Leptyx (EUW)
: Does it seem like a challenge for Riot ?
I honestly don't know. I have very low faith in them.
: QOL: Make Bami Cinder stop triggering tower aggro
On one hand, I agree. On the other hand, as a Tank, when you are not in a 1v1 situation, you often WANT to draw aggro on YOU so that it doesn't focus your squishy damage dealer. So, I don't know. In doubt, I would just keep the current situation, because at least it's consistent.
Leptyx (EUW)
: View allies' masteries in lobby (similarly to viewing their spells)
I would support that if there is a good way to integrate it in the user interface.
: Why does Kled lose turret aggro when he dismounts?
He can remount only once every 30 seconds. 30, not 3. And people "getting away" with stupid play is just players knowing the limits of their champs. It's the opposite of being noob. Being noob would be to NOT dive you and let you survive when they can kill you.
Lan Fan (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=ThisName1sDumb,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=MXGkQPZo,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-15T21:26:23.597+0000) > > I mean, untargetability always drops turret agro. Same thing happens with fizz's jump and that sort of thing. It would be weird for it to not to work like that with Kled too, unless you're suggesting that he isn't untargetable while he is dismounting. Are you? But why in hell is dismounting untargetable but mounting is targetable?!
Because being untargetable for both would be too strong, and being targetable for both would be too weak. I agree I was disappointed by the lack of consistency when Kled was first released, but I came to realize that's the only way he had a chance to be more or less balanced.
: The Fiora change is actually a huge step in the right direction
*thread is at -1* me: *reads comments to try and see why* *everyone agrees with OP* me: *perplexed* 0_o . Anyhoo, good thread OP.
: Riot, I really just wanna congratulate you on how good your matchmaking system was for my last game
So, OF COURSE, this was a Normal game, so SoloQ MMR don't matter, because Normal MMR is entirely separate. And THEN, on top of it, the enemy team was a full 5-man premade versus your team 4-man squad. It's NOT the system that chose to put a random Bronze2 player with the Plat guys. It's the Plat guys who chose to go in a game with their Bronzie friend. What do you want the match-making to do in such a situation? There is nothing it can do that will make it a fair game in any case. **Don't complain about the match-making, complain about the lack of restrictions on premades.**
: the wrong part is how rigged it is, thats the teams i got after getting gold 3 in 9 win 2 loses and then losing only 2 at 0 lp, and these players were within the same mmr than gold 4 yea i agree, i hate the love i had for yasuo ;/
Because of all those losses on Yasuo, the system believes you're worth a low-Gold/high-Silver MMR, and it sees you're already Gold3. And as it always tries to give fair matches to everyone, it matches you in low-Gold games. That's not rigged, that's the **opposite** of rigged, it is trying its hardest to give you games at your level. Now, it turns out you "lied" about your real level to the system by playing a champ you're bad at, and what it believes is your level is wrong, but that's not its fault... And keep in mind: yes, your team is "bad" (relatively to you), but the *enemy* team is **just as bad**. Which is why you manage to be the Ace and get a 60% winrate in the first place. Once again, nothing wrong in the system. You just gotta keep playing until the system realizes what your true level actually is.
: im so fucking done with losing while being ace
You're winning 60% of your games on Ekko. LoL is a 5v5 games, you can't win everything just by yourself. You're already winning the 10% of games that depend on you, why are you complaining? As for you being Ace when losing, you're Gold3 playing at Silver1/Gold4 MMR. That's perfectly normal too. And that, combined with your 49% overall winrate, ALSO explains why you're only getting 14 LP a win. There is nothing at all wrong in your match history. Just keep playing all those champs with a 55+% winrate, give up on that Yasuo who single-handedly tanked your MMR, and chill.
Meddler (NA)
: Yep, we've got it as a learning task for a new designer who's just started. We'll put it in for testing and, unless it feels poor to Sona players for some reason, get it into an upcoming patch.
Coolkipp (EUW)
: Have you considered making irelia's ammo bar visible to opponents as well as akali's passive? I think it would make a huge difference in how people approach these champions due to the current ambiguity it creates when playing against them.
