Login | Register


All times are UTC - 5 hours


It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:12 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Testing "Wonder" runeword
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 1:16 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:28 am
Posts: 1136
Location: Vancouver, BC
Made in a divine scepter (140 durability, range 2 weapon). I think making it in a Knout could be better, for the range 3 (80 durability is a bit low, but it's probably doable).

The unrequested inclusion of lvl 50 FrozenOrb is working well. Since I'm deep in melee when it goes off, it quickly passes through the ranks, usually only hitting a couple critters before it's out in the open, so doesn't do a lot of damage, but it's pretty. There are occasions where I've noticed the damage it does, and it seems balanced. Each shard does about 775dmg, so 3 of them striking a baddy is equivelent from 1 shot from the lvl 50 Blizzard. I like that the FOrb attracts stuff further away, since that helps lure things into my Meteor and Blizzard patches. I had not considered that effect, and it works well.

The 10% proc of Blizz and FOrb take a while to occur, so for the first bit of every encounter I'm just swinging, but when they do go off they work well enough. I suppose that might just be the price I pay as a Convictor, rather than a FrostBite druid (His base attack is meaningful, Zeal is not). It's hard to stack more than 2, but it occasinally happens, and the damage at that point satisfies me for a level 65 weapon. It's a shame the cold dmg to attack is capped at 250-500, but the mods from non-weapon gear add up well enough. If the cap can be overcome by adding another 250-500 cold dmg in another mod slot, that would be great.

Potential Changes:
1) I totally forgot that Lo doesn't do anything in weapons for cold-element characters. It just adds 15% Deadly strike, which is completely useless on that weapon. Because of that, I think the cold pierce should be changed from -24% to -30% (before I thought Lo would bring it to -30).

2) The procs need to be changed from OnAttack to OnStrike, so that the runeword is relevant to Bowzons (I'm tired of just seeing Multishot bowzons and Rogues).

3) The weapon could benefit from having 10% lvl 50 Glacial Spike (about 1k dmg) returned to it, since it could help buy tmie waiting for the other 10% procs to occur. I'm hoping that with a 3rd 10% proc, something's bound to happen as soon as monsters are engaged. Initially this proc was removed from the word to satisfy the 7-mod limit, however, only 5 of the requested mods are on the weapon anyways, so there's apparently space for another mod.

4) I'd appreciate if the Cannot Be Frozen mod is removed and replaced with something more useful. I had suggested +100 durability or 2% OnStruck lvl 14 FrozenArmor , but for some reason those were rejected without explanation. Maybe some more IAS (+30%?), ARating (+300?), or -50% monster defence (Not IgnoreTargetDefence!!). Those would help the runeword be more acceptable to FrostBiters and Bowzons. The Attack Rating or -MonsterDef won't help Convictors much, so if we're concerned about overpowering them, then use one of those two.

5) I'm guessing the CBFrozen was added to promote an "icy" theme. I just occured to me that a novel icy-mod would be 5% chance ressurect those A5 ice demons in the ice caves (crystal passage, glacial and ancient's way. The ones that use Arctic blast. Those critters might help tank, which would just as effective a defensive mod as FrozenArmor on struck or GlacialSpike. I'm not sure if this mod would be too strong or not, your call. I'm not sure I've seen any items ressurect those guys yet, so it might be neat.


Top
 Offline Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Testing "Wonder" runeword
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 3:16 pm 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:48 am
Posts: 2432
1. my worry about adding too much %cold dmg and pierce is that this becomes a powerhouse weapon for A3 cold mercs who don't care about the lack of physical dmg in the wpn. I even wonder now if it is a bit strong for them.

2. I think you made edits to your post after I had already begun implementing it. Anything added after Tuesday evening would qualify for that. Either that, or I simply misread your post. I didn't skip Frozen Armor for no reason, but I do think there are already plenty of ways to get FA with power crafts, so I am not sure if it is all that worthwhile. I am a big fan of Cannot be Frozen, but it can be tweaked for sure.

3. does it make sense to increase the proc to 15% each rather than adding yet another spell?

