Did everyone forget about BP? | Forums

[Knight_Raime]

flipping a deflect should definitely be impossible and just sounds like an oversight/possibly just an exception for orochis garbage deflects. I could agree that his flip is OP for the following:

- Can flip air assassinations which is utter BS
- Can flip multiple people and damage them all
- Flip has massive AoE making big brain attempts to cancel the punish to save your teammates impossible without hyper armour so its basically not possible because idk how you'd react fast enough and get HA to successfully stop it

I think the thing i despise the most about vortiger is how he hogs the oathbreaker feat all to himself AND can heal while in bulwark. Bulwark heal should straight up be deleted or given to the other two shieldy bois

Being able to flip drop attacks seems a bit cheesy sure. I'd be fine with letting that go (along with getting rid of his ability to flip feats) but I also strongly encourage the devs to rework how drop attack damage works so it's not an insta kill 90% of the time. It would make so many maps feel a lot nicer to play.

Oathbreaker is a pretty cheesy feat as well. I personally don't put much stock in it considering how easy it is to play around revenge in coordinated groups. But I get why people dislike it. I wouldn't mind nerfing it though i'm not sure how to. Healing behind being in his shield seems fine currently. You can't really do it in someone's face who expects you to do so. It's heal isn't strong either. If anything his unique tier one and tier two are balanced. It's his tier 3 and tier 4 that are a bit problematic.

As for flipping deflects go i'll just have to disagree. It makes sense completely from a mechanical standpoint. Deflects do not halt the person attacking. He can fast flow into full block off of attacks. If you wanted to argue that you don't like the interaction sure, that's fair. But it's 100% sound from how the game currently works and how the devs currently view deflects (i.e you need to know what you're deflecting.)

[Knight_Raime]

How would you feel if i asked for aramusha's blade blockade to be able to be entered via a recovery cancel, counter bashes, counter feats, have an animation that extends if multiple people hit it instead of failing, and counter drop attacks as well?

Because if black priors isn't OP than thats what aramusha should get. Hint hint aramusha blade blockade has the same recovery and gb weakness and can only be hard feinted into if tricking opponents for less damage.

Ive talked about this elsewhere. Even with the recovery and gb weakness black priors bulwark is far more versatile and powerful than any other similar move. That means it is directly OP considering the current balance of the game. And ill say this again here as well, anyone that somehow thinks otherwise when examining the move is not doing critically and definately has a bias.

Vakris already touched on the specifics you asked so I won't echo that. I will however point out the flaw in your argument. Just because something might be considered okay in the game doesn't mean we need to slap it on everyone. People already complain about heros being too similar just from slapping properties onto other heros. Copy pasting BP's move to aramusha's would be lazy. And frankly he doesn't need BP's bulwark in order to make his blade blockade actually viable.

Also, if BP's full block stance is the only good stance then we need to buff the other stances. Not nerf his. Because that assumes that all other full block stances are at an acceptable place. And they really aren't.

[TrondurIGotu]

Warlord's headbutt is much easier for me to dodge. Even if it is true they have the same speed, I just cannot dodge BP's bash. Only off of random guesses do I ever go to dodge, and even then, you cant punish it half the time since the timing is weird.

[Knight_Raime]

Warlord's headbutt is much easier for me to dodge. Even if it is true they have the same speed, I just cannot dodge BP's bash. Only off of random guesses do I ever go to dodge, and even then, you cant punish it half the time since the timing is weird.

WL's headbutt was buffed semi recently. You can't punish his headbutt via a dodge into gb anymore unless you read the bash coming and dodge early just like bp.

The animation might be easier for you but I personally struggle against dodging his bash more than BP's.

[Vendelkin]

And I just want to say this, anyone who argues with the premise of, "And if you don't agree with my opinion then you're wrong/biased!" is either dreadfully insecure in the validity of their argument or hasn't done adequate research and examined their argument with critical thinking.

Im letting the conversation roll cause im done trying to change minds, people can critically analyze it themselves. But this little piece i have to counter. I said that because the move bulwark counter is so unconventional when metrically compared in any way to any move. Trying to claim i havent done my research and flip that statement on its head is childish. I stand by the statement, and i have done my research. And i solidly know anyone that looks at bulwark counter and pretends its somehow a balanced maneuver has eyes clouded on the subject in someway.

