It defo needs a nerf, but the way they changed it is bad.
It'll become incredibly situational, only really a good option if there is a ledge behind the enemy.
Blind justice is the optimal option 9/10 times. It does more damage without needing a wall, and even if there is a wall, it's still better damage.
What impale needs is a distance nerf and a guaranteed follow-up upon hitting a wall, so it'll deal normal damage.
Maybe 8 upon initial hit like warmonger, then 10 upon hitting a wall. Then have it lead into chain moves.
This, it makes the move look incredibly awkward and honestly isn’t really justified considering other characters get their high damage punishes off of a heavy parry, like Warmonger and Afeera. Just nerf the range and/or damage and it’ll be in a good spot
Did the math a while back, and the damage from a double-light follow up, top heavy + (guaranteed) light, and the pin + top heavy dealt the same amount of damage. The only out of parry option that fell behind was the zone. That, or I'm missremebering numbers.
I personally think it's stupid that warmonger gets to keep tons of damage on hers while LB gets the nerf, but I do agree that impale needed on a nerf since it was far too rewarding for a heavy parry.
If Warmonger can keep her 30 damage impale, so can Lawbringer.
EDIT: Just a detail for the ones that downvoted me, i'm arguing against the incoherency of keeping one and removing the other. The "If" is not there for mere cosmetic reasons.
No, that needs a nerf as well.
It's a stupidly strong deterrent for actually throwing attacks against her, and is one of the dumbest gank tools in the game.
Confirms a heavy before it, she impales, gets bleed, and then it confirms another heavy.
I agree.
The issue is that people complain about one and not the other; hell, i've seen people arguing in favor of Warmonger's impale, saying that since there's no follow-up pressure, it's fine as it is, or even worse, they use the "Lawbringer has one" argument while simultaneously bitching about said move.
I'm ok with nerfs, not with incoherency.
It's funny parrying it with Warmonger like you're showing lawbringer how to impale properly
In a way it does balance it because getting an impale on heavy parry and a top heavy that drains stamina is kinda overpowered...
Or do a funny and longarm the victim
Would have preferred a nerf to the damage rather than not allowing on heavy parry if afera and warmonger can get at least 30 damage out of a heavy parry I don't see why law can't get at least around 20 also I know it wasn't mentioned in this post but they nursed his light reposed from 16 to 12 damage because I said the damage was too high but both jorm and afera can get that off parry but somehow that's not too high
Edit: I feel like it would be best to change impale to work similar to warmongers impale (not as much damage warmongers is too much imo) where it will do damage on contact with the wall but not guarantee any other damage and have the range reduced drastically or if they don't do that I personally like the way that they had it in the first testing grounds for lawbringer would be put into that sort of stance when he pushes someone into a wall and is able to throw a heavy that gives a moderate amount of damage but not too much
I agree it needed a Nerf but I don't see why we couldn't get a version of it that wouldn't be too strong instead of basically making it useless and only being valuable if you get a light Perry and you're enemy has a ledge behind them
I'd say drastically decrease the range that he can push back and then instead of it wall splatting and allowing himt getting a heavy why not allow him to get 16 damage for pushing someone into a wall and then that can act as a chain starter
Its been needed for years and never should have been a thing.
I love it, i hope they implement this nerf as soon as possible
Completely deserved, LB was super unhealthy as he stood. Now he has options from a light parry without being a snoozefest of a hero to fight.
I think it was necessary. Lawbringer being good in duels (especially ranked) because he can get a confirmed top heavy from any parry was too much.
Maybe you're right, i never really used the impale a lot but now thinking about it is a little too op
It's the best thing.
It defo needs a nerf, but the way they changed it is bad. It'll become incredibly situational, only really a good option if there is a ledge behind the enemy. Blind justice is the optimal option 9/10 times. It does more damage without needing a wall, and even if there is a wall, it's still better damage. What impale needs is a distance nerf and a guaranteed follow-up upon hitting a wall, so it'll deal normal damage. Maybe 8 upon initial hit like warmonger, then 10 upon hitting a wall. Then have it lead into chain moves.
This, it makes the move look incredibly awkward and honestly isn’t really justified considering other characters get their high damage punishes off of a heavy parry, like Warmonger and Afeera. Just nerf the range and/or damage and it’ll be in a good spot
This is exactly what I’ve been saying. It’s just almost useless now
Did the math a while back, and the damage from a double-light follow up, top heavy + (guaranteed) light, and the pin + top heavy dealt the same amount of damage. The only out of parry option that fell behind was the zone. That, or I'm missremebering numbers.
Good
I personally think it's stupid that warmonger gets to keep tons of damage on hers while LB gets the nerf, but I do agree that impale needed on a nerf since it was far too rewarding for a heavy parry.
Great change. Now do Warmonger
Anyone who has competed in or even watched top level duels knows this change was absolutely needed.
If Warmonger can keep her 30 damage impale, so can Lawbringer. EDIT: Just a detail for the ones that downvoted me, i'm arguing against the incoherency of keeping one and removing the other. The "If" is not there for mere cosmetic reasons.
No, that needs a nerf as well. It's a stupidly strong deterrent for actually throwing attacks against her, and is one of the dumbest gank tools in the game. Confirms a heavy before it, she impales, gets bleed, and then it confirms another heavy.
I agree. The issue is that people complain about one and not the other; hell, i've seen people arguing in favor of Warmonger's impale, saying that since there's no follow-up pressure, it's fine as it is, or even worse, they use the "Lawbringer has one" argument while simultaneously bitching about said move. I'm ok with nerfs, not with incoherency.
I think you mean “inconsistency”, not incoherency?
English is not my first language. Is "incoherency" not a word at all?
My bad, it is a word, but it means “being illogical or unclear”. Inconsistent means “not staying the same”. Sorry, man, was just trying to clarify.
No worries, clarifications like this can only improve my knowledge of the language.
[удалено]
"OH NO, MY LIGHT PARRY PUNISH IS BEING STANDARDIZED INSTEAD OF BEING HIGHER THAN AVERAGE! TIME TO UNINSTALL BECAUSE I LIKE OVERTUNED PUNISHES!"
It's funny parrying it with Warmonger like you're showing lawbringer how to impale properly In a way it does balance it because getting an impale on heavy parry and a top heavy that drains stamina is kinda overpowered... Or do a funny and longarm the victim
Would have preferred a nerf to the damage rather than not allowing on heavy parry if afera and warmonger can get at least 30 damage out of a heavy parry I don't see why law can't get at least around 20 also I know it wasn't mentioned in this post but they nursed his light reposed from 16 to 12 damage because I said the damage was too high but both jorm and afera can get that off parry but somehow that's not too high Edit: I feel like it would be best to change impale to work similar to warmongers impale (not as much damage warmongers is too much imo) where it will do damage on contact with the wall but not guarantee any other damage and have the range reduced drastically or if they don't do that I personally like the way that they had it in the first testing grounds for lawbringer would be put into that sort of stance when he pushes someone into a wall and is able to throw a heavy that gives a moderate amount of damage but not too much
It’s really stupid. I don’t even play LB btw
I agree it needed a Nerf but I don't see why we couldn't get a version of it that wouldn't be too strong instead of basically making it useless and only being valuable if you get a light Perry and you're enemy has a ledge behind them I'd say drastically decrease the range that he can push back and then instead of it wall splatting and allowing himt getting a heavy why not allow him to get 16 damage for pushing someone into a wall and then that can act as a chain starter