Thoughts on Fautbreaker

I think Titans were pretty bad ass and with the exception of moog none of them see much play anymore. Perhaps there will be some changes to titans in the future and id like to get opinions on what direction you guys think the Faultbreaker should go.

 

Leave it in the trashcan. You either tone it down and it becomes no Titan or we have issues like Zev/AA when you.make iy worth it's cost.

 

While I agree with Baskit's premise, I don't like the idea of the go-to fix for a rune to be "leave it shoeboxed because we can't fix it". For those who play League, it's similar to how Riot addresses Yorick: too much of a problem to balance properly, so they pretend like he doesn't exist. It's a lazy fix, quite unfitting of any serious game developer. The way I ideally imagine Faultbreaker is as a troop displacement unit, smashing apart tight formations and causing havoc among groups of enemies. Abilities such as Tectonic Pulse, Break the Line, Tremor, Crushing Charge, and Impact Strike all fit this theme and could be considered ideal candidates to add to Faultbreaker. Reduce his base stats a bit (-10 HP, -1 speed, -1 range should do) to drop his cost. Add Impact Strike to base, then remove Heavy Charger from U2. Add Tremor and Break the Line to U2 in their place. Lastly, Change his first upgrade line to Charge 3 and Crushing Charge. Making him less of a stat monster and more reliant on getting in close for disruption purposes makes him higher risk and higher reward, along with dropping his cost to ~85-95 nora; well worth it in the right situations.

 

I kind of agree with baskit. it would be great to have him as a good champion but as it stands it seems that making a 100 nora unit worth its cost is causing huge problems in the game atm and until we get a way to solve this we should probably just leave it as a good champ but not worth it kind of thing

 

Operating under the assumption that they will be changed regardless of whether or not you think they should, any suggestions for him ?

 

One of the difficulties in making really high cost units worthwhile is that low to moderate cost units frequently have the sort of abilities that should probably be exclusive to more expensive units. If you can get top notch abilities with a lower total investment, why pay more and assume the risk? As much as I'd like to see high cost units that are worth deploying, achieving it requires a serious examination of the caliber of abilities that lower cost units are offering.

 

Unless there is a Pox 2.0 or the failed revamp redone, 80+ nora cost units are not going to see play in this game anymore. Sad, but true.

 

When did 80 nora become "expensive"....

 

When 60 nora units became so good

 

I'll use Colossal as a random example, but bear in mind this could just as easily be Scale Armor or Resistance Physical or whatever when found on the lower end of the scale. Colossal champs are floating around in the mid 70s and sometimes upper 60s, usually with decent defense, high health, or other abilities to stretch their survivability even further. So a player can get pretty much all the survivability you can expect a champ to come equipped with by the time you hit the mid 70s. What does that leave 85 to 100 nora champs to offer besides the risk of putting you at a even larger nora deficit when a spell or maneuver kills or disables the champ? Likewise, if my lower 70s Surge champs are routinely hitting for 12-20, where are the theme's high cost units offering better combat performance? They don't exist and would need both Surge and Colossal if they did, maybe with Shielded on top.

But it's more a matter of performance scaling at various costs than of this or that ability (I should have said "the sort of capabilities"). Put simply: A player can find plenty of units with exceptional performance without ever sniffing 80 nora, making it it increasingly difficult to justify each additional nora. If the desired range of nora costs for all champs is 65 to 85 with most played champs being a neat 75, I suppose this isn't a problem. But if even the 85s aren't noticeably better than the 75s, the range continues to tighten...

 

Yes. If you can get powerful abilities in cheap bundles, there is little an expensive package can do to sell itself.

Depends on the implementation. Paying more for the same because you have less is odd.
Like 0 Defense, 34 HP champs that cost as much as 3 Defense, 55 HP champs odd.

The situation for high cost champs is similar to pre-revamp and there is still a lot of individual champs that need their configurations adjusted to be playable, but I do see the revamp and post-revamp adjustments as positive progress.

 

I was thinking in terms of overcoming the aversion to high cost units by giving them exclusive access to certain abilities that either raise damage or survivability significantly above the norm in an efficient way (in other words, the abilities just wouldn't be placed in cheap configurations). However, I realize that's something that would require a game wide champ by champ examination, which is unrealistic. Scaling ability costs based on the unit's cost may be worth exploring to see if it works.

 

Not to be rude, but how does this refute that cheap ( 60 nora units as an example) are better then expensive ( 80 nora as an example) units? All you showed was that they, like every rune, got "worse" after the revamp and even stated that they were hit less then the expensive champions for obvious reasons. The examples used being weaker then their pre-revamp versions doesn't negate the idea that comparatively the cheaper nora units do too much, or are a better value then the higher priced options specifically post revamp. Not to forget the price adjustments made after "equal out" the price ranges that lowered higher units prices with out really adjusting the lower ones up much.

This is a good idea. Another in line idea would be to limit ability numbers/ranks/types to price ranges effectively making, as an example, sub 70 nora units overtly weaker then the 80+ nora ones. A standard average price for an average unit should honestly be, imo, 75-85 with anything lower being much weaker, and higher being much stronger. A 90-100+ nora champ should need 2-3+ champs/runes to take out, but that also brings up how easy it is to remove champions and peoples hatred for sturdy/defensive based play.

edit: What if stats were not really a variable for champions? If each race had a set stat line with minor variations for the same or similar base price. It would, possibly, help balance prices so you didnt have the issue of low stats+ powerful abilities being to cheap. Just an idea to standardize prices in and out of factions. All Boghoppers are set with XYZ stats and have a base price of whatever nora cost before abilities even come into it. Theoretically you could also then price abilities to have faction variable prices ( FS has cheaper leap for example, but more expensive Tough) to play around with but might be to complex.

 

Ok. Thanks for clarifying. It was just odd seeing as how the statement that led to your post was that 60 nora units became so good. I guess I let it imply that since the expensive champs do too little compared to the cheaper ones, that they did too much.