SoFFacet

TDude, I don't agree at all. Our teams have played UB/Sed vs LE/Oak twice (1-1), so I know exactly what tactics you are referring to when you say "knowing how to survive." I think this is a case of a character powerful at a lower level of play seemingly becoming weaker when its' opponents reach a higher level of play, but in fact becoming powerful again once the character in question is also played at a higher level. In this case, you guys had a nice attack combo and some neat defensive trick

Overall this is just a Hybrid Torch that obsesses over Flag Locks and Citadel Upgrades, right? Getting Mint 1 at 1620 War Score = good idea. Using lots of Flag Locks = usually a good idea. Having 1 person be responsible for all Cit upgrades = bad idea. Buying catas at WR8 = usually a bad idea.

[quote]No, it's really not. DG would become most competitive with automated matchmaking, in which case all house rules would be completely unenforcable and off the table. The things that are proposed to be forbidden here are all bugs, and bug fixes are devs' concern, not the players.' I know I sound really cynical right now, but the bottom line is that these kinds of rulesets never really work out because it reduces the community to an uncompetitive size and using every

[quote who="Lemminkaeinen" reply="9" id="2320731"]Since you're giving me mandates, I suppose that I can give you one as well: Stop addressing me. I'm not interested in what you have to say about this game. Also, QQ[/quote] Pathetic whiney premade-critic can't refute arguments so he blusters incoherently about mandates. Stop posting your trash here. No one wants to hear any more of it. EDIT: TDude, your team and mine should meet for a decisive game 3! Those were

Prison and Crucible are more 2v2ish. Leviathan and Zikurat are more 4v4ish. 3v3 is the most popular game size, and Cata is the only good 3v3 map. EDIT: Btw, Favor points is a terrible way to track the DG metagame.

[quote who="ItchyDustbin" reply="3" id="2320344"]How do you know they don't? Wait, you're talking about something you have little knowledge about again, nevermind. I'm sure quite a lot of the people you are branding with your "premade" tag are just friends playing together, whereas most of the organised teams when I played tried to play against each other fairly often.[/quote] I know, he just keeps whining about the same things, no matter how often the flaws in his point of view are p

[quote who="Lemminkaeinen" reply="5" id="2320059"]SoFFacet, are you OK with the unkillable minions inside the enemy citadel exploit then as well? And do you consider it a nerf when that functionality is taken away?[/quote] Two completely different things, one destroys all gameplay, the other leaves it intact but is slightly imba. [quote who="Schobbo" reply="7" id="2320122"]Sedna High Priest BUG is of course a BUG, if you say otherwise you must be freakin retarded.[/quote]

Rumors of Sedna's late-game demise are greatly exaggerated.

[quote]Any oversight which is corrected should be considered a nerf by your logic. If magnificent presence rank 2 decreased cooldowns by 230% of the desired effect but rank 1 and 3 functioned as intended, or if rank 3 of unit armor and weapon upgrades had the same oversight everyone would use them, but that wouldn't mean fixing them would be a nerf. It's a fix. Do you honestly believe that 50/50/50/230/50 is the intended functionality?[/quote] I understand your logic, the "pro

Right now Sedna priests cost 2100 and heal 30%. Using these priests is completely legitimate. When High Priests are changed, Sedna priests will cost 2700 and heal 22%. Using those priests will also be completely legitimate. This is pretty much the definition of a nerf.

Scaled Helm is cheaper and more effective than Plate Visor. There is no logical reason this should be the case. Yet no one complains that buying Scaled Helm is bugged, or is an exploit. Ergo, neither are High Priests. When they are changed, it will be a nerf . Probably a deserved one, as well. But it is important to distinguish here.

I don't like this idea. Individual hosts can create their own rules, but this seems like a project bent on creating scrubby social taboos based on the arbitrary preferences of a few people. If you start down this path, where will it lead? Almost any tactic that happens to annoy the right player could be added to the list of house rules and be banned. Default rules = The rules. [quote]2. Sedna Healing Wind + Level 3 idol Priests/High Priests[/quote] Th

[quote]which will help bring QoT up to speed given that her autoattack (if it weren't bugged) blows sedna's out of the water in utility.[/quote] Explain? Afaik she has the weakest AA in the game. EDIT: Also, please explain why those quote brackets don't work. [e digicons]:annoyed:[/e] I hate this forum so much. EDIT 2: I fail at spelling simple words. Go me.

