So what are Blizzard’s current idea about GR clear potential for players with high paragon and great gear whose top clear includes fishing for a good rift? This is a rhetorical question as you and I already know the answer to this question.
The current iteration of crusaders are +9 GRs above their target in non-season.
I know reading is hard, but do try and read the entirety of my post. There’s a lot of good words in there. A little short on numbers, I know, but snuggle up with a blanket and some ocean sounds and you’ll get through it A-okay.
I read your post in its entirety. You stated that historically Blizzard nerfs for 2 reasons. I simply asked if for crusaders, if their current GR clears exceed Blizzard’s posted expectation for GR clears?
I do not want to discuss barbarians with you. I want to focus on a more obvious outlier.
Here ya go.
https://prodimage.images-bn.com/pimages/9781501164767_p2_v3_s550x406.jpg
There’s some colored pencils in the side drawer.
Maybe it’s close by to the Always-Online Police, you should have meetings together!
You could spam Blizzard vids with timestamps for information amongst yourselves all day!
Oh, the joy you all could have 
Funny though how the Offline Croud argue and argue for it even after getting an swer.
Do you argue and refuse to pay when petrol goes up , do you demand the shop owner not sell that last item to the other guy so you dont miss out . Just be adult and accept reality and these discussions can stop
Do you know that the game producer last month also posted on their game balance philosophy? It contradicts what you have posted in this thread.
Just get over your weird obession with arbitrary numbers rofl. They want to tune builds areound 141. Your favourite build is clearing 145? 150? Then a nerf is probably coming and you should prepare for it.
If you want your class to stand out and and enjoy being OP then tough luck, there are other classes out there that will be far less fun to play as a result of your shiny new toy being too strong. This is not a hard concept to grasp, so get on with it.
Whether they choose to balance around 140, 145, 100, or 150 is of little interest to me. But seeing as they hardcapped GRs at 150 it would be stupid to allow solo clears to reach it because then we would have groups clearing it a lot faster than they already are.
The same kind of people who struggle to clear 140 with a DH, and clear max 143 with a WD. Barb should not get a special treatment over those classes. And neither should crusader, or monk for that matter.
The devs have said that they literally aim for 141 at 10k paragon. Do you think they aim for “141 ez” ? No, they aim at 141 for skilled players and excellent gear, and resources and the time and dedication to fish […]. Which, as you just said, barb can do at 146, so a bit above their target. Nobody here is saying to bring barb to max 135 with the same gear & paragon. The goal of this thread is to make it so that barb’s max potential level is ~141 ±2 grift levels.
Do you think using rend manually to proc AD is a good mechanic ? I mean, it’s supposed to be a whirlwind build at its core, from what I see on streams, it looks a bit clunky to stop WW to use rend and start again. Imo, one of the proposed nerf (ambo’s pride to reduce rend duration only on WW-applied rends) would indeed nerf the high end build by reducing its AD potential while keeping its lower end power relatively untouched.
Although, to be honest, considering how much XP barb botters can make, and since it seems we are not getting a ban wave any time soon (at least in NS), I wouldn’t mind just reducing the overall the damage of the build (150% → 75% on the belt for example).
I wouldn’t be so sure about that. I’d like to give it a try but can’t be bothered to augment my WW set with 150s.
And make it more fun and enjoyable for some other players. I’m sorry, but I don’t enjoy AoV pushing build on crusader, and I don’t enjoy WW on barb, but I don’t see the point in playing another build if I can’t get at least somewhat close to the top leaderboard. If every top spot on the leaderboard is taken up by a not-nerfed build “because it’s more fun not to nerf” at gr145-150 while other sets (leap quake, roland crusader for example) were correctly buffed to their 140 target, then they might as well not exist for me.
I still remember back in season 6 (or rather, era 6), everybody was playing Hammerdin crusader. Everybody ? Not exactly. There was one (1) guy in the top 100 (including EU, NA and Asia btw, so that’s 300 players) able to keep up with hammerdin and who cleared a top10 (6th place EU iirc) with Roland sweep attack. You see, Hammerdin was stronger (although, maybe not ? I’m not that great of a player, if Rxt had played sweep attack back then, maybe he would have cleared higher than with hammerdin) but Roland wasn’t that far behind and could be used to be on the first page of the LB. Same happened recently in S15, everybody played Invoker crusader, except me with a solid 125 clear as roland (rank 11 EU).
