: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d00020000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T20:52:22.463+0000) > > That's more than 1 rotation.... > > 1 spell rotation means using each spell one, or in her case, both parts of E R once, yet you used Q twice. > > One rotation would be (just the damage abilities here) Q -> P -> E1 -> E2 -> P -> R1 -> P -> R2 -> P. > > You threw in another Q after meaning it's more than 1 rotation. > > It's like saying "Zed W -> E -> Q -> E deals more damage than X doing just 1 rotation]". > > But hey, I don't have few hundred thousand mastery on her, nope, never player her. More specifically, 350k with her as my most played and Ahri as my 2nf most played. So yea, I know both quite well. Okay. So by your logic ryze physically can’t be better than akali because he needs to cast his q more than once. I mean. His actual rotation is qeqwqeqrqeq But he’s only allowed to have qew. By the logic you’ve just stated. Okay. Good to know. Oh oh oh. Same with Aatox. Has to use his q more than once. So can’t have a full rotation.
Do you fail to read or are just trolling? You're now talking kill combos when we talked about burst. I asked you how you define "burst". 1 spell rotation or damage dealt in 3+ seconds? Using each spell once is 1 rotation, simple as that. Yes, Ryze uses multiple rotations to kill, can that burst someone down? Yea, it can, but that doesn't mean it's 1 rotation. Do I need to draw for you? Ryze uses 2+ rotations, and what you said to be Akali's rotation is still 2+ since it uses multiple casts of the same spell, which is different from her R1 & R2 thingy as it's still one spell with empowered recast, similar to Aatrox Q. Plus, did you actually put Ryze R in his combo? Seriously? Learn the basics, then come to argue.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d000200000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T13:39:46.206+0000) > > Read what you wrote, slowly. > > Then read what 1 spell rotation is. That is her rotation. :/ clearly you don’t even play the champion and are trolling. I’m done replying.
That's more than 1 rotation.... 1 spell rotation means using each spell once, or in her case, both parts of E R once, yet you used Q twice. One rotation would be (just the damage abilities here) Q -> P -> E1 -> E2 -> P -> R1 -> P -> R2 -> P. You threw in another Q after meaning it's more than 1 rotation. It's like saying "Zed W -> E -> Q -> E deals more damage than X doing just 1 rotation]". But hey, I don't have few hundred thousand mastery on her, nope, never player her. More specifically, 350k with her as my most played and Ahri as my 2nd most played. So yea, I know both quite well.
Tioym (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KW8ahJqy,comment-id=000a00000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T15:10:56.804+0000) > > The role you play in doesn't mean the identity... > > Darius was played bot lane, that doesn't change the fact that he's a bruiser. > > Vayne still builds as a marksman even if she's top lane. > > Pyke is an assassin but he's a support, Evenlynn is an assassin but he's a jungler, Kat is an assassin but she's a mid laner. > > An identity is not the role you play the champion in, but the way the champion is ment to be played. Akali is ment to be an assassin but she's played as a bruiser. > > Shyvana also has the same identity problem, she's ment to be an AD Bruiser but she's played as AP Assassin, basically the reverse of Akali. Few people pick Akali Top because she does so well against some champions due to her Shroud. That's it. Her shroud works better against Top-Laners rather than Mid-laners. The Rest of her Kit is designed around Mid-Lane. You can Play Malphite AP and Tank. You can Play Galio AP and Tank. Pyke can build Tanky and be decent despite Nerfs to Tank Pyke. Evelynn is a jungler simply because her Passive is for Roaming. When was Darius played bot-lane? I don't know about this one sorry. I feel like every champion has their Niche and instead of looking at it as if it's a bad thing you should just accept it. Isn't it good that you can play AP AND AD Malphite? It gives more Depth to the champion and it's not the same old Song every time. I can see what you mean by your argument but I feel like it just doesnt work that well. It's the same as forcing a champion to a singular role. Just the way Camille Nerfs have forced her to be a Top-Laner instead of a Jungler. Yes Camille Jungle does not Build Differently than Camille Top-lane but was it really good to Wipe out Camille from the jungle? Also the Nerfs are : **(Passive) AP 70% -> 50% AD 90% -> 60%** You say these Nerfs will be better for AD Akali but I don't see that happening. Currently if you build AD Akali you will do a lot more damage than after this Nerf so this is Obviously a Nerf to Akali as a WHOLE. You have probably Misunderstood the Changes.
When the ADC items got nerfed, a lot of champions went bot lane, one of them being Darius. Of course, that only happened in high elos, as lower elos were.....special. I understood the passive nerf quite well, I think you don't understand something. The passive requires you to auto attack, and having it that strong of an AD scaling double dips hard because not only does the AD buff her attack by default, it also buffs the passive damage. They also nerfed the AP on it to prevent the old AP Bruiser Akali build (Liandry into Rylali's) coming back when the AD one gets nerfed. Also, it's not "few players take her top", maybe few in low elo, but the higher elo you go, the more people play her top. Sometimes diversity is bad, there's no way around it. Camille had to go out of the jungle because of how strong he was compared to how strong she scales. Her ganks are insane, once she gets a Tiamat her clear speed is fast and decently healthy, and most importantly, she scales way too well for how strong she is early game. Look at the other early junglers like Rek'sai or Xin, they don't scale that well. When a new role is discovered for a champion (Viktor top, Taliyah jg, etc), Riot gives time to see if the thing is toxic or not. Just because you don't have problems vs it in low elos doesn't mean the thing is healthy for the game. AP Malphite works only in lower elos because they don't know how to punish, but in higher elos? No-one goes AP Malphite because there it's a troll build. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should do it. If the role is deemed toxic for the champ, it's taken out. Yes, forcing a champ into a specific role can feel stupid, but sometimes it's a necessity. Janna mid anyone? Or Lulu top?
Tioym (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KW8ahJqy,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2019-05-24T04:54:14.793+0000) > > Although I hate that Akali is getting nerfed as it's hard for me to learn her due to the mastery points I got on the prerework Akali, I do agree that she needs changes. > > Not nerfs nor buffs, she needs an actual identity. Right now she's advertised as a mid lane assassin but due to how high her TTK is, she's played as a bruiser in top. I don't mind having the option to play either one, but she needs to find out what she actually is. If she's an assassin power shift her towards that, lower her sustained damage and buff her burst while still allowing her to go bruiser in certain conditions, but if she's a bruiser, then change her accordingly, and the current change does that, it balances around bring a top lane bruiser, and I don't mind that. I see your point. I wouldn't really "Mind" if things go that way but the Nerf is clearly: Reduction in Both **AP & AD %**. It's NOT only AP being reduced here so It's a nerf to both Bruiser AND Assasin Akali. Next this Concept about "Identity". Let me break it to you: Very Few champions in League have this Identity you talk about. You want Akali to be in Either Top OR Mid. What other champion do you think only stays in their Lane? Very Few. Just today I got my ass handed to me by a Top-Lane Vayne. Well? Why is she in Top? Isn't she supposed to have the "Identity" of an ADC and stay Bot-lane Only? If you think it was just a troll/Counter Pick then you're wrong because Top-Lane Vayne does **VERY** well into many Champions. Well then is she getting nerfed? Not really. It's not only Vayne Top. It's not like I'm giving you an Isolated example. Look at Aatrox; he does great Mid & Top. Look at **VLADIMIR**, This piece of shit(Biased but god damn dude) does GREAT in both Mid & Top. Look at Irelia, She does great Mid & Top. Look at Kayn - He does great in Jungle but is very Viable in Top. Look at Lux, She is a great Support AND Mid-laner. These examples are just from the top of my head. The Identity Concept you speak of does not Exist in Riot's Standards and probably never will. They will Buff/Nerf a champion at Whim/Players Whining OR **Because the Champion is picked a lot in Pro-Play**. I would accept your reasoning if Riot actually did that to other champions, but they don't. So There's no reason for Akali to be Nerfed.
