User blog comment:GreenMoriyama/Izo, the Blizzard Prince/@comment-3391671-20160328235017/@comment-3391671-20160330114123


 * So, are you suggesting to make it decaying or shorten it? As for CDR, IMO, Izo would build at least a bit of CDR as his W and R features semi-long cooldowns and his E does not scale down; the CDR was placed due to the removal of charges. If "buff a part because you nerfed another" is not the way I should go, please let me know what should be touched upon (you mention numbers, so I would ask the same there too).
 * Uniquness from Yasuo... you do make a point. Yet, I was taking advice (or should I say, implementing certain aspects because of certain comments?) and hoping the ability would scale better. The AP ratio was 30%, which is why I had bumped the AD ratio to 90% from 70% with the removal of the AP ratio. In the end, I cannot say much for or against the healing aspect =w="
 * My concepts are WIP, so as much if an ability seems to go in one direction, I don't mind changing that direction as long it's justified. I can minimize the slow duration to the likes of 1.25 (since the duration refreshes if you continually attack), but otherwise I would have to see where Izo's abilities head to in order to make any new changes to Frost Fang.
 * Picture Veigar's Dark Matter? Hmmm... either it is because I do not play in ranked games or I just happen to play Veigar well, but I find myself hitting DM often enough that I am pleased with it. In the same vein, I felt that even when telegraphed, Izo would be able to hit Glacial Blade often enough. But you make an obviously good point; I might have been just too stubborn to make Galcial Blade less of a damage ability and more about its kiting and CC capability.
 * Should the permaslow be lower and static, such as 15% or 12%? Icannot say much in regards to Hoarfrost aside from asking what you do not like about it. The cooldown was set with the intention that Izo doesn't jump around too quickly, but I come to believe that was an unnecessary worry.