I agree, and made that comment in the original QGT where I requested an ammo bar for Sona. Meddler replied at the time that the trade off was information overload vs clarity, and they had ruled to reduce overload for this one.
: Is it planned to be implemented as something only the Sona player can see?
Yes, per the earlier QGT where I requested the feature in the first place.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: September 13
Hey Meddler o/ Any news about the Sona ammo bar? Did you manage to ping someone? What did they say?
: can someone please explain to me why kled is this op?
Actually, there is a 30 seconds CD between 2 remounts. He can dismount and remount in 5 seconds, yes, but only once. If he dismounts a second time, he won't be able to re-remount. Treat it as a Tahm Kench gray health shield or an Ekko with R up: for all 3 of them, they basically have 2 health bars, and they will try to bait you into over committing. if you forget the second health bar. But respect it, and they won't be able to do much.
Saezio (EUNE)
: Yeah I understand how my claims seem void. And mostly apply to higher elo, but I believe that the more you climb you should be rewarded with better matchmaking, better game experience in general. Whereas the opposite happens atm due to smaller player pools combined with the autofill system which becomes more and more annoying and apparent as you climb. Someone with mid/adc might only have to autofill 10 times in 100 games in silver but that number grows surprisingly past plat 4. (I am not in any way trying to rank shame anyone, I just want to stress out how the higher you climb the more frustrating this autofill system can be, especially for people that are maining the most "desirable" roles) BTW I want to point out this has been a very civil discussion by the standards of these boards and I want to thank you for that. I have seen some of your points and I hope I have made some of mine clear without being too much of an ass.
> BTW I want to point out this has been a very civil discussion by the standards of these boards and I want to thank you for that. I have seen some of your points and I hope I have made some of mine clear without being too much of an ass. Appreciated. I do try my best. And yes, I see where you're coming from. I'm still not convinced over all, but you have some good points.
AIQ (NA)
: In ranked? I'd hope people are playing their strongest roles if not they kinda deserve having to constantly adjust lol. This system would not exist in a normal. Also the points placement are not affiliated with a role rather the priority. Position 1/2/3/4/5 is not Top/JG/MID/BOT/SP so and adjustment of as you proposed would be a 10 point change. Literally a single click. However, I understand what you are after what if one day I want no Support and the next day I want only support. I have no accurate data as to who would be right, I only know my friends and people I op.gg based on that I'd have to say people do NOT vary their potions too often and have a clear role or 2 (not champion) they want to play and this usually does not change until months of practice on another role. Fillers would have like a button that they can press and set everything to 40 so they don't have to play with sliders either. If you have 4 roles hit fill add 10 to each and reduce the one to 0. It's really not that complex and I doubt you or anyone would be adjusting it too often once set. Maybe if you are a top/mid player and you want top more than mid one day, but again that's and easy adjustment of 2 clicks an drags.
> Also the points placement are not affiliated with a role rather the priority. Position 1/2/3/4/5 is not Top/JG/MID/BOT/SP so and adjustment of as you proposed would be a 10 point change. Literally a single click. But you do have to say *somewhere* which is your most favorite position. Like if I just tell you "90/70/20/20/0" and nothing else, and you don't know me, you have no idea where to put me in a team comp, you realize that? And this is a good example that the UI for something like that would be much more complicated to do than it sounds, when you start to think about all the details.
AIQ (NA)
: In my head you'd only need to set it once then it's remembered. You should know what you want the first time and that should vary very little over time.
I think you underestimate how often people change position. Sure, some people focus on one lane only, and THESE people don't change their focus regularly. But all the players who play 3+ lanes switch a lot more often. Like, someone who put 90/70/20/20/0 probably will never change. But someone who put 60/40/40/30/30 may very well swap to 30/30/30/60/50 in two days.