The role you play in doesn't mean the identity... Darius was played bot lane, that doesn't change the fact that he's a bruiser. Vayne still builds as a marksman even if she's top lane. Pyke is an assassin but he's a support, Evenlynn is an assassin but he's a jungler, Kat is an assassin but she's a mid laner. An identity is not the role you play the champion in, but the way the champion is ment to be played. Akali is ment to be an assassin but she's played as a bruiser. Shyvana also has the same identity problem, she's ment to be an AD Bruiser but she's played as AP Assassin, basically the reverse of Akali.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d0002000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T05:12:11.034+0000) > > How do you define burst then smart pants? > > One spell rotation? All assassins and a lot of mages deal more damage in one rotation than she does, so by that definition, Akali has lower burst than Ahri. > > Damage in a short period of time regardless how many spells were used? Then you need to define the period of time. 5 sec? 2 sec? 1 sec? If it's lower than 2 sec, it falls in the per rotation category because of cooldowns and I already stated that Akali had lower burst in 1 spell rotation. If it's higher than 2 sec, say 4 sec, she needs to play her passive minigame twice with her Q, if she succeeds, yes, she has more damage because used more spells, what a shocker, using more spells equal more damage, unbelievable, no-one figured that out before you. The only issue, why do you allow her to proc the passive twice? > > If she runs towards you to get out of the circle, auto her back, you're close to your minions, if she autos you, those minions will aggro her making it so she loses the trade. > > So basically, she wins the trade if you're dumb, but if you aren't, she can't win trades reliable. > > I called you bronze because you refuse to use logic. Q passive e passive r passive r passive q passive. Ahri physically cannot do more damage on one rotation that that.
Read what you wrote, slowly. Then read what 1 spell rotation is.
: I was focusing mainly on why they gutted that, she could take rav+tob+Q healing+doran's shield passive/damage reduction, which when you stacked all of them was a bit much when you consider her trading ability via shroud and Q. OP wanted them to give her a scaling heal but the problem was the fact there was an additional heal source in general rather than the fine tunings. Old Akali correct me if i'm wrong only had her old passive and the vampirism mastery, making new akali a bit more excessive. I didn't really factor in gunblade
Old Akali was still in the game with the new runes, so she also had access to RH + ToB, so heal wise they were pretty much equal, but with a caviat. Although they both healed around the same amount, the fact that N Akali could heal from range is a big plus over O Akali. O would put herself more in danger as she needed to auto attack to heal, while N simply had to hit at least 1 creep to get the full healing, so a more reasonable nerf would be to tune the healing based on how many targets were hit, so if she hits just 1 creep, it's not as rewarding as hitting the whole wave, something akin to what Ahri has on her Q, but yes, in a way N was more excessive over O.
Kadexe (NA)
: Akali needs to be reworked to be more accessible, and less powerful in the hands of pro players.
I don't fully agree. Should she be changed to be weaker in the hands of the best players? Yes. But I don't agree that she should be much more accessible. I'm already tired of seeing "mechanically intense champions" being made easier to play (Zed, Riven, Vayne and co.) I actually want some champions to simply not be for lower elos, yes, it sucks that Akali has to be one of them as she is and always was one of my most beloved champions, but I still believe that not everything should be for everyone.
: > [{quoted}](name=Tioym,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=AQmiZB2W,comment-id=000c000200000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T04:31:14.427+0000) > > I'm not saying Akali needs to be buffed. I'm saying they need to stop nerfing her further. So No your stats prove nothing. No one said she needed buffs. As for needing nerfs, I wouldn't say the term nerf is appropriate, more or less powershifts or a straight up redo of her kit. >You can Look up the Top 10 Player stats for almost every champion and see very high winrates. You missed the point If you can't identify the difference between this: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/389945345594884098/581257949524262932/unknown.png and this: https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/389945345594884098/581340419145728004/unknown.png Then don't bother trying to come up with logic. That doesn't mean one needs nerfs, or one needs buffs, that means akali, does succeed more in challenger, where as other champions don't succeed much at all in challenger despite lower skill floors. You started this topic, how do you fail to keep up with it? >Does that mean Every fucking champion now needs to be nerfed? Dodges the point > How come Top 10 *Insert Champion* Player can have a 60% winrate but when a Top 10 Akali Player >gets that you think to yourself: Wow fucking broken better remove. Dodges the point because if the top peak of the leaderboards feel the need to ban a champion, and that said champion does infact do significantly better at that peak where assumingly everybody should know how to counter it, but it doesn't do well in lower MMRs, its literally Azir syndrome where the champ is toxic and if it is performing well, its probably too strong and warranted enough to nerf or adjust it. This isn't the case because if trundle has a 60% winrate, but mostly only in diamond and masters, thats not the peak performance, thats him succeeding in less coordinated lower MMR where players make mistakes that he can punish, that doesn't make trundle good infact he's pretty shit right now. There's no reason to nerf something because low diamond can't handle it, but there is a big issue if high challenger can't handle it to the point they're banning it since again, that's a sign maybe there isn't counterplay after all. As for other champs that are all challenger peak performance; Jayce (oh wait he is getting nerfed on PBE), Aatrox (hot damn, how many nerfs has he gotten already?), Riven (nerfs on PBE), Vayne (nerfs on PBE) must be akali exclusive. > It's just you twisting things to suit your argument. https://www.potterybarn.com/pbimgs/rk/images/dp/wcm/201849/0387/kensington-pivot-oval-mirror-o.jpg > No Point having an argument with you because you're biased and you will only twist things to prove your point. Good Job. Imagine being hardstuck denial. I think you should focus on practicing playing the game and less on debates because somehow your conversation skills are worse than your game experience. I should just say 'nah you're biased' anytime i'm wrong, I wonder how far that'll get me {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}}
I agree with you with all except 1 point, but that's questionable. You said Akali has Ravenous + ToB + her own healing. Her healing got removed, now she doesn't have any more innate healing, so you are wrong there, unless you ment Gunblade, then you correct fully.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d00020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T03:42:42.555+0000) > > She actually does. Ever got hit by a full Ahri combo? > > Then again, low bronze and from NA, so can't really talk too much about skill, it's lack is obvious. Lul. Go figure. Doesn’t have an actual argument. Points out “you you you. You’re brooooooonze.” To a person who doesn’t play ranked.
How do you define burst then smart pants? One spell rotation? All assassins and a lot of mages deal more damage in one rotation than she does, so by that definition, Akali has lower burst than Ahri. Damage in a short period of time regardless how many spells were used? Then you need to define the period of time. 5 sec? 2 sec? 1 sec? If it's lower than 2 sec, it falls in the per rotation category because of cooldowns and I already stated that Akali had lower burst in 1 spell rotation. If it's higher than 2 sec, say 4 sec, she needs to play her passive minigame twice with her Q, if she succeeds, yes, she has more damage because used more spells, what a shocker, using more spells equal more damage, unbelievable, no-one figured that out before you. The only issue, why do you allow her to proc the passive twice? If she runs towards you to get out of the circle, auto her back, you're close to your minions, if she autos you, those minions will aggro her making it so she loses the trade. So basically, she wins the trade if you're dumb, but if you aren't, she can't win trades reliable. I called you bronze because you refuse to use logic.
Tioym (EUW)
: Let's Talk Akali.
Although I hate that Akali is getting nerfed as it's hard for me to learn her due to the mastery points I got on the prerework Akali, I do agree that she needs changes. Not nerfs nor buffs, she needs an actual identity. Right now she's advertised as a mid lane assassin but due to how high her TTK is, she's played as a bruiser in top. I don't mind having the option to play either one, but she needs to find out what she actually is. If she's an assassin power shift her towards that, lower her sustained damage and buff her burst while still allowing her to go bruiser in certain conditions, but if she's a bruiser, then change her accordingly, and the current change does that, it balances around bring a top lane bruiser, and I don't mind that.
