Necros and sustain
1 2
All that giving siphons an ICD would do is break them. Either they will never be strong enough to help sustain against more than one target, or they get balanced for that and one opponent will never be able to break through. It’s the same issue we have with Death Shroud: an amount suitable for defense against 3 opponents would be immensely overbearing for one, and an amount balanced for one opponent is just a speed bump against three.
I don’t think we actually disagree that much when it comes to siphons, or at least we seem to agree on the nature of the problem. Consider your own example where a 1v1 involving a necro turns into a 2v2. The fact is you could replace the necro in that example with any other class and the problem would be exactly the same – except you don’t hear other classes going “boo, my Cleansing Wave/Shadow’s Rejuvenation/Virtue of Resolve/Whatever is not enough to deal with incoming damage from multiple sources, give me higher numbers!” They simply make do with the healing they have and accept that it may be inadequate under the circumstances. That’s how raw healing works for all classes, and necromancers do not deserve preferential treatment. Rather, the simple truth is that, as a mechanic, healing based on finite numbers just isn’t meant to counteract damage from multiple sources, for precisely the same reasons you described above – it’s impossible to balance properly for that purpose without breaking it in 1v1 fights, and vice versa.
The answer is you need to compartmentalize your problems. When we’re talking about damage from multiple sources, we need different tools. The reason why other classes survive 1vX situations and we generally don’t isn’t because they have access to healing, but because they have access to something else, namely percentage-based mechanics. Dodges, blocks, invulnerabilities – you name it, they have it. Where the vampiric traits are 1) based on finite numbers and 2) proc on outgoing attacks, these are mechanics that are 1) based on a percentage and 2) proc on incoming attacks. And that’s the answer you’re looking for. You may think you want life siphoning to scale for incoming damage, but you don’t. It’s the wrong thing to ask for and won’t solve the 1vX problem without creating other problems, as we already seem to agree on. What you really want is better access to percentage-based mechanics. And given that that’s the case, I have only one thing to say to you:
Welcome to the club!
It is simply a non-issue that ICD-based siphons won’t scale with the number of opponents, it’s just not the job of life stealing to compensate for such circumstances to begin with. So we’re offloading that concern – and rightly so – to a different set of mechanics that does a better job and can be properly balanced for the purpose. Incidentally, as far as life stealing goes, the place where your analysis (and Andele’s for that matter) is right on the money is … drumroll … signet of vampirism. Here is a siphoning mechanic that is 1) based on finite numbers and 2) procs on incoming damage. An ICD is utterly useless under those circumstances. You would literally have no choice but to, as you put it, pick whatever you feel is the ideal average and just roll with it. And wouldn’t you know it, a.net went with an ICD instead. Go figure.
One last thing. Before you go off on the “a.net has already said we’re not getting x/y/z” tangent, yes that’s true. Some of the most common percentage-based solutions out there are off limits to us (such as vigor and blocking). It’s also true that we don’t have the mobility of other classes, and we’re not getting that either (specifically non-targeted gap closers). But we are by no means out of options. Protection is a boon we already have access to, and we should have more of it. Increased access to stability would help an awful lot with the mobility issue as well. And I don’t know who came up with it, but endurance stealing is a brilliant idea that fits the overall design philosophy of the class to a tee, and it deserves to be promoted fiercely! This is just to name a few by the way, there are plenty of other ideas buried in the depths of this forum that should make their way onto a.net’s table, and it’s our job to make sure they pay attention. Some are admittedly better than others, but there are several quality suggestions out there that would make our life easier in 1vX situations. And as for the vampiric traits – they do have a place in the attrition puzzle, it’s just not the place you think.
TL;DR: Use the right tool for the right job.
Here’s the thing, though: we don’t have defenses that scale beyond one opponent. So, in order to survive focus-fire, we need something else that scales. Siphons are the most obvious answer because, as they currently work, they automatically do that. The issue is that they don’t do anything close to “enough,” even in a 1v1 situation (so scaling doesn’t even enter the picture).
