Ganks eat too much HP, and here's a solution | Forums

[MrBdur]

A 4v1 should not be survivable unless you are REALLY good. Having options to allow the 1 to survive easier against ganks is just dumb. You SHOULD die quickly in ganks.

Solution? Avoid ganks. Move with your team. Learn coordination.

I have been playing FH for over 4 years without ever using a single OS intentionally.

If I don't complain about ganks, neither should you (no one specific, just anyone reading lol).

[Tio_Croc]

Seems like the two intelligent kids of the class disagreed lol.

But I agree on making zones costing less stamina, A good number would be 24. Two hit zones would cost 12 per hit, 3 8 per hit, 4 6 stamina per hit. All of them should have a consistent cost of 10 stamina for feinting.

[Knight_Raime]

We already know Raider is going to benefit a lot from the changes, especially when he couldn't benefit from zone OSs so he gains an option outside
revenge

I disagree about raider benefitting massively from removal of OS changes. But I made a whole thread about the TG disappointment with him so i'm not going to repeat that here. I will just say that the potential for him to benefit from OS changes exists. But only after his mix is made better. There are other heros who'd i'd state benefitted from OS removal more than raider did.

If I was wrong with my first bullet point, okay, I can accept that. However, I shall clarify that with my original suggestion to damage reduction, the starting point should be the damage of attacks that are considered too high. If that proves to be not enough, then further reductions should be made. Again, increasing temporary damage reduction would have a knock-effect with heroes that synergise their defensive feats & perks or their healing feats & perks, especially with classes that have high HP.

I can agree that targeted damage nerfs should be the first thing to look at.

If reducing damage isn't going to make much of a difference whether it is temporary, nerfing high damage attacks, or global reduction, then why were you arguing for it in the first place? At least we can agree that the devs should review pins and animation locks to address balancing issues in general and infinite ganks where possible. I think they should review revenge locks to assess fairness in that respect.

Either you're misunderstanding me here or you're purposefully conflating things to discredit the argument. I will restate my position just to be clear. I think there are specific attacks that should be brought down regardless of any other changes specifically because they will be landing more often now. I also believe further changes need to be made specifically to how certain mechanics work because there are specific ganks out there that are too strong purely because of how little counter play exists for them. Reducing the damage for specific moves (ex Goki comes to mind) will certainly effect how obscene his ganks are damage wise. But it won't nerf how busted they are from a mechanical standpoint. So further action must be taken regardless of damage changes made. Is this more understandable?

It wouldn't be easy but if it's necessary for balance, it should be done. However, I was more referring to the problematic ones, not necessarily reworking the entire lot.

I'm not sure which pin moves you see out there that you don't think are problematic ones. All of them are. The only reason Shinobi's is currently getting more attention is because the forgiveness window to be able to grab someone and continue the gank is bigger. You can absolutely layer things like goki hug into Cent pin or vise versa. But the margin of error is much thinner. If you wanted to be super nitpicky you can say the S tier of pin moves are shinobi's sickle rain and Goki's hug. But i'd rather they just look into all the pin moves at once instead of having to potentially revisit the ones they didn't touch later on.

I'm saying that I don't think gank setups that involve manipulating or taking advantage of CGB, parry attempts, and block stuns are unfair. Many coordinated ganks look like this which takes knowledge and skill to apply. They are not exploits. If you get caught by a coordinated gank, that's more down to the player, rotation, or team coordination. You have to ask yourself why were you in that position in the first place.
If you feel there are bugs or inconsistencies then report them, like free GB from an external block or Shinobi's bin breaking a rule. If it is intended, you'll have to deal with it.

