Casit

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

 

Besides that I would like those enchantments that improve combat stats via skill scaling to go entirely. I find them impossible to balance and also silly. If you can't find other meaningful uses for a skill - remove it, too.

 

 

I think they're basically intended to add replay value, like item versions of Berath's Blessings. You won't know they exist your first time through the game so you won't build for them; second time through you can make a build around them and wreck face.

 

I agree with you that abilities should not scale with skills though and I assume that's a bug they'll fix.

[knownastherat]

Meaningful .. well, I tend to agree. If there is no use for having a very high skill, say around 20, why have the option to increase it to 20? 

 

I can only speculate but to me it seems the developers (and not only them) are not fond of min/maxing and base balance around this attitude. This restrains variety and niche, admittedly powerful, builds. I mean if dumping stat below 10, for example, is not desirable, do not give the option. However, if there is such option, it should come with benefit and cost. This is choice and consequence, the motto, in my understanding, of PoE. 

Edited June 11, 2018 by knownastherat

[Nemesis7884]

 

 

 

But it matters if you have 200 or 210. +10 on an armor is actually pretty good in this case.

Most players wouldn't have 200-210 deflection so that extra +5 looks weak to them. If you balance most items around total stacking and power builds these items will all look unattractive to 99% of players.

+10. The armor itself gives +5 right from the start and can go up to +10 with enough skill points. +10 is a great value for an armor.

 

200 was an extreme example. Every tank would profit from +10 to deflection from something that's not a cape, weapon, a shield or a ring. I don't think that this item is only useful for 1% of builds. It's useful for every build that has decent deflection - so most tanks.

 

 

First of all, the game tooltip should state clearly how it scales.

 

Secondly, the way I read the statement you quoted is: +5 it's not worth to bother with simply because for the vast majority of players it's inconsequential. 

 

Lastly, when I say something like: everyone profits from +1 deflection, it is an irrefutable statement. The point here, however, is that for a heavy investment one gets very little in return.

 

Lets consider following example: Player A buys PoE Deadfire, as soon as s/he finds Cadhu Scalth, which is pretty early, reads its description: Heavy Shard: +3 Deflection (improves with Atheltic skill). S/he continues playing, investing everything in Athletics because s/he wants the improvement, only to find out at the end that with Athletics at max. s/he got 5 points extra deflection. I do not know about her/him but I would be quite disappointed, despite +5 Deflection is useful for every tank.

 

This reminds me of the infamous "lootboxes" .. has a chance to contain this or that. It never says what the chance is because if it would, they would not sell as well as they do. 

 

 

thats what im saying, its no fun, it doesnt feel like youre getting something for your investment and doesnt make items enough "diverse" from one another...i think it would have been better if instead of heavily nerfing items they rather changed how they worked or put in diminishing returns or improved more on enemies etc... using skills and items with tiny bonuses just doesn't feel fun

[Braven]

 

 

The deflection of the armor (up to +10) stacks with a shield's deflection bonus. They are not mutually exclusive. Each point of deflection has increasing returns the higher you go (compared to enemies' ACC). So for a high-deflection character this armor is still very good. For other builds the deflection bonus is negligible, sure. It doesn't matter that much if you have 50 or 60 deflection. Take something else. But it matters if you have 200 or 210. +10 on an armor is actually pretty good in this case.

 

I can't say yet if it's well balanced now but it definitely was too strong pre 1.1.

Just out.of curiosity, do we know what the max deflection build is yet? Can you actually reach 200 deflection or is the functional cap closer to like 120?

I have gotten over 230, however you start really giving up other defenses at around 215 and that is really enough deflection anyway.

 

Getting those numbers certainly takes some cheese, like never resting and stacking one-time bonuses that expire on rest.

 

The hardest part is increasing the other defenses which is particularly important if using Wizard’s Double. Reflex and Will are fairly easy to boost up, but fortitude can be hard. This is why I think that helwalker monk / wizard is able to get the best overall defenses. 10 wounds provides 40 fortitude making it superior to paladin, particularly with the F&C nerf. I also use the pet that provides +8 fortitude instead of one that helps deflection. I plan to post a build showing how to do it, but still playing through with it. Basically Fortitude > Deflection > Reflex & Will.

 

Another advantage of monk is that you can purposely hurt yourself to lower your health to a very low amount safely. Some items provide scaling benefits based on your remaining health (more benefit the less you have). For example, there is a large shield that provides up to 20 bonus deflection based on remaining health. Getting it to 18-19 makes it quite a bit better than the one based on Athletics.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Braven

[QuiteGoneJin]

If you really dislike it look to the Deadfire Tweaks mod, he puts it at .35 per intimidation instead of .25. 

[Tigranes]

It was crazy OP before, and it needed the massive knockdown.

 

How does it make sense that, on top of all the other ways you can stack deflection, you suddenly discover that oh, my guy has 10 intimidate, so now I get 10 more deflection? It became a complete no-brainer for anyone who is stacking deflection, allowing paladins to get their deflection so high that most enemies could never touch them.

 

The very idea of a linear scaling "+x combat bonus per skill" is weird - it was always going to be hard to balance. It needed to be, say, +1 deflection per Intimidate capping out at +7, or some other equation, so that you could get significant bonuses from it without getting stratospheric. Same goes for how one of the ranged weapons, I think? has Arcana-based accuracy bonus.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

It was crazy OP before, and it needed the massive knockdown.

 

How does it make sense that, on top of all the other ways you can stack deflection, you suddenly discover that oh, my guy has 10 intimidate, so now I get 10 more deflection? It became a complete no-brainer for anyone who is stacking deflection, allowing paladins to get their deflection so high that most enemies could never touch them.

 

The very idea of a linear scaling "+x combat bonus per skill" is weird - it was always going to be hard to balance. It needed to be, say, +1 deflection per Intimidate capping out at +7, or some other equation, so that you could get significant bonuses from it without getting stratospheric. Same goes for how one of the ranged weapons, I think? has Arcana-based accuracy bonus.

 

 

The ideal would probably be a diminishing-returns curve, say, something like (left hand column intimidate points, right hand column extra bonus)

 

1. 1
2. 1
3. 2
4. 2
5. 2
6. 3
7. 3
8. 3
9. 3
10. 4
11. 4
12. 4
13. 4
14. 4
15. 5
16. 5
17. 5
18. 5
19. 5
20. 6

Idea being, all you really need to is splash the skill a bit to get a solid bonus, and you can theoretically go all in and get a slightly better bonus, but it isn't worth it to build entirely around the item unless you want to anyway for some other reason.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[knownastherat]

It's pointless "to build" around +6 deflection armor with regards to Intimidate.

 

If someone, someone diverging from normal (in a statistical sense) greatly, wanted "to build" character around stacking Deflection, that someone would have to sacrifice much more than 20 Intimidate. This someone, Braven, already posted in here and explained how it's done including +40 Deflection from Wizard's Double or not resting. In comparison, +6 Deflection for 20 Intimidate is just a bad deal. Weapon and shield style is +6 Deflection for one invested ability point. It just does not compute.

 

The problem here, and other threads about "balance", is concern that someone could stack Deflection to become immortal. I say .. who cares?

 

20 points in Intimidate ought to be, in my opinion, worth more than 1 ability point. 

[fiddlesticks]

What's the highest Intimidate check in the game anyway?

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

What's the highest Intimidate check in the game anyway?

 

 

Highest I can remember seeing is Nemnok at 18.

 

I'm not sure what the theoretical highest possible intimidate score is, 23 or so?

Edited June 12, 2018 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy

[Tigranes]

It's pointless "to build" around +6 deflection armor with regards to Intimidate.

 

If someone, someone diverging from normal (in a statistical sense) greatly, wanted "to build" character around stacking Deflection, that someone would have to sacrifice much more than 20 Intimidate. This someone, Braven, already posted in here and explained how it's done including +40 Deflection from Wizard's Double or not resting. In comparison, +6 Deflection for 20 Intimidate is just a bad deal. Weapon and shield style is +6 Deflection for one invested ability point. It just does not compute.

 

The problem here, and other threads about "balance", is concern that someone could stack Deflection to become immortal. I say .. who cares?

 

20 points in Intimidate ought to be, in my opinion, worth more than 1 ability point. 

 

Why is +6 deflection for 20 Intimidate a bad deal? You are already investing those passive skills somewhere, and half the time, they give you no deflection or other directly combat-relevant bonus. The very idea that you can suddenly invest in Religion or Metaphysics or Intimidate to give yourself a little bonus in your combat capacity is already a bonus - it's not like you could put those points in Reflex or Fortitude instead.

 

It was ludicrous that you could give yourself 20 extra deflection for basically zero combat cost, especially if you are playing with a full party and you can easily afford to cover other desired passive skills. It's like complaining that picking the right hull type for your ship used to give you +20 Fortitude, and now it only gives you +5.

 

The bottom line is that once you learnt about the item, you could give yourself a huge dollop of extra deflection with no real tradeoff to other areas of your combat prowess, which put the Legacy (and other items like it) at a massive advantage over other available gear. A curve like Hieronymous' would be very sensible.

[knownastherat]

I tried to explain why .. because in context 20 Intimidate is a heavy investment, unlike 1 in Weapon and Shield.

 

If you think about it along the line ..  since its free it's a decent bonus .. , then I would agree. However, it's not free for all players/playstyles as something else has to be given up, and if it was free indeed than it's not a good design because where are the choice and consequence? I can quote Mr. Sawyer talking about the significance of choice and consequence at GDC if needed. 

 

I do not comment whether 20 is ludicrous or not. I comment on the notion that "balance" means that for 20 points in Intimidate the player gets +6 Deflection and react to comments about "balance" which try to appear to be rational despite they are not.   

[fiddlesticks]

I think that's reversing the causality though. You shouldn't invest in Intimidate just to get extra Deflection from the armour. But if you're investing in Intimidate anyway for role-playing purposes, the extra Deflection is a nice little bonus.

[knownastherat]

Not for me. I do not play in full party and I have to make choices with consequences. If it is indeed just "a nice little bonus" intended by developers, then I have no argument. It is their game after all. 

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy]

hrm, I thought I'd made this edit but it looks like it didn't save:

 

Alternative, superior suggestion: follow the Party Assist curve math, with break points at 1, 2, 4, 7, 11, 16, and 22.

Edited June 12, 2018 by Dr. Hieronymous Alloy