Every profession that builds for survivability should get it and should be able to survive multiple opponents for a bit. On every profession, this is true, except necro, simply because we lack any active defense that scales.
So, since we don’t get active defense, we need some other survivability method that does scale. Replenishing health more rapidly when faced with multiple opponents fulfills that purpose. Scaling it down for 1v1 is simple because it is impossible to siphon health from enemies that aren’t present. You don’t need to give values that would be relevant against multiple foes to siphons as-is because if there aren’t multiple foes, that relevant extra healing simply isn’t there. That issue would be introduced by giving siphons an ICD, because it currently doesn’t exist.
By asking for ICD’s on siphons, you are asking for necros to have zero methods for scaling survivability unless ANet gives us things they have specifically and repeatedly said they will not do instead of buffing tools we already have that would work if they didn’t simply suck.
Are there other possibilities? Perhaps, but that requires getting brand new tools instead of making the ones we already have function properly. ANet has already admitted that siphons suck (although admittedly, that was before the debacle of shifting numbers from Bloodthirst to base values and giving them “scaling”).
The issues with necros not having an answer to sustaining against multiple opponents is not going to go away. Adding ICD’s to a possible option will do less than nothing to help us in that regard.
I see literally no advantage whatsoever in ICD’s on siphons. They negate the ability to scale with opponents, they give the safer weapons the same reward as the riskier weapons, and they don’t reward the necro, the class that is the practitioner of Aggression magic, for being aggressive. ICD’s on siphons, no matter the resultant values, would run completely counter to what necros need and should be.
(edited by Drarnor Kunoram.5180)
Here’s the thing, though: we don’t have… siphon siphon icd talk…
Look dude, just ignore ManaCraft, he has shown that he has no prior mmo experience and that he does not understand the issue at hand.
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
Here’s the thing, though: we don’t have… siphon siphon icd talk…
Look dude, just ignore ManaCraft, he has shown that he has no prior mmo experience and that he does not understand the issue at hand.
You are the one that needs to be ignored. Who cares how many years of MMO experience you have. Seriously. Who? You are not a developer and neither of us are either. The amount of years you wasted on WoW raiding and being hardcore does not make your arguments anymore valid than anyone elses. PERIOD.
Back to the topic, ICD on siphons for sure is a bad idea IMO. Simply due to risk/reward. Dagger/Axe most definitely need to have an advantage in siphoning over staff/scepter. Furthermore, the scaling in 1vX situations is where we need most help. Finally, siphons need to scale well with healing power. Lets make this stat useful.
Look dude, just ignore ManaCraft, he has shown that he has no prior mmo experience and that he does not understand the issue at hand.
People with prior MMO experience were the ones who made the game. It doesn’t mean kitten all that you played a few other games.
I respect Bhawb’s and ManaCraft’s reasoned discussions and have had civil debates with them in other threads. However, I have to agree with Drarnor 100% on this issue; ICDs on siphons would not help our situation for all the very cogent reasons he’s (she’s?) already given.
I’ve made multiple arguments along the same lines in numerous threads over the past nearly 2 years of playing exclusively a siphoning blood necro. No point repeating them because (1) Drarnor already covered it all and (2) I’ve grown cynical that ArenaNet will ever improve siphoning in any appreciable way. I applaud those who still argue in defense of our lack of defense, though.
Based on my experience to date with over 4,000 hours put into a siphoner I can promise you the nightmare scenario of the OP blood necro processing life stealing to the point of de facto invulnerability is a myth; even if siphoning were scaled up beyond it’s current base in one form or another (direct increase to current numbers, scaling with number of opponents, etc.). There already exist sufficient limiters, gates, and inherent weaknesses of the profession (long cool downs, poor mobility, vulnerability to CC, lack of boons, etc.) for that ever to happen.
I’m not going to expound on it as I’ve already written a book’s worth of posts on the subject in other threads (and I’m tired of beating a dead horse when ArenaNet is obviously not listening). Besides, Drarnor stated it best right here and here.
