Blade or Starlord???

Shakyz

Which one deserves 5/65??

Comments

danielmath

is this a joke? blade......

The_One

SL doesn't benefit mush from it

Shakyz

İ ve both of them 4/55 and i havent finished lol yet tats why ask it

ljainD5

Blade is definitely a better option.

danielmath

Shakyz wrote: »

İ ve both of them 4/55 and i havent finished lol yet tats why ask it

blade is better for lol, as well as every other part of the game

Bahamut

SL. I don’t care about what Kabam says I know they’re going to nerf Blade. “But wait” you say “they said that they don’t plan on changing him”. Yeah well they said the same thing about Thor DS and SW and we all know how that turned out...

Deadbyrd9

Blade, No reason to rank sl to rank 5. It’s not needed

unknown

This content has been removed.

unknown

This content has been removed.

danielmath

even if blade is nerfed he'll probably still be better, and he's better for lol then SL period. Anyone who ranks up SL to 5/65 is a moron

Romario26

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

LoPresti

SL does not gain much from being r5. Unless you grind LOL for fun every day, go with Blade.

danielmath

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Kestrelle

Bahamut wrote: »

SL. I don’t care about what Kabam says I know they’re going to nerf Blade. “But wait” you say “they said that they don’t plan on changing him”. Yeah well they said the same thing about Thor DS and SW and we all know how that turned out...

Seriously, your bars just came off and your already violating forum rules. Just wow.

They've answered this enough. Until they actually go against everything they've repeatedly told us, leave it be

xNig

danielmath wrote: »

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Which is a big problem, no? Lol

QuantumBob

Both are great and don't follow the hot headed people here or elsewhere. What's right for them may not be right for you so rank whoever you prefer. If prestige is important to you then I'd rank Blade. If not then it doesn't matter as long as you can keep a combo. Blade or Sl will destroy pretty much any obstacle in the game. There are a few fights in LOL that may present a difficulty for SL but otherwise he can one shot everyone there. Sl can also one shot practically all AW bosses too. R4 Magik's, Juggernauts, Spiderman. Doesn't matter. SL will quickly kill them. Don't forget that there will no doubt be an Act 6 and LOL 2.0 so claiming SL at 5/65 is pointless just isn't true. Ranking him means he hits harder sooner, has more health and is futureproofing him. We all know Blade is a badass too and can also one shot a lot of opponents. Can't go wrong either way.

danielmath

xNig wrote: »

danielmath wrote: »

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Which is a big problem, no? Lol

Any regen champ is going to be cheaper, not just blade. I'd have saved like 10k units if i rank my 4/55 morningstar instead of SL for the 5 paths i ran with SL.

xNig

danielmath wrote: »

xNig wrote: »

danielmath wrote: »

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Which is a big problem, no? Lol

Any regen champ is going to be cheaper, not just blade. I'd have saved like 10k units if i rank my 4/55 morningstar instead of SL for the 5 paths i ran with SL.

Just that you won’t be able to match SL’s damage output with Morningstar, which translates to longer fights, which means fatigue tends to set in and more chances of getting Kabam evaded and comboed to oblivion. I think I would have spent 10k units more if I ran with Morningstar instead of SL for the 7 paths I did half a year ago.

danielmath

xNig wrote: »

danielmath wrote: »

xNig wrote: »

danielmath wrote: »

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Which is a big problem, no? Lol

Any regen champ is going to be cheaper, not just blade. I'd have saved like 10k units if i rank my 4/55 morningstar instead of SL for the 5 paths i ran with SL.

Just that you won’t be able to match SL’s damage output with Morningstar, which translates to longer fights, which means fatigue tends to set in and more chances of getting Kabam evaded and comboed to oblivion. I think I would have spent 10k units more if I ran with Morningstar instead of SL for the 7 paths I did half a year ago.

i mean....i did a path with her and it was the cheapest path i did (by a decent margin), sure it takes longer but being at full health you don't die from an evade or lose your combo

xNig

It really depends on which path was taken. Despite all being inner paths, their difficulties vary by quite abit.

danielmath

xNig wrote: »

It really depends on which path was taken. Despite all being inner paths, their difficulties vary by quite abit.

She wrecked venompool, widow, strange, while SL was a nightmare against VP (for me at least). She's still better then SL for most fights (of course there's a few exceptions). I still would've saved thousands of units if had her for all my paths.

Rektor

SL’s gonna get nerfed so I’d say no to him.

Any champ whose answer is “strong enough at r4 to clear everything. Don’t need to r5” and already got nerfed and already got a node made just for him in the hardest content is on the chopping block.

Rank blade. He won’t be getting adjusted any time soon, if ever.

Kestrelle

Rektor wrote: »

SL’s gonna get nerfed so I’d say no to him.

Any champ whose answer is “strong enough at r4 to clear everything. Don’t need to r5” and already got nerfed and already got a node made just for him in the hardest content is on the chopping block.

Rank blade. He won’t be getting adjusted any time soon, if ever.

Source for SL getting nerfed (as in verifiable quote from kabam employee)?

Vision_41

Blade!

Rektor

Kestrelle wrote: »

Rektor wrote: »

SL’s gonna get nerfed so I’d say no to him.

Any champ whose answer is “strong enough at r4 to clear everything. Don’t need to r5” and already got nerfed and already got a node made just for him in the hardest content is on the chopping block.

Rank blade. He won’t be getting adjusted any time soon, if ever.

Source for SL getting nerfed (as in verifiable quote from kabam employee)?

Find it yourself, if you can. You know, like your buddy did last time you attempted to call me out

Kestrelle

My buddy? Who the heck is that? Fairly sure I don't have any buddies here

Rektor

Anyway, OP, like I said before being harassed, any champ whose answer is “strong enough at r4 to clear everything. Don’t need to r5” and already got nerfed and already got a node made just for him in the hardest content is on the chopping block.

Rank blade and don’t look back. He’s the wiser choice.

Kestrelle

Actually, it was you who did the harassing. I asked a legitimate question. I genuinely want to know the source

Though I do agree, go with blade

Romario26

danielmath wrote: »

Romario26 wrote: »

SL to R5 would be cheaper if you’re good at the game, if you’re great at the game keep SL at R4. SL only benefits at using less synergy at R5 and less hits. Blade is for less skilled players that can’t keep combo, it’ll be like 1400 hits to take down a 3.3mil champ though
But all round blade would be a better choice cause war blade is better

Just cause it takes less hits doesn't mean it's cheaper. Blade is cheaper for LOL if you're good or bad, it doesn't matter

Less hits means less time, time spent doing something else worth something. Hence why I said cheaper, just think before you start having your verbal diarrhea.

Romario26

Just let this video sink in before you rank a champ for the end game content you want to 100%

https://youtu.be/Kt4oxcmoc4c