edwardvulture -> RE: =ED= March 7th, 2014 - Onward to War (3/14/2014 9:59:14)
|
If the devs took this suggestion. I am more than sure that build diversity would at least triple. In the short run, "omitting" loses did increase build diversity. But the thing is, they didn't back it up with a major balance change that allows build diversity. As of now, it is most efficient in terms of stats to invest largely in life, dex, tech, str, and NOT SUPPORT or ENERGY. Crits and rage are broken because let's face it. Getting rage faster will do you no good when your gun only does 300-400 damage. A block or deflection is infinitely better than a critical. And i'm not gonna lie, omitting loses was more of a morale boost for players, especially the ones that didn't copy builds to comepete. My original concept would have made achieving a high % over a time period achievement-granting. But that part didn't get put in...which i'm fine with because the title did. And seriously, not all players are good build-makers. I've ran out of builds for my CH.... instead of using the High Energy, high life, high strength/supp massacre build (that uses ), or the strength/ low support build, I'm using the SUPPORT 5 bonus build. I've resorted to using 5 bonus and low support builds too not because I'm a bad build maker. Because of the current effects of stats, passives--->actives, lack of agility, lack of incentive to invest in skills... must I go on?
|
|
|
|