That sounds like a wonky hitbox that needs to be fixed to me. The animation needs to be changed to match the actual hitbox more accurately.
How is that a design problem?
His description is focused on engaging and solo target damage.
What would you pick him for?
To sometimes pet an assassin while walking around pushing E to heal to pad your dps stats?
We already have stiches filling the role of being a punching bag.
The design problem is how much he relies on his Q for that. What I’m saying is that he needs other builds that allow him more flexibility while still remaining in that role.
Yesterday, I played against an ETC that was on point denying me my followup AA after landing my Q. Something like the E build I envisioned in those suggestions I made would have been a great alternative.
Imperius’ playstyle might change, but his role would stay the same, a very good duelist with strong sustain and single-target damage output with moderate AoE damage against heroes. He would just be less dependent on Q build for it.
Q is his gap closer , he will be reliant on it whether you like it or not , whether you spec for it or not.
Sure, but he really shouldn’t be as reliant on it as he is. There’s a reason Q build is basically mandatory, and that’s because he doesn’t have any other build that competes with it. You build Q and land your Qs or you’re not gonna get much done.
Think of KT. His playstyle can vary drastically depending on whether you build around Flamestrike or Living Bomb, but at the end of the day his role remains that of a Mage who forces enemies to watch their positioning around each other and not group up too much.
I see no reason why giving Imperius another build that still fulfills the same overall role but in a different way than Q build would be a bad thing.
Except that’s how hitboxes work.
Please show exact evidence of this happen or from now on it is simple as a connection problem.
What you saw was not what the server during that, get that connection fixed, hipp hipp.
Seriously, this keep being mention about a deadzone and all but not even a single mention of a video of this occuring.
Is this a joke?
What we’re talking about isn’t the deadzone, it’s just what looks like inconsistent ability splat, where the targeting splat and animation sometimes seem out of sync with the effectual hitbox.
Ever felt that “how did that hit/miss” confusion? That’s an every-game thing with Imperius’ Q. And since it doesn’t happen nearly as often when I play other heroes, it isn’t likely to be lag. It just feels like the splat is a bit misleading.
The deadzone is the area where you can overshoot with your Q. There is a lunge before the the stab (unless you cast it point-blank), and if you lunge past a target then the stab misses them. That isn’t inconsistent or problematic, it’s just annoying since target that ability closer to yourself amplifies the effect small mouse movements have on its trajectory, making it easier to miss-aim it.
The dead zone is then a design choice form the sound of it and if it wasn’t there then he would be OP, I don’t understand why you (or maybe some other people, apologies) imply that the deadzone is a bug(?) when it’s as simple as a design choice, remove it and you have a Q with CDR that works exactly like ETC? pls god help us.
The hitbox inconsistency of size could be looked into as it is pretty much a rectangle calculation but this never happened to me nor seen this complained outside by any pro players that I discuss Imp frequently with, it sounds to me as close as the players complaining to me about TF2 Spy not backstabbing due their poor 90~ ms connection causing them to miss as the animation play or facestabbing happening when it doesn’t because yes, connection again.
Again, what you saw was not what the server saw, the wonders of poor connection and its results due packet loss or whatever depending on how Blizzard developed their servers.
If you can provide actual evidence, even in the form of replay I would appreciate it because this myth keeps going around without anyone confirming it, ridiculous.
I’m not implying that’s a bug, because it obviously isn’t. And I agree that if they made it hit all enemies in Imperius’ path they’d need to nerf him to compensate. I’m fairly on the fence about that, since I think his Q itself is mostly fine. It’d be nice, but I’m not sure it’d be worth the nerfs.
I am aware of what latency is and how it works.
But again, considering that not only is this a consistent issue for Imperius, but it is a consistent issue with only Imperius, I doubt that is the source of the issue. If it were, it should also be happening in the games where I play other heroes.
Then share the replay and prove it is there.
Because this as a myth as it gets. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
That isn’t a dead zone, that is just poor targeting on the part of the person playing Imperius. You can hit someone at point blank range, you just have to aim correctly.
A dead zone is an area where you cannot hit a target, like hunters had in WoW prior to Cataclysm. They literally could not attack something that was too close to them, other than with Raptor Strike. None of their shots or auto-attacks would work.
There are no dead zones in HotS.
