|
On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed.
I hate karthus. I feel he is really strong and that his ult does too much damage such that as a squishy (AD carry) I've got to always hold over 40% life otherwise I'm dead.
That said I like my champions to be unique. Singed is a very unique champion because no one else just runs around and does damage like him.
I'd rather he were not removed from the game.
|
Yeah, btw, does exhaust still work on Karthus after he's dead? All debuffs are removed so it's "canceled", right?
Looking at Zed, I find his kit kinda awkward, because his "burst" is, assuming ult+W setup so all spells hit the target thrice:
AD (ult) + 460 + 2.0 bonus AD (Q + 50% damage Q twice) + 180 + 0.9 bonus AD (E) = 640 + 2.9 bonus AD + total AD.
When factoring in his ult it does (assuming level 16) 1.5 AD + 4.35 bonus AD + 960 damage.
It's a bit more if you manage to proc his passive with that burst (which may very well be possible during the early/mid game, but won't once his targets have some HP/armor seeing how we consider the case where he procs it before the mark explodes), with up to 12% of the target's max health, closer to 6-8% lategame as it is mostly magic damage and he won't build any MPen.
For some comparison, the burst from other AD burst casters (I'm not really going to count Rengar in, since he's often built tanky now, and he automatically wins with his 450 + 5 total AD if you manage your ferocity for a double Empowered Q on his ult, even before factoring W/E in; Kha'Zix wins automatically on an isolated target, otherwise he does a bit less burst, which is what interests us here, and a bit to a lot more over a few seconds with his ult for passive resets):
Talon: 1020 + 4.5 bonus AD + AD, can possibly add 1 AD ratio if he does aa->Q. Doesn't take the amplification from his passive and E into account, and a lot of it is in a respectable AoE.
Pantheon: 545 + 5.0 bonus AD (+ 650 + 1.5 AP magic) + AD, adding one auto if he goes W->auto->E->Q (or Q->E), with a big chunk of the physical damage in AoE, and considering that he'll miss most of the magic damage (500) if he queues up another spell during his fall (from what I've noticed, his ult does no damage nor does it slow if you queue up a spell as Pantheon doesn't play the landing animation).
I'm not saying that Zed's damage is too low, of course, but it feels, when you look at his numbers, kinda low because his ultimate plays such a huge part in it, as gap closer, tool for enhancing his burst, and main part of said burst.
If you take away the ultimate (and thus damage equivalent to 1 AD + 50% of his Q damage from the basic burst), he feels pretty underwhelming, kinda like Xerath.
Of course he still has harassment tools like his Q, which Rengar lacks, and escape tools, which Talon and Pantheon lack outside of their ults (they can use their jumps, but it's awkward as they need to jump to an hostile target, which must be a champ in Panth's case), but it leaves me wondering about the way he's going to be played when his ult is on cooldown.
Also the lack of sustain or defensive steroids, while good (see Rengar and Kha'Zix, or even Diana... ), make him seem frail in the jungle. From what I've seen so far he can't really jungle off of dblades the way Nocturne, Riven, Lee Sin can, and a wriggles doesn't go too well with his kit I feel.
I'm stil curious because his kit seems fun and interesting, but the numbers making his ult so essential and the way his kit goes with jungling leave me wondering.
|
On November 05 2012 11:40 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed. Wait, so because the decision of whether or not you should kill him in a give fight is unclear, highly situational, and depends a lot on a player's situational awareness and game knowledge, he has "no counterplay" and should be removed? Decision-making should be easy, binary, no-brainers at all levels of the game? You've gotta be fucking shitting me... 90% of situations where the "no counter-play" argument is used involve scenarios where players demonstrate poor foresight, game sense, and situational awareness, rather than situations that are actually "no counterplay".
No, its only unclear because it doesn't matter which option you choose.
Some of you obviously have poor reading comprehension, I specifically said I don't judge him OP or UP. He's not a free win. Obviously the best way to beat him is to shut him down early game, so his damage although unmitigateable is weak. But from a game design perspective this is a really a touchy balancing mechanic. Power curves are fine to an extent but I think most of us would be against adding superweapons or other such units to SC or other games whose only counterplay is to prevent them being made, because regardless of whether or not they have a huge effect on balance due to their difficulty to acquire or overcosting, they actually are pretty boring and frustrating to play with. This is because they are actually a really simple and boringly binary mechanic compared to well designed unit relationships with more options available to the player.
