This is how vanilla D3 should look like and not expansion.... !!!
So many people think D2 shipped with patch 1.13. Its kinda ridiculous. Be happy that Blizzard takes better care of their products than any other video gaming company and listens to community feedback.
WT build is pretty expensive if you want to do it effectively (ie use WT as a fury generator instead of a spender). You will need -4/-5 WT SoJ and belt (probably IK), you need high crit chance, and a high damage/socketed 300 spear isn't cheap. I wouldn't suggest going WT unless you have like 150m+ to spend on those items specifically, in addition to just generally upgrading the rest of your gear. It would be better IMO to just stay WW and keep farming instead of trying to force a build that probably will be difficult to make work well with your budget.
There is some imbalance yes, but barbs are not superior on every level, there are many things that monks have that a barb doesn't. The class can use some tuning to be sure, but its not nearly as bad as you make it sound. Monks have a higher skill cap than barbs, but a good monk is easily able to keep stride with a good barb any day.
Monks can use skorn too, and you can get 6% LL on it. Its very easy to break 150k dps with a skorn. On a side note, sheet dps means nothing when you compare two different classes side by side, since abilities are vastly different between classes. Ever notice MoC doesn't increase your sheet dps by 48%? A WD with 100k dps spamming zombie bears will blow a 100k dps ww barb out of the water for actual damage done during a fight.
Monks also have things going for them that barbs don't, such as serenity (4 second invulnerability), sss which deals a ton of damage while the monk is invulerable. Tempest rush is basically the same mechanic as whirlwind, sweeping winds is incredibly efficient aoe dmg. Monk have a very high combat mobility due to the teleport associated with many of their attacks. Spirit regen means you start every fight with full spirit. Monks can have double resist in many areas, and if you just go with a single resist its way cheaper than a barb with OWE.
The only thing I think that makes monk sub-par to barbs is that they are very vulnerable to ground aoe's since their main stat does not provide mitigation against that damage like a barb's strength does. You cannot dodge molten/plague/etc etc, which means that you are going to take more damage than a barb to those damage sources. You can potentially offset this by getting higher resistance than a barb can, but that means getting double resist rolls and sacrificing dps stats.
I think the main reason resist all generally ends up getting stacked over armor actually has more to do with how the affix system works though. If you can get +350 armor on an item or +70 resist all, the resist all is going to be better all or almost all of the time and both take up 1 affix slot.
But there is no reason that these two stats have to be mutually exclusive, which is the point I am trying to make. Its well worth using 2 affix slots to pick up both stats in many gear slots. Obviously slots like gloves, rings, amulet it is more important to pick up as many attack modifiers as you can, otherwise I see few reasons to not try to get armor in the remaining slots.
IMHO, armor is the most underrated stat in the game.
i forgot it, since its more productive stacking resists, and its quite relative depending on your armor level.
Stacking resists and ignoring armor is quite unproductive IMO. Your total damage reduction is Resistances x Armor. At 10.3k armor, my dmg reduction is at 77.45%, and with 990 allres (ignoring individual resistances for simplicity's sake) 76.75%. So,
1-0.7745=0.2255; (reduction from armor)
1-0.7645=0.2355; (reduction from resistances)
0.2355*0.2255=0.0531 (Total damage taken)
Which means I take 5.31% of the damage that monsters deal after mitigation. Lets say that instead of trying to get armor on most peices like I have done, I instead just went for All resistance, leaving me with about 6400 armor (I have seen many barbs with under 6k armor in very good gear, so this is a realistic value). At 6400 armor, damage reduction is at 68.10% from armor. Only 9.35% less than when I was at 10.3k armor, so I only take ~10% more damage right?
1-0.6810=0.319
0.2355*0.319=.0751
So after armor and resistances, I only take 7.51% of damage from monsters, which doesn't sound that bad. But...7.51/5.31=1.41, meaning I am taking 41% more damage than before. In the current state of the game, this is ok since its fairly easy to outgear the content, but once you start to turn up the monster difficulty in the next patch, you may wish you had a bit more damage reduction.
If you want to maximize your mitigation, the best way to do so is by keeping your damage reduction from Armor and All resistances equal, or as close to equal as you can get. Relative values for armor vs all resistances is 1 Resistance = 10 armor, if you keep a 10:1 ratio. This value is dynamic and will change depending on how much of each stat you have.
+1 after patch u will need great gear to farm MP10 :/
Why is this a bad thing? Its something to work towards. The highest difficulty should require the best gear.
Even right now Barb Items are So So UP at the Price :/ after patch they will even grow More
I doubt it, the bar for what the top end gear is at is going to be raised, more gear will become available with the increased droprates of legendaries and all items being rolled at ilvl63, it will be much easier to find gear, and the market will be flooded with gear that is considered pretty good right now. Give it a week or two and gear that costs 100mil right now will be down to 10-20mil
Yes, I did read what I quoted. You asked where I got 9 from so I said it. If I didn't read it I wouldn't have mentioned blackthornes because you'd be a moron to not see they compare EHP wise (not counting the LOH) to pants that are 10m+ and they cost like 1m.
You're either comparing max loh vs max life steal or you're comparing single property to single property.You're just trying to make it fit your argument.
You also didn't mention gems so I brought that up. My point is 9 vs 4 is not fair just like 5v4 is not fair. That's it. It's that simple.
Compare stat for stat on slot for slot for stat like an intelligent person would. You don't see a good scientist attempt something without controlling/limiting the variables as much as possible. I mean do you build your gear the same way you compare things rather than weighing it against your options for that particular slot?
YO DAWG MY CHEST HAS MORE STATS THAN MY LEGS FUCK LEGS SUCK.
Besides you already illustrated the point that you didn't do any serious testing with loh vs life steal when you brought up AOE. Because that doesn't change anything unless LOH doesn't proc on that aoe ability. (like sweeping winds) As far as barbs go that isn't the case.
Blackthorne's are ok if you wanna tank, but with the stats we were talking about in the comparison, its unrealistic to think that anyone would chose to use blackthorne's because they have very little contribution to damage. And again, the LoH proc isn't even worth mentioning its so low. I was assuming common sense would be taken into account, my mistake.
Different slots have different stat allocations, you cant make a 1:1 comparison in just one slot. I thought this was obvious but apparently not.
Gems: again, no one is using LoH gems with that amount of LoH already on their gear or high damage (assumed, since LL is worthless in low end gear and then there isn't even an argument to be made here).
An "intelligent" person would know that unless you ran hundreds of permutations, logged the data, and used statistical analysis, just running around and going by what your gut feeling is better is a meaningless conclusion; hence the reason I resorted to math rather than testing to make my case.
Anyways since this has derailed to the point of name-calling there is no point in continuing the discussion. You and I seem to be trying to make separate points, and I think we both got our respective points across.
I've had a few friends of mine make the mistake, so i'll state it here just in case:
This drop rate is for WHITE ITEMS.
It doesnt mean that 16% of your rares are going to be 63. It means 16% of your whites are going to be Whites, and your magic find will determine which ones of them are magic or rare.
Its all items; whites, blues, yellows. Your MF will determine the quality of the drops, not the ilvl.
1
1
1
Monks can use skorn too, and you can get 6% LL on it. Its very easy to break 150k dps with a skorn. On a side note, sheet dps means nothing when you compare two different classes side by side, since abilities are vastly different between classes. Ever notice MoC doesn't increase your sheet dps by 48%? A WD with 100k dps spamming zombie bears will blow a 100k dps ww barb out of the water for actual damage done during a fight.
Monks also have things going for them that barbs don't, such as serenity (4 second invulnerability), sss which deals a ton of damage while the monk is invulerable. Tempest rush is basically the same mechanic as whirlwind, sweeping winds is incredibly efficient aoe dmg. Monk have a very high combat mobility due to the teleport associated with many of their attacks. Spirit regen means you start every fight with full spirit. Monks can have double resist in many areas, and if you just go with a single resist its way cheaper than a barb with OWE.
The only thing I think that makes monk sub-par to barbs is that they are very vulnerable to ground aoe's since their main stat does not provide mitigation against that damage like a barb's strength does. You cannot dodge molten/plague/etc etc, which means that you are going to take more damage than a barb to those damage sources. You can potentially offset this by getting higher resistance than a barb can, but that means getting double resist rolls and sacrificing dps stats.
1
IMHO, armor is the most underrated stat in the game.
1
1-0.7745=0.2255; (reduction from armor)
1-0.7645=0.2355; (reduction from resistances)
0.2355*0.2255=0.0531 (Total damage taken)
Which means I take 5.31% of the damage that monsters deal after mitigation. Lets say that instead of trying to get armor on most peices like I have done, I instead just went for All resistance, leaving me with about 6400 armor (I have seen many barbs with under 6k armor in very good gear, so this is a realistic value). At 6400 armor, damage reduction is at 68.10% from armor. Only 9.35% less than when I was at 10.3k armor, so I only take ~10% more damage right?
1-0.6810=0.319
0.2355*0.319=.0751
So after armor and resistances, I only take 7.51% of damage from monsters, which doesn't sound that bad. But...7.51/5.31=1.41, meaning I am taking 41% more damage than before. In the current state of the game, this is ok since its fairly easy to outgear the content, but once you start to turn up the monster difficulty in the next patch, you may wish you had a bit more damage reduction.
If you want to maximize your mitigation, the best way to do so is by keeping your damage reduction from Armor and All resistances equal, or as close to equal as you can get. Relative values for armor vs all resistances is 1 Resistance = 10 armor, if you keep a 10:1 ratio. This value is dynamic and will change depending on how much of each stat you have.
1
2
Also, copy/pasting the same shit 5 times makes people less likely to read your whining posts.
1
Blackthorne's are ok if you wanna tank, but with the stats we were talking about in the comparison, its unrealistic to think that anyone would chose to use blackthorne's because they have very little contribution to damage. And again, the LoH proc isn't even worth mentioning its so low. I was assuming common sense would be taken into account, my mistake.
Different slots have different stat allocations, you cant make a 1:1 comparison in just one slot. I thought this was obvious but apparently not.
Gems: again, no one is using LoH gems with that amount of LoH already on their gear or high damage (assumed, since LL is worthless in low end gear and then there isn't even an argument to be made here).
An "intelligent" person would know that unless you ran hundreds of permutations, logged the data, and used statistical analysis, just running around and going by what your gut feeling is better is a meaningless conclusion; hence the reason I resorted to math rather than testing to make my case.
Anyways since this has derailed to the point of name-calling there is no point in continuing the discussion. You and I seem to be trying to make separate points, and I think we both got our respective points across.
1