Saezio (EUNE)
: Ok, personal experience and feelings. And, I am sure that is what riot says, that it is very small MMR differences in the same game, but have you actually checked estimates? What is riot going to say if they are making unfair matches for the sake of fast matchmaking? I don't see how pick order was frustrating? You had to pick from the roles that were left. And sometimes you could post your scores with a champ to your team so if you had 70% winrate over 50 games with a champ they gave you their pick. NOW they feel entitled cause "oh the game assigned me mid, sorry" (BTW what I am saying obviously is beneficial for the most part for higher elo players, maybe plat 3 and higher or something, where there is less people)
> Ok, personal experience and feelings. Numbers, not feelings. For real, the data is public, go check for yourself. > I don't see how pick order was frustrating? Because you had to argue with peers, with equals, in a VERY time-constrained environment, and without even a starting point. Position Select at least gives a basis. Pick Order gave you a way to decide who had the final word, but it forced you to start from scratch. > And sometimes you could post your scores with a champ to your team so if you had 70% winrate over 50 games with a champ they gave you their pick. You can STILL do that, just the same as before, because... > NOW they feel entitled cause "oh the game assigned me mid, sorry" ... BEFORE they felt entitled just the same cause "oh, the game assigned me first pick, sorry." (And they would feel EVEN MORE entitled with your suggestion to use MMR as a sorting factor.) > (BTW what I am saying obviously is beneficial for the most part for higher elo players, maybe plat 3 and higher or something, where there is less people) I can understand the frustration of Plat3 and above players, and I feel sorry for them. But what THEY need to understand is that Riot shouldn't fuck over 80% of the player base just to solve a potential issue that exists just for the top10%. That would be a stupid trade-off. IF you suggestion actually solve the issue, which is also very debatable. (I didn't reply to the "Riot lying" part because, OK you don't believe them, that's your choice, but there just isn't any way to move the conversation forward past this point.)
Saezio (EUNE)
: And why not USE that MMR for pick order. It doesn't matter if its half a division(which it isn't unless you mean tier) just use that to determine who selects first, instead of dumb luck that we don't even know anything about. I don't get why you are so upset over it. Autofill seems like a far inferior system and let me demonstrate why. If you go by MMR order you can choose from the remaining roles (btw none can troll because you will have to actually pick the role before picking the champ). So you essentially ONLY have to pick your LEAST desired role 1/5th of the games, and that is provided NONE has picked that role in that lobby of the 4 previous picks. Autofill on the other side DOESNT KNOW EVERY PERSONS ROLE PREFERENCE EXCEPT THE 2 PRIMARY/SECONDARY. Do you understand how that helps create less frustrating matches? And I am not even mentioning how this way people will become more accustomed to playing all roles.
No, I do mean division, not tiers. Go check in the Ask Riot archives, you'll see. And half a division is meaningless. It's one game difference. Why would you want to create stupid hierarchy in the team for one game worth of difference? You'd get first picks like you trying to boss other people around for no good reason. And your demonstrations are all sweet and nice, but actual experience directly contradicts them. I get my least favorite role literally never (because it's not Sup), and I'm auto-filled maybe once every 30 games? I was literally auto-filled 4 times in 150+ games this season, you can check me on OP.GG, 3 times as Sup, once as Jungle. So do YOU understand how pick order and its constant bickering was infinitely more frustrating?
Saezio (EUNE)
: But at the very least it did not inherently give your team disadvantages. Like, the best MMR player SHOULD get priority pick. So your team has the best chances to win. Because for example, if you have 2 mid mains in the team, the one with the better MMR will play the role. Right now, sometimes you get so much inferior players on key roles while the good players are stuck on other roles that they do not prefer. Should matchmaking be hindering a team's chances of winning like that? I wonder
The difference between the "best MMR" and the "worst MMR" in a team are on average less than half a division, it was in an Ask Riot a couple months ago. And that's taking into account all the cases with Duos. So if you're not smurfing and not playing with a duo much lower than yourself, get down of your high horse and realize that the other players in your team have essentially the same MMR as you. You're not better than them. And even if you actually are, the **system** doesn't know it. The only thing the system knows about you IS your MMR.
xelaker (NA)
: That's what I'm getting at. Why reward something that is already rewarded with more gold for doing what you are doing anyways? Should minions give bonus gold for taking them to half health?
