POE2 Spells are WAAAAY too superior compared to attack.

"

iHiems#0168 wrote:

I don't understand. What attack skill are you taking for reference to say that + level to skill on gear isn't something someone playing attack cares about?

It's just math. The base damage for spells comes from the skill gems. The base damage from attacks comes from the weapon (usually the physical damage). Increasing skill gems, does not increase the base damage for the attack. Going from level 19 Lighting spear to level 25 increases the percent of the base damage the attack deals (327% to 438%)

https://poe2db.tw/us/Lightning_Spear

That damage is then increased further by all your additive and multiplicative damage increases. If the base damage is crap, the amount you get from the percent increase will also be crap. You want the highest base damage you can get FIRST, then if you have room, you go for other stuff.

https://www.poe2wiki.net/wiki/Modifier#Local_and_global_modifiers

"

#% increased Physical Damage:
This local modifier directly modifies the weapon's base physical damage.

https://www.poe2wiki.net/wiki/Attack

"

The base damage, attack speed and critical hit chance of an attack are determined using your weapon's stats unless a skill says otherwise.

Another way to think of it: A endgame caster can use Voltaic Staff as long as it has +6-7 skills levels and other stats. Nothing about their dps will change. But there is no combination of affixes that will ever make an Oak Greathammer viable at endgame.


TLDR: In order to get the same increase in attacks, that you get with +spell levels, you have to increase the weapons base physical damage.

idk man, did play spells all the time and it was ... okay, then after switching to attacks (bows and crossbows) -> it's SO much more comfortable to play and also stronger with less effort for gear (talking endgame here, not campaign)

so, i strongly disagree to the title

This is almost entirely a resultant playstyle perspective and people can have a very different opinion based on what "level" or how far into the endgame they've gone with either specific archetype.

As for leveling in the campaign you don't need "triple phys prefixes" on weapons lol. And even then, you can do just fine in early maps without having that "ultra GG" weapon. You just have to adjust your build for it. I mean, it's not going to hurt to have that triple-phys weapon, but it's certainly not necessary - there's plenty of tools in the toolbox for you to make it work. It just involves being a bit more creative and knowing where "good enough" lies to use it as an interim weapon. Usually that means you're using a weapon that's suitable for your character's level, and it has almost any combination of acceptably-tired attack prefixes.

It does have implications for how you manage the damage though, and it DOES take some reading and good decision-making to properly adjust, but that's basically the premise of this game.

It creates a scenario where you are more likely to need to use different support gems or jewels or tree nodes in the interim until you find your "desired" weapon prefixes for the end-game version of any build you have planned. But this is absolutely not holding back attacks vs spells - you just need to have the capability to be flexible in how you manage the damage you've been given.

When using spells, it's a bit more intuitive because your damage source is static - it's from the skill itself. You don't need to have any flexibility about whether your spell is going to be doing phys, fire, cold, or some combination, or to what magnitude, past choosing what spell you are using.

This makes it really straightforward for people using spells who are "following a build" because it reduces variability in the areas that are related to decision-making such as "what points to I put in the tree?" and "what support gem should I use?" and "what does a good wand/staff even look like?".

Both archetypes while leveling are still sensitive to the quality of drops, but when the damage source and type is static (spells), following a pre-ordained sequence of skill points and support gems is less likely to require adjustment because it does not need to respond to changes in damage type variability, and as long as your points/supports make sense, you'll be doing "good enough" damage for the campaign.

It also makes it a more forgiving skill choice for new players who are following a build. If they are new and not following a guide - they are still active in decision-making of "what points/supports do I use?" process - so they will be less likely to feel like they are suffering from bad weapon RNG if they choose to go the martial weapon route.

Someone accustomed to approaching leveling with a static damage source (ie. spell-centric) perspective - maybe perhaps they've always planned their spell builds, or followed one - will feel that leveling up as a martial weapon character is much more reliant on having good luck with weapon drops. But the truth is it's really just a different approach to managing resources in the game.

By the time you're in endgame, you'll definitely want those "required" affixes, but spell casters will need them as well, so it levels out.

A discussion about whether using spell skills vs attack skill is better for clearing or confronting game content at the top-level, in endgame, feels like way too general of a statement to make because of all the variability in game content, gear, and player capability. There's probably not one "correct" answer.

"

darrenrob82#3531 wrote:

"

Exilion99#5481 wrote:

Needing +5 gem Staffs are as easy to get +5 on Quarterstaffs, in which, +5 gem for spells are significantly better than for attack.

It's the second hardest suffix to roll. I'm not sure what you mean by easy?
It's less than 3% to get ANY two handed +skill levels. Getting +5-6 melee is 0.2% (+7 is 0.08%).

As easy as a Perfect Essence. Both Sorcery and Battle give the same value, and Perfect Essence have unlimited rolls anyway.

Obviously +6/7 are hard, for both.

"

Exilion99#5481 wrote:

As easy as a Perfect Essence. Both Sorcery and Battle give the same value, and Perfect Essence have unlimited rolls anyway.

Obviously +6/7 are hard, for both.

I understand. I wouldn't consider using perfect essence easy. If it was greater essence, I would agree but perfect is a crap shoot. But in a trade league, if you're rich sure.