Aura Reservation and Reduced Mana Support Gem Change

"

b15h09 wrote:

"

torturo wrote:

-they allow powerful solo builds, something developers want to slaughter, they want you in a party

Have they said that? Because they chose a god awful genre to build a game in, if so. Seriously, let me count the ways I can interact with a party.

Auras
Body blocking

Did I miss any?

Qarl said Rory want's aura's to be more party viable is what I heard idk about destroying solo, they are fixing the line of site issue, and are thinking of up'ing the radius...personally I hate parties, I can do 2 lvl 78 maps in the time it takes a party to do 1! lol

Not to mention most people in a party annoy me. Was in a party the other day on my 88 summoner...I had the wand, boots, all 20 quality gems, 11 zombies, 4 spectres, 5 link spectres, zombies 4 linked in a +2 minion helm with lvl 3 empower, had all the proper offense supports in place, running hatred and haste on generosity, and even a offensive curse...and I had someone demanding me to be kicked for poor dps, which was BS! And then the leader kept going on and on throughout the whole map about someone solo'ing his map, but I didn't see anyone away from the group....after one map he said he was remaking the party, never got the invite...not that I wanted back in anyways, worst group ever! So just no...I like solo, fuck people! lol

"

EAKZOI wrote:

rory said that the opportunity cost of the golems are pretty 'low'.

The opportunity costs are the stat points necessary to make them survive longer than 4 seconds and the time spent respawning damage sponges that don't kill anything you're not already killing.

Too bad it doesn't take stat points to make Auras or curses worth using, neh? 400% increased damage and 50% increased attack speed stats into my Ground Slam, but none necessary for my Hatred.

"

If you don't want people stacking so many auras (which is pretty apparent based on the changes to aura reservation you keep making) why not just limit maximum simultaneous auras per character to 2 or 3

I was all for a hard cap like minions and curses get.

Too simple and clean I guess.

yes very true

Biggest disappointment I've seen from Grinding Gear Games.

You're fixing something that is not broken

GGG if you want us not to play POE just say so.

further more i concur and qoute @papas88063

"So you decided to make a super rare gem that takes forever to level replace reduced mana and this was done because some character don't have access to reduced mana. yet a higher tier gem is its replacement, Okay. Also now you say it will also help with reducing socket pressure for players, yet people who play at a high level end game will still need to use that socket for enlighten, makes sense.

This change makes me feel like I am going to be forced to play EB if i want to run 2 heralds and 1 aura (100% mana reserved there).

I understand why things might be needed to change, but you we have to have healthier options to replace the ones you are removing. Beta testing needed and will give more input then."

LAUGHED OUT LOUD

"

man_ga wrote:

I never understood the stigma behind auras. They make a good addition to any build

This is exactly the problem. Every build uses them. A build is gimp if it doesn't use two.

"

-they allow powerful solo builds, something developers want to slaughter, they want you in a party

Well, if this is true, i think they should increase the party bonuses to make Party Play more attractive, and not screw the Solo Play to force the player to play in parties.

If you're a developer, you want to increase the game content, and give players MORE options, not less. And don't limit players to do what you want to do.

Removing options from players is a really bad design. Gamers play games because of 3 factors:

1. Competence

2. Autonomy <<

3. Relatedness

(This video explains it better https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyUC_28HIvA)


The second factor is the most present on the Path of Exile game (And it's the reason that I LOVE THIS GAME). And preventing the player from solo the whole game with a build that HE created is a REALLY, REALLY bad design on THIS specific case.

I'm not asking to stack 25 auras on my toon and get FULL DEF FULL OFFENSE, but the current state of the auras are at least 'OK' imo.

If there's something to be balanced, that is their opportunity cost, and a little tweak in their mechanics. And that's all.
The reduced mana gem doesn't need to be mandatory anymore, and this is a good thing. But again, the way they're doing it, it's a little bit illogic and i think a lot of people agree with me in that point.

Why they want to reduce mana reservation for auras with yet another gem ? Why Enlighten now ? It is a waste of socket. It will be better if they just fix mana reservation cost for all auras and they give us more free space for active skills. GGG wants to remove "POE - one button smashing game" stigma, but they are making one step back.

"

SevenKnives wrote:

Why they want to reduce mana reservation for auras with yet another gem ? Why Enlighten now ? It is a waste of socket. It will be better if they just fix mana reservation cost for all auras and they give us more free space for active skills. GGG wants to remove "POE - one button smashing game" stigma, but they are making one step back.

Maybe just to piss off anyone that successfully corrupted gear specifically to run auras on. Who know? The official stance makes no sense, though.

I feel like GGG are waging balancing war with the 1% most wealthy players. These changes are going to do little to impact those with insane wealth, but it will make the weaker players who don't play as often truly struggle. I feel like this is a step in the wrong direction.

"

FUZZB0X wrote:

I feel like GGG are waging balancing war with the 1% most wealthy players. These changes are going to do little to impact those with insane wealth, but it will make the weaker players who don't play as often truly struggle. I feel like this is a step in the wrong direction.

From a developers stance its not "a step in the wrong direction" because this change will lead to players showing more interest in the trade game due to the fact that their character is weaker, while doing so they will get addicted.

"

vangrandson wrote:

"

FUZZB0X wrote:

I feel like GGG are waging balancing war with the 1% most wealthy players. These changes are going to do little to impact those with insane wealth, but it will make the weaker players who don't play as often truly struggle. I feel like this is a step in the wrong direction.

From a developers stance its not "a step in the wrong direction" because this change will lead to players showing more interest in the trade game due to the fact that their character is weaker, while doing so they will get addicted.

I dunno man. I've never found anything addicting about the current trade game. It's actually the number one reason I get burned out on this game and drop it for months at a time. It definitely seems a step in the wrong direction (unless that trade system is right around the corner), but I may be a minority.