I wish the option to engage on him, kill him and then disengage was more viable, as that would be interesting and result in complex play to prevent or perform. But right now unless you have a xerath who is fed enough to one shot him with ult, his wall will totally shutdown your disengage which makes it a terrible option unless he is awful.
|
On November 05 2012 12:09 Alaric wrote:
Yeah, btw, does exhaust still work on Karthus after he's dead? All debuffs are removed so it's "canceled", right?
Looking at Zed, I find his kit kinda awkward, because his "burst" is, assuming ult+W setup so all spells hit the target thrice:
AD (ult) + 460 + 2.0 bonus AD (Q + 50% damage Q twice) + 180 + 0.9 bonus AD (E) = 640 + 2.9 bonus AD + total AD.
When factoring in his ult it does (assuming level 16) 1.5 AD + 4.35 bonus AD + 960 damage.
It's a bit more if you manage to proc his passive with that burst (which may very well be possible during the early/mid game, but won't once his targets have some HP/armor seeing how we consider the case where he procs it before the mark explodes), with up to 12% of the target's max health, closer to 6-8% lategame as it is mostly magic damage and he won't build any MPen.
For some comparison, the burst from other AD burst casters (I'm not really going to count Rengar in, since he's often built tanky now, and he automatically wins with his 450 + 5 total AD if you manage your ferocity for a double Empowered Q on his ult, even before factoring W/E in; Kha'Zix wins automatically on an isolated target, otherwise he does a bit less burst, which is what interests us here, and a bit to a lot more over a few seconds with his ult for passive resets):
Talon: 1020 + 4.5 bonus AD + AD, can possibly add 1 AD ratio if he does aa->Q. Doesn't take the amplification from his passive and E into account, and a lot of it is in a respectable AoE.
Pantheon: 545 + 5.0 bonus AD (+ 650 + 1.5 AP magic) + AD, adding one auto if he goes W->auto->E->Q (or Q->E), with a big chunk of the physical damage in AoE, and considering that he'll miss most of the magic damage (500) if he queues up another spell during his fall (from what I've noticed, his ult does no damage nor does it slow if you queue up a spell as Pantheon doesn't play the landing animation).
I'm not saying that Zed's damage is too low, of course, but it feels, when you look at his numbers, kinda slow because his ultimate plays such a huge part in it, as gap closer, tool for enhancing his burst, and main part of said burst.
If you take away the ultimate (and thus damage equivalent to 1 AD + 50% of his Q damage from the basic burst), he feels pretty underwhelming, kinda like Xerath.
Of course he still has harassment tools like his Q, which Rengar lacks, and escape tools, which Talon and Pantheon lack outside of their ults (they can use their jumps, but it's awkward as they need to jump to an hostile target, which must be a champ in Panth's case), but it leaves me wondering about the way he's going to be played when his ult is on cooldown.
Also the lack of sustain or defensive steroids, while good (see Rengar and Kha'Zix, or even Diana... ), make him seem frail in the jungle. From what I've seen so far he can't really jungle off of dblades the way Nocturne, Riven, Lee Sin can, and a wriggles doesn't go too well with his kind I feel.
I'm stil curious because his kit seems fun and interesting, but the numbers making his ult so essential and the way his kit goes with jungling leave me wondering.
I think the kind of problem Zed suffers is somewhat similar to what LeBlanc suffers. His W is a gapcloser that also brings more damage, but once you use it for gapclosing it becomes a weaker damage tool.
