A potential change I'm keen to hear your thoughts on

lol this thread.

looking forward to another ggg response with some info tho
possibly soon..
to clear up some of these shenanigans.

"

Kamirun wrote:

I love this change, I'm looking forward to seeing if it still works out for all involved.

As for spell casters not being able to spam spells, isn't there a new jewel coming up that will allow you to get +2 (possibly more range) to energy shield per hit? This could also be going on weapons as a new mod entirely, if not and it is only the jewel.. well there ya go. get the jewels.

Nice even more crap to spread our characters thin. This doesn't even feel like an ARPG anymore it feels like a god damn third person view FPS.

I don't agree with this change. I dont feel like MoM/AA is too high of a defense as it is, I find it hard in alot of builds to manage it and try to get other types of mitigation without relying on pots since the keystone for MoM is so far away. Have to use a Cloak to make it work best.

When I'm around level 80-85 it works well, but I still have to watch out for chaos damage, hard hitting phys monsters, cold damage, lightning damage. As well as dangerous map mods. Devourers and Rhoas are quite dangerous.

Making MoM and AA worse, I dunno how I would build defense on a true caster, its almost like you're trying to force us to make use of fortify in some way even as a ranged character this way.

"

Weed wrote:

"

neoatomium wrote:

Before throwing the stones at me :
1) I didn't read the 55 previous pages. Don't know how we could blame me for that.
2) I talk for the case of new challenge leagues, not permanent ones where what I say is no longer true. (in perma league, gear just do everything)
3) I'm not complaining about EB change. EB mechanic is changing, I'll be more than happy to test that in the beta or when the 2.0 is released. To me, it's just a door open to completely new possibilities.

"

Rory wrote:

I suggested it offhand as a strange idea, but it solved a few key factors we were investigating, like AA/MoM defense being too high for too low a cost, so it was decided to go ahead and try it out.

I disagree with this statement. When we start a new character in a new challenge league, sustaining enough mana to hold AA and MoM at the same time is expensive (or it seems).


I know that you have thousands of data I don't have so you are in much better position to determine if a skill/combination of skills is overpowered :)

GGG won't share the data, we've asked but they never share anything. They want you to play the game how they want it. I don't think GGG is getting any more support from me.

If I were a dev I'd certainly not share my data either, I know how it's working and that's not what I'm asking.
I never complained about skill nerf, passive tree changes, etc. because I know that my single experience can't beat cumulated years (hundreads of years ?) of collected data and I always accepted it for any games I played.
But when a developer says "we feel that xxx is a problem" whereas I saw no problem, I know it's because something didn't work like the team expected, and so the question crossing my mind is (I like questioning myself) : "what did the devs wanted to do" or "what were they expecting" ?

In that case "AA/MoM combo is too easy to achieve" --> "How difficult should it be to achieve ?"

"

justinmm1988 wrote:

They want us to be squishy so they can have a fake facade of difficulty!

Maybe it's the reason ^^

But if they really wanted to nerf AA once again (like they did for BoR) they could just have increased the mana drained from AA.

Changing the mechanics of EB
1) makes the combo AA/Mom much harder to make viable
2) creates a whole new world of possibilities

They kill 2 birds with one stone.

This is a bit of a personal example of how I'd need to adjust my build to the new EB:

I have 824 base ES from gear and passives. 50% increased ES from passives, 67% from intelligence. This gives me 1788 mana-shield. I have 5.8% life regen and can easily take zealot's oath. This means I can have 103.7 mana-shield regenerated per second. With the new unique Shaper's Seed, I'd get 157.35. I would be losing 291.2 life regen by taking zealot's oath now, 433 with Shaper's Seed.

My current mana regeneration is 310. My incinerate has a mana cost of 37 with Apep's rage and casts 13.7 times a second, though has echo so the mana/s is only 253.45. If I remove Apep's rage and instead use my old Cybil's paw, the mana/s is 166. I do however go from 5815.6 tooltip DPS to 4869.8, a 17.3% loss. Arctic armour at level 25 with 26% boost drains 58.4 mana/s while stationary, 350/s while mobile. Just to note, I do not use MoM or have any mana leech.

