Rethinking steel skin (in General)


three4thsforsaken January 24 2009 10:49 PM EST

Alright, I understand the reasoning behind the AC nerf and the introduction of steel skin. It was to break down the defensive blender that was so dominant last year and the teams with simply bizarre amount of damage reduction.

The concept behind steel skin is very good and balancing, allowing us to retain the use of AC regardless of its nerf.

However, I strongly feel it's move to a ED was a bad one.

In the past few months we've seen the game move into one with a very strong emphasis in EDs especially that of AS and GA. First of all, although this move isn't really a bad one for CB, adding more EDs isn't what we really need, especially one geared for walls. Walls have always been more of a non-ED alternative, a way to make use of positioning and damage reduction rather than spamming HP on everyone.

But now walls are best used in a ED team. AS hp doesn't count towards their SS requirement, and SS combos well with an RoS team with an ED emphasis.

Also a great balancing factor I really thought benefited the game was how AP and SS competed against each other. A wall is either has great reduction with a SG weakness or less reduction with SG under control. That is gone now.

So in a nutshell I feel we should consider:

1. The ability to train SS as a skill (perhaps a new skill?)

2. SS not being dependent on HP. Base effect like AP. (It only penalizes teams that train HP and encourages more ED teams).

3. ToE training max effect of SS on user or team. (ToE being useful again? Whoa!)

4. BoE or AC training an amount of SS.

my two cents...again.

Tal [G6] January 25 2009 12:33 AM EST

i agree with pretty much all of it but especially number 3
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002eK0">Rethinking steel skin</a>