Auras

Activating auras then removing the gem will keep the auras active.
yep removing gem or selecting a second skill in that skill slot. keeps aura going but not equipped.
There are other threads on this issue, but this is as good as any...

I haven't seen any official response to this yet as to whether it's intentional or not, but the general consensus (and my gut) tell me it's unintentional.

UPDATE: I've since found the post where Rory from GGG has said this is a bug.

However, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here and make some strong arguments as to why it should be left as it is:

1) Weapon swap usefulness: If auras are changed to only work while equipped (like all other gems), then weapon swaps will be used to do the same exact thing -- except with the additional cost of having less tactical/creative gameplay.

Any other use of weapon swap would be sub-optimal. Wouldn't you rather to be able to choose to do something more creative with your weapon swap without sacrificing auras (which we know you won't)?

Off the top of my head:

Ranged/Melee swap. Check.
Elemental Weapon/Physical weapon swap. Check.
Sword and Board/2h Weapon swap. Check.

All are more interesting and increases character customization more than just an aura stick on weapon swap, but that is exactly all you'll get if it's changed. Furthermore, it increases tactical combat options WHILE extending the item hunt for good gear.


2) Inventory Space Trade-off: Storing extra gems and/or gear with gems in them takes up inventory space. You're consciously making the choice to be able to pickup less gear, which is very relevant to the endgame when doing maps.

3) Gem Leveling: Without gems equipped, they don't level. You'll have to spend the time to level/upgrade gems that you otherwise wouldn't. If this is left as-is, then every character will want to level 4 to 6 more gems that they otherwise would not.

4) Good for the Economy: Leaving this as it is will strengthen the value of aura gems AND all other gems to some extent, since high quality aura gems are very desirable. Since the best way to increase a gem's quality is by vendoring other gems to create gemcutters, this will help to remove gems from the game. Also, players will want their weapon slot items to have stats as good as their primary.



Counter (and counter-counter) arguments :P



A) Won't this lead to everyone running around with XYZ auras?

Yes, but you'll already have that with weapon swaps (as the are now). The only real limiting factor to the number of auras you can have is your mana pool.

If too many players stack so many auras that it becomes a problem in GGG's eyes, then it would be better to just increase their mana costs rather than directly restrict creativity.

B) That's just stupid. Aura gems would then work differently than other gems in a fundamental way.

They're already fundamentally different than every other gem, since they reserve mana and are party buffs. Complexity isn't a bad thing, especially when it increases character customization (which is fun).

C) That will be confusing for new players.

Since nothing will make this game very noob friendly, why even start down the path of dumbing things down? They'll learn the ropes along the way, and once they figure it out they'll likely think: "SWEET! Now I wonder what I can do with my weapon swap?!".

D) The problem is that auras continue to work on weapon swap, which is also part of this very same unintentional behavior. Fixing both at the same time would solve all these problems.

That's not a good direction that GGG could go. You'll still end up with XYZ auras on your bar, except now you'll have even less skills to choose from while in combat. Optimal play will be 1/2/3 attack skills, and 3/2 utility skills, and 3/4 auras. Furthermore, people will actively try (even moreso than now!) to reduce the number attack skills on their bar down to just one.

The only way this might work out alright is if the cooldown when swapping weapons was removed, and swapping weapons always happened immediately after pressing the button.

E) The problem is that auras are just too good/desirable, and they all should be nerfed in order to promote/preserve character/build diversity.

Fact: Something is always going to be more desirable/better than the alternatives.

Given this fact, why not let it be auras? Auras promote teamwork and makes grouping with others more fun/desirable. Nerfing auras hard enough to make using them sub-optimal will directly translate to a nerf to grouping in general. For those of us who enjoy playing in party sizes larger than one, this would indirectly be a nerf to fun itself.

F) No.

That's not a good reason/arguement. ;)



Before I started writing this, I was sure that this aura gem behavior was unintential and should be fixed.

Now, I'm not so sure.

After reading this, what do you think?

Please discuss.

Editado por útlima vez por Daemonjax en 12 ago. 2012 13:45:27
"
Daemonjax escribió:
Counter (and counter-counter) arguments :P
I guess that makes this a counter-counter-counter argument* :P

*actually it's more of a nitpick, but whatever :P
"
Daemonjax escribió:
That's just stupid. Aura gems would then work differently than other gems in a fundamental way.
No it won't. The issue with auras lasting after you remove the gem is that it's unintuitive, not that it's fundamentally different from other skills. In fact making them cancel when you remove the gem would make them fundamentally different.
The gem gives you the ability to cast a spell. You cast the spell and that puts an aura on you. If you take out the gem, you lose what it gave you, which is the ability to cast the spell, not the effects of it.

