See, i knew you liked didn’t hate me. 
You da best McFluff.
So you want people to be more like me and make abominations such as the 2h melee rogue?
The first thing you mention is talking about effective builds. “Good” is a more subjective term.
Reads Dread’s and Perry’s replies
snigger
This is the only shit that works on my tin can internet.
Dude just dont put any hope to this topic. At EHG forums only “game lovers” you will listen only hate so just dont try. This game anyway dont changing. If you want constructively check steam forums.
I care about this game so I leave feedback, I dont care if others dont agree with me thats their opinion and neither should you, the developers wouldnt go on the steam forums you are screaming out to the nether there
Im start this topic with same motivation. But now i understand why this game have so much players. So good luck.
I certainly don’t understand much where’s the issue here:
Bladedancer can avoid one-shots in most (not all) Tier 4 boss blows and 250-300 corruption? Check
Bladedancer skills can clear Tier 4 and 250-300 corruption with some mods without being a slog? Check
Bladedancer can deal about 250k dps in dummy with some skills provided you build around them? Check.
I didn’t play with the new 0.9 changes (and sure will be more adjustments towards the march release), but LE is in a state where there’s a wide range of skills and builds that are proven effective enough to deal with all the current endgame content. Certainly Bladedancer checks all the boxes, I hope in 0.9 is still be the case (unless massive unheard over-the-top nerfs, sure it will be).
Seems EHG acknowledged just a bit the Dual wield problem and lowered increased damage taken from 15% to 12%? Not huge by any means, but a step in the right direction.
That’s the thing though, there have certainly been changes that the community needs to work through and adapt to to give considered feedback rather than a kneejerk reaction.
Both feedback and reaction are important.
In my humble opinion, “this problem” arose because of an inappropriate sense of justice. The classic “for balance” if something is given, then something must be taken away.
Dual wield is considered as a bonus, to the detriment of which protection is reduced.
Personally, this causes me sincere surprise. Why does a character with one sword and an empty second hand take less damage than a character with two swords.
The lack of a shield in the second hand already reduces survival compared to other characters.
As a result, we give the character dual wield, he loses his shield, receives additional damage and becomes significantly less protected compared to a number of other characters.
To compensate for this, he is given a glancing blow. Which, combined with the shield, makes the rogue more protected than sentinel (I didn’t play sentinel, but this kind of rogue looks strange. https://youtu.be/tult_OSGvxs . I don’t remember exactly, corruption might be near 400 (195% more health and damage))
He’s using a Bastion, put that on a Sentinel & you’ll see similar results. The Rogue is “good” at it because of Shroud of Dusk (when hit get a Dusk Shroud which leads to capped glancing blow & life gain from life on glancing blow). The Sentinel can get the same (Life on Block from Aegis of Renewal plus Paladins get Shield Wall for for more life on block & more life plus ward on block if they want) plus they’d have more DR from block but less chance to dodge (ie, none).
“He” is me)
In search of a situation when I need to play the role of rogue, I have reached 1300+ corruption and I am tired.
In my opinion, this is a fundamental issue because of which there is a feeling that your character is unfairly nerfed.
All statements about “too much damage” or “too much DR” come from the fact that there is no understanding of the “normal line”. Since such a rogue is like in the video, this is absolutely normal for this game.
Well, you could argue the positioning using two swords leave you more vulnerable, but obviously is a gameplay decission: want more damage? take also more damage.
This maybe is not an issue itself, but when the game scales enemy damage at the same pace of enemy health, instead of what every other game does: health scales much faster, then as a result you have a tank meta, damage is usually enough, so lets get more defenses.
Bastion is insanely overpowered, moreso in our tank meta. It has been said so many times, but devs don’t care, so… it is what it is.
But if you didn’t take more damage while DWing then you’d never go 2hander because 2h melee weapons are just objectively worse (without the damage taken penalty). If X is always better than Y in every way then that’s not balanced.
I’m not saying DWing is currently balanced compared to using a 2h melee but it needs to be worse in some way. You could say that 2h should be slower but harder hitting while remaining the same overall dps the weapon + shield would be lower dps but more tanky.
If I take a second sword in my hand instead of a shield, I already take
Bastion is one of the very few unique items that gives a noticeable bonus to protection, compared to exalted items. I even made a video on this topic )
But if you remove it, the situation will not fundamentally change. The whole game is built like this. Rogue can get a block cap, glancing blow, a treshold cap even without it, and all this at the same time.
Rouge has the ability to significantly scale the defensive mechanics, but there is no way to increase the mechanics of movement.
If we take a specific unique item, we will not touch the main system problem.
This is quite an interesting topic, but I have not yet met anyone who would like to discuss it.
I don’t understand why something should be worse than another if we are talking about parallel classes of weapons.
What’s the point of choosing a class and specialization if in the end it all comes down to adding something by subtracting something?
I’ll try to rephrase…
By what logic, a rouge with a 2h sword should be balanced with a DW rouge? What is the point of choosing a class in this case?
I’m just talking about the weapons being balanced (or not) with each other (DWing v 2h melee), adding classes into the mix is adding another (significant) layer of complexity because all the melee classes are different & have different benefits for different weapons. If DW/2h were balanced around a Rogue, it’d presumably require a significant buff to 2h, but then that’d give Forge Guards a massive buff (since they have lots of 2h melee passives).
Is a character’s direction, such as defense, a less complex layer than a character’s class?
According to the logic of “justice”, it is necessary to take away the protection of the DW characters, to give them additional protective mechanics as compensation, with which we get a rogue like in my video, radically ignoring its role as a fast and light fighter.
is it really worth it?
In addition, the question also arises, why does having a dagger in my character’s second hand make the opponent’s hits stronger? Why is my character more affected by poison and ignight?
And again the question. Why balance 2h vs DW without taking into account the class, if the whole point of this game is to play for a certain class.
There’s ways to balance weapons, more around their purpose in builds and synergies with skills/effects. Perhaps give 2h weapons large base damage, and a much higher minimum hit. So they are more attractive, when coupled with big hitting skills with a cooldown. While dual wielding would be preferred for ailment builds, or anything requiring quick hits. Could also have 1h or 2h weapons directly effect skill cooldowns. But alas, I guess a defensive penalty, that makes absolutely no sense, is probably best.
As a result, we criticize players who build characters solely as a scorecard without reference to gameplay, but we defend the balancing system that kills gameplay.