Rune Discussion: Banish (Week 5)

Week 5 is here folks! Lets have a hearty discussion on this, and the surprise appearance Aspect of Oblivion! (Sorry it's a day late. If you have seen my Information page, then you know I have some mild Insomnia issues. I passed out for 21 hours. XD It happens....)



My thoughts : (Just to get the topic going.)

I would honestly like to see Banish renamed 'Oblivion', and have its effect be similar to Journey of Oblivion.
_________
From:
Banish: (55) Target enemy champion and any equipment on it are returned to their owner's rune dock with a two turn cooldown. The nora costs are refunded at the start of the owner's next turn. The nora refund is unaffected by reducing effects.

To:
Oblivion: (55) Target non-Avatar, non-Boss, non-Elite champion is removed from play, its CD is set to 2, and its nora cost is refunded at the beginning of its owner's next turn.
_________



Surprise appearance Aspect of Oblivion!

Current Kit:



Previous Kit



My thoughts: (Just to get the topic going.)

• I keep 1 in my meta bg, just to counter superchamps. You never know when they are going to appear, and this L'usara's Staff shenanigans is getting annoying. (Again...) -_-

My Suggested Changes:

Spoiler: Changes List

Base:
-2 dmg
Charged Attack moved to UP 2
Supercharged Removed.


UP1
Abuse Charged 3 (3 Nora)
Attack Charged 3 (6 Nora) (Default)
Death Charged 3 (9 Nora)

UP2
Charged Attack (8 Nora) (Default)
Charged Fire Bomb (8 Nora)
Charged Flame Fist (8 Nora)

New Aspect of Oblivion:

Spoiler: New Aspect of Oblivion

10 dmg
6 spd
1-3 rng
1 def
46 HP

Base Abilities
Attack: Magical
Journey to Oblivion
Oblivion Shield

Undergrad Path 1
Abuse Charged 3 (3 Nora)
Attack Charged 3 (6 Nora) (Default)
Death Charged 3 (9 Nora)

Upgrade Path 2
Charged Attack (8 Nora) (Default)
Charged Fire Bomb (8 Nora)
Charged Flame Fist (8 Nora)

New Base Cost 87
Depending 84-90

________________________________________


Community Suggested Changes:

• ?
• ?
• ?

Poll rotations will be thus:

• Highest vote becomes new discussion
• 2nd, and 3rd place get put on next weeks poll choices.
• 4th place gets swapped out for another possibility.
• If there is a tie between 3rd, and 4th I use my vote as a tie breaker.
• I do not vote unless there is a tie.

 

A WILD ASPECT OF OBLIVION APPEARED

anyway i like banish but what i don't like is the refund part of banish they should remove it completely and increase nora cost to 65

 

Generally it is not used because of the refund, but I sometimes use 1. If I can nab a side font. I can get rid of a contester in the early game. It will pay off big. By the time they can even manage to go contest it again, the font has payed for the spell, and most of the opponents rune costs by now + given me map presence. It is powerful, but highly situational. You also have to be very careful how you use it. If the opponent is saving nora for a power turn. You should NOT give them more nora.

A few complaints I had against the spell:

• It also refunding equipment.
• It did not put the removed runes on CD.
• Combined with the previous two issues. The enemy could just REDEPLOY the same champ. Effectively making the spell 55 nora for a few turns of safety.

Primarily I use this spell, when I see no reason to fit Aspect of Oblivion into a BG. It doubles as an anti-contest during the early game, and as an Anti-Super champ later. However its secondary use can fail due to Superchamps usually having a form of Shielded, or Planar Bound. Though; Planar Bound is far less accessible now. So I will generally use AoO as it can bypass the secondary issue.

 

What i was thinking is making banish so that we can use it on our own champions sort of likea mini banish. This will allow us to recall champions and redeploy them later sort of a slightly weaker version of reanimate.
Banish (60)
Target champion is return to their owners runedock with a five turn cooldown. The champions owner gains 50% refund at the start of the next turn. Both Nora refund and champions cooldown is unaffected by reducing effects. This way you can use FW to reduce further reducing any way of absuing

 

A few things to note.

• Using it on our own champs. Yes.
• Cost for the effect. No.
• 5 Turn duration. No.
• The extra clarification. Not Needed.

I agree that it could/should affect our own champs. Would be a nice secondary effect. The CD of runes is done on a 'round'. Using a 'turn' duration just gets needlessly confusing. The FW Bonus only affects champs that have died naturally. It does not affect set turn CD for things that have been removed.


We might change your suggestion to.

