Descent Chest Feedback

You could consider replacing the starting provisions with an Alluring/Curious pair. If not in Descent, perhaps in the new Season 4 race type, or in Season 5's Descent sequel.

Rather than having things like a Dual Strike + Cleave starting chest, you could split up each class's 2 strongest options, making for an interesting choice.

"

unsane wrote:

You could consider replacing the starting provisions with an Alluring/Curious pair. If not in Descent, perhaps in the new Season 4 race type, or in Season 5's Descent sequel.

Rather than having things like a Dual Strike + Cleave starting chest, you could split up each class's 2 strongest options, making for an interesting choice.

The first part sounds fine. The second part is exactly what made descent such a competitive disaster in the first place- each classes most efficient gems (and certain other items) need to be readily available for everyone, or the race results all come down to drop luck.

"

KoTao wrote:

Rather than having things like a Dual Strike + Cleave starting chest, you could split up each class's 2 strongest options, making for an interesting choice.

each classes most efficient gems (and certain other items) need to be readily available for everyone, or the race results all come down to drop luck.[/quote]I don't think giving every class access to all the same gems is real balance. If the problem is that Cleave is OP, the answer isn't to give everyone access to Cleave; it's to balance Cleave alternatives so that each have their pros and cons, then give exclusive access to certain classes, making the classes feel more different than just their starting position on the passive tree.

For example: No class should get Dual Strike and Cleave. One dual-wielding class gets Dual Strike; the other gets Cleave. This would force the Cleave class to make due with a less-than-optimal single-target; the Dual Striker would get some decent AoE skill, and eventual access to Melee Splash, which would make them very strong after level 18 if they could figure out how to get there.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

If the problem is that Cleave is OP, the answer isn't to give everyone access to Cleave; it's to balance Cleave alternatives so that each have their pros and cons, then give exclusive access to certain classes, making the classes feel more different than just their starting position on the passive tree.

An alternative could be to remove gem drops in Descent. It would not make the classes more balanced, but it would remove the luck factor involved in gem drops.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I don't think giving every class access to all the same gems is real balance. If the problem is that Cleave is OP, the answer isn't to give everyone access to Cleave; it's to balance Cleave alternatives so that each have their pros and cons, then give exclusive access to certain classes, making the classes feel more different than just their starting position on the passive tree.

For example: No class should get Dual Strike and Cleave. One dual-wielding class gets Dual Strike; the other gets Cleave. This would force the Cleave class to make due with a less-than-optimal single-target; the Dual Striker would get some decent AoE skill, and eventual access to Melee Splash, which would make them very strong after level 18 if they could figure out how to get there.

This doesnt work because it just becomes a matter of lucky gem drops ruling the leaderboard again. Any situation where an early drop-only gem can double~triple your killspeed is going to result in disaster, from a competitive standpoint anyway.

Cleave needs to be put in line with other melee gems until dual wielding becomes viable outside of skills designed to break it.

Youve misquoted me in your previous post, btw.

"

Hassefar60 wrote:

An alternative could be to remove gems drops in Descent. It would not make the classes more balanced, but it would remove the luck factor involved in gem drops.

It seems like their original intention was to force a few narrow specs on each class to make them distinct from eachother and to keep playstyles segregated, but if so, leaving drop only gems available was a pretty big oversight.

"

KoTao wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I don't think giving every class access to all the same gems is real balance. If the problem is that Cleave is OP, the answer isn't to give everyone access to Cleave; it's to balance Cleave alternatives so that each have their pros and cons, then give exclusive access to certain classes, making the classes feel more different than just their starting position on the passive tree.

For example: No class should get Dual Strike and Cleave. One dual-wielding class gets Dual Strike; the other gets Cleave. This would force the Cleave class to make due with a less-than-optimal single-target; the Dual Striker would get some decent AoE skill, and eventual access to Melee Splash, which would make them very strong after level 18 if they could figure out how to get there.

This doesnt work because it just becomes a matter of lucky gem drops ruling the leaderboard again.

Time and time again the same names make the top. Luck has very little to do with it. What you're proposing is like asking poker to remove the straight flush from the game, for "balance reasons."

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Time and time again the same names make the top. Luck has very little to do with it. What you're proposing is like asking poker to remove the straight flush from the game, for "balance reasons."

Im only talking about descent. The standard races are fine, as most of the major luck factors can be mitigated with a 2 minute mule at the start, vendors and zone resets.

Most (or perhaps all) of the top finishers in descent ran a ton of races and accordingly got a few where everything lined up. Luck has everything to do with getting a huge blue:white ratio or finding ice nova / cleave / roa in the first or second zone, and those are the things that need to be addressed.

Something that is absolutely necessary in my opinion is that Rangers need an Iron ring or quiver in their first chest. I tried both, Duelist and Ranger several times in the 24h descent any my results with ranger would vary by alot depending on wether or not I get a quiver in one of the first two zones (or an iron ring). It makes such a huge difference, without either a quiver or iron ring you only have like 7 dps or something pathetic like that, whereas a quiver and iron ring easily double your dps, allowing you to own everything and keep pace with duelists.

It makes ranger really rng dependant early on, you get an iron ring or quiver, you save a good 3-4 minutes in the first two zones and can destroy massier, if you don't get either you are pretty fucked and sometimes even have to skip him which subsequently makes you miss out on a lot of loot.

Just make it fair, make the quicksilver chest also drop a quiver and/or an iron ring and there would be alot less RNG for rangers.

I mean duelists start off with two one handed weapons but rangers only get the worst bow in the game and not the second part of their "weapon set"? What's the logic behind that. Not only do rangers start off with the worst AOE of any class (split arrow) their early game is entirely dependant on wether or not you get an iron ring or a quiver in the first two zones.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Time and time again the same names make the top. Luck has very little to do with it. What you're proposing is like asking poker to remove the straight flush from the game, for "balance reasons."

I never found ice nova. Guess how many descent witch races I won/season leader board runs I made. Yeah... Exactly. Considering that's where the rewards lie... its frustrating as hell relying on the RNG.

Theres enough good racers running, even for witches, that are capable of winning with high end drops that the odds of one of them getting said drops in each race is high enough that not getting them, ever, makes it impossible to actually compete.