About efficiency of spells once again

Drain vitality 45 nora:
"Take what you can, discard the rest."
Target champion has -6 DMG and -3 SPD for 6 turns. Then, the closest 3 champions you control gain +2 DMG and +1 SPD for 6 turns.

The stats given are worth about 72 nora according to champion cost formula and even though effect lasts 3 rounds, The UD playstyle can get away with this most of the time.
If you wanted to counter this spell totally, you'd need to dispel 3 of opponents champions and cleanse yours, where obviously spell purge comes to my mind first. In this case, your opponent will still have 1 turn of +2 damage on his champions and +5 nora if you managed (countering is harder than casting) to do it.

I don't think it's something really bad for the game, but pure resource efficiency in faction spellset makes the other factions need to build around their own efficiency (like it always actually has been). That's why themes need boosts, commanders, good healing and so on. Please, devs, don't overnerf in-themes efficiency and avoid too good single champions that combine into, so called, >CANCER SPLITS<

 

Where are you getting 72 nora from? I get closer to 30. Or are you counting the difference between -6 and +2?

 

Let's hope this guy never sees marsh song played.

 

FS faction bonus: lose 2 rune slots, gain 14 nora per round.

 

last time i did maths it was 58 somehow but it should be like this: +3 speed total for you: 24 nora; +6 dmg: 12 nora; -3 speed for them: -24 nora and -6 dmg for them: -12 nora.
+36 nora for you and -36 nora for them, unless speed is counted in another way.

@GoldTiger I actually see marsh song as a bit of tempo hit but players playing without pressure against FS think marsh song is the boss of runes.

Also, I'm not hating on drain vitality or marsh songs, just want to make sure people understand why things seem so strong sometimes.

 

Those are the costs for "permanant stats". Your pricing would be correct if they got the stats forever.

 

Kinda off topic, but what are the nora costs of each type of stat? I've always wondered that, but never had the trouble to look into it...

1 DMG - 2 nora
1 SPD - 8 nora
1 DEF - ?
1 HP - ?
1 RNG - ? (this one might be kinda weird)

 

For a while Def and HP were tied together but I am not sure if they are anymore.
Range also gets wonky because it is costed by the number of spaces it covers. 2-4 would cost the same as 4-5 because they both have a coverage spread of 36 spaces.

 

Please come back with an un-biased opinion.

 

i said that in topic in sentence 'even though effect lasts 3 rounds, The UD playstyle can get away with this most of the time' which meant that most of the time, UD champions if they are aggresive don't last or need those stats more than those rounds, which is kind of correct to my experience.

okay.

 

Keep in mind that the spells give the stats to champions already on the board. Their location actually give them a slight bonus to their value to the stats. Which is part of the reason the "only lasts three turns" thing is a meme.

I never understood the removal of commander and defender. They weren't global, and units could still be killed by spell spamming anyways. Didn't seem broken to me either.

 

I agree that the spell does too much, but just looking at it as if it created a 12 damage/6 speed/0hp/0def champion out of thin air is really wonky.

The power of DV is that it is essentially 2 spells in one: a temporary debuff and a temporary buff, taking up a single runeslot. How does it compare to individual spells?

Case 1: Devolve
30n
4 turn duration, halves def, speed, damage
If we assume a typical 12 damage/6 speed champ, the stat loss is identical except that DV does not debuff defense and lasts 50% longer. The more stats on the target, the better devolve becomes relative to DV.
The trick here is whether devolve is appropriately costed. My gut feeling is that devolve would be a great spell at 25n but is pretty whatever at 30n.
There is a lot of interpretation here, but I would say that the debuff effect of DV is ~20-30% better than devolve (150% duration, stat debuff is slightly worse on an "acceptable" 6spd/12dam target and gets even worse the juicier the target gets, no defense reduction to help with one-rounding).
So if you accept that devolve is appropriately priced at 30n, the debuff alone on DV is probably worth 40n. If devolve is overcosted, the DV debuff is probably worth 30-35n.

This leaves 10-15n for the friendly buff.
This is going to be a lot harder because there are no other spells (that I know of) that give these kinds of stats, but you can break down the speed buff into AP generation.
The extra speed does not do anything the turn it comes into play, so what you are really looking at is 2 turns of +1ap and 3 turns of +2 damage.
My comparable for this would be

Case 2: Wings of Glory
35n
AoE3, 2 ap per champion, +2 damage for 2 turns, pounce for 2 turns.
This is pretty close to the buff effect, though there are a lot of substantial differences:
The first difference is the variable # of champions. WoG could be used on anywhere from one to eight champions, but would typically hit 3-5 champs in a mid-game context. For this comparison I would say it is reasonable to assume it hits 4 champs on a typical cast.
The second difference is that the ap gain in WoG is all up front, where DV's gains are spread out over multiple turns.
The third difference is that DV's damage buff lasts 50% longer.

The fourth difference is that WoG grants spot pounce to all affected champions. This is huge because it is both a gap closer and a physical melee attack that provides a lot of versatility to your champs (eg. vs an arrow eater), but it also gets a lot of its power from the ap and damage gains.
You can already see that this comparison is very imperfect and there is a lot of room for interpretation, but I am going to say that the spot pounce provides about 10n (or a little under a third) of the spell's value. I believe that this is a conservative estimate, which leaves the rest of the spell's effects at 25n.
So, assuming that WoG hits 4 champs and DV hits 3
AP gen is probably 50-60% value (3 champs x2ap over time vs. 4 champs x2ap immediately)
Damage is probably 120% value (3 champs x3 turns vs. 4 champs x2 turns)
So overall we're looking at 60-70% of the value of a ~25n spell, or 15-20n.

So I would say that the spell, right now, is 5-10n undercosted, but you also have to consider (as you have pointed out) that the spell loses value if any of the buffs/debuffs are taken off the board before the spell expires. Since most of the spell's advantages over its comparables comes from its 6-turn duration, it would lose a lot of its efficiency if any of those four affected champions come off the board within 2-3 turns of its casting.

 

Drain vitality is kinda OP I agree, either shorten the turns to 4 or reduce the champs to 1 or 2.

 

@davre Another thing about the Wings of Glory comparison: it has a theme clause. However easy to build around, it's still a clause and with how I understand clauses it's supposed to be stronger/cheaper than a clause-less variation.

 

An "its okish, slightly undercosted" would have done it.

 

I definitely got carried away, but the whole point of this forum is "discussion" and I have made a lot of assumptions that shouldn't be taken at face value (ie. may be worth discussion).

Food for thought: how much would you pay for a spell that grants the buff clause alone: "Target champion and the nearest 2 friendly champions gain +2 damage and +1 speed for 5 turns"?
If it costed 20n, would you run it? How much of that power would come from the spammability of a 4-turn CD spell buff?

 

That spell sounds like ass. But I'd use it in UD, since grimlic and rip demon carry. I'd spam tf out of it. Maybe even with golden lamias with exertion.

 

Ok, I'm a bit biased about this, but I don't really like and wouldn't for anything like to see too much splits that play good champions (useful, universal skillset) that don't cost much nora for their stats. It's okay to have couple of them in every faction, but it's not okay if they make a split that contains those and have a similar spellset supporting them, ahh screw it. Im not complaining at anything more. No more threads. I'm sorry. If you wanna discuss do it. Im out.

 

Splits are always better then ff.

You can't compare to having the plethora of options that a split has available

 

I don't mind split themes, but I am against good stuff as a rule of thumb.