I also think tele on dudu @ 24 is too strong. might be easier to say shapers only. i will see if i can get a working one up over the coming days and will test it.

This post was edited by ferdia on Dec 23 2017 07:29am

Imo shapers are already strong enough as they are on lvl 18, can't see any reason to let them lvl to 24 tbh.

There are 2 (cavein and peka?) that i know of around in eu that are strong in both tvt and 1v1.

I can understand sorcs since they simply don't work in 1v1, fine.

Shapers are on the same tier in 18 as a lot of other chars imo, should we lvl them all to 24 then? ^^

But this is after all just my opinion

I think everyone has aired their views quite well, and I will leave it up to James & co. to land on a decision. I have not been involved@18. My personal opinion is that its a shame that no one ever did anything before now re: Sorc/Druids/Ama/Pala's, but its never too late to consider something new.

But then do the few sorc users that are out there have to build 2 sorcs, 1 for tvt and 1 for 1v1? Yes 24 is more viable 1v1 but its agreed 18 is good enough in tvt so 24 would be a bit too good perhaps. Seems messy.

I still say better off adressing what has been tested (zons with/without cthons or str bugged boots as thats a relatively new thing) and see how 24s fold into casual tvt play before worrying about putting anything in stone.

Cavein (a wolf player) who is from what i can tell the only one with experience from wolfs at 18 from the people discussing said there is no need to lvl wolfs 24 since they are strong as they are. Have anyone tested any duels with him? If not maybe it's better to start there instead of making lvl 24s.

This is just becoming the same as the mld where the argument was that each class should have a viable build. Assa had one in trappers and druids had windys and rabies, still the decision was made to make lvl 59 hybsins and fury druids.

The way i'd do it is to start by allowing 24 sorcs (the only class who doesn't have a viable 1v1 build) and if it works fine we can start thinking about other builds. Everything doesnt have to be done at once



i agree

This post was edited by Skullflower on Dec 23 2017 09:44am

i agree with all 3 of you, but i think one thing is missing from the picture. James 18-24 mixed tourney is designed really as a beta test, but with a prize. its not an official tour so bragging rights will still be with Skull until the next one is held

and my thought was to run a ALL 24 builds welcome (to make sure 24s that got built arent excluded), 18s as well if they want to challenge themselves (chargers/bowas especially) event right after. wait until the first is done so that its less confusing.

what i didnt think of is if this conflicts with the next tour, or if that really bothers anyone. running both at once could get sticky admittedly.

as to balance i think shapers at 24 vs 18 opponents will end up on the side of OP, especially if zons lose cthons. i thought up a frenzy dual clegs build for a barb but i think it would be the same thing, once the zon gets hit they wont be able to get away from the barb. and a druid will swarm a lot of chars with zoo.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 23 2017 09:37am

i tested bowa vs cavein. he is psn based. thus, feral rage would lose 5-0 vs a bowa.
i dont know what light based feral would do in comparison, it would undoubtedly be closer, but im not sure if sufficient to get a result.

i tested my (shit) assa vs cavein. he beat me, and he would win 5-0. but my character is weak, and would lose against most things with its current equipment. i will continue to try to upgrade my assa and will duel him again in stages to see if i can change the result. its a click and hold matchup so its very gear dependant.
i acknowledge the point which has not been aired yet, that a lvl 21 druid would smash a lvl 18 druid. (phys vs elemental in melee).

This post was edited by ferdia on Dec 23 2017 12:36pm

Regarding level 30 duels, is there a real reason behind your frw cap that actually means something? Or is it just a couple of guys in a position of "authority" who decided they thought it was better based on their experiences?

As an east player, I have never played with a frw cap, and in well over a decade of LLDing I never noticed a situation where I thought that a frw cap should be implemented... Even vs the 160 frw/defensive zon Marle aka yeawhatup (highly skilled zon player too, plus he had WSG on top of all that frw!). Sure, he was harder to catch than almost any other zon, but 1) he was catchable, and 2) there was another zon with only 120 frw who was equally hard to catch, showing that it is skill and not pure frw that makes the escape.

Other stats need to be sacrificed for frw... If anything, I would ban *glitched* frw before banning a certain *amount* of frw

You can ban 5%frw scs and only allow 3s in order to force people to sacrifice more for their frw... but putting a hard limit on frw honestly seems like someones preference, not a legitimate rule.

Not trying to bash your rule set really, just honestly see no reason whatsoever for that rule and believe it to be just someones personal preference, looking for clarification.

This post was edited by Belarathon on Dec 25 2017 04:14am

generally, in europe lld & mld started in duelling leagues where there were such limits - while that doesn't give an actual explanation, it's never bad to know the context in which something originated.
we have close ranged chars (namely barb & fury) that don't tele, so the limit in frw is some sort of insurance in their ability to land hits on opponents (the same is true, while to lesser extent, for asn).
another factor is the immense difference in price of 3 & 5frw charms. ideally, the outcome of duels is dependent on player skill more than anything. we know that will never be entirely true, but we can work towards that.. in part by giving wealth less of an impact.

however, your point of this being simply a preference is not wrong. good barbs would probably also manage to hit 150frw opponents more than bad ones hit 80frw opponents. and let's face it, imbalance in wealth is simply a fact of the world. whether we want to do something about this or not is simply a matter of preference.

Thank you for the answer! In that case, I would recommend banning 5% frw scs and taking off the frw cap You do nothing to reduce the gap between wealthy/poor by putting a frw cap. The wealthy with 5%s will still ultimately have to sacrifice less in order to maintain the same frw as a poor person with 3%s. Ofc this is only my opinion vs an entire realm. Just putting in my thoughts.

This post was edited by Belarathon on Dec 25 2017 04:58am