Game is turning into a glass cannon only builds

Ulsarek

It takes more immersion into the task of developing & designing a game than you may give credit. The motivation behind your words is not very clear to me, but according to you I don't seem clear either.

Everything is interconnected and affects the experience.
Their responsibility is not only to you but to many, and to bring in those who do not want to play the game in its current state but would if it were a bit better.

This is a natural 'ambition'. I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be good.

It is true that number changes are a good method of making different archetypes effective but the reason behind the inaction is also a good question.

How tanky should a Juggernaut be vs a Witch or something? How much 'power' including tankiness should be gotten from gear?
1 Question is Innate to the character or ascendancy, the Other Question is about the Liquidity of these playstyles/ powers.

But these questions are too simple. They are too simple to grow -- they offer nothing to anchor decision-making, liquidity, to limit or shape or guide direction.

Even if you don't find my post useful or refreshing it is useful or refreshing to others. Maybe you do find it useful or refreshing but complain anyway because you don't understand why you feel the way you do. Not my problem.

Should the Witch always die in 1 hit and the Juggernaut survive 1000? At its core the question is how different each character and general playstyle or archetype be. But the Journey is what is important, the Experience of the game every step of the way.

How does the limited Isometric view affect what playstyles may exist? It is the First and Last limitation. You can't make much playstyle differentiation between Range and Tank-Melee when the time between seeing and being able to attack or be attacked by an enemy is 0.5 seconds.

I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be a good game.

"

Dylan_Schreiner wrote:

Ulsarek

It takes more immersion into the task of developing & designing a game than you may give credit. The motivation behind your words is not very clear to me, but according to you I don't seem clear either.

Everything is interconnected and affects the experience.
Their responsibility is not only to you but to many, and to bring in those who do not want to play the game in its current state but would if it were a bit better.

This is a natural 'ambition'. I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be good.

It is true that number changes are a good method of making different archetypes effective but the reason behind the inaction is also a good question.

How tanky should a Juggernaut be vs a Witch or something? How much 'power' including tankiness should be gotten from gear?
1 Question is Innate to the character or ascendancy, the Other Question is about the Liquidity of these playstyles/ powers.

But these questions are too simple. They are too simple to grow -- they offer nothing to anchor decision-making, liquidity, to limit or shape or guide direction.

Even if you don't find my post useful or refreshing it is useful or refreshing to others. Maybe you do find it useful or refreshing but complain anyway because you don't understand why you feel the way you do. Not my problem.

Should the Witch always die in 1 hit and the Juggernaut survive 1000? At its core the question is how different each character and general playstyle or archetype be. But the Journey is what is important, the Experience of the game every step of the way.

How does the limited Isometric view affect what playstyles may exist? It is the First and Last limitation. You can't make much playstyle differentiation between Range and Tank-Melee when the time between seeing and being able to attack or be attacked by an enemy is 0.5 seconds.

I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be a good game.

[Removed by Support] I trust GGG with what they're doing, there's a reason they became the lead in this genre. Whatever they're doing or plan for future patches has more credibility than your armchair devtalk will ever have. You see issues in places that don't exist and want to slap bandaids on non-bleeding wounds. Unless this is an alt account I don't even consider you knowledgeable enough to comment on a lot of balance related topics yet. You barely played the game with your slightly older than a month account. Please.

Now let's kindly return to the actual topic at hand. You've heard CoryA.

"

tafonso wrote:

they like their rng defence mechanincs which will fail you.

As it is clear the RNG or Gambler's way of creating a rainbow is not very good. There is a big difference between Quality and Quantity.

100% Reliable is a Quality in its own.

Hence, number changes don't fix everything and aren't very unique or interesting most of the time.

This is enough detail.

"

Dylan_Schreiner wrote:

Ulsarek

It takes more immersion into the task of developing & designing a game than you may give credit. The motivation behind your words is not very clear to me, but according to you I don't seem clear either.

Everything is interconnected and affects the experience.
Their responsibility is not only to you but to many, and to bring in those who do not want to play the game in its current state but would if it were a bit better.

This is a natural 'ambition'. I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be good.

It is true that number changes are a good method of making different archetypes effective but the reason behind the inaction is also a good question.

How tanky should a Juggernaut be vs a Witch or something? How much 'power' including tankiness should be gotten from gear?
1 Question is Innate to the character or ascendancy, the Other Question is about the Liquidity of these playstyles/ powers.

But these questions are too simple. They are too simple to grow -- they offer nothing to anchor decision-making, liquidity, to limit or shape or guide direction.

Even if you don't find my post useful or refreshing it is useful or refreshing to others. Maybe you do find it useful or refreshing but complain anyway because you don't understand why you feel the way you do. Not my problem.

Should the Witch always die in 1 hit and the Juggernaut survive 1000? At its core the question is how different each character and general playstyle or archetype be. But the Journey is what is important, the Experience of the game every step of the way.

How does the limited Isometric view affect what playstyles may exist? It is the First and Last limitation. You can't make much playstyle differentiation between Range and Tank-Melee when the time between seeing and being able to attack or be attacked by an enemy is 0.5 seconds.

I am trying to connect the original question to the broader goal or ambition of the game which is to be a good game.

i m not invested in this conversation topic at this point tbh and i didnt actually read the newer responses. but i want to say, i damn appreciate your efforts in how you colour your responses.

+100 effort

Thanks. Glad that it is appreciated

Using this much color for simple posts takes away readability and just distracts from the message you're trying to convey. Especially when you're doing it on a dark themed website. This isn't some elementary schoolers mind-map. Sometimes less really is more.

Huh?

Say again?

"

Dylan_Schreiner wrote:

Huh?

Say again?

Sure thing!

"

Ulsarek wrote:

Using this much color for simple posts takes away readability and just distracts from the message you're trying to convey. Especially when you're doing it on a dark themed website. This isn't some elementary schoolers mind-map. Sometimes less really is more.

"

Ulsarek wrote:

Using this much color for simple posts takes away readability and just distracts from the message you're trying to convey. Especially when you're doing it on a dark themed website. This isn't some elementary schoolers mind-map. Sometimes less really is more.

really? that's just a petty complaint. Let him do what he wants! Add a little color to your life.

"

ArtCrusade wrote:

"

Dylan_Schreiner wrote:

Huh?

Say again?

Sure thing!

"

Ulsarek wrote:

Using this much color for simple posts takes away readability and just distracts from the message you're trying to convey. Especially when you're doing it on a dark themed website. This isn't some elementary schoolers mind-map. Sometimes less really is more.

whats that mean?