TL;DR: Our siphoning sucks because it doesn’t.
So many souls, so little time. ~ Kraag Deadsoul
(edited by Kraag Deadsoul.2789)
I’m a dude last I checked :p
I’m a dude last I checked :p
One never knows on the interwebz; safe not to assume. Now I know for future discussions.
So many souls, so little time. ~ Kraag Deadsoul
Here’s the thing, though: we don’t have… siphon siphon icd talk…
Look dude, just ignore ManaCraft, he has shown that he has no prior mmo experience and that he does not understand the issue at hand.
You are the one that needs to be ignored. Who cares how many years of MMO experience you have. Seriously. Who? You are not a developer and neither of us are either. The amount of years you wasted on WoW raiding and being hardcore does not make your arguments anymore valid than anyone elses.
People with prior MMO experience were the ones who made the game. It doesn’t mean kitten all that you played a few other games.
Actually, no, experience and knowledge of a topic does in fact make ANYONE WHO HAS IT, their arguments valid, unlike ones made without it.
Allowing people which have no knowledge or investment in a topic to talk and have a opinion without lashing back at them when saying stupid things is why the US is in such a massive debt, its why the freaking kitten party was allowed to survive the first world war and its why slavery among many other kitten things in human history happened (and thats just taking non religious examples).
And as shown on the topic and with how this game was developed, both a lot of the devs and a nice bit of the playerbase has no such knowledge nor such experience of it.
Thus why we are at this problem of necro siphons being sub par even to regeneration effects, despite its trade of reliability.
For example D&D, Magic and Yugioh all have (had… its going whack now with kittenty people leading their design teams) all nice formulas for base power and allowed variations from it.
For example a spell which triggers a aoe explosion, but requires melee range, should by default have one of the following; cooldown, damage, aoe radius, secondary effects, use time pre rest; higher than one able to be cast from range.
OR all such skills are by default melee, with the option to gem/skill upgrade/perk it to a ranged spell, thus having to sacrifice potential cooldown, damage, radius, secondary effects or usage count for it.
That is called resource balance (or for magic power ratio/for YGO levels) which when combined with set regulations which dictate the resource usage which allows appropriate deviation (aka mana curve/level scale) allow for different but gameplay balanced fights (aka you can have colors/different archtypes).
If you thus have any suggestion for life siphoning which wasnt previously stated, feel free to mention them, but be warned since the bloody harsh fist of science will slash idiocy like “internal cooldowns on offensive sustain are a good thing” into smithereens.
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
Here’s the thing, though: we don’t have… siphon siphon icd talk…
Look dude, just ignore ManaCraft, he has shown that he has no prior mmo experience and that he does not understand the issue at hand.
You are the one that needs to be ignored. Who cares how many years of MMO experience you have. Seriously. Who? You are not a developer and neither of us are either. The amount of years you wasted on WoW raiding and being hardcore does not make your arguments anymore valid than anyone elses.
People with prior MMO experience were the ones who made the game. It doesn’t mean kitten all that you played a few other games.
Actually, no, experience and knowledge of a topic does in fact make ANYONE WHO HAS IT, their arguments valid, unlike ones made without it.
Allowing people which have no knowledge or investment in a topic to talk and have a opinion without lashing back at them when saying stupid things is why the US is in such a massive debt, its why the freaking kitten party was allowed to survive the first world war and its why slavery among many other kitten things in human history happened (and thats just taking non religious examples).
And as shown on the topic and with how this game was developed, both a lot of the devs and a nice bit of the playerbase has no such knowledge nor such experience of it.
Thus why we are at this problem of necro siphons being sub par even to regeneration effects, despite its trade of reliability.
For example D&D, Magic and Yugioh all have (had… its going whack now with kittenty people leading their design teams) all nice formulas for base power and allowed variations from it.
For example a spell which triggers a aoe explosion, but requires melee range, should by default have one of the following; cooldown, damage, aoe radius, secondary effects, use time pre rest; higher than one able to be cast from range.