For clarification i'm referring to force someone to parry a move which locks them into an animation and they can't do anything about it so they get setup ganked that way. Not someone trying to parry, feinting, and then taking a GB or something for being in feint recovery. The only way you can validate that as a wrong play is if you tell me the correct play for the defender. Free GB in an external situation based off of having your attack blocked is not a bug nor an inconsistency. That's playing exactly how the mechanics work. If you have an attack bounce you have a huge recovery window before you can do anything. There for you can't CGB. So free GB externally. Both that and being able to setup gank someone who is stuck mid parry animation are working as intended but I don't think either are fair from a gameplay perspective.

If people are fine with gank damage due to past issues being fixed then why were you arguing for further temporary damage reduction?

Again either misunderstanding or conflating. The segment you are quoting is purely stating that the issue I and others are discussing (i.e too much damage in ganks) might end up not being a problem. The thing is we've zero clue if it is or not because it will take time for everyone to actually experience it enough and have discussion about it.

As for the power of ganks, only infinite ganks and broken pins(e.g. Shinobi's Sickle Rain) need looking into. Anything 'power' related, to me, comes down to the weaknesses of certain heroes

So you're telling me that goki's T4 and demon ball are not actual balance problems and it's just every other hero in the game's fault for being weak?

Yes, I'm saying ganks are more an issue for assassins mainly because of their weaknesses. If some of them were addressed, then ganks would be less problematic for them. Apart from that, gank issues are mainly related to map rotation and team play, as well as individual decision-making.

The most lethal ganks in the game don't care if the person is an assassin or not.

The other solution for ganking issues would be for better matchmaking so veterans at least are not put with players that make poor decisions and ignore objectives.

This doesn't do anything to solve how lethal some ganks are in competitive play. Nor would it address competitive complaints or even acknowledge that the discussion of ganks in general effects all levels of play. Not just solo queing in dominion.

You seem to keep framing the removal of OS as a bad thing. The 'ripple effects' I see are the ones where people who chose not to make real reads when dealing with mixups and not learning to defend themselves properly in ganks without the use of an unintended tool or 'crutch' if you will. This is only a short term problem mainly due to muscle memory which will solve itself within a season. The only other 'ripple effects' are exposing balancing issues that were hidden by OSs and zones can finally be balanced which, again, are good things. I believe most people are happy with this change, even just by going by the comments in Freeze's video alone.

I firmly believe that removing zone OS's was harmful for the game and nothing can ever be stated for me to believe otherwise until the game plays much better from an external situation. I acknowledge that removing zone OS's can have benefits themselves to other areas besides duels of which I don't care about. But until I see the devs actually make those steps i'm not on board. Of the 3 heros who were put on the TG that removed all OS's only 1 of the hero's had their zones even touched. It's very easy to run with an idea based on dev speak. After 5 years of playing the game one should've learned by now to not get ahead of themselves.

The reasoning of them not being able to keep zone OS's is sound. The argument on how it prevented them from balancing zones in a major way is sound. But it's only a position. It's not a promise or a plan. And that's all i'm going to say on OS's, i'm really tired of discussing it.

[Soldier_of_Dawn]

I disagree about raider benefitting massively from removal of OS changes. But I made a whole thread about the TG disappointment with him so i'm not going to repeat that here. I will just say that the potential for him to benefit from OS changes exists. But only after his mix is made better. There are other heros who'd i'd state benefitted from OS removal more than raider did.






I can agree that targeted damage nerfs should be the first thing to look at.




Either you're misunderstanding me here or you're purposefully conflating things to discredit the argument. I will restate my position just to be clear. I think there are specific attacks that should be brought down regardless of any other changes specifically because they will be landing more often now. I also believe further changes need to be made specifically to how certain mechanics work because there are specific ganks out there that are too strong purely because of how little counter play exists for them. Reducing the damage for specific moves (ex Goki comes to mind) will certainly effect how obscene his ganks are damage wise. But it won't nerf how busted they are from a mechanical standpoint. So further action must be taken regardless of damage changes made. Is this more understandable?




