XeroKimo (NA)
: - DH is balanceable, they definitely put that reset to be similar to the old one, the biggest issue for DH currently is definitely the fact that if multiple people take it, once they poked someone below 50% HP, it's a free proc for everyone, even the ones that didn't do anything to help that, suggestion would be that there has to be a minimum cooldown before having a person's soul proc, say 25 seconds, that way they can't stack up on it, also remove the reset proc, but scale the cooldown to like 30 seconds late game keep the 45 seconds early. - The new bounties will need some tuning, it's legit the first patch it's been out so of course they'd need to get a better feel for it, it's currently making lower elo be worse because any lead you make will be taken away, and the mechanic definitely is seemed to target for higher elos, but right now I totally agree, getting leads are almost non existent, gold wise, which can be helpful for comebacks, but it feels less rewarding when you beat the enemy in a micro level or macro level. - The gold for turret plating is still up for tuning as well, again, it's legit been the first patch of preseason don't call it a failure from just that. The mechanic is mostly intended to make it so early grouping to push a turret can be more punished as gold is split between players nearby, so the individual lead is less, and they get a extra resistance temporarily that stack per plating destroyed in the last 20 seconds, and per champion on top of 40 resistances per plating destroyed up till 14 mins, it's definitely a promising mechanic so they just need to fine tune how much gold or how the gold will be split in the future - You seem to misinterpreting the "high damage", currently there are 2 things to blame, that is DH, and the speed up of the game due to how the new bounties work and turret plating. The only instance of an increase in damage ever in LoL's history is season 6 with the introduction of keystones, and that has carried on to today. The damage in a champion's kit generally hasn't changed over the [years](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/yTorNEcE-quick-gameplay-thoughts-august-3). While the introduction of keystones are controversial, I'm on the side that is thankful that they exist for one reason only, because champions that fall out of meta will still be viable to play even if you aren't a one trick. I know full well cause I've been a fill main for years, while it's always been rough to play champs that aren't meta, since season 6, they've definitely been much more easier to play, with the exception of the ardent meta, where shields and heals were so prevalent that burst wasn't an option at all.
Rioter Comments
: I don't think he meant it like "wah league sucks and i'm leaving for a new and better game". Pretty sure he just meant it's time to take a nice little break from this game.
I don't want to be a pessimist but this is basically all i have been reading once Overwatch beta came out. People decided to complain and bait everyone into thinking they'd be switching games (Overwatch) like i don't know that every Blizzard game has never been free and that the majority would be just indulging in the beta, then cursing Blizzard when it was over. League has always been free and people constantly complained how Riot charging for cosmetics was dumb and they wouldn't waste a penny and yet i'm now somehow supposed to believe that they'll actually spend a dime on a game that is p2p? I'm not trashtalking Overwatch, i think the game is worth 40 euros because it is genuinely fun and different. I'm just stating the facts.
: When i said that I meant why was he trying bloodrazor + guinsoos instead of bork + guinsoos.
BorK is a bad item to rush on Vayne, despite what you're seeing Vayne players do. If Gosu is still doing this, then he is wrong too. * Bloodrazor gives you max % HP shred as opposed to BorK's current % HP shred. * The price is 2625 vs 3400 gold. * The effects are Red Smite + Bloodrazor VS BorK + 25 damage. AS is the same. Damage is easy to obtain from multiple sources and BorK starts scaling once Vayne hits mid-late game. Guinsoo follows the same principle. If you're going to rush BorK, Challenger's Smite + Bloodrazor is a better and a cheaper replacement. Don't rush Guinsoo's, it's an early trap purchase. You'll need too much time to get all the gold and if you're losing, you're never going to hit a point where you can kill people before they kill you. If you're not rushing Guinsoo's, then Bloodrazor and a Smite is also a weak early game investment. And if you're not getting this, then opting for a more expensive alternative (BorK) is also a bad choice. So you're left with the traditional ADC items that scale really well with Vayne and make her a monster earlier into the game. Then you can choose BorK or Guinsoo as a response to enemy tanks, never decide on a preset build before a game starts. These items are only good if a champion is doing good.
Kensue (NA)
: ***
I always find it funny how you find it relevant to LoL boards that you're going to switch games and that anyone should care about your decision. MOBA and an FPS game isn't the same, so even if you found Overwatch more fun then League (and this is just for a moment because you now have new experience to comb through), as soon as you get stuffed, you're going to default to League again. Basically, stop playing for a while, wait for new content or patches and then take pleasure in having to mini-learn the meta changes in a few games. You think Overwatch doesn't have that? As soon as you played it for a while, enjoy its meta, the usual map hiding spots, strats and heroes that are good or bad on it. You're still not going to enjoy every hero they have to offer, same as League, which has a significantly larger roster.
