Nothing wrong with Blade Flurry, it's not OP it just doesn't suck like typical melee

"

Emphasy wrote:

"

The fact that he switched to es meant he should have lived a bit longer but hes still dw assassin and still died.

He is still not DW. He used a shield, you could argue that a 430 ES shield is not good enough, but then again, hardly anything is in the situation he was in.

Apparently ETUP changed his entire build then, because when I watched him play during the weekend he was dual wielding as a life based assassin. Well whatever.

"

Fruz wrote:

Your prediction ? What about the EQ builds in there ? => don't make me (us) laugh lol.

Yes, my prediction. I'll quote it for you in case you forgot:

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

So by reading these posts to me it looks like you basically agree with the premises I listed. Assuming HC temp league top 50, that blade flurry/reave/frost blades etc counts as "melee" (and totems/summons do not), and assuming BF does NOT get nerfed.

You believe all of the following will be true after a few days:
1. There will be more casters than melee
2. Blade flurry will be less than 15% of total builds
3. Blade flurry will not be the most used gem/build
4. Less than 30% of the total existing melee gems (that can be builds, IE excluding whirling blades or riposte) will appear in that bracket
5. Some form of caster or totem build will be the most common build (IE, not a bow and not a melee)

You also believe that, barring some nerf to totems and/or supports:
1. There will be more totems than melee
2. There will be more supports than melee

So, you agree to all of these points being accurate predictions for the next HC temp league top 50? And yet you agree to nerf BF anyways?

Every single one of those predictions came true. EVERY ONE OF THEM

AND my prediction that etup dies within a week also comes true despite him practically changing his entire build aside from using BF. Miraculous how I can figure out what's going to happen and somehow GGG cannot.

Ironically it doesn't take a genius to figure out this was going to happen but hey, good thing we nerfed bf right? Because God forbid we should ever for even ONE FUCKING LEAGUE have more melee than casters. Because expensive builds must not outnumber cheap, easy as shit from level 1 to level 100, builds. No, mother fucking path of flame blast must go on.

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

Because God forbid we should ever for even ONE FUCKING LEAGUE have more melee than casters

Blade flurry is spell casting with a melee weapon so even if it had not been nerfed and was played hypothetically by 100% of the league it still would have been 100% spell casting.

BV is more melee than BF, so by your own logic Melee was the dominant playstyle last league.

They need to get a spine and muster the courage to stand up to this "clear speed meta" that has turned the game into a bullet hell shooter with fantasy themes.

They literally turned blade flurry from a melee skill to a ranged AOE spell by their own admission "because it wasn't going to compete with the current meta" if that isn't waving the white flag of balance surrender I don't know what else to call it.

"

alhazred70 wrote:

BV is more melee than BF

I think this bit disqualifies you from further discussion tbh, I could go on with a few other problems I have with that post but this really sums it up best.

I want to be clear about one thing, you aren't wrong about the clear speed meta, the direction the game is headed, your general sense of what is wrong with this game. But until you have a REAL solution for those problems, any argument for nerfing BF is void.

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

"

alhazred70 wrote:

BV is more melee than BF

I think this bit disqualifies you from further discussion tbh, I could go on with a few other problems I have with that post but this really sums it up best

I mean if arbitrarily dismissing my post without anything to back it up is all you can manage maybe this internet thing isn't for you?

BV in general (more so in builds that can't take more than a couple increased area nodes) requires being closer to monsters than BF and exposes you to boss one shots unlike ranged skills. Melee is defined as close combat.

So is it that your world view is defined by labels other people put on things for you, or by the actuality of a thing, disregarding labels?

"

alhazred70 wrote:

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

"

alhazred70 wrote:

BV is more melee than BF

I think this bit disqualifies you from further discussion tbh, I could go on with a few other problems I have with that post but this really sums it up best

I mean if arbitrarily dismissing my post without anything to back it up is all you can manage maybe this internet thing isn't for you?

BV in general (more so in builds that can't take more than a couple increased area nodes) requires being closer to monsters than BF and exposes you to boss one shots unlike ranged skills. Melee is defined as close combat.

So is it that your world view is defined by labels other people put on things for you, or by the actuality of a thing, disregarding labels?

Without anything backing it up? There isn't anything about BV that makes it melee and you're calling it melee. It never namelocked, it scaled from the gem and not from the weapon, it has a spell tag and not a melee tag. It has no attack tag. It does not scale with str without an iron will gem and it does not require accuracy to hit enemies. It does not originate

I mean hell by your definition lightning tendrils is melee and reave is not. This is a terrible argument and I'm not going to waste my time with it, so yes, I'm dismissing your post.

Technical yes, it is kinda odd, that they are not distinguishing melee from attack. Melee always means attack + melee weapon. Because if you look at Spells, BV is melee, Molten Shell is melee and even Lightning Tendrils and Flamesurge are kinda melee.

If we are really technical about it Cleave radius is 20, Blade Vortex radius is 14, so it isn't even hard to guess what is more Melee. And if we are even more technical, auto attacking with Disfavour is less melee than Blade Vortex (because it likely has a weapon range of 15, compared to BVs 14.

However right now the most important component and what makes Melee (and Bows mostly too) bad is not the short range, it is that Melee means attack and attacks scale with weapons. When you level a spell you put on a tabula, put on the supports and level until Maps. There is even a nice Tabula replacement and guess who benefits more from a +1 Chest, the highest benefit comes for CI casters, because 100% increased defenses still leaves you with zero HP on your chest, but with a huge amount of ES.

