I still like, I just think the AI needs to be able to handle it more intelligently).

Yeah, this is matching what I'm seeing. The -25 in my example above was because it was a graze. So it seems to be d100 + interrupt, with a +25 bonus for crits and a -25 penalty for grazes. That makes me feel a little bit better, because on a normal hit you still have a chance to interrupt your target unless their concentration is 25 points higher than your interrupt. Yes. I was going to say this after reading the OP - there's no base 25 Interrupt, it's just your perception modifier +d100 vs their resolve modifier +75. @Xom, don't trust the wiki. It's a liar and a cheat.

If that's the case... it would be nice if they'd fix it. Pretty glaring issue for Barbarian players. Pick this talent or be stupid. I'm stupid - but I don't want to be stupid.

Inverse spread of DR and Deflection is a bad idea because then you just find the mathematical optimum for survivability and put everyone in that. Since Deflection lowers your chances of getting crit and hit, it may actually be straight-up better than DR at a certain point. 16 DR means nothing if you're constantly getting crit by everything. And yes, I know that Deflection only helps against some attacks whereas DR helps against all. I still don't think trading DR for Deflection is a good idea. You're trading survivability for survivability, which is silly. The current system of trading survivability for combat speed is interesting because there's actually a choice there. The speed penalties just need to be tweaked a bit, maybe to encourage less all-or-nothing armor tactics by making the armors on the edges (as in, clothes and plate) offer worse tradeoffs. You'd do this by making the speed penalties very low at first, so you don't have to pay much to get a little DR, but then having them ramp up higher as armor gets heavier. This was suggested (not by me) in another thread a few days ago, though I can't for the life of me remember where. In any case, I think that's a much better solution than trying to make all armor give similar amounts of survivability, just in different ways. That turns it into a numbers game. And as much as I love numbers, forcing your players to be math whizzes to play your game is bad game design. Tradeoffs should be intuitive and easy to make decisions on with decent heuristics. Let spreadsheets remain the realm of the math geeks and minmaxers. Don't make everyone use them. ;P

I agree in principle, but I'm not sure how well these mechanics even work right now. Pull in particular seems to be kind of inconsistent, at least if the Fighter's "Into the Fray" ability is any indication. I don't think I've ever seen that ability work on an engaged enemy, which kind of defeats the purpose IMO. Of course, maybe I've just been unlucky...

Awesome to see the fix going into 1.04! I seem to remember this bug occurring on more than just Guls, however - do the "Dank Spores" have any similar abilities? In particular, I believe I noticed this bug get worse on one of my characters (as in, health was already bugged and got even more bugged) after fighting the Dank Spore encounter in the bottom right of the Defiance Bay catacombs. I may be remembering incorrectly, and I'll keep you apprised if I see it happen again after the patch.