The big nerf list (patch 1.2) (WIP)

[Titus_Draconius 4]

My prediction of what's going to happen after wizard is "balanced" :

 

1. late level spells won't be worth casting. ( because of casting times and point 2) )

 

2. Weapon casting spells will be buffed. This will be the best damage dealing option. Especially combined with +hit and convert to crit buffs coming from ranger and fighter.

 

3. Defensive self buffs will be nerfed. HP and deflection from other classes will be necessary.

 

4. Because of 1,2 and 3 wizard is going to be a great multiclass option, but a terrible single class option.

 

I think I'd rather have the wizard as a very potent single class. Meh in the beginning, weak and pathetic even, but Dr. Strange at the end. Is this so wrong to ask?

 

Concerning resting: Make it like tabletop rpgs, if you rest in a dungeon it should feel risky. Add punishing ambushes.

[dunehunter 1,173]

 

 

It's getting to the point where it's more obvious that people like Dunehunter is just messing around since he doesn't really care much about the game being challenging to play, just challenging to think about playing.

 

Obviously it's you that didn't give any concrete suggestion to make the game more challenging here.

 

 

That's really a problem with you not reading anything to begin with. Figured why you left the game at chapter 3 because it has texts instead of easy numbers and pictures.

 

 

I think it is not a problem only for me, many players didnt finished the last chapter because it is plain compared with the first two chapter. And I did read your points earlier. 

 

It is you that ignoring others points. We are talking about nerf the gamebreaking things here, never said to balance the game based on POTD, this game will be still easy without these gamebreaking one shot everybody things.

[MadDemiurg 408]

 

 

 

 

Finally, I play with none of the OP stuff in my game and it is still trivially easy on PotD. Thus, nerfs will not help make it less trivial.

 

 

Reducing classes power gap is a good start to make the game more enjoyable.

 

If some classes are way powerful that the rest, how a designer should balance the encounters? 

 

Oh sorry I forget, as Zeitzbach, just make the game both easy for strong and weak classes, leave hands from mouse and keyboard and let AI play it 

 

 

There will awlays be weaker and stronger class, best weapon/spell etc. Nerf one, another one takes it place. What you are saying is gaming utopia never achieved in any game even with biggest studios.

There was, is and always will be "Meta". There is always strongest build and weakest class. That's how it works. And I am 100% sure Obsidian do not have both time and manpower to balance the game the way you want. And by the time they will- most players will already move on.

 

It's impossible to achieve "perfect" balance, but it's quite possible to achieve decent balance.

 

Obsidian did, in PoE1. I have faith they'll do it again. They had the time and manpower too apparently.

 

Even Tyranny got the worst offenders like material enchant stacking or volcanic weapons fixed, even if it took a long time.

 

 

Tyranny already "died" at point when they did fix Volcanic weapons. I managed to finish game 3 times and then there was quite some time before that even happened. 

 

It's not online game where you have to constantly worry about balance. 

 

It likely died because it had 0 replayability because of terrible balance.

 

PoE1, in contrast, did not.

 

 

 

 

 

It's getting to the point where it's more obvious that people like Dunehunter is just messing around since he doesn't really care much about the game being challenging to play, just challenging to think about playing.

 

Obviously it's you that didn't give any concrete suggestion to make the game more challenging here. 

 

 

That's really a problem with you not reading anything to begin with. Figured why you left the game at chapter 3 because it has texts instead of easy numbers and pictures.

 

 

I think it is not a problem only for me, many players didnt finished the last chapter because it is plain compared with the first two chapter. And I did read your points earlier. 

 

It is you that ignoring others points. We are talking about nerf the gamebreaking things here, never said to balance the game based on POTD, this game will be still easy without these gamebreaking one shot everybody things.

 

Actually, only 40% finished the first chapter, lol. I think it's normal for these games.

 

Personally I replayed it like 4 times I think.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[Zeitzbach 229]

 

 

 

It's getting to the point where it's more obvious that people like Dunehunter is just messing around since he doesn't really care much about the game being challenging to play, just challenging to think about playing.

 

Obviously it's you that didn't give any concrete suggestion to make the game more challenging here.

 

 

That's really a problem with you not reading anything to begin with. Figured why you left the game at chapter 3 because it has texts instead of easy numbers and pictures.

 

 

I think it is not a problem only for me, many players didnt finished the last chapter because it is plain compared with the first two chapter. And I did read your points earlier. 

