Originally Posted by Dr_JP
General good idea, but charges gained through time passed isn't a good idea, because it'd tend to make its owners more feared about dying, which isn't S&Y, a ganking mid game item, purpose.
Because of Dota2, I'm a long time far from playdota.com forums, but I'm about to publish a general buff to make S&Y survive compared to new alternative paths for its components.
- 16 dmg (from 12)
-16 IAS (from 15)
- 16 MS (from 12)
- S&Y is a item for gankers, achievable at mid game, easy to build, offers poor DPS but lots of tankability and mobility;
- If you really wanna be mobile, S&Y should be the best option;
- +4% MS means, usually, +15 MS;
- Though Maim might look weak and unreliable, it must be interpreted along with self-MS bonus;
- Against a S&Y owner, any maimed enemy is slowed like 30%+16%, resulting in a relative 46% MS slow for 4 seconds, which becomes more reliable as IAS increases;
- Aesthetically more pleasent, symmetrical +16 bonuses.
Do you think that would be the most simple yet efficient way for S&Y having its place under the sun?
That's not bad, but I like my own better :P.
Complex is nice.
DotA's built upon complex, and recently there hasn't exactly been any Magic Missle level abilities. Point and Click seems to be on its way out, and so does orthodox play-styles. Variety is the spice of life, eh?
The time passed means that it needs to be rushed if chosen for its full potential. This encourages its mid-game use.
There are 3 possibilities:
You gain momentum, adapt a reasonable item for a better upgrade, like Manta or Halberd, or turtle and scale it up.
Should one be failing, they can upgrade.
Should one be stomping, then its all the more easy to stomp.
Should one be doing fine, but turtling hard, they can scale safely with a nice cheap easy to build item.
Thus it balances out. Its a complex balancing thing, but I think it'd work out great.
The charges aren't meant to be a thing you should pick it solely for. You pick it because you can hardly go wrong with it.
I know it being disassemble-able is not in the original post, (I don't think I added it) because I saw another thread for it and did not want to steal that thread. I would happily merge them, however, or add it in and give credit. I did not have time this morning.
I hope my ramblings make some sense. If you need me to clarify more I can.