Ok this forum officially sucks. Its been telling me the latest post in this thread was from Ceeshond all the way up at #22, so I didn't know there were more posts here until I randomly looked at the thread again. Anyways: [quote]Ok, Offensive vs. Defensive. First I'll make some analogies everyone can understand then I'll bring them to light in the game. If you've ever studied Chess, for example you will see that when you do a defensive strategy you need one

These types of fanboy showdowns always amuse me. In the red corner, Cosmoe, who spends every waking moment raising the alarm about the underusage and underpowered-ness of his pet DG! In the blue corner, Celmare, who bristles at the very notion that QoT is relatively weak! My $.02: QoT is relatively weak, but not because of Bramble Shield. She's squishy, slow, her spells cost too much mana, and to top it all off her AA stinks. Also compared to Sedna she has no inte

Well minion-horn builds are an autowin against anything right now, if you use the gay citadel-kamikaze tactics. Other than that I'd agree Sed/UB is the metagame. Zech, imo you will have much more success if you design a pair to take down a pair , rather than design one DG and leave everything else vague. Still, I like this build. 1 point in Penitence for interrupts, 1 point in Shield for emergencies, and the rest dedicated to overpowering minion DPS. I think it probab

[quote]Also even a 1% chance to one-shot an enemy with an AA would be overpowered. Especially on a Demigod like Regulus who is already annoying[/quote] Actually that tactic is currently available. If you have many %chance-crit items, they stack. If they all go on the same attack, you can get several thousand damage in one hit, often head-shotting your unlucky victim.

I'm with Itchy on this one. Aside from the wee little detail that most of these things should have been in the game since release (and the still missing team automatch), it looks good.

[quote who="CosMoe" reply="14" id="2318244"]Generally speaking, don't you think that there's something wrong with the game if an "offensive skill" outweights the advantage of a "support skill" for your teammates? [/quote] First of all I don't believe that a 30% slow on 1 target will often be more useful than 1500 HP. But anyways, Snares are not purely "offensive." They are "utility" skills, meaning they can be used either offensively or defensively. As per

[quote who="Kokujin" reply="22" id="2318137"]Hmmmm, interesting. Very good points. We have to retest and adapt again I guess. Thx SoFFacet for explaining once again, I belive you are right.[/quote] Ha. If our teams ever play each other we both may regret giving away so much in this thread... a little. :P

[quote who="Kokujin" reply="20" id="2318041"]We have tested, the 2 alternatives you are sugesting. Both skills would drive to a lacking mana situation.[/quote] Pounce 1 vs Inner Grace 2 is still the one thing that bothers me most about this build. Inner Grace 2 does almost *nothing*. So little, in fact, that even if I never use Pounce once during the early or midgame, I still would have no regrets about having taken it because there is always the chance I might have been able

[quote who="Krazikarl" reply="10" id="2317095"]Yeah, as people have been saying, the real problem is Regulus. Reg is popular. But he is completely countered by LE and UB, two popular Dark DGs. Rook is a tough DG to play too - he is good if you know what you are doing, but most players really dont play him well. Really if Sedna and Oak were more popular, Pantheon would be a lot closer. Those are two strong DGs that are good at working with each other.[/

[quote who="Nesrie" reply="23" id="2313361"]I have certainly run into my fair share of extreme feminists that really defy rational arguments, but they are no different than any other extreme group like people extreme about religion, or politics or any other ideal. I would not group all feminists into one category just because some of the more verbal and overbearing individuals who claim that label left a sour taste in my mouth anymore than I woul

SG-1

[quote who="Kokujin" reply="8" id="2316983"]I already stated on this topic why I don't care for speed. BUT if speed is something I need to counter on the match, and it really something I have to do to win the game I will keep the same setup and buy Wand of Speed. Usualy unacessary. Could you provide an opposing team which I will need speed to win the game?[/quote] This sentiment is correct in general, but I would contend that speed is also useful for tactical maneuvering during b