Banish (55)
Target champion is returned to their owners runedock with a CD of 3. The targeted champions owner gains 100% of the cost of the champion back at the start of their next turn.

(There is a reason why it gives full price back.)


Rephrased my original suggestion based upon your idea to use it on our own champs.

 

I gave 50% cause 100% refund is ridiculous to begin with maybe i don't mind 75%-80% but not 100%

 

I want the same for Journey to oblivion change so it can target champions so you can save friendly champs them from dying

 

Yeah I could see 75-80% as well. Unfortunately the high refund is what keeps this runes price low. If it gave no refund, it would be higher in cost than Drown, as it has no restrictions.

That would be a nice change as well. Making it have extra utility. Unfortunately I think it would raise it's cost exceptionally high. As it would effectly become Cast:Sacrifice with a full refund, lower CD on both the champ, and the effect that causes it. I would like to stay away from that.

 

Aspect of Oblivion is a good rune. I think it's not used so much because it's not a demon nor fits in any other theme, yet it is a decent include in a goodstuff deck.

Banish, is not a rune i would run personally unless there was a meta where it shined - if people where running grimlics mirror for example.

 

right now banish is used for a quick font grab early game or late depending on circumstances. The idea of it being able to affect friendly champs sounds fun, but I don't know what it would be like without copying the IS spell.

Also, AoV well deserves his Demi-God status for he is much more than the common filth around.

 

More or less why we are discussion them. Just to see what happens. Possible tweaks. Redesign imaginings. Post your thoughts with glee. We are all loving demonic bastards here.

 

IMAGIRL, adding Phase Spider to the list is just gonna make voting problematic. It will divert everyone's votes towards that, but Sok already said he's gonna change it AFTER the change to Incorporeal. It makes sense if you think about it, it's easier to judge what needs to be done that way.
But now people are gonna vote for that before the Incorp change and then you're gonna discuss it in that state. Making that discussion very inefficient and likely to miss the target. A game dev considered best to wait on changing Phase Spider, but a bunch of players can do better?

Don't say I didn't warn ya.

 

It is not harmful to discuss something with those changes in mind. If you look at KF, they are already discussing possible changes to themes, and runes that might need to happen when the KF Faction Bonus gets changed. I do not speak directly to Sokolov on the balance, and changes in UD. That is Badgerales role. This intended purpose of these discussions is to make the UD community more active, and have fun talking about Possible Tweaks, Redesign imaginings, and thoughts about effects in general.

I do not think it harmful to possibly discuss a rune that has a change in the future. At worst it will be a waste of time. At best, Sok might see the changes, and we will a small influence in it. Either way. The community will have been together for a time. That is all that matters.

As always. Welcome my Basilisk riding friend. What do you think of the OP?

 

I am arguing that it is inefficient/a waste of time and I guarantee you that is is very very difficult to keep accounting for the Incorp change while thinking of suggestions. It is quite a significant functional change. I am saying that another voting option in that slot, a non-Incorporeal one, would be better.

Nobody said anything about harm. But why not try and have the highest chance of these discussions being useful/making an impact? Sure, let's have fun, but Phase Spider is already on Sok's radar and there are so many options to pick from that it's just a shame.

 

I do not disagree with you. In fact, I agree. It was on my list to be on the poll after the incorporeal changes. However it was suggested to me that we get to it before that time as it would be a good discussion. An I am inclined to agree with the suggestion. While we might not get a fully working design from the discussion. We might get a though process going that Sok agrees with if he happens to glance at that thread. More over; as stated "The intention of these discussions is to get the UD community together", and I think that a controversial topic would put them in a room throwing ideas around.

 

I did mention in my message that I would discuss once the incorp change hit given Sok's attitude towards it. Personally I think that Phase Spider's current failure has nothing to do with the details of incorporeal and everything to do with the fact that corporeal form now costs AP.

On topic, AoO used to be run 2x in my spiders because you could usually get 2-3 attacks a turn with him which was good for getting value out of arachnablade. Journey was always a secondary thing for me. If we could get him back to being able to generate charges fast enough to charged attack every round then I would probably go back to running him.

 

at one point i made a fun deck with AoO. The deck was split fw/ud. I would get AoO's charges up, cast journey to oblivion, then use the fw spell delay 2x. Just to troll people. Made me laugh a few times. The nora refund is unfair to me when compared to other spot removal.

 

i have this used against me, next turn = power turn.
200 nora anyone?

what if for 60 nora, it gave back 25-50% per turn (at the start of champion owners turn), until 100% was refunded

 

That sounds very very powerful. Maybe at 50%? Idk.

 

We already decided 75% so NO!