Seism just showcases how horribly broken banners are

All relics? No. But if I was to do something as gamechanging as remove faction bonuses and tie them up in a relic I wouldnt want them to also become vulnerable to early game siesm. I like Siesm as a mechanic but I dont want it to become a lazy "opponent has a relic out so I auto deploy Siesm" mechanic. Thought should be involved at all stages of the game.

 

Don't start whipping out those pleasant generalities. Why on earth shouldn't such bonuses be vulnerable to Seism, especially if they come packaged in a cheap, 20 nora chunk? I can totally see a line of reasoning for an explanation -- but lay it down. Seism has been costed and distributed to to, ideally, already address the concern to raise about the timing of its use, so if some relic, by that relic's design, would alter the rational involved in Seism, that seems like an arguable point.

Like you said, though, your idea wasn't put forward as a complete and wholly-advocated suggestion, so you don't necessarily need to back it up in that way, but neither do I think it's appropriate to defend a case with non-specific terms.

 

Relics completely should be vulnerable to Seism but I think where the disconnect lies between our positions is the degree of vulnerability. As it stands Siesm just seems lazy to me. There is no range. 95% of relics will be killed instantly anywhere on the map. If one is in play the Siesm champion automatically becomes efficient to deploy. Siesm isnt used like Jab to finish off relics. Its just used to straight up remove them.

I just want more thought involved. If Siesm for example destroyed the closest relic regardless of owner, the Siesm player would have to think before they deployed. They may have to deploy in a different font or use Relocate: Relic to move their relic further away in order to hit the opponent (Note: Not saying that this is a good idea).

 

Efficient assuming you are just trading the nora cost of Seism for the nora cost of the relic (assuming its real), which you aren't. Seism also involves playing the Seism champ, and something like Excavator wouldn't see a lick of play without Seism: it's not a good deploy otherwise. Seism as an ability doesn't exist as some raw value proposition outside of the champions on which it appears. Yeah, it's real good, and there are some good champs with Seism, but I do not think it's current incarnation needs to change. Some of this perspective might come down to the kind of decks I use -- low-resource FW where opponents playing Seism can actually be a good thing for me (and where it's possible to screen important items), and worms, which don't depend on relics.

As far as vulnerability, what would you imagine or suggest? You mentioned nearest relic, which essentially precludes someone using Seism from running any relics at all. Maybe Seism is changed to ~15 damage, and you're just expected to deploy 2 of them to destroy backline? That latter option would mean retooling things like Siegemonger and Excavator which are too otherwise clunky if they demand 2 rune slots and 2 of their bodies on the field. If Seism dropped to 15dmg/2nora from 20dmg/10nora, I could see Excavator remaining viable, but only because it exists within FW, and other factions wouldn't have that luxury. Besides, it wouldn't change the fundamental calculus of efficiency involved in destroying relics. Seism is, I think, too niche an effect to be viable if it depends entirely on destroying combat relics without generating efficiency on the back-line (however one might manage that design) -- unlike equipment, stealth, or cleanse-able conditions, front-line relics are already vulnerable to the basic playloop of Pox; noone needs Seism to cover that option.

Without saying "more thought" -- a phrase I've already said I find problematic and unconvincing -- if you could explain what exactly you want Seism to do, and perhaps hint at how that might be done through design, then we could get somewhere.

 

I dont have any particular ideas that I feel are better than current iterations. Relics are an entire class of rune that as a whole feel very "oppressed" at the moment. I used to run 3-5 in a deck and at most I now run 2 with a 3rd in pallies. The ones I do still run are ones like Hahndor Memorial or Earthshaker that have an upfront effect because after that siesm hurts less. Relics with persisting effects are far less appealing just because Seism exists and it isnt even a mechanic that has been particularly proliferated yet. I will admit that I cant name all the units that have it but I am pretty sure half the factions don't (Not saying that they should) have it.

 

Yeah, from a meta-game perspective, BGs that wanted to run the occasional persistent, back-line relic got hurt, while Seism does much less against decks which run no relics or a lot of relics.

 

Concerning seism, just make combat relics have more than 20hp.

 

@Markoth The champions, who have seism as either baseline or upgrade ability, are:
Chipped Boulder (ST/FS)
G'hern Rager (SP)
Goblin Rockpack (UD)
Siege Monger (UD)
Skeletal Excavator (FW)
Tortun Mortar (KF/FS)
Whirling Quarry (SP)

The factions with no access to seism whatsoever are: IS and SL.
Champions that are run with seism: Chipped Boulder (Baseline), Goblin Rockpack (Upgrade), Siege Monger (Upgrade), Excavator (Baseline) and Whirling Quarry (Upgrade)

Out of these 5 champs only 2 could be regarded as overofficient, considering they have seism (Boulder and Quarry). Both champs also happen to have Rock Barrage, so it could be that.

@kalasle Personally, I'd rather have seism as a permanent debuff that deals 25% of relic's MAX HP every turn. It'd force relic-heavy BGs to run mason champs if they want to keep their relic alive for longer. It'd make the ability less of a middle finger in general and it'd still fill its purpose. Perhaps some mason champs would see a resurgence thanks to that.

 

SP relic idea!

Hiistzine
Whenever a friendly voil champion is deployed a vampyre bat is summoned to and agecent space.

 

So it's not instant, but guarantees a kill on every relic, and otherwise operates how it does now in terms of efficiency. I don't see what this would substantively change. Elaborate?

Pffffffffft. Nope. Just screen with 20 nora relics, better than running garbage with Mason.

Nah, it'd still kill stuff -- even kill it better, if it's something like Statue of Xulos or a >20 HP relic.

 

There's room for counterplay with mason champs, something current seism doesn't grant. A lot of mason champs are runnable, but can't necessarily afford getting into the BG.

Not all mason champs are garbage. Even the FW ones are pretty decent.

The idea isn't to nerf seism to oblivion, but to allow the reacting player to have room for a reaction to begin with. Also you've just contradicted yourself with this, considering the argument brought up before.

Another option would be to make certain relics simply tougher, but I doubt it'll happen.

 

So you want seism to be a slightly modified overload? (10 damage every 2 turns vs. 25% damage (most relics are 20hp) every turn)

 

Do you mean, like, a limited number of 25% xHP triggers? The way you wrote it seemed like the triggers were indefinite.

There are a few otherwise playable champs which happen to have Mason. "Pretty decent" doesn't cut it for FW, though, certainly not in the case of a champion as thoroughly neutered as Elsari Mason. The ability is crap healing, and its uses for relics are narrow at best, even if Seism was changed. It turns Mason into a sort of bad counter-deploy?

I don't see how. Seism gets better at killing high HP relics, get slower at killing relics in general, and otherwise maintains its cost:benefit ratio against stock relics like Banners.

 

i like the idea of varied banner types for every faction / theme, that you can only choose one banner. i think the banner should be attached to shrine in some way as a slot, not as a deployable relic and thus does not take up one of your 30 deck slots. idk but some champions may need a health and dmg increase if you do away with the standard banner, you could always keep that one as an option tho.

 

This would go against their current intent, where they are supposed to benefit people playing full faction decks over splits. Even if it's only benefiting half of your champs it would still be a bonus that you no longer have to weigh against other deck slots like you currently do.

It is an interesting idea though, maybe some kind of activated ability (with a nora cost) on the avatar with a 16-20turn duration? Maybe split decks choose between two options that are half as potent and share a cooldown? Dunno.

Of course, then the problem becomes: "what do we do with all these warbanners now"

 

Are you suggesting you ever don't include a banner?

 

Banners are so auto they're even auto in splits.

 

#stitched.