I'm not sure which pin moves you see out there that you don't think are problematic ones. All of them are. The only reason Shinobi's is currently getting more attention is because the forgiveness window to be able to grab someone and continue the gank is bigger. You can absolutely layer things like goki hug into Cent pin or vise versa. But the margin of error is much thinner. If you wanted to be super nitpicky you can say the S tier of pin moves are shinobi's sickle rain and Goki's hug. But i'd rather they just look into all the pin moves at once instead of having to potentially revisit the ones they didn't touch later on.



For clarification i'm referring to force someone to parry a move which locks them into an animation and they can't do anything about it so they get setup ganked that way. Not someone trying to parry, feinting, and then taking a GB or something for being in feint recovery. The only way you can validate that as a wrong play is if you tell me the correct play for the defender. Free GB in an external situation based off of having your attack blocked is not a bug nor an inconsistency. That's playing exactly how the mechanics work. If you have an attack bounce you have a huge recovery window before you can do anything. There for you can't CGB. So free GB externally. Both that and being able to setup gank someone who is stuck mid parry animation are working as intended but I don't think either are fair from a gameplay perspective.





Again either misunderstanding or conflating. The segment you are quoting is purely stating that the issue I and others are discussing (i.e too much damage in ganks) might end up not being a problem. The thing is we've zero clue if it is or not because it will take time for everyone to actually experience it enough and have discussion about it.



So you're telling me that goki's T4 and demon ball are not actual balance problems and it's just every other hero in the game's fault for being weak?




The most lethal ganks in the game don't care if the person is an assassin or not.



This doesn't do anything to solve how lethal some ganks are in competitive play. Nor would it address competitive complaints or even acknowledge that the discussion of ganks in general effects all levels of play. Not just solo queing in dominion.




I firmly believe that removing zone OS's was harmful for the game and nothing can ever be stated for me to believe otherwise until the game plays much better from an external situation. I acknowledge that removing zone OS's can have benefits themselves to other areas besides duels of which I don't care about. But until I see the devs actually make those steps i'm not on board. Of the 3 heros who were put on the TG that removed all OS's only 1 of the hero's had their zones even touched. It's very easy to run with an idea based on dev speak. After 5 years of playing the game one should've learned by now to not get ahead of themselves.

The reasoning of them not being able to keep zone OS's is sound. The argument on how it prevented them from balancing zones in a major way is sound. But it's only a position. It's not a promise or a plan. And that's all i'm going to say on OS's, i'm really tired of discussing it.

I'll try to keep this brief. Apart from infinite ganks and overtuned tools in general, the 'power' of ganks is not an issue, otherwise, there would be regular complaints about it. Most players I've seen don't complain about the 'power' of ganks but being ganked in the first place and they normally blame it on lack of support. Ganks are not supposed to be 'fair' otherwise they wouldn't be ganks. Dying quickly in 3v1s & 4v1s is normal. Dying quickly in coordinated 2v1s is normal. You're not supposed to have good odds of survival fighting alone, whether you're dealing with pins, wall-splats, high damage attacks, chained hit-stuns, stun attacks, unblockables & bashes, impossible reads, feats, getting ledged, drop attacks, or a combination of these. Counterplay isn't always available and that's normal. You're best defensive tool is good decision-making and team coordination; in other words, not fighting alone. Also, dying quickly allows for quicker zone captures. If you drag them out you will have longer matches. There may be complaints from members of the competitive community but they are not always right. I'm far from convinced that all pins are a problem otherwise there would be a lot of complaints about them. They are intended ganking tools and, therefore, a part of the game.

The devs have looked into death-balls(endless ganks) in the past and, as a result, we have damage reduction, pins being interruptible by both teammates and the opposition, and several tweaks to revenge, among other things. What else can they do without potentially swapping one 'problem' for another?

We all have views of what we think is and isn't busted but it's up to the devs to decide if an intended mechanic is unbalanced or not. If they choose to leave certain tools as they are then we'll just have to deal with it.