4. Unfortunately, I don't know how to add durability to the wpn, so I had to skip that one.

5. The uniq sword already procs those guys, so maybe some other icey monster is better?

_________________
People who live in cinder block houses can throw whatever they want.


Top
 Offline Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Testing "Wonder" runeword
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 11:28 am
Posts: 1136
Location: Vancouver, BC
I don't mean to blame anyone, you've already mentioned to me that you were under several limitations while adding in the new runewords for 1.21z, such as extreme last-minuteness, 3am coding, etc. You've also mentioned that the odds of future changes are low, but not zero. It's for that reason that I made my suggestions. My post is mainly about testing with someting new, to let people know what it's like. It's true that I was a bit frustrated with not seeing my suggestions exactly as written, but I think that's understandable. Simiarly, I don't know all the seemingly odd caps and limitations that prevent my suggestions from being as expected. For example, I'm currently baffled why the unique wyrmhide boots were given 160-240 cold, 1-500 lit, when I had suggested 250-500 cold, 1-750 lit (both coincidentally within the cap). Considering WarTravellers adds 2-4k dmg to a phys-based character with 1000% EDamage (This doesn't appear hard to acheive), I expected that 251-1.25k for any character would be fine. Especially considering that the boots are higher level and Elite.

Anyways, considering your points above:

1) "Wonder" has no +Skills, so if someone wanted to use it on a cold merc, they'd be better with a 6-os weapon with 6 MS gems in it. It's impossible for +Skill% to be better than -ResPierce, when the numbers are the same. It's impossible for "Wonder" to outperform that 6-os weapon for an A3 merc. Please keep in mind that my point (1) is just to return the cold pierce to what it originally was in my suggestion. I suggested 24% because I failed to realize that Lo rune would not turn this into 30%, which is what my suggestion requested.

2) My last post was to suggest using bows for the weapon. I have not edited the post since then, or it would have been noted in the forum as an edit timestamp. That edit was made Tuesday afternoon, so as you mentioned it shouldn't be part of the changes. All of this aside, my point (2) was just a suggestion that the procs be switched to On-Strike, to promote bow useage. I agree that FArmor is possible using other gear, I just wanted it on an item that my char would use normally, rather than messing with my inventory or cube. I understand that elite HitPower rings are becoming pretty popular since they take less space than AbsoluteZero on switch. The new HitPower crafts was a nice and I think balanced change.

3) Yes, increasing the procs to 15% is reasonable, but I was asked to keep the proc % down for Blizz (FOrb would have the same problem), since the screen-clutter slows some machine. GSpike is very GPU-friendly I think, especially in melee (there's no GSPike animation for more than a few frames). This suggestion is mainly because there's space for another mod. I'd be happy to go to 15% procs, and save the mod-space for something neat.

4) I understand this as another Cap-like limtation, no problem :). I think the following would work (based on Uniques mods, but changed for runewords):
TCode = dur
TParam = <blank>
TMin = 100
TMax = 100
Alternatively, replenish durability mod exsts on "Prudence" so you could copy and paste it to another runeword. The replenishing should at least extend the durabilty a fair bit (possibly indefinitely), but most importantly enable repairs for 1 gold which would be super-convenient and awsome. No more cubing with a forge rune to avoid 1-2M repair bills. We wouldn't have to worry about "Wonder" being overpowered in ethereal items, since there's no ED% in the runeword.

5) Meh, forget raising icy thingies then. They'd probably be overpowering anyways. Taking a look at Frostwind, it's a pretty decent weapon, wonder why I don't see it used more often. Toss in a socket with a FrostTear, and it Should be decent for a FrostBiter. You'd lose the +Skill dmg from "Wonder", but gain ias and that IcyHorror revive. Perhaps it would be more popular by removing FreezeTarget and giving either 3 sockets (2 more than normal) or +2 AllSkills. The fairly high (25%) chance of GSpike freezes everything anyways, so the FreezeTarget doesn't do much.


Top
 Offline Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Testing "Wonder" runeword
PostPosted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 4:54 pm 
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 10:48 am
Posts: 2432
i love frostwind - use it on my merc for the slow :)

I think that most of the frostbiters just love the superspeed of 2h weapons and have been going that route. That and I just haven't seen many frostbiters. I agree though, there is nothing wrong with that sword now though.

_________________
People who live in cinder block houses can throw whatever they want.


Top
 Offline Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron