And then he loses out on potential damage. See what I mean? His design forces you to play within a certain parameter. You try and break it or you accidentally go over the limit and you lose health. Terrible champion design and not practical in content.
That's the whole point. It limits what you can do. It's not the first place we've seen this cost. Suicides are basically the same thing. You can do more Damage, for a cost. That's what balances it.
uhhhhh are you really comparing something players can choose to unlock (masteries) to make their champions hit harder, with an ability the player cannot choose on a specific character and it's attributes? They're built in no matter what, while suicides are not. And even then, you can adjust suicides and tweak them. You don't have that luxury with this champ. I wouldn't personally use him either way and don't have a stake in this myself, but to argue that it's the same as using suicides is kinda weird.
I would argue that Bishop's design is better than suicides in many respects. You can't really control suicide damage completely: you can mitigate it somewhat and a few champs can negate recoil, but by in large suicide damage is not fully avoidable: if it were, everyone would run them. But you do not need to take any damage with Bishop, ever. You only take damage if you choose to take the risk of pushing his charges to the absolute limit, which is a real time gameplay choice.
In any case, the OP's original argument was that "you may get punished for being too greedy." To me, that's an example of a good design element, not a bad one. Counterbalancing the fact that the degen is pretty high is the fact that you don't have to take any of it, ever. If it was low and completely avoidable it would be a penalty in name only, and everyone would just push Bishop to max charges all the time and take the risk. That would make the entire mechanism somewhat pointless.
"You can't control suicide damage completely" - no one claimed this here. What we did point out was you can play around it like you mentioned, some champs benefit more or less depending on their kit, and you can run different builds with varied results. You can change your build before a game mode, you have the choice. And the BENEFIT of doing any of this is BALANCED out by the reward, in damage increase. Not just on specials but all attack percentage. The sacrifice is worth it, but the players have that choice.
Most of the posts I see defending Bishop, his design, or trying to showcase his damage potential is having to push his charges higher or "to the limit" as you state.. "You do not need to take any damage with Bishop ever" - but no player is going to rank a champ like this, or put resources into him over another champion, because they won't be able to use him to maximize his damage potential. You're predictably defending his design while admitting you won't be able to use him like people have described to do an ability other champions already have in spades, and don't take huge damage from to get them useful in the current game meta. That by definition is bad design.
"You may get punished for being too greedy" would be a good design if it compared to other champions abilities, or suicide builds, or Bishop's overall character design in the first place. He barely has utility, his damage isn't great if you don't want to push his charges, all of his attributes don't balance out so someone wanting to use him to his max potential is therefore forced to push him to the limit and take unavoidable damage as a result. What you ignored in the OP comment was that they wanted some balance to this because it's not scaled well. Suicide builds are. You get increased benefits for EQUAL detriment to your champion, and even then it's easier for some champs to handle that build. "You don't have to take any of the degen ever" is false, because he doesn't do enough without doing this mechanic and you're basically admitting the degen is inflated to make people not want to use it. It's like a textbook description of a bad champion mechanic. Sorry, we're gonna have to disagree on this one dude. No one with a healthy roster or even up and coming is gonna pull a six star Bishop and be excited they can't use him at his max potential, and it's not "greedy" to want some decent damage from an otherwise meh champion.
Greedy? No. It is however, a choice. It's perfectly feasible to play him within limits. If you cross the threshold, the cost is Health. People can make their own choices. What this highlights is there is a limit to what he can do. There's a certain sacrifice to be made. That's much more interactive and useful than just a set limit. Otherwise we'd be discussing how he can't do much at all. It's a simple concept. You can push it, but there's a price to be paid.
May I ask you a question? Do you have Bishop? And if so, do you use him in any content... that being AW, AQ, Variant, or Act 6?
I have him yes. Have I used him? Yes. I haven't played in a few months since I retired, but I'm quite familiar with him. He has insane potential with his L3, which is where the majority of his strength lies. There's just a limit as to how far you can push him. Otherwise, you start to Degen. Which means you need to choose your timing wisely.
Most of the posts I see defending Bishop, his design, or trying to showcase his damage potential is having to push his charges higher or "to the limit" as you state.. "You do not need to take any damage with Bishop ever" - but no player is going to rank a champ like this, or put resources into him over another champion, because they won't be able to use him to maximize his damage potential. You're predictably defending his design while admitting you won't be able to use him like people have described to do an ability other champions already have in spades, and don't take huge damage from to get them useful in the current game meta. That by definition is bad design.
The reason why Bishop's performance tends to be perceived to be lower has little to do with his overload degen, and more to do with the mechanics of building up charges in the first place. Sparky has an intrinsically similar trade off where building poise carries significant risk of taking damage, just through less explicit mechanics. Unless you are sufficiently skilled, trying to build to max poise can get you up against the wall and then killed. And in fact, the common advice often given to less skilled players regarding Sparky is to not try too hard to maximize his poise, and to settle for less rather than take too much risks with him, as he's a glass cannon.
In game design terms, this is fundamentally the same trade off as Bishop, just in a different form.
"feasible to play him within limits." Yeah no, it's not. That's the whole point of OP's post. He can't do much at all beyond ramping up to get huge damage at an unbalanced cost compared to every other champ in the game as well as something like suicide masteries. It's a simple concept - little utility, huge trade off that's not worth it compared to tons of other champs, all around lackluster execution. You all can argue all you want about it but I guarantee you're not picking him over your roster favorites to not use the biggest function he has, because you're "choosing" in your mind not to. That makes no sense and from a design perspective makes a terrible champ.
That argument is relative and inevitable. Every Champ (at least the majority) have something unique. However, this game has, and most likely will always have, a select number of Champs that are the go-to at the highest levels. There's always going to be a preferred list, and it's virtually impossible to create all Champions in a way that are all viable options at the End-Game level, while still balancing a game. Why would you choose him over others? Either you want to, or you don't. You're not supposed to comparatively choose all Champs over the others because comparison by nature creates a scale and a preference. TL:DR - They're not going to be all comparable to the "God Tiers".
That argument is relative and inevitable. Every Champ (at least the majority) have something unique. However, this game has, and most likely will always have, a select number of Champs that are the go-to at the highest levels. There's always going to be a preferred list, and it's virtually impossible to create all Champions in a way that are all viable options at the End-Game level, while still balancing a game. Why would you choose him over others? Either you want to, or you don't. You're not supposed to comparatively choose all Champs over the others because comparison by nature creates a scale and a preference. TL:DR - They're not going to be all comparable to the "God Tiers".
Well I'm not going to choose a clunky champ like Bishop to play the contents I'm in. Defend him all you want but this is my opinion and you cannot change that no matter what points you bring up. I still think his degen damage is excessive for the payout you get.
I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm giving my own view. I see how the mechanic is designed to balance him while allowing people to make choices concerning their use of him. You can feel however you like.
Comments
In game design terms, this is fundamentally the same trade off as Bishop, just in a different form.
TL:DR - They're not going to be all comparable to the "God Tiers".