Specific Itemization Problem

You're not reading what I wrote if that's all that you're getting from my writing. Like I said before, you do not need an item as a complete equal to be a valid alternative. You may have that opinion, but then being stuck on one shield in this case and demanding for us to change your opinion without you even wanting to consider the alternative(s) is a bit pointless to discuss if that's the route you're choosing to take.

And the advantage in blocking for a teammate who may never have drawn their Hard to pin down/any other defensive card to begin with can be a game winner all it's own. If you'd like to demonstrate an effective formula to weigh both advantage instances then by all means do so, I'd love to see the results.

Edit: P.S. Swapping cards on Slippery and Hawlic's is cool btw, I don't mind Legendaries being a bit more powerful.

 

I'm in the camp which thinks that for pvp, Hard To Pin is a much better block than any other block out there (with a few situational exceptions like Parry). By extension, Slippery Shield is without peer when it comes to shields.

From my point of view, Hard to Pin strongly skews the pvp dynamic of class balance in favor of warriors (or, if you prefer, melee classes).

The basic dynamic of warriors versus wizards is that warriors do tons more damage, but wizards can control and kite better. If the wizard controls or kites the warrior more effectively than the warrior's ability to close the distance, the wizard wins. If the warrior reaches melee range, the warrior wins. Of course in real life it is not quite that black and white (the wizard could have a parry or a Toughness up his sleeve), but it is still generally the case a large % of the time.

The way this matchup usually goes is that the warrior approaches the wizard under cover. At some point he has to step into the wizard's line of sight, usually at medium short range (3 to 6 squares). If the wizard has an encumber spell, he needs to cast it now, before the warrior is in melee range, or else the wizard has a risk of being 1-shot.

Now there are 3 possibilities here:
1 - the warrior gets encumbered and henceforth has a very difficult time reaching the wizard
2 - the warrior has some kind of block which negates the encumber effect. He still has chances to close on the wizard, the wizard still has chances to escape
3 - the warrior has a block which negates the encumber effect AND allows him to move closer to the wizard in a single card (Hard To Pin). This double swing wastes the wizard's turn AND allows the warrior to close the gap all at once.

The same scenario occurs if the wizard tries to use any other blockable spell (Winds Of War, Path Of Knives, Whirlwind Enemies, etc) in order to prevent the warrior from reaching melee range.

Possibilities 1 and 2 above offer interesting counterplay and gameplay scenarios. Possibility 3 changes this by giving a fairly overwhelming advantage to melee attackers.

I greatly enjoy running warriors in my teams, but cards like Hard To Pin and long distance step attacks (Nimble Strike, Dancing Cut, Vicious Thrust) makes it very hard for me to design an effective team which does NOT include a warrior.

 

I have won so many games due to having opponents try to shoot my warrior within 3 range. Do that and they've got a 2/3 chance of getting completely owned. Not only that but they usually waste their push back or slow card on that effort. It really ruins a lot of games...

This is especially frustrating because there are so few options for these cards. If you don't happen to get the right items - and one in particular Vibrant Pain - then you just won't be competing at the top level in a couple of months. Play a lot a lot for 6 months? Maybe a 50% chance of finding one. Meanwhile some guys have two already

The idea of just nerfing step attacks in general - at least the ones that move you more than 1 - is probably a better route to go, though.

 

Thank you Yth for explaining it in this fashion. Hopefully all of the many explanations, both with logic, theorycrafting and evidence (ask the top players what shields they use / devs have access to metrics which will show that slippery shields are being abused) will be enough to persuade some of the less clued in people.

Another way of looking at it in my eyes:

Which shield would you NOT, want your opponent to have? I would always, no matter what comp I'm running, choose slippery shield.