I enjoyed being able to compete with slightly stronger sets but being able to clear higher by fishing more, min maxing more, and maybe a little bit of skill ?
But right now, there is no way in hell a build balanced around 140 max push will ever touch AoV crusader, a build capable of clearing 150 in less than 12 minutes.
Hence why I would like to see this build nerf.
And same goes, to a lesser extent, with WW barb.
One class is always going to be stronger. That’s not a problem when we’re talking a few tiers, and the easiest way to fix that is – you guessed it – ask for weaker sets/builds/classes to be buffed.
You do not need to ask for nerfs to accomplish what you want.
It’s like you read what I wrote, almost got it, then failed to get it at all.
Fun Police, this is going to come as a shock, but y’all ain’t the developers. Sit down and cool it. Stop asking for nerfs.
Oh boy. Here we go.
Yes, I think it’s a great mechanic. It forces you to coordinate/synch to CoE cycles, be attentive to grouping, and be strategic when and where you decide to hard-cast. It allows access to Area Damage, but it forces manual access to it, which requires strategic decision making.
Whirlwind deals 0 damage. That skill is only there to apply Rends via Ambo’s, heal/generate Fury, and for mobility. It is radically different from the old Zodiac WW build even if it looks almost identical.
I really wish folk who didn’t truly understand a build refrained from proposing “fixes.” The use of hard-cast Rends and AD are huge contributors to the build’s damage output. Not 1 or 2 GRs.
You’re welcome to think stopping to Rend is “clunky,” but the build requires (and has always required) a start-and-stop platy style to make use of Rage Flip, one of the true MVP skills in the build. Adding in a few hard-cast Rends over the course of a rift is not a big deal, and anyone complaining about it is longing for a mythical version of the build that never existed in optimal form.
No, I’m sure. You could say that knowing stuff about WW and Rend is sort of my thing. Head over to the Barb forum and you’ll see what I mean.
You have 7k Paragon, so I’m confident you can crack 130-140 if you put in the time and Augs.
How exactly does that work? No one can provide a concrete answer because there isn’t a concrete answer.
Know how to fix that? Ready?
ASK FOR BUFFS.
NO THANKS, WE GOOD.
I previously linked this article that might be a useful read. Confirmation bias affects all of us, including myself. I have posted recently a few times that online only will reduce piracy (true) and that piracy will reduce Blizzard’s earning (maybe not as true as I had thought). The latter part of that statements seems true and obvious but it may be more complex as a recent EU study showed.
The reason I bring up confirmation bias relates to some simple observations. Typically, one will ignore facts that do not support their view and then will gravitate to emotional arguments.
Also, your motivation to author the barb buff proposal provides a concrete answer to your question about why class imbalance makes the game less fun for some.
You and I differ in “only buff, never nerf” versus “use both nerfs and buffs”. Neither opinion is right or wrong but a matter of preference. I do not like to eat liver and onions, some people do.
I have looked at the era data using other metrics that look broadly at the leaderboard including low paragon players and also “GR efficiency”. You claim that GR efficiency is a valid metric as it considers ~7000 data points total across 7 classes. These metrics also show the power of crusaders and barbarians. This information has been linked/provided to you, but you do not acknowledge it.
The reason that I mention this is it is another hallmark of confirmation bias/motivated reasoning.
The game producer has stated their balance formula and it has been quoted and linked in this thread. This includes nerfs to overperfming class(es) such as crusaders. So…
I would say that there is a recognition that nerfs for 2 classes in particular (with the highest probability for crusaders) is coming. The first post in this thread asked for suggestions if they do decide to nerf & buff.
As you know, I never advocated for the complete removal of the rend damage modifier for lamentation. I proposed lamentation to be buffed with a NEW rend damage modifier of 100% that did not exist in patch 2.6.6.
I will ask for buffs that brings my preferred build in line with their goal of ~141 gr (with great gear and extreme paragon). I will also ask for nerfs on builds that far exceeds that goal to bring the down to roughly 141 (not to the ground). One does not have to exclude the other.
It’s not my thread. It is -literally- the goal of the thread. Having the devs listen to that feedback or yours doesn’t matter.
As a reminder, first post here:
You know what, I don’t have a care in the world for D4 threads. I don’t go there. I don’t argue with what people want for D4. I have my own opinions on the matter that usually differ from what those thread propose/ask.
