Why does ST and voil pay more for flying?

Fail.

If it was a bundle cost, then why does Climb + Clear exactly equal Mountaineer?

You can try and justify the randomness that is plaguing many of the decisions made by dev+council thus far, might even get some naive people to believe you, but I don't really see that furthering this game towards a better spot.

 

On the other hand, Windstiker/skylancer were made to counter flight, as well as the grounded condition, all of which do nothing to the theoretical Moutaineer + Chasm Walker champ.

 

bakki so angul

pls dont hrt luvulongtim

 

As noted, but negatives such as getting high by Earthquake type mechanics also exist, I think all of these are too far outlying to consider when you are talking about moving an ability 1-2 nora.

 

The bundle logic for cost increase doesn't count for mountaineer because the abilities rarely have the chance to work together it's almost always one or the other.
Vuln + evasive isn't the same.

 

Just remove the sonic vulnerability from Sonic Flight, already. It's one of those things that adds to flavor but just isn't necessary. Deafening Aura doesn't prevent stealth. G'hernbound doesn't give Vulnerability: Psychic. Boon of the Undead doesn't give Healing Deficiency. Real-world logic is a suggestion, not a rule, in PoxNora.

 

I'm not sure if you're as daft as you lead on or if you're just determined to argue with anyone agreeing with the thread because i'm the one that posted it. Regardless of the reason I think we'd all appreciate it if you took some time to gather a bit of logic then come back and try again. When people say you should pay more for certain ability interactions we're talking about things like tough and high def or resilient, high damage with a bomb/cone ability or colossal and pretty much anything in the game. How does evasive make vuln sonic better? How does vuln sonic make evasive better? The fact that 2 passive abilities happen to be on the same champion doesn't automatically give them some wonderful interaction that should increase the cost which until just now was what I considered to be common sense.

 

Right, because ranged sonic is so prominent. Are you going to try to quantify the value of sonic vuln only increasing the damage by 32% instead of 40% into a nora cost? The value of Vuln Sonic is 3, reducing 3 by 20%, the absolute reduction of effectivity vs ranged does indeed give you 2.4, which would round to 2, but that's only against ranged attacks. Now you have to reduce that 0.6 discount by the valueof range 1 sonic attacks and the value of the likelihood of facing melee vs ranged. Next you need to further reduce the discount by the likelihood of also receiving non-attack based sonic dmg such as Sonic Greeting, Deafening Aura or Echo Chamber.

You're telling me that the same Dev(+team) that went live with a 113 nora Demolition Team went through this analysis of the minutiae?

 

Easy there, I was agreeing with you, man.

 

really though, just to answer bakki's assault a bit, i'd say the bundle part comes into play a lot more just because of the number of abilities that get tacked on there. the revamp was trying to cut back on ability number per champ, and these bundles fly (ha) directly in the face of that.

however, if i recall my original post, i was more saying that the bundle was likely a part of it (although i did word it improperly, i'm usually much more vague) and then i went on to describe the part i found more significant. i realize the nuances of language can be lost on many, especially over the internet, so my apologies for the part i played in the misunderstanding

as well, it should be understood that i am not and have not been for some time now a member of the council. i don't know Bane Shift about what they do in there beyond random hearsay (much like the rest of the community, i'd imagine), and i generally speak only for myself unless i make it plain that i'm doing otherwise


is it more clear now, or is someone else gonna get pissy

 

I will not take it easy. I will, however, take it hard.

@Dagda Bundles are great for consolidation efforts, we've got many bundled abilities, sometimes they are spelled out, like prestige, sometimes not. Having bundled abilities cost different than their composition is not a good idea. It's not thematic at that point, it's simply a discount only available to that rune because it's part of a theme. Reasoning: take that rune and play it in a deck that has nothing to do with the theme, the advantage still exists 100%.

The intrinsic benefit of bundling should be solely that you are gaining access to more abilities than we would normally allow, since we have a maximum of 8 now right (read that somewhere, not sure on source) or at least we have a lessening of abilities.

If I remove two abilities to simplify a rune, but add a 3 ability bundle, it's effectively at +1.

 

I had already addressed this on the last page but I agree that for some things there should probably be a combination cost. However I can't imagine anything realistically having a combine cost of 5 nora so at the very least I think that the other 2 flight abilities should have their cost lowered to 6 to match flying.

 

What's funny is that the reasoning for Gedden nerfing NKD is that it was "too much of a bundle ability".
The lols.

 

For the record, I'm not saying that the costs are right, but if people want to make a thread about 2! abilities, they could aswell try to make some sense for what they are saying.
But now, if you think that the combination of tough + resilient is worth the same as the addition of the costs of the single abilities, well, that's your problem.

 

1-how much

2-Unless I'm very much mistaken, this thread was nebron complaining that his bundle was not, if you look at the exact merits and costs, coming in discounted (quite the opposite, really). To my mind, that's much preferable if these bigger bundles are to exist, as it seems to me that the natural order would dictate that you should pay more for extra abilities.

Just as a sidenote, the original goal was no more than 5/champ for most champs, it was recognized early that a 5-cap would mess with certain runes too much and sort of force certain bundles (so 5 as a general rule, the number I recall them really not wanting to break was 7 but I dunno anymore)

In effect, though, what I see it as is more of a slight sandbag for runes unless they're run in certain configurations, which is fine by me- I don't think that expecting to throw all your favorite runes into a deck and having it be perfectly competitive is viable, and I think that certain runes being restricted to specific deck-types is fine so long as the decks and runes are viable with that constraint

But that's my opinion.

3-I feel like i had something I actually wanted to say about this, but Firk it

Nah.

IIRC there was a big thread about kitchen sink abilities, and where the line was between them and acceptable bundles. Also, I seem to remember people complaining since new-NKD came out that it was too strong (and while I hate to dredge up the past, I'm fairly sure I was one of the few/only that actually thought the new iteration could be too much). Was it really a nerf?

 

Yeah, I know, and I agreed with the nerf and reasonings at the time, but "being extremely undercosted compared to what it cost for the abilities it gave to champs" is EXACTLY what we are talking about here.
Consistency much? NONE.

Edit: yes Dagda, yes it was a nerf. Jeez I wont even argue about a vet proof ability anymore.

 

@ #1: over 9000

@ the rest: lol no u afk

 

I get it.

 

How often?

 

How often do you want?

Also @NKD It got a righteous survivability buff. Less reactive.