Not really worth an artifact. You can just make an alias to set them - it would be nice if the game let us handle that sort of stuff through IG methods and it really should make the process as easy as possible since things have become way more complicated, but if they try to gouge us for an artifact, I'll just code something myself.
I am slightly disappointed at the potency change as it seems to make little sense. I know as a Bloodborn our frenzy is bad already, but this sounds kind of iffy as we lost a chunk of our hit power with scythes in two ways now (removed serration too). Any admin care to explain pretty please why this happened.
With the changes to stat scaling and the combinations available through statpacks and enhancements, it was nearly possible to hit the effective strength cap without any artifacts as a praenomen/bloodborn, rendering investments pointless. Bloodborn were the other class (other than templars) who were in need of a DPS adjustment downward, just because of how much pressure they've been pushing across multiple routes. By changing potence to a bashing upgrade for both vampire classes, strength boosting artifacts and effects are effective again.
I am slightly disappointed at the potency change as it seems to make little sense. I know as a Bloodborn our frenzy is bad already, but this sounds kind of iffy as we lost a chunk of our hit power with scythes in two ways now (removed serration too). Any admin care to explain pretty please why this happened.
Because Bloodborn and Praenomen could hit 21 strength with 0 artifact investment, or a starchart at the very least.
Start with powerful for 15 str. +1 enhancement + 2 potence + 1 white amulet +1 blessing +1 stars = 21 str
@Riluo with the new statpacks it was possible for vampires to get to 21 strength in Powerful without having to buy a +str artifact. This also allowed vampires to get to 20 str in Stalwart, which was a ridiculous amount of tankiness for pretty much no damage tradeoff.
As far as getting hit twice, Bloodborn damage was definitely far too overwhelming on the high end.
EDIT: Derp I didn't even see that it already got answered twice. But my answer included Stalwart!
I'd suggest adding an extra level of expgain to typical/normal while removing one of the experience boosts via enchantments. Formerly, people had to pick one of the weaker statpacks for the full exp boost, whereas now people can pick powerful/stalwart/resilient and level 2 exp boost, losing only 10% compared to the typical/normal statpacks.
For the sake of comparison: Typical with +con, +balance, +blunt, +2 exp boost ends up at 14 str, 12 dex, 14 con, and 13 int with 10% blunt audit and 30% exp boost. Someone using stalwart instead (+str, +balance, +blunt, +2 exp boost) would end up with 13 str, 11 dex, 15 con, and 12 int, 20% blunt audit, 10% cutting audit, 20% exp boost, 10% electric audit, and 10% magic vuln.
Essentially, the tradeoff for picking typical/normal as a bashing statpack seems to be really underwhelming for the 10% boost in experience. Now, if the innate bonus in those statpacks were higher and you could only get 10% from enhancements, people would have to chose between more experience or vastly higher survivability/dps.
Did you ever consider putting +exp in augmetic instead of a stamina enhancement?
I do not believe putting XP boost as an augmetic would be a good idea as you would be removing that option from a large population of the game as not many at over the 110 level to gain that option. While XP boosters are needed for us at such high levels, I believe it is a needed option for those that hit 80 and above.
“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It's not.” ― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
Veritas says, "Sorry for breaking your system Macavity."
Veritas says, "My boss fights crash Macavity's computer now."
I do not believe putting XP boost as an augmetic would be a good idea as you would be removing that option from a large population of the game as not many at over the 110 level to gain that option. While XP boosters are needed for us at such high levels, I believe it is a needed option for those that hit 80 and above.
If the exp statpacks had a higher boost (like I suggested in my post), people would have access to them at level 1 and above.
We're delaying turning off reincarnations for now because we have a few more changes in the works that's going to leave people wanting to shuffle their statpacks/enhancements around.
Comments
Abhorash says, "Ve'kahi has proved that even bastards can earn their place."
Start with powerful for 15 str. +1 enhancement + 2 potence + 1 white amulet +1 blessing +1 stars = 21 str
For the sake of comparison:
Typical with +con, +balance, +blunt, +2 exp boost ends up at 14 str, 12 dex, 14 con, and 13 int with 10% blunt audit and 30% exp boost. Someone using stalwart instead (+str, +balance, +blunt, +2 exp boost) would end up with 13 str, 11 dex, 15 con, and 12 int, 20% blunt audit, 10% cutting audit, 20% exp boost, 10% electric audit, and 10% magic vuln.
Essentially, the tradeoff for picking typical/normal as a bashing statpack seems to be really underwhelming for the 10% boost in experience. Now, if the innate bonus in those statpacks were higher and you could only get 10% from enhancements, people would have to chose between more experience or vastly higher survivability/dps.
Did you ever consider putting +exp in augmetic instead of a stamina enhancement?
Nothing is going to get better. It's not.”
― Dr. Seuss, The Lorax
If the exp statpacks had a higher boost (like I suggested in my post), people would have access to them at level 1 and above.
We're delaying turning off reincarnations for now because we have a few more changes in the works that's going to leave people wanting to shuffle their statpacks/enhancements around.