Vainglory Forums

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RQgdfLlQqgox1KP644F0WetoJYhlI9ysNNEcDLh6uGs/edit?usp=sharing

So I decided to dedicate too much time again and made another custom hero. This time he's a protector character who is probably conceptually good but mechanically WAY too broken. As always, give me your opinion and tell me everything that needs to be fixed (barring "the entire thing", because that's obvious).

The abilities seem really confusing just by the amount of stuff in them, if you try to shorten them that would really help

It's ardan. It's literally ardan in different words.

In regards to him being Ardan, I did a lot of experimenting with him before making this character, and I've played with several Ardans as well as watched others, and I would disagree with you.

Before I get too into this, I want to ask you what you would say if I told you that Taka was nothing more than a Kashka clone. Would you agree or disagree based on nuances of the characters and their play styles?

Taka is a koshka clone, the only real difference being the heroic perk, taka's lets him play WP as well as CP but other than that, yeah.

This makes me cringe so much. Taka and Koshka are clones? Nonononono... Your idea is a good one, I wouldn't call exactly like ardan, but I believe that both Ardan and the Xander guy are way too similar to each other. Really? A shield that deflects damage and can be casted on an ally? Ardan/catherine much? And the ult, are you sure you weren't thinking about Ardan's terrain limiting ult? Xander? More like Rip-off! Honestly, this idea is just a copy. Although if anything, the Xander passive reminded me of Catherine's passive, but was still unique I have to admit.

Well I guess that's the community. Try and make a point and it goes out the window. Alright.

But it's a completely false point. There's nothing similar at all about Taka and Koshka. The two of them are my main jungle so I've played enough of them. They play completely different and require completely different strategies. I really don't see how they're anyway alike enough to be considered clones.

Ha, you're just rubbing salt on your own wounds. If you make an invalid point, then it goes out the window. Of course, its just that you cannot accept that your "hero idea" was similar to another hero.

I said that Taka and Koshka are clones to make a point; I don't think they're clones at all. They're both guns, which would make some people think they're the same thing. But one's a shotgun, and the other's a rifle. To someone not skilled with them, they seem the same thing. They both have a pounce move that closes distance, a move that does damage, and a move dedicated to some means of changing combat (Taka can box to ambush and Kasha can stun). If you know nothing about them, then you would say that they are clones, but if you look closer, you see they are very different. Taka is a burst character designed specifically and only to ambush, whereas Kasha is designed to hit lots of people and provide constant damage support. I know that Xander is close to Ardan. I based him off of him, Catherine, and Phinn.

Ardan is designed to assist another hero by hanging around the side and ensuring that his teammates stay alive, whereas I have Xander set up to be an active part of the fight, only being effective at all if he's the one actively taking damage. Xander is deigned to be a tank that body blocks, soaks up damage, and keeps his allies alive by never letting them be hurt, whereas Ardan is designed to be a steroids-on-demand style hero that runs with another hero and ensures that THAT hero does all the fighting better than their opponent, keeping him alive with Vanguard and securing kills/preventing deaths with Gauntlet. Xander's A prevents an allied hero from being hurt by having him take the damage onto himself. There's no reflection to the enemy, it's just Xander taking the pain instead, whereas Ardan's A is designed to allow the allied hero he vanguards to perform better (be that running away with the speed boost and health shield or engaging an opponent). Ardan's is combat centralized, whereas Xander is survival centralized.

Xander's B is meant to complement an aggressive tank playstyle, only becoming viable if he is constantly taking damage. Ardan's B is simply a stronger basic attack put there to grant him another means of damage dealing.

Finally, their ults. Yeah, they're really damn similar, but they serve different purposes. Ardan's ult is focused on penning enemies in or keeping them out. Ardan's team is taking Kraken and the enemy is in the bush, so he throws down the gauntlet and, voila, the enemy can't attack the Kraken unless they are willing to get stunned first, giving Ardan's team an advantage. You couldn't use Xander's let like that, because you could walk around it and either kill him or ignore him and get the Kraken. Alternatively, Xander's team is running after a botched ambush attempt. They're all low health and fleeing to lane from the jungle with the enemy team right behind them. To save his two team mates and prevent the enemy team from acing, he turns around and lets right in a chokepoint, preventing the enemy team from advancing at all. Ardan's ult cannot do this to the same degree. My point with these examples is that, yes, they are similar; but in specific function, Ardan would not be best used playing him like Catherine. Catherine can soak up damage, but can't do much more with that. I made Xander with the intent of creating a character that can capitalize on taking lots of damage from lots of sources, because Vainglory lacked a character who thrived on taking damage, and they used their berserker (to a degree) card with Rona, so I couldn't make that.

And yes, in regards to my last post, I was rubbing salt in my own wound. It ****ing hurts. It's irritating when someone can't understand the point of something you're trying to say. So yeah, I did **** up there and react poorly, but I'm hoping this *****how above will clarify some things.

And just in case, I completely agree that they're the same two characters. But, there's enough of a difference that if Taka and Kashka can make it, then so can they.

And I appreciate your complements and the time that you're taking to comment at all. I just want to make it clear that he's not a copypaste frankenstein of existing heroes anymore than Blackfeather is.