[Vendelkin]

Vakris already touched on the specifics you asked so I won't echo that. I will however point out the flaw in your argument. Just because something might be considered okay in the game doesn't mean we need to slap it on everyone. People already complain about heros being too similar just from slapping properties onto other heros. Copy pasting BP's move to aramusha's would be lazy. And frankly he doesn't need BP's bulwark in order to make his blade blockade actually viable.

Also, if BP's full block stance is the only good stance then we need to buff the other stances. Not nerf his. Because that assumes that all other full block stances are at an acceptable place. And they really aren't.

You both obviously failed to catch my hyperbole there. In no world would i want aramusha's bb to function like black priors. If you actually think about my statements you would know this because I argue the move is overpowered. Thus its pretty clear.... im being hyperbolic with that request.

[Knight_Raime]

Im letting the conversation roll cause im done trying to change minds, people can critically analyze it themselves. But this little piece i have to counter. I said that because the move bulwark counter is so unconventional when metrically compared in any way to any move. Trying to claim i havent done my research and flip that statement on its head is childish. I stand by the statement, and i have done my research. And i solidly know anyone that looks at bulwark counter and pretends its somehow a balanced maneuver has eyes clouded on the subject in someway.

Pointing out someone's bias in an argument is not a counter point and does nothing to further the conversation. Same goes for automatically asserting your perspective as the correct one. The closest technical term to what you are describing would be "over tuned." Over powered means something else entirely and Vakris has already covered that. Further more, i've already pointed out that just because one option is superior to all other options doesn't mean said option is the only thing at fault here. We can adjust aspects to the move. But the more pressing concern should be to improve the other comparable moves.

You both obviously failed to catch my hyperbole there. In no world would i want aramusha's bb to function like black priors. If you actually think about my statements you would know this because I argue the move is overpowered. Thus its pretty clear.... im being hyperbolic with that request.

One should never assume the other individual is aware of what you're attempting to say or explain. It's perfectly possible to express your perspective on a point while being short, concise, and to the point. A conversation takes at least two people. If there are communication issues both parties are responsible. Not just one.

[Vendelkin]

So you want Aramusha to have a blade blockade that can flip every single move in the game? That is problematic because Blade Blockade can be done from neutral and is faster than Bulwark and it has less risk in using it in terms of speed wise, but grants nothing usefull in return. It might somewhat be fair if it flipped light attacks tho and punish them.

Please re read the thing you just quoted me saying.

[Vendelkin]

One should never assume the other individual is aware of what you're attempting to say or explain. It's perfectly possible to express your perspective on a point while being short, concise, and to the point. A conversation takes at least two people. If there are communication issues both parties are responsible. Not just one.

It's also perfectly acceptable to expect other people to catch onto the nuances of a conversation by reading what has been said carefully. Yes i could have conveyed my response differently saying instead: "it seems i failed to convey my hyperbole clearly." Doesn't make a big difference tho and getting caught up in that is pointless now. I felt that I was clear enough, and thus placed the onus on yours and Vakris interpretation.

Please re-read this segment
"How would you feel if i asked for aramusha's blade blockade to be able to be entered via a recovery cancel, counter bashes, counter feats, have an animation that extends if multiple people hit it instead of failing, and counter drop attacks as well?
"
The very opening: "how would you feel?" suggests immediately that i am not asking for this, that I am doing so to elicit a response and the truth regarding aspects of the bulwark maneuver. This is completely normal argumentation. Even if a bit nuanced or contextual.

I expect people to read what I post.

[Vendelkin]

Also pointing out biases invites people to consider their own position. Thinking critically demands the ability to self examine and to accept that what other people may critique with regards to your position may be true.

Yes I operate from the bias of an aramusha main in this regard, but I have in another conversation with you shown you metric arguments compared with each and every other full block or similar move as best can be done. So although I am biased I attempted to overcome the bias by considering other metrics. All i hear from anyone arguing it's not OP is its weak to guard breaks.

No crap. So are tons of other maneuvers weak to guard breaks. but none of those moves have as many upsides or versatile responses as bulwark counter does.


As a side note: discussing nuances of one persons definition of OP is pointless. Vakris defines it in such a way as to downplay my argument without actually targeting the meat of the argument. Arguing the semantics of the word OP versus Overtuned sets up a strawman because it again enable the spouted "it has a counterplay {guardbreak}" which I am very aware of. Since we started this
According to dictionaries:
"defeat or overcome with superior strength."
or
"be too intense for; overwhelm."
E.G. bulwark has superior strength.
I used the word at face value. The maneuver is superior to any other defensive move in the game.
It follows: Bulwark is Overpowered.