Because I'd be using AA, I cannot recharge mana-shield, so I need my regen to match my costs. AA while stationary would not apply to this, so I'm saved 58. With Cybil's I'd be around my mark, though it's a heavy damage hit. I could alternatively drop AA, throw my 6-linked Infernal mantle and Voideye into the garbage and use the new dagger that converts 75% of fire damage to chaos, though I don't really want to. Nevermind the numerical changes, I'd be throwing away a large majority of my character and be forced into a single option.

As for what I gain, if the cost of AA is lowered significantly I can either save on passives by re-allocating mana passives (now less useful) or drop clarity though I doubt that's possible. However, I only have 3 mana passives that do not also grant me life or life regeneration. One point is already allocated to zealot's oath, so I'm saving 2 points at best.

Because I use Infernal mantle, I cannot reserve more than 64% mana, it's just too dangerous. I currently reserve ~55% at most depending on aura setup. Because my maximum mana will be much lower, unless the base mana cost of clarity is hugely lowered I will likely be forced into reserving over 64%, so my aura setup is still up in the air. It's very likely I cannot gain any auras unless Infernal mantle has the increased spell damage on low mana mod removed and depending on how much the clarity base is lowered, may have to drop a herald.

Overall the only main gain here is the possibility of ES gain mods such as +ES on hit from jewels, as well as those 2 passives, which will likely be spent on obtaining a jewel socket. In exchange I am losing all of my life regeneration. The following would need to occur for any benefit to come to my character:
Incinerates mana cost greatly reduced
AA's mana drain hugely reduced
Infernal mantle's increased spell damage on low mana hugely reduced or removed

Otherwise, this will be a net loss for my character, whom I do not in any way deem overpowered. I play very carefully, have a potential maximum of 15061 armour on top of AA, a potential 5871 evasion, level 9 CWDT with level 9 immortal call with 20% quality and a level 19 20% quality increased duration, no attack-block but 36% spell block and 5000 life. Despite this, I can die and do, so far 81 times in 300 hours played since open beta. I do not deem my build to have very little investment in defenses nor those defenses too efficient.

Oh and my damage is nothing incredible either, incinerate will always be a slow build compared to what's actually possible. It's not like I'm a glass cannon here - in fact I made the character with the intention of being as tanky as possible while also capable of as many map mods as possible. It used to be a max block build before AA was added to the game. I was really happy to finally have an alternative defense for top-of-the-tree witches to make use of, but now it's being nerfed, again.


I like the idea of ES covering mana, it's mechanically very interesting. I just think that opening this can of worms means changing a massive amount of the game. A very massive amount.

RIP AA/Mom and EB. You will be missed.

Unless skills get a complete cost rebalance, this change will make some builds next to impossible without either being forced to also path down to Ghost Reaver and waste a slot on life leech gem or be forced to use doryani's gear, or getting zealot's oath, 13% regen, and 4k energy shield. Kinda ridiculous.

You say mom/aa is too good for too low a cost, but I have: 270 int for a total of 54% inc es and 135 base mana; 185% inc mana regen, 74% inc max mana, with another 512 base es, 181% mana regen, and 137 base mana from gear, Inner force and devotion for 27% inc effect of buffs on you, for a grand total of:
366% increased mana regen, 74% increased max mana, 64% inc es, 512 es, and 137 mana
which translates into: 2346 mana, with 191 mana/sec, Turning on clarity bumps it to 329, which is enough to run lvl 23 AA (lvl 4 empower).

No EB I'm sitting at 840 ES, 1128 mana, 251 unreserved, 230 regen with clarty, and only 92 without. Even with clarity running, this not enough to run with lvl 16 AA with IF/Devotion, let alone a lvl 23 one.


This isn't even considering the huge cut to the power of mom with the lack of extra mana regen to fight incoming damage, or the fact that if you nerf AA mana cost to be reasonable in the post-eb-nerf world of path, everyone and their dog will be running it, because they can afford to. The only reason AA is even half balanced is the sheer AMOUNT of man you need to run it well. I have literally 2x as much inc max mana, 3x as much inc mana regen, a higher level clarity, and 2-3 times as much total mana as all my other casters, JUST TO RUN ARCTIC ARMOR/MOM.

