This all is too confusing. Just kill Chuck already.
This all is too confusing. Just kill Chuck already.
Haha, that made me chuckle. From what I understand, the gimp (if this new idea of passive aggression becoming a debuff is kept) will block all passives on the first turn unless your guys have immunity talis (because that form of immunity isn't granted by a passive). HH/AD won't work unless they are equipped with immunity talis. So, your choices are either to bring a team full of immunity talis and sacrifice some damage, or bring a HH/AD with an immunity set. Passive aggression will go into effect at the beginning of the gimp team's turn, so if you go 2nd but your immunity wears off by the time you take your turn, you'll still have your passives active because passive aggression will only go back into effect when the gimp gets a turn.
TL;DR: Yeah, this is pretty fuckin' in-depth and confusing at first haha.
Bizarro Prisoner...Warden Maclo...Handcuff talismans...etc!
Here you go with that logic stuff again! I think some people just don't understand the nature of PvP, it seems this is the first taste for many. Everyone wants to be in 1st place and blames the ways we achieve it on not being fair. There are just some that are simply more motivated/skilled than others. I'm tempted to get Eternal with no Prisoner just to quiet this foolishness.
That's exactly what buggs me...we were forced to use certain talismans just to face Chuck all this time, and we will continue to do so even more it seems. Also the sacrifice in damage is usually big.
Do it, we are all eager to see that, since no one dared to bench his prisoner. But provide also your last week's stats so we see the difference, for educational reasons only ofcourse. Good luck![]()
Would be interested to see how many would actually go without Chuckles for the next few days before the update.. I'm about 99% sure that no one with a Prisoner as he is now goes without him for the last week he is OP.
I don't think I'm wrong. Immunity DOES counter it - unless you can't cast immunity. The Prisoner has a chance to trump the Hellhounds passive ability to cast immunity - BUT NOT IF THE HELLHOUND HAS IMMUNITY TALISMANS. Then the Prisoner can't stop him from granting immunity to the entire party, which neuters his ability to debuff anyone. Safe though first round. Second round and on? Cast immunity as a skill, not a passive - and that immunity on each member continues giving protection from the Prisoner.
So send an ordinary Hellhound? Yes - there's a 50% chance you won't get immunity from him. But equip him with Immunity Talismans? You're set - as i pointed out in my original post.
Last edited by Nicko; 04-07-2017 at 01:37 AM.
just one question: do you think it is fair that a strategy exists that cannot be countered no matter how "skilled" you are? (look at beta taunt and freezefest for example).
this was only possible because the prisoner and siege removed every defense ability available and turned this game into a luckfest when going 2nd. where is the strategy part of that, that's a pure gamble...
now 98% of people without a prisoner cannot counter siege, so we are a basicly a two class society, the ones that can play against almost eveyone, and others who highly rely on luck when playing versus many
opponents. this is too much of a difference if you ask me and indeed i think this is highy unfair.
every strategy has to have a counter strategy otherwise this is unfair/unbalanced/OP imo .