One other point that I’d like to make. There are players out there with mental illness, while a nerf might not seem like a big deal for the fortunate level minded population, it DOES affect other folks more severely.
Mmkay?
3 Likes
…says the guy who gets zero upvotes 
2 Likes
I suspecting something here, what if they want Dexterity class to be an entry class, capable 120, supp oriented. Because this will be, monk and dh in 2.7.0 @4000 paragon will not be capable to do 130+ without a lot of fishing.
but this is sad, they should say that clearly: “we want monk and dh to be chars for begginers, to play up to grift 120 then switch to another class or remain supp”
You definitely are on to something.
Well, it looks like we sized this up the D3 game. See you next patch.
I wonder if they’ll actually listen to the community 
5 Likes
I think if the revamped Firebirds goes live from PTR where it does GR140+ then you really have to question their approach after GoD DH and WD nerfs.
I fully expect Rathma to get a small buff when going live from PTR v2 and Firebirds to get a nerf when going live.
Otherwise if I was a DH or WD main I’d be very displeased.
3 Likes
You DON’T want to play new GoD set with your friends.
Adding more players = more monster HP.
But if Barb groups them up nicely for you in lovely pixel pull you will not do more damage because GoD’s group clearing potential is severely limited by 3 pierce cap.
You will be just slower if your friend joins in. It will not work.
4 Likes
The initial change was targeted towards Gears of Dreadlands using Hungering Arrow, which severely nerfed its performance and also didn’t fix the same issue across other sets. The new fix is now on the core legendary power that Hungering Arrow relies on, and Gears of Dreadlands’ power has been adjusted to compensate and also encourage other primary abilities.
They say that they adjusted GoD power to compensate huge nerf. Compensate its power in what setup? Group setup? I dont think so. They only looked at set’s solo performance and that is all.
On live servers we can get 50+ pierces per arrow in big monster pull pixeled by Barb. They limited that to only 3 pierce per arrow!!! You can’t compensate that by buffing GoD 6P set bonus from 10,000% to 15,000%. This is still severe nerf for people who like to use set in groups.
Most of people posting here tested new set only in solo play. I am yet to see any test runs in group play.
4 Likes
firebirds and rathma will always suck no matter the boosts cuz wiz and necros are trash toons thats gets 1 shot no durablity not to mention these 2 are the 2 slowest toons in the game
If they decide to keep the pierces nerfed they should at least compensate by adding more damage to the build and a better qol change like “stacks staying there for longer”. 15k modifiier is only 1.5 times the old one which is 2 - 3 measly Grs difference. The moment they gave birth to this build, in the first iteration of ptr pre season 21, it was really bad and dhs were dissapointed cause they were waiting for a strong fresh build that would put them in the map again and make them viable for solo/groups. This was good i guess while it lasted so now we are back to playing whatever class the devs deem worthy and fun.
8 Likes
I don’t get it. Some people are going crazy over 6P set bonus buff that is only giving us +1GR in solo speed runs.
6P set bonus is worth 2.58252 GRs but you can still feel the effect of offhand nerf even in speeds.
And 120s speeds are not going to be a thing, not even with new followers. By solo speed runs I consider runs that take under 3 min on average.
90% Sure this will go live like it is unless we get the 10% chance it’s over
They made an excuse have to fix missile dampening and instead nerf the set 10-15 tiers then minor buff it so it’s still 8-12 tiers lower lol way to use those smoking mirrors
2 Likes
Yeah, that aspect is irksome. Had the developers been more transparent in their motives, a lot of of the alternate solution theory crafting could have been simplified. That said, it is a possibility that they won’t buff the set any further but it would leave Demon Hunters at the bottom of the power spectrum (perhaps just above Witch Doctors).
If the intent was to nerf all the classes to GR135ish at P5000, then why did they not address Crusader, Necromancer, Wizard, etc.? Just nerfing a few classes at once while not touching others is what leads to these torch-n-pitchfork rallies on the forums.
Lastly, by making GR140 out of reach again for solo (under say paragon 8000), they have essentially locked out players from attaining high gem levels if they don’t play in groups. This kind of “trying to close Pandora’s box” is also detrimental to the player base: newer players cannot compete with older players with high level gems gained pre-nerfs.
5 Likes
If you go through the patch notes 2.6.7, 2.6.8 etc then you see that they have tried to nerf Crusader several times but haven’t quite managed it. I can’t tell you why they haven’t just gone with a numerical set bonus adjustment, but as I’ve said elsewhere it smacks of a problem in the architecture or overall design of Crusader.
To quote from that article I’ve already posted far too many times:
“A single change can ripple through many other parts of the game, so it’s important we’re mindful of what each change can affect.”
I’d find it really valuable if Blizzard could please publish new figures on where the classes are now at the moment.
Data from 2.6.7 non-seasonal:
| Barbarian |
Crusader |
Demon Hunter |
Monk |
Necromancer |
Witch Doctor |
Wizard | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GR Avg. | 130 |
138 | 125 | 130 | 123 | 130 | 130 |
Group play has always had a built-in advantage for XP, gem-ups, loot find. Sure, I agree that it is suboptimal for people like myself who haven’t played in a group for years, but as long as they eventually balance all solo classes (or D4 replaces it) then I don’t have a problem with it. Numbers are just abstract concepts. What even is a 140?
The biggest thing for me is the “oh it takes time they’ll get nerfed too” crowd like, no, it’s a matter of public record they are just churning the meta and introduce problems at least as fast as they solve them. It’s obvious that two set redesigns were too much to take on in a single patch this cycle. Not really sure why we’re shooting for two and a half.
If you’re going to balance the game, you don’t do it haphazardly, one build at a time. People pop up in “Make GR130 5K Paragons Again” hats and try to blogsplain why anyone who is unhappy with any changes is a baby and a bad player, and all the while the devs are in the background like “Haha wizard go brrrrrrrrr”.
You need to do a general balance patch and stop singling builds out every 3-4 months. Even if you get it wrong you aren’t punching down on someone’s only viable option (and still getting it wrong).
1 Like
You mean like 2.6.1?
1 Like
“haha they did that once, ur argument is invalid” 
No, not arguing with you at all. I saw your low paragon on your account and figured you haven’t been around that long. Just extra food for thought to support you as they have actually done it before.
Having said that, I think it probably isn’t going to happen again given they seem obviously resource-strapped and that many changes requires a lot of QA, CM, PTR, dev time they probably don’t have.
I don’t know your career background but mine is in software engineering so my experience might count for something. As you were 
2 Likes
I would agree with this for seasonal play since it resets everything every season. However, for nonseasonal characters, if you could get gems to 140 reliably solo before, and not after, then it really hurts the game for newer players.
Don’t try this “zen of numbers” stuff with me! That said, I would agree that a GR140 is an abstract level of difficulty if everything else was scaled relative to that: all characters, all builds, all items, all gems, etc. which would essentially be a just a renormalization of numbers.
For example, if all player damage and monster life decreased by a factor of 10, it wouldn’t make an impact. But if you do such a “stat squish” except leave in some exceptions (e.g. gem levels), then that creates a problem.