So no, it really doesn't take "too little investment".

Releasing the infos 1 by 1 reminds me the time I was playing Magic : the Gathering. Each time Wizards spoiled a card of a new extension, everybody was starting to create new potential decks that could break the metagame while the pros were "hey calm down lil' champions, wait all the cards are spoiled before drawing conclusions"


Will say the same : let's wait to see all the changes (and it seems there really are a lot) before throwing rocks at ggg

"

neoatomium wrote:

"

Weed wrote:

"

neoatomium wrote:

Before throwing the stones at me :
1) I didn't read the 55 previous pages. Don't know how we could blame me for that.
2) I talk for the case of new challenge leagues, not permanent ones where what I say is no longer true. (in perma league, gear just do everything)
3) I'm not complaining about EB change. EB mechanic is changing, I'll be more than happy to test that in the beta or when the 2.0 is released. To me, it's just a door open to completely new possibilities.


I disagree with this statement. When we start a new character in a new challenge league, sustaining enough mana to hold AA and MoM at the same time is expensive (or it seems).


I know that you have thousands of data I don't have so you are in much better position to determine if a skill/combination of skills is overpowered :)

GGG won't share the data, we've asked but they never share anything. They want you to play the game how they want it. I don't think GGG is getting any more support from me.

If I were a dev I'd certainly not share my data either, I know how it's working and that's not what I'm asking.
I never complained about skill nerf, passive tree changes, etc. because I know that my single experience can't beat cumulated years (hundreads of years ?) of collected data and I always accepted it for any games I played.
But when a developer says "we feel that xxx is a problem" whereas I saw no problem, I know it's because something didn't work like the team expected, and so the question crossing my mind is (I like questioning myself) : "what did the devs wanted to do" or "what were they expecting" ?

In that case "AA/MoM combo is too easy to achieve" --> "How difficult should it be to achieve ?"

These are exactly the types of things they never share, but the community wants to know! e.g. "how difficult *should* it be to achieve...?" They don't show any evidence for why it's too low cost for high defense. I'm not asking for all their data, just some evidence as to why they want to make this change, otherwise the community is going to give them the backlash. Honestly does GGG even play PoE? I seriously get the feeling that nobody there even plays the game. As an individual player, I now have to make changes because every other player does the same stupid build. Well maybe if the game wasn't in a crappy state in the first place people would make more 'diverse' builds. Just lower the monster damage and people won't try to seek out the most OP defensive setup in the game. I've never been able to afford and/or reap the 'insanely overpowered benefits' of CoD in this game, I guess I'm just terrible, but I don't think it's fair that they do this.

"

neoatomium wrote:

Releasing the infos 1 by 1 reminds me the time I was playing Magic : the Gathering. Each time Wizards spoiled a card of a new extension, everybody was starting to create new potential decks that could break the metagame while the pros were "hey calm down lil' champions, wait all the cards are spoiled before drawing conclusions"


Will say the same : let's wait to see all the changes (and it seems there really are a lot) before throwing rocks at ggg

Well Rory is asking for opinions now. Would really suck having this go though, this would mean 3 of my HC characters would be unplayable as spec'd until I found better gear or dropped AA to have no defense.

Losing the ability to play some of my fave characters doesn't make me thrilled.

"

Kamirun wrote:

I love this change, I'm looking forward to seeing if it still works out for all involved.

As for spell casters not being able to spam spells, isn't there a new jewel coming up that will allow you to get +2 (possibly more range) to energy shield per hit? This could also be going on weapons as a new mod entirely, if not and it is only the jewel.. well there ya go. get the jewels.

So to spam spells every caster should use the same jewels much like they all use eb now? Back to square one i guess. I thought this jewel-thing was to tailor the skill tree towards your own needs and encourage tree diversity, not to streamline it further.

I still see some potential in this new eb, but not as eb. Just add it as a new keystone, nerf eb es-conversion to like 75% effectiveness or something instead. AA? well it is not what some people make it out to be and it is definatelly not that easy as some say to specc for.