Blade Flurry however isn't the solution to that. Putting so much damage into a skill that it basically removes the issue of weapon scaling because every poor unique is good enough to work with it is a terrible design. Blade Flurry essentially is so good that it pushed the Binos price back up, a item that was hardly used last league. And the reason is that Binos is all you ever need for BF, you could craft a better weapon, but the skill is powerful enough that you don't have to.

"

Without anything backing it up? There isn't anything about BV that makes it melee and you're calling it melee.

The thing here is that people likely have another vision of melee than GGG. If you think melee you think about hitting someone with your fist, that is the most basic form of melee combat people might even have experienced (I hope not, because it hurts). However Lacerate is far from that and Blade Flurry too. So his backup is pretty clear, just look at the reach, and that isn't something entirely unreasonable. However considering how poorly bow attackers are doing, the melee part is not the issue, the attack part is. Attacking is generally worse than casting, melee or not. And for GGG Melee always means attack, and in there terms BV isn't melee, because it isn't an attack.

"

1. There will be more totems than melee
2. There will be more supports than melee

Well you weren't 100% accurate. There aren't that many supports. There are 10+ Melees, and less than 10+ Supports, I think there are also less than 10+ Totems now because somehow all those Inquisitors died.

"

5. Some form of caster or totem build will be the most common build (IE, not a bow and not a melee)

Honestly right now we have a close call. FB is clearly dominating, but I feel Earthquake is second. There is 9 times Earthquake and 14 times selfcast Flameblast. And after that there is a bunch of nothing. Of course that is expected, those EQ builds are Lab farmers and FB is to quickly advance the atlas due to being able to oneshot many bosses, so there is a clear reason why those builds are common, they are also both more likely to keep up with Breaches. In both cases the numbers will go down and we will see more diversity once those people have a few dozen exalts. Because while both those builds can do any content in the game, I doubt that people want to stand there charging flameblast against shaper and stuff, so we will see our high dps weapon attack builds there and again CI Bladeflurry can just stand there and take the beating in the same way BV did it.

And again there is a huge difference between HC and SC, in SC I was able to buy my perfectly colored FB Skin of the Lord for less than an ex, because not many people play Flameblast, however if you want to buy a Binos for BF you have to spend a lot.

"

Emphasy wrote:

Well you weren't 100% accurate. There aren't that many supports. There are 10+ Melees, and less than 10+ Supports, I think there are also less than 10+ Totems now because somehow all those Inquisitors died.

IDK where you came up with those numbers. I have a hard time differentiating which ones are the supports aside from the ones that have SUPPORT IN THEIR NAMES, but I was able to find 4 definitive melee characters. 1 BF, 2 cyclone, 1 with 5-linked EQ AND 5-linked AW (I'll count this as melee to be fair), and 1 EQ-only. I also found 1 other EQ that had more links on their ancestral warchief than they had on their EQ, so I would call that a totem build, but I would maybe compromise on calling that 1 for a total of 6. Where you find 10+ I have no idea. Unless you are counting some of those private profiles as melee, based on the ancestral warchief distribution and their class selection I doubt they are more than 1 extra melee.

DEFINITELY there are more totem than melee, no matter how you rule it. You can make an argument about supports but I doubt you're right about that.

It's not as cut and dry as it was before, because there are a lot of people using totems with spells and totems with melee. So maybe if you define things oddly you can argue either way. One thing that's for sure is I don't see more than 4 living, non-totem, non-summoner "real" melee characters. And when I say real I'm including EQ and BF. If you want to go a step further and qualify real melee as walking up to a monster and hitting it, there clearly won't EVER be any up there aside from possibly flicker strike, which isn't up there.

When you go off about what qualifies melee, it's pretty simple to me and it has nothing to do with range. It's weapon-based, attack, melee tag. Non-totem, non-summoner. I'm pretty sure 99% of the melee players as well as GGG would agree those specifics are what qualify a gem as melee. I'm not even sure why anybody would argue this distinction based on range, and I'm pretty sure this is part of why GGG is making stuff like BV spell gems and BF melee gems.

Regardless, the one thing we both agree on is the weapon attack part being why it is shitty. It's why I said BF would suck no matter how OP they made it, and why BF sucks right now.

Does making it OP fix the problem? Not for bow, but I don't see any reason why this wouldn't give melee some needed help. We all knew there wasn't going to be any room for melee in this league aside from EQ. And if you thought EQ was too good, fine.

But right now there are 3 people using EQ in the top 50 at best, and where the fuck is the right side of the tree in that list? I see 1 trickster (not surprisingly) and 3 rangers. In fact I see 1 shadow at all, even counting the dead assassins which is very predictable, there's still only 3. And I thought trickster was pretty strong too.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Legatus1982 wrote:

Lol @ dual wield assassin life build in HC

You really do know nothing indeed.
Etup ripped to DD with 10k ES buffer ( 1H + shield, Obviously ).
You could have least tried to inform yourself before, now you look ridiculous.

Etup is still 4th even dead, and will still be in the top 50 for a while.
With the lack of information that you have, it's also literally not possible for you to know what all characters are playing by the way, like half of the profiles are private.
Your prediction ? What about the EQ builds in there ? => don't make me (us) laugh lol.


Also would you have the kindnest to explain how DW is worse than 2H ?
Let's see ....


[Removed by Support]

Just because Etup can get high ranking with a decent 'melee' skill doesn't mean melee and blade flurry are op. Cyclone was actually not broken when it was reworked and made better, and Etup went #1 with it. He went #1 with it because he had a broken as shit support Bob and Havoc coming in with +levels out of the wazoo CA (pre-nerf) killing hard bosses for him.

This skill is actually dogshit like some of you seriously overhyped this.