 

It is you that ignoring others points. We are talking about nerf the gamebreaking things here, never said to balance the game based on POTD, this game will be still easy without these gamebreaking one shot everybody things.

 

 

And I say that yes, nerfs are needed but some are only game breaking because AIs cannot answer them.

 

Immortal buffs are broken because AIs cannot remove them as this game scales the enemy level but do not give them new skills. Not a single ranger really use attacking skills and just basic your team until you get close enough for them to switch to dagger.

 

2k damage do needs nerf but not a direct damage nerf. THey need to either have low pen instead or low accuracy so they will shine in certain situation while failing in another. You nerf meteor, peopel go for salvo. You nerf Salvo, people drop Wizard and go play Druid for damage. You nerf Druid and what next? It goes on and on. Nothing is solved. This is why number nerfs shouldn't even be considered that much until PotD/Vet is fixed UNLESS it is that broken to the point there is no possible counter to it even if you buff the enemies.

 

Imagine if AIs actually prioritize casters if they start casting big spells and actually interrupt them. The noise mechanic is there so work with that. Just give the level scaled ranger Twin shot after level 16 and see how fast they down your casters for just starting the fight with empowered meteor.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Zeitzbach

[dunehunter 1,173]

Yeah I stopped playing after I get tthe Volcanic weapon. But mainly because I didn't like the growing skill by use mechanism. You need to keep using parry/dodge to make it powerful which drives me crazy. Why can't they design the skill system normally.... But I really like it's spell crafting system.

[MadDemiurg 408]

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one". Again, the point is not gutting abilities 1 by 1 but bringing them all to some consistent power level (that also does not oneshot enemies).

 

 

Yeah I stopped playing after I get tthe Volcanic weapon. But mainly because I didn't like the growing skill by use mechanism. You need to keep using parry/dodge to make it powerful which drives me crazy. Why can't they design the skill system normally.... But I really like it's spell crafting system.

I played through it once... but I had no desire to replay it because of how broken it was. I stuck around for a while, but no fixes in sight. After a couple of years I decided to check it and it seemed much more balanced but I've only brought myself to play a bit because I was occupied with other games already.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[Zeitzbach 229]

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one".

 

I do get tired of repeating that

 

In a Dps contest, you are either first or you are last.

 

You brought up why play barbarian when you can play fighter for AoE.

 

THat's the exact situation. All class is currently viable. Some are just more viable and it will stay that way if you keep having them overlap in roles and moments. You might as well ask now why I would play a Wizard if Druid has way better AoE damage when Wizards do get nerfed? Is it the CC? The self-buff? Not important enough in the current game. More damage = win.

 

Set them apart if you want them to all be viable without overshadowing the other.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Zeitzbach

[1TTFFSSE 188]

1.) someone mentioned that in a beta there was an actual good hard version of PotD, good just roll it back to that - or a variation of that, that also means the devs probably already have pre-made parameters to increase the difficulty on PotD and all they have to do is a pass-through test or two - so maybe it will come soon

2.) speaking of tests they should then take a fight like say Cancelhout (genereic midgame boss fight at fairly high level) and test all the empowered abilities and their results on say that fight - and then determine if something is too strong for their liking. I think they will find a bit too many empowered abilities one-shotting the whole screen - or nearly so, and I don't think that is "intended" from a balancing point of view. 

3.) basically at the moment the main offender is how empower works and not really the abilities of the classes - although granted some few abilities are really overtuned or bugged to be exploitable. 

4.) set piece "boss fights" in PoE2 are at the moment for me the biggest disappointment compared to some encounters in PoE1, none of the dragon etc bosses in PoE2 have a dangerous alpha-attack strike that can wipe you immediately if you don't follow certain mechanics, tactics, and preparations unlike in the first game PoE1

[theBalthazar 495]

Yes Tyranny spell's creator was extremely enjoyable. Perhaps the only thing superior to Pillars. That's why it is a really good game -overall-. 6 Trees are pure fail, poor theorycrafting. 25 % of fire damage in magic tree for...... Weapons. Totally logical. A part of forced investment by line. (not fan of this) Like stalker link for example : p

 

If one day there a minor version of this spell creator for Pillars (like two slots in devotion for the faithful) I will be very happy.

 

With that we could have strong "personnality" of spells of Pillars + a part of customization.

Edited May 18, 2018 by theBalthazar

[MadDemiurg 408]

 

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one".

