vipdiablo3 professional players point of view to Master weaken thinking and discussion

The recent weakening of the Master provoked a strong response from the players, everyone understands the Windseeker weakened, but many people think that, like 1.04 winds enveloped the weakening of such changes for the player. Too harsh . I have the same feelings, at 1.04 before I wrote a long post about why I and many others feel that the weakening winds enveloped a snub. But this time I felt worse to buy diablo 3 gold.

1, AC,Blizzard, before you attach great importance to communication. Like when you confirm the bulls salamanders do not ignore the MF. You take action to carry out the verification, is a great thing for this skeptical players, even if it was later proved to be wrong.

On the other hand, you do not have a frank inform Master weaken. We have experienced many times without consulting cut, weakening or even not be included the patch notice (for example, from 1.03 to 1.04, we see the empowerment of the the glow edge and Arcane greatly weakened). When you explain the causes of these weakened, such as the weakening of the winds enveloped, you are often given false interpretation of winning the lottery, is obviously not true. Do you worry about legendary items trigger chance? Everyone said so, I think history will prove that, the legendary items chance to trigger does not matter, because even Windseeker this is obviously more efficient than weaken before the winds enveloped skills can not get better gains on legendary items trigger .

In fairness, you seem to crowd control skills Bowen hinted repeatedly: Hey, mages, our eye on you! I think this is fair. After all, play unlimited ice mobs Master for other occupations is too strong. However, due to the design of your mage skills, so the unlimited ice is often our only choice, while high-grade monster strength, which is our only choice.

Some people do not play the Master, or they do not have the depth to try other career, they may not understand, the Master is a very very very very dependent on the kite play a role. In fact, I have three roles, demon hunter, pro-son and Master, I can safely honestly say that my Master is the least efficient of these three kite role is even more than the remote own son much worse. Master of relying on ranged damage inefficient. Many of our remote magic boot type, from the perspective of efficiency, very low. But the real issue is the viability of the Master is so weak.

2, viability

Other roles can rely on life steal and strike back some treatment skills to save your life (or at least pro-son), which is quite feasible Master. When using the wand and adder / shield, the Master’s life steal restrictions in the ceiling of 3% (or 0.6%) is in purgatory. The use of the hands and arms of the Master, you can get 6%. In contrast, pro-son a maximum of 9% or 12% to reach in the role of passive skills.

Strike back is also a problem. The role of the other type of dual wielding weapons alone reached 2000 Click to return to the upper limit, the Master only 1000 points. This is all coefficient significantly weakened before data. Master to rely strike back, it means not only weapons, but also in other parts of at least two have hit back, this is a very high threshold.

The viability of the final choice is a skill, but our choice is so lacking. Similarly, compared to pro son – Revenge brought each target 5% / 8% maximum blood draw, domineering Warriors Rune each blood ceiling of 8%, 9% tear damage value (each target per second to 140% weapon damage sustained injury), set blood chopped 1% per crit, destroy the giant God every target of 8%, perseverance brought 20% of the short period of time the blood-sucking ability (in addition to incentives charisma brought about 1%).

Do not get me wrong, own son has a means of recovery is perfect. They get a lot of choices, and those choices can produce recovery effect. But the Master of the blood back means, what does
Previous: Introduction of the Followers involving Diablo3 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Comments are closed.