I believe it was a sarcasm by Dragonmaster but what do I know?
I donāt think that even that is the core issue here.
I would say that poor balance and not too good design of some of the gems is more problematic.
Some gems are just completely underpowered while some are just to good (aka BotT) or to mandatory (BotS) to not using them.
In my opinion BotT is the gem with the worst design (not in a vacuum, but in the context of how the game currently is). Basically all melee builds and Demon Hunters (and cold focused casters) can trigger Trapped easily, which then provides a huge straight forward damage bonus, which is why that gem is used in almost every build.
If the gem would work like the Necromancer ring Krysbinās Sentence (with different numbers of course and the triple damage against stunned/frozen/feared/rooted/etc enemies as its lvl25 effect), the whole issue would be resolved because the gem would be more situational.
_~https://us.diablo3.com/en/item/krysbins-sentence-P6_Unique_Ring_03~_
I sure would like to be able to use 4 or 5 gems, but in the end that will also only lead to a similar situation that we have right now where some gems are just at the top, while others are useless. So without re-balancing and redesigning some of the gems, even an increased number os available gem slots will not fix the issue.
Iām liking the ideas people are offering regarding this gem. It might be helpful to think of a revised Invigorating Gemstone as being built on the model of Gogok, which I think most of us agree is both one of the most useful and most interesting gems. For the small amount of time Iāve used IG, Iāve never thought the stacking mechanic was one of the main problems with it. So, what if the gem was written as:
On each successful attack, increases your resource cost reduction by 2.5% and your healing from all sources by 2.5% for 5 seconds, stacking up to 10 times.
Upgrading increases healing bonus per stack by 0.25%
Rank 25 bonus: Become immune to crowd control.
This would give you, at rank 25, while at 10 stacks: 25% RCR, Immunity to CC, and 87.5% increased healing. This healing would scale up as you level the gem, to 400% increased healing at rank 150.
While that seems like a lot of healing, I think thatās what it takes to really compete with Esoteric, which is an incredibly good gem.
I could possibly imagine Blizz adding a single additional slot to the cube where you could utilize the power of an extra legendary gem, but I have a hard time imagining them adding a dozen additional slots.
2 Likes
One of the problems with the stacking mechanic on this gem might not be obvious on the first glance: the psychological effect of not benefiting from its full benefit the whole time, aka first having to attack several times to stack it to get the maximum effect.
They had a similar issue in WoW regarding Rested XP when the game was still in beta, where players hated the idea that you would get less experience after you played for 2 hours or so, because they felt like something was taken away from them. Later the dev team changed it so that instead of getting less XP after you played X hours, you were now getting more XP for X hours when you rested for a while, while also reducing the overall amount of XP you get.
It was basically exactly the same, just with tweeked wording of the effect and now players love it, because they feel that instead of having taken something away from them, they are being rewarded for something.
I feel it is similar with this gem.
1 Like
It was, still poor blood āelementā 
As for BiS, there will always be a BiS gems pretty much regardless of what it done to them. The element gems could be an āalternativeā depending on the utility and if they were a higher multiplier over some of the āall damageā gemsā¦ Mainly when you look at the T2 list, those do have some use or another but the T3 gems just really are plain garbage and basically outclassed by another gem. Some modifications to bring these T3 gems up to at least the niche level and have some uses is needed.
Canāt make it 30% because itād not work well for 2h weapons etc.
Eeerm, sure, if itās only 4-5ā¦ But Iām talking 8+ legendary gem slots (While not every would be able to obtain the max 11 slots with GR 150, GR 105 isnāt that hard to do now, and GR 90 for 7 gems is just a matter of getting all needed pieces).
Overall, there areā¦
4 non-situational gems that can be considered a damage increase no matter what for EVERY single build in the game (Powerful, Stricken, Gogok, and Toxin)
2 gems that are situational damage increase, but cover a TON of builds (Zeis, Trapped)
7 gems that are only used in specific builds (Chip, Enforcer, Taeguk, Simplicity, Iceblink, Pain Enhancer, and the upcoming LoD)
5 purely defensive gems (Estoric, Guard, Gizzard, Invigorating, Moratorium)
3 utility/speed gems (Wreath, Boon, Ease)
And finally, 2 near-useless gems (Soulshard, Teardrop).
Now, talking the 4 man meta, there would be a list of BiS gems, but ONLY 2 would be mandatory for the entire group - Gogok, and Stricken.
Powerful, Trapped, and Zeiās would be mandatory for the 2 damage dealers, but useless for the zDPS.
You would need Iceblink and Toxin, likely on the zDPS, but thatās only 1 each.
With the current balance, LoD would be mandatory for the two DPS, but not so much for the zDPS.
Finally, DPS would want Taeguk/Enforcer/Chip/Simplicity depending on the build - As far as I know, youād have at max Enforcer and Chip together, Wiz would just use Taeguk.
So this leaves us at 7 slots used up for the Damage dealers (Gogok, Stricken, Powerful, Trapped, Zeiās, LoD, build-specific), and just a mere 4 used up for the zDPS (Gogok, Stricken, Iceblink, Toxin).