: I don't understand the purpose of this. Wouldn't bork + guinsoos do the exact same thing but better?
Bork is % current HP and Bloodrazor is % max HP. Guinsoo is as expensive as IE now and it specifically serves as a tank killer, not an item that gives you a lot of power for the price, without it's stacks for the Phantom Hit passive to kick in. It is used as an additional item to complete a build against high HP targets and should not be a core item to make a build from. If you go for this with Vayne (and BorK has been nerfed because of her, quite some time ago), you're going to pay a lot of gold and you're still going to have to reach a late game for these items to shine, where Vayne also shines. If you're a Vayne player, i suggest skipping BorK as a first purchase. Every ADC needs damage and crit, so the usual buys for them are a BF Sword (as a first buy) and then completing a Zeal item before the BF item (Shiv, RFC or PD). Why? Stat efficiency. Finishing a crit item first gives you the ability to crit off the damage from a BF anyway + an additional effect, whereas any BF item gives you 20% crit and you're paying a lot of gold to get it. * {{item:3031}} is much better with a Zeal item completed, because of more crit + AS. * {{item:3508}} Vayne doesn't need as she doesn't use a lot of mana but the Crit to CDR conversion is nice to have, if you need it. * {{item:3072}} gives a superior lifesteal than BorK and more damage + a shield. * {{item:3147}} you never this buy first as ADCs struggle to deal assassin levels of damage early. If you need this effect, it is best gotten as last 2 items, where ADCs can almost 2-3 shot you.
: > [{quoted}](name=rip dravengod1,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZpgjIeUb,comment-id=0005000000010000000200000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-05-12T10:30:35.429+0000) > > You're basically cherry picking my comments and going way beyond the scope of a game. I like how you say that without mentioning where or how I do that, not to mention I can't possibly see how cherry picking is relevant to anything here. > Clearly the game balance issue is way smaller in scope to apply it to how the real world works and don't make an attempt to do so. So because problems with even more complexity still are constantly improved on, balance in league is harder to achieve? wtf? > Game balance doesn't correlate to real life research and development. Of course it does, game balance IS a real life research and development, you have a massive company with many talentend employees tackling this problem, are these people not real? are they not researching and developing both tools and solutions to this problem? are they not payed with real money to improve the balance of this game? This is exactly "real life research and development". > Balance isn't _**"we can go this way and we'll paint a bigger picture in the future".**_ Simply because one chance/new addition to League in the future can completely screw up what they've done in the past in terms of balance, leading to the never-ending cycle of balance. Only if you do things poorly, otherwise you will leave levers to pull things back together if it pulls them apart, the only reason new champions cause so many issues is because riot wants them to, that's because riot very often sacrifices balance for the sake of other things(lc$bigplays probably being the most problematic one). > If that's the case, true balance does not exist. Still as bullshit as when you first claimed it. >The game would need to completely stop evolving (getting new content out) in order to reach this state. No, in each new state of a game true balance can still be achieved, it just shifts states. > That means that the balance needs to be always on a smaller scale, champion/item or class wise. You're never balancing League as a whole, you're always balancing parts of it. How the hell do you think all complex real life problems are approached? there's rarely one big solution which solves the whole problem, instead constant improvements on the problem are constantly made. > ##This problem is more akin to solving a complicated mathematical equation. You need to know the definitive problem in order to find a mathematical formula with a definitive number of variables that describe it perfectly. You cannot just add new variables to the mix, thus complicating the problem and not expecting that the formula you're constantly adding on to, is immune to changes from it's root. No it isn't, and sure you can constantly change the problem. > Here's how balancing works: > You first examine the data on the specific champion, you understand in which cases they are overperforming and then you change the numbers accordingly. And how do you want to define "overperformance"? anyway competitive play and the very high end of solo q are the way to go, the thing is that riot very often decides to not give a flying fuck(like the refusal to react to the fact tank supports having been dominating for literally years), or to have buttsecks with certain champions(constantly shoving thresh/ahri/lee/nida/zed/le broken down our throats). >You don't go around and change random things, saying "what the hell, i'll just wing it. It will all fall in line in the future". Ofc you don't, you go by feedback from said higher end of solo q, and competitive players. > Here's an example: > Sejuani and the Cinderhulk. > Sejuani stuck out as an overperformer so Riot tuned her down and made her be balanced around the Cinderhulk. No, she wasn't. >However, after they also concluded that the Cinderhulk was overperforming, the item was nerfed and that was Sejuani's double nerf - she was downsized with no compensations to her kit. In this case, it was very clear that Sejuani would fall off this hard and that she needed compensation but it didn't come in time when it was important. > **I'm merely stating the facts, i'm not taking potshots at Riot.** These aren't facts, I remember the sejuani nerfs, this isn't what happened. Basically sejuani was overperforming yes, but then riot decided that fuck it time for their famed "winrate balancing", sejuani after both nerfs to herself and cinderhulk sat on more or less 50% winrate(+-1%), according to riot it was balanced, according to everyone else it was crap. The mistake was winrate balancing, nothing else. > I also never correlated the champion's win rate with their viability. I don't know where you're getting this from but you are putting words in my mouth to justify your sophistry. It's funny that you say that, because I never said you did, nice one though. > What i've said is that if a certain strong champion (that's currently in the spotlight) is removed from it, there would be no vacant spots because then someone else would replace them, as a next viable pick. And I didn't say you were wrong, I said that this is exactly what a poorly balanced game looks like, this won't happen in a game which is even somewhat balanced, league is "balanced" around incompetence and stupidity, when that goes away in competitive play or starts to go away as you go up in elo, so does the illusion of balance. > _**The keyword here is "overshadowing".**_ The champion in question is good at what they do and there's no point in picking someone else that's less effective at what they do unless their spot is no longer contested. With that in mind, i'm not saying that there's no such thing as overtuned champions. There most certainly are. But they are a few and far between. Nowadays, we think that if something is a strong pick (which is always more dictated by the meta and items offered), it immediately needs to be toned down and are justifying it as "balancing it out". > This kind of balancing is bad kind of balance. Because there are many cases where champions have gotten nerfed because they were strong in their meta, only to require buffs when the meta shifted and they ended up struggling to exist. Does it really make sense to you that 2-3 champions overshadow fucking everyone? I mean sure league can be claimed to lack niches, but surely you don't think it's that bad for 2-3 champs to overshadow everyone? Because anyway, they don't, they OVERPOWER most champions, and overshadow a few. Also your understanding of "meta" is poor, a meta will first of all be dictated by a set of champions who is overpowered, and then reacted to by champions who are good(could be claimed to be counters) against the first set, the mistake is nerfing the latter, nerfs to the former on the other hands are VERY much needed, we are in a mess because often the first set is made of lc$bigplays champs, whereas the second isn't, so we just make a whole mess out of the game to give an illusion of balance based on incompetent play in the lower elos,where the lc$bigplays champs appear weaker. > Here's stonewall008 discussing the same issue: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maqco7uo36o I found it shallow and pedantic.
Your entire rebuttal is the definition of what cherry picking is. You didn't treat it as a whole and responded to that, you basically cherry picked singular sentences and made your reply a mile long - which it needed not to be. Your whole 16 points could have been condensed in 1 or 2 alone. Again, you're using the term "overshadowing" the wrong way. I did not say anywhere that Graves, Kindred and Nidalee were not overtuned. They most certainly are. But Xin Zhao was not overtuned. He was strong because of a certain item combination. This combination was nerfed in his case specifically, except that his nerfs also followed shortly after. His ganks were no longer deadly and since killing is the only thing he was good at, he dropped out of favor very quickly. On the stonewall's video - it can't be both shallow and pedantic. Pedantic means to be precise, meticulous, exact. Shallow means being of little depth. These are two opposites. What you've basically done is rate the video on a scale of 1-5, both 1 and 5.
: So why did we bring blood razor back when it was deleted for being a noob trap in the first place?
% max HP damage is important to have if Riot intends to keep tanks in the game and feeling good to play and there's no reason they shouldn't. Since Devourer has proven to be a feast or famine problem (if you get dumpstered early, you end up with no damage and if you efficiently stack too early, you end up more dangerous than any other champion in the game), Riot replaced it with a flat value enchantment. Junglers now don't have to farm hard to contribute and they can gank early as well. This doesn't eliminate jungle farming but it makes it less punishing if a gank doesn't end up in a kill. Bloodrazor is also better as an echantment as it now has the ability to cover a portion of on-hit junglers that will use the item, rather then being the exclusive jungle item that is tailored to them alone.
: It was a noob trap in the sense that people would build it on champs with no synergy with on hits with the idea that it would help them tankbust. The new enchantment is pretty straight forward. I suppose it is still somewhat a trap on account of the smite kog theorycrafting but I haven't seen anyone do anything like that in an actual game. It's pretty obvious going lane smite for a mediocre onhit is pointless.
I've seen Phylol trying out smite Vayne with Bloodrazor and Guinsoo however, that build is pure trash. You don't have any lane pressure that you can use, you're just farming it out to the mid game. Which definitely means that if Vayne can't make it successful, it's not a good early game combination and investment as you'll always rather have some power to fight people with rather then constantly avoiding fights and losing objectives until you buy these two items. These two items seem to be fortifying your lead and enabling tank killing rather then giving you the raw power to win fights early. Which means that they are best suited for as a response to someone on the enemy team, and not a must buy in every game.
: Just destroy tank ekko please
I am all for having diverse build paths for champions but if the other assassins are not catching on to tank builds, i also don't think Ekko should. It's actually a really awkward spot for him to be in. Maybe the solution to this problem is to decrease his skill base damage further but improving his AP ratios to accommodate and balance out for the loss in power. That way, tank Ekko would be a gimmick build and he should return to AP items in order to be successful. Maybe i'm wrong here but this sounds like a reasonable solution to me. Pretty much right up the same alley as tank Fizz.
: > [{quoted}](name=rip dravengod1,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZpgjIeUb,comment-id=00050000000100000002000000000000,timestamp=2016-05-11T16:22:40.612+0000) > > 1. If it is impossible to attain balance, then there is no balance. That's like saying "if it's impossible to attain complete knowledge, then there is no knowledge", and that's just complete and utter bullshit. > You can't tell me that we know the direction but not the destination. And yet researchers of all kinds are doing a rather impressive job without ever knowing the complete picture. > 2. There's always going to be a power hierarchy until Riot decides that every champion should have same 5 skills and do the same damage. Depends on how you define a power hierarchy. If you define it by "highest pick/ban champion" then yes, but champions have different uses, as far as MSI went for example it was pretty much "pick kindred, if you can't pick do that then pick nidalee, and so on" There was a very clear "this is better in pretty much better in all scenarios" and then there was a next in line. This is the sort of power hierarchy I'm talking about, and it's exactly how incredibly poor balancing looks like. >Then there's going to be games about pure strategy. Picks and bans are part of this strategy, a part which is very often trivialized in lol due to incredibly poor balancing. > 3. I didn't claim that the majority of champions are not viable. My point was that everything is viable. Great, again with your lunatics, "if it can win then it's viable", oh good, I've won games with intentional feeders and afks, I guess feeding and afking is viable now. >If Riot nerfed the spotlight champions, the tier below would take their place. Players are never looking for averages, they look for something that's fantastic in a given time. Riot doesn't need to buff anything, they just need to nerf something for a shift to happen. Buffing and nerfing are basically the same thing as far as variety is concerned, and players are looking for the strongest picks, if something is obviously too strong with complete disregard to anything, that's poor balancing, if something is often too strong but still situational, then you have room for improvement. > Strong and overtuned picks do exist but you're used to saying that everything is strong just because it performs better than expected. Strong and overtuned is when a champion in question forces everyone to adapt to them. Not to adapt to their pattern, but to their overall power. Ummm... no? Take the dominant tanks of msi(ekko/maokai/poppy), hell take maokai in specific, he just tanks and is too good at it, you're not adapting to anything, he's just too good at what he does.
You're basically cherry picking my comments and going way beyond the scope of a game. Clearly the game balance issue is way smaller in scope to apply it to how the real world works and don't make an attempt to do so. Game balance doesn't correlate to real life research and development. Balance isn't _**"we can go this way and we'll paint a bigger picture in the future".**_ Simply because one chance/new addition to League in the future can completely screw up what they've done in the past in terms of balance, leading to the never-ending cycle of balance. If that's the case, true balance does not exist. The game would need to completely stop evolving (getting new content out) in order to reach this state. That means that the balance needs to be always on a smaller scale, champion/item or class wise. You're never balancing League as a whole, you're always balancing parts of it. ##This problem is more akin to solving a complicated mathematical equation. You need to know the definitive problem in order to find a mathematical formula with a definitive number of variables that describe it perfectly. You cannot just add new variables to the mix, thus complicating the problem and not expecting that the formula you're constantly adding on to, is immune to changes from it's root. Here's how balancing works: You first examine the data on the specific champion, you understand in which cases they are overperforming and then you change the numbers accordingly. You don't go around and change random things, saying "what the hell, i'll just wing it. It will all fall in line in the future". Here's an example: Sejuani and the Cinderhulk. Sejuani stuck out as an overperformer so Riot tuned her down and made her be balanced around the Cinderhulk. However, after they also concluded that the Cinderhulk was overperforming, the item was nerfed and that was Sejuani's double nerf - she was downsized with no compensations to her kit. In this case, it was very clear that Sejuani would fall off this hard and that she needed compensation but it didn't come in time when it was important. **I'm merely stating the facts, i'm not taking potshots at Riot.** I also never correlated the champion's win rate with their viability. I don't know where you're getting this from but you are putting words in my mouth to justify your sophistry. What i've said is that if a certain strong champion (that's currently in the spotlight) is removed from it, there would be no vacant spots because then someone else would replace them, as a next viable pick. _**The keyword here is "overshadowing".**_ The champion in question is good at what they do and there's no point in picking someone else that's less effective at what they do unless their spot is no longer contested. With that in mind, i'm not saying that there's no such thing as overtuned champions. There most certainly are. But they are a few and far between. Nowadays, we think that if something is a strong pick (which is always more dictated by the meta and items offered), it immediately needs to be toned down and are justifying it as "balancing it out". This kind of balancing is bad kind of balance. Because there are many cases where champions have gotten nerfed because they were strong in their meta, only to require buffs when the meta shifted and they ended up struggling to exist. Here's stonewall008 discussing the same issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maqco7uo36o
: > [{quoted}](name=rip dravengod1,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZpgjIeUb,comment-id=000500000001000000020000,timestamp=2016-05-11T09:08:33.146+0000) > > This statement is a paradox. No, it isn't. > There is no perfect balance in League. There is. Granted it's pretty much impossible to attain, but it can still be striven towards, and currently we are very far from it. >No champion does the same thing and sometimes, damage or versatility can be a deciding factor in what makes a champion a power pick. It can be, in most cases it isn't. For example kindred who is spoken of here, was(got some nerfs, we will see where they place her) just ridiculous across the board, you know she's going into the jungle, you know what her kit is good at, she was just too good overall(and the same thing can be said for many champions, like ekko, nidalee/etc). > Let's say that Riot stops the patches and decides to flat out nerf every champion that takes the spotlight, to an underperforming level. What would you expect to happen after? > The next champion in line would replace the nerfed champion. When there's clear power hierarchy that's when the game is the least balanced. >There would be no gaps or lack of champions in that role, there would be champion rotations and inevitable meta shifts, if enough rotations warrant it. You're just so used to a game being poorly balanced you don't know anything else, many champions can be viable at a given the time, making more of them good is harder, but making only 3 for each role good is crazy easy to do, and is not anywhere near a balanced state.
1. If it is impossible to attain balance, then there is no balance. You can't tell me that we know the direction but not the destination. 2. There's always going to be a power hierarchy until Riot decides that every champion should have same 5 skills and do the same damage. Then there's going to be games about pure strategy. 3. I didn't claim that the majority of champions are not viable. My point was that everything is viable. If Riot nerfed the spotlight champions, the tier below would take their place. Players are never looking for averages, they look for something that's fantastic in a given time. Riot doesn't need to buff anything, they just need to nerf something for a shift to happen. Strong and overtuned picks do exist but you're used to saying that everything is strong just because it performs better than expected. Strong and overtuned is when a champion in question forces everyone to adapt to them. Not to adapt to their pattern, but to their overall power.
: As a previous plat player and gold player atm, everything you've just said not only doesn't make sense but makes you seem like a wrongly concieted asshole. Ranked play is encouraged to mimic that of pro play as best as it can. Of course it often fails but pro play generally sets the stage for the meta. The general population follows their example. Don't shit on someone else trying to take advantage of the meta because you're too adamant about learning how to beat a champion or simply not banning them.
I have a feeling it's about his pride as a "skillful" player. He wants to play and win using the non-meta defining champions and has a harder time winning with them. So every win feels like a hard earned one rather then piggybacking on the success of a certain strong pick and calling yourself good, which can often mask your skill behind the winrate of the champion itself. I completely support this way of playing as it adds a layer of mastery but i don't agree with his attitude. What he's implying is: _**"i want to make it harder for myself to win with non-meta picks but fuck anyone who picks the meta champions that make me try harder to win, therefore they should auto lose their games".**_ It's an oxymoron.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Bíg Ticket,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZpgjIeUb,comment-id=0005000000010000,timestamp=2016-05-10T18:12:50.156+0000) > > Huh? Why not? > > People who have to pick freelo champions to climb don't deserve to climb in my book. That's what bans are for. And yes, often there's more op champs than bans, but part of being good is also picking what is best for the situation, and sometimes(way too often frankly, and more often than not) it just boils down to power picks. Seriously, don't blame the player, for all he knows if he doesn't pick it his opponent will, blame the game for being poorly balanced.
> [{quoted}](name=manbearswine,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZpgjIeUb,comment-id=00050000000100000002,timestamp=2016-05-10T23:40:56.161+0000) > blame the game for being poorly balanced. This statement is a paradox. There is no perfect balance in League. No champion does the same thing and sometimes, damage or versatility can be a deciding factor in what makes a champion a power pick. Let's say that Riot stops the patches and decides to flat out nerf every champion that takes the spotlight, to an underperforming level. What would you expect to happen after? The next champion in line would replace the nerfed champion. There would be no gaps or lack of champions in that role, there would be champion rotations and inevitable meta shifts, if enough rotations warrant it.
: Huh? Why not? People who have to pick freelo champions to climb don't deserve to climb in my book.
I have no idea how to respond to this. Is Urgot the only thing they should play because he isn't classified as "freelo"? Would you be OK with a Kindred in your team that's winning you a game by default, as long as you're the one going to the Freelo City? If you don't like to give the enemy team a certain champion, you ban it. Your reasoning is pretty skewed.
: Personally, the only thing that concerns me is if you talk about them negatively. What would constitute as negative for DE? I play Warframe, and there are some things that I have an issue with, and constructive criticism can be seen as a direct attack towards someone, even though it's more of a gentle nudge in a different direction. The only thing that worries me about that is if someone provides some constructive criticism (e.g. they say something negative about DE's business practice or something, and then provide an alternative), it can be seen as being extremely negative. It does seem tyrannical the way you worded it, much like the last example as well: "they will find a reason to ban you" pretty much. If a mixture of DE's strictness and Riot's general laxness on some rules both in the forums and ingame was combined and pieces of each characteristic were combined (the positive ones), then I could see it as a pretty strict, but fair system. Sadly, the above will never happen. But it is nice to imagine a "perfect" system like that.
There are a ton of videos about DE's no tolerance policy. There are no such videos for League. People still complained that they've gotten "unjustly" banned but consider the following: In League, you first rack up punishment tiers that result in a 2 week ban and a permanent ban as a last resort, if you show no signs of improvement. It takes dedication at consistently being toxic in League to get booted out and the only thing that's banned is your one account. Warframe's report system is entirely player driven where the support hands out bans like hot cakes. Maybe i'm exaggerating here but that's what i've heard. As you've seen from our boards, there's there's a very few posts offering constructive criticism and they are very few and far between. The usual special that Riot gets is shitposting or just "feedback" about Riot's changes being bad/witch hunts based on specific Riot employee's track records that sparks the inevitable talk about should they be fired or not. This kind of behavior should not be tolerated by mods and should be discouraged, except it isn't. Transfer this attitude over to Warframe's boards and it gets removed immediately. Except that even the inkling of our behavior is getting removed as well. You'd think that this would clean up the environment and pave the way to constructive criticism only but it's the opposite - no one knows if they can talk about DE's design decisions in any way, leading to their boards feeling like it's run by dictator. As i've explained above, the in-game in Warframe environment isn't better at all. All you need to do is get reported enough times so that your case gets in the eyes of the mods. After that, you're guaranteed to get punished for something regardless how small of an infraction it was, if there was any. There would be no evidence provided to you, just an explanation that you were in violation of the rules and that an action has been taken against you. And we've had this system in League - the Tribunal. I guess that it didn't live up to the expectations because if you let people themselves decide what is good and bad behavior, things can get muddy pretty quickly.
Slave15 (NA)
: Yeah, that's why they fired him. All the good work.
Did you have an accident at the salt factory and you suddenly became The Ultra Salty Man? All you do is shitpost. Every time it's about Riot, you're there to add a neutron star levels of salt to the post. Watch your mouth, kid. Lyte's systems are always looking for the people like you.
: He has several other very toxic posts on just this single thread. I smell infection stemming from a (well deserved) permaban.
That's the thing in League - there are no unjust bans. It takes a very dedicated player at consistently being toxic to get yourself banned permanently. If someone got booted out, then it means they very well deserved it.
: he ruined the game
Or it could be that you ruined it for yourselves.
: When rules for sports change, its because a player performance shows that things need to be changed. Rules need to be made specifically because of those players. Riot making changes to prevent Proxy Singed from being a free win is a good parallel to that, not the changes they've been trying to push forward the past year.
Literally every change they do is related to how the pro scene showcases the environment and individual champions. Since they are more organized and better mechanical players, the usually define the meta and the meta champions are strong in their own regards.