In exactly the same way, the Fireball gem gives you the ability to cast a spell. You cast that spell and it creates a fireball. When you remove them gem, you lose the ability to cast the spell, but the fireball doesn't disappear out of the air.

Same with minions. You lose the ability to raise them, it doesn't retroactively un-raise the ones you did when you had that ability (there is some disagreement in the office on whether this should change - personally I don't think it makes sense to un-raise minions when you lose the ability to raise more).


Note that this doesn't mean we won't change how this behaviour works - as I said, it is unintuitive to most people. I'm just pointing out that the reason they work this way is because that's how all skills currently work, and leaving that would not make them fundamentally different to other skills - changing it would (but is probably still for the best). We just haven't done the work required to make them different from other skills in this way yet, so they work like all other skills.
I think if you change it to cancel the auras when the gem is removed it would (or should) also cancel them when you swap weapons.
✠ ✠
It does seem weird to me that it's like this..

This opens up more skill slot options for people so they have a less difficult choice of what skills to use with a fixed number of skill slots

I like the notion that you would have 6 skill slots and have to make your build work with those slots.

If you want an aura that's a skill slot you shouldn't be able to use for an active skill, aka you make a sacrifice. Which makes people have to think a bit harder about how they build their character which IMO is a good thing

Also there must be balance issues.
For instance with my summoner I could cast wrath, anger, energy shield aura, mana regen aura, evasion aura and then switch to active skills or totems and my army would be ridiculously strong which seems too imba

And auras differ from active skills in the way that, yes you cast them the same, but, they have a permanent effect, whereas an attack skill has a short term effect
Here are some questions I thought I'd ask to encourage discussion about this situation, and other similar situations in the game. I'm not trying to push a particular agenda here, I'm genuinely interested to seem how people respond when asked about the details of similar situations, and whether that changes how they see the aura case.
I totally agree it seems unintuitive that the aura stays on. But in some very similar situations, I'd find the opposite behaviour unintuitive. I'm very interested in both why that is, and how much my intuitions match other people's.

1) Do people think the aura should cancel only when you remove the gem (so you could change 'q' to and aura, cast it, then change it back, provided you keep the gem equipped), or also when you change the skill binding away from that skill (meaning if you want to swap which keys you're using for two skills and one of them is an aura you have on, the order you do that matters)? I've seen both suggested.

2) Do people think summoned minions should unsummon when you remove the minion gem? Just like auras, they're a spell you cast that then has a permanent (or at least semi-permanent) affect.
2a) Is your answer any different for permanent minions (zombies) compared to non-permanent minions (skeletons)?
2b) Same question, but totems (which do have an inbuilt duration, but it's quite long).
2c) Same question again, but this time for traps/mines (which do have an inbuilt duration, but it's likewise quite long).
2d) What if there was a (purely hypothetical) solo minion that reserved some of your mana while it was out, and you'd cast the spell again to desummon that minion and recover the mana? Would the answer be different then?

3) Do people think the same logic should apply to curses - If I remove my curse gem (or unassign it's key, depending on answer to 1), should things I've cursed loose the curse? Does the answer to this change if I've taken Hex Master and have permanent curses? Why or why not?
3a) If not, what is different about casting an aura that lasts beyond when you take out them gem compared to casting a permanent curse that does the same - why does this situation seem different? Does the fact one affects you make the difference?

4) Towards the extreme other end of the spectrum: if you take out the fireball gem, should the fireball in the air disappear, of keep going? Why is this different? Is it just because the fireball won't last long anyway?

5) Molten shell is a non-permanent buff you cast on yourself. Should it disappear before it's time after having been successfully cast if you remove the gem? If yes, is that just because it's already temporary? If no, does this match your answer to 4? Why or why not?

6) If you use a skill to give you charges (frenzy, power siphon, enduring cry, etc), and then take out the gem for that skill, should you lose the charges?

