[FIXED] Adjust Rapid Fire like Soul Strike with Cloak

brandonv516

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Cathexis

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

Granted rapid fire is on a bow, but that doesn't make it unusable to a mag class.
I use resto/desto ult in builds on my stam sorc, it doesn't make it not viable.

brandonv516

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

Cathexis

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things. It lets you move at full speed, it has a turret morph, it does substantially more damage.

It isn't a situation where say one class or one stat spec gets an egregious advantage.

The ideal purpose of homogenizing skills is to ensure that say for example (as a fake overpowered buff) nightblades don't get a buff called "major torpenflorps" that gives them 1000% movement speed on a class ability, while no other class has access to "major torpenflorps" or something which is aesthetically/mathematically equivalent.

In this situation, everyone has access to those two ultimate abilities, with a high degree of equity.

brandonv516

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

Cathexis

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

There is consistency. The consistency is everyone has access to both abilities. If you want your channel ult to reveal cloak, you must use soulstrike. Soul strike and rapid fire are two different abilities. The rationale for making things homogenized is not about making everything the same. It's about making sure that one side is not getting a completely slanted set of stats just for having different categorical access.

It's categorization as a dot is irrelevant, it does damage over time, but it is not a traditional dot, because it is a channel. Channels are different than dots.

brandonv516

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

There is consistency. The consistency is everyone has access to both abilities. If you want your channel ult to reveal cloak, you must use soulstrike.

The abilities should behave consistently. I apologize that I didn't word it like that.

I don't use either channel. I am seeking this homogenization to balance combat for my Nightblade using Cloak.

Thanks for your input.

Cathexis

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

There is consistency. The consistency is everyone has access to both abilities. If you want your channel ult to reveal cloak, you must use soulstrike.

The abilities should behave consistently. I apologize that I didn't word it like that.

I don't use either channel. I am seeking this homogenization to balance combat for my Nightblade using Cloak.

Thanks for your input.

I can perhaps see the argument that they have in the past set a standard that ultimates should not be hard countered, and in that regard a nightblade should not be able to cloak out of an ultimate, just as meteors can't be reflected, etc etc.

However, personally I believe ultimates should be able to be hard countered with abilities where applicable, and that soul strike's ability to break cloak should be inherently unique to that ability.

So in that regard I guess this is a personal perspective, as this is the same problem I have with overload being reflect-able.
I am a traditional player so I don't see the ultimates being not hard counterable as being a practical rule, and I forget that they did balance around it. And if it were a real rule, then overload attacks wouldn't be reflectable.

brandonv516

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

There is consistency. The consistency is everyone has access to both abilities. If you want your channel ult to reveal cloak, you must use soulstrike.

The abilities should behave consistently. I apologize that I didn't word it like that.

I don't use either channel. I am seeking this homogenization to balance combat for my Nightblade using Cloak.

Thanks for your input.

I can perhaps see the argument that they have in the past set a standard that ultimates should not be hard countered, and in that regard a nightblade should not be able to cloak out of an ultimate, just as meteors can't be reflected, etc etc.

However, personally I believe ultimates should be able to be hard countered with abilities where applicable, and that soul strike's ability to break cloak should be inherently unique to that ability.

So in that regard I guess this is a personal perspective, as this is the same problem I have with overload being reflect-able.
I am a traditional player so I don't see the ultimates being not hard counterable as being a practical rule, and I forget that they did balance around it. And if it were a real rule, then overload attacks wouldn't be reflectable.

But it's not unique right now...

Soul Strike prevents Cloak for 2s.
Rapid Fire prevents Cloak for full duration.

If by unique you mean weaker and easier to counter then yes it definitely is.

Cathexis

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

There is consistency. The consistency is everyone has access to both abilities. If you want your channel ult to reveal cloak, you must use soulstrike.

The abilities should behave consistently. I apologize that I didn't word it like that.

I don't use either channel. I am seeking this homogenization to balance combat for my Nightblade using Cloak.

Thanks for your input.

I can perhaps see the argument that they have in the past set a standard that ultimates should not be hard countered, and in that regard a nightblade should not be able to cloak out of an ultimate, just as meteors can't be reflected, etc etc.

However, personally I believe ultimates should be able to be hard countered with abilities where applicable, and that soul strike's ability to break cloak should be inherently unique to that ability.

So in that regard I guess this is a personal perspective, as this is the same problem I have with overload being reflect-able.
I am a traditional player so I don't see the ultimates being not hard counterable as being a practical rule, and I forget that they did balance around it. And if it were a real rule, then overload attacks wouldn't be reflectable.

But it's not unique right now...

Soul Strike prevents Cloak for 2s.
Rapid Fire prevents Cloak for full duration.

If by unique you mean weaker and easier to counter then yes it definitely is.

Oh is that new? I didn't know, apologies.

Nerhesi

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Cathexis wrote: »

brandonv516 wrote: »

Now that these two ultimates are on par with one another, Rapid Fire should have the same 2s rule with preventing Cloak as Soul Strike has.

It should not be able to completely negate Cloak for it's entire duration.

Let's keep this homogeny going!

That would in no way make these abilities homogenous, and theres really no need to make abilities homogenous if they don't fall into a stam/mag or class category split. These are ults, they are available to everyone, if you want to use soul strike, use soul strike, if you want to use rapid fire, use rapid fire. There is nothing stopping you.

There was a valid argument against Rapid Fire preventing Cloak for the full duration when it costed almost double that of Soul Strike.

They are DoTs which are supposed to be negated by Cloak - not the other way around. The 2s rule of negating Cloak is fair but should be applied to Rapid Fire as well.

It is not a dot, its a channel.
And categorically they are unique abilities with equal availability, they dont need to be homogenized.
Rapid fire simply does different things.

And Soul Strike is not? A channel still does damage over time, just not passively.

Availability is not an issue, there's an issue of consistency in mechanics.

We need to understand that a dot and a channel are not "mechanically similar". Otherwise, weaving light-attack and DD is the same as a dot as a results in damage occuring at certain intervals....

Hell the argument can be made that DD and Dots are closer to eachother than a channel because a channel is the ONLY unique thing in the game that stops you, the user, from doing anything else.

brandonv516

Glad to see this was addressed and acknowledged as a bug:

Rapid Fire
Ballista (morph): Fixed an issue where this ability could continuously break the caster’s invisibility.