Basic attacks philosophy
"+300% [x ] "
Core skills
“Every 5 seconds, +80%[x ] damage at cost of your HP”
My rend with starless sky does 30M barely hits 40M per tick damage.
My flay damage hits 200M per tick.
Whats behind this philosophy? whats the point of core skills which costs resources and an extra skillbar slot.
I actually think they are trying to cater the game to be more console friendly and it’s much easier mechanically to play the basic only skills when on controller. As in literally just move and hit X to attack.
I do agree with the sentiment the overall game play feels lacking once we only design around basic and generator builds.
that 300% costs 25 resource per cast? why to skip that. it basically makes basic skills core/spenders.
IMO new uniques sound exciting and I like them.
Just as you skipped the part that basic attacks already has 10 times more power than core skill without those changes.
Basic attacks generates like 40 fury, why do you care if it costs 25 resource?
As a controller player Ive played mostly no basic skill builds. It makes no difference in difficulty.
What’s happening is they are switching up the META. Basic skills are in for now but they’ll be gone again in a season or 2.
My Iron Maelstrom does 100k damage per hit. Dealing 20k Bleed per tick. ON A 40 SECOND COOLDOWN. Where’s the balance in all this??
none of sorc or necro skills generate 25 resource per cast, fat from that, at least on single target. that would require like 100% more resource generation to achieve which is not that easy. or combination of resource reduction. it’s not as simple as free 300% damage for free.
for barbarian - well another reason to nerf that class. 
Core skills should be at least same power as the strongest basic attack. So the only advantage would be extra skillslot.
That sword is cash money, making it a spender also allows SO many sorc secondaries to trigger. Its a big W for item design. does it fix things? no but its a step in a fun direction, finally.
Anything slightly different to what D3 did and you people are down to your knees.
The D3 concept of skills where basic=bad, secondary=good is trash.
Basic skill cost nothing and have (on sorc at least) multiple augmentations, good multipliers, ect.
Core skills cost mana, do not scale as well (behavioral aspecs like ice shards’ piercing cold lose damage at the benefit of a behavioral change, ie multitarget)
Idk, shouldnt the cost skill hit harder? Makes sense to be rewarded for careful play on a high damage, low sustain spec, for example.
The only things wonky with controller play are mobility skills and some ground based skills like Necro curses or sorc blizzard, but you can spam cast those things easily with any boost to your rss generation.
I think of the wonky movement skills as the price you pay for more precise mobility with the thumb stick. You get to the point where you use evade a lot less because you can simply avoid things all together or just take a few small steps and stay in range of melee attacks.
If you learn to use the target lock effectively placing those ground skills is much easier, but it’s one more action to manage and also can get wonky with its target selection on a pile of minions. You try to target the elite but for some reason it wants to always choose the extra health minion with 3 trillion HP.
I am not sure. If the core skill offers more aoe damage than the basic it should be okay to hit weaker. If the core skill doesn’t have the aoe it should hit harder.
Thats fair, but i think the need to manage sustain also warrents an innate damage increase. Otherwise what is the reason, just make all skill basic.
I’ll go even further and say a skill is a skill no matter where it sits in the skill tree, period. It can be (potentially) be made to be the strongest as long as it serves a specific purpose/utility so it won’t trivialise other skills.
This would be ideal for sure, but sadly we got 1 class with build diversity atm and even half of there skills suck.
by weaker you mean 10% or 400% gap between them?
Depends on the aoe size. A full screen aoe would be weaker than a 30° cone. I would think using a liner scale based on area covered. If single target is 10,000 and full screen is 4,000 per enemy then a cone would be like 7000 per enemy.
Double Swing vs Flay what % you think is right between them?
Flay would need higher initial damage and balance damage with DS on the bleed. This is due to the larger tornado area that double swing can have.