Some people actually enjoy simple kits...

Did you know different people have different tastes and win by different means? Amazing right! Okay. So we have a game with 133 champions and growing. Yet for some strange reason, a vocal portion of the community seems to think Azir, Vayne, Riven, Ryze and Yasuo are the ideal design every champion should be aimed towards. I see lots of buzz-words thrown around like "Unhealthy", "Interactivity", "Hidden Power", "Stat Check", etc. Basically all boiling down to one thing. "Your champion design values strategy/build choices/teamwork/meta-play/stat crunching over twitching better! They must be badly designed. Victory in this strategic, objective based game must ONLY be achieved through twitching better to get a higher KDA!" I hate to tell you. Not everyone wants to win by being Boxbox. Some of us want to perfect farming. Out position the enemy. Strategize better. Make better decisions. Have better team fight engagements. Coordinate better. Have better map awareness. Communicate better. Innovate our builds. Or dozens of other methods of achieving victory. Besides just having superior twitch mechanics. And with 133 champions in the game. Reworking all of the currently "simple" designs into convoluted, 'impossible to balance', mini-game obsessed, three hit passive champions. Isn't at all necessary. You can go Gosu it up on Vayne. I will be over here being a tactician, shot caller and game knowledge nerd on Shyvana. We can co-exist. So stop pretending twitch, feast or famine, high risk high reward designs. Are the only viable design. ________ 117 Upvote Edit: Figure I should add some clarity to a few complaints. 1: Never said complex champions do not require strategy or thought. But they are more forgiving on those as long as you have skill on them. Mess up on Ekko? R to safety, dash and movespeed. Mess up a flash+R ln Annie? You are screwed. Just as simpler champions tend to be more forgiving on skill as long as you have strategy and thought. Both require a level of skill and thought and strategy. But they differ in focus. 2: I agree some designs can be TOO simple. My favorite champion is Shyvana. I think her kit needs some interactivity and counterplay, and more fun usage of her ult. Meddler confirmed she was being looked at. But I'd still prefer her design be simple. Not too simple like Garen, but simple like new Poppy who is one of the best champion designs ever imo. Simple but healthy. 3: I don't hate skill based champions. Top lane I play Riven because my favorite streamer is Boxbox. I simply prefer the strategic playstyle of people like Hai, Trick2g, Singed420 and others. Yes they all have excellent mechanics but they focus on strategy. Trick2g and Singed420 even choosing "simple" champions(Udyr/Nasus/Yorick and Singed respectively). 4: "Complex champions are easier to balance". If a system has more things to break more things will break. BOTH complex and simple kits have their downsides to balance. Yi and Aatrox are problem champions. But Ashe and Sona seemed easy enough to balance to a reasonable spot. While Yasuo, Azir, Taliya, Kalista, Ryze, Ekko, Fizz, Lee Sin, Riven, Nidalee, Graves, Jhin, Lucian and more have all been balance nightmares that people are never happy with. Some simple champs are great, Poppy, others aren't, Garen. There are some complex champions who have seemed fine in my eyes. I actually have NO problem with Yasuo's current state other than Wind Wall being 'annoying'(annoying isn't a balance issue). I actually haven't had a problem with Zed since his first round of changes. This post isn't about that however. It's about the players and even some devs who think simple=brainless and bad, complex=better design and players.
Report as:
Offensive Spam Harassment Incorrect Board