 

I do get tired of repeating that

 

In a Dps contest, you are either first or you are last.

 

You brought up why play barbarian when you can play fighter for AoE.

 

THat's the exact situation. All class is currently viable. Some are just more viable and it will stay that way if you keep having them overlap in roles and moments. You might as well ask now why I would play a Wizard if Druid has way better AoE damage when Wizards do get nerfed? Is it the CC? The self-buff? Not important enough in the current game. More damage = win.

 

Set them apart if you want them to all be viable without overshadowing the other.

 

It's not the dps contest, or at least it shouldn't be. There's also a difference between "this ability/class is a bit better" compared to "this ability/class does 3x damage of comparable abilities/classes".

 

Like, let's say Ability 1 deals 20% more damage.

Ability 2 deals less damage but also has a debuff. You know, a debuff that's actually relevant because neither of these abilities oneshots enemies. They are not the same, but supposedly at least (roughly) balanced.

 

Wizards should not have inferior damage to druids. Wizards should have better alpha damage, self buffs and actually useful conjured weapons.

Druids should have heals, as well as better DoTs/sustained damage + shapeshift. 

 

You know, like it was in PoE1.

 

I feel like I shouldn't be explaining such basic game design stuff.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[dunehunter 1,173]

1.) someone mentioned that in a beta there was an actual good hard version of PotD, good just roll it back to that - or a variation of that, that also means the devs probably already have pre-made parameters to increase the difficulty on PotD and all they have to do is a pass-through test or two - so maybe it will come soon

2.) speaking of tests they should then take a fight like say Cancelhout (genereic midgame boss fight at fairly high level) and test all the empowered abilities and their results on say that fight - and then determine if something is too strong for their liking. I think they will find a bit too many empowered abilities one-shotting the whole screen - or nearly so, and I don't think that is "intended" from a balancing point of view. 

3.) basically at the moment the main offender is how empower works and not really the abilities of the classes - although granted some few abilities are really overtuned or bugged to be exploitable. 

4.) set piece "boss fights" in PoE2 are at the moment for me the biggest disappointment compared to some encounters in PoE1, none of the dragon etc bosses in PoE2 have a dangerous alpha-attack strike that can wipe you immediately if you don't follow certain mechanics, tactics, and preparations unlike in the first game PoE1

 

Yeah the beta 4 Titan boss fight is really fun, you need to be prepared for it, but it feels good when u finally beat the titan.

 

Yes Tyranny spell's creator was extremely enjoyable. Perhaps the only thing superior to Pillars. That's why it is a really good game -overall-. 6 Trees are pure fail, poor theorycrafting. 25 % of fire damage in magic tree for...... Weapons. Totally logical. A part of forced investment by line. (not fan of this) Like stalker link for example : p

 

If one day there a minor version of this spell creator for Pillars (like two slots in devotion for the faithful) I will be very happy.

 

With that we could have strong "personnality" of spells of Pillars + a part of customization.

 

Yeah I remember the magic tree, 25% lash makes the rest tree totally lame

Edited May 18, 2018 by dunehunter

[MadDemiurg 408]

Well, beta never really had "good" PoTD, it just had one difficult fight and since it was much lower level range a lot of the currently broken stuff wasn't even there or didn't get so OP in that level range, so yes, it felt better overall.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[Zeitzbach 229]

 

 

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one".

 

I do get tired of repeating that

 

In a Dps contest, you are either first or you are last.

 

You brought up why play barbarian when you can play fighter for AoE.

 

THat's the exact situation. All class is currently viable. Some are just more viable and it will stay that way if you keep having them overlap in roles and moments. You might as well ask now why I would play a Wizard if Druid has way better AoE damage when Wizards do get nerfed? Is it the CC? The self-buff? Not important enough in the current game. More damage = win.

 

Set them apart if you want them to all be viable without overshadowing the other.

 

It's not the dps contest, or at least it shouldn't be.

 

Like, let's say Ability 1 deals 20% more damage.

Ability 2 deals less damage but also has a debuff. You know, a debuff that's actually relevant because neither of these abilities oneshots enemies. They are not the same, but supposedly at least (roughly) balanced.

 

Wizards should not have inferior damage to druids. Wizards should have better alpha damage, self buffs and actually useful conjured weapons.

Druids should have heals, as well as better DoTs/sustained damage + shapeshift. 