: Akali nerfs were well needed
I mean sure...the assassin with the highest TTK loses damage. People wonder why she's taken in top lane building AD and playing Bruiser instead of Assassin. The answer is simple, as is, unless the enemy is dumb and feeds her, she can't assassinate, but due to her AD scaling, she can brawl, which is kinda the only thing she can do right now. Maybe power shift her a little towards burst instead of sustained?
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d000200000000,timestamp=2019-05-24T01:42:00.895+0000) > > Ahri has higher burst than Akali, just so you know. Um. Is this a joke? Like. Are you actually about to debate that ahri has a higher damage output that akali? Holy shit man.....’this level of delusional is too much for me. Sure. Ahri has more burst that akali. You can believe that. But you are wrong.
She actually does. Ever got hit by a full Ahri combo? Then again, low bronze and from NA, so can't really talk too much about skill, it's lack is obvious.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-23T23:42:19.572+0000) > > Her W has a relative cooldown of 28 seconds, so does the term repeat gank say anything? > > The cooldown of her W starts AFTER the ability ends, and if you know where her jungler is, wait it out? If the guy is not, there's no way he or the mid laner will reach her in time. > > Her passive ms? I mean, what are you guys playing? Yi jungle with......uhm....uh.....err.... > > I can't even think of of a duo where got neither CC nor damage to hit her in W. I wanted to say Yi with Vlad, but Vlad can use his AoE on her W, then there's Lee, who has AoE ad well, like....If you gank her properly she dies because I can't find a situation where she has the upper hand unless: > A) fed a f and kills you both. > B) has wards and thus backed up properly > C) she's not ganked right Okay. So the counterplay to akali is have your jungler sit in your lane for upwards of 2 minutes at a time and 2v1 her. Mkay. Sounds fair.
Basically the same way you beat Zed. Just because some champs require jungle assistance doesn't mean they are unfair. A decent amount of champs require jungle assistance if they are good and you don't see anyone cry about them.
: > [{quoted}](name=Pink her Ult,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d0002,timestamp=2019-05-24T00:26:05.229+0000) > > Ahri has 3 unconditional dashes and I don't see her getting an nerfs(ever). Ahri also doesn’t have a stealth, stupidly high burst, and hybrid scalings sooooo.
Ahri has higher burst than Akali, just so you know.
GripaAviara (EUNE)
: The problem with Akali imho is the following, you never give a champion 2 escape mechanics, unless 1 is an ultimate with lower cd. Akali has invisibility and freaking 3 dashes. Ofc the champion will be frustrating to play against. They should remove the ultimate dash, make the smoke her ultimate with a bigger CD and some stat boost in smoke and find some other spell
I love her talk "3 dashes" when 2 of them are help ult. Does anyone know the meaning of repeat gank? And no, repeat gank is not camping.
Cevrad (NA)
: Its actually quite weird, cause the majority of her plays were solo. Its almost like this champion is actually busted in the hands of someone who actually isn't mechanically handicapped. In the right hands, I've seen it first hand in D1 stomp games. It just depends on who is playing the champion, how much experience they have in each matchup, are they capable of learning from losing matchups how to differently approach them? I actually expect her win rate to go up after this nerf. Because the people who are really good at her and who love the champion are going to keep playing her, and they are going win about 51% of games. The people who are causing this win rate to be horrible like TFBlade (legit just spams FotM champs) are going to stop playing the champion. I mean all it takes is a bit of research into High elo Akali mains, they aren't suffering, carrying the majority of their games. I mean there is a 900+ game Akali main in D1 winning 53% of games. This is going to be the same thing that happened to Kha'Zix 2 years ago. This nerf will end with a positive net in Win rate.
51% on mains is laughable and sad at the same time. But you are still missing a lot of stuff. Yes, she makes solo plays but those don't win games. She creates pressure and in pro play her team can capitalise on said pressure. How many times do we see in Yolo que champs going fed, causing a ruckus, then losing the game because the team did nothing with said advantage? That doesn't happen in pro play. when played well, she's reliable at causing trouble, the problem is she can't win games on her own unless the player far outskills the rest in the match, but in that case, any champ will do. She needs a team to help her win the game, even if she's fully capable of making solo plays.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vEJyxh1r,comment-id=000d0000,timestamp=2019-05-23T16:52:04.324+0000) > > 2 of them being on a 2 min cooldown since it's her ult. > > Basically, if you gank her once and she uses it to get away, don't fucking jerk off in a bush for 5 mins till she has it again, just do a repeat gank and kill her since she now has only her E. Oh. You mean her one dash. And a stealth. And 87 ms steroids?
Her W has a relative cooldown of 28 seconds, so does the term repeat gank say anything? The cooldown of her W starts AFTER the ability ends, and if you know where her jungler is, wait it out? If the guy is not, there's no way he or the mid laner will reach her in time. Her passive ms? I mean, what are you guys playing? Yi jungle with......uhm....uh.....err.... I can't even think of of a duo where got neither CC nor damage to hit her in W. I wanted to say Yi with Vlad, but Vlad can use his AoE on her W, then there's Lee, who has AoE ad well, like....If you gank her properly she dies because I can't find a situation where she has the upper hand unless: A) fed a f and kills you both. B) has wards and thus backed up properly C) she's not ganked right
: Here’s the difference. Ryze is punishable. Akali is not. Akali has 3 unconditional dashes. If at any point you ever die on this champion under any circumstance, it is 190% your fault. Difficulty is irrelevant when safety is that high
2 of them being on a 2 min cooldown since it's her ult. Basically, if you gank her once and she uses it to get away, don't fucking jerk off in a bush for 5 mins till she has it again, just do a repeat gank and kill her since she now has only her E.
Cevrad (NA)
: So... learn to play another champion? Or get really good at Akali and stomp the way pros do... I don't get the premise of the post, champ is busted, deserves nerfs.
You miss a lot of things then. She's busted in pro play because she is super strong when you have a team that fully collaborated. She's "eh" even in challenger, where the most skilled player are simply because they don't have the same communication and collaboration as pro play. That's the problem. You have the communication and collaboration - she's busted, you don't - she's iffy or worse.
: They say vision is the key to winning...
What I'm the.... You get team mates that amount more than 30 vision score combined? I want your team mates more than my own. I mean, my support said he can't ward, ADC that he won't ward unless the support wards as well, mid that he can't afford to buy wards because he needs damage and top said nothing, ended the game with more vision score as a jungler than my 4 team mates combined. And the sad part? It's almost every game. "I am warding, you just don't watch the minimap" - 0-6 Yasuo with 0 vision score.
