Why Are We Getting Mid-League Build Nerfs After Being Told We Wouldn't?

I don't usually make feedback posts, but this situation deserves one.

The issue is not whether Flicker Strike is strong or weak. The real issue is consistency and trust.

Before this league, we were told that builds would not be nerfed in the middle of a league. Many players took that statement seriously. We invested our time, currency, and progression into characters based on the systems that were introduced in 0.5.

Now, only a few days into the league, we're being told that Flicker Strike will be changed because players found a way to reach 100% charge consumption reduction through interactions that were created by the new patch itself.

If 100% uptime on Flicker Strike was never intended, why were players given the tools to achieve it in the first place? This interaction did not come from an exploit or a bug discovered years later. It came directly from the item and Ascendancy changes introduced by GGG.

Even more frustrating is the reasoning provided:

"We are planning on limiting the amount of charge consumption reduction you can get on Flicker Strike so that it can't be 100%. Currently the ability to be effectively immune to damage due to moving makes this powerful enough that we need to cap it."

As someone who has played the build extensively, this description does not match reality.

Flicker Strike is not "effectively immune to damage." It is a melee skill that constantly throws the player directly into danger. You cannot fully control your positioning, making it especially vulnerable to large AoE attacks, dangerous ground effects, and many endgame boss mechanics. In fact, Flicker Strike has consistently been one of the most dangerous and death-prone playstyles I've played.

The build is fun because it is chaotic and unique, not because it makes players immortal.

Whether the build deserves balance adjustments in the future is a separate discussion. The bigger concern is changing a build after players have already committed significant resources to it, despite previous statements suggesting that league-start investments would be safe from mid-league nerfs.

If GGG wants players to trust future balance decisions, they need to be consistent with the expectations they set themselves. Right now, this change sends the opposite message.