Legendary Gem Revision... 2.6.7?

General Discussion
61

Let me make sure I’m clear on what you’re suggesting… which I think is that each bleeding enemy also inflicts that damage onto all enemies within 10 yards?

I’d have to think a little about the actual damage numbers involved to figure out whether that would produce a reasonable result (i.e. neither too weak nor too powerful).

My major concern would be that it would create some significant server problems… it would be kind of like AD, but with a 100% proc rate, so a bigger problem. For builds which use PE and fight in major density, like WW (actually, I guess all builds that use PE fight in high density), I think you would experience some serious lag.

63

Yes sir, that’s exactly what I’m saying.

If I could help you there, I would, but I have poor Bo staff skills, mean poor math skills.[quote=“Rage-13139, post:61, topic:1479”]
My major concern would be that it would create some significant server problems… it would be kind of like AD, but with a 100% proc rate, so a bigger problem. For builds which use PE and fight in major density, like WW (actually, I guess all builds that use PE fight in high density), I think you would experience some serious lag.
[/quote]

I’m not sure about lag. I’ve never noticed major lag when using IK 6pc / Waste 4pc Rend. You can have the entire screen Bleeding for 15 seconds and again no major lag.

64

aside from the effects, i would like to see a general quality of life change so that gems and effects have around a base 10 second duration, rather than ultra short ones like many do now.
to me, forcing extremely fast movement to make these gems work, seems like a design flaw from an era where APM was considered the only way to measure skill. (instead of you know, paying attention to the screen)

65

You are basically suggesting to give everyone access to everything. If there would have been 15 offensive legendary gems that are useful and “mandatory” to every build, you would have suggested to give everyone 15+ gem slots.

Your suggestion implies that players no longer had to make meaningful choices, which to be honest is not really good game design in my opinion. Instead of opening up the amount of slots available to every player to such an extend, a better alternative is to bring the various legendary gems on par with each other, including the defensive gems.

That can be done by buffing some of the gems, nerfing others and slightly redesigning other gems, so that they are more or less at the same powerlevel.

I can see that adding more gems slots can allow for more customization, but more than 5 slots are not really necessary. Giving everyone access to everything is a fairly bland approach…

1 Like
66

Same here… 10+ legendary gems are way too much. But I guess 6 slots might be okay, if you cannot stack 6 dps gems… and regarding implementation - how about a different idea:

Offensive gems > will be socketed into jewelry, no change.
Defensive gems > could be moved to chest armor sockets

This would be way easier to do than moving gems to the cube…

1 Like
67

Right, but when you Rend enemy “A”, he takes damage from Rend. Just that one guy.

This would be like that guy, and all 25 enemies around him, all taking damage from that instance of Rend-- the one stuck to guy “A”… and most or all of those 25 guys would also be dealing out damage in the same way, so the game would have 25 * 25 (or 625) separate instances of damage to keep track of. In and of itself, that might be ok, but when you throw it on top of calculations for AD, Bloodshed, etc, I think you might run into some serious problems. This sort of stuff definitely causes lag. Just watch Wroboss’s Whirlwind Lag video on YouTube, then imagine the problem being twice as bad.

1 Like
68

I’m generally of the mind that some gems have needed help, yes, but also still want to see a tertiary affix added at level 50 that could potentially help to this end.

I’m also going to be selfish and link to an ancient thread I made forever ago about completely new gem ideas. Some may not have aged well, but it was something I did for funsies.

Diablo 3 Forums

69

I gotcha now, that could definitely pose a problem. :frowning:

1 Like
70

4x Rend doesn’t deal meaningful damage, and Rend doesn’t proc AD or crits. WW, however, does, so changing PE could have major implications for builds such as Zodiac WW, Firebat WD, etc. Remember, we’re not approaching this from a Barb-centric standpoint. We’re trying to devise buffs to gems that benefit as many classes as possible. Not ever class will be 100% satisfied with each and every suggestion, but we should, I think, try to make as many gems as possible better for as many classes as possible.

1 Like
71

Some gems just really need some better numbers to make them at least not meme tier.

Simplicity Strength

Generator skills tend to have really low multipliers, so i think in order to fix the problems with this gem all they need to do is just add bigger numbers, overall i think this gem its pretty easy to fix because only generator based builds use it (and tbh most generator builds are in bad state outside of carnevil), so i think changing 0.5 % damage per rank to something like 2% damage per rank would be a nice idea (maybe carnevil needs a sightly nerf to compensate for this buff, but i’m not sure i know nothing about of WDs).

