We have not received permission from Veeshan to share the quoted post.
We can't flag on pretty much any mate, so unless we're talking the situation that tautau described - right now we might not be able to wake our mates with a hit.
This isn't true, actually. Knockback and Knock-Up can be made OP because it's not cleansable in any meaningful way, it's just a setback that is usually non-reactable.
This is where my lack of outside experience shows itself. What do those 2 effects do? I assume knockback just pushes you in a direction and knock-up throws you upward for a few seconds? If those are the case then yeah, I'd say that knockback is a CC only in the most literal sense of CC (as in, you're Controlling a part of the Crowd). The melee showcase had those rock mobs that pushed the character back with their hits. Would that be considered a CC then too? Cause that might mean that we could potentially have weapon passives with that effect (cause the effect itself is already in the game).
And if knock-up is what I said then yeah, that'd be the biggest CC in the game and I guess it could be seen as OP. But I'd definitely dislike it then, cause there'd be no counterplay to it. But I said as much in my original post. No CC is OP
as long as there's a counter
.
I don't really understand people who use this sort of reasoning.
For something to be 'over-powered', it only has to be 'outside the standard power scope of the rest of the system', not 'unstoppable'. If a tactic shuts down 90% of opposing strategies to the point where they stand no real chance and then when you put in all the effort to counter it, you've devoted so much energy to it that the rest of your flow requires you to play perfectly while your opponent basically 'hits a button and waits for you to do a lot of hard work to overcome it', this is 'OP' to me.
I know that you don't play a lot of games that make you personally care about balance (and also that you don't really care about it much yourself), but I'd hope that you could come to accept that in this world of competitive games, people will (correctly?) use the term 'OP' to refer to something that is just by its
nature
(not by its tuning) so much work to counter that you might as well give up or resort to using it.
There are many mechanics that I've personally removed from games or seen developers remove from games for this reason. Then again, I basically 'went to war' over this before and that took years so I guess there will always be holdouts who insist otherwise.
The problem in that situation came from the fact that once 'I removed the OP thing from the game', the population of people willing to play the version where it wasn't removed fell to basically nothing.
I still disagree with you, therefore, but I'm definitely familiar with your stance.
If you find yourself very precisely defining the semantics of 'a counter', there's no need to explain it to me, because the entire problem with balance in games is that people don't agree on what 'a counter' is.