As far as the benefits of removing OSs, I'm allowed to be hopeful and I don't think I'm getting ahead of myself, especially when Raider's zone changes are considered. I'm currently under the impression that the wait will be a long one. For OS users, in the long run, you don't lose a defense tool, you just stop misusing it and apply its intended purpose. Non-OS users will see their offense become more viable and eventually gain additional contexts with their zones.

[Knight_Raime]

I'll try to keep this brief. Apart from infinite ganks and overtuned tools in general, the 'power' of ganks is not an issue, otherwise, there would be regular complaints about it. Most players I've seen don't complain about the 'power' of ganks but being ganked in the first place and they normally blame it on lack of support. Ganks are not supposed to be 'fair' otherwise they wouldn't be ganks. Dying quickly in 3v1s & 4v1s is normal. Dying quickly in coordinated 2v1s is normal. You're not supposed to have good odds of survival fighting alone, whether you're dealing with pins, wall-splats, high damage attacks, chained hit-stuns, stun attacks, unblockables & bashes, impossible reads, feats, getting ledged, drop attacks, or a combination of these. Counterplay isn't always available and that's normal. You're best defensive tool is good decision-making and team coordination; in other words, not fighting alone. Also, dying quickly allows for quicker zone captures. If you drag them out you will have longer matches. There may be complaints from members of the competitive community but they are not always right. I'm far from convinced that all pins are a problem otherwise there would be a lot of complaints about them. They are intended ganking tools and, therefore, a part of the game.

The devs have looked into death-balls(endless ganks) in the past and, as a result, we have damage reduction, pins being interruptible by both teammates and the opposition, and several tweaks to revenge, among other things. What else can they do without potentially swapping one 'problem' for another?

We all have views of what we think is and isn't busted but it's up to the devs to decide if an intended mechanic is unbalanced or not. If they choose to leave certain tools as they are then we'll just have to deal with it.

As far as the benefits of removing OSs, I'm allowed to be hopeful and I don't think I'm getting ahead of myself, especially when Raider's zone changes are considered. I'm currently under the impression that the wait will be a long one. For OS users, in the long run, you don't lose a defense tool, you just stop misusing it and apply its intended purpose. Non-OS users will see their offense become more viable and eventually gain additional contexts with their zones.

I disagree with the notion that a problem only becomes one when it's wide spread. Unlock tech was not wide spread and mainly only featured in high level/comp play and the devs still took steps to make sure it was removed. Pins as a mechanic have been widely discussed both by regular players and comp players. It was and still mostly is an on going conversation whenever ganking is brought up.

[Soldier_of_Dawn]

Seems like the two intelligent kids of the class disagreed lol.

But I agree on making zones costing less stamina, A good number would be 24. Two hit zones would cost 12 per hit, 3 8 per hit, 4 6 stamina per hit. All of them should have a consistent cost of 10 stamina for feinting.

The two of us disagreeing has become quite the tradition. Sorry to hijack your thread like that.

Somewhat similar to your suggestion, I think a fair way to cost zones is to apply the standard cost of every heavy, light, and bash thrown, like what they did with Raider's zone. So:

• 12 for each heavy
• 9 for each light(I prefer 6)
• 15 for each bash

On top of that, I would remove the cost of feinting/cancelling zones so they can be used as anti-gank tools as the player sees fit instead waiting for revenge first.

As we already know, Raider's will cost 12 because it's only a heavy. Heroes like Orochi, Warlord, and Warden would be the same. PK, Valkyrie and Tiandi would be 24 in total as they throw 2 heavies. Highlander would be 36 in total for 3 heavies. Gladiator would cost 29 in total; 15 for the bash and 12 for the heavy. I'm sure you get the idea.

All zones should also be recovery cancels for chains and single hit zones should be chain starters as well. I'm pretty much echoing a few things Freeze said here:

YouTubeShare has been deactivated.
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content?