|
On November 05 2012 12:10 sob3k wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 11:40 TheYango wrote:On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed. Wait, so because the decision of whether or not you should kill him in a give fight is unclear, highly situational, and depends a lot on a player's situational awareness and game knowledge, he has "no counterplay" and should be removed? Decision-making should be easy, binary, no-brainers at all levels of the game? You've gotta be fucking shitting me... 90% of situations where the "no counter-play" argument is used involve scenarios where players demonstrate poor foresight, game sense, and situational awareness, rather than situations that are actually "no counterplay". No, its only unclear because it doesn't matter which option you choose. Some of you obviously have poor reading comprehension, I specifically said I don't judge him OP or UP. He's not a free win. Obviously the best way to beat him is to shut him down early game, so his damage although unmitigateable is weak. But from a game design perspective this is a really a touchy balancing mechanic. Power curves are fine to an extent but I think most of us would be against adding superweapons or other such units to SC or other games whose only counterplay is to prevent them being made, because regardless of whether or not they have a huge effect on balance due to their difficulty to acquire or overcosting, they actually are pretty boring and frustrating to play with. This is because they are actually a really simple and boringly binary mechanic compared to well designed unit relationships with more options available to the player. I wish the option to engage on him, kill him and then disengage was more viable, as that would be interesting and result in complex play to prevent or perform. But right now unless you have a xerath who is fed enough to one shot him with ult, his wall will totally shutdown your disengage which makes it a terrible option unless he is awful.
What an ignorant statement given the state of ZvP in SC2.
|
The thing i hate most about karthus is that he discourages aggressive play in lane. like if i am top laner and i get aggressive, make a big play but end up with low health, then karthus can just ult to get himself a kill and top laner an assist. Other team wins even though you out played your opponent.
Now i know, in the situation above i should have taken karthus into account, but then i am always avoiding aggression after 6 when karthus ulti is up knowing unless i win big (can't be ulted to death) then it will be a win for the other team.
Anyway, the cooldown is long enough that it isn't that big of a deal, but I still find it a dumb mechanic.
|
there's a lot of counters to karthus... burst-type mids with a good cc/ gap closer can destroy him pretty hard lane phase. there is really no reason you should be engaging with the intent of fighting in his e range, unless he's so ridiculously steamrolled and you are ridiculously ahead (even then, bad idea as TPA vs AZF showed).
imo karthus is actually really, really counter able.
|
I agree that Karthus is a stupid design and if he were removed I'd lose no sleep over it.
That said, you could still nerf a lot of his kit and leave him a lot less aggravating to play against (i.e. lower AP ratio on ult, shorter range, width, and slow / shred on his wall, shorter duration of his passive (e.g. such that he can do one spell and then ult), but if you nerf his damaging abilities, especially his ult, then the passive becomes less oppressive).
But really, if there was going to be any one change to Karthus, it would 100% be a significant nerf to the damage of his ult.
|
On November 05 2012 12:10 sob3k wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 11:40 TheYango wrote:On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed. Wait, so because the decision of whether or not you should kill him in a give fight is unclear, highly situational, and depends a lot on a player's situational awareness and game knowledge, he has "no counterplay" and should be removed? Decision-making should be easy, binary, no-brainers at all levels of the game? You've gotta be fucking shitting me... 90% of situations where the "no counter-play" argument is used involve scenarios where players demonstrate poor foresight, game sense, and situational awareness, rather than situations that are actually "no counterplay". No, its only unclear because it doesn't matter which option you choose. Some of you obviously have poor reading comprehension, I specifically said I don't judge him OP or UP. He's not a free win. Obviously the best way to beat him is to shut him down early game, so his damage although unmitigateable is weak. But from a game design perspective this is a really a touchy balancing mechanic. Power curves are fine to an extent but I think most of us would be against adding superweapons or other such units to SC or other games whose only counterplay is to prevent them being made, because regardless of whether or not they have a huge effect on balance due to their difficulty to acquire or overcosting, they actually are pretty boring and frustrating to play with. This is because they are actually a really simple and boringly binary mechanic compared to well designed unit relationships with more options available to the player. I wish the option to engage on him, kill him and then disengage was more viable, as that would be interesting and result in complex play to prevent or perform. But right now unless you have a xerath who is fed enough to one shot him with ult, his wall will totally shutdown your disengage which makes it a terrible option unless he is awful.
I don't think people rely on shutting down karthus in the early game to beat him. He's pretty hard to shut down.
I find when I play karthus he's not as bad as you say. It's hard for karthus to be hitting everyone on an enemy team so one bruiser can go in and kill him and he'll just be dead there... doing nothing. Just like with fiddlesticks, you can kick karthus away to reduce his damage significantly while his team dies. You act like every karthus just flashes into your team, lays down a wall, dies, and wins the teamfight because he did that, when in reality if karthus dies in 4 seconds and out of position, those 7 seconds of continued defile damage will not add up to fiddlesticks levels of damage and his team will lose.