 

You know, like it was in PoE1.

 

I feel like I shouldn't be explaining such basic game design stuff.

 

 

It has been proven multiple times in games like this where action have interval, that it's far better to kill and prevent damage than to allow damage and deal with it. Once your damage go above a certain point, you can trivialize the game combat.

 

This was also the thing in PoE 1. I always play Druid and I like Hiravias. I got through 90% of the contents in PoE on PotD using 2 free-cast hailstorm at every fight. AoE so large and damage so high only the tankiest monster remain alive and you have to me in WM II for the lowbie to get to fight.. until I use the 2nd set of Hailstorm.

 

Unless you make enemies strong enough to be worth CCing, there's no point to CCing. Right now, the only damage threat in enemy team above level 10 are wizard because they scale with levels while the fighters and rangers are still using low-level gear and never dealing more than 30 damage a hit unless they crit. There's no need to CC. There's no need for immortal buff. THere's no need for devotion. You drop the wizards, you win because every other type of enemies are both weak and braindead. The only other somewhat threatening one are the fampyr because they can charm and that's it.

[Dr. Hieronymous Alloy 1,249]

I don't necessarily disagree with those suggestions BUT 

 

Buffing underpowered abilities should be a bigger priority. Just as one set of examples, there are a lot of cipher abilities that are useless right now -- mental binding takes longer to cast and recover from than its total duration, for example; Defensive Mindweb was brutally nerfed since the first game; Haunting Chains is literally worse than a level five wizard spell. 

[Ryz009 402]

I rather empower be removed honestly. Leave my spells alone.

 

Actually no keep empower but only have it restore resources. The power level buff is unnecessary.

[MadDemiurg 408]

 

 

 

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one".

 

I do get tired of repeating that

 

In a Dps contest, you are either first or you are last.

 

You brought up why play barbarian when you can play fighter for AoE.

 

THat's the exact situation. All class is currently viable. Some are just more viable and it will stay that way if you keep having them overlap in roles and moments. You might as well ask now why I would play a Wizard if Druid has way better AoE damage when Wizards do get nerfed? Is it the CC? The self-buff? Not important enough in the current game. More damage = win.

 

Set them apart if you want them to all be viable without overshadowing the other.

 

It's not the dps contest, or at least it shouldn't be.

 

Like, let's say Ability 1 deals 20% more damage.

Ability 2 deals less damage but also has a debuff. You know, a debuff that's actually relevant because neither of these abilities oneshots enemies. They are not the same, but supposedly at least (roughly) balanced.

 

Wizards should not have inferior damage to druids. Wizards should have better alpha damage, self buffs and actually useful conjured weapons.

Druids should have heals, as well as better DoTs/sustained damage + shapeshift. 

 

You know, like it was in PoE1.

 

I feel like I shouldn't be explaining such basic game design stuff.

 

 

It has been proven multiple times in games like this where action have interval, that it's far better to kill and prevent damage than to allow damage and deal with it. Once your damage go above a certain point, you can trivialize the game combat.

 

This was also the thing in PoE 1. I always play Druid and I like Hiravias. I got through 90% of the contents in PoE on PotD using 2 free-cast hailstorm at every fight. AoE so large and damage so high only the tankiest monster remain alive and you have to me in WM II for the lowbie to get to fight.. until I use the 2nd set of Hailstorm.

 

Unless you make enemies strong enough to be worth CCing, there's no point to CCing. Right now, the only damage threat in enemy team above level 10 are wizard because they scale with levels while the fighters and rangers are still using low-level gear and never dealing more than 30 damage a hit unless they crit. There's no need to CC. There's no need for immortal buff. THere's no need for devotion. You drop the wizards, you win because every other type of enemies are both weak and braindead. The only other somewhat threatening one are the fampyr because they can charm and that's it.

 

CC was perfectly viable in PoE1. And as I said, I'm all for enemy buffs too.

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with those suggestions BUT 

 

Buffing underpowered abilities should be a bigger priority. Just as one set of examples, there are a lot of cipher abilities that are useless right now -- mental binding takes longer to cast and recover from than its total duration, for example; Defensive Mindweb was brutally nerfed since the first game; Haunting Chains is literally worse than a level five wizard spell. 

 

I'd say fixing outright gamebreaking stuff is the top priority.

 

Fixing just OP stuff is about the same priority as buffing trash.