Pain Enhancer

This gem has the problem that is mostly used for the attack speed buff instead of the damage, so i think a way to solve the DPS problem of this gem is again add way better numbers to this gem. changing the 50% damage to 500 % per rank probably would make this gem a decent option in some LON builds.

Mirinae

The problem with this gem is that the base damage is holy, so only crusader and monks can really benefit from this gem, the other problem is that the overall proc rate is just too low.
My ideas to fix mirinae are :
Increase the damage per rank from 60% to 150%
Change the smite proc from 15% to 40%
Level 25 bonus should be smite 3 nearby enemies every second and heal you 5% hp per enemy.
With this change this gem will probably be a solid option for single target builds (ya, i’m thinking in non thorns frenzy barb when i post this) , because you will keep doing decent damage other targets and will improve healing a bit.

72

Boon of the Hoarder and Gem of Ease do not have a place in neither speed GR’s or GR pushing, so they can be excluded from this list.

LoD is only mandatory for non set builds and imo that gem should be able to be socketed everywhere (helms, jewelry, weapon, chest, pants, off-hand) to free up one more gem slot for LoD builds.

Esoteric is really useful, but not against physical damage, so I guess you can say that it is kinda situational. Furthermore, the problem is not necessarily Esoteric itself, but also that other defensive gems just suck.

Zei’s requires some setup to work properly…

… and that leaves us with only two gems that in my personal opinion are really problematic because they are just so powerful that I would consider them mandatory: Bane of the Powerful and Bane of the Stricken - and this is what I would do about them:

================================

BotS: I know, you can say that BotS is also situational because it only works against guardians, but its effect is so powerful that it can not be ignored. What I would do to address this is actually not nerfing the gem itself, but rather nerfing rift guardian.

What I mean by that is to lower rift guardians health via diminishing returns, starting at a certain GR level, whether that diminishing returns starts to kick in at GR80, 90, 100, 110 or whatever, but it should be to such a degree that BotS no longer is mandatory.

Eventually the numbers on the gem can be adjusted as well in addition to that change in rift guardians life.

BotT: I already posted this idea in this thread, but maybe it is goot to mention it here again. The problem with BotT is that its effect can be easily triggered by most build and classes (basically all melee classes, all Demon Hunters and all Classes that use cold damage), so it is basically a straight forward damage increase with a huge number behind it (compared to other gems).

My suggestion would be to make BotT more situational and let it work like the Necromancer’s ring Krysbin’s Sentence…

_*~https://us.diablo3.com/en/item/krysbins-sentence-P6_Unique_Ring_03~*_

… which would only require a slight redesign, primarily of the level 25 bonus.

Bane of the Trapped

  • Increases your damage against slowed enemies by x% + y% per level
  • Level 25 Bonus : triples the damage bonus against enemies under hard CC effects (stun, freeze, fear, charm etc)

Let’s say its current damage gets reduced by 2/3 against slowed enemies and it can only deal its full damage against enemies that are under a hard CC. That would make the power of this gem more situational and overall less useful for many builds or they had to include some hard CC skill like Ground Stomp or Frost Nova into the build to get more situational use out of it.

================================

If these two gems would be addressed, a large part of the problem would be resolved imo.

73

I’m not against it, so don’t get me wrong. But this change would make LoN rings obsolete - they would need to add something to the rings then, so that they still have a reason to exist. Unless they rework LoN rings into something different.

74

I don’t think that this would be the worst thing that could happen to the game. There are plenty of obsolete items in the game already and being able to socket LoD into all socket slots just has some overall advantages for LoD builds, so I don’t see that making LoN obsolete is a good reason not to do it.

75

I really didn’t want to get into this conversation. But, I thought the point of changing anything in the game was to try to obtain some balance, so there were no obsolete items. (Or as close as possible).

76

I guess you could say that in the end it boils down to having the choice between two evils and then choosing the lesser one.

Allowing LoD to be socketed into other slots besides jewelry gives LoD builds one more legendary gem slot (something they could need, because they already have the drawback of having to equip LoD in the first place just to play non-6piece set builds - something that should be baseline), but it makes LoN obsolete.

Not allowing LoD to be socketed into other slots besides jewelry may keep LoN an option (which I honestly doubt it will btw), but it reduces customization options for LoD builds, while they are already having the drawback of having to equip LoD first to play builds that otherwise should be viable, but aren’t because they are not buffed by a 6 piece set.

You see, doing it and not doing it both has drawbacks. In the end you have to choose which one to sacrifice. Pick one. You can’t have both.

77

Feel like we’re starting to stray a bit from the path. There is very little likelihood that Blizzard will introduce new mechanical systems in the game (letting you socket leg gems into anything other than jewelry, for example), so rather than focus on wishful thinking, it might be better for us to focus on A) how to improve gems that under-perform, and B) how to do it in a way that benefits the most amount of classes.

