Seism just showcases how horribly broken banners are

Is it HP stacking or is it because of the cost of HP stacking? Those are different things.

At the same time, often with these discussions it seems like whatever is being considered OP isn't being compared to what there would be instead. If the player didn't spend nora on Boost, he would have something else. It's true that HP is pretty basic, and I don't disagree that costing might be an issue, but I disagree with the fundamental concept that HP stacking in of itself is always, forever, a problem.

I know you always have a problem with HP:Nora going above 1:1 on any unit, regardless of context or where the HP came from, but I disagree with that assessment because I think the opportunity cost has to be considered.

So to be clear, I don't disagree that HP stacking CAN be a problem due to the circumstances (or that the Warbanners are strong and auto include/OP), I just disagree that HP stacking itself is conceptually a problem in of itself (especially to the extent you claim it is).

In either case, you will note I was the one that nerfed most of the stuff you mentioned, and in general stat stacking has been dramatically decreased (but of course, now we are moving onto complaints about ability/effects stacking, because you have to replace X with Y). Foment was removed less because of stacking with Boost and more because of consolidation - the goal of Commander/Defender/Boost nerf/consolidation was to eliminate these redundancies in abilities and have one ability for each stat - which also addressed stat stacking concerns and made the abilities more accessible - now you need several different units (and pay a lot more nora) to achieve the same results.

 

Also, for reference... old Boost was basically: +3 DMG, +6 HP, +1 DEF, and +1 SPD... came in around 14 nora I think (not that any champ paid full price for anything back then)?

So much stats! Now you'd need Boost (7), Commander (7), Defender (7) AND Improve: Speed (10) for a total of 31 nora to get to that level of stats (though Boost is global now).

 

Agreed. The cost of the effect matters. That's my point.

It always holds true. Because if you remove Boost, the champions would have something else, and if that something else is as OP as you think Boost is, we just changed one thing for another.

In the cases of runes that are playable without Boost, you can argue the runes themselves are OP'd, but that's not because of HP stacking specifically or that the cost of Boost doesn't matter - it matters still, the champ would even stronger in the cases where Boost doesn't matter if the champ costed 7 nora less.

 

I agree that it doesn't matter what I do, something will always be considered OP. The question of whether HP stacking specifically could be an issue in the future, I agree, it could be.

But I don't think that's because of HP stacking in of itself, but the fact that anything that exists in the game can theoretically "blow up in my face."

The point isn't that HP stacking can't be a problem, but that the nature of the problem isn't with HP stacking itself and nothing you have said so far convinces me that, mechanically somehow HP stacking effects is something so fundamentally different than it deserves its own consideration separate from general OPness.

 

It sure sounds like you do when you make statements like this:

The only way I can think of to read that statement is... HP stacking should not exist because it will always, no matter what, be an issue - which to me is having a problem with HP stacking on principle.

 

So let's make this more concrete:

Is there a realistic cost to Boost or Warbanners where you'd consider it not to be an issue?

If so, what is that cost?

If not, why not? And is the only solution to not have +MAX HP that affects more than a single unit at a time? i.e. +MAX HP is a problem in of itself, except at unrealistically high costs?

 

It's certainly true +MAX HP effects in themes with access to a large number of summons have a different scale of effect than those that don't. The game has generally gone in a direction where effects are becomining increasingly ignoring summons, for better or for worse.

 

My claim is that you have always had a particular beef with HP stacking in particular and I do not share the same concern to the level you seem to think is a problem - but this is just a subjective feeling on my part.

For me, in general, I tend to believe the problem lies more with cost in general and that effects themselves are rarely fundamentally broken (I mean, obviously there is a host of stuff you can create where it WOULD be a fundamental problem, but most effects don't fall into this category unless you are going out of your way to make one of these). Now, maybe you don't think HP stacking is fundamentally broken, but at least this point I am genuinely confused as to what your stance is because you seem to be arguing both sides.

Either HP stacking is an issue and should be removed, or it isn't and is fine to stay (but maybe needs some tweaks in terms of numbers/details/cost).

But your statements to seem to suggest you think both are true. In either case, I agree with you that HP stacking is a potential balance concern - but that applies to everything so.

 

I don't think anyone disagrees that HP stacking on summons is on a slightly different scale of concern, which is why it's been nerfed consistently for so long. Of course, at this point is is becoming increasingly clear that it is not Summon power level that people are concerned about, it is the fact that summons exist at all in a playable form, but that's a different topic.

 

Should strong effects exist? What makes Boost unacceptably strong or warrant special consideration? Is it because you feel that HP is so fundamental that it should not be increased at all? I can see that argument. I can also see the argument of it begin specifically tied to the ability to scale (and Pox has a wide range of potential number of units, so the variability of the ability is larger than most). And it doesn't apply to Commander/Defender as much because those stats are slightly less fundamental than HP - so even if the +DMG granted is worth more in some abstract way, the +HP is more dangerous balance wise because it's more core to every unit, etc.

I am mostly trying to understand the underlying argument here, because I don't think you have quite articulated it.

Again, I agree that it can be a potential balance concern - but everything can be, what makes this one a stand out in your mind? Keep in mind I am not suggesting there aren't any arguments - I just don't want to put words in your mouth (or anyone else's), which is why I ask often ask leading questions.

 

If I am going to nerf banners, I am just going to nerf them. I am not going to add a new feature to keep them around in some weird way.

 

Let me back up a bit and see if I am discern your argument, DMR.

• HP Stacking is strong
• HP Stacking is so strong, conceptually, that even if it was appropriately costed, it would still be a potential problem
• HP Stacking is strong because HP is the most powerful stat due to its universal applicability
• HP Stacking is so strong that almost nothing in the game beats Boost
• HP Stacking is not OP in of itself but depends on the context, it's just that the context is narrow, and is easily broken because of how strong HP stacking inherently is
  
• However, HP, in any situation where it exceeds 1:1, is a potential problem, regardless of the cost to get there (negative abilities, lower other stats, lack of other abilities, thru buffs from other units, spells, etc.)
• Boost is undercosted but the game is full of miscosted abilities so it would be silly to talk about it
• Despite how OP it is in almost every situation, HP Stacking shouldn't be addressed because the game is borked on a bigger picture level, including Avatars, Faction Bonuses, non-RuneDock resources, etc. so it doesn't actually matter because the game itself is fundamentally broken to the point where OP abilities don't matter

Any of these points incorrect?