 

Yes, Cipher has a lot of spells in need of buffs, especially at lower PLs, probably deserves its own thread.

 

 

I rather empower be removed honestly. Leave my spells alone.

 

Actually no keep empower but only have it restore resources. The power level buff is unnecessary.

 

Empower for restoring resources is fine, allows you to do more stuff in boss fights. Empowering abilities gives too much alpha and is a bigger global problem than any spells I agree.

 

Spell internal balance is still bad. Mind you, I would also buff a lot of trash spells. Some are not even worth it over auto attacking right now.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[Zeitzbach 229]

 

 

 

 

Damage numbers need to be consistent.

 

Like, there should be some min-max damage range for let's say PL9 aoe. Then all the classes will be viable, not "the next OP one".

 

I do get tired of repeating that

 

In a Dps contest, you are either first or you are last.

 

You brought up why play barbarian when you can play fighter for AoE.

 

THat's the exact situation. All class is currently viable. Some are just more viable and it will stay that way if you keep having them overlap in roles and moments. You might as well ask now why I would play a Wizard if Druid has way better AoE damage when Wizards do get nerfed? Is it the CC? The self-buff? Not important enough in the current game. More damage = win.

 

Set them apart if you want them to all be viable without overshadowing the other.

 

It's not the dps contest, or at least it shouldn't be.

 

Like, let's say Ability 1 deals 20% more damage.

Ability 2 deals less damage but also has a debuff. You know, a debuff that's actually relevant because neither of these abilities oneshots enemies. They are not the same, but supposedly at least (roughly) balanced.

 

Wizards should not have inferior damage to druids. Wizards should have better alpha damage, self buffs and actually useful conjured weapons.

Druids should have heals, as well as better DoTs/sustained damage + shapeshift. 

 

You know, like it was in PoE1.

 

I feel like I shouldn't be explaining such basic game design stuff.

 

 

It has been proven multiple times in games like this where action have interval, that it's far better to kill and prevent damage than to allow damage and deal with it. Once your damage go above a certain point, you can trivialize the game combat.

 

This was also the thing in PoE 1. I always play Druid and I like Hiravias. I got through 90% of the contents in PoE on PotD using 2 free-cast hailstorm at every fight. AoE so large and damage so high only the tankiest monster remain alive and you have to me in WM II for the lowbie to get to fight.. until I use the 2nd set of Hailstorm.

 

Unless you make enemies strong enough to be worth CCing, there's no point to CCing. Right now, the only damage threat in enemy team above level 10 are wizard because they scale with levels while the fighters and rangers are still using low-level gear and never dealing more than 30 damage a hit unless they crit. There's no need to CC. There's no need for immortal buff. THere's no need for devotion. You drop the wizards, you win because every other type of enemies are both weak and braindead. The only other somewhat threatening one are the fampyr because they can charm and that's it.

 

CC was perfectly viable in PoE1.

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with those suggestions BUT 

 

Buffing underpowered abilities should be a bigger priority. Just as one set of examples, there are a lot of cipher abilities that are useless right now -- mental binding takes longer to cast and recover from than its total duration, for example; Defensive Mindweb was brutally nerfed since the first game; Haunting Chains is literally worse than a level five wizard spell. 

 

I'd say fixing outright gamebreaking stuff is the top priority.

 

Fixing just OP stuff is about the same priority as buffing trash.

 

Yes, Cipher has a lot of spells in need of buffs, especially at lower PLs, probably deserves its own thread.

 

 

CC wasn't just perfectly viable in PoE 1. Paralysis scroll was broken as you can trivialize any combat with it. The crafting material is infinite anyway if you just rest and money is not an issue if you don't horde every unique items in the game.

 

If anything, the reason CC was viable was because they somewhat balanced the game around you having a priest to prevent CCs. Now priests are gone and CC got dumpstered especially with all the easy talents to "Gain resistance". You can even just eat the lobster. CCing in PoE II is a joke once you start dealing damage and have superb/legendary armor.

