
Originally Posted by
Passarelli
I chose that as an example. Also, I thought 3 was decent balance in a 6 slot system. You can do decently without a lace if you learn how to counter things without it. It would also mean you had to make a hard choice and mean that ultimates are still somewhat useful after the first 4 rounds (where almost everyone has a lace).
Keep in mind that I only thought of this after cyber made the comment about weighting helm to take up 2 slots rather then 1. I agree that it would be much simpler to simply restrict the item on some races. This method, however, would also add another layer of asymmetric balance.
Helm and Health should definitely take 3 slots. Personally, I think lace should also be 3, but 2 would be fine. This would make it so you would actually see people buying orb or mask much more, and less people grabbing helm, health, or lace.
I understand some of those items are cheaper, but when 90% of people buy helm, health, and lace, with the 9% of the remaining buy 2 out of the 3, it tends to show that they are much more desired and thus forcing the player to make a hard choice out of 2 or the 3, or buying 1 a weak item and a midrange, or all midrange/weak items. Ideal balance would be making each of the items as desirable as each of the others.
I also like this design better then the one I have heard floated of making an item that makes you immune to the effects of other's laces for 10-15 seconds, like an antiward. However, even this could fit if you make it take 6 slots and thus clear all other items in your inventory.
By the way, it isn't specifically helm and health that are overpowered. It's that if you have both of those plus a lace, you greatly limit the ways someone can actually kill you to the point of absurdness. This only means that even more people will use that combo and it becomes a vicious cycle and hardly any of the other items get any love at all.