Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Hotarµ (NA)
: Try closing all processes relating to League through your task manager. (CTRL+ALT+DEL) If that doesn't help, uninstall and reinstall the game again. If that **still** isn't working, [file a support ticket here. ](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new) Good luck!
this is during the uninstall and reinstall phase :/ ill file a ticket i guess
Rioter Comments
PhRoXz0n (NA)
: Crit Item Explorations
removing mr from hex drinker would be a a serious blow against ad champions that build it to survive against ap champions in lane, the lifegrip passive is detached from the reality of mages softening up targets in lane before going all in to finish them off
: League gameplay changes over the next few months
any plans to revert the nerfs to yi over gold funneling?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Geneseid (NA)
: There's practically no item in this game you can build against Yi
why is it always the argument that the yi knows how to use his q but you dont know how to use ur cc? i find it odd that you've been playing an s tier jungler (xin zhao) and actually complain about yi
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Saw that video this morning, got a few questions if you don't mind. How would you finish the item build if you got to 6 items? Would you change it if there were more or less squishies or tanks? Why did you rush rageblade before your jungle item? Was it a situational choice or would you always do it? Have you found the on hit build to work consistently better than the crit build? Why the glacial augment? Aren't you missing out on a ton of extra damage with something like Lethal Tempo? Anyways, great work as always, keep it up. You are the only league youtuber I know that's actually putting out instructional content these days.
> [{quoted}](name=RedPannda,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=aup8Hwvd,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2018-03-28T21:34:11.707+0000) > > Saw that video this morning, got a few questions if you don't mind. > > How would you finish the item build if you got to 6 items? > > Would you change it if there were more or less squishies or tanks? > > Why did you rush rageblade before your jungle item? > > Was it a situational choice or would you always do it? > > Have you found the on hit build to work consistently better than the crit build? > > Why the glacial augment? Aren't you missing out on a ton of extra damage with something like Lethal Tempo? > > Anyways, great work as always, keep it up. You are the only league youtuber I know that's actually putting out instructional content these days. I'm not sure yet as I'm still tinkering with the itemization. Against that particular team I may have gotten a GA and Steraks gage. I rushed rageblade because it's provides a powerspike that dwarfs blood razor and botrk, particularly since I max E over Q. I can kill almost anyone with a fully stacked rageblade so I'm going to do it consistently until patches change things up again. I'm trying out Glacial Augment because it makes it easy to stay on top of people and permits easy ganks without relying on the red buff. I don't see the value in Lethal tempo or PTA activating after a few auto attacks if they've gotten away from me already.
Rioter Comments
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: March 21
thoughts on how to get in touch with riot as a content creator? i noticed a stream link in the game client the other day, how do i get in touch with the people who organize that?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: March 3
any plans to buff highlander? it's kinda slow
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Keyru (NA)
: Boards Moderation Discord Verification
Rioter Comments
: Why did Master Yi get a buff
yi's pretty overpowered right up till about bronze 4
: Master Yi Weak When?
Just because you lost one game to an objectively weak champion (currently ranking as the worst jungler in the game) does not mean that champion is broken.
Cycera (NA)
: Thank you! I love you! I want to improve at jungling, I suck really hard! This will help me!!