This leaves 4 slots for the Damage dealers, and an amazing 7 slots open for the zDPS. We would likely see Wreath on everybody for the speed boost, taking up 1 slot - 3 left for damage dealers, and 6 left for zDPS.
Thatās FAR better variety then what we got now. Sure, Estoric Alteration would likely take up another slot, and maybe even mutilation guard, but for the last one? Gizzard, Invigor, AND Moratorium, while terrible compared to Estoric and Mutilation, arenāt that terrible compared to each other. Heck, you might even figure that youāll level up 5 times in your next GR, and thus taking Soulshard would be a decent alterantive compared to āweakerā defensive options.
And there is SO much more room for design for additional utility/defensive gems.
If Blizz ups/removes the GR cap, well, suddenly we got 13, maybe even 14 gem slots open!
Not to mention that having all those gems available can up the average player at least 5 more GRs, if not signifcantly more.
For solo, yea, more issues there, but think about it - Is the 10% damage buff/toughness buff REALLY worth, say, CC immunity for your build that otherwise lacks it? 20% damage boost from Powerful is ONLY a single GR increase, I donāt think that would be worth 60% less damage from all affixes from guard? If you donāt have CC available to your solo character and you are range, is Trapped that great for you? Zeiās is worthless for most Monk, Barb, and Sader builds. Solo will have an entirely different set of BiS gems for EVERY build, and even in the worst case scenario, somebody who cleared GR 150 in a 4 man meta will have at least 2 gem slots that they can put whatever the hell they feel like in it.
So, yea. As I stated earlier, we canāt trust Blizz, at all, to properly balance gems. Thus, a much, MUCH better alternative is to open up the number of gem slots that players can grab all of their BiS, mandatory-for-this-build gems, and then decide if they want the very, very slight amount of extra push power from the āSolid, but not BiSā gems, or utility/defensive options.
Each Gem should have its own function and purpose.
- Taeguk is the channeling Gem for instance.
- Stricken is the single target damage Gem for instance.
- Gogok is the gem if you need CDR.
- Esoteric is the default Gem if you need defense.
- Simplicity is the Gem for Generator/Primary Skill builds.
- Zeiās is the Gem for long range and distance fighting
- Trapped is the Gem for melee range
ā¦so on and so forth
Most of the Gems I have not listed do not serve a purpose in the current game design. Even if you could use 6 Gems, how realistically is it you would choose to use Mutilation Guard and Invigorating? Be honest. You would take a couple more damage Gems 99% of the time.
So this is definitely a balancing issue imo. No matter how many Gems you can use, the bottom tier Gems just wonāt see action except for very niche situations, if even. Until those Tier 3 Gems find a proper power level they wonāt find a purpose and they wonāt be used.
3 Likes
Bit of a moot point. 2H donāt work at 15% either. You want speed so DW will always be the way to go.
Well said, Jako.
At first I was going to quibble and say that perhaps ādefenseā, as assigned to Esoteric in your list, could be branched out a bit. But in reality, the never-ending quest for more damage generally means that no build will ever take more than 1 defensive gem (and often, 0).
So it really is a question of bringing Invigorating, Gizzard, and Mutilation Guard up to the point where they feel competitive with Esoteric, rather than clearly inferior options.
1 Like
Please note my earlier post. Itās not 6 gems. NOT 6 gems.
In the current meta, it would be 8-11 gems. At 8 gems, yes, you will prioritize damage gems.
However, at 11 gems, there arenāt enough damage gems that can be used by EVERY build, to the point that you can fit in multiple defensive/utility gems.
There is also the possibility of Blizz further increasing the GR cap, which would open up even more gem slots.
At this point, it goes from balancing multiple, numerous gems, to only rebalancing Teardrop, since it then becomes the ONLY gem that offers nothing besides itās measly, mediocre damage pulse.
Solo play will have a bit more limited choices, but again - is a mere 20% damage boost (Powerful) really worth 60% reduced damage from all melee and most affixes?
More damage is not always the best choice. As stated, there would be only 2 gem choices everyone would have (Because they would be good for EVERY single build - Gogok and Stricken), and then some gems that 90% of builds would have (Trapped and/or Zeiās), then gems that are a significant boost to only a few builds (Chip/Enforcer/Taeguk/ect)
Then gems that, while they are a damage increase, may not be enough of a damage increase to warrant trading off the defense/utility increase from other gems (Toxin is only good for itās rank 25 power these days. Powerful is only a single GR boost worth of damage. All of the defensive gems offer a signficantly more powerful boost then both Powerful and Toxin, even Moratorium)
It may be useful to try and come to a consensus about what we, as a community, believe is possible with regards to legendary gems.
With the many new affixes on items and the introduction of the Dreams gem in 2.6.6, itās clear that thereās still work being done on D3. In light of that, I suggest the following as a baseline for discussion about gem revisions:
- Most likely: Buffs to existing affixes on gems
- Likely: Small mechanical alterations or adjustments to existing affixes
- Less Likely: New affixes to replace old/outdated affixes on existing gems
- Improbable: New legendary gems
Further, as Jako pointed out, every gem has a distinct purpose and roleāa unique identity, so to speak. That should be maintained whenever possible.