OR all such skills are by default melee, with the option to gem/skill upgrade/perk it to a ranged spell, thus having to sacrifice potential cooldown, damage, radius, secondary effects or usage count for it.
That is called resource balance (or for magic power ratio/for YGO levels) which when combined with set regulations which dictate the resource usage which allows appropriate deviation (aka mana curve/level scale) allow for different but gameplay balanced fights (aka you can have colors/different archtypes).If you thus have any suggestion for life siphoning which wasnt previously stated, feel free to mention them, but be warned since the bloody harsh fist of science will slash idiocy like “internal cooldowns on offensive sustain are a good thing” into smithereens.
You assume way too much… Why don’t you try to prove him wrong with actual arguments, instead of using ad hominem? I’m one of those posters who enjoy reading other people ideas without really posting; but please don’t make it uncomfortable to read this thread/discussion.
snip
Fair enough. Its entirely possible that the limitations that keep VM in line would be able to keep everything else in line, and I just don’t see it because they are so weak right now that I never use them anyway.
You assume way too much… Why don’t you try to prove him wrong with actual arguments, instead of using ad hominem? I’m one of those posters who enjoy reading other people ideas without really posting; but please don’t make it uncomfortable to read this thread/discussion.
I have proven it with examples above, (e.g. Priests, both in holy and shadow spec, Death knights with blood spec, Necros in EQ across the board, in game spectral skills, in game minion master vs warrior sustain comparison and if you want i can count off tempest warriors in rift, old wow pally builds, basic 3.5 d&d and multiple examples from league of legends, dragon age, dota, Diablo 2, older FF games/JRPGs in general) thats why im so kittened off since noone has read them or bloody bothered to google if they dont get what was said.
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
Been away for a bit with some health issues but I can see not a lot has changed in principle.
If we only relied on backward looking experiences we would not get innovative solutions to many problems. Innovative solutions are not necessarily restricted to the experienced gamers.
That said I wonder why they just don’t have a more basic look at this.
To me the problem lies in the scaling of our healing abilities and as Bhawb has rightly said they are concerned not to trigger OP healing by focussing on the wrong scaling parameter.
Our siphoning is used to counter the damage we take, not the entire damage but a proportion of that damage which, with other skills, we use enable us to continue the battle.
The problem I see is NOT the number opponents we have in and of itself, it is the damage they inflict. Scaling off the number of opponents is the WRONG parameter to use if you want siphoning to be consistent and not OP in 1vX scaling situations. I think it would be far more appropriate to scale our siphoning on the damage we receive eg you convert XX% of the attacks against you to health (you could dress it up with fantasy words). This would be far easier to balance and would scale with the the real issue involved…the damage taken.
Just an idea….back to skulking.
Edit spelling
(edited by Oldbugga.7029)
If you do that, it becomes Protection that gets reduced by poison. Siphons are meant to let us recover health outside of using a healing skill. If you can get a bit of breathing room, such as via Well of Darkness or fearing someone, you can feasibly regain enough health to take another hit. Well, if our siphons weren’t utter crap, anyway.
The sad thing is that it really wouldn’t take much to bring them up to par. 300 health/second may be lower than the passive regeneration that other professions can achieve, but it is accompanied (usually) with life force gain. That said, since other professions have active defenses that we simply lack, perhaps bumping the target number to 350/second is more in line, especially as the necro must make investments not only in traits and gear, but also in actions to get those returns.
@Drarnor:
So far as I can tell, the only new point you raised that I haven’t addressed yet is that of risk/reward, so I suppose I’ll go over that quickly. This is something I would consider to be a purely theoretical concern, the reason being that necros already have boatloads of AoE skills that reward engaging multiple opponents. The reward is pretty obvious too, you simply get to kill more. Generally the offensive abilities provide enough incentive for you to behave however it is appropriate for your class/build to behave, while defensive abilities are typically just that – defensive. The vampiric traits are of course an exception to that rule, but they’re an exception that really doesn’t matter much. Lack of incentive to engage multiple opponents is a concern on paper, but hardly in practice. The requirement of staying in combat is still there, and your offensive skills will do the rest.
