Return of Reckoning

Penril wrote:There is a difference between "that skill is too strong! nerf it!" and "that skill is very strong but does not need a nerf". Guard falls into the latter category.

Good clarification.

peterthepan3 wrote:

Akalukz wrote:If guard isn't so strong, then why are some many people opposed to making changes to it.

I am yet to see an overwhelming majority of the relevant parties, i.e. those who do smallscale, say that guard is OP.

Why are only those that do small scale considered relevant, just a question. I would think a larger % of the players are not small scale players in general. I feel there should be hard counters to skills, especially skills that are basically free.

Suggested changes
New renown skill to strip guard on a 5 min c/d etc
Only allow target to have one guard at a time (no changes to mechanices, just adds a bit more complexity)
Require tank to have a shield, or if going 2-hand, only reduce damage 20% or something
Take away chance to block/parry/disrupt transfer damage from guard, only allow the tank to mitigate the damage. (I can't remember if this still happens or not)

Any abilitiy that has a CD longer than 60 should be scrapped imo, long CD abilities are just as cheesy as RNG in a competitive game.

Requiring guard to have a shield to be at full effectiveness would totally make 2h tanks useless unless there was some kind of major buff to them

IDK but I think messing with avoidance on guard could have drastic effects in large scale fighting in ORvR or at least be way more pronounced there. Unless you could find a way to make avoidance on a per hit basis or something.

long c/d is probably true, more of a gimmick skill than not i reckon.

I know not everyone will agree with me, especially on these forums. And i am fine with that i like discussions, hit helps pass the time at work.

I have long felt avoidance of guard damage was always wrongly implemented. I think the 2h vs s/b could be resovled with more "protection" when wearing s/b and less when using 2h. something to think about

Because the guard change suggestion - as first posited by Haojun - was in regards to it being apparently too powerful in smallscale. Few pages back.

peterthepan3 wrote:Because the guard change suggestion - as first posited by Haojun - was in regards to it being apparently too powerful in smallscale. Few pages back.

Thanks for the clarification, but seems to me as if equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 basically waits on someone to make a mistake, with or without guard. Guard just prolonging the fight, which i get, the problem of guard is when it isn't equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 of 12 v 12 matches.

Random pugs guarding in scenarios vs guard in premade is almost incomparable. The problem seems to arise when premades are thrown in with pugs. Be it pugs in ORvR or pugs in scenarios, the problem is the same. This is where guard becomes too strong. and shifts it to the first part of Penril's statement instead of the the last. """There is a difference between "that skill is too strong! nerf it!" and "that skill is very strong but does not need a nerf". Guard falls into the latter category."""

Jaycub wrote:It seems to fit very well with the BO aesthetic, would love to see them throw gobbos into battle. Probably don't need it from a balance perspective though. Maybe IB/BG should have it to stop potential cheese by throwing them into backlines to spam healdebuffs?

Ally push/pull/swap abilities are something I'd been thinking about, but in a different context, as part of a redesigned KotBS/Chosen.

Akalukz wrote:

peterthepan3 wrote:Because the guard change suggestion - as first posited by Haojun - was in regards to it being apparently too powerful in smallscale. Few pages back.

Thanks for the clarification, but seems to me as if equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 basically waits on someone to make a mistake, with or without guard. Guard just prolonging the fight, which i get, the problem of guard is when it isn't equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 of 12 v 12 matches.

Random pugs guarding in scenarios vs guard in premade is almost incomparable. The problem seems to arise when premades are thrown in with pugs. Be it pugs in ORvR or pugs in scenarios, the problem is the same. This is where guard becomes too strong. and shifts it to the first part of Penril's statement instead of the the last. """There is a difference between "that skill is too strong! nerf it!" and "that skill is very strong but does not need a nerf". Guard falls into the latter category."""

I get you, yea. It's equally strong in both RvR and scenarios when complemented with a good team on voice comms, but as Vig said a few pages back people still do get killed through guard (most of the time, in fact, unless lucky with punts). Which is why I was a bit mehh when the person in question called for a nerf to it but ONLY in small encounters.

Akalukz wrote:

peterthepan3 wrote:Because the guard change suggestion - as first posited by Haojun - was in regards to it being apparently too powerful in smallscale. Few pages back.

Thanks for the clarification, but seems to me as if equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 basically waits on someone to make a mistake, with or without guard. Guard just prolonging the fight, which i get, the problem of guard is when it isn't equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 of 12 v 12 matches.

Random pugs guarding in scenarios vs guard in premade is almost incomparable. The problem seems to arise when premades are thrown in with pugs. Be it pugs in ORvR or pugs in scenarios, the problem is the same. This is where guard becomes too strong. and shifts it to the first part of Penril's statement instead of the the last. """There is a difference between "that skill is too strong! nerf it!" and "that skill is very strong but does not need a nerf". Guard falls into the latter category."""

No, it doesn't. Because no one should be asking for nerfs/changes based on poor play/pugs.

Here, let me quote this rule (again):

5. No PUG arguments.

Balance is based around classes being played competently. Do not make any argument which involves disparity of skill, gear or specialization on either side. It is desirable when buffing classes or specs to avoid making them PUG killers, but a buff to an underpowered element of the game which renders it or the class more powerful against PUGs is not a problem as long as this element has valid counterplay.

Penril wrote:

Akalukz wrote:

peterthepan3 wrote:Because the guard change suggestion - as first posited by Haojun - was in regards to it being apparently too powerful in smallscale. Few pages back.

Thanks for the clarification, but seems to me as if equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 basically waits on someone to make a mistake, with or without guard. Guard just prolonging the fight, which i get, the problem of guard is when it isn't equally skilled / geared / matched 6v6 of 12 v 12 matches.

Random pugs guarding in scenarios vs guard in premade is almost incomparable. The problem seems to arise when premades are thrown in with pugs. Be it pugs in ORvR or pugs in scenarios, the problem is the same. This is where guard becomes too strong. and shifts it to the first part of Penril's statement instead of the the last. """There is a difference between "that skill is too strong! nerf it!" and "that skill is very strong but does not need a nerf". Guard falls into the latter category."""

No, it doesn't. Because no one should be asking for nerfs/changes based on poor play/pugs.

Here, let me quote this rule (again):

5. No PUG arguments.

Balance is based around classes being played competently. Do not make any argument which involves disparity of skill, gear or specialization on either side. It is desirable when buffing classes or specs to avoid making them PUG killers, but a buff to an underpowered element of the game which renders it or the class more powerful against PUGs is not a problem as long as this element has valid counterplay.

But that is exactly what guard is... a pug killer. get rid of guard in certain areas where it's premade vs pug and suddenly it becomes a lot more competitive. I would think people that are overly skilled / coordinated would welcome more competition. It is absolutely 0 fun spawn camping scenarios, for both the campers and those being camped.

(added space for clarity)

Not to mention the direct counters are very slim definition of counter. Reminds me of when the Dev's on live said the answer to bomb groups was punts.... ummm that was fine till the got stomped.

Are you seriously comparing current Guard to old bomb groups?