Using this as a guide post, we can determine productive suggestions from those that arenāt really driving the discussion forward. For example, suggesting entirely new affixes for PE isnāt as beneficial as suggesting ways to buff or slightly alter its existing affixes. By the same token, suggesting that PE drop bleed damage to deal Fire damage (and yes, I realize no one has suggested such a crazy thing) isnāt as productive as keeping PEās focus on bleeds, physical damage, and attack speed.
Thoughts?
I wish to both explain and ensure that people understand the benefits to moving gems to the cube and vastly increasing the number of available gem slots. I feel this would be possible for the D3 devs, and would be a more efficient use of time then attempting to increase the power of gems when the remaining D3 team already seems to have a hard enough time keeping up with mere intra-class balance.
Given the past actions, I feel that it is both incredibly likely that there will be additional, large, 3-9x damage boosts to multiple builds in the future (Wizard and Necros are both nearly 10 GRs above everyone else for solo push, and thatās not counting the many underpreforming builds and even classes who can be as far as 20 GRs behind Wizard and Necro), which would likely result in further buffs for Wizard and Necro.
Considering that GR 150, while not exactly common, is obtainable to dedicated players, and that solo pushes are getting closer to GR 150, I feel that, along with the highly probable incoming ābalanceā buffs, Blizzard will likely raise the GR cap, potentially removing it entirely, which would also cause the current ācapā on gems to be raised as well.
I feel that attempting to buff gems in the current without looking towards the potential future would be folly. A number of gems currently have hard caps - Iceblink, while once a powerful gem when the highest you could get other gems was rank 50, is now an incredibly weak gem even for cold-damage focused build as you can get gems up to 150 now without too much difficulty. Furthermore, should the GR cap increase, the difference between uncapped gems and capped gems would only increase, which would require further changes to balance gems. This doesnāt even take into account potential ābreakpointsā at which gems could potentially go from underpowered to extremely powerful - An extreme example, but if Moratorium could receive enough of a duration boost through pure levels, it would eventually become a more effective defensive gem then Estorics. Similar case with Invigorating Gemstone and Gizzard. Gizzard can be even more of an issue as itās secondary effect scales with itās level as well.
I feel that rather then attempting to balance gems with the current meta, it would be best to instead add a system that allows additional gems to be used, WITH potential growth going forward into D3ās future.
On the topic of consensus, I feel that new legendary gems would not be improbable, considering that blizzard has recently added the LoD gem. It is quite possible that blizzard will add a further Triune gem should the Triune seasonal buff prove popular enough. Itās even possible for additional gems to be added outside of that to fulfill specific, unused niches, such as a LpH gem, overheal gem (Shenās Delight, the gem that never made it), scaling stat gems, ect.
All of which would be folly should Blizzard continue to use the very outdated mechanic of limiting legendary gems to just a mere 3.
This is incredibly unrealistic. Lately, weāve seen new items that include new art assets and new affixes, and weāve seen new affixes amended to existing items.
We have not seen new game modes, new mechanical systems of interactions, or changes to skills or runes. Iām not saying your idea is badāon the contrary, I think itās really cool and creative!ābut itās not realistic given the context of recent D3 development.
Letās please avoid dreaming up whole new mechanics for the game and stick to amending what we currently have. Just my two cents.
2 Likes
You want to go from 3 to 8-11 equipped gems?
Do you know how unrealistic that is?
I was kind of chuckling at the idea of 6. Of course if we could use 11 gems some of the Tier 3 gems would get used. If you could use 11 gems you could use them all lol.
Oh man.
Now I remember why I hate theory crafting on these forums. Too many people want to go for the grand slam instead of hitting higher percentage single and at least scoring a couple of runs.
3 Likes
Considering the recent blog post from Nev, this sounds right to me. I think we should eventually produce another set of āList 1ā and āList 2ā changes for gems.
1 Like
What if we add to PE Secondary (take from Rends: Bloodbath page): Critical hits causes bleeding and all enemies within 10 yards of easch other as Physical over 5 seconds.
This could allow for better Bleed damage and adds a different play style focused better grouping Skills to be used.
Well, DH, I think the issue with PE, Toxin, Wreath, and Mirinae is that flat damage numbers like that just arenāt especially damaging , when you compare them with some skill that might have 2 or 3 different 5x bonuses from legendaries, and then another 40x - 100x set multiplier thrown on top.
Well, Rage, I think that IK, CoE, F&F, PEā¦ could make this change to PE an improvement. Not to mention that having a mob of 20 Bleeding on each other is a multiplier in and of itself. It would make PE better than it is now in itās current state.
Wouldnāt you agree?
Iām against another powercreep, but what if the currently almost useless leg gems could be socketed dunno like in a belt or boots socket slot? They provide not enough to call it actual powercreep but they still can be used somehow.