CyunUnderis wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 10:17 am
I don't think the example you took is good (especially in 24 vs 24 or Zerg vs Zerg - might be more real in 6 vs 6 or 12 vs 12). The greater the mass, the weaker the combo Clean + CD reducer is compared to the combo ID + CD reducer because, like you say, there is a lot of debuffs (including DoT), so ID will naturally be covered, even if the Slayers don't do it themselves.
leftayparxoun wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 10:57 am
Even ignoring the other debuffs that may be placed alongside ID, like Cyun mentions, proposing that For The Witch King (FTWK, Destro CD reducer) can be used to counter ID is a completely wrong mentality imo, and does the argument for ID no favours. Let me explain:
I demonstrated in my previous comment how ID can quickly get out of hand when purposely stacked. If FTWK+Cleanses is the intended counter to it then, in my opinion, it is a game design mistake:
For Order to successfully perform the offense it just requires Slayers in the same party paired with a WW SM. You could have 2 parties in a wb for example with the same strategy.
For Destro to successfully perform the counter-defence it requires a FTWK bg in
EVERY party that may be attacked by the enemy blob.
As a result:
1. It limits Destro's warband class options (by practically enforcing a Chosen+ FTWK Bg duo for Meta comps)
2. It promotes defensive use of FTWK (save it for when the ID train starts) vs free use of WW for Order (use it whenever you want to apply pressure)
3. It may even promote a similar class diversity issue on Order, where Kotbs + WW SM are stacked with Slayers in every party.
On the other hand, while Furious Stomping can't be disenchanted by certain classes (like IBs as was mentioned) you don't need to have 1 disenchanting class in every party; as long as there are sufficient tanks near the backline that can disenchant Choppas (For example 4 Kotbs, 1 from every party, especially if using the Destroy Enchantment tactic) the issue shouldn't require a change in Order party composition.
To summarize:
- Having to change party/warband composition to a great degree to counter just a single ability is bad game design and should be avoided at any cost.
- Having to change faction-wide class builds to a great degree to counter just a single ability is an even worse game design (and the reason I'm glad old Rampage got rightfully changed)
While I didn't want to detract from the original topic, I believe many of the things we have discussed here are also relevant to possible balancing of other issues, like for the CC discussion. For that reason I decided to keep the conversation going. I hope neither the Author of the post or the people reading it mind this (imo needed) detour.
My point was that it's bad faith and a misdirect to argue X skill is powerful under XYZ circumstances and then fail to apply a similar level of circumstance to the counter. That is no different from saying 5 Slayers are more powerful than 1 DoK; therefore, Slayers are broken. If you're going to apply circumstance to justify your points, you need to apply the same level of circumstance to the counter and then assess and discuss the balance.
You mention that you need to have a BG in EVERY party with a cleanser - with SM and WW you'll still need to have a SM in EVERY party with slayers, it kinda cancels out. Also you can use a FotWK boosted cleanse out of party; so realistically you could get 2-for-1, just like Slayer and SM.
Furious Stomping is - as you acknowledge - harder to remove, shatter is similarly uncommon to ailment cleanse, but still has to be executed in melee range, and
successfully pass defence checks.
Tell me how easy it was to shatter Rampage.
Both skills have the ability to be covered by other ailments or buffs - this is super basic, but if you break it down to the counter-play available, FS has much higher agency and less native counterplay. ID, if you really wanted to, you could move away from the group - only a W key is required. You can't stop a Choppa W-keying you without spending something.
While ID can be applied to multiple targets, Furious Stompin lets you move it with you - hugely underrated in power. As I said earlier, as a driver, if I had the choice of both skills as they are, I'd be having my guys take FS. It's more homogenous, flexible, and isn't reliant on your target - you are in control.
Both factions have comp restrictions on what is FotM, Destro with Choppa (Why take a mara/SH/Sorc when you can take MORE CHOP), Order with WL(? is it now BW - doesn't matter; point is what happened to dear engie).
The way to break up wonky warband comp is to stop pidgeoning classes into specific roles, it completely strips the organic nature out of the meta. If all classes have multiple viable specs, counters will naturally be formed, quite quickly. This is opposite to your summary of what you think is poor game design. If players have a lack of tools, then whatever is the hardest to deal with will rise to the top.
Games go through this all the time, particularly the more competitive ORvR ones. Classes might not change super frequently, but changing specs and gear sets is a core part of what kept many of those games running for a long time. It's poor game design to not have the ability to adapt your character to changing situations; it's why we constantly have such difficulties in attaining parity; the masteries and specs for many classes suck, and there's maybe 2 viable specs. For healers, there's usually only 1.
I don't want to detour the topic either, but it often seems to derail with players liking to talk about how their faction is wonky. The are some serious painpoints that are covered within the OP that are relevant, to what we're discussing, especially the un-noted bias (not balance favouritism) between the core mechanics of MMO PvP concepts and how it affects balance.
I think it's painfully clear to everyone that the balance issues run deep, and that it's exceptionally broad, touching on huge swathes of the game.