You don’t have to come to this thread and argue with people who want nerfs and say “you suck, you don’t know anything, I’m better at barb”. Again, this thread is not meant as way to convince the devs to nerf or not. The goal here is, IF THEY DO NERF, they don’t do a bad job at it. Because eh, while I like what blizzard has done with this game (there is a reason I spent nearly 9000 hours on it after all), I am still not convinced they know their class that well, balance wise.
That’s fair. So you would say, if the build was to be nerfed because the devs decided so, you would prefer to lower everything at once by nerfing (for example) the belt, rather than nerfing AD. Note that you can have a third opinion, but as of right now, I haven’t seen any worthwhile. I don’t consider “don’t nerf the belt, instead nerf the 4p set by the same amount” as a very different way to nerf the build. In the end, you decrease the overall multiplier of the set. A different way to nerf the build would be… Well, that’s a bad idea but it would be a nerf: remove the plough to swordshare rune (the healing rune, not 100% sure of the name) of battle cry, that would nerf the build’s healing potential WW and pretty much force you into using bloodfunnel to survive higher greater rifts.
I know how the build works. I am sorry, but at some point, saying “it’s not a WW build” is just not true. The build is 100% a WW build. If you don’t WW, you die, if you don’t WW, you don’t do damage. If you don’t have the ambo’s pride WW-applied rends, you don’t do damage. It is meant to be played as a WW build. It just happens that the damage comes from rend.
Aren’t you one of the guys who said that patator’s 140 clear on the PTR was an outlier, and that it would be its absolute max potential, and that on live it wouldn’t clear above 140 maybe 141 ? Can you really say that you truly understand a build when clearly, you couldn’t see its potential on the ptr when I, a guy who player 1 hour with it on the ptr, saw and said it would clear at least 145 on live ?
If I can slap on augments and spend a couple hours learning the build and clear a 140, that means the build is too strong, because someone who is truly dedicated (we are still talking about 10k paragons here) will do way higher than 140 then.
Ok, so I’ll just say it again. In this thread, we talk about nerfs. There is another thread where you can ask about buffs.
I just want to reiterate: I don’t want the high end competition to be about who can clear 150 the fastest. And if we just keep on buffing to whatever is the strongest, we will eventually run into that exact issue.
I will ask for buffs the day they remove the gr150 max level. Until then, I’ll be happier with asking for builds balanced around 140ish as a soft-maximum.
I said it in this exact thread, as a high ranker, you always had 2 choices until recently - clear the same level but faster, or clear a higher level but without worrying about the time. If you balance build around 150 and can’t open 151 well, you don’t have much of a choice any more.
The devs can choose whatever they prefer. My “asking for nerf” mentality is really no better than your “asking for buff” mentality. We can agree to disagree, and I would totally be OK with giving some feedback on how to buff crusader in your “get everything to 150” thread, if you were also OK to give some feedback on how to nerf barb in this “get everything to 140” thread.
I remember very well how you “super awesome duper barb” advertised the clearly inferior WW support barb build for rat runs. I went on your thread, gave some feedback as to why charge barb is superior in every way, and you just dismissed it while saying that “clearly, no, you don’t need charge”. Like dude, I came on your thread as both a zBarb and necro DD player, telling you “ok, as a necro DD, when I play with zWW barbs, I feel they sometime are too slow, but never have any issue with charge barb, and I feel the exact same way playing barb”. Your answer: “no, WW will never struggle following a rat group, you don’t need more speed”. HOW can you answer that ? It clearly can, because I just told you I have this issue ??? If at least you gave some downside to normal charge barb, the answer would make sense but just didn’t!
In the end, I let it slide, and I just stopped playing with WW barb players. The end. Who gets shafted in this scenario ? Well, mostly the barbs who could have played with me but decided to follow your build guide, and end up with a worse group, or no group at all.
To the people calling for nerfs and balance that believe the game will be better or only be fun if perfectly balanced…How the hell are you still around?? We’ve had anything but balance in this game. We are coming up on 8 yrs this year, if you’ve made it this far you must have had fun playing the game (an imbalanced game) or you never played the game and are just a forum troll.
