You'll have a lot of work giving each Crusader Set a 'different purpose'.
Right now, they are all useless. LoN Bomb outperforms them in any game mode (Speed rifts, GR speed, GR push, Group, Ubers, Keys)
I don't even see how Invoker or Roland could have different purposes as they are both relatively clunky. Which would make them more a GR push set instead of something speedy. But on the other hand, Seeker and Akkhan aren't that mobile either...
I would really like you guys to take a look into this thread. Some suggestions each giving the 4 crusader sets a kind of purpose..
Thanks Brandy :)!
E: Oh and if you guys did not notice, the crusader community is starving for something like this chronicle blog. Literally about the whole crusader class :D :P
I have that thread bookmarked. ;) No wonder it was purple in my browser.
We're definitely going to try to hit a bunch of different topics. LoN Bomb and the challenges with it might be an interesting discussion. I'll toss that one in the suggestion pile for future blog options.
We do want to close the gap where we're able. But some sets and play styles are naturally going to better at certain activities than others.
I think that's great, so long as there's still choice. Like how I could still play Sunwuko's in greater rifts despite raiment being superior. Sunwuko's isn't optimal, but it's viable. Same goes for jade vs helltooth.
I also think it's more acceptable to have large differences between sets for activities such as bounties and normal rifts than it is for GRs. When you're a bit slower on a normal rift you just have to spend a little more time on it. When you're a bit slower on a greater rift you get nothing. And GRs are really the end goal of Diablo, so I think players care a lot more about their ability to do those than they do about their deaths breaths/keystones per hour.
I think that's great, so long as there's still choice. Like how I could still play Sunwuko's in greater rifts despite raiment being superior. Sunwuko's isn't optimal, but it's viable. Same goes for jade vs helltooth.
Situations like these are what we're aiming for. It's just that not everyone agrees that this is an "acceptable" level of balance. :) It's hard to make everyone happy when everyone's definition of "viable" is different.
Aside from this, it’s unrealistic to expect that all 24 class sets (plus Legacy of Nightmare and its boundless combinations) are going to be balanced 100% equally across the board.
This is true, but it also sounds like the equivalent of letting the good be the enemy of the great. Since there will always be a best set we shouldn't even try?
I think it would be sufficient that to just get to a point where set wasn't the best predictor of leaderboard position. What I mean by that is that something like paragon level, quality of gear, or gem levels would be a larger contributor.
To get there we don't need all the sets to reach the same GR. We just need maybe 5 GR difference (aka still more than double the DPS). Then almost everyone could pick the set they wanted. If you wanted to push greater rifts with a set that isn't the best you could make up for it in other ways. As it is now the differences between sets are so big no amount of paragon or anything else will make whirlwind compete with raekor's or leapquake.
For a good example of this kind of balance just consider monk last season. Yes ulianas was the best, but if you look on the leaderboards people still got pretty high up there with innas/raiment generator and with sunwukos. If you wanted to play those other playstyles you could still be relevant and not feel like you're totally wasting your time. This isn't an impossible goal by any means.
This is true, but it also sounds like the equivalent of letting the good be the enemy of the great. Since there will always be a best set we shouldn't even try?
That's definitely putting words into our mouth. It's more about stating clear and realistic goals. It's true that we aren't aiming for 100% parity across all sets. What we are aiming for each set to have a purpose that, most importantly, feels fun and has a place in the game. That purpose may be a different area of the game.
We do want to close the gap where we're able. But some sets and play styles are naturally going to better at certain activities than others.
Nevalistis
I have that thread bookmarked. ;) No wonder it was purple in my browser.
We're definitely going to try to hit a bunch of different topics. LoN Bomb and the challenges with it might be an interesting discussion. I'll toss that one in the suggestion pile for future blog options.
Nevalistis
Situations like these are what we're aiming for. It's just that not everyone agrees that this is an "acceptable" level of balance. :) It's hard to make everyone happy when everyone's definition of "viable" is different.
Nevalistis
That's definitely putting words into our mouth. It's more about stating clear and realistic goals. It's true that we aren't aiming for 100% parity across all sets. What we are aiming for each set to have a purpose that, most importantly, feels fun and has a place in the game. That purpose may be a different area of the game.
We do want to close the gap where we're able. But some sets and play styles are naturally going to better at certain activities than others.