gersy wrote: ↑Sat Jan 11, 2025 4:24 am
comparing avg player to trolar is not really a good idea. a lot of games he's playing with dps oriented gear, sometimes going as far as using bloodlord weapon and axe slam m4 so naturally he's going to go in left tree. for other people, playing different comps or playstyles, it's not useless at all. i'd rather put it on an average IB player and have him play 5/5/13 for traditional SC/roaming. for 6v6, yes maybe not the play and the play is to play more points in 2h tree and ignore this buff. IB doesn't need 2h for punt tactic like other tank, so they can stay snb and go with this AA/crit/parry buff build and OHD tactic. it's surprisingly effective tbh, i mean we're using it often and seeing it working well, with 80-90% winrate in SCs i'd say it works fine. for the way my team plays and the content my team plays, most situation we'd rather BoG than GBF and definitely rather BoG than a morale pump that takes a tactic slot. you can have your own opinion ofc, there's a place for everything.
Good and interesting points you've brought for discussion, thanks!
First, the Trolar case, i believe there should be a balance between efforts put and performance. Should be top criteria for balancing and we surely don't have it here, e.g. what some people can do on engi vs avrg engi player. Difference is astonishing. However tho, im convinced that discussion should be held regardless player skills and with assumptions its perfect.
Second, average IB, yeah you've got a strong point that its easy to use, gives instant result without much efforts put. Especially good point you have about going snb for regular sc/roaming, lots of utility, even bringing htl.
However id love to argue here that BoG introduction has reduced IBs efficiency as you could previously do the same with GnM but you'd be ultimate AP battery instead of providing mere 25% AA increase. Im strongly convinced that AP >>> AA, plus another argument that AP pump has been greatly effective not only for SC/roaming but for city/orvr as well. I think that there are no arguments against that ap pump provides more damage overally then aa increase, especially opening up options like infinite id spam (dull playstyle but still very effective). So from all POV BoG introduction is a nerf to IBs allaroundness and efficiency. GnM was a great passive TyS! generator, other currently available options are not effective (you waste gcds) and very dull. Gameplay wise what we've had before was more intelligent and smart play, even taking into account that pump was passive (so you had space to better manage other gcds).
Third, GBF vs BoG, ill try to rephrase myself abit, if your IB knows the drill than it will overcompensate those 25% of AA increase by its own damage and also would open itself possibility to do much better bursts with GBF cancellation. That is demanding for your healers of course as they would have to have more attention and a bit demanding on IB movement as you have to be more careful too, of course considering that IB in this case goes offensive. However (ill try to look up those last tournament matches later, just to bring more clarity into discussion) there are examples where its clear that overall party dmg is higher if IB actually ignores BoG.
This all leads to a thesis ill try to phrase (maybe someone can word it better here): BoG has no effective applications in current meta.
Yeah its easy to use, not demanding, agree with you here but regardless there are always other options that are technically more effective.
So to clarify, its what i mean/understand then write/read things like "BoG is useless". Repeating myself but BoG should either also debuff elemental resistance by 380 as WAAAGH (instead of RP gimping itself) or be replaced back by GnM to return crucial meta build for ap pump.