The remainder of your post can basically be summarized by the following quote:
By asking for ICD’s on siphons, you are asking for necros to have zero methods for scaling survivability unless ANet gives us things they have specifically and repeatedly said they will not do instead of buffing tools we already have that would work if they didn’t simply suck.
I gave you a paragraph on this already, but I’ll take the scenic route down the a.net tangent with you if you desire. The Anetophobia™ defense is typically the logical place for this debate to end anyway, in fact it mirrors a previous debate I had on the very same topic quite nicely. The argument boils down to something like this: since a.net can’t be trusted to know what they’re doing, and the class is already subpar in terms of defensive measures anyway, we shouldn’t advocate ICDs because a.net is likely to implement them in a vacuum while doing nothing else.
Since I’ve already been down this particular road before, I trust you won’t mind if I switch to cruise control for a moment and, at the risk of tooting my own horn, simply quote myself:
For the record, I’m sure you could probably diagnose half the users on this forum, myself included, with varying degrees of Anetophobia™. There’s always the risk that we’ll end up not with what we ask for, but some kittenized version of it instead. But fear is not a rational basis for decision making. Speaking of which, it’s probably also true that a.net are still afraid of what they saw during the beta. They went the wrong distance down the right road, and as a result we must now drag them back to the idea of attrition kicking and screaming. What a.net really needs to do is hit “Shake It Off!”, stack and buff, and head back into the fray.
As for implementing ICDs in a vacuum, I don’t think anyone was ever arguing that point. ICDs are merely a necessary side effect of letting vampiric traits scale more aggressively with healing power. And even if you get the sustainability part of the equasion right, that still leaves the issues of appropriate levels of DoT and lockdown – neither of which solves the problem in a vacuum either. You need to get all of it right.
Whether a.net shares the same understanding, only time will tell. But we have no choice other than to work with them, and that means giving them the benefit of the doubt.
Some of the terminology is a bit outdated given that it’s a blast from the past, but you get the general idea I’m sure. It’s from a thread started by Kraag, who by the way is on my personal shortlist of users whose writings I implicitly recommend – although if you feel tempted to take a glance I would humbly ask that you have the courtesy not to necro it (how’s that for irony). I’m sure you’ll recognize many of the talking points, and they’re well worth a read.
Anyway, this seems like a good time to wrap this up for now (perhaps for the best as my person is attracting undue attention anyway). We’ve been over most of the relevant stuff as far as I can tell, and as I already alluded to the above argument tends to constitute an impasse. You basically either have faith that a.net will get enough components of the attrition recipe right, or you don’t. Either way, I thank you for playing ball.
Manacraft, you have still failed on one very, very important thing in arguing for ICD’s on siphons.
Why would they be a good thing? How would an ICD actually help siphons at all, and how would that help not be possible outside of ICD’s?
(edited by Drarnor Kunoram.5180)
The sad thing is that it really wouldn’t take much to bring them up to par. 300 health/second may be lower than the passive regeneration that other professions can achieve, but it is accompanied (usually) with life force gain. That said, since other professions have active defenses that we simply lack, perhaps bumping the target number to 350/second is more in line, especially as the necro must make investments not only in traits and gear, but also in actions to get those returns.
Just to mention, with minimap investment, Engie, Warrior, Ele and Guard all got efficiently 500 hps (warriors having the a guarantee of 498 pre second with adrenal and signet, its scaling being 10% of healing power, instead of 2%); others actually have to work a bit.
*whoop edit since i got adrenal wrong, still tho a nice 498 pre sec
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
(edited by Andele.1306)
Adrenal Health only ticks once per 3 seconds. They don’t have quite that high.
Manacraft, you have still failed on one very, very important thing in arguing for ICD’s on siphons.
Why would they be a good thing? How would an ICD actually help siphons at all, and how would that help not be possible outside of ICD’s?
