Furthermore, I don't agree that general's minions should give XP when killed. This would turn the minions into a liability, which negates the point of having minions as part of the general's abilities.
Not really. All this makes sure of is that you can't cheese minion swarms and auto attack. You have to actually do cost/benefit analysis when you use them. This would cause people to actually micro and manage their minions a great deal more, actually adding depth to the general class. There is no reason as I see it, that they should do nothing when they die. There should be a reward for killing minions, even if its small.
Why does my hero get expereince for killing minions of your citadel that are weaker than ones you summon yourself? If it defeated the purpose, you wouldn't want to ever upgrade your citadel.
Totally agree. Now they shouldn't give MUCH xp but if you land a killing blow on one you should get some. Like 10-20 xp.
The fundamental problem is that there is a big asymmetry going on here:
Some "Generals" can either be very good assassins or they can be very good generals. Assassin DGs can only be assassins.
Some DGs, like say TB, should be very strong against minion DGs. After all, TB has all kinds of AoE tools to take them out. But if generals like Erebus and Oak see a team that is made up of anti minion DGs, they can simply play an assassin build. And assassin Erebus or Oak owns TB and the like. The flexibility of Erebus and Oak means that you cant really counter them, or at least its MUCH more difficult.
Now there are some exceptions to this. A Rook might be good against both general and assassin builds (not too sure since I dont play Rook), but the point is still there: Erebus and Oak have two very different build types that require completely different counters. This makes their minion builds exceptionally difficult to counter since they can easily switch out of them if you try and strongly counter the minion build with proper DG choices.
Yeah i think this is the main problem. And both builds are very similar and only are maybe 5 or 6 changes to your choice of skill ladder. And since both builds are fairly effective it makes it just the enemy you are playing. I play rook as one of my main 3 characters (TB, Rook, and Erebus) and he does very well vs an oak one on one. But vs erebus it's brutal. 2k health nightwalkers against 8 towers may still mean all the nightwalkers die but it ties up your towers damage for at least 20-30 seconds meanwhile erebus and his nightwalkers are pounding away at rook himself. An assassin build doesn't work well against rook. Minion works very well for erebus and decently as oak. (I edited this last few sentances in so if i repeat myself i couldn't figure out how to take out the part below without losing my point)
I myself can play all the assassins fairly well and all generals except sedna well. I even relize PLAYING as oak and erebus that their minions are too strong. Rook is massacred unless he has all 8 towers up due to the fact that 10 nightwalkers sent in before erebus can practically negate the towers damage for a good 30 seconds+ because of their amazing health. Oak's spirits aren't as swingy vs rook but still do good against it. Spirits are unhittable by mines the MAIN reg build so regulus gets mauled by spirits. UB's ooze just doesn't have the damage to kill nightwalkers fast enough. And since the erebus spawns them almost if not FASTER than UB can kill them then UB is negated there. TB late game even has some trouble. I play a hybrid burst damage build that involves fire nova AND rain of ice and have trouble killing Nightwalkers late game.
Assassins in my mind are screwed over vs. these 2 demigods if they play minions builds. Torchbearer probally being on even terms but the other 3 are pretty much dead. Exceptions are regulus and erebus because mines DO hit his minions, rook and oak is fairly even due to the fact that oak doesnt have 200+ hps like erebus, and if they do a non minion centered build.
Another WALL OF TEXT!!
