Snapshotting

"

nirvanafan4ever wrote:

Hopefully you guys plan to buff up summoners then.

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

"

Wraeclastian wrote:

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

This article was written by me, Nick and Brian.[/b]

This article was written by Nick, Brian, and I.

Spoiler

I'm going to have to ask you to hand in your badge, officer, because that's incorrect.

"This article was written by me" - correct.
"This article was written by I" - incorrect.
The presence of the other names doesn't change which pronoun is used.
Were it phrased such that we were the subject of the sentence, it would be "Nick, Brian and I wrote the article".

http://www.elearnenglishlanguage.com/blog/english-mistakes/i-vs-me/

Putting the pronoun at the end of the list is not a hard grammatical rule, but a common convention*, and whether it applies in certain circumstances changes depending who you ask - I was taught that it applies specifically to "I" because that sounds weirder coming first in a list.

*This is at least my understanding, and certainly seems to be born out by some breif brief internet research on the matter.

"

gingasteve wrote:

"

robmafia wrote:

"

Xasrai wrote:

This is simply not true. The utility gained for a summoner by being able to swap out those support gems gives them both offensive and defensive capabilities that NO OTHER BUILD has access to.

*facepalm*

4 offensive spectres = 4 offensive spectres
4 defensive spectres = 4 defensive spectres
4 utility spectres = 4 utility spectres


get it?

2 offensive, 1 defensive, and 1 utility = 4 spectres. holy shit, 2+1+1 stillequals 4!

you act as if 4 magically becomes >4, if someone chooses to diversify them.

you're wrong. THERE'S NO NET GAIN. LEARN WHAT YOUR OWN KEYWORDS MEAN.

2 defensive and 2 offensive lacks the killing speed of 4 offensive and lacks the tankiness of 4 defensive. it's not magically better, just because you ignorantly think so.

you said it's a "net gain." and then you failed to ever support this claim, while vehemently arguing it.

After reading all 28 pages, Thanks for getting rid of snapshotting. Its honestly about time.

As for this guy "robmafia" who is apparently the most passionate summoner on the forum.

I can see where he is coming from with the quoted text.

"2 offensive, 1 defensive, and 1 utility = 4 spectres. holy shit, 2+1+1 stillequals 4!"

Congratulations you achieved level 1 math, Lets take a look at some level 2 math:

You have one 6-link chest or two-handed weapon to socket your raise spectre gem in, you summon your first 2 spectres (offensive) 5 support gems used, you then switch 3 of these support gems for 3 different support gems for your defensive spectre, then another 2 swapped for your utility spectre. That's 5+3+2=10 support gems used + raise spectre meaning you essentially have an 11 link chest. Because whilst you have all these spectres you are gaining the effects of all the support gems you have used. Yes it is more fun for you, yes it clearly gives you an advantage. Which is why i for one am glad to see the back of snapshotting.

"

APExJAN wrote:

Until now snapshotting was a part of the game. Maybe not meant to but many builds relayed on this. My question is will we get a free re spec(i mean many builds are gone to waste once this is implemented)

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

1.2.0, like our other major expansions, will include a one-time optional full passive reset. That's part of why 1.2.0 is a good time to release this change, since this will be occuring then.