Thought on BF Sword

123
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Illumiele

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbunkleFlux View Post
The only change is that you now make the investment in pieces instead of having to save your money specifically to buy it all at once. This makes building AD less of a pain and improves certain characters' earlygames without actually changing anything about them at all.
Actually it changes the early game.It's bad enough that bf sword has a lower value/stat ratio that other AD items.You don't even want to sacrifice the early game to get one. That shouldn't happen.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Frosh

Friend of Urf

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Illumiele View Post
Actually it changes the early game.It's bad enough that bf sword has a lower value/stat ratio that other AD items.You don't even want to sacrifice the early game to get one. That shouldn't happen.
Incorrect, sir.

Long sword is 10 dmg for 415 gold, or 41.5 gold per damage.
Pickaxe is 25 dmg for 975 gold, or 39 gold per damage.
BF Sword is 50 damage for 1850 gold, or 37 gold per damage.

You get 'more bang for the buck' by buying a BF sword.

5 long swords = 50 dmg = 2075 gold (5*415)
2 pickaxes = 50 dmg = 1950 gold (2*975)
1 bf sword = 50 dmg = 1850 gold


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Carados

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbunkleFlux View Post
This isn't DotA. Ideally, LoL should be surpassing DotA's limitations, not restricting itself to them 'just cause'.
That would be a relevant point if it wasn't an intentional design decision to put it at such a high cost and it was instead a limitation of the Warcraft 3 engine.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Illumiele

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frosh View Post
Incorrect, sir.

Long sword is 10 dmg for 415 gold, or 41.5 gold per damage.
Pickaxe is 25 dmg for 975 gold, or 39 gold per damage.
BF Sword is 50 damage for 1850 gold, or 37 gold per damage.
You're saying 41.5 is lower than 37? Or is something else incorrect about my statement?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Frosh

Friend of Urf

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Illumiele View Post
You're saying 41.5 is lower than 37? Or is something else incorrect about my statement?
As long as we are both saying that bf sword is a better value than long sword or pickaxe, then we're in agreement. I read your post to mean that it has a "lower" (IE: "inferior") value/stat. As long as you mean cheaper, then we're good to go.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CarbunkleFlux

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
That would be a relevant point if it wasn't an intentional design decision to put it at such a high cost and it was instead a limitation of the Warcraft 3 engine.
That doesn't mean it has to stay that way. That's ridiculous logic.

Quote:
Actually it changes the early game.It's bad enough that bf sword has a lower value/stat ratio that other AD items.You don't even want to sacrifice the early game to get one. That shouldn't happen.
Reread what you replied to, please.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Illumiele

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarbunkleFlux View Post



Reread what you replied to, please.
Done. The post and your suggestion is stupid. The change I want is a lower stat/value ratio('less bang for the buck',to eliminate any confusion) for expensive items. Most games I've played have this pattern. Of course there is that 6 item limit that only LoL has afaik that might affect the prices.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CarbunkleFlux

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Done. The post and your suggestion is stupid. The change I want is a lower stat/value ratio('less bang for the buck',to eliminate any confusion) for expensive items. Most games I've played have this pattern. Of course there is that 6 item limit that only LoL has afaik that might affect the prices.
You wandered into a topic trying to solve a completely different problem, then. This isn't about whether the BF Sword really is overpriced for its relative value or not. I think it's perfectly fine the way it is, price-wise.

This is about making the process of saving up for a BF Sword less of an uphill strain and opening up options for convenience.

As for my 'stupid' post, I suppose I need to spell out what you seem to be missing. I wasn't saying it wouldn't change the earlygame. I was saying that it improves certain characters' earlygames without changing anything about the characters themselves. Way to not pay attention.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ezekiels

Member

04-29-2010

No way. The point of the BF sword is to sacrifice for a bit to get that large gain in damage. You can get a B.F. now in a short enough time already to take your champ from 'still viable' to 'shat brix all over you'.

If we had 3 longswords transmuting into a BF sword then why stop there? You just keep gaining damage now at a linear rate.

Way too powerful, and I'm melee DPS.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kinney

Senior Member

04-29-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShardOfDarkness View Post
I'd have to check (and I don't have the time atm) but I think BF Sword is at least twice as expensive as the next base item in the game (except maybe 1-2 of the more expensive combine costs).
It actually isn't - the second most expensive non-combine items are Giant's Belt and Recurve Bow at 1100 and 1050.


123