I suggest the following as a baseline for discussion about gem revisions:

  1. Most likely: Buffs to existing affixes on gems
  2. Likely: Small mechanical alterations or adjustments to existing affixes
  3. Less Likely: New affixes to replace old/outdated affixes on existing gems
  4. Improbable: New legendary gems

Further, as Jako pointed out, every gem has a distinct purpose and role–a 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 aren’t really driving the discussion forward. For example, suggesting entirely new affixes for PE isn’t 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) isn’t as productive as keeping PE’s focus on bleeds, physical damage, and attack speed.

Thoughts?

78

Let’s talk about our defensive gem options, since those are both underused, and we have a pretty clear goal line in terms of buffing them (parity with Esoteric).

Let’s start by going with “List 1” principles, and only revise numbers upward, without revising any mechanics.

Molten Wildebeest’s Gizzard – This gem just needs larger numbers to be competitive. Right now it caps out at 160k LPS / 320k HP shield. In order to compete with Esoteric, I think it probably needs to provide a) enough healing to refill your life globe within 2-3 seconds, and b) a shield that approaches 100% of the value of an average life pool (maybe around 800k?)

If we aim for a rank 150 healing number of 300-400k life per second, I think this gem would be in a good place. If the “base” healing amount was increased from 10k to 50k, and the healing amount per level was increased from 1k to 2k, at rank 150 you’d have 350k life per second, and a shield of 700k. I think that’s pretty reasonable.

Mutilation Guard– The secondary for this gem is bad, but if we’re playing by List 1 rules, we have to just leave it as is. The primary ability is quite good. If the melee damage reduction capped out at 80%, as compared to the 60% reduction you get with Esoteric, I think you’d have a pretty good defensive option.

You could make this change by increasing the “base” percentage from 10% to 30%, increasing the max rank of the gem from 100 to 140, or some combination (increase base value to 20%, max rank to 120).

Moratorium– This one is tough, though luckily we have a lot of different numbers we can alter. Just off the top of my head, I think you could increase the “staggered damage taken” amount from 35% to 75%, and also increase the base duration from 3 seconds to 5. The upgrade amount could increase from .1 seconds to .2, and the % chance to clear staggered damage could go up from 20% to 50%.

Collectively, these changes would give you something like 75% mitigation, as long as you’re killing enemies quickly and frequently. In GR pushing circumstances, where you might not be killing quite so often, it would likely be somewhere between 50% and 75% mitigation, depending on the particular build.

Invigorating Gemstone– The secondary for this gem is pretty good, it’s the primary ability that’s terrible. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I think that 400% increased healing at rank 150 is not unreasonable.

To get there, you could increase the base bonus from 1% per stack to 2.5% per stack, and the upgrade bonus from .02% to .25%. While increasing your healing by this amount seems like a lot, you of course have to actually get the healing from other items or skills, which means those item or skill slots aren’t allocated to damage dealing stats/abilities. And keep in mind that Esoteric effectively more than doubles the effectiveness of your healing already.

That’s my two cents on how to change these gems, if mechanical alteration is off the table.

3 Likes
79

SO many great suggestions, but I think we should look even bigger picture here.

Legendary gems are integral in numerous ways, but they are a bit boring once you unlock that level 25 ability.

My proposal along with several of the changes listed above would be to have 4 tiers for each gem, that unlock at 25-50-75-100. My preference would be to have the first two tiers be more utility focused, while the last two years buff the damage of the gem/theme. The initial abilities should stay the same imo or receive buffs to make them compotent.

My biggest but unrealistic dream would be to have the gems affect augments in some form. Maybe once we get that level 100 unlocked, we gain the level 0 base ability on our gear?

80

I’m with you in principle, as getting gems to rank 25 was once a major accomplishment, and is now laughably easy (though, I think one extra ability would be enough). But, my gut tells me that Blizz probably won’t make a change quite that drastic. You never know, though!

1 Like
81

But there are already a few gems that can be socketed into slots that are not jewelry, namely Gem of Ease (weapon) and Red Soulstone Shard (helm), so that isn’t a new mechanic or wishful thinking.

What about nerfs?
In order to achieve balance, nerfs are sometimes necessary.

As I said in one of my earlier posts, Stricken and Trapped are the ones that are the most problematic, that could use some adjustments in one way or another…

They are working on new sets for each class and new legendaries, balance changes, gameplay adjustments etc, so I don’t think it is too much to make suggestions that revolve around reworking affixes on existing legendary gems.

1 Like