Anivia's ult does more damage than karthus' defile and it slows from a range. That's also hard to disengage from but not impossible. Do you also recommend removing anivia from the game?
|
On November 05 2012 12:25 Craton wrote:
I agree that Karthus is a stupid design and if he were removed I'd lose no sleep over it.
That said, you could still nerf a lot of his kit and leave him a lot less aggravating to play against (i.e. lower AP ratio on ult, shorter range, width, and slow / shred on his wall, shorter duration of his passive (e.g. such that he can do one spell and then ult), but if you nerf his damaging abilities, especially his ult, then the passive becomes less oppressive).
But really, if there was going to be any one change to Karthus, it would 100% be a significant nerf to the damage of his ult.
Anytime i get into game theory i end up looking dumb but well, here goes.
I wish karthus ult did bonus damage to any champion who had been hit by one of his skills in the last x number of seconds (lets say about 6 or 7 seconds). That way you could nerf the global part of the ult that is so annoying to the other lanes while still making it a strong teamfight ability.
just a rough idea, but i think it would improve the champ.
|
On November 05 2012 12:22 Zdrastochye wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:10 sob3k wrote:On November 05 2012 11:40 TheYango wrote:On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed. Wait, so because the decision of whether or not you should kill him in a give fight is unclear, highly situational, and depends a lot on a player's situational awareness and game knowledge, he has "no counterplay" and should be removed? Decision-making should be easy, binary, no-brainers at all levels of the game? You've gotta be fucking shitting me... 90% of situations where the "no counter-play" argument is used involve scenarios where players demonstrate poor foresight, game sense, and situational awareness, rather than situations that are actually "no counterplay". No, its only unclear because it doesn't matter which option you choose. Some of you obviously have poor reading comprehension, I specifically said I don't judge him OP or UP. He's not a free win. Obviously the best way to beat him is to shut him down early game, so his damage although unmitigateable is weak. But from a game design perspective this is a really a touchy balancing mechanic. Power curves are fine to an extent but I think most of us would be against adding superweapons or other such units to SC or other games whose only counterplay is to prevent them being made, because regardless of whether or not they have a huge effect on balance due to their difficulty to acquire or overcosting, they actually are pretty boring and frustrating to play with. This is because they are actually a really simple and boringly binary mechanic compared to well designed unit relationships with more options available to the player. I wish the option to engage on him, kill him and then disengage was more viable, as that would be interesting and result in complex play to prevent or perform. But right now unless you have a xerath who is fed enough to one shot him with ult, his wall will totally shutdown your disengage which makes it a terrible option unless he is awful. What an ignorant statement given the state of ZvP in SC2.
You wanna explain to us or are you just gonna leave it at that?
|
On November 05 2012 12:22 Zdrastochye wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:10 sob3k wrote:On November 05 2012 11:40 TheYango wrote:On November 05 2012 11:32 sob3k wrote:
Anyone else here think Karthus should be reworked or removed from the game?
I'ts has nothing to do with whether or not he's overpowered or underpowered, I'll leave that up to pro players, but his kit is completely awful from a game design standpoint. He's put together in such a way that there is no counterplay to him, If you ignore him he does massive damage to everyone on the team, if you focus him he does basically the exact same amount of damage. As long as he stays with the team there is nothing you can do to mitigate him at all, especially after zhonyas. His ult which is supposed to have this long channel, he's given it for free after he dies. So by killing him early you are actually increasing his upfront damage, not to mention that his wall will do its thing regardless of his status.
