They kind of are now, but you still get weird choices across our specs, imho. Take, for example, row 1 for SV: One ability is damage on a spender and the other two are focus generators.
In general, I don’t think talents should add abilities but instead should only modify the things you already have. If there are talents that add an extra button to your bar, those things should be on the same row, and the choice should come down to what quality of damage you want to do.
For example, something like this:
- Row 1: Modify openers (Viper’s, Terms [no focus component, remove minimum range], Tip of the Spear)
- Row 2: Modify AoE (row unchanged)
- Row 3: Modify Survivability (Chelonian Crest without duration buff, Natural Mending, Camo)
- Row 4: Add Ability - Utility (Steel Trap, Crows [instead does damage in an area and lowers chance to hit, kinda like the BM PvP talent that literally nobody uses, but now has PvE utility to help mitigate damage to tanks, for example], Caltrops - slow+bleed)
- Row 5: Modify Mobility (Trailblazer, Posthaste [if not baseline], Narrow Escape)
- Row 6: Add Ability - Damage (Chakrams, Flanking Strike [should be a spender], Some kind of thrust/impale - melee range, primary target takes X damage, enemies in a 10yd line take % damage, but all get a bleed.)
- Row 7: Modify Primary Attack (WildFire Infusion, Bloodseeker + Alpha but no additional charges, Mongoose but it instead stacks haste - not damage [the mongoose is known for speed and reflexes, not pumping. I guess they could change the name to Honey Badger Bite if damage was the theme])
Additional thoughts: I think binding shot should be baseline. KC should have two charges baseline. Rows 3 and 5 should be identical across the three specs, though the positions could be swapped? This is a very rough “what if” and doesn’t include the necessary adjustments to durations and damage some of these changes would require.
Such would deny options between control and button-efficiency.
Given this…
…I’d have thought you would find those options fairly essential.
Wouldn’t you be better off asking for the gap in control to be reduced a bit, if anything, if you feel uncomfortable taking a button-adding talent that you wouldn’t otherwise feel obliged to take? In turn, perhaps said button-adding talents could see greater power or applicability as to finally be worth taking…
I don’t think I’m following your meaning of control.
Look at what the button-adding talents are typically situated against.
Chakrams provides more focus-target value, is entirely consistent, and has no DoT component, rather than potentially being forced to adjust with one’s upcoming version of Infusion; Flanking Strike is entirely on-demand, not varied by proceeding Kill Command casts, unlike its competitors in TotS (directly affected) and MB (indirectly affected). They both offer a bit more immediate burst and/or control compared to ability-augmenting talents.
I would suggest that you can get that value out of existing abilities.
Yet your proposed talent grid obliges that two new buttons be taken, where previously one could avoid adding any further buttons.
To be clear, I don’t think your proposed grid is any worse, apart from that obligation, than our current trees, but I just also don’t remotely see the need for this “more formulaic” approach, either.
More diversity in gameplay, perhaps, or more applicability from the individual talents, wherever they may be swapped to, etc., would seem laudable goals, but restructuring them just to make the competing choices ultimately more alike… I just don’t see the net benefit.
As rendered here, yes. Was that not the point of your arranging them “formulaically”, giving them shared affordances, though by differing means?
I see what you’re saying. I didn’t fully consider this:
That would be an easy enough thing to change, though, and still keep rows themed.