Why do we have Racials?

why every one so racist?
haha
what about elves or fae decks they pretty effective if you use the right champs spells and equips
i dont think there any racial which is too effective to use
BTW siren have you made this post before seems like a Deja Vu

 

Themes restrict so that the increased power gained by having a synergetic strategy is normalize back to the normal balance by restricted rune selection. In addition these methods of design allow a more direct way to align lore with function. Take Leoss for example. Leoss have clerics and warriors both but doesn't it stand to reason that a Leoss cleric would work better with other Leoss?

BTW, I see the word "lazy" thrown around a lot here, why is that bad? It seems to me that it is often used for simple overarching solutions to a problem and I would assert that simple solutions are often the best solutions.

 

Themes restrict yes, but racials restrict too much. Look at every "racial" through out the history of pox. Killed diversity in faction and "theme" ( racial are not themes just so you know), as you stopped seeing X race champ out side of its selective bg type because it was not deemed efficient/effective with out it its racial active, the old sandbag bs at its best. Then you look with in the race pool for runes and you end up running 2xs of the best of whatever since it all comes down to the racial for effect and end up shoeboxing 60-80% of the race since they only have 1 bg which only has 1 optimal champ selection since its all about the racial and not the interactions of said runes.

face it, racials are a broken and shallow mechanic. Hence why every developer after Corpse tried to stay away from blanket racials as a theme drving mechanic ad DOG taking a firm and clear stance against the whole concept. its lazy, shallow, and eventually bad for the race to have itself defined by a race. Expecially in a game where new champions come out with new abilities/combos that may or may not simply be better then older runes making those older race only bg runes even less runnable.

you want themes? Have them mean something and be about how the theme plays or conceptually how its designed instead of a blanket we all ahve the same ability: X or racial slapped on us.

 

I am just a pooh with a small brain but it appears that what the player base and the developers have both stated as a goal is to open up play and increase diversity in BGs; to make the game more about outwitting rather than whacking moles.
Racials don't necessarily undermine that but they don't do a bad job of it. If you have a powerful racial, it logically makes it that much harder to essentially "opt out" of a powerful incentive in your choices of champions and ultimately a style of play.
This tends to become even more pronounced because many racials come with "must have X champions deployed" conditions. After you get done, you throw in a few uber/swiss army/cheap trash things and you're done.

Hopefully, the uber/swiss army/cheap trash stuff goes away and we get far fewer auto includes for any BG because they trump synergy with naked power. At the same time, it would be nice to see racials reflect more tradeoffs and/or far more flavor than the power seen in some of the racials right now.

If a champ can play outside a racial BG (and I think we would all agree that needs to be a goal) how powerful can/should you make the racial? Logic says not much if you don't want "bad things" to happen or you need to put a governor or penalty on that added racial power. I never liked playing racials before the addition of splits because they always came with huge liabilities; sometimes limits in damage types and sometimes opting out of important things like detection or unequiping. You could drive trucks through the gaps left by most racials in early years. Many racials now represents "complete" arsenals where you don't lose a lot by sticking to a racial theme. Part of that is just way more champs but a part is a conscious or unconscious decision by the devs to lose the liability part of racials. Which, and I am just a pooh with a little brain, seems more than just a little dumb.

I suppose you could create lots of equally powerful racials and then it would be fine; except it then restricts nonracial play. Personally, I like making BGs where my opponent asks "why is he playing that dumb shoebox plant champ" and having him or her find out it's because it has a wacky synergy that exists totally outside cookie cutter racials or naked power.

 

racials gave many champs a deckslot in the first place. without them, the champ isn't then 'free' to be used in any deck, they go back into the shoebox.

 

Tbh Archers are a formidable class-theme, but the current meta is just too strong for them. I mean, AoE rain of arrows is a direct counter alr to Elusive/Dodge 3 issues. But its way incomparable to Pallies. They're just too damn strong and efficient. At least KF/UD archer is good. Not much alt damage tho.

Rangers on the other hand, could be tweaked. I agree with that. A purely physical melee AND range flavor on Rangers (attack: physical + Arrowshot) is just dumb with the worldwide Reshy and Void Shield we're getting. They should implement more Alt-damage rangers... even in splits most Rangers' offensive capabilities are physical-centric.

P.S I think Bok Raider should be a ranger + archer.

 

Well, your post wasn't too constructive until the end, but I think (think being the keyword here), I understand what you are saying.

I personally think race based racials are simply another way of making themes, but I agree that it should be one of the least restrictive things about themes.
I personally feel the order of most restrictive to least should be this: Protectorate vs Wrath. Then faction to faction. With race AND class being at the bottom. Races can be a theme, but so can classes. For instance, you could have a theme of cats, or a theme of knights, or cat-knights.
The point being that less restriction for theme building is better, though there should be enough to prevent "good-stuffs" battlegroups (ugh, don't get me started there).

Anyway, the question still stands, what does everyone think of the types of synergy found in the Maljaran themes? Try to be constructive!

 

Thats assuming, like we all have not been assuming loads of things in here anyway but..its assuming that the champion in question doesn't belong to a theme if it doesn't have a racial or wouldn't see play with out its racial if the theme didn't use a racial to set up its theme. It can easily be part of a theme with out a racial if race isnt the driving factor for a theme but rather just helps to drive the individual way said champion is designed. A boghopper should be designed way different then a draksar who is fundamentally different from a normal human. Those design differences should be the only thing a race really impacts. After that theme wise, a SL or IS phalanx style bg would draw from all the races in SL/IS and have them add non forced interactions to make said theme.

