You know what happens when your Reflexes turn to Iron?
" You should follow the link I provided a page or two back. :) https://linktr.ee/wjameschan -- everything I've ever done worth talking about, and even that is debatable.
Huh. My mace dude is now an actual cultist of Chayula. That's kinda wild. |
|
So I just saw a 2000+ evasion leather...on an IR character.
It's the only piece of evasion gear he's wearing. He has over 12k armour from grace and determination. This person is not my friend anymore. :( https://linktr.ee/wjameschan -- everything I've ever done worth talking about, and even that is debatable.
Huh. My mace dude is now an actual cultist of Chayula. That's kinda wild. |
|
Total cheese.
At least make the evasion budget convert to an equivalent armour budget: Iron Reflexes converts all evasion rating to armour 30% less armour from converted evasion rating Regardless of whether other changes take place, this one must. -- I don't have alpha access, that was a LONG time ago. Last edited by Zakaluka#1191 on Oct 18, 2012, 1:47:54 AM
|
|
" If only to keep within the standards of the build-changing keystone being a mix of positive and negative changes, yes. https://linktr.ee/wjameschan -- everything I've ever done worth talking about, and even that is debatable.
Huh. My mace dude is now an actual cultist of Chayula. That's kinda wild. |
|
that's not the point.
You're not supposed to get MORE RATING from the conversion, just a different kind of rating. 1.4 evasion rating is equivalent to 1 armour in the current affix pool. Maras and duelists putting on leather to cheese the system into 40% more rating is completely meta. This change just makes your choice of armor type less relevant. Maintain existing stat symmetry in the affix pool with the conversion, and IR suddenly becomes less broken. The penalty should just go with the conversion, it's not even a real drawback. That you've been able to do this without a penalty on the conversion for so long is the only thing making this keystone too powerful. It just makes pure-ev gear only slightly more attractive from a total-rating perspective under IR than any other type. The only remaining advantage would be dex bonuses to %EVR. Which are rightly far more pronounced for a shadow-ranger than a mara-duelist. -- I don't have alpha access, that was a LONG time ago. Last edited by Zakaluka#1191 on Oct 18, 2012, 3:20:00 AM
|
|
Okay, with the deepest respect, I'm going to ask you to take off the Really-Smart Hat and put on the Face-Value Hat, and then re-read what I said. ;)
Naturally we know you're getting MORE armour from the conversion, and that to put a negative modifier would even things out, but at face value, the description of IR is all positives, no negatives. Heck, you still get to keep 5% chance to evade despite the total conversion. We Acrobats don't get to keep 5% damage reduction. So while you're right (as usual), as a Keystone, IR needs a face-value 'cost'. https://linktr.ee/wjameschan -- everything I've ever done worth talking about, and even that is debatable. Huh. My mace dude is now an actual cultist of Chayula. That's kinda wild. Last edited by Foreverhappychan#4626 on Oct 18, 2012, 3:42:45 AM
|
|
"I would argue it has a face-value cost: you lose all your evasion rating. In exchange, you gain armour rating based on how much you lost. Just like how blood magic removes all mana, but gives the ability to spend life on skills. Something is given, and something is taken. Same again (even more so) with Eldritch Battery. The benefit may be outweighing the cost in this case, I'm not sure myself. But the cost is clearly there - you have no evasion rating. The fact that converting means we do the giving and the taking in the same step doesn't mean the taking isn't there. Loosing all your evasion rating to gain equivalent armour rating is not "all positives, no negatives". It's one positive for one negative. Last edited by Mark_GGG#0000 on Oct 18, 2012, 8:52:44 PM
| |
Top +Armor Affix: 120
Top +Evade Affix: 322 Bit of a balance issue there. IGN: KoTao
|
|
" ✠ ✠
|
|
" his response wasn't implying in any way that the 100% conversion is fine. He was simply responding on charan's point: whether it's consistent with other keystones from a general design perspective. Mark avoided commenting on balance with that reply. Which is a pattern. Means they're probably debating this issue internally. --
I don't have alpha access, that was a LONG time ago. |
|