7) If you puncture an enemy, or use some other skill that puts a debuff on them, and then remove that gem, should the debuff be removed?
7a) If you use explosive arrow on a monster and then remove that gem, should it still explode when the charge duration runs out? How does this interact with the answer to 7 (i.e. is the charge removed when you take out the gem, and if so does it explode then, or is it left on, and either explodes or whiffs later)?

8) If you start an attack skill (say heavy strike) and then remove the gem before the skill hits, should that cancel the attack? Keep in mind that if chilled and under temporal chains, and with a low attack speed, that attack could take several seconds, and if you removed the gem because you were, for example, swapping in a different hat with lots of cold resistance but fewer gem slots, you will benefit from the resistance immediately.
Editado por útlima vez por Mark_GGG en 12 ago. 2012 22:56:14
It does feel cheesy to use atm, the only reason I do it is because I don't have enough active skill hotkeys to use, so I have to resort to this strange mechanic.
Editado por útlima vez por Zenocide en 12 ago. 2012 23:21:14
1) Do people think the aura should cancel only when you remove the gem

I think my "intuition" is warped. My expectation is, that for persistent effects that have an effective duration of "-1" - like an aura - it should be cancelled when the ability to cast that skill again is removed.

That's how other games do it. So my intuition is that it should no longer refresh. When you remove the gem, the aura should expire shortly after, as by intuition - auras are states that must be maintained.

That's how I would personally program an aura. Every frame (or every X seconds), the player refreshes the effect of the aura on himself and nearby allies. If the aura cannot be cast to refresh the aura, then the aura dissipates.

2) Do people think summoned minions should unsummon when you remove the minion gem?

Minions should persist for the remaining duration they have. If a minion has a duration of "-1" then they should also persist, because from the logic of other games, minions are not refreshed like auras. Minions are summoned once and then re-summoned when they die.

3) Do people think the same logic should apply to curses?

Same as above. Curses must be refreshed "manually" by the player, thus removing the gem should not retroactively remove the curse. If a curse has a duration of "-1" it should not expire, as a curse is a debuff - a debuff by the logic of other games persists for as long as the skill states it does. If the ability to cast the spell again is removed, the debuff should not be removed from the entities previously effected.

4) Towards the extreme other end of the spectrum: if you take out the fireball gem, should the fireball in the air disappear, of keep going? Why is this different? Is it just because the fireball won't last long anyway?

Fireballs should exist until they dissipate naturally.

5) Molten shell is a non-permanent buff you cast on yourself. Should it disappear before it's time after having been successfully cast if you remove the gem? If yes, is that just because it's already temporary? If no, does this match your answer to 4? Why or why not?

Molten Shell should persist, because it is a buff and not a persistent effect you must sustain on your character.

6) If you use a skill to give you charges (frenzy, power siphon, enduring cry, etc), and then take out the gem for that skill, should you lose the charges?

No.

And basically no to the rest.

I guess I'm trying to say there is a distinction between a skill that produces an effect for a given duration (be that duration in TIME or in CONDITION). The condition of a summon is "until it unsummons or dies". The condition of a buff is "until the buff timer runs out". The condition of an aura is "until the aura is no longer being cast".

Let's say you guys introduce a monster that can silence players, disabling skills. If I am a silenced player, my existing skill effects should persist until they need to be refreshed. An aura should refresh itself as often as possible.

Now, if you guys have a different theory on auras and think auras should persist after a gem has been removed... I'm fine with that to an extent. It seems slightly abusable, but upon reflection, I think it is fine for this type of game. The amount of effort required to constantly switch out gems and such to perform some feat ... currently seems fair. There is a cost for that action and a part of "beating" a game is discovering tricks like this, even if these tricks may cheat the system a little.
My Keystone Ideas: http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/744282
I think having the freedom to freely switch out skills on the fly as the player sees fit is a good thing. While it does feel 'cheesy', I think that can be remedied by creating a cost for not having skill on the active skill bar.

Currently skills level as long as you have them equipped somewhere. I propose changing this so that only skills on the active bar gain XP. Now you have a definite cost for swapping skills in and out to get around the 8-keybind limit - you can continue to do so if you value the flexibility, but knowing that it comes at a price may add legitimacy to the practice.

Of course, there will be people who swap skills in right before a kill to get the XP, but given the large amount of mobs and the speed at which they die, I personally don't think it would be a significant problem, and more power to player willing to go through that hassle to max-min.

Reportar publicación del foro

Reportar cuenta:

Tipo de reporte

Información adicional