> [{quoted}](name=Cycera,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oZm1nA5k,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-01-29T20:54:00.207+0000) > > Thank you! I love you! I want to improve at jungling, I suck really hard! This will help me!! thanks, for a while there I thought boards didn't care about my posts no more D:
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Why I am quitting Mordekaiser
: You summed it up pretty well, but I'll throw in my two cents from the perspective as one of the team leads. From a process perspective: When we're working on a patch, we have about two work weeks to choose our targets, dig into a shit ton of data, come up with a few paperkits, implement said paperkits, test them, get feedback, iterate, test again, finalize iterations, and get in for actual bug testing and localization lock (for things that are changing tooltips and need to be translated). What this usually amounts to is that we have from ~Wednesday afternoon to the following Friday to get our changes through the various development stages and into the next patch. After we lock on the Friday, we have the following Monday/Tuesday for any final power tuning and bug fixing before the entire patch gets "locked" and no more changes can be submitted. From there it goes into extensive bug testing internally, at vendors, and in partner regions to ensure all big bugs have been caught and fixed before we go Live the following Tuesday-Wednesday. This means that from the time we start working on a task, it takes 3 weeks before that change will actually get shipped live (which is one of the factors in it feeling like it takes a long time for things to get changed). Now, not all of our work is targeted on a 2 week cadence, there are times where we have some larger work on our plates for a few sprints/months before it ships, but the bulk of our work gets run through the rapid two week cadence. When we're already working on a fast schedule, one of the things that can drag down any team in any organisation is having too much work in progress. It's something you need to be hyper aware of, as having too many things on the go at once is likely to lead to a lot of stuff falling through the cracks, or burnout because of people trying to deal with the overhead of each individual piece of work they have on their plate. What this means at Riot is that the specific designer may have 4-5 tasks of varying sizes on their plates for a given patch, and each of those tasks requires investigation, ideation, implementation, playtesting and gathering feedback, iterating based on said feedback, fixing bugs, writing patch notes etc. Anything that bleeds over to the next sprint adds to the overhead they need to manage the following sprint (including adding another testpoint to playtests that are already crowded with changes from all the teams in core gameplay). While breaking things up as you suggest would lead to smoother releases, it also just doesn't scale well in a real world development scenario (that's not intended to sound condescending). What this means from a product perspective: One of the things that we try to aim for with our larger changes is offering interesting and compelling gameplay that alters the way players may think about when to pick a specific champion, how to build them, or where they could play them. Things like; what if you could take Nunu bot lane with an Azir or Kayle instead of just in the jungle when you have a hyper scaling adc? Or what if you could take Morgana or Zyra in the jungle if you got autofilled jungle as a support main but your team was entirely physical damage? These types of changes tend to err on the riskier side of the equation because we're trying to balance for a lot of factors. Things like what will this look like in pro play? What about Diamond? Will this be pubstompy in Bronze? Would this be something players find exciting or interesting? The list goes on and on, but at the end of the day, sometimes we have to take our best guess which is informed by the few playtests we get, trust our gut, and go with it. Can this result in us having some releases where we sit back, see the results of a change and think "damnit we did it again". Yep. But does that make me question whether we should have held onto a change for an additional 2 sprints to try and eke out even a tiny bit more value from playtests to give us the confidence in a direction or present tuning? Very very rarely. When all is said and done, the data that we get from our changes being out in the wild for even an hour gives us far more information than we can get from our playtests. This means that we can adjust a champion to be right around where we're happy with a day or two after release as opposed to holding onto them and carrying the overhead cost of managing the task through the various dev stages for another month to get us to the same result (maybe). While people tend to look at them as massive misses on our part (which they are), I'm fine accepting that cost as long as we're willing to own up to it when we do and hotfix them when necessary. At the end of the day as a lead I'm accountable for the results of my team, and if needing to do hotfixes was causing players to churn from the game or completely lose all faith in Riot then I'd definitely revisit this as a philosophy, but as that hasn't materialised so far my tendency is to lean towards iterating quickly as opposed to drawing changes out over a long period of time. @OP: To be entirely clear, your thoughts aren't wrong. If we wanted to go for the smoothest releases possible, we could easily adjust to releasing changes the way you suggest (1/4 or 1/2 at a time). The primary benefit there would be we'd have less egregious cases like Nunu crop up, and the primary cost would be that we'd be able to do net fewer changes as we adjust our workload to account for carry over tasks. It could be that the trade-off is worth it, though for now I'm not convinced. In my mind the worst case right now is that we end up having champs like Nunu be strong for a day or two, people get to see them pop off with some fun synergies, and then we get him to a spot we're roughly happy with - which is ideally far better than he was before. That being said... One of our hopes with changing our patching cadence to be a large patch followed by a small patch is that we get additional breathing room to work on larger projects rather than trying to bundle everything into a standard patch. By changing our small patches to have significantly fewer changes than what players are currently used to, it grants us significantly more bandwidth to work on the larger term stuff that hopefully has a larger impact on the overall state of League. Hopefully the above reasoning makes some amount of sense. I have this awful tendency of writing fucking bibles on the boards :P. Let me know if anything needs additional clarity.