Do you think if Diablo 3 had perfect balance all the players who left would come back? Would this game all of the sudden become more fun? It’s just some unrealistic idea that people have and believe that the game will somehow be more enjoyable if the 10k paragon players are all within a rift or two for all classes? If you are a 10k player maybe this means something to you but I kinda doubt it.
The only legit argument I’ve seen for balance in the game that could result in more enjoyment/fun is mixing up the speed/endgame metas. Obviously, if your class is in the meta it’s more fun for you and you don’t have to make a class just to run the meta. Rotating classes in and out of the meta should be a thing and I believe that kind of balance would bring more fun and enjoyment to the game.
Making all classes (at 10k paragon) clear a certain GR or be within a tier or two sounds nice, but does it really bring more enjoyment to the game? I’m pretty sure if there was rotation in and out of the meta for all the classes, no one would really care what the solo clears are for each class. You compete against your class so whatever that GR limit is…it’s the same for everyone playing that class. If you aren’t competing, does balance even matter?
There will always be the fastest spec for speeds, the best group comp for speeds, and the best comp for endgame meta. Getting all classes to approximately the same GR does not necessarily mean inclusion in those groups.
I’m not saying they shouldn’t try to balance…but it’s been almost 8yrs and if you are still playing the game…how can you say balance at the top matters? Does balance at the top really matter? I’d be much happier if each class had a spec that was comparable for solo speed runs and if the metas were mixed up season to season. That would bring a lot more fun to the game then making all the 10k paragon players balanced around a certain GR level.
The only balance that can bring more enjoyment to the game is mixing up the meta for speeds and endgame and giving each class a comparable spec for solo speed runs.
I have no problem with blizzard tuning down specs, but at the same time I’m not going to go around asking for nerfs. For example, if Sader gets nerfed it literally does not affect my enjoyment of the game at all, but those who play sader could get less enjoyment, especially, if they swing the hammer too hard. Buffs to classes and specs that perform poorly…heck yeah ask for buffs. Buffs bring enjoyment, nerfs do not.
You are bringing 4p meta into the picture here. I will play whatever is meta in groups, and usually the build I like the most among the meta builds (which can be a build qi don’t really enjoy) or the build that is needed the most by my group.
I would like to have a choice in playing what I like period when playing solo. At least. It’s the only mode where there is no peer pressure to get you to play something meta. Well, unless you are trying to do some ranking on classes whose builds 1te not well balanced.
I would like for builds that are “off meta” to be “close enough” so that if I am a better roland player than aov crusader, my clears with roland are higher. Higher, not faster.
You also talk about making players come back or whatever. I think the ship has sailed on that one. Making players come back by over buffing builds is not the way to go. “Come we have cookies” -> they come, eat the cookies and leave. Might as well not come. But that’s my opinion, we can agree to disagree on that one.
So sick and tired of these nerf threads, you guys dont even understand what it takes to do these GR150s. It took me 2800 keys to clear 150 in 8:40 on crusader this season and you guys want to nerf it for what because 10k paragon players can clear a 150 in non season. Time to get your heads out of the sand.
New dev team bro. They seem to be doing some stuff.
You already have that choice. Everyone has that choice. Now if you are talking for competitive reasons you might play another class solo over the one you prefer that’s still your choice. Paragons are achieved through group so what you play solo doesn’t interfere with being competitive. What I’m saying is if you are in it for the competition, you aren’t playing solo.
No I agree with you. I’m just suggesting neither will having perfect balance bring back players.
I think a lot of players especially the competitive ones feel this way, I do as well. They will play whatever role needed. But there are a lot of players that want to play their main class and want to play that class in the metas. I’m not saying one way or the other is right, but there seems to be a great number of people that would be happier if they could play their main in groups 
Most anyone playing still has adapted to what we’ve been given. We play the roles even if we would to prefer to play our main character. A lot of people though would like to play their main character at least once in a while.
I play all the characters except for Necro. It has never bothered me ever when Wiz or Dh or Sader or Necro, or whatever class it was that was OP. You either played that class or one of the roles in meta. It is what it is. Balancing all the classes isn’t going to change much. You aren’t going to get more enjoyment from the game.
I just don’t get why everyone is up in arms about the Sader, I could care less. It does not affect me in any way except for the fact the I’d play one in the meta now, which hasn’t been possible for many seasons.
Ok great. Will them balancing the game at the top end make the game more enjoyable to you?
Yes. That is exactly how any game should be balanced.