: The problem with that argument is that the community of the game is running on a logic of "these 20-30 champions are the only ones that matter." Even as high up as plat/diamond, you have people like Hashinshin who seem to believe that "I lost because this isn't how the game is supposed to work" instead of "I lost because I was bested on the battlefield." Imo, I feel like the way to handle that is to attempt to dissolve that feeling. I accept that there are some champs that just aren't going to feel viable unless you've mastered them...but let's look at someone like Kench, and then at someone like Kassadin. Kench is a pretty basic champion, who was overperforming in team play/high elo and underperforming in solo queue/low elo. They nerfed his W and slightly buffed his damage, and now low elo/solo queue are SCDREAMING about his damage in top, and team play/high elo barely look at him. This is a case of a very basic champion that didn't feel rewarding in low elo and felt busted in high elo, and their attempt at a fix instead just reversed the problem. his overall popularity never changed though - he's pretty much in the "rarely used" category and many people who see him hovered will still call him a troll pick in low elo. All it changed was that now people like Hashinshin are more negative about him, and people who see him picked in plat+ don't like seeing him anymore. How would you look to change such a basic design without making him god in one elo or the other? The game needs more levers. Now let's look at Kassadin...a tale of one of the most popular picks turning into someone almost dead to the community. He was just an overall oppressive pick for most of the first *three seasons*, then they nerfed him through the floor and he's pretty much just seen no matter the elo as a troll pick. He's a pretty technical champion - one you'd expect to be seen in higher elos when a Kass master could bust loose and become a force of nature...but you very rarely see him anywhere above silver/gold. His kit's not rewarding enough compared to Yasuo or Zed for skilled players to continue playing him in higher level play. And people like me can't use him well...though the people who are good with those such as Kat or Akali can still tear up silver with him, he's just not a very fun pick. Yet we already know from how he was in the past that if this guy gets any form of buff, you plat+ players are going to take him and start giving 1v5 anal with no lube to every team you come across, and he'll be instantly pick/ban again. How are you going to buff such a complex design without giving those with skill the ability to be Void Exodia again? This game needs more levers. I stated it twice and with my CDR argument a third time - the only way to make this game feel good again, and the only way to reward skilled players while also opening up more champions as "meta-viable" again is to give the game more levers. I honestly feel like items are the way to go here, with some changes to the new runes to make them feel like you have to do something to "charge" them through the game. Some are like this...the Hunter runes are good, and the ones that involve you taking/dealing damage or using a summoner are fine...but ones that say "you exist - here's 5% CDR and stupid amounts of early game adaptive damage just cause" are the ones that need to be given more interaction. Put more emphasis on the skill, but put *much more* emphasis on building against your opponent over simply outplaying them. Seasons 2 and 3 are what a lot of people know as the golden age of LoL, and that's mainly because you had a lot more options in terms of both playing from behind *and* pushing your advantage. Currently, the game feels very snowbally, where the better mid/adc wins and the other lanes are pretty much just there to provide pressure to empower their mid/adc // slow the enemy mid/adc as much as possible. I don't want to push the game to the point where the early game is irrelevant again, but I certainly want to push that other lanes feel relevant again if they get fed, but have to contend with enemy Yasuo or Vayne who also got fed. Currently, I feel like the game's just missing a lot of levers. Or more specifically, that there are certain item levers that are just so much stronger than the rest that using anything else makes no sense. Let's look at top lane - arguably, they have the most *variety* of item levers in game, but they all feel like they're just undertuned when compared to the items of other classes, with maybe the exception of Sterak's. Why build these "fighter items" like mallet or sunfire when you can just take IE + Duskblade on Rengod top and just build full tank from there to be uncounterable? Why take stuff like RoA/Abyssal Mask when you can just take a Liandri's + Zhonya's and shred everyone with aftershock Lissandra? The levers are just not used because the levers for every other class outscale their levers. Look at ADC, and their levers are loosely in 2 categories: build AS or build crit. AS you machine gun people down and BoRK gives you all the % damage you need to just slowly shred anyone. Crit build you have no attack speed but literally anything you do is 3/4 pretty much anyone's hp. They probably have the least levers in the game in terms of variance - you're either a gatling gun, or you're a tactical nuke on click. Except...they're actually not the worst off. The worst off by far is mages. Their items are all so compact, they literally finish *one item* and gain so many stats it's off the walls...but all of the stats are overlapped, so they're all far weaker than they should be. So I for one am very excited to see what they do with AP items...because to me, that's a step in the right direction, if they unclutter all those fused stats and make what mages build matter again.
Can I be honest? Regarding Kench, I'd nerf his W in such a way to take power away from it, but I wouldn't add it back as damage. To start off, the bigger cooldown base and halved when eating an enemy creep/champ is good, but not the self slow, in a way, quite the opposite, increase the move speed a little when he swallows an enemy, not by much from where it was, just a little more and go from there, if he needs a tad more, buff his other utility. If all else fails, rework him. Making him a bruiser doesn't fix things. You have to understand that Tahm was a get out of jail card for free. He felt bad in lower elos because of two things: - People who play him either had no idea who to eat or when, and I can't tell you how many kills I've lost because our ally Tahm ate me for some unknown reason, or ate the tank when he needed to keep his skill up in case the ADC or jungler gets jumped in - People who play along him don't know how to play with him. They jump back in danger when he saves them, they let him go first then back off. Most of those weren't problems regarding him specifically, but player skill. When you put the player skill on both sides, you get a major problem, as he was basically making his ADC almost unkillable early unless you either had the damage to kill both (yea...no) or had means to keep him away from the ADC. He was just too uninteractive and safe and he had too much power budged placed into his Devour. As for Kassodia, he's in a league of his own in a way, he actually ins't as complex as you make him be, he is more in line with old Akali, weak early laner with the capacity to take over the game single handedly, but because unlike Akali's R being enemy targer, his R was free of target, he needed much more power taken off. His kit is binary, not easy, not complex, binary. He either one shots everyone and gets away, or no-one and is useless. Akali would've needed much more skill from the player than Kass, because she was one of the two assassins with no way out, they go in, hope for the best. (Note: Diana is labeled as a Diver, even if she currently plays like an Assassin, that's because of the AP itemisation problems) Kass, just like Tahm need actual reworks, not power shift. But unlike the likes of Akali, Azir, Irelia, Nidalee, etc, it's not because they are rewarded for being good, but because Kass unless kept weak is toxic, his kit is simple, his play style is simple, just survive early game and get your power spike items, if the game doesn't end till then, it's gg, you won. He's in a way similar to Veigar or Nasus, because the longer the game goes, the stronger he becomes. Kassadin is too point and click. Some champs need reworks because of this fact, but there comes a problem, how do you actually figure who is "must keep weak because too strong when mastered" and who is "must keep weak because busted otherwise", Kass is the later while Azir is the former. When strong, Azir still needs a decent amount of skill from the player to get to the point of no counter play, but when Kass is strong, you don't need much skill, as you can't fuck up point and click delete that's super safe. Let's look at another example, Akali vs Irelia, both on release. Both were tearing up a new one in high elo and pro play, but only one was doing so in lower elos. Yes, people complained about Akali's W and how she can sit under turret, but only the high elos and people who mastered her could actually dodge tower shots, the rest couldn't, many couldn't even carry games on her even tho she was "OP". Irelia was on the other side of the spectrum, safe, strong and reliable, she needed stuff taken out and made weaker because at that time she was toxic when good, while Akali was too good when mastered. But what can you take out of Kass' kit? The main issue with lower elos is that they can't make that difference between "too good when mastered" and "toxic when strong". As for items, that truly depends, Mage items are fucked right now, but for the rest, you don't really have a point. RoA is ment for AP Bruisers while Mask is for tanks/bruisers. Lissandra is neither, she's a control mage, she doesn't need to tank damage, she needs to avoid it, Aftershock is just to ensure she gets to do her job without being blown, but she doesn't need much else, plus, kinda no-one builds Liandry on her unless late in the game, but that's because she has CC. Yes, some did build it as 2nd item, and it has a sub 45% wr on her as 2nd item, while barely breaking 50% as 3rd item, with only going positive as 4th or 5th item, meaning you actually hinder yourself by building as you say. Regarding Rengar Top, that's a cheese lane, and according to op, he doesn't want those removed. Fun fact, in higher elos, Rengar actually has a much better win rate as ADC than as a top laner, with kinda the same play rate. (Top being around 52% while ADC being around 56%, both with around 1% pick rate in D+), but that strategy has counters, he can't win vs Kled at all, has a 36% win rate against him, 40% vs Cho'mpster, 41% vs Poppy, even Ornn craps Rengar, as he has a 45% against Ornn, thus showing that the build can work (tho it's DB into Trinity, not crit) only against certain champion, so there's no "Rengod", it's "Ren-please-don't-learn-to-play-against-me-or-I-lose"
TehNACHO (NA)
: You're probably thinking of Skill-Capped's Complete 9.9 Jungling Guide, as well as a mix of multiple other Jungle Route guides they make, which is more of a guide for Junglers to learn the Jungle, as opposed for everyone to ward Lv1. While I'm certain skill-capped has bits and pieces covering each ward spot for each individual route (I know my description of the Raptor Ward and the Predator Route _is_ basically a one for one transcript), there's no all-in-one guide for warding since the 9.9 scuttle changes, which this post was intended to be. There's only so many ways to Jungle optimally however, so many wards to counter those routes, and I and whoever writes for skill-capped have similar writing styles, so this ultimately results in a very samey feel; I can recognize that. I'm sorry if this does look like copying.
I understand the writhing similarity thingy, I wrote a guide for Dota a long while ago and used another guide as a blue print for layouts as it was my first hero guide and got complained that it's copied, when the other guy had sections that mine didn't and vice versa. He talked a whole lot how armor works since the hero has armor reduction while I didn't at all, due to Dreams limited chars per section, I had 3 sections dedicated only to mid lane match-ups, which the other guy didn't, and a lot of similar things, but what I did in the end was post a forenote with "hey, I used this [link] as a blue print so it will look similar" type of thing. Anyway, sorry for blaming for copy. That 1st part didn't help, plus a while ago a guy copied Shadiversity's female armor vid here on the boards, so.... Still, good job on the post. I for one love Skill Capped, they have super good vids, and high quality.
TehNACHO (NA)
: Some Thoughts About Level 1, Early Wards, and Countering Junglers
I would say nice post....But....it's almost a 1-1 from a video on YouTube. Not sure which was it, Skill Capped or someone else, but I know for sure I watched one saying almost exactly the same thing. Now, I'm not mad that you shared, but if it's indeed a copy and not a coincidence (can happen) at least share the original to give credit. If it's just a coincidence, ignore my comment.
Rioter Comments
: He said he would *prioritize* buffs over nerfs because from a development standpoint, buffing feels better than nerfing. After a good amount of time running through C&C here, I've come to a similar conclusion - I'd much rather someone tell me to put *more* into my design than someone tell me "cut this out, it's op." I also like being able to find a place to say "hey, if you added this little quirky feature I was going to use for something, it'll work really well, since I cant make it work for mine" and hate seeing created concepts that are "god modded" and overblown to the point you don't even know where to begin trying to suggest the nerfs. So from that perspective, I completely understand his thought process. It does indeed feel better to add more than to take away from a project. But I'm not CT: I do not mean to state that as to say "screw nerfing things, lets overtune *everything* to the point of being frustratingly overpowered and see where it goes!" and I honestly don't think the OP meant it like that either. There are always going to be instances where champions need target-nerfed. There are always going to be instances where items need to be nerfed, and the blanket effect indirectly nerfs an entire class. For example, I still think CDR is too easy to access, and the 40% CDR build for mages going totally obsolete is the main reason many of them were driven to support. I think blanket nerfing (through either runes or items) the access to CDR so that building CDR items feels relevant again would be healthy for the game - and I feel it would nerf about 70% of the game and make a lot of people upset that they're not playing URF anymore. That's probably an example that doesn't really cover the high vs low balance much (not that I'm defending the OP there, he's definitely vouching for lower elo over higher elo) but I would certainly hear about it a lot more from low elo players coming onto the boards with a freaking aneurism than I would high elo players, and I honestly feel like the high elo players would be much more split as to whether its good or bad after thinking about it for a couple days, whereas the lowbies will more or less unanimously agree I'm killing the game. Lowering the access to CDR would indirectly nerf some of the damage output, and specifically, the issue with CDR is that you can hit cap CDR building the core damage items for literally *any* mage, and still end up with about 10-20% for AD champions that scale with attack speed and don't even *need* CDR. This last part about AD champs mainly pertains to people like Jayce or Jax, and most ADCs, that just accidentally end up with like 10-20%CDR without even trying to build into it (10% from runes, and another 10% from some item they're buying for the effect and not the CDR (Death's Dance on Draven is the first example that comes to mind, since it made his early game ridiculously more oppressive and the CDR meant loads more for his kit than the people playing him let on.) The other reason I look to the CDR bit as my example is that after turning off URF mode, it's easier to see the heavier hitters as heavier hitters instead of seeing everyone as an ability spammer, and make better decisions in targeted buffs *and* nerfs to give champions their individual identities back. But pretty much everything about the example I used is my bias. >.>
I do agree with reducing access to CDR, as sometimes I end up overcapping just because my core items give so much that when I need a situational/defensive item, the CDR becomes a wasted stat. Now, I do not agree with low elo > high elo for the simple fact that you then punish skill. That will simply put everything to the spot where skill doesn't matter, take what's easier to play and be done. You can't have everything viable, and again, viable where? We know by now that EU meta differs from NA meta and both differ from KR meta. KR are all about the early game, if they can make something an early game problem, they will, because that's how they play, while NA and EU prefer a bit more slower games (not by much, but still). Then you have champion mastery. Azir, Elise, Ryze, Nidalee, Taliyah, Kalista and other such champions. Where do you balance them? Balance them for people who can play them correctly or for people who can't? If you balance them for people who can't play them, they will be generally viable picks, but they would have 0 counter play when played by someone who mastered them, but if you balance for people who mastered them, they aren't "viable" champions. These champions don't have a really middle ground, it's one or the other. And that's why balance for high elo is actually better than balance for low elo. In high elo, you get the players who actually know how to play, so if something is strong there, you know it's actually strong, and then you need to look why it's strong. Is it strong only on a few players who mastered that champ or generally strong? Again, if it's strong only on a few players, then it's unviable for most, which goes against ops rule of "viable for all", but if it's viable for all, it's 0 counter play. Then there's the meta difference between low elo and high elo. We all remember the Voli jungle guy, super good win rate, etc in D+, but lack luster in G- because of how different the meta is there. Although he can carry games on Voli jg in high elo, the skill, knowledge, game sense, etc of the players in low elo make it almost impossible to climb on champs as Voli. Yes, you can do it, but it's much much much MUCH harder than in high elo with the same play style. How do you solve that? Balancing for low elo means one thing, that no matter what you say, is undeniable - punishing skill. Op contradicted himself quite a bunch, saying that in situations like Yorik's case, he'd tell players to "get good", but Yorik was nerfed because at the time, his lane win rate according to Riot was almost perfect. Win lane lose game, Yorik was at the time hard to stop in lower elos because of the lack of knowledge, nerfing him was a low elo balance, but it killed the champ in higher elos, but he said he wouldn't balance like that, that he'd do it around skill, which is a high elo balance. Some champs can't be buffed, no matter how unviable they are, they either need a rework (Yi, Feedamere, Foodyr, Garen and co.), or massive skill from the player (Azir, Ryze, Elise, Nidalee), how would he solve that problem? He already shown he doesn't have the knowledge, talking as vaguely as possible, he never gave exact numbers he wants to do because "this isn't a real situation", but how I'm supposed to take him serious when beside "I want to do X" I have nothing from him. In his Spellthief's example, I said that it could work, but it will need heavy tampering, but most importantly, it needs a starting point. It's like I'd say "Hey, Shaco mains, I want to rework Shaco so he becomes AP viable again, I want his Boxes to X, Backstab Y, and ult do Z", well, what are the numbers? And lastly, he wants to balance X for Y, but is he capable of it? I can't balance Shaco, I don't play him, in the almost 4 years since I play LoL, I played Shaco once, 1 time, I can't talk about his balanced, but if op is the one who agrees what goes out and what doesn't, how can he prove the changes are good? The current Riven changes, barely relevant in low elo, if not an actual buff, yet strong nerfs in higher elo, but if you remember, all boards was filled with was "these Riven changes will do nothing", yet depending on tracking site used, her higher elo winrate lost anywhere between 4% to 6%, that's huge, especially considering she got a "compensation buff" on Q, which means the nerf was an actual nerf, yet low elo players didn't, and some still don't, agree it's an actual nerf. How do you balance that? Tell them to get good? That's high elo balance, which is the opposite of op's goal. Nerf Riven even more to comply to the low elo balance philosophy? Then that goes against what he said, that he'll tell people to "get good" Point is, you can't actually balance for low elo without turning this game into a failure. The game runs on a logic of perfect imbalance, or balanced imbalance, but in order to keep it balanced, you need good players, thus you need high elo balance, yet he wants the exact opposite. Fun isn't a good measure for balance.