The only point of including ICDs would be massively increasing the per-hit siphon without the devs needing to worry about issues of disproportionate procing between weapon and utility setups. As it is now, even if we can get siphons to a point of being good, the devs have to balance them such that they cannot be too strong; meaning that they will balance to the extreme build that has the best proc mechanics.
In this case, that would be D/WH. This means that even once they do fix siphoning, it will only ever be allowed to be good on D/WH, or whatever set is as good as it at procing. This is why specific siphon traits like VM and VR should be the main focus of being able to specialize (in AoE siphoning), and Vampiric needs gating, like an ICD, or needs to be replaced with another minor.
The entire issue with non-ICD, non-specific procs in this game is that they have no way to even them out between different builds, and without that they are forced to only allow the best setup to work with those traits, and all else will, by result, be subpar.
Technically speaking, this means Vampiric Master/Ritual need to be the large traits that enable siphoning builds (and obviously Ritual needs buffs), and Vampiric needs to be a general purpose one that is useful in every build via gating, like an ICD. Vampiric Precision is kind of in the middle, you could argue its need for precision is enough gating, or you could argue that you can still make a very tanky build with high crit chance.
(edited by Bhawb.7408)
You could make a very tanky build with high crit chance, but that same build would lack healing power. Better healing power scaling is a big part of the changes that need to be made to siphoning.
I’m still not seeing how adding an ICD is so necessary. Make the siphoning good for the build that most needs it (the highest risk setup, which, coincidentally, also happens to be the fastest hitting), and the slower, lower risk weapons will still be able to spec into it to get extra sustain, but they generally need less and also won’t get as much. With necro skill design as it is, we have natural gates and tradeoffs to siphoning effectiveness that make it much easier to predict and control than you give credit for. If you refer back to my suggested values, Vampiric didn’t get much of a buff. Why? Because it’s the least gated and also picked up by builds that just want things like Ritual Master that have zero investment in siphoning.
You argue to add an ICD to avoid volatility, but siphons are inherently volatile. An ICD would fail spectacularly on that front while unnecessarily limiting what the necro can do with it.
I’m still not seeing how adding an ICD is so necessary. Make the siphoning good for the build that most needs it (the highest risk setup, which, coincidentally, also happens to be the fastest hitting), and the slower, lower risk weapons will still be able to spec into it to get extra sustain, but they generally need less and also won’t get as much.
Dagger has built in the highest sustain of any build already, by a pretty large margin. Its return for being melee is that it has better sustain than every other weapon combined.
You argue to add an ICD to avoid volatility, but siphons are inherently volatile. An ICD would fail spectacularly on that front while unnecessarily limiting what the necro can do with it.
An ICD puts every build on equal footing for a minor trait. Every other siphon can remain volatile, its good because that is how you enable a full build. But you shouldn’t be forcing a minor trait to only exist for entire builds (PotH), it should be meaningful for all builds and as it is now it isn’t remotely meaningful unless it is on specific setups that allow it to proc vastly more than others (and its not even that meaningful for those builds).
Without the ICD, we completely bar off siphoning as a defensive mechanic from every build that doesn’t run a siphon build. If that is the goal, fine, then move it off the minor trait so the support/healing tree doesn’t get shafted by a trait that only exists for one build.
In that case, would you be in favor of Vampiric getting an ICD, but Vampiric Precision continuing without and both getting buffed significantly (especially in the healing power department)? I’m still not convinced that Vampiric needs an ICD, but being that trait alone, I can kind of understand.
Regardless, Vampiric would always provide a benefit to any build that has at least 3 points in Blood Magic. Protection of the Horde did not do the same as it was tied to a skill type.
In that case, would you be in favor of Vampiric getting an ICD, but Vampiric Precision continuing without and both getting buffed significantly (especially in the healing power department)? I’m still not convinced that Vampiric needs an ICD, but being that trait alone, I can kind of understand.
Regardless, Vampiric would always provide a benefit to any build that has at least 3 points in Blood Magic. Protection of the Horde did not do the same as it was tied to a skill type.
Sure. I think its reasonable that precision could be tied to more niche uses like the other two.
PotH might have been a bad example, but Jagged Horror (if we leave aside the buggy issues where it actually made content harder) is a similar example where it did “technically” help all builds, but it was vastly stronger in one build than every other because of the multipliers that one specific build got.
In that case, would you be in favor of Vampiric getting an ICD, but Vampiric Precision continuing without and both getting buffed significantly (especially in the healing power department)? I’m still not convinced that Vampiric needs an ICD, but being that trait alone, I can kind of understand.
Regardless, Vampiric would always provide a benefit to any build that has at least 3 points in Blood Magic. Protection of the Horde did not do the same as it was tied to a skill type.
Sure. I think its reasonable that precision could be tied to more niche uses like the other two.
PotH might have been a bad example, but Jagged Horror (if we leave aside the buggy issues where it actually made content harder) is a similar example where it did “technically” help all builds, but it was vastly stronger in one build than every other because of the multipliers that one specific build got.
Except that it only did something after you already won.
Tho the suggestion of putting vampiric as a master (or even grandmaster, then putting deathly invigoration as the master major and vamp rituals as a master major) with 100 effective hps on one target when traited would make it a true build… or as mentioned making vampiric traits mutually exlusive/unlock vamp procs on different types of attacks thus letting the devs balance the numbers for 1v1 with a single trait and then others being effective buffs in the same way as you can further trait up a weapon/utility/profession mechanic.
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
Tho the suggestion of putting vampiric as a master (or even grandmaster, then putting deathly invigoration as the master major and vamp rituals as a master major) with 100 effective hps on one target when traited would make it a true build… or as mentioned making vampiric traits mutually exlusive/unlock vamp procs on different types of attacks thus letting the devs balance the numbers for 1v1 with a single trait and then others being effective buffs in the same way as you can further trait up a weapon/utility/profession mechanic.
I think my biggest issue is just if vampiric is a minor trait, it needs to be good for all builds. Our good minors are like this, whereas Vampiric has such a wide swing between anything with wells/WH and basically everything else (I think the rest of our weapons are actually basically even after doing some quick math).
An ICD is just I think the solution to keep vampiric as a minor trait and good for everyone, while the major traits allow you to specialize into a full siphoning build (since the tree has a whole lot more than just siphoning). Of course you could give something else that is useful to everyone there, and then have vampiric be a master major trait. But an ICD would basically say “vampiric is your 1v1 trait, rituals is your teamfight trait”.
Both work, just different ways, and both should allow vampiric builds to work in different ways.
Tho the suggestion of putting vampiric as a master (or even grandmaster, then putting deathly invigoration as the master major and vamp rituals as a master major) with 100 effective hps on one target when traited would make it a true build… or as mentioned making vampiric traits mutually exlusive/unlock vamp procs on different types of attacks thus letting the devs balance the numbers for 1v1 with a single trait and then others being effective buffs in the same way as you can further trait up a weapon/utility/profession mechanic.
I think my biggest issue is just if vampiric is a minor trait, it needs to be good for all builds. Our good minors are like this, whereas Vampiric has such a wide swing between anything with wells/WH and basically everything else (I think the rest of our weapons are actually basically even after doing some quick math).
An ICD is just I think the solution to keep vampiric as a minor trait and good for everyone, while the major traits allow you to specialize into a full siphoning build (since the tree has a whole lot more than just siphoning). Of course you could give something else that is useful to everyone there, and then have vampiric be a master major trait. But an ICD would basically say “vampiric is your 1v1 trait, rituals is your teamfight trait”.
Both work, just different ways, and both should allow vampiric builds to work in different ways.
If they make vampiric rituals work on everything that is a aoe/works as current vampiric but with its own numbers, tho that would just be as said, moving over vampiric and replacing the 15 blood trait.
When life gives you lemon, ask if its from a anime or manga.
1 2