He's just terribly designed. Wait, so because the decision of whether or not you should kill him in a give fight is unclear, highly situational, and depends a lot on a player's situational awareness and game knowledge, he has "no counterplay" and should be removed? Decision-making should be easy, binary, no-brainers at all levels of the game? You've gotta be fucking shitting me... 90% of situations where the "no counter-play" argument is used involve scenarios where players demonstrate poor foresight, game sense, and situational awareness, rather than situations that are actually "no counterplay". No, its only unclear because it doesn't matter which option you choose. Some of you obviously have poor reading comprehension, I specifically said I don't judge him OP or UP. He's not a free win. Obviously the best way to beat him is to shut him down early game, so his damage although unmitigateable is weak. But from a game design perspective this is a really a touchy balancing mechanic. Power curves are fine to an extent but I think most of us would be against adding superweapons or other such units to SC or other games whose only counterplay is to prevent them being made, because regardless of whether or not they have a huge effect on balance due to their difficulty to acquire or overcosting, they actually are pretty boring and frustrating to play with. This is because they are actually a really simple and boringly binary mechanic compared to well designed unit relationships with more options available to the player. I wish the option to engage on him, kill him and then disengage was more viable, as that would be interesting and result in complex play to prevent or perform. But right now unless you have a xerath who is fed enough to one shot him with ult, his wall will totally shutdown your disengage which makes it a terrible option unless he is awful. What an ignorant statement given the state of ZvP in SC2.
or ZvT xD
|
Honestly i think karthus is in a fine spot atm, if they were to change something i'd say give his Q a higher mana cost at all ranks or reduce the mana gained passively from his E.
|
On November 05 2012 12:30 petered wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:25 Craton wrote:
I agree that Karthus is a stupid design and if he were removed I'd lose no sleep over it.
That said, you could still nerf a lot of his kit and leave him a lot less aggravating to play against (i.e. lower AP ratio on ult, shorter range, width, and slow / shred on his wall, shorter duration of his passive (e.g. such that he can do one spell and then ult), but if you nerf his damaging abilities, especially his ult, then the passive becomes less oppressive).
But really, if there was going to be any one change to Karthus, it would 100% be a significant nerf to the damage of his ult. Anytime i get into game theory i end up looking dumb but well, here goes. I wish karthus ult did bonus damage to any champion who had been hit by one of his skills in the last x number of seconds (lets say about 6 or 7 seconds). That way you could nerf the global part of the ult that is so annoying to the other lanes while still making it a strong teamfight ability. just a rough idea, but i think it would improve the champ.
My problem is that it is too strong in team fights.
Over and over and over lategame fights come down to a Karthus ult doing 50% of your AP Carry, AD Carry, and Support's HP, regardless of if Karthus died or not. You can't prevent his ult unless he's pants on head retarded (i.e. tries to ult in front of you while alive or wastes all his mana on e and then you're in a miracle position where you can run away not killing him while also not needing to deal with his teammates), so the mere fact of his existence guarantees anything not named tank will lose a massive portion of their HP. As far as I'm concerned, that's the hallmark of bad design.
I want positioning to matter and there to be a back and forth in combat, not a "regardless of what happens, my ult WILL hit you and it WILL do a huge portion of your HP."
That it probably also does too much to people in sidelanes during lane phase is a secondary concern that would probably be alleviated by addressing it having too much power lategame.
On November 05 2012 12:22 Zdrastochye wrote:
What an ignorant statement given the state of ZvP in SC2.
You can leave your SC2 whining in the SC2 forums, thanks. You know exactly what his example meant.
|
Can someone give me Bankplank runes/masteries/build please? I know I saw a video a few months ago of it and it looked really fun :3
|
On November 05 2012 12:38 Craton wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:30 petered wrote:On November 05 2012 12:25 Craton wrote:
I agree that Karthus is a stupid design and if he were removed I'd lose no sleep over it.
That said, you could still nerf a lot of his kit and leave him a lot less aggravating to play against (i.e. lower AP ratio on ult, shorter range, width, and slow / shred on his wall, shorter duration of his passive (e.g. such that he can do one spell and then ult), but if you nerf his damaging abilities, especially his ult, then the passive becomes less oppressive).
But really, if there was going to be any one change to Karthus, it would 100% be a significant nerf to the damage of his ult. Anytime i get into game theory i end up looking dumb but well, here goes. I wish karthus ult did bonus damage to any champion who had been hit by one of his skills in the last x number of seconds (lets say about 6 or 7 seconds). That way you could nerf the global part of the ult that is so annoying to the other lanes while still making it a strong teamfight ability. just a rough idea, but i think it would improve the champ. My problem is that it is too strong in team fights. Over and over and over lategame fights come down to a Karthus ult doing 50% of your AP Carry, AD Carry, and Support's HP, regardless of if Karthus died or not. You can't prevent his ult unless he's pants on head retarded (i.e. tries to ult in front of you while alive or wastes all his mana on e and then you're in a miracle position where you can run away not killing him while also not needing to deal with his teammates), so the mere fact of his existence guarantees anything not named tank will lose a massive portion of their HP. As far as I'm concerned, that's the hallmark of bad design. I want positioning to matter and there to be a back and forth in combat, not a "regardless of what happens, my ult WILL hit you and it WILL do a huge portion of your HP." That it probably also does too much to people in sidelanes during lane phase is a secondary concern that would probably be alleviated by addressing it having too much power lategame. Show nested quote +On November 05 2012 12:22 Zdrastochye wrote:
What an ignorant statement given the state of ZvP in SC2. You can leave your SC2 whining in the SC2 forums, thanks. You know exactly what his example meant.
