I get what you are saying, but I think you are presenting your conclusion as more absolute than it really is.
I am not swatting away your criticism. The whole point of asking for feedback is to go back and forth on whether an idea can work, what parts are unhealthy, and what would need to change. If every attempt to refine the idea gets treated as “that proves it is fundamentally broken,” then there is not much room for actual discussion.
I also think “hard to balance” and “not healthy by definition” are not the same thing. Plenty of mechanics in games are volatile, situational, or highly skill dependent. That does not automatically make them unhealthy. Sometimes it just means they need clearer limits, bigger tradeoffs, or a more focused use case. Such as limiting to one target.
Where I disagree most is the idea that sacrifice or damage redirection is inherently broken as a concept. I do not think the concept is automatically unhealthy just because a bad version of it would be oppressive when ahead or weak when behind. That can be said about a lot of strong save tools, snowball tools, or utility actives. The real question is whether there is a version of the idea that creates meaningful choices, counterplay, and risk without becoming automatic value.
I also think you are locking in one very specific interpretation of the item, where it becomes a pure tank funnel or a bait suicide button, and then judging the entire concept based on that version. That is exactly why I have been talking about restrictions and redesigns. Not because I am dodging the criticism, but because that is how item design works. You test whether the core fantasy can survive once unhealthy edges are cut off.
For example, the idea does not have to remain “full self absorb with unlimited upside.” It could be partial redirection, capped redirection, shorter duration, stronger penalties, or a version that is much more about buying a second or two for repositioning than about hard funneling damage. At this point, we are not just talking about tuning random numbers, we are talking about shaping the mechanic into something healthier.
So I do appreciate the criticism, especially the concerns about bait use in low skill play, and abuse cases in organized play. Those are all real concerns. I just do not agree that they prove the concept is DoA. To me, they prove the concept would need tighter boundaries and probably a more focused design than my first version.
If the conclusion ends up being that the best version is closer to shared mitigation or redistribution instead of pure self absorb, that is still useful feedback. But that is different from saying the entire underlying idea of a sacrificial support item is fundamentally unhealthy as a matter of fact.
I mean, I am around Phantom 1 elo, so uhh, yeah, I think I have the right to point out if something seems overwhelming to break balance. I struggled with 1K hours on this game, purposefully trying to improve myself, which I've shown huge growth in how I play. And I'm not done building skill. I'm likely to be higher, but I have limited time in terms of commitments.
"Where I disagree most is the idea that sacrifice or damage redirection is inherently broken as a concept." That is why I suggested a shared damage redirection, instead of just a concentrated "suck damage up". Taking it to the extreme will break how team fights and positoning would work, and would not have healthy variety in terms of how to play the game. The one that is taking the points to the extreme is you, not me. When something is volatile, that is best when the teams are equal, not something that gives unfair advantage or disadvantage, that will break the point of skill expression, and even if you adjust it statistically, you would piss off a lot of people with it. This is not to say there shouldn't be rng elements (in fact, I greatly encourage it), but not to
that extent.
" The real question is whether there is a version of the idea that creates meaningful choices, counterplay, and risk without becoming automatic value."
That is literally my point!!!! Meaningful choices will evaporate when it becomes dominant when ahead, counterplay can be greatly squashed, and when behind or equal, you are incentivised NOT to pick it up. This is why I shared an item similar to Knight's vow. The whole "let me be heroic and sacrafice" is something that is best reserved to a character, similar to how Victor hurts himself to get stronger and embraces pain, another character can be a support style Victor.
"I also think you are locking in one very specific interpretation of the item, where it becomes a pure tank funnel or a bait suicide button, and then judging the entire concept based on that version." That is what it will collapse into. You are presenting it as a heroic sacrifcing option. Why would a Tank who's front lining buy this when they can just keep putting up pressure and meat shield, especially since they have damage resistance?
Why wouldn't a carry buy it, put it on a tank, they recieve less damage (because of resistance, I'm assuming it's post resistances, because "damage they take"), then heal themselves up with the raw dps? The tank becomes greatly more tankier due to positive feedback, and the carry gets a free meatbag to do what they want. That isn't heroic sacrificing, that's just incentivising something naturally in the game to become oppressive.
And when fights are volatile due to being equal in strength (which is where Deadlock is exciting!!), why would you even use that item? Let's go with steelman, and the tank guy gets extra damage resistance to help with the absorbing. Okay. That will just make a carry team that nightmareishly scary to deal with. And it will basically be a tank beefy version of plated armor/fury trance. How would you be able to deal with a frontline who is taking absurd amounts of damage all of a sudden? When the coordination of players get good, they will absolutely walk the floor with that item, it wouldn't even be funny. And then add a heal in case you die? That's overkill!!! This is why I suggest a Knight Vow implementation. Limited it to one lucky unit, and have it a "yin yang" style effect. You scratch my back, I scratch yours type thing.
" It could be partial redirection, capped redirection, shorter duration, stronger penalties, or a version that is much more about buying a second or two for repositioning than about hard funneling damage. At this point, we are not just talking about tuning random numbers, we are talking about shaping the mechanic into something healthier." And that's what I've been suggesting!! Are you even reading what I'm saying? You're proving my point you are not interested in what I have to say. If you ask for criticism, you need to listen to what I'm saying. We aren't even entirely disagreeing either.
"But that is different from saying the entire underlying idea of a sacrificial support item" Your implementation of it, even with numbers adjusted is not fair, for the reasons I listed out. Okay, with this idea in mind, what could work is applying it, where they can activate a soul rebirth death. Upon their death and when respawning in place for the next 6 seconds, give all nearby allies in a massive (not too large) aoe area damage resistance, and store the damage dealt to the team in that area. Heal a % of the damage done globally to all teammates (no range).
This gives extra defense to the user (don't kill me, I may respawn!), defense to the whole team, it can cause a support to be the shotcaller and coordinater of a fight, making them more active in a fight, adds an element of stall, massive healing and macro support (even helps with teams who want to get away from a bad fight, split pushers or fights spreading across). It also has 6 seconds on the clock, which if used on a carry, you would be locked out of a carry for a while, even more if you can prepare for them or extend it (both winning and losing team). I chose 6 seconds as it is similar to Doorman's lockout. Again, encouraging meaningful choices throughout a teamfight, in usage and in counter.
This can be bought on carries, tanks and supports. Greater use cases. There is the potential of a carry being cheeky, so it can be incentivised for the effect to trigger upon activation 1 second afterwards, and causes a -8% damage reduction, maybe slightly adjusted. And a death needs to occur in the next 3 seconds, after the 1 second of preparation. You can try to trigger a burst, or cause them to pop it early.
This will be a good fight when behind, neutral, and even when ahead (but not oppressive due to counters, being able to escape/slow down a fight, and also people have to invest and lose momentum during lead snowball). It should have a sizeable cooldown, about 5 minutes. That will fit the whole volatile nature of where will surpasses odds, but not in a way that it is a coin flip - to encourage calculated plays, and televised at that.
I could call it "Divine Will". 6.4K vitality item. Or "Dying Wish". Or "Celestal Rewrite".