That's a bad analogy. What is rewarded with Plates is not "getting a tower BELOW 50% health", it's "getting a tower below 50% health QUICKLY", because Plates are not permanent, they fall off at 14 minutes. And, do you get a reward for clearing minions waves QUICKLY? Yes, you do. You definitely do. You get lane priority, you can roam, assist your jungler, etc.
AIQ (NA)
: I'd like a weighted system that considers all 5 roles. Where you put like ~200 where you want with a minimum of 20 on 4 and a max of 90 on 1 with Max and mins on the rest as well. something like for the one tricks 1. Preferred role ~90 2. 60 3. 30 4. 20 5. 0 But maybe you are a fan of 2 roles a lot and the others are meh to you. 1. 80 2. 80 3. 20 4. 20 5. 0 OR maybe you are the Autofiller we need, but not the one we deserve. 1. 40 2. 40 3. 40 4. 40 5. 40 This would nearly guarantee that after the 3rd phase you are in a match. Since the system does not have to consider which role is needed rather which value so if there is a slot less than 50 open it's yours. It sounds great in my head. ######probably the only place though.
> [{quoted}](name=AIQ,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Y37EQ3Ux,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-09-11T16:14:03.025+0000) > > It sounds great in my head. > > ######probably the only place though. I mean, it's a good system on paper. The biggest problem is the User Experience/Interface. You don't want people to have to fiddle with 5 sliders with complex, interdependent constraints before even starting the game. You don't want people to wonder about the difference between 80 and 65. Etc.
Saezio (EUNE)
: OR riot could simply remove position selection. So everyone becomes familiar with all 5 roles. Players are so fucking special these days... Just make people select their role as the process of picking happens. First place (highest MMR) picks a role, second MMR gets to pick one of the 4 roles left. AND SO ON. It is just a better solution to what we had back in 2012 and that shit was better than this autofilled crap.
I for one does not want to go back to the days of pick order. It was generating a lot of strife and anger for nothing, people mad at their own team-mates before the game even started.
: NEW MATCH MAKING IDEA
It's not "new". It has been discussed, again, and again, and again since the very start of Position Select almost 3 years ago. I don't have the energy to rehash this discussion once again now...
: > [{quoted}](name=DeathBurst,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=PEZhEkWc,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-09-10T23:46:17.736+0000) > > Nope, still no. The whole point of the Augments was that they entirely changed how your champion worked and their role in the team. Geez, you could get Tank Sona, On-Hit Malph, or Healer Ziggs. > > Just check in the game currently, how many champs have multiple (item) builds viable at the same time. Ezreal with AP burst vs AD poke is the poster child, but beyond that, not much, there's usually ONE optimal build, with slight situational variations that don't really alter your playstyle, they are just optimizations. Because having two drastically different playstyles working on the same base kit is fundamentally super hard to balance. > > And now, realize that you're asking, through Augments, for EVERY. SINGLE. CHAMP to get 3 or 4 different playstyles, that are all equally good (otherwise, no point of having "choices", if there is one right answer and wrong choices). It's not a matter of "handling it properly", that's impossible to handle so much stuff. Because keep in mind that the complexity of balancing increases exponentially --not linearly-- with the number of possibilities. 300 is not twice as hard to balance as 150, it's a hundred times harder. Ah, thank you for pointing out a problem with this idea that I already pointed out myself in the original thread, productive of you I'd say. And again, the original point of augments doesn't matter, I used the term augments because it's the closest term I have in league standards.
If your Augments are NOT like the original ones, if it's something tame like "+20 damage to Q" or "+100 range to W", they will fail on both accounts. 1/ That's **still** super hard to balance, because you still have 140 champs x 10 augments = 1400 different elements to tweak individually, instead of 12x5 = 60 Runes in the current system. Like for real, I'm not sure you realize the scale of what you're asking for. The 60 current Runes took 3 months to balance halfway properly, and were tweaked a lot with changes to Keystones every other patch for 6 additional months. Balancing 1000+ Augments wouldn't take "a whole season of work behind the scene", even if the complexity augmented linearly (and no, it doesn't), it would easily take 3 years. 2/ You lose all the pros of the original Augment system. What was fun was the discovery, the experimentation, and the ability to virtually play 2 or 3 different champions depending on your choice of Augments. If the new version is just slight boost to certain abilities, it's no better than the current Runes. Like, why take an Augment saying "+20 damage on Yasuo E", when you can simply take Sudden Impact? The result is the same.