 

The only thing that is really killing me in my PotD run on ranger is Serafen Wild perverted mind exploding in my face at the first 12 levels, dealing like 150 damage stun instantly.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Zeitzbach

[tela2k 40]

Said some of this before, but since nerf vs buff seems to be a hot topic right now:

I've personally always enjoyed most the DotA philosophy of balancing. Many of the abilities and synergies in that game are so ridiculous that it's incredible the game even works, let alone has a thriving competetive scene. Strong vs strong rather than weak vs weak. First buff the Deadfire mobs and give them the same abilities you have and then make them use those. Great successes and harsh punishments. Before anyone complains about comparing PvP and PvE: XCOM2 is much the same, you might feel overpowered one moment, and then be totally screwed the next, because a couple enemies used their abilities in a way you didn't expect. So going with the DotA thing, let every ability keep it's unique feeling, only in the absolute worst gamebreaking cases should abilities be nerfed by removing features. If an ability doesn't feel unique and is just being compared to another which does more of the same, then change it until it's different enough.

I honestly wouldn't want to remove cleaving stance or swift flurry self proccing, but would much rather see difficulty buffed to a point where that kind of stuff seems reasonable. I mean right now sure cutting down mobs with cleaving stance feels about as good as mauling old ladies, but if the enemies are strong enough to cause you serious problems, then turning them to strawberry jam with that 5 Crit 2 Hit is going to feel pretty damn justified. Risk of nerf waves is always you end up with a bland and sterile feeling game. It might be difficult but it isn't satisfying. Obviously this approach would require having a look at all the abilities and buffing them and altering them where multiple abilities do the same thing with different numbers. Give enemies high level abilities and make sure they can use them. Surely this is much more work than just nerfing stuff, but it would definitely result in a better game.

And again I'll just keep repeating this: the Curses might solve much of the problem. Everyone gets to fine tune the difficulty how they want. Add enough monster buffs and self nerfs or whatever and surely the game will be difficult enough even for the worst masochists.

TL;DR There are many ways to balance. Balanced ≠ satisfying

[MadDemiurg 408]

I agree that most CC abilities need a buff in PoE2.

 

PoE1 had some OP CC that could use a nerf too, although it's wasn't really easy to stack enough accuracy to reliably CC toughest enemies.

[theBalthazar 495]

I especially hope reduction of guile cost for rogue.

 

FoD = 10 accuracy + 60 % damage + intoxication if bleak walker. = 1 zeal.

Withering strike = 25 % damage and the same kind of affliction. = 3 guile.

 

First version of blinding strike ? No damage boost, a good affliction yes... Bu I don't know, don't need 2 guile...

 

Rogue tree is extremely weird and that since beta 1.

 

I agree that most CC abilities need a buff in PoE2.

 

 

Yes, perhaps a passive with +5 accuracy for spells with affliction ?

 

But I think honestly, the main problem is the disapearance of -20 x -20 y. Now there is always MIASMA. but after that, you only have -10 via new affliction system. (-5 of an attribute)

 

Relentness storm is now a poop because you only cover 3 seconds average (base 2s). Perhaps go on base 3s stunned. Druid need that. It was my favorite class. Now I don't want "this" in my team : p Best C.C. is now a chanter with paralysed.

Edited May 18, 2018 by theBalthazar

[MadDemiurg 408]

Most classes are balanced poorly.

 

E.g. rogue is not a weak class by any means... Single target damage potential is there, if you don't compare to broken stuff. But most active strikes are bad.

 

Let's say I think FoD or Fighter's penetrating strike are a good benchmark for a balanced 1 pt ability (I don't like how much full attacks favor dw, but it's a different topic). They give you solid returns without doing ridiculous **** like chain self proccing 1000 times.

 

Then we have barbaric blow for 2 which is in many ways worse... or rogue trash attacks for 3.

 

PS: XCOM2 is actually a paragon of balance compared to PoE2 atm, pls don't even mention it). It's actually an enjoyable tactical experience on Legend/IM, I would very much want PoE2 to be on that level, even PoE1 wasn't.

Edited May 18, 2018 by MadDemiurg

[Zeitzbach 229]

I agree that most CC abilities need a buff in PoE2.

 

PoE1 had some OP CC that could use a nerf too, although it's wasn't really easy to stack enough accuracy to reliably CC toughest enemies.

 

You don't even need to "Land". You just need to graze with it and the next one gets a guaranteed hits.

 

TBH, PoE CC war was more tedious than hard. "Oh hey this one has a fampyr Ima use my Anti-Dominate and laugh". "Oh wait, I'm out of casts! time to rest and laugh at them for the next 4 encounters."

 

Perma CC war is some of the most boring and cheap illusion of difficulty you can find in a turn-ish game.

 

If anything, I prefer the game has careful comp that can break the standard "1-2 Front, 1-2 Mid, 1-2 Back" comp. Back to the day of Ragnarok Online in its prime. You have skills that create a defensive zone that block all melee attack. You have defensive zone that negate range attack. They can't stack and you can push enemies out of them.,

 

You also have curse zone that silence all casters in that area. The game already has sigil and silence debuff. Utitlize them and design hard critical encounter with them.

Edited May 18, 2018 by Zeitzbach

[Ganrich 1,397]

Yeah, combos like Fighter/Chanter Unyielding ad infinitum need to go.  Same with Monk level 8 Empowered Strikes + level 9 Inner Death which will delete a target from your harddrive and possibly from time itself.  Same with broken Empowered AoE death storms.  Same with a lot of other classes.  You cannot make PotD a challenge while these exist.  Period.  End of story.  No argument that "you should play solo" works either.  I like playing with my party, and I find solo tedious.  The game should be balanced around 5 man parties, and those that want to solo can do so to their hearts content.  Those who want to steam roll the content have 3 other difficulties to do so.  I expect even if they tone these major combos down that on Veteran and below they will still blow stuff up with ease. 

 

You will never get everything 100% balanced, but getting abilities that just wipe the enemy with 1 or 2 abilities is silly.  Those abilities should still be viable, but they shouldn't be this broken. 

 

I especially hope reduction of guile cost for rogue.

 

FoD = 10 accuracy + 60 % damage + intoxication if bleak walker. = 1 zeal.

Withering strike = 25 % damage and the same kind of affliction. = 3 guile.

 

First version of blinding strike ? No damage boost, a good affliction yes... Bu I don't know, don't need 2 guile...

 

Rogue tree is extremely weird et that since beta 1.

 

Although I agree rogue's abilities are too pricey for what you get in a lot of cases.  I will play devils advocate and say that Rogues have sneak attack.  Which, by the time you get Withering Strike (and if you have an affliction on the target already), you are going to do a great deal more than +25% damage.  I am not sure the exact scaling of Sneak Attack by that level, but by end game it is pretty up there (70%?).  That's not including Deathblows and Deep Wounds either.  Rogue's definitely need another 1 point spender at the minimum, and probably a whole re-tuning of their Guile costs. 

Edited May 18, 2018 by Ganrich

[MadDemiurg 408]

 

I agree that most CC abilities need a buff in PoE2.

 

PoE1 had some OP CC that could use a nerf too, although it's wasn't really easy to stack enough accuracy to reliably CC toughest enemies.

 

You don't even need to "Land". You just need to graze with it and the next one gets a guaranteed hits.

 

TBH, PoE CC war was more tedious than hard. "Oh hey this one has a fampyr Ima use my Anti-Dominate and laugh". "Oh wait, I'm out of casts! time to rest and laugh at them for the next 4 encounters."

 

Perma CC war is some of the most boring and cheap illusion of difficulty you can find in a turn-ish game.

 

If anything, I prefer the game has careful comp that can break the standard "1-2 Front, 1-2 Mid, 1-2 Back" comp. Back to the day of Ragnarok Online in its prime. You have skills that create a defensive zone that block all melee attack. You have defensive zone that negate range attack. They can't stack and you can push enemies out of them.,

 

You also have curse zone that silence all casters in that area. The game already has sigil and silence debuff. Utitlize them and design hard critical encounter with them.

 

Paralyze is against will and only debuffs deflection, so it's not guaranteed to land after graze by any means. It wasn't too difficult to counter with priest, but at least it added an extra layer of complexity, and it was also harder to deal with or land solo. Again, not saying it was perfect, but it was better than it is now.

[theBalthazar 495]

For me the best for FoD is to return at this previous version :

 

20 accuracy + 25 % fire damage. [15 % bleak walker ; 20 % personal OR 15 % shared]

 

AGAINST... 2 zeal.

 

Eventually, if we are crazy, Obsidian can create a v3 ON the tree for PAY a diminushing of cost... for single class for example ^^.... (for "personnal" way, for shared, found an other bonus)

 

Penetrating strike is an extrem limit of 1 discipline. But I think It is ok for me.

 

Withering strike need to stay at 3 guile for differentiation (there is enough "trash" active abilities with rogue). But with +50 % damage mini.

Blinding strike 1 guile. His extension can stay at 2, it is OK.

Strike the bell is too much complex for nothing. And finally 1 guile is enough.

Edited May 18, 2018 by theBalthazar