I wonder why Warding costs only 2 Nora.

http://www.poxpoints.com/PHP/maderu....net/images/ability_icons/small/icon_buff.gif

PS. He is in UD because he is a monster.

 

well, makes you realize how weak dmz in a way

 

Still wondering.


http://www.poxpoints.com/PHP/maderu....net/images/ability_icons/small/icon_buff.gif

PS. He is in UD because he is a monster.

 

Not sure if this is sarcasm. When FW creates DMZ around its champions, it can be quite frustrating. Not only cannot you damage your opponent's champs, but you also cannot help yours through spells if they are covered by DMZ.

 

Warding is 2 nora because it prevents friendly spells as well. It's a double-edged sword.

 

But you can damage champions...

Anyways, 2 nora cost for warding shows how weak dmz is both in practice and design. Since warding more or less has a similar value.

 

DMZ is ridiculously good. It's just on pretty shitty champs apart from Inkblight.

 

Despoil is also decent too playing against it.

 

DMZ is Shielded on steroids, if Sok puts it on barely decent champions they'd become insanely good, simply because it's pretty cheap for all it does ( and people won't run it if it isn't so it's a tough call). Also @fogandsteel , Warding is the worst option out of the 3 if you want an OP champion.

 

You think having area limited spell control is not a similar value to having spell protection without the area clause. Interesting.

 

I got Shielded confused with Warding. I didn't realize that there were two different abilities that prevented casting spells on a particular opponent's champ.

Anyways, (1) obviously, both Shielded and Warding are very nice abilities in a game that has Vertical Push, Drown, Fading Recollection, Split Personality, Whispers of the Mind, etc.;
however, (2) they become even much nicer once you equip your champ with some powerful equipment, especialy if it creates some sort of synergy with the abilities that the champ already has, because your opponent cannot use spot shatter/remove equipment spells. He has to deploy a champ with shatter/remove equipment ability, move him in position and keep him alive, which is much trickier than simply casting a spot shatter/remove equipment spell.

IMO, both Shielded and Warding should have higher nora costs. In a recent game vs Hierokliff, when he equipped Bastion the Avenger with some powerful equipment, it surely felt OP for me. And for mere 2 Nora.

PS. I understand Warding also prevents you from casting certain spells to help your champ, but the benefits greatly outweigh the inconveniences it creates.

 

Yeah, I should have included Shielded instead of Warding, but what other 2 abilities did you mean?

 

He's saying you're comparing DMZ, which prevents your opponent from targeting your champs to Warding which prevents all spell targeting. If DMZ didn't allow anyone to target spells inside the AoE, I would agree that it is bad.

 

Warding is 2 nora because it's both a positive and negative depending on the situation. An ability like Pariah is all negatives whereas Shielded is all positives. Warding is an in-between.

 

I would gladly pay 10 nora for warding on several champs.
It's a dreamworld ability and 2 nora is a very good deal.
DMZ is also cracking as per inkblight.

 

Why pay 10 nora for a worse version of Shielded, which is only 3 nora?

 

They are both undercosted. These abilities also scale, that is, the more expensive/powerful champ is, the more value they add.

 

Warding I believe is fine at 2 nora. Shielded could be more expensive for what it adds. The downside for Warding is enough that it doesn't merit much cost. Shielded is 3 nora, Pariah is -5 nora, and Warding is 2 nora.

 

Using the logic that Warding is an in-between (or rather that it adds the abilities of both Shielded and Pariah), it should cost -2 Nora, which probably tells you that Shielded is way undercosted.