Lets say a new spell was going to be released. "Return to the shoebox" - Target champion is destoryed, leaving no Nora globe behind. Price = Cost of target champion + X E.g. if X is 10 Nora and you target a 75 Nora champion, the spell costs you 85 Nora. What would be the reasonable value of X? Or in other words, how much more Nora would you be willing to spend over your oponent in order to gain a tempo or map placement lead? I personally do not think an exact number can be reached, but after being involved in the Nora Induction thread I thought it would be fun to discuss this idea.
variable cost spells is an interesting idea. is mobi on turn 2 when you have 1 champ out worth 60 nora? what about on turn 10 when you have 5 champs out? but how do you calculate its cooldown? divorcing cooldown from cost would allow for more accurate costs. I know that isn't the point of your thread. I make my own points. on topic: it depends. the word 'tempo' implies your progress relative to your opponents. If your opponent only has 1 champ out and never deploys another one, then there is no tempo hit. so the answer to your question must in some way be relative to your opponents actual number of deploys or rate of deploy.
I disagree with variable spell costs because of this example. If I can use draconic benediction with 2 champs out to win (or have a chance of winning) then I should pay the full price of the spell. Even though technically it won't be worth as much as if I have 10 champs on board, it might stil be the spell which made me win the game. It's about calculating risk vs reward. Should aoe then be priced by amount of champions hit? Hell no.
+40. Would still be runnable. Unfortunately, making the + value a flat number as opposed to a percentage means that this theoretical spell would be better against higher cost units, as the additional cost composes a smaller portion of the total cost; hence, greater value for the spell.
i tend to agree with that. i was merely using an example where the magnitude of the effect is entirely dependent on the board condition. i still think cooldown and cost should be decoupled though.