> [{quoted}](name=Maple Nectar,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=qgPXfKtQ,comment-id=00030002,timestamp=2018-01-26T04:32:36.379+0000) > > You summed it up pretty well, but I'll throw in my two cents from the perspective as one of the team leads. > > From a process perspective: > > When we're working on a patch, we have about two work weeks to choose our targets, dig into a shit ton of data, come up with a few paperkits, implement said paperkits, test them, get feedback, iterate, test again, finalize iterations, and get in for actual bug testing and localization lock (for things that are changing tooltips and need to be translated). What this usually amounts to is that we have from ~Wednesday afternoon to the following Friday to get our changes through the various development stages and into the next patch. After we lock on the Friday, we have the following Monday/Tuesday for any final power tuning and bug fixing before the entire patch gets "locked" and no more changes can be submitted. From there it goes into extensive bug testing internally, at vendors, and in partner regions to ensure all big bugs have been caught and fixed before we go Live the following Tuesday-Wednesday. This means that from the time we start working on a task, it takes 3 weeks before that change will actually get shipped live (which is one of the factors in it feeling like it takes a long time for things to get changed). > > Now, not all of our work is targeted on a 2 week cadence, there are times where we have some larger work on our plates for a few sprints/months before it ships, but the bulk of our work gets run through the rapid two week cadence. When we're already working on a fast schedule, one of the things that can drag down any team in any organisation is having too much work in progress. It's something you need to be hyper aware of, as having too many things on the go at once is likely to lead to a lot of stuff falling through the cracks, or burnout because of people trying to deal with the overhead of each individual piece of work they have on their plate. What this means at Riot is that the specific designer may have 4-5 tasks of varying sizes on their plates for a given patch, and each of those tasks requires investigation, ideation, implementation, playtesting and gathering feedback, iterating based on said feedback, fixing bugs, writing patch notes etc. Anything that bleeds over to the next sprint adds to the overhead they need to manage the following sprint (including adding another testpoint to playtests that are already crowded with changes from all the teams in core gameplay). While breaking things up as you suggest would lead to smoother releases, it also just doesn't scale well in a real world development scenario (that's not intended to sound condescending). > > What this means from a product perspective: > > One of the things that we try to aim for with our larger changes is offering interesting and compelling gameplay that alters the way players may think about when to pick a specific champion, how to build them, or where they could play them. Things like; what if you could take Nunu bot lane with an Azir or Kayle instead of just in the jungle when you have a hyper scaling adc? Or what if you could take Morgana or Zyra in the jungle if you got autofilled jungle as a support main but your team was entirely physical damage? These types of changes tend to err on the riskier side of the equation because we're trying to balance for a lot of factors. Things like what will this look like in pro play? What about Diamond? Will this be pubstompy in Bronze? Would this be something players find exciting or interesting? The list goes on and on, but at the end of the day, sometimes we have to take our best guess which is informed by the few playtests we get, trust our gut, and go with it. Can this result in us having some releases where we sit back, see the results of a change and think "damnit we did it again". Yep. But does that make me question whether we should have held onto a change for an additional 2 sprints to try and eke out even a tiny bit more value from playtests to give us the confidence in a direction or present tuning? Very very rarely. When all is said and done, the data that we get from our changes being out in the wild for even an hour gives us far more information than we can get from our playtests. This means that we can adjust a champion to be right around where we're happy with a day or two after release as opposed to