: > [{quoted}](name=DeathBurst,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=PEZhEkWc,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-09-10T09:31:25.134+0000) > > Fun? Yes (at least at first). Interesting? Sure! More balanced? Ahahaha, nice joke. If they were handled properly, they would be. As I said in another reply, even if they weren't handled perfectly, they would still probably be better than current runes.
Nope, still no. The whole point of the Augments was that they entirely changed how your champion worked and their role in the team. Geez, you could get Tank Sona, On-Hit Malph, or Healer Ziggs. Just check in the game currently, how many champs have multiple (item) builds viable at the same time. Ezreal with AP burst vs AD poke is the poster child, but beyond that, not much, there's usually ONE optimal build, with slight situational variations that don't really alter your playstyle, they are just optimizations. Because having two drastically different playstyles working on the same base kit is fundamentally super hard to balance. And now, realize that you're asking, through Augments, for EVERY. SINGLE. CHAMP to get 3 or 4 different playstyles, that are all equally good (otherwise, no point of having "choices", if there is one right answer and wrong choices). It's not a matter of "handling it properly", that's impossible to handle so much stuff. Because keep in mind that the complexity of balancing increases exponentially --not linearly-- with the number of possibilities. 300 is not twice as hard to balance as 150, it's a hundred times harder.
: Hey! Thanks for replying to me once more! So there are counter picks in gold but it is better off to play champions that I am good at. I usually go Ekko if I am confident that I will win against the enemy laner but I usually go scaling champions if I know that I cannot win against the enemy laner. I believe if I narrow down my champion pool and stick to champions I am good with I assume that I will eventually climb! Thank you for your comments and I hope that me and you will climb well 😃
Just to give concrete examples: as Garen, I can win most of the time against Teemo, I can at least not die and farm against Vlad, and I do lose against Darius once in a while, but most of the time I can survive, and I even outright win sometimes. Experience, knowledge and player skills are often more important than match-ups. But yes, good point, if you are in a hard match-up, it's much better to have a scaling champ that doesn't fall off, good job pointing that out. Good luck and have fun o/
: Forget all the arguments and BS, just do me an easy favor and try playing Pantheon support. I guarantee you'll have fun and see how good it is. Basically every engage should be stun, then Q, then E move and auto attacks. I usually go with Exhaust and Ignite summoner spells, this helps increase damage and keep the enemy near you long enough to get kills for yourself and your adc.
I mean, I said "B-tier", I didn't say "total trash". It's like Trundle or Sion, it can work, but that's not his main role for a good reason, and if you're not a Panth main already, there are better options available... If you ARE a Panth main and auto-filled support, sure, play it there, be my guest, it's not absurd. But it's *obviously* not optimal either, and it's silly to argue in your first post that he would be actually "OP" as a support...
: Most of your examples are ULT moves. We are talking about a basic ability that can be spammed every 7 seconds with low cooldown. Best comparison would be Leona Q stun move, which is single target.
No, most of them aren't ult... Leona, Braum, Alistar, Taric and Thresh (i.e. all the true Tank Supports) have an AoE/multi-target hard CC on a basic/passive ability. And they ALSO have additional CC in their kit. Including their ult, yes, but the ult is **in addition** to the basic ability. Panth has **one, single-target** CC in his whole kit. Doesn't even compare. Sion too has an AoE hard CC on basic ability, and Maokai too, because I forgot to mention his Q in the previous post. For real, you say the "best comparison" is Leona Q, but then she has 2 other hard CC in her kit, so if that's the closer skill to Panth's, it's a terrible argument for Panth as a tank.
: So I invest time in learning a game and you assume I can't live without it. Yeah, you should like an idiot.
More like, why do you keep investing more time, if you're not having fun? What will be the return on that investment? What will be the reward? If you "invest" to get nothing at all in the end, it's not an investment, it's just wasting time. So, I'm not saying you're addicted to LoL. I'm just saying, what else can explain you keep on "investing"?
: I believe his damage immunity move lasts longer with more ranks. It certainly looked and felt like it lasted forever when I played him,I felt invincible. And with low cooldown, you can spam the damage immunity move every 9 seconds I think. Most stun moves are single target, but it's still very effective because it also lets you jump forward and close the gap. You can also spam the move about every 6 seconds with low cooldown. If you don't believe he's a good tank support, then try it out. I had major success with him and I think you can too. Plus he's a lot of fun.
No it does not increase with rank, it's 1.5/2.5 at all ranks. https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Pantheon#Aegis_Assault And no, not most hard CC from Tank Supports are single Target. * Leona E and R are AoE * Braum R is AoE and his passive has 0 CD * Alistar Pulverize is AoE * Taric stun is a double AoE * Thresh E is AoE * Malphite R is AoE * Maokai R can hit multiple target * Sion Q is AoE, and his R too even if relatively small
xelaker (NA)
: Assuming you either killed or forced a back and had free minion farm without harass... so prob getting around 300-500g and wrecking a turret in one fell swoop and that's not really counting a double kill or turret kill.
You might be getting 300-500g from the whole action, but you're still getting only 160 from the plate. So removing plates, as OP is asking, would reduce that amount by 160, no matter what.
: Is the new Pantheon rework OP?
E is 1.5/2.5 seconds, depending on whether empowered or not, not 6. And his only CC is single target. I don't know if Panth is OP or not. But IF he is OP, it's not as a tanky support. He's a B-tiers tank support, at best.
: The only reason I play LoL.
I mean, "it's investment" sounds a lot like "it's an addiction" to me... Have you heard about the Sunken Cost Fallacy?
: Why everyone is ragequitting even in ranked now?
From my experience, people don't ragequit more than usual, currently. Sorry, that's not very helpful, but I mean, are you sure it's not just your impression?
GigglesO (NA)
: Does nothing stop onhit builds?
Yeah, it's pretty hard to tank on-hit builds. The counterplay though is picking your fights. Why would you try to fight a fair 1v1 against a stacked duelist? Ambush them. Out rotate them. Play the macro-game.
Neriticc (EUW)
: Remove turret plates from bot lane turrets.
Each plate is worth **half** a kill, AND is shared between all champs present. * One kill is 300 g for the one that gets it and 150 for the other = 450 total. * One plate is 80 g for each = 160 total, barely more than a third.
: Hey! Thank you for replying! The reason why I am playing other champs rather than Ekko and Zed is due to the fact that I am not to confident to lane with particular match ups such as Leblanc and Katarina as Ekko. In some circumstances where my team requires an ad champion but Zed is banned, I normally pick champions like Irelia and Yasuo since I have some experience on them. From you advise I believe is telling me to narrow down my champion pool, which I will improve on doing that, but there is a problem whilst narrowing down my champion pool that I do not know what to do such as laning against Leblanc and Katarina, especially when the team needs ap and ekko is not a good pick for them( I am not confident with ekko in these match ups) Could you provide me some tips on that. Thank you for your reply!
> not confident about certain match-ups Doesn't matter. A bad match-up on a champ you know well is better than a good match-up on a champ you're not good at. Just take your usual champs and play safe in lane, don't die, and do your usual stuff in late game. And also, even if you're not confident **now**, after playing that same bad match-up 10 times, it will be much easier. > team requires AD Most of the time, you can just ignore that. If the enemy team has no real tank/frontline, your damage mix doesn't matter, they won't stack defenses anyway. And even when they *do* have a frontline, it's not guaranteed that a better damage mix is worth more than just you playing well on a champ you're good at. Maybe, maybe not, hard to tell for sure. So don't sweat it and stick to your mains.
: Hey! Thanks for you reply. So what you are saying is stick to Ryze, Zed, Ekko and Vladimir these 4 champs? So I should narrow down the champions I pick/ play in ranked, I will try and do that. Furthermore, are there any other parts that I am doing bad on? Such as Csing? Another problem is that I find it really hard to lane against Katarina and Leblanc, could you provide some picks or counters or what to do with laning against them? Thank you for your reply!
