The Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Harmful Content

"

Nobake wrote:

Shotgunning is too strong, I don't necessarily agree it needs to disappear entirely. Perhaps making every projectile hit on a single target do 30-50% Less damage, cumulative.

"

dudiobugtron wrote:

"

Nobake wrote:

Shotgunning is too strong, I don't necessarily agree it needs to disappear entirely. Perhaps making every projectile hit on a single target do 30-50% Less damage, cumulative.

Why should spell projectiles shotgun, but not attack projectiles? What are the benefits of this, gameplay-wise?

"

heyyous wrote:

So basically the complaint is people do not like the melee play style. I thought we played games for fun not only because we like finding items. I guess I am different to enjoy being able to tank damage and keeping up my endurance charges. I like being in the middle of mobs knowing if I forget to keep my endurance charges up I will die. You can also leap slam or flicker strike into groups for extra fun. Playing melee is about feeling like a badass and I for one enjoy it.

It is pretty stupid that rangers can tank fairly well though, It does take away the allure melee has, I think that is more so the problem on top of the fact people are using the phrase enviable improperly, Here I thought they were saying it wasn't possible to do.

"

Nobake wrote:

"

dudiobugtron wrote:

"

Nobake wrote:

Shotgunning is too strong, I don't necessarily agree it needs to disappear entirely. Perhaps making every projectile hit on a single target do 30-50% Less damage, cumulative.

Why should spell projectiles shotgun, but not attack projectiles? What are the benefits of this, gameplay-wise?

Spell and attack projectiles should obey the same mechanics in this regard. I assumed they already did, if this is not the case then is should be addressed.

"

heyyous wrote:

By ranged your pretty much just saying lightning arrow. A lot of people can't even stand the kill speed of RoA. Once again another example of skills needing to be buffed rather then nerfing skills people are actually enjoying. Ever see a poison arrow build? I haven't :( How about burning arrow? Nope I haven't. There is a niche explosive arrow build but other then that it's about it. I'm sure lightning strike can be built to kill very fast since it can pierce. So the issue isn't even melee versus ranged its lightning arrow and spork versus every other single skill in the game.

"

Moosifer wrote:

I feel I inspired some of these points through my constantly ranting or most people who understand the game are coming to the same conclusions. I don't think I read anything I disagree with although implementation could be different. This did kind of inspire me to do another long feedback though. Some of these things I've been preaching for months but everyone just ignores me.

I can say that I played for variety. In CB there were more options because you were more relaxed on EHP standards. While there's still many good options the majority of passive trees look exactly the same besides 5-10% of their passives. Personally I think we need a radical change to how we approach the passive tree. If a high EHP is going to be required then we need to start giving weapons inherent benefits/drawbacks and linking life/armor/evasion/ES/etc to weapons/playstyles. This EHP or DPS decision is starting to backfire.