holding onto them and carrying the overhead cost of managing the task through the various dev stages for another month to get us to the same result (maybe). While people tend to look at them as massive misses on our part (which they are), I'm fine accepting that cost as long as we're willing to own up to it when we do and hotfix them when necessary. At the end of the day as a lead I'm accountable for the results of my team, and if needing to do hotfixes was causing players to churn from the game or completely lose all faith in Riot then I'd definitely revisit this as a philosophy, but as that hasn't materialised so far my tendency is to lean towards iterating quickly as opposed to drawing changes out over a long period of time. > > @OP: > To be entirely clear, your thoughts aren't wrong. If we wanted to go for the smoothest releases possible, we could easily adjust to releasing changes the way you suggest (1/4 or 1/2 at a time). The primary benefit there would be we'd have less egregious cases like Nunu crop up, and the primary cost would be that we'd be able to do net fewer changes as we adjust our workload to account for carry over tasks. It could be that the trade-off is worth it, though for now I'm not convinced. In my mind the worst case right now is that we end up having champs like Nunu be strong for a day or two, people get to see them pop off with some fun synergies, and then we get him to a spot we're roughly happy with - which is ideally far better than he was before. > > That being said... > > One of our hopes with changing our patching cadence to be a large patch followed by a small patch is that we get additional breathing room to work on larger projects rather than trying to bundle everything into a standard patch. By changing our small patches to have significantly fewer changes than what players are currently used to, it grants us significantly more bandwidth to work on the larger term stuff that hopefully has a larger impact on the overall state of League. > > Hopefully the above reasoning makes some amount of sense. I have this awful tendency of writing fucking bibles on the boards :P. Let me know if anything needs additional clarity. Is there a reason communication with a champions player base is inconsistent when balancing a champion? I've heard riot augustus regularly interacts with the rengar community when working on changes for rengar. I'd like to have some of that too for the Yi changes given that riot meddler admitted a while ago Riot wasn't sure what to do with yi.
: It's an interesting changelist but not necessarily the changelist that'll ship. We're planning on doing further exploration on Yi changes.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot Novalas,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=AkdoqJg0,comment-id=00300000,timestamp=2018-01-26T01:23:01.103+0000) > > It's an interesting changelist but not necessarily the changelist that'll ship. We're planning on doing further exploration on Yi changes. praise buddha, i shall sacrifice a small animal in your name good sir
Chermorg (NA)
: BORK and Steraks both give AD. Not every scaling is designed to be exploited 100%
> [{quoted}](name=Chermorg,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=n1hJxc9V,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-01-25T08:15:59.107+0000) > > BORK and Steraks both give AD. Not every scaling is designed to be exploited 100% you might want to look up steraks gage, it does not work with the new meditate
: You seem to not realize that the Ahri player actually offered a reasonable buff to a champion. They also explained why it'd be nice to have, and the reasoning for it to be a thing, and also on one of the most complained about rng abilities. Your Yi post is you just saying "buff yi" with no logical/thoughtful responses as to how.
> [{quoted}](name=Emelie Cauchemar,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=E6BO8ZFk,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-01-22T17:18:06.139+0000) > > You seem to not realize that the Ahri player actually offered a reasonable buff to a champion. They also explained why it'd be nice to have, and the reasoning for it to be a thing, and also on one of the most complained about rng abilities. > > Your Yi post is you just saying "buff yi" with no logical/thoughtful responses as to how. that isn't my post
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Seriously Yi doesn't need buffs...
https://i.imgur.com/mXZLD4W.png
: 2018 Ranked Placements Venting post!
I got 1 win, 9 losses and ended up p3 :/
Rioter Comments
Le Meme (NA)
: I went 7 wins for 3 losses, 2 lowest grades were c's. average was a to s. I was placed in silver 3. My friend, who I duo q'd with through placements except 2 games, also went 7 for 3. He was placed silver 5. My friend goes 4 and 6........ ( was plat 5 at the end of preseason and like gold 2 or 3 at the end of the season ) and gets placed gold 3..... im not one to argue that better players deserve to get placed higher. BUT AND ITS A HUGE BUT! No player should be able to lose over HALF of the placements AND STILL GET PLACED IN GOLD 3! IF YOU LOSE 6 GAMES IN PLACEMENTS WHY ARE YOU NOT GETTING PLACED AT THE LOWEST TIER OF YOUR LADDER? ( GOLD 5 ) YOU GUYS REALLY DID RIG THIS SYSTEM AND ITS NOT LACK OF KNOWLEDGE CUZ I KNOW WHY I WAS PLACED IN SILVER 3! ITS CUZ I ENDED THE SEASON IN SILVER 2! BUT ME WINNING A GAME LOSING A GAME THEN GOING ON A 5 WIN STREAK LOSING ONE MORE THEN WINNING ANOTHER WHILE GETTING S' AND A'S AND ONLY 2 C'S ( CANT GET A+ WITH AN AFK AND A TROLL ) JUSTIFIES WAY HIGHER ELO THAN THAT SHIT!
> [{quoted}](name=Le Meme,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zAQYmP7q,comment-id=001500000002,timestamp=2018-01-17T19:16:58.627+0000) > > I went 7 wins for 3 losses, 2 lowest grades were c's. average was a to s. I was placed in silver 3. My friend, who I duo q'd with through placements except 2 games, also went 7 for 3. He was placed silver 5. My friend goes 4 and 6........ ( was plat 5 at the end of preseason and like gold 2 or 3 at the end of the season ) and gets placed gold 3..... im not one to argue that better players deserve to get placed higher. BUT AND ITS A HUGE BUT! No player should be able to lose over HALF of the placements AND STILL GET PLACED IN GOLD 3! IF YOU LOSE 6 GAMES IN PLACEMENTS WHY ARE YOU NOT GETTING PLACED AT THE LOWEST TIER OF YOUR LADDER? ( GOLD 5 ) YOU GUYS REALLY DID RIG THIS SYSTEM AND ITS NOT LACK OF KNOWLEDGE CUZ I KNOW WHY I WAS PLACED IN SILVER 3! ITS CUZ I ENDED THE SEASON IN SILVER 2! BUT ME WINNING A GAME LOSING A GAME THEN GOING ON A 5 WIN STREAK LOSING ONE MORE THEN WINNING ANOTHER WHILE GETTING S' AND A'S AND ONLY 2 C'S ( CANT GET A+ WITH AN AFK AND A TROLL ) JUSTIFIES WAY HIGHER ELO THAN THAT SHIT! i've gone 2-8 in past seasons and got p2 ._.
Meddler (NA)
: Wouldn't expect Yi or Trynd in 8.2. Hoping for 8.3, haven't yet identified what we'd be looking to buff for each of them though. In terms of facing juggernauts that's somewhere I'd expect champs like Yi to have some trouble. Mobile champs get a lot more agency over when fights happen and ability to disengage, so juggernauts need to able to just straight up brawl with them well in melee range if that actually happens.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=rBEuvwxg,comment-id=001f0000,timestamp=2018-01-12T16:43:39.941+0000) > > Wouldn't expect Yi or Trynd in 8.2. Hoping for 8.3, haven't yet identified what we'd be looking to buff for each of them though. > > In terms of facing juggernauts that's somewhere I'd expect champs like Yi to have some trouble. Mobile champs get a lot more agency over when fights happen and ability to disengage, so juggernauts need to able to just straight up brawl with them well in melee range if that actually happens. buff per level ad buff per level attack speed change e to make it work with total ad again put highlander back to 10 seconds devourer has been gone for 2 years now there's no need to keep punishing him for an item that was removed
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Show more

Commando Yi

Level 78 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion