I Call BS on PU2

A) it should have always been los
B)I wouldn't call3/4 of my esf's health "little"

Actually, the fact that Striker didn't require keeping target in sights was a bug, which took waaaay too far to fix.

Look back to GU04..

Hence it wasn't changed in function, just the bug was fixed.

I know it doesn't feel like it because SOE let the matter be for so damn long, without even commenting.

Not the fundamental mechanics though. A change in numbers is not a change in HOW it functions like going from a toggle to a cooldown for ZOE or bonus health overall to DR versus small-arms only. If the only adjusted the speed and damage of ZOE there would have been no refund.

Holy **** this thread is totally worth it just for this gif. Where did you find this??

be ready my friend.


http://imgur.com/a/uvsrA#SIUQmd3

Dammit Torok only 250SC for second pounder... I thought it was the same for Falcon?

Not 11 months ago

No probs. Definite patch outrage

As to dying during, if your Vanguard is on fire and about to blow, does shield save it? If not, it's the same idea as in DotA; DoTs can (sometimes) be unaffected and still kill you.

If you'll accept 7 seconds, Omniknight http://dota2.gamepedia.com/Omniknight has Guardian Angel, which renders all nearby allies immune to damage for 7 seconds (they can still attack)... It's something of an I-win button - definitely moreso than the Vanguard shield. I know you don't play the game and the first link doesn't mention it, but it's what I was actually referring to (primarily - a few other abilities are pseudo-invuln, like Chronosphere and Stone Gaze - they basically stop anyone from attacking you).

Anyway, we're pretty far off topic now

Would you say that's not the case for Magriders or Prowlers then?

Ironically, OP is the literal antithesis of frosty.

I won't dispute your earlier points as I'm sure you're aware those are only specific instances of invulnerability. Your point regarding spells versus physical is a good one, as is ability to diffuse invulnerability. I would not be adverse to more damage types and some able to negate invuln (or drain the shield faster), or gadgets to counter it at all.

In fact, I'd be happy to see the shield gone entirely. What I want is a tank that's actually useful to my faction, not to me. The Vanguard just isn't useful; it falls behind in all metrics, and that needs to be addressed. If that comes at the price of removing its one versus one superiority, that'd be great - I can't stand 1v1

QFT

Seriously, in a game with constant balance changes and updates (at least in the past), if you bought a gun and then complain about it being nerfed, then that's on you for being so naive.

This is the standard nonsense response to the issue.

Fact is I have thousands of Certs tied up into things that were either nerfed to uselessness or, if we're playing the semantics game, "changed to be more in line with what they originally intended developmentally." Regardless, it's a situation where when I spent said certs when something was one way where I would have never spent them on today's version. While yes, eventually, I will earn enough certs for it to not matter that doesn't mean I want the fruits of my time and effort tied up into things that I won't use.

This really isn't an unreasonable request. We're talking over a year of changes many of which never came with a cert refund. A one time respec of most things (IE: Weapons wouldn't be refunded). Not really sure what the issue is.

Those stats about survivability are skewed due to anchored mode prowlers typically looking to set up a hex away. Don't lump my precious cavalry tank in with those gun carriages. Proxy Radar is all the utility I need, unless they actually went through with moving that to defense, in which case, not happy. I don't want to give up extra side armor.

Immune to physical damage, though Omniknight can put both guardian angel and repel on someone and it takes a purge to be able to do anything to them. Plus it gives 20 hp per second. Absolutely hilarious when you see a chronosphere coming and then everyone frozen is also immune to physical damage.

Comparing DOTA to PS2, now I'm imagining a TR MAX with lockdown having the option to instead force an enemy MAX to use lockdown.

But really comparing DotA to Pside isn't really fair because DotA is a game about breaking itself. It sets up a set of rules and then gives each hero a way to break them. If someone on the other team breaks a rule you depend on, there's usually something you can do about it.

If you had a fully certed ZOE for God knows how long you probably farmed enough (determinedly) "unfair" certs to cover your refund 10x over.

If you want your ZOE certs refunded, you should hand back all those other certs you acquired with it as well.

Like I said, Omniknight's ultimate Guardian Angel is Physical attack immune not Spell immune, so it's not an I-win-button because you can still get bursted to hell i.e. Lion, Lina. etc. Repel (Spell immune) after Guardian Angel is obviously dumb idea because that would remove the physical attack invunerability.

Chronosphere has a BIG downside. It can freeze BOTH of your team mate and opponents, so if you fail or lack of awareness, it can cost you the entire game sometime; after all it is still a spell and can be stopped with Orchid. There's always a counter and downside in dota 2 abilities.. just need to play it well enough.

I'm more imagining that every time someone toggles ZOE on and off, I get to heal myself...

Or better... I get to steal ZOE on my HA. Pahahahaha!

I can't really say because I don't play with those very much (not that I spend a lot of time in my Vanguard either), but I would assume yes. There are several factors including:

1. The main cannon is generally better than the secondary, so 2 main cannons > 1 main cannon + 1 seconday
2. With two tanks, you can flank the enemy making them split their fire between two targets, or focus on one while the other simply unloads on them

This, obviously, becomes less of a factor when you start having an entire squad or more, because you then start to have traffic jams and would likely be better off with fewer fully-manned tanks instead.

How is that a nonsense response? I too have thousands of certs tied up in things that I never use, either because they got nerfed/changed, or because I was just trying things that didn't pan out. I'd love to have those certs to place elsewhere, but I don't feel that I *need* them because I can just get more.

It's nonsense because it's the default scenario that would happen regardless. It's tantamount to basically saying "Deal with it" when we're already, in fact, dealing with it.

The proposal is a way to have us not deal with it in a manner in which would present the least number of sticky issues for developers (such as weapon refunds due to the muddy waters of SC/Cert costs). If you can find a flaw or raise a concern with that proposal, such as something we maybe didn't consider or think of or even a dissenting opinion such as you don't think there was enough changes to warrant a respec that'd be some kind of normal response.