Did the rundown myself on try mode about deadzones, seriously if anything this is what we call wind up animation before it procs, its like “cast time”.
Please, source your content next time, let alone CONFIRM YOUR CLAIMS TRUE, because as it seems like, these are myths and as such not weaknesses nor bugs or issues.
(it even procs faster, how odd)
Also for the wonky hitbox, it seems like i said, a packet issue of the instigator of such action, if i can hit someone by just looking the whole other direction from point blank range then the rectangle seems to be working as intended, even on the tip of the spear when the animation doesn’t even suit the size of the spear itself in doing so is hitting the target.
Again, what you saw =/= what the server saw.
2 Likes
Nope.
So I don’t get this.
You actualy can nerf it in several ways while still keeping it partialy active:
- You could for example make it consume only 1 stack instead of keeping all of them, making consecutive hits get less bonusses from these stacks (the order of removing being based on the first one applied). This effectively makes him only get 3 bonus stacks of damage, and with proper timing of his abilities even more.
- You could negate its passive bonus damage when taking this talent. Which does something similar to nerfing Burn the Impure, but at a diffirent phase in the game.
- You could shorten its duration even further to like 2 seconds, but make applying a stack increase the duration for all of them (resets it to 2 seconds). Appending wouldnt work though as that would often still grant him 6 seconds if he instantly applied all 3 marks (not to mention E retriggering this constantly which would be massively OP). But 2 seconds means he has to spread out his combo in order to lengthen the duration, which is a bit more difficult to perform
What I meant that if you nerf BoS, it’s either useless (like a duration nerf, when you kill your target quick anyway) or you make it trash (like slowly consuming the marks).
Plus Storm talents are designed to be game changers, and often ppl can’t even reach them.
So I don’t think that we should nerf it instead of the talents that make it good.
There are plenty of underwhelming storm tier talents, so ‘trash’ is still just relative. The bonus might be far less, but still work to a certain degree. That doesnt directly mean its trash, but it might only become a niche because of synergy requirements.
If the talent would still only work in combination with Burn the Impure, and nothign else, but imperius remains extremely dangerous with this combination, i dont see any issue.
So yes, nerfing is an option.
Wait a minute… do you really want to nerf a hero for the sake of bad players? You set the first stone for future nerfs on Kael’thas, Ming, Tassadar and other currently popular picks in low elo.
Do you want that? But thanks to your efforts.
Not just.
I talked about multiple reasons and points but everyone gets fixated on the few that resonates with them the most, it seems, like “Tracer should’ve dodged”, “it’s about low ranks”, and stuff.
Imperius doesn’t have insane winrates at high elo to justify nerfs based solely on that.
But he’s really popular and sees a lot of pro plays and if we look at his dmg numbers, it’s imo, slightly higher than it should be.
Some small nerfs would probably silence the lower ranks while it wouldn’t effect the higher ranks that much, where you don’t need to be able to single-handedly 100-0 someone.
And we all now that there are certain Heroes that are balanced even with low winrates at Masters rank and are considered strong despite that.
I believe that currently Imperius is too easy to get value out from even if the player is not that familiar with the character and if we nerf him, he’d lose mostly just his popularity.
Tassadar is insanely popular in high ranks too. So I’m not surprised if ppl want some nerfs on him.
Ming and Kael are also pretty popular in Masters, but I wouldn’t nerf them, because their winrate are on the lower parts of the balanced spectrum, what I’d aim for for Imperius too.
Check the clip linked, or run some tests yourself and see how much dmg he can do. Check it for other Heroes you think can do a lot of dps and see if you think he’s fine or not.
And I also mentioned, that if the nerfs have too big of an effect on him, we can and should buff him. So if the nerfs make him weak, it’d be a soft “powershift” on the long run. Sacrificing a small portion of his dmg for other stuff, which can be survivability, or slightly more PvE dmg (not much, so he’s still “bad” at it).
The Q has a “generous hitbox” because the head of the spear is the only active part of the skillshot.
You can’t complain about one without considering the other.
1 Like
The Q also attaches much faster if casted from very close range, it is very generous that the leap isn’t a const value of wait (example) 1 second before check everyone, it changes based on leap range.
If anything it is waiting for you to stop after going from point A to B.
It is very generous that the leap issue is almost redundant and meaningless in the activation process.
And therefore it is not as a weakness as you all make it sound.