Yes, 4 champs is more than enough. I climbed from Silver1 to Plat4 playing literally only Garen in SoloQ, and with barely 53% winrate over 150 games. https://euw.op.gg/summoner/userName=DeathBurst On the other hand, with your top4 champs, your *lowest* winrate is 55% on Vlad. With all 4 combined, you are above 59% over 170 games. That's much much more than what's needed to climb. So yeah, maybe we could nitpick about your CS or whatever, but it doesn't matter. You clearly have the level to climb already. You just need to focus on what you're already good at.
: What's the point of a ranked system in this game?
> What's the point of a ranked system in this game? Same as in any other game. > When your Diamond players play the same as silver players, and your grandmaster players run it down just as much as bronzes ask yourself the question. Sure, I'll ask myself the question when that is true. But for now, it's not true, so I won't. > Literally, have any of you'll who have supposedly 'escaped' low elo ever felt like you were rewarded for doing so? Yes, because.... > Is the matchmaking any better? ... no, but... > Are your teamamtes any wiser? ... yes, definitely.
: Reminder: Unlock all champions for ARAM
What do you say to Riot telling us ARAM-only accounts don't exist in noticeable proportion?
: Odyssey Augments as runes
> TL;DR : Having Odyssey augments replace the rune system would be incredibly fun and interesting, and probably more balanced than the current rune system. Fun? Yes (at least at first). Interesting? Sure! More balanced? Ahahaha, nice joke.
: > [{quoted}](name=DeathBurst,realm=EUW,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=MjrsLTba,comment-id=0067,timestamp=2019-09-05T01:11:48.844+0000) > > As a Garen one-trick, not a single of the Eternals for Garen sounds exciting. Yes, I kept in mind the note about rekindling and personal best in a single game. > > * Enemies killed with R is just grinding, and after rekindling it's just barely better than counting kills. > * Damage dealt with E is incentiving grouping for team-fights, which Garen is bad at. But beyond that, it's entirely out of your control, and tracking personal best will just show how much you were able to dumpster your laner when you had an easy match-up. At best boring, at worst warping. > * Time spent with passive up is strongly correlated with game length. Getting a good score won't be about avoiding poke or anything skill-full, it will just be about dragging out games... > > EDIT: in contrast, Kled Eternals are much more interesting. Getting the delayed trigger on Q that enemy can avoid if you don't play correctly, getting good R with accurate prediction of where enemies will be 3-5 seconds ahead, and proper use of your passive away from base. Yeah, fine, that's what I want to see, that demonstrates mastery and skills. I appreciate the feedback. What are some things you'd be more excited to track on Garen?
Things that display mastery of the champ and the nuances behind it. For instance, not exhaustive list: * Channels interrupted with Q * Reduced CC with the first .75s of W and/or amount of damage negated with W. * Amount of time you got isolated (or amplified with the mini-rework coming soon) damage on an enemy champion * **Efficient** use of R, not just kills. Wasting R on an enemy at 50 HP shouldn't count. Dealing 1500 damage to a Tank should, even if it doesn't kill it entirely. Not sure what's the best way to define "efficient" in a consistent manner, but just kills is boring. Also, I'm really not sold on the concept of personal bests in a single game. Even my suggestions here are correlated with game length. Not as much as just the time Passive is up, but still a lot. Ideally you would want to track stuff with a single use of a skill, e.g. for Garen "max damage blocked with a single W", not all W over the whole game. Problem is, for things like Malphite R, once you got a 5-person R, you can't go beyond that with a single cast, so it's not a perfect solution either. **But basically, *ALL* Personal Best incentivize to some extent dragging out games, refusing to end, just to grind for longer. And I'm not sure that's healthy.**
: Eternals Feedback Thread: Set 1 Uniques
As a Garen one-trick, not a single of the Eternals for Garen sounds exciting. Yes, I kept in mind the note about rekindling and personal best in a single game. * Enemies killed with R is just grinding, and after rekindling it's just barely better than counting kills. * Damage dealt with E is incentiving grouping for team-fights, which Garen is bad at. But beyond that, it's entirely out of your control, and tracking personal best will just show how much you were able to dumpster your laner when you had an easy match-up. At best boring, at worst warping. * Time spent with passive up is strongly correlated with game length. Getting a good score won't be about avoiding poke or anything skill-full, it will just be about dragging out games... EDIT: in contrast, Kled Eternals are much more interesting. Getting the delayed trigger on Q that enemy can avoid if you don't play correctly, getting good R with accurate prediction of where enemies will be 3-5 seconds ahead, and proper use of your passive away from base. Yeah, fine, that's what I want to see, that demonstrates mastery and skills.
: "Self Ban" system idea
> EDIT: Those who downvote. Care to explain why? Or they just recognized themselves in the first lines, and don't wana play with similar players. Probably too complicated to implement, probably not effective even if it somehow managed to get implemented. The odds of getting matched with the same persons twice is very low, unless you play at like 3 A.M. and/or in very high MMR.
Voldymort (EUNE)
: >Currently there is only one. actually there's 6 {{item:3102}} {{item:3814}} {{item:3111}} {{item:3222}} {{item:3157}} {{item:3139}} and a summoner spell {{summoner:1}}
> [{quoted}](name=Voldymort,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=MUlxHy2H,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-30T10:42:14.455+0000) > > actually there's 6 > > {{item:3102}} {{item:3814}} {{item:3111}} {{item:3222}} {{item:3157}} {{item:3139}} > > and a summoner spell > > {{summoner:1}} Let's not forget {{item:3053}}
: How to deal with bad teammates
This seems to be just a rant to vent some frustration, but in case it's actually a serious question... Like RNG. You treat team-mates like RNG, good or bad. Seriously, sometimes the ADC with just 1 item gets 3 crits in a row, and it's unlucky, but that's part of the game. Well, same with team-mates. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes don't, but you have no control over it. It's like RNG.
: And yet it's in DotA 2 and not abused to get free wins.
Never played DotA 2, but I'm somehow skeptical. Let's be clear: ONE player can unilaterally, without any option for anyone else, cause the game to be a tie? 'Cause that's what OP suggestion really means.
: Pause the Game if there is a AFK
* Pause the game if there's an AFK --> sure, why not * 5 minute grace period --> too long. For comparison, WarCraft3 had a 1 minute grace period, and StarCraft2 just let opponents unpause the game immediately, if I remember correctly. * End games in a tie --> HELL NO. If you do that, the *immediate* consequence is people harassing other players. "You lost your lane and fed, GTFO, go AFK and don't make US lose LP because of YOU." Toxicity would skyrocket, not decrease. So yeah, if you're not the AFK players, it sucks to lose because of them, but the opposite solution would be 10 times worse. * Harsh LP loss for AFK --> No. Just make it a normal loss. There should be punishment for AFK (and there are some already, low priority queues, etc.), but going AFK doesn't tell anything about players' skills, so it shouldn't impact LP/Ranking. A normal loss is fine already.
: Meanwhile in Top Lane?
I play mostly Juggernauts (Garen/Illaoi/etc.), not exactly Tanks, but I have to deal with Melee vs Ranged match-ups all the same. And basically, yes, you have to give up some farm. In such a match-up, your goal is not to **win** laning phase, it's to **stay even**. Because in most cases, these ranged picks Top are a bet to win the game early, and **time is playing for you**. Picking a ranged Top laner usually means that the overall team-comp lacks either utility or durability, and your team will have a better shot at winning full 5v5 team-fights. So the strategy is (trying to) staying even, most of all not dying, and playing for late game. Also, in *some* match-ups, you have a power-spike around level 6-10 when you finally get enough damage to kill your opponent in one rotation and you can all-in them. But this you have to learn on a case-by-case basis, there is no general rule. For instance, Garen vs Teemo is around level 7-8, whereas Garen vs Vlad is after one full MR item+one damage component (Phage or Sheen), and so around level 10. Just remember the possibility might be there and try and look for it.
Show more

DeathBurst

Level 232 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion