: Small Diana Gameplay changes coming to PBE
I think before you commit to these changes, you need to think very carefully about what you want Diana to be. Do you want her to be a Diver or an Assassin? If you want her to be an assassin, then you remove sustained damage in exchange for burst commitment. If you want her to be a diver, then you keep sustained damage and nerf burst. What you are doing here is NERFING BOTH. The attack and movement speed buffs do not meaningfully compensate for the removal of her sustained damage pattern in terms of making her more like a diver, but you're also cutting out some of her burst at the same time. To me, these changes seem confused. It really feels like you're trying to keep her ability to be both, and as we've seen with the case of people like Wukong, that is extremely difficult or nigh impossible. Please consider pulling these changes until you solidify what her gameplay identity is supposed to be.
Rioter Comments
CritDoge (NA)
: Item Shop Layout Always Defaults to Grid Mode
The patch seemed to have fixed my issue. I have no idea how.
: Maybe it's just me but I thought that the old Shyvanna bio was much better? I liked how much more was set up as to how she got to Demacia and how her dragon-father helped her escape. Also the use of Petricite in the final fight was not mentioned as well. Idk maybe just a personal idea but I kinda liked the older story a bit better
No, I agree. The whole point of her luring Yvva into the petricite ruins was basically lost, and I feel that's a shame. Also, you know, her ripping out Yvva's heart with her bare hands, which was SUPER badass and one of my favorite parts about the bio because it really emphasized Shyv's dual nature and her struggle to control the dragon inside of her.
: You can finish reading it on the wiki. https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Silence_for_the_Damned#I
> [{quoted}](name=DerMangoJoghurt,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=BzWoJ5op,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-05T19:59:42.072+0000) > > You can finish reading it on the wiki. > https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Silence_for_the_Damned#I THANK you!
  Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=LqLKtMpN,discussion-id=uTwIp3JW,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-14T22:00:49.612+0000) > > Grid Mode doesn't list cost of items it does
> [{quoted}](name=tPnV36pOV3tCmrWL,realm=NA,application-id=LqLKtMpN,discussion-id=uTwIp3JW,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-14T22:04:01.162+0000) > > it does Honestly I think it's just because I have a nice wide rectangle to click inaccurately in to buy my item instead of having to hunt for a smaller square. I'm a spam-clicker in the shop so being able to accurately buy with inaccurate clicking is nice XD.
: Why do you need it in description mode lmao did you just start playing yesterday
> [{quoted}](name=tPnV36pOV3tCmrWL,realm=NA,application-id=LqLKtMpN,discussion-id=uTwIp3JW,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-14T21:55:36.214+0000) > > Why do you need it in description mode lmao did you just start playing yesterday Aesthetic preference. I don't like having my items all bunched up with narrow spacing. ~~And Grid Mode doesn't list cost of items, I believe, which is actually important information.~~
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Visual and Sound Effects Update: Anivia
Hi Sirhaian! Everything looks pretty good to me, except for the explosion of Q and the hit particle of E, where they look really...cartoony, for lack of a better word. It just looks like a bunch of unshaded cyan polygons flying off into the ether, and seems really out of place with League's softer, more polished aesthetic.
CritDoge (NA)
: Clash Team Looking for an ADC
@Everyone who friended me, I'm in game with our midlaner, will reply as soon as I can, thank you!
Rioter Comments
TigBits2 (NA)
: G3 Midlaner looking for clash team
TigBits2 (NA)
: G3 Midlaner looking for clash team
We're in a game right now, but I can add you after.
: Hi Meddler, I'd like to get your quick opinion on Kindred's Ultimate ability. To me it feels like a tool that is rarely used, and even when it is used it isn't used well. Perhaps that's just me not knowing when and where to use it yet, but I'd like to hear your input anyway. Thanks!
> [{quoted}](name=EdwardWolperting,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=Y8q9wl4r,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-06-29T16:08:38.137+0000) > > Hi Meddler, > I'd like to get your quick opinion on Kindred's Ultimate ability. To me it feels like a tool that is rarely used, and even when it is used it isn't used well. Perhaps that's just me not knowing when and where to use it yet, but I'd like to hear your input anyway. > > Thanks! No, I would have to agree with you. Not only is it fairly mechanically clunky, it is also really, really thematically disjointed from what they are. Kindred are the spirits of DEATH, and if you see them, it should mean that it's basically your time to go. Why do they randomly have the power to delay people's deaths? It also feels much more like a support's ability as opposed to a carry's ability, as well.
: The actual mains are tired of a champion that is 1 shot or nothing, with only a linear combo and absolutely no DPS while also getting punished for trying to duel since he has to wait for his burst while also having his ult be only a long range engage tool as a melee champion makes him really annoying to play as. I'm a Fizz main and i have no problem with the current W but i really want riot to revert his ult so it has a neutral size and can be used at melee range since every other assassin has some sort of outplay potential on their ults alongside engage potential (Zed R to dodge an engage and turn it around, Talon R turns him invisible for a quick passive mark and dodge skillshots if he's good, Leblanc can recast abilities depending on what she needs, Kass has a literal Flash he can get creative with... etc.) while Fizz only gets rewarded if he backs off or hides in a bush and can only use it as engage from a long range since melee range ult on Fizz is absolute trash.
> [{quoted}](name=Sebastit7d,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=dLyjyRT5,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2018-06-28T17:54:10.118+0000) > > The actual mains are tired of a champion that is 1 shot or nothing, with only a linear combo and absolutely no DPS while also getting punished for trying to duel since he has to wait for his burst while also having his ult be only a long range engage tool as a melee champion makes him really annoying to play as. I'm a Fizz main and i have no problem with the current W but i really want riot to revert his ult so it has a neutral size and can be used at melee range since every other assassin has some sort of outplay potential on their ults alongside engage potential (Zed R to dodge an engage and turn it around, Talon R turns him invisible for a quick passive mark and dodge skillshots if he's good, Leblanc can recast abilities depending on what she needs, Kass has a literal Flash he can get creative with... etc.) while Fizz only gets rewarded if he backs off or hides in a bush and can only use it as engage from a long range since melee range ult on Fizz is absolute trash. That's because this is the identity that Riot wanted to give him: a proper initiating assassin that's dangerous at range. Both Zed (W->R) and Leblanc (W->R) have to blow two cooldowns if they want to initiate on someone at range, whereas Fizz only needs the one. It also grants him a source of hard CC that will interrupt dashes when it activates, which gives him a huge amount of closing potential where he might not need to even use abilities at all and can just walk to his target. You're also forgetting that of all the assassins in the roster, Fizz is the only one that has untargetability ON A BASIC ABILITY. That is a HUGE part of his power budget. So to give him melee fish power, you'd probably have to take something away from him, like making him able to be hit while on top of his troll pole, or removing the CC from his fish altogether.
: I agree that the Trident mark is a very clear visualization of the damage, and likely any version we do in this direction will be a clarity downgrade from that. However, we believe that since the first chunk is significantly lower than the second, we can probably solve the clarity around big burst through additional VFX/SFX if needed. Fizz has a limited window in which to recast the W, so the play around case is to beware the second W once you see the first W come out.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot NeuroCat,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=huEn04VG,comment-id=0003000000000000,timestamp=2018-06-20T19:26:02.287+0000) > > I agree that the Trident mark is a very clear visualization of the damage, and likely any version we do in this direction will be a clarity downgrade from that. However, we believe that since the first chunk is significantly lower than the second, we can probably solve the clarity around big burst through additional VFX/SFX if needed. Fizz has a limited window in which to recast the W, so the play around case is to beware the second W once you see the first W come out. If you insist on sticking with this double-cast paradigm, we already have a champion in the game that has such a paradigm in a clearly telegraphed way to her opponents: Camille. I would look towards her Q for inspiration as to how you want to make this new W have proper clarity for the people playing against it.
: He still has a dot, just doesn't have the "charging" mark that he applies with autos/R. Delaying Fizz's full damage allows his opponents to play around it, so we want to keep his time-to-kill in a range that still feels fair to opponents. Items change the equation a bit (e.g. Lich Bane), so its probably more fair to look at different gameplay situations holistically. I'd encourage you to try it on PBE if possible - I actually think his damage is a bit high in this version right now, especially early, but we'll see how it tests. I'm happy to jump onto the FizzMains subreddit.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot NeuroCat,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=huEn04VG,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-06-20T18:41:33.928+0000) > > He still has a dot, just doesn't have the "charging" mark that he applies with autos/R. > > Delaying Fizz's full damage allows his opponents to play around it, so we want to keep his time-to-kill in a range that still feels fair to opponents. Items change the equation a bit (e.g. Lich Bane), so its probably more fair to look at different gameplay situations holistically. > > I'd encourage you to try it on PBE if possible - I actually think his damage is a bit high in this version right now, especially early, but we'll see how it tests. I'm happy to jump onto the FizzMains subreddit. I feel like this change removes a lot of clarity for how his opponent should be responding to him. Before, with the trident mark, it was clear that once that thing filled, you should either get out or be prepared to eat a large chunk of damage. With this, it will feel like "Huh he did a chunk...and then he did another chunk for no reason." I greatly dislike this cast paradigm, and would recommend you seek a better alternative. Honestly, I don't really see anything wrong with the trident mark system other than "it makes people who played pre-rework Fizz not like it anymore," which is not necessarily a problem, because pre-rework Fizz was an awful balance nightmare with untargetability, a dash, and an AOE slow all on one ability with a low cooldown. I played Fizz both before and after the rework and while there was some adjustment period for post-rework, I honestly felt like it was more interactive to play, and felt a lot better when I could time a W+Q right as the mark matured as they got knocked up by a max-range shark.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=000000010001000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:14:00.341+0000)But overall, it doesn't feel like significant work has been put into the instant feedback system for a long time, and you know what, that's FINE. It is OKAY to not put player behavior as a high priority, AS LONG AS YOU OWN UP TO IT. > > My issue with Riot is that they CONTINUALLY say that they're working on it when it doesn't feel like any strides have been made in that department. It's fine to say a facet of your business is currently low priority. > > It is NOT okay to say you're working on something you're not. I think this is a perception issue. If the system has gone from, say, 99.5% accuracy to 99.75% accuracy, for example, that's actually a 50% improvement -- but that 50% improvement will not be noticed by any one player. If feeder detection has gone from taking 20 games to taking 15, that's a 25% improvement -- again, one that won't be noticed by any one individual player. I think it's unfair for us to simply assume that nothing is being done and Riot has an entire behavioral team just sitting back and relaxing -- I've met several Rioters, and all of them have been *super* passionate about building the best game they can, and doing right by the players, even in private conversations with no company eyes on them. I can't even *begin* to think they're lying to us about what that team is trying to do.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=00000001000100000000000100000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:38:53.926+0000) > > It's a 0.25% improvement out of 100%, but cutting a 0.5 percent error rate to a 0.25 percent error rate is a 50% reduction of your current error rate. > > This I agree with, certainly. More transparency would be great. > > It does. No offense, but that's a conspiracy theory. That last line was mostly added as black humor. I know the team exists, since I see Tantram posting regularly on the boards. I get where you're coming from with the error rate. Interpreted like that, it's a significant improvement. Although looking at accuracy gains, it doesn't look like very much. All in how you interpret the data, I suppose. Good talk!
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=000000010001000000000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:14:00.341+0000)But overall, it doesn't feel like significant work has been put into the instant feedback system for a long time, and you know what, that's FINE. It is OKAY to not put player behavior as a high priority, AS LONG AS YOU OWN UP TO IT. > > My issue with Riot is that they CONTINUALLY say that they're working on it when it doesn't feel like any strides have been made in that department. It's fine to say a facet of your business is currently low priority. > > It is NOT okay to say you're working on something you're not. I think this is a perception issue. If the system has gone from, say, 99.5% accuracy to 99.75% accuracy, for example, that's actually a 50% improvement -- but that 50% improvement will not be noticed by any one player. If feeder detection has gone from taking 20 games to taking 15, that's a 25% improvement -- again, one that won't be noticed by any one individual player. I think it's unfair for us to simply assume that nothing is being done and Riot has an entire behavioral team just sitting back and relaxing -- I've met several Rioters, and all of them have been *super* passionate about building the best game they can, and doing right by the players, even in private conversations with no company eyes on them. I can't even *begin* to think they're lying to us about what that team is trying to do.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=0000000100010000000000010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:21:13.528+0000) > > I think this is a perception issue. If the system has gone from, say, 99.5% accuracy to 99.75% accuracy, for example, that's actually a 50% improvement -- but that 50% improvement will not be noticed by any one player. > > If feeder detection has gone from taking 20 games to taking 15, that's a 25% improvement -- again, one that won't be noticed by any one individual player. > > I think it's unfair for us to simply assume that nothing is being done and Riot has an entire behavioral team just sitting back and relaxing -- I've met several Rioters, and all of them have been *super* passionate about building the best game they can, and doing right by the players, even in private conversations with no company eyes on them. I can't even *begin* to think they're lying to us about what that team is trying to do. Okay, besides the issue I take with your math here in the first bit (that's only a 0.2513% improvement), I would agree that yes, it is a perception issue. My perception is that someone who said an unadulterated, unedited word that should most DEFINITELY be punished pursuant to Riot's policy was allowed to walk. IF a perception issue is the problem here, it might be a step towards fixing it if they made sure stuff like this situation didn't happen on a regular basis. And I DO mean regular, like, once every few days, someone uses a racial or other stereotype slur in my games and walks away unpunished. There's a big difference between wanting to make the best GAME you can and wanting to have the best COMMUNITY you can. Doing right by your players can manifest in a large variety of ways. It just doesn't feel like (again, perception) the player behavior team is really being communicative at all on their progress. Even some sorts of stats update on how effective the system is becoming would be nice. On a darker note, you're right, it's hard to imagine that Riot has an entire behavioral team just sitting back and relaxing. Maybe said team doesn't actually exist at all.
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=0000000100010000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:05:54.250+0000) > > The man literally called me a n!$%^r. Please tell me, in WHICH context, that would EVER be acceptable. With a hard R. I didn't say it ever was. I said the system messes up on rare occasions. That should absolutely be hit with a 14-day ban.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=00000001000100000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:09:18.091+0000) > > I didn't say it ever was. I said the system messes up on rare occasions. That should absolutely be hit with a 14-day ban. Okay, if you have a system that 'messes up' and does not detect literally one of the most offensive English language racist slurs ever (with no creative spelling or modification of the word), then I think your system has done more than 'mess up'. That indicates a fundamental flaw in how your system is designed. Period. If you want my personal take on it, it doesn't really feel like Riot really cares about player behavior as a top priority anymore, post-Lyte departure. We've gotten, what, a half-baked honor system that 'incentivizes' good behavior, and occasionally a Rioter will come on the boards and right a wrong that the instant feedback system made (see the instance where people were being made to say toxic things by someone who threatened to int if they didn't). But overall, it doesn't feel like significant work has been put into the instant feedback system for a long time, and you know what, that's FINE. It is OKAY to not put player behavior as a high priority, AS LONG AS YOU OWN UP TO IT. My issue with Riot is that they CONTINUALLY say that they're working on it when it doesn't feel like any strides have been made in that department. It's fine to say a facet of your business is currently low priority. It is NOT okay to say you're working on something you're not.
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=00000001000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:02:18.463+0000) > > Still doesn't explain why the guy was allowed to play five more games after that one. No, it doesn't. I've also never, however, said that the system was perfect. It slips up in both directions on occasion (erring more on the side of leniency), but that doesn't mean that it's not doing its job well overall.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=000000010001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:04:16.238+0000) > > No, it doesn't. I've also never, however, said that the system was perfect. It slips up in both directions on occasion (erring more on the side of leniency), but that doesn't mean that it's not doing its job well overall. The man literally called me a n!$%^r. Please tell me, in WHICH context, that would EVER be acceptable. With a hard R.
Hellpyre (NA)
: You know that you don't get the feedback report every time someone you've reported was banned, right?
> [{quoted}](name=Hellpyre,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=0000000100010000000000010001,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:02:57.492+0000) > > You know that you don't get the feedback report every time someone you've reported was banned, right? You're supposed to get it if the game you reported them for was the one that got them punished. Given what the dude said to me, he should have been punished for that specific game, no?
: > [{quoted}](name=CritDoge,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=000000010001000000000001,timestamp=2018-03-21T18:59:54.365+0000) > > I had a Rengar literally say "Shut the fuck up Ornn, you n****r." Yes, with a hard R. To me last night. Didn't say anything back, just finished the game and reported him. From Riot's list of "byebye words," that should have been an immediate punishment, and I should have gotten the instant feedback report. Instead, nothing. The instant feedback report has been notoriously unreliable lately, and, to my knowledge, even at it's most reliable it was only sent to a single individual per punishment that went out, so it's very possible that another player in your game received the message, if a message went out at all.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=0000000100010000000000010000,timestamp=2018-03-21T19:01:11.366+0000) > > The instant feedback report has been notoriously unreliable lately, and, to my knowledge, even at it's most reliable it was only sent to a single individual per punishment that went out, so it's very possible that another player in your game received the message, if a message went out at all. Still doesn't explain why the guy was allowed to play five more games after that one.
: > [{quoted}](name=Shukr4n,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=0000000100010000,timestamp=2018-03-21T18:46:54.304+0000)why dont riot ban trolls, inters, afkers? because "that s too difficult to find those kind of bad behaviour" You're confusing "we don't ban them as quickly as people would like us to be able to because we want to confirm that the bans are not improperly applied and having that level of certainty in an automated system is difficult" with "we don't man them." Riot *does* ban this behavior when it's found. In fact, they ban it very aggressively (save for AFKing, as that's impossible to get the reasons behind and might be out of someone's control). It earns a 14-day ban on the first punishment the system is confident in.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1ht9qdk2,comment-id=00000001000100000000,timestamp=2018-03-21T18:52:11.802+0000) > > You're confusing "we don't ban them as quickly as people would like us to be able to because we want to confirm that the bans are not improperly applied and having that level of certainty in an automated system is difficult" with "we don't man them." > > Riot *does* ban this behavior when it's found. In fact, they ban it very aggressively (save for AFKing, as that's impossible to get the reasons behind and might be out of someone's control). It earns a 14-day ban on the first punishment the system is confident in. I had a Rengar literally say "Shut the fuck up Ornn, you n****r." (Yes, with a hard R) to me last night. Didn't say anything back, just finished the game and reported him. From Riot's list of "byebye words," that should have been an immediate punishment, and I should have gotten the instant feedback report. Instead, nothing. In fact, this man went on to play five more games after that one.
Rioter Comments
: I had a feeling during his reveal Urgot/Fiora clarity might be a little messy but this goes beyond my worst fears
> [{quoted}](name=Spideraxe,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=ad9PLZQ6,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-02-19T23:32:08.784+0000) > > I had a feeling during his reveal Urgot/Fiora clarity might be a little messy but this goes beyond my worst fears Oh whoa it's Spideraxe! Hey there!
Rioter Comments
CritDoge (NA)
: Let's talk Grievous Wounds (Again!)
On another note, this is a very NON-INTERACTIVE role for the champions affected by grievous wounds. Their response to the existence of these items is literally: "I pray that my opponents are too stupid to rush Grievous Wounds."
: Completed For Noxus mission, icon missing
I am also experiencing this issue. It's definitely not lost in the other icons, either. I just checked.
CritDoge (NA)
: Let's talk Grievous Wounds (Again!)
OKAY. So with the upcoming AP itemization rework coming up, this has introduced some serious concerns to the game. The change of {{item:3165}} to Morello's Cursed Tome, as well as the change in passive to proccing grievous wounds REGARDLESS of health threshold, means that we need to have a discussion around how strong this effect currently is, and how it completely nullifies the kit of certain champions. TL;DR: {{champion:8}} {{champion:16}} {{champion:36}} can have what makes their kits work (healing/regeneration) completely nullified by every single champion in the game. With the addition of consistent sources of grievous wounds, I would really like Riot to look at how strong this effect is. It effectively decreases each of these champions' effectiveness by 40%. For how easily these items can be accessed, I don't think that's fair. So, there are a few solutions to this: 1) What I proposed in my original post. Nerf the effectiveness of Grievous Wounds to a 10-20% in line with the other reduction/augment effects in the game (Cold Steel, Forbidden Idol passives) 2) Make Grievous Wounds items MUCH more niche. There should be a heavy cost to pay for specializing into countering the enemy's sustain. Right now, Executioner's Calling and Bramble Vest are relatively accessible, but {{item:3165}} is currently CORE, and the changes to it do not really make it any less so. In fact, the context post literally says, and I quote verbatim, "Having GW on this item allows manaless champs to consider it on first buy, especially with the attractive Flat Pen." THIS IS STILL NOT A MOVE AWAY FROM MAKING THE ITEM CORE. Instead, you are just shifting the subset of champions that WOULD build it as a core item. The idea is that Grievous Wounds should be something you OPT INTO, not something that you HAPPEN TO GET as a result of ITEMIZING FOR FLAT PEN. In order to stop Grievous Wounds from becoming an UNINTENDED BUT CHAMPION-CRIPPLING BENEFIT, it needs to be a CONSCIOUS CHOICE on the part of the player to opt into it. Currently, Morello's Cursed Tome DOES NOT ACCOMPLISH THIS. The timing with which the effect comes online is also less than optimal, as many champions are able to finish this item before aforementioned champions hit their sustain spikes. This is a plea to the devs who may be reading