Yeah, giving IS lavaesque UD area denial is confusing, but UD basically got Righteous Deflection. Maybe they'll eventually merge into some super faction that everyone has to play and the devs will no longer have to worry about the others.
Bro you are not dumb for thinking Fury of the storm is strong/OP(cause you do this anyways) No sir you are dumb for thinking that "most broken" award goes to this champion. Obvious nominations other than fury: Woodchuck Split Personality UD(If not all) the phoenixes Hyannis flame dude Hyannis double Jab Cyclops Anything with Sapping Armor #NerfIScuzISuk #furyofthestormbeatme #IthinkUDisfine #obvouslyhasnotplayedvsdraksarhunchback
Storm zone is broken vs 2x2. Other than that I agree that there are more broken runes from Coalitions. She is undoubtedly strong tho.
- 2x2 is the issue but cuts both ways. It hurts allies and is hard to control in IS.. UD lava is easy to control. It also doesn't hurt on cast or deal a stationary tick like lava. Just sayin
This isn't true. Fire phoenix is stronger and possibly the hyaenid dash+fire trail or the new surge abilities.
The growing aspect is dumb, as is the animation when the ability ends where it wants to spend half a second clearing each square, one at a time. Cd3, 4 turn duration, aoe 3 static.
- Likely. Comparing it to an ally centered aoe (consecration) is not a good comparison, more like a poison cloud without a debuff. Growing is a delicate solution to not making it too strong on use, that it's power slowly grows but also cuts both ways since it affects allied ground/flying units as well. (short of elec resistance/eater..which is huntress and fury mainly)
- Now the deep balancing nuances come into play. Is field properly costed and is just too powerful... what I mean is does it need a cost reduction for trimming ability or would the new version of the ability still be appropriately costed. - I don't know either way but this is usually the second part of a balance discussion "Hey nub its a nerf, you don't get anything in return!!" while sometimes this response is appropriate, not in all cases is it relevant. Sometimes an ability is just scaled too high in power but is actually appropriately costed, so a reduction of the scale warrants a reduction in the cost. - A good example would be an ability like "Nuke: This champion makes a ranged attack at 20 spaces for 50 damage" even if this ability is costed properly at say 70 nora. The power scale is too much, it's just silly and not balanced. But if you trimmed it to 10 spaces and 25 damage, you wouldn't still cost it at 70 prolly...but not 35 either likely. Hard to judge these subtle balances.
So the basic idea is that it does less damage upfront then Cones/Bombs, but has an area denial aspect. As the other player, you have the choice of either staying there, or get the hell out, and even in the case of first turn centering or knockback shenanigans, the damage potential is fairly capped. Does it need to last 6 turns? Probably not. Tho Duration 4 does mean that it only grows once, and perhaps it would just be better to make it fixed size (@Baskitkase suggests AE3). AE3, of course, does mean that centering becomes a lot more damaging.
Just to clarify, do you mean the ability is bugged vs 2x2 or just really stong vs them (I know that it was but I also think I fixed it a while ago).
Can you reproduce that? If she steps on more than one square she will take tons of damage, as it is 5 per square (potentially 20 damage in one move).
- If you nerf the power to grow once or not at all, its crappier...and would not be worth its current cost. So a cost reduction would be best if the power is dramatically altered. But not for efficiency for relevance.