: You would make a similarly good politician. You use the terms "too much/too little" as if there's no feasible way to *hit the target.* This I will chalk up to you being so disappointed in the current attempts by the balance team on these matters that you'd rather assume it impossible, accept the current iteration, and lock it in as a meta for fear of changes that ruin your current niche in the game. You've made some valid points...so before this all feels like a personal attack instead of a disagreement with your negative outlook, let's look into some of these. Let's start by taking a look at ALL support items, and what they do: - Coin line: rewards good lane management and passive play with coins that give gold or mana. Good passive option, not something anyone complains about as it's literally impossible to abuse and is easily punished by intercepting supports who misposition for the coins. - Relic line: rewards good lane *pressure* by giving you a minion execute that duplicates gold to your nearest ally in range and a slight hp boost. Solid push/siege option, not something people will complain about since you can easily end up overextending and getting rekt, and it has the lowest passive gp5 of any gold item. Also, without an ally nearby, you're just getting the standard reward of minion gold with no benefits to the adc. Now for the fun one... - Spellthief line: rewards aggressive play by granting you gold on champion or tower hit/UNIQUE spell cast on enemy champion. People complain about this one because by its nature it's easy to abuse, and literally feeds off of abusing the enemy laner(s). But the main concern for me is that it has more gp5 than the relic line. It rewards passive options far too much as the aggressive option, and it rewards aggressive options far too much for doing far too little aggressive work for it. 3 charges for 33/66 gold? I can hit those 3 charges on Nami with E/W/auto in the blink of an eye with virtually no counterplay. In fact, I tested Hail Of Blades aggressive Nami with E start and found that just running it lv 1 with E/rapidfire autos was almost more efficient than the traditional Aery/W run *specifically* because of the ease of proccing these charges very quickly and just playing super passive while they were recharging. I had the upgrade by 3 minutes in. I had the quest done by 7 minutes. The average for the support items to upgrade is between 10-13 minutes. This means not only is this the EASIEST item to abuse, it's also the easiest to COMPLETE when NOT abusing it. Personally, OP is onto something, but isn't taking the idea far enough imo. I'm on board with the idea of changing the recharge rate without making the charge useless. However, in order to balance this, I think it should NOT reward passive play (Reduce or REMOVE the gp5 element) and that it should give its greatest rewards to those who can be *consistently* aggressive instead of those that operate in short bursts. 5 charges, 5 gold (10 if upgraded) and each charge on a 60s cd. If the charge is used within 700 units of an ally, the cd of that charge is reduced to 15s (keeping the rule it can only charge one charge at a time). For this iteration, I'll say no passive gp5 at all and go all-in on turning constant poke into money. [**these numbers, to your credit, will have to be tampered with a bit to find a balance, but as placeholders, I'll use these**] This concept means that supports who can be consistently aggressive towards enemy champions (reward for zoning) gain larger rewards as their charges will consistently come up faster. Solo lanes that take this are essentially only getting the usage of a gp5 item out of it since they're only able to proc these off in short bursts, and even less so if they can't be consistently aggressive within their window of charges. Upgrading it would be far more beneficial to both supports and to solo laners, but in order to get any sort of actual abuse out of it as a solo laner, either the enemy jungle would have to leech half their exp, or they'd have to roam and leave their lane completely open. Also note that the item and its upgrade are significantly weaker than most other items that can be bought, so they're also sacrificing considerable damage/kill potential they'd usually have for their roam, and will be very hard pressed to contest someone in their solo lane in an all-out fight. If this brings a meta-shift to roaming mids, at least people are quite literally going *out of their way* to use this, and there's a solid amount of counterplay to be found in catching these roaming mids mid-roam and taking them out before their team can help them, or by just taking their whole freaking mid lane while they roam. In exchange for losing their early game power and trying to roam a lot, they accelerate their gold to try and reach their items faster, but that investment (if they're *good*) will not really start to take precedent until their 3rd or 4th item, and the enemy laner will still be pretty much on par with them until closer to the 15-20 minute mark before the extra gold starts to actually matter in terms of stats. Overall, I'd say that takes the abuse factor and turns it more into a "strategic" factor with clear and open counters. It'd be notably worse than the blatant abuse of the top lane version unless the jungler consistently sat at top and took all their exp...in which case, the counterplay would be pretty much to just destroy bot lane completely and force them to stop their splitpush. --- I would love to also get into the jungle items...but honestly, I'm not a jungler, and as such my idea of balance will almost certainly be one that shoots junglers in the foot and causes outrage. I at least know my limits. However, it's another of your "too much/too little arguments that I find somewhat annoying to be forced to leave alone. If someone else were to make a suggestion that seemed sensible, I'd definitely be keen to support it over "leave everything set in stone and limit the hell out of gameplay levers."
I did talk about a middle ground and how that would simply move the use of it from top lane to mid lane. The reason for that is because mid is a common patting place for junglers, so depending on where the numbers are, the jungler just walking about/doing raptors will reset the charges. I know it will require tempering, but the issue would be where? By "too little or too much" I didn't mean exactly the extremes. You see, if the punishment for being away from an ally isn't big enough, solo lanes will still take it, or at least the mid laners, but if it's on the other side of the spectrum, screw the charges, my ADC is in base, I'm taking that farm regardless, just last hit obviously, and that's what I should do anyway, shouldn't I? I mean, it's much worse to let those creeps die than to get them. You would need to tweak the gold generation, range, cooldown, base charge rate, charge rate slow/stop when away. But considering Riot did say soon after that there will be an AP item rework, you can see why I said the change was good. It would take too long to find the correct spot, while in the meantime it would be either too good or too trash, and due to the soon coming of the item rework along Mordekaiser, it would be no point in trying to find the balance then when you can do so after the rework. I do a knowledge that op has some ideas, but the problem is the introduction. He wants to only buff when we're already in a meta that needs some serious nerfs. As long as in his head the idea of nerfs is bad, and the fact that he wants to balance for low elo, he can't comprehend balance too good. Yes, right now you can see what's strong because players are bad or strong because it's strong, but after he starts balancing, you can no longer. There are champs that simply need to stay in a weak state, that should be balanced around people mastered them, not around low elo, but he doesn't get that because he wants everything to be viable in low elo. He thinks that just because stuff was nerfed because high elo, high elo is bad, but in reality, that stuff was nerfed because it had no counter play when you were good enough to pull it off, it has to be balanced only around people who can master that, and if it's balanced then, it's fair, but that means it will be weak for the rest. Or look at tanks, they are strong in 5v5 premade, but weak in Yolo que because they are team fighters, so how do you make that viable without bringing another tank meta? See my point?
: Bloodrazor has been cancer since its inception, literally the only thing gating it is the fact that there's only 3 adc's that can semi reliably jungle, and they usually need the ad instead, yi is the only melee that can really abuse it and he does so at the cost of damage early (when most other top tier jungles can invade/supress). It's the same thing as phantom hit, a %hp on-hit shouldn't exist just as much as a %max every 3 shouldn't **as an always up passive**. Kog has to pay for his with specific time to hit, and a cooldown after, literally every other % is tied to an ability or a cd, make it so bloodrazor only applies for the first x-auto's on a champ, or after using a summoner, or hell make it an active to grant x seconds of it instead of oh i'm in range guess I got outplayed
Never said it wasn't. But if you remove the restriction of needing Smite, you'd see a lot of people buying it. That was my point.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=REJUPcjY,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-05-20T18:02:57.867+0000) > > Ok mister smart pants. > > How would you nerf the interactive Spellthief's no cs top lane without hurting supports? A variant of the strategy used - instead of completely turning off spellthiefs proc when alone, have its recharge rate dependent on proximity and time to last ally contact. Imagine the following - ADC forces the opposing laners to reset, leaving you alone for a bit. You get your 3 pings on the bot tower. The recharge rate is then greatly slowed since you're alone. Then, you roam mid, meet up with your midlaner, and your recharge is back to normal. You get your pings in there, hang out for a bit to get back up to 3 charges, and roam top to place a ward on herald and possibly burn those charges on pinging the top tower. This still kills the toxic strategy (since our solo laner is going to require *constant* jungle attention if they still want to run it, and I mean fucking *constant*, a lot more than just asking for a gank when you get pushed in) while allowing a support to roam and still get their procs off to generate a bit of extra gold and helping to pressure other lanes, rather than being shit outta luck when their laner leaves. It's less crude than the "no ally, no proc" sledgehammer that was used. > Also, unlocking the jungle items away from Smite? Well damn, looking forward to on hit adc being broken because of Blood Razor. Maybe that means jungle itemization needs another look - it could be that Blood Razor is just not a good item concept. It could also mean that defensive itemization needs another look. Maybe players will, as they say, "git gud" and come up with a counter strat. We wouldn't know. > And viability, viable for who, low elo Yolo que or high elo aka the good players? Yes. A less cynical way to put that would be "low elo 96% of the people playing the game".
You'd make a good politician, you know that? In you change Spellthief like that, what are the ratios? Delay too big and slow rate too slow? GG,m changed nothing. Delay too short and slow too big? No difference from now. Middle ground? You succeeded in moving the problem from top lane into mid lane. Change the slow to the point where taking the creeps means there's no difference from now? Well, then it's still just fancy wording from what you have now, because if the ADC isn't in lane, don't think I'll just look at the creeps die, that's my gold right there. No matter how you change the ratios, your suggestion either does nothing, moves the problem to another lane or simply is no different from now. Next, I gave Blood Razor as an example. Cinderhulk in top lane? Why not? Warrior on ADC or bruiser? Hell yea. As for the guy who said "just power shift", how much you power shift? Too little? Who cares about wasted stats? Not the actually good players. Look at Shurelia, Vlad used to take it despite the wasted stats, they moved so much power into the mana part that almost no-one builds it now. If you move too little power, wasted stats would mean nothing, if you move too much, you get an Ohmwrecker case, where yea, you can do it, but why would you? It's trash, you just hinder yourself by it. But since its a jungle item at base, who would get buffed by that power shift? Tell you who, the strongest early game junglers, and I'm sure no-one wants that meta back. And lastly, your idea of balance is off the rails completely. How do you balance for bad players? Kill the champ? Look at Yorik. We all know that ghoul nerf long ago for the sole reason that low elo players could not play against him for the sole reason that they didn't have the knowledge and mechanics, but in the higher elos he was on the weak side because they had the knowledge and mechanics. Champion picks into Yorik had little importance, you either knew to play around his ghouls or you didn't, so how do you balance such champs? Nerf them? Then you kill the champ when the enemy knows what to do. Yorik after that patch dropped to <48% wr and less than 1%. Not even his mains could win reliably, let alone anyone else. What next? Buff his counters? They were already of little importance because it was the lack of knowledge that caused the problem. Buff his counters even more? Gratz, you just made some champs overpowered because bad players can't play. And Yorik isn't the only champ on that boat. There are many champs low elo have problems dealing with when the player is good on the champ. Taliyah is an example, she's in my top 8 most played champs, and I got told a lot that she's broken, OP, needs nerfs, etc, and that was recently, as they don't know to play against her, yet she's a balanced champ, but what would you do? Nerf her? Buff her counters? Tell players to get good? I don't know who upvotes you, but you don't deserve to be let anywhere near balance. You basically want to punish good players.
: If I were God Emperor of Riot and could do whatever I wanted for season 10..
Ok mister smart pants. How would you nerf the interactive Spellthief's no cs top lane without hurting supports? The fix Riot did is the best, and they even buffed the gold generation. Also, unlocking the jungle items away from Smite? Well damn, looking forward to on hit adc being broken because of Blood Razor. You just toss out ideas with no actual example of how you want to fix it, just say you will. And viability, viable for who, low elo Yolo que or high elo aka the good players?
Rustypug (NA)
: lmao agreed, every yas main ive played with is also a zed main and vice versa
I added some more details to the skins, not to keep them as bland. What do you think?
Rioter Comments
: Jungle Difference feels insurmountable in low elo.
That depends on why said player is doing bad tho. Yes, it may be that the enemy jungler impacted the game more than your own, but why did that happen? Take for example my last Kha'Zix game. I couldn't do jack because the enemy Katarina constantly roamed with Amumu, even invading me in the jungle to make sure I'm down. Our Malzahar kept crying about me, how I'm bad and how I lose the game, but what about him? He did ping, sure, but he never left his lane, when the enemy Kat was mostly away from lane. What do you in that case? Take tower plates, get more farm than her. But him? He didn't took 1 tower plate, Kat's tower had almost full HP when the plates expired, and when it came to farm, he had less than 10 cs more than her. Also he had some weird sexual fantesy with Amumu, as except the one time he ulted Kat in lane to get a kill when she dove him, he never used his ult on anyone else other than Amumu. Another example would be when you as a jungler get invaded repeatedly and the team refuses to help. Yes, you're behind, you can't do anything, but all that could've been avoided if your team helped. There are many reasons for why a player is doing bad in the jungle, and not all are "because he's trash" or "because the enemy jungler is OP". Just having a strong champ doesn't mean much unless the enemy players are worse than you. Trust me, I learned that the hard way. And yes, I don't want to shift the blame to the team, I know there's lots of players who would love to troll you. I had an Amumu myself refusing to gank anyone but for Ezreal because Ez asked me if I let him mid and I said no, or a Rammus who at almost 15 mins was 0-2-0 refusing to gank because "it's just a normal, who cares if we win or lose". Yes, players like that exist and you can blame them, but don't blame every jungler who's doing bad, because YOU might be the reason why he's doing bad.
: Yuumi is an Item, not a champion
Yuumi also has the issue of "needs a team with a wallnut instead of a pea as brain", because she can't do anything solo, she needs her team. A bad ADC will also make Yuumi look bad, and since we all know how ADCs work, "it's Yuumi's fault". I think you does indeed need a few more minor buffs, BUT, if you have a good player on Yuumi and a team behind her, or well, in front of her, she's strong even now.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=YMKcQcpA,comment-id=000f000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-18T06:21:23.271+0000) > > You missed the joke there tho. > > If I don't want to ban Hecarim, and say I give the ban to my team mates, they'll not ban Hecarim either, they'll ban something random. I just used Zed and Yasuo as example because so many times I see someone ban something very rare, say a Zac, then go with "please ban Zed". > > Bad team comps aren't the problem of the system, it's the players. Now you're bringing Zac into this...
You even reading what's written? Or trying to understand?
: My post is showing up as a general reply post to me that only mentions Hec. Though I do think Yasuo and Zed are good bans for issues of team morale and being able to delay purchasing Zhonya's a bit, I'm lost as to why you're asking me about it.
You missed the joke there tho. If I don't want to ban Hecarim, and say I give the ban to my team mates, they'll not ban Hecarim either, they'll ban something random. I just used Zed and Yasuo as example because so many times I see someone ban something very rare, say a Zac, then go with "please ban Zed". Bad team comps aren't the problem of the system, it's the players.
Saezio (EUNE)
: So then don't ban orianna in ranked, ask people if they need the ban. Don't ban "none" that's wanting to lose.
I think you missed the point there. I perma ban Shaco. The point was that his logic is: "If you don't ban something you're bad against, you're hindering the team, as you can practice in normals", which is what I replied to. You can't practice everything in normal because of the "it's just a normal" mentality. Remove that mentality and you'll get less "none" bans in ranked. Due to the inability to practice match-ups in normal, ofc they will try it in ranked till they learn the match-up, but if they know the match-up already and they know they can't win it no matter what unless the enemy is a troll, they will ban, but until that point, they won't. That was my point. I never said I don't ban anything.
Pika Fox (NA)
: I wouldnt care in literally any game mode. If you need bans to do well, youre simply not going to climb, ever. Unless youre targetting bans to individual players (ie, in a tournament) bans arent worth anything.
I perma ban Shaco for the off chance I get against a Shaco main. Those guys have little to no skill playing something else most of the time from what I've seen, and when told who ban Shaco, they make the Dead See look like it's the Sugar Sea. Always a pleasure. Otherwise, you won't climb if you can't solo carry in lower elos, and no matter what you ban, you will have to once in a while have to face that champ fed, so better be prepared and win more than be able to do nothing because "my team can't handle it so I don't want him fed". He will get fed in your games unless you specifically perma ban it, so why not cure the disease from the roof by learning to play instead of hoping someone else has the skill to deal with it?
Saezio (EUNE)
: Well, in normals IDGAF cause nothing is at stake except for pride. But in ranked not wanting to at least ban someone for your team's sake (just ask if anyone wants something specific banned) seems awfully close to Griefing. That is at least to me. Maybe you think helping your team have an easier pick/ban phase or potentially even a better game is a bad thing.
"Nothing is at stake" Do you fucking know how many games that mentality lost? "It's just normal, I don't need to try hard" - 0-2-0 Rammus at 20 mins. You can't learn too many match-ups in normal games because of that bull mentality. Normals are full of people who either try to learn new champs (So nothing to learn from winning that match-up) or players with that bull mentality (So again, nothing to learn from that match-up) or the Zed/Lee/Yasuo mains who pick their best champ and play the match like it's a win or die situation. I legit never saw Orianna, Corky, Malzahar or A-Sol in normals unless it was me or a friend trying them out, but I see them (except A-Sol, but even he shows his tail once in a while) in ranked games. I have a hard time dealing with Orianna, but I never see her in normals so I can't practice that match-up there, yet by your logic I should ban her because otherwise I gimp my team, so I wouldn't be able to practice the match-up there either. The problem is exactly that "no need to try, it's just a normal game" which is why people ban none. If they could freely practice that match-up in normals instead of either getting a free win or a free loss, depending on which side gets the more monkeys with that bull mentality, no-one would ban "none", or at least, a lot less people would do it. But you can't practice in normals unless said match-up is vs Zed or Yasuo. So fix that trash mentality first then you will see less people not choosing a ban.
: Refuses to ban anyone in champ select. Their team is low on durability and peel so someone on the enemy team picks Hecarim. Gets a loss because Hecarim alone is deleting their team. {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}}
And banning Yasuo/Zed solves that how?
: This is mostly in reference to ranked, yes. The most common excuse I see when pressed is "I want to get better/learn more matchups," like dude learn the game in normals ranked isn't the place.
That's debatable. In normals I get a lot of "I don't care, it's not ranked" where they don't troll but don't try their best either. Winning such a lane doesn't really teach much, so trying to master the match-ups in ranked where people try more is actually more rewarding. But that's debatable, as each has his own opinions. Learning a match-up doesn't equal learning the game. You can be good at the game and bad in certain match-ups, and some of those champs are almost never picked in normals. I never saw an Orianna in normals, but a decent amount in ranked.
: Unimplementable and not rewarding
Care to expand?
: I'd say it boils down to a couple problems; - Lack of vulnerability &/or too short of windows to retaliate, partially from newer champions having negligible mana costs via too high regeneration, and also from an excessive abundance of cooldown reduction. - Champion kit's being able to deny being punished for obvious mistakes, granted sometimes this is due to matchup, but when it's something that happens more often than it should be regardless of who's going against them, that's when it's a serious issue. - Snowballing fiesta meta, things spiral out of control so quickly that the loosing team has no chance of coming back unless the winning team does something willfully stupid in unison, more or less making only early game champions viable short of cheese, and unless you're playing one too you're going to struggle against the bullying trades.
Well, I think the issue with "vulnerability" Windows is how vulnerable a champ is during that window. For example the Riven nerf in 9.10. It's considered a strong nerf at high elo because people are capable punishing her when her E is in Cool down, but in lower elos it's insignificant because people aren't able to. Also look at Yorik, a good while ago he was hard nerfed because low elo didn't knew how to play vs his ghouls even tho he was at the time only good in low elo, after the nerf, his D+ stats were less than 1% pick rate with a 46-48% win rate. So counter play would also come to player knowledge, if 1v1 high elos can punish something, should it be nerfed just because lower elos don't know how/don't gave the mechanics?
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=N0dhRWA0,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-05-14T08:36:34.071+0000) > > Troll thread... I'm sorry have I triggered you because I'm not understanding why she's allowed to leave shroud and stay stealthed? Fuck I'm sorry cupcake I'll try better next time.
You don't even know how her abilities actually work yet you complain about them. So you're either stupidly bad at the game or trolling.
: Wait...Why does Akali still have a grace period when leaving her shroud?
: Wouldn't the buff to riven q not change anything?
In late game a little, but she still has less EHP due almost 3 extra sec on E at 40% cdr. Also her laning phase is weaker as she can block less. Basically, good players are rewarded more if they know how to punish her, bad players...not my problem.
Rioter Comments
ZaFishbone (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=ubB5Wo5A,comment-id=0013,timestamp=2019-05-13T13:35:48.135+0000) > > I have a friend from NA play on EUNE. His solo ranked on NA is around P4, EUNE solo rank is B2. > > Now, not saying he can't climb, but he's saying that NA is a much more skilled region than EU(W/NE) and because our players are so incompetent he can't solo carry them as he does in NA. > > > (Tho I rarely see him carry, if at all) The empirical evidence form his ranks on the 2 servers would suggest exactly the opposite, I'm afraid.
Ikr. I told him that, but well, he's stubborn as hell.
Azca33 (NA)
: Watching MSI is Depressing for NA Fans
I have a friend from NA play on EUNE. His solo ranked on NA is around P4, EUNE solo rank is B2. Now, not saying he can't climb, but he's saying that NA is a much more skilled region than EU(W/NE) and because our players are so incompetent he can't solo carry them as he does in NA. (Tho I rarely see him carry, if at all)
Rioter Comments
Lacuni (NA)
: Is this a good time to main jungle?
Ok, so.....it's complicated. Jungle is good role to play and main, but, you will need to understand a few things. But first thing first, ignore what the other 2 guys said. Now, on the main thing, watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsbdrED2fTo Jungle is still a strong role if you can adapt to changes, and I can't stress that as much as it should. YOU NEED TO ADAPT. You see all the people "I can't be 5 levels ahead of my solo laners, jungle sucks" or "I'm not the main carry anymore, jungle sucks". Jungle isn't an easy role, takes a lot of adapting that's not only patch to patch basis, but game to game basis. Routes, champs, match-ups, etc and for the jungle it's mode different from other lanes, as both the champs you and the enemy jungler play change things, but also the routes taken. Where did they start, what can they do, what match-up would they want to influence? If the enemy is a Lee and you deduce he wants to influence top lane, and his red is on bot side, you should start on blue side just to make it so that when he reaches top lane, you're also there. I see a lot of "jungle mains" who basically have no tracking skills. They know their champion, they know that 1 route they did for the last 3 seasons and won't change it no matter how bad it may be right now. They lack objective focus and even if they get ahead, they have no idea how to use it (AND STOP GETTING LIANDRY'S TORMENT ON EVELYNN). Had such a game earlier today, I got ganked early and the enemy laner got an advantage, but she was bad, like, she knew how to play as Akali, but that's all, yet no matter how many times I asked Eve to help, she refused. She tried once when I was in base, almost died and basically never came top again all game, if not for our mid Va(a)rus ganking for me, that match could've ended differently. That Akali died to each and every actual gank, and soon started dying 1v1 as well because she still thought she's stronger, and even tho our Eve got fed because the enemy team was dumb, she didn't know to take objectives, where to gank, all she did most of the game was AFK farm, and for the most of the game, she was behind in both KP and farm to Twitch. My advice? Try the role, see if you like it. The vid I shared you has a lot of good info you can use, some nice champ recommendation, but do keep in mind that the role is stupidly intensive when it comes to macro play. If you doubt you can keep up with that level of macro, then don't try the role. I swear macro play loses more games than anything for junglers. You can be a godlike Lee, if you only play for kills and nothing else, even if you may win once in a while because of that, it won't always work.
Show more

Rylalei

Level 191 (EUNE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion