1. PvP with the Vampirism Rune: Longer fights don’t mean balance   The vampirism rune may make fights longer, but this does not represent realism nor improve competitiveness. In PvP scenarios, this kind of mechanic:   Devalues burst damage — classes focused on explosive damage, like assassins and offensive mages, lose impact because the opponent can simply heal quickly after surviving the initial burst.   Favors passive sustain builds, where tanks and warriors with vampirism can survive indefinitely, turning PvP into a war of attrition rather than skill and strategy.   Reduces the weight of tactical decisions — like positioning, timing control, and focusing priority targets — because whoever heals too fast ends up forgiven for mistakes that should be fatal.     The result: excessive vampirism creates a scenario where the winner isn’t who plays better, but who can keep regenerating constantly — and this breaks the arena concept as a field of skill, timing, and precise execution.         2. PvE with anti-vampirism bosses: An artificial and risky solution   In PvE, the idea of adding bosses with abilities that reduce players’ vampirism effects is valid in theory, but it raises practical problems:   Requires careful design to avoid feeling like an artificial punishment — if the game starts creating bosses just to “fix” vampirism excesses, it signals that the problem lies in the core system, not in PvE.   Doesn’t replace the importance of real healers, but can cause frustration if players feel their vampirism is useless arbitrarily against certain enemies.   Creates inconsistency: In one area vampirism is essential; in another, it’s nerfed. This breaks the cohesion of the player’s build and progression system, confusing the experience.           Conclusion:   The excessive power of the vampirism rune unbalances PvP and weakens PvE design, requiring “patched” solutions like bosses with specific resistances. The best approach would be:   Limit the vampirism effect in PvP (with strong reduction in competitive environments).   Naturally reinforce the role of healers in PvE, with challenging content that demands cooperation and positioning, not just passive endurance.     If the arena is meant to prove who is better, vampirism cannot be the deciding factor.  

хорошо, что не написал. избежал перманентной блокировки аккаунта:

This isn’t competition — it’s a massacre.       • "The goal of the arena is to show that you're the strongest and can beat any competitor. So this would destroy that essence."   In reality, the arena doesn't just measure brute force or numerical superiority — it measures tactical ability, game sense, timing, and character building. When resources like gear and runes are unequal, what the arena truly measures is time invested or money spent, not actual skill. Therefore, systems that level the playing field, like proxies or balanced alternative modes, reinforce the true competitive essence — which is to showcase real skill under equal conditions, not just gear advantage.         • "Many servers nowadays also have unwritten rules to help new players get arena gear, like the up-left strategy to let them win in 5x5 or Crucible."   Unwritten rules are fragile, inconsistent, and easily broken by ill-intentioned players. Relying on them means depending on unstable morality instead of a functional system. Furthermore, if a system requires informal help just to be accessible, that’s already a sign of intrinsic imbalance. A proper competitive system doesn’t rely on veteran charity — it relies on fair, transparent, and systemic access for all.         • "And if this is really a problem, it's better to create another arena ladder called 'Proxy League', where people fight using proxy heroes that can be customized (but customization is available for everyone), and the one with the best strategy and best build wins the match."   That’s a great idea — but if the “Proxy League” is where skill truly decides the winner, then why isn’t it the main arena format? If the current arena values farming time or payment over strategy, then it’s the current mode that has lost its essence — not the balanced one. Therefore, the “Proxy” mode shouldn’t be a side feature; it should be the standard competitive format, while the current system (based on unequal gear) should be an optional mode for those who enjoy long-term gear progression.       In summary: The true essence of competition is skill under equal conditions. Keeping a system that favors geared veterans only perpetuates inequality and pushes new players away. Implementing or prioritizing balanced modes doesn’t destroy the essence of the arena — it restores it.          

Абсолютно согласен, но я больше имел в виду, что, например, есть амулет со скоростью и автоатакой и такой же с пробивом. Или такой же с хп. Вполне может так оказаться, что у тех же искателей от другого шмота при переходе с 32 на 34 накопится перекап скорости, из-за чего амулет массово начнут менять на содержащий пробив или хп. Вторым таким примером можно взять кольца с точностью и с хп, где тоже в зависимости от сборки и имеющихся книг можно по-разному собираться. 

Тут не соглашусь, разработчики изначально делают все предметы под определенных персонажей (ну по крайней мере должны).  Т.е. нам же не рандомно статы пихают в бижу/шмотки/пухи. Например с новым арбом воды даже логично смотрится, что его будут точить именно под рейды, а значит нужен урон и туда запихали пробив (не у всех же есть триты наверное, так подумали разработчики или подняли стату)