well it would force karthus to get in range of the carry in a teamfight to be able to land a spell on him. if your bruiser can zone him or take him out of the fight early, then he may not be able to land a spell in order to make his ult do insane damage to your carry.
I see your point, though. My idea probably isn't that good, but I still hope they take a look at his ult to give it a bit more interaction rather than guaranteed damage, as you pointed out.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
I really really like the design of Karthus, it's like a AP hypercarry with a strong midgame map presence despite weak roaming so it's very very unique and the way you play both as and against Karthus is really unique as well due to his passive. You really have to adapt your positioning and change your decisions in teamfight like when to dive/when to back off etc and it's really interesting. I think removing that and making him more generic would be a great shame. He wasn't even "by far most picked" in this MLG, I think Orianna ? was the most relevant AP carry so it's not like he is overpowered he is just different.
|
United States47024 Posts
On November 05 2012 12:38 Craton wrote:
My problem is that it is too strong in team fights.
Over and over and over lategame fights come down to a Karthus ult doing 50% of your AP Carry, AD Carry, and Support's HP, regardless of if Karthus died or not. You can't prevent his ult unless he's pants on head retarded (i.e. tries to ult in front of you while alive or wastes all his mana on e and then you're in a miracle position where you can run away not killing him while also not needing to deal with his teammates), so the mere fact of his existence guarantees anything not named tank will lose a massive portion of their HP. As far as I'm concerned, that's the hallmark of bad design.
I want positioning to matter and there to be a back and forth in combat, not a "regardless of what happens, my ult WILL hit you and it WILL do a huge portion of your HP."
That it probably also does too much to people in sidelanes during lane phase is a secondary concern that would probably be alleviated by addressing it having too much power lategame.
I don't see this as necessarily a bad thing. The gameplay you describe is more or less a product of the fact that in 99% of cases, AD and AP carries can get away with being nearly entirely glass cannon. It chunks half their HP because everyone more or less accustomed to getting away with having no more than 1 full defensive items on those champs, which leads to its own issues (such as the lategame damage disparity between melee and ranged).
Arguably the game should have more effects like these to keep ranged champion itemization more honest, and it would alleviate some of the other gameplay problems present in the game.
|
Bankplank
Runes:
AD reds
gp10 yellers
Armor/MR blues
gp10 quints
Masteries:
9/0/21
3/3 AD, 2/2 Minion damage, Take arpen or cooldown either works
21 utilty with 3/3 Mp5, 4/4 Greed ,and 2/2 Wealth for regrowth+ 2, 6% cdr, and 15% ss cooldown
Remember to take Flash/TP cd mastery
or 9/9/12
Same offense masteries
A little more safer because of the extra defensive masteries
Utility is just 4/4 Greed with mp5
Spells:
Teleport/Flash- get to lane faster, flash to escape
Heal/Flash- super safe since you will be squishy as FUCK in lane
Ignite/Flash- if you feel man enough
Build:
Regrowth + 1 or 2, depending if you went 2/2 Greed
Rush Philo, then HoG, Kages, Avarice in any order
Fit Boots of Lucidity after Philo usually or skip it until after a few gp10 items if you aren't having any trouble in lane
Should have a IE by 15-20 mins depends on your farming
Next build standard GP with Trinity, Warmogs, Mallet, LW, etc.
Tiamat for luls
|
It seems like it would be better to alleviate that by making glass cannon builds less attractive through itemization changes than addressing a systemic issue on a champion by champion basis, but the point is well taken. Karthus certainly isn't solving the problem you describe by being the way he is, though, just exploiting it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
