HoYoverse has revealed plans for character banners and weapons early in the second half of the Genshin Imact 3.4 patch with February 7 2023. You don’t have to wait for leaks and doubt whether to spin the gacha or leave the twists for later. Legendaries have been known since the developers' stream, but there were no insider speculations about epics.
As soon as the banners go down Xiao и al-Haytama, they will be replaced Yelan и Hu Tao, but only now it has become known what 4 * heroes will be in their banners and weapons. Among the epic characters will return:
- Xingqiu (Hydro, one-handed sword) - The character is great for both Hu Tao and Yelan in certain builds. For him, preferably C6.
- Beidou (Electro, Claymore) - we recommend knocking out at least C2, this will significantly increase her damage.
- Ningguang (Geo, Catalyst) is a great DD or Sap DD, it is also important for her to knock out at least C2, and C6 generally enhances her elemental explosion damage well.
The incarnation of a deity with a spear Homa's staff and bow Aqua Simulacra will complement the following 4* weapon options: Lithic Blade (two-handed), Aquila Favonia (one-handed), Storm of dragons (Pole), Codex Favonia (Catalyst) and Rust (Shooting). In the comments on social networks, they note that, as in the first half of the patch, epics are more depressing than encouraging. This can be explained by the low demand for the indicated 4 * weapons in most character builds.
Also, the developers have already officially announced Dahyu и Miku, but it is still unknown whether they will be in the same banner (as al-Haytham и Yaoyao or Candace и Cyno) or in different (like Nahida и Laila).
Write in the comments, how do you like these banners and who did you decide to knock out? For all leaks and announcements, follow timetable banners and follow others the news on the site, plums for patch 3.5 will soon go.
In general, probably one of the top banners of all time. Ye lan is useful, Hu Tao is useful. All 4s are very strong. Poor Haitham|Xiao. They will skip them now, how to give a drink.
Do not speak for everyone.
Not everyone needs this hutava, which must be kept at low hp and balance the stats with the weapon like crazy.
Yelan is helpful, but nothing more.
With any DD, you need to balance the stats a lot, and Tao is the strongest DD, this is an undeniable fact. Yelan is the most useful Persian, replacing Blue, who is played in all packs of first-order reactions, and is also indispensable in a second-order reaction.
Weak epics in the armory?
Dragon's Bane is a perfect r5 option for Khutava if the homa doesn't proc.
Favonium is an option for pumping energy in packs with a strong volatile dp. The sword is in Benet's hands, Mona takes the catalyst and easy pee pumping rofls of energy.
Rusty on p5 is a great option for Yoimiya, Torta, phys Fischl.
A stone sword, of course, is such a thing, but sorry, one poorly applicable gun in the mountain of goodness is an adequate risk for those who will spin the banner.
take cashbacks again, all fours I have on c6+
Good fours. Xingqiu is understandable, a must have. Nina is so-so, even C6. Very long ult animation. Well Beidou under the reaction is good.
cashback banner Yelan, when beidou and xingqiu c6, it will be sad to turn Yelan.
A typical picture for those who have been playing for a long time. They would still stuff the cat girl.
If you are talking about Diona, then for example, I don’t have a single game in a year. Already rank 57 almost. I would be happy with her, a good character, you can find a use
>>As in the first half of the patch, the epics are more depressing than encouraging.
And can the authors of the articles keep their personal opinions to themselves? I, for example, come in to read the news, and not to read the subjectivity, and these moments depress me rather than please me. And, the question is, why is Homa bad, which is, if not the best spear, then one of?
So Khoma is not epic.
epics (short for epic) are 4* weapons.
Homa - 5 *, legendary.
Regarding the dissatisfaction of the players, this is not subjective, but a statement of feedback in the comments.
Firstly, stating reviews in the comments is subjective, and secondly, then you need to indicate this. Looks like the opinion of the author. The guy here said it right. Homa really messed up, but that's okay.
Be kind, we do not need to tell us how to work.
At first, you cannot publish an article with 2-3 sentences and 4 pictures. Almost any article expresses the author's vision of a particular situation. If you find fault with "subjectivity", then here it was impossible to mention the constellations, the same author dared to express his opinion.
Just so you know, no recommendation system or search engine will show an article if it's short and non-unique. That is why the authors expand the basic source material (in this case, just pictures and text with a list of characters / weapons), this is part of their tasks (certain requirements are put forward for articles) and they are paid for this. There is no point in an article that no one will see.
Secondly, articles gain thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of views and no one will change the style of narration and work in the red because of 2-3 stifling / toxic in the comments 🙂
Thirdly, we are always open for feedback from readers and, if necessary, we make changes to the articles, supplement, update, but this is not the case. The commentator above simply expressed his dissatisfaction with the fact that someone dared to speak badly about "Khoma", although this spear was not even discussed.
Sincerely.
And why say that this is not subjective, if it is? It turns out that I can’t do anything, but is it possible to call me a stifling one for pointing out the failure in fact? Well, don't change. You will go far with this approach.
Without respect.
Man, but you didn’t indicate the failure in fact, you yourself were mistaken
No need for childish insults. Most of my answer relates to the first comment, where the authors were advised to "keep their opinions to themselves", and since you supported it, then, therefore, to you.
To avoid misunderstandings, he clarified in the article that the subjective opinion of users in the social. networks, not the author.
Regarding the “failure in fact” - in the comments I meant that it was not my subjectivity that was indicated, and not that it was not subjective at all.
PS In principle, most of the articles are a reflection of the author's subjective vision of a particular topic and options for its disclosure. In the same way, you can’t come to the YouTube blogger’s channel and reproach him for being on your channel dare to express your opinion.
PSS In the comments, you can share your vision of the situation, no one forbids, each article is open to discussion.