 

you guys seem to arguing against race having any kind of impact in game. im just not seeing the downside of it having an impact. and im not really seeing a lot of examples of champs that are hurt by it.

 

For me poxnora is all about racials, having 2 common zombies destroy a legendary tank is priceless, why? because there is power in racials, same goes with all the races, game should be less meta BGs and mora racial BGs, just my opinion.

 

You're both right, and both wrong too.

Tarth, you are right in saying that race shouldn't stop themes form being built, but it should restrict it sometimes (due to lore, think about it, when would Draksar and Barbarians TEAM UP!?).

Ragic, you are right in saying that race should have an impact in the game, though there are some champs that were never given any synergistic abilities, and because they also don't have a theme race they get shoeboxed (here's looking at you, Risen Yeti, though he is a bit better now, I still won't include him in anything due to lack of synergistic abilities).

Racials should be there, it makes since realistically and lore wise. But they shouldn't be the ONLY thing that brings themes together, and they should not be nearly as restrictive as they are now. There needs to be more synergy in general, not just races and classes, but for everything. And some things have some synergy, but would benefit (either mechanically or with flavor) from more synergy type things.

We are kinda getting off topic though... Let's try to stay constructive, and polite.

Again though, WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE MALJARAN SYNERGIES? I think that they should be looked at, especially if the Devs are gonna remove synergy abilities from champs, think about what would happen to Stitched if you did that. :O

 

No im arguing against race being the theme. I clearly, or at least thought it was clearly said that rae should factor into design of the individual champions not the theme. As in a human, is much different in its design then an elf which is different then a jakei and deep elf and so on and so on.

What I am against is a race being a theme. Its overly restrictive for design, bg construction, and game play as a whole. I mean look at IS paladins. Its not even a race but its been able to squeeze out most shamans and priests from their combined theme and we have a constant power creep shoeboxing of paladins every expansion or we have units that people say or wish to be paladins since they can't run them otherwise in said theme. To top that off paladins is one of the better examples of themes still! Which just goes to show you the issues associated with the rest of the themes that are actually race restricted since they have even more restrictions on them. Barbarians with the old savage were atrocious for this very reason and the current clan set up doesnt really help much since it either waters down the tribes or you restrict to one tribe to get more effect pushing out most of the sub set of a faction.

If barbarian was a class then you could at least have dwarfs/trolls/constructs be paladins like you have humans/dwarfs/angels being paladins for some diversity and what not but you can't since its a race. Add to it that you cant even have all humans be barbarians, even ones who are thematically barbarians in the lore or from their tribes are still excluded from their bgs since they dont have their racials. Its a shame.

 

I think everyone is getting just a little too stuck on racials... The point of this thread is NOT RACIALS. The point is more about SYNERGY IN GENERAL.

"Sigh".

Tarth, I think your point of making things less restrictive is good, but racials are really not that bad of an idea. Why not have races be themes? But who says that each champ can only fit into ONE theme? Why not take Blah from the race of X's, and use him with the MathFunction battlegroup?
I agree, racials should not be the cause of shoeboxing (but many times are), BUT, that doesn't mean that racials should be completely forgotten, or should I say, shoeboxed?

ANYWAY, CAN SOMEONE PLEASE ANSWER MY PREVIOUS QUESTION!? Sheesh, don't get so hung up on everyone's tangents... (like I'm doing right now!)

 

Racials should be what support themed decks. In addition to common abilities/themes. They should not be crutches nor should they be useless tag-ons.

That said, most 'races' do not currently have 'racials', which IMO is part of the problem and lack of synergy and part of why the meta is dominated by Goodstuff battlegroups.

 

My favorite racial is currently the Draksar Racial (Violent) -- it's much easier to trigger if you have more draksar out, but you can still trigger it with just two draksar if necessary. I think only some races should have racials though, not all races as some players have lobbied for.

I also support the idea of spells and abilities that affect specific races. Maybe even abilities that affect a target and units that share a race.

 

If not all races have racials...why have them at all?

Or asked another way: what is there to encourage building, say, a Moga deck, if the Moga don't have something tying them together? That something would be the purpose of a Racial. Not that it has to look the same as others...it could look very different. But without some sort of tie-together ability, there's no reason to play Moga.

 

The only thing tying moga together is that they all need a g'hern nearby, I'd hardly say that ties them together.

As a moga player, I can tell you that the things that tie the theme together are the abilities and spells that support them (Surge on Aviator, Dirge, most g'hern; Swarm on Recruiter; Improve Range on Aviator; Catapult on the Thrower; Drive on Taskmaster; Intimidation since you'll have tons of dudes; Strength in Numbers; etc).

 

So, honest question here, cause I see people saying this a lot: Why only give racials to some races? (besides not wanting more restrictions like others have said).

 

Right, so they do have some synergy, but they don't really have that one thing that ties them together other than G'hern Bound. In my opinion, it just looks nicer if things that go together have some sort of thing that makes them recognizable as those guys.

 

They have fantastic synergy without a unifying ability, and, in my opinion, that's a much better way to build themes, which is how moga managed to seduce me away from 5 years of almost nothing but UD.