Lyte (NA)
: Goodbye for now, Riot Games
You were a man on an impossible mission. Your efforts and projects were appreciated and although there are vocal players who'd say otherwise, i think you brought a big change in the community and the game itself in a positive way. I wish you the best of luck in another game called "Life", that has outstanding graphics. #I'M http://i.imgur.com/2xxgAVV.jpg[/img]
jama655 (NA)
: What your describing from DE makes it sound tyrannical, thank God i never type in chat on that game wtf
Not tyrants, just very strict about the rules. I personally didn't feel it on my skin but there's that one guy revxdev on youtube who got banned for some shit. It's not him i'm worried about, it's about other people who saw how DE dealt with him and decided to speak up about their bans - more or less in the same fashion. I take all of these with a grain of salt because it's always the players vs the devs thing but one particular case stuck out - a guy with 2000 hours in Warframe and had bought every prime access was reported enough times because he was on top of the leaderboards, with insane times. People supposedly called BS on that, reported him for hacking/exploiting/cheating of some sort and DE investigated. DE reached the conclusion that he was breaching ToS and banned him with cause. They did not disclose with him what exact rules he was breaking or evidence against him, they just banned him and said he cannot appeal his case. Once he did so anyway, he was banned from support too, because DE doesn't want to discuss anything with their players, their word is final and they don't have to explain anything. So all you have to do is be a suspect and they will find dirt on you, even if your record is pristine.
Rimram (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Linna Excel,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FI82wRd4,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2016-05-09T00:47:54.920+0000) > > I don't think most people appreciate how nice riot is and how much it takes to get permabanned. the problem is that it taks wayy to many reports for someone to actually get banned for trolling! so many times i hear "yeah bro report me, it wont do shit LOL" and yeah thats exactly how its been going, i actually met the exact same person a week later doing the exact same thing over and over and over again. he just says "yep i've been reported a gajizillion times and shits happened thnx rito! and proceeds to 1v1 a turret. so no, i say be harsh af.
That's not true at all. I've had a case with a player who was a Tryndamere main and with any inkling of the game not going well for our team or someone says something to him, he gets salty and proceeds to give kills to their enemy laners, goes AS/AP build, AFKs or just runs a marathon around jungle camps for the entire game. I've reported him and so did the others, he played 4 days after that and he was absent for 2 weeks, denoting a 2 week ban. The next time he returned, he still continued his winning streak of toxicity and after one day, it was all over for him. I've even received the notification about him getting punished. He quickly racked up the punishment tiers and got banned.
MeilinII (NA)
: The problem is for League, you can make a new account free. Overwatch they'd have to buy the game again and get a whole new licence, and if your'e on console even that won't work. Pay to play is always less toxic than free to play with good companies.
People are less toxic there because they know what's on the line - their money. Specifically, their entire battle net account that's like a bank of Blizzard's products they've already paid for. Losing that would mean again paying for the product they already own and all those hours put into the games are gone. With games like League, you're essentially paying for nothing to start playing and the only thing you're putting into them is time. People who don't value their time much are likely to be more toxic by default because the punishment for it is not strong enough. Losing your account and having to go through the same process again is a pain in the ass for the majority, but for the minority, like tyler1, was the opposite. I'll make a comparison - Warframe (Digital Extremes) VS League of Legends (Riot Games). DE is not taking shit from anyone on any level. If you go against their partners, rest assured that you will be dealt with. If you talk about them in a negative way, they will deal with you personally. If you show any inkling of toxicity in their community, they will not hesitate to ban you. If you get reported enough times, even if you're not guilty of anything (and players can be brigaged into mass reporting a person for nothing and the charges still stick), they will investigate your case, they will reach the conclusion that you are guilty of something because you got reported so many times, they will not say what was the rule you were violating and they will ban you without an appeal. If you make an appeal anyway, they'll ban your account from the support and they will also IP ban you - since Warframe is not a competitive game. As far as LoL goes, Riot believes in reform. Permanent account suspension is the last resort and they don't do IP bans because they might hurt PC bangs, colleges and a lot of other places other than individuals they're trying to get rid of.
lolptwo (NA)
: PSA: To all the toxic kids thinking they can join Overwatch
You don't need to worry about a thing with League players in Overwatch. Judging by the trend of players who are already raising a ruckus about not spending any more money on LoL, they are certainly not going to spend in on anything else either. People who want free things think they are entitled to them.
Dextix LT (EUNE)
: They do what is asked of them but they simply mess it up. People wanted stronger tanks, not tanks that deal as much damage as assasins. People wanted weaker towers, not pea shooters that fall in a few seconds. People wanted stronger mages, not overpowered and overtuned messes in some cases and unplayable champions in others. What people want is not wrong, they want the right things. Riot however is not capable of producing satisfying results because they fck up constantly. That is why you have such bad reactions to wanted changes, because the changes were wrongly implemented and were done badly. Lets take an analogy. If in a restourant you ask for more salt in your soup, is it your fault if the chef adds 5 spoons instead of a little? No its cthe chefs fault, the same is with Riot. TL DR: People ask for the right things, its just that RIot sucks at implementing at those things and thus make people angry because the changes they wanted were fcked up.
So tell me, is there a game where an individual patch completely solves a specific problem in a game? Because that would be a perfect solution and unfortunately for you, they do not exist. People wanted stronger mages and they got them. The cards have fallen in such a way that certain mages are on the stronger side and some on the weaker, but still better then they used to be prior to this patch. If you want the just right amount of something, that's going to take a few smaller patches in between to hit the right numbers. And i'm sorry, your feelings are not facts. Riot needs data to make changes, not a horde of crying players who think that nerfing/buffing a champion by a certain % is going to fix anything. You need to understand exactly what's the problem so you know what to look at and even then, you still need to understand in which situation the problem occurs. And then you need to find a good value for the numbers, not just slap them around and hope it works out.
: What happens when Riot Listens to the Boards
What's more important on the boards is that the players come with the complaints and Riot listens to them - except they actually need appropriate data to make changes in a certain direction and that takes time. When the changes finally come through, the complainers conveniently forgot what they asked for and they complain how the environment right now (that they requested) is unacceptable and are demanding reverts. For example, before all of this, the boards were complaining about the state of mages and how it feels like crap to play as them. The usual bunch that benefits from a certain default item line is the best or utility mages, with the rest being benched. Zhonya's was a really expensive item to counter assassins and the only super protection item that when dumpstered in a lane against an assassin, could take an eternity to get and feeling like you can not even be on the same screen as the assassin to help your team out. As soon as the changes were discussed way earlier by Riot, people were not happy with the state of AP changes and the already here mage update (one more point of complaints), so much so that the threads around that time all had a negative connotation to them. So, where did we end up now? - Malzahar getting banned at the same rate as Zed. * Zyra actually being a hard zoning mage, dealing even more damage. * Vel'Koz dealing true damage on his ult, 1:1 AP ratio to melt tanks. - Veigar is an AP execute mage that is encouraged to attack champions. - Brand actually setting the teams on fire with max % HP damage. * Annie having a miniboss Tibbers and % damage reduction E to counter assassins. - Syndra being way more teamfight scarier with levels. * Zhonya's, despite it's biggest controversy, still amazing and cheaper. * GLP-800 a the Rocketbelt being a real mage option of Frostqueen's Claim. * Towers are stronger. * Dragons more relevant as individual objectives. * Pops Dragon giving you the previous 5th stack of Dragon's buff + 50% stronger collected Dragon, equaling the Baron's objective power - if you need to trade them. * Rift Herald not being a gimmick objective anymore - only worth for lone wolfs. * More AP items specifically tailored to different types of mages. * Flat mana enabling more spell rotations early and late game. * Devourer replaced and Guinsoo turned into an epic item that can't be rushed. Need i go on? The overall patch brought a lot of positive changes and Riot addressed the concerns of players very accurately. There's still a few of patches in between to truly balance it out but is the best one so far.
Émiil (NA)
: Unpopular opinion - Patch 6.9
Unpopular opinion? Nah. The general opinion is that the overall patch has been very good for a lot of reasons. People who complained on individual segments of the patch (AP items, Mage Update...) are the minority that likes to raise a ruckus before they get a chance to feel it for themselves. * So far i'm seeing that Mages and their items are in a very strong spot (despite Zhonya getting cheaper but lost a bit of AP and longer active CD). * Dragons are very good and individually worth to champions, rather then having to stack a few to feel the difference. * Bloodrazor and Guinsoo seem to be on a weaker side but Riot left it there intentionally and will adjust it in further patches (so that they don't repeat the same mistake before it - and the naysayers were losing their minds over these items being more OP...)
: > [{quoted}](name=Twiggles,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=YUWj8Jtd,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2016-05-07T19:16:05.196+0000) > > I feel like champion mastery has no purpose You could have stopped your post at this part.
If he stopped there, it would have sounded like a stupid complaint. At least he explained why he feels that way, which is how you should leave your comments in any case. You should always be precise when leaving feedback.

Domaća Džukela

Level 120 (EUNE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion