Some1 did their maths wrong it only does 10 damage overall over several turns, its balanced. Stasis though that's a completely different story, it does 24 damage over 5 turns, and causes your champs to be paralysed in the font for that time. It also combos too well with baneblast. The combo of the 2 spells in tandem is 44 damage in an aoe 3, that's Firking nuts!
Well, it's going to hit at least a few champs, the point is that 4 damage times 5 champs even if it's cleaned immediately is 20 damage, since it's global.
Most aoes do at least 24 damage anyway as they hit at least 2 champs. But you are right festering wounds x 5 champs is 50 global damage. Anyway Sok you should take a look at Stasis. This rune does like 24 damage over 5 turns in an aoe 3, that part is alright its the Firking paralysis bit that isn't! Combine Stasis with Baneblast and you can do 48 damage in an aoe 3 over 5 turns. Now the reason Stasis is OP is if you cast Stasis on a font, the font is yours which is a game winner on too many maps. If you deploy a relic on the font to contest it, the opponent can just destroy the relic. I tried using cleansing emerald after they used paralysis and they just destroyed the cleansing emerald. With IS's range its easy to destroy any relic you might deploy to contest a font. My suggestion is make Stasis affect friendly and opposing champs. It would still be good as if you cast it in the right place, it would cause all the opposing ranged champs to flee, which would allow you kill their engaged melee champs.
Since Yobanchi brought up attrition, I feel like attrition is something that's fun to use but ridiculously and stupidly irritating to play against. It's so mind numbingly repetitive and time consuming that even when I win I'm turned off by playing another game, including games against non-FW opponents. But when I play it it's all fun and happiness. That might be the issue with Festering Wounds. Not it's power level, but just that it encourages attrition. And that's annoying.
Playing against attrition with a fair deck is a pain in the ass, but it's always been a blast, for me at least, when using some other brew of nonsense. If all you want to do is play some champions, don't interact them much with each other, and then attack, you're going to have a rough time. If you want to get out some nutty combination of runes that interact heavily with each other, attrition is going to let you do what you want and it will be fun for all.
Hahaha, this has to be the most hilarious sentence I've heard on these forums for a while, and oh boy the pearls with have here are astonishing. The award of the Biggest Troll Phrase 2015 goes to: kalasle!
I can definitely agree with you on the fact that attrition does physically let you drop units and get some synergy going, but to be honest I try to build most bgs to do that anyways. It doesn't matter whether I'm playing against IS, SP, or anything else. I can always get some synergy going unless I get a completely and utterly shitty draw. So using a fun bg that's a brew of none sense and filled with champs that interact with each other really, in my personal opinion, doesn't make playing against attrition anymore fun.
Totally serious. Attrition puts consistent but only moderate pressure on the opponent, and if the opposing goal is to deploy about 3 or 4 particular champions and mash them together into a super-ball, that's going to happen. Attrition often gets called the control deck of Pox, but it isn't really -- it's mid-range. It wants to grind down in a low-resource environment and then jam through some sticky threats, but it can get walloped if the opponent goes longer. Perspective probably does play a part in it. I see attrition as a particular kind of challenge, and that's cool. As far as the BG against attrition -- I don't just mean including all the weird runes you want, I mean having your own bullcrap options, like a Shielded cleansing super-champ, or a death-ball of stats, or a package of hardcounters. Few FW decks or players are going to be equipped to handle all of that stuff, and attrition gives you time to mess around and mess them up.
Well, sure. But like Makarov said, you can build a cool synergistic bg with anything, so saying "if the opposing goal is to deploy about 3 or 4 particular champions and mash them together into a super-ball" doesnt mean much because most of the time the guy thats playing like this will loose. Which you make him drop the bg and play something else. So attrition isnt really anything special on that regard. KKKKKKKKKK. "It's mid-range"? Whaaaaaat. Attrition gets "walloped" if the opponent goes longer? Whats the opponent playing, attrition too? Dang this made no sense whatsoever, sorry. I don't want to turn this into a debate on whether or not people should like attrition or not - we all have different views - so I will no longer reply on this topic. However, I'm a firm believer that attrition style of play made people quit this game. As time goes on people want fast paced games where they can achieve victory in a time lapse of 15 minutes or so. Games should not last longer than 1 hour, period. And I personally played games as long as 2 hours or so, that makes no sense whatsoever. Delete FW or at least delete attrition style of play.
Haha I actually ended up deleting the perspective part because I felt it wasn't that important of a comment. But I suppose it is! I completely understand what you're saying but I feel my own experiences and biases are going to keep me from agreeing with you. Unless I'm in a happy and laid back mood I tend to just be annoyed by attrition. You do have a point, but this is me saying it's just my own current personal distaste of playing against attrition. It's hella fun to actually use every now and then though haha So, Festering Wounds itself isn't necessarily overpowered, I actually think it's fine. It just encourages attrition which seems to be pretty unpopular
Pretty much any BG with unlimited scaling, or even just high scaling. Attrition often has very little of that, unless it has some Vengeful plan built in, and is ready to use it. So Fury setups, heavy AoE buff stacking, super-champing (with Shielded, of course) -- those can all stomp on an attrition BG if they reach a certain point. Attrition wants to play a very long game, but it does that by keeping the total amount of interaction on the board to a minimum. It doesn't actually get more powerful as the game progresses.
It does because you are cycling your champs way faster than your opponent, to the point where he can no longer interact with the board because, well, his champs are staying on CD and yours arent. Plus UT. K, done.
Yes, the deck works, it has a plan, but the runes it deploys remain at the same material strength at all points in the game; beyond UTOH and maybe Xulos Tariff, it doesn't develop an effective-nora generating board. On the other hand, decks that can reach 25 or 30 DMG easily on a champion generate an effective-nora yield at an increasing rate as the game goes on, while attrition has a definite maximum rate, which it wants to find and hold. Essentially, the derivative of the sum of advantages yielded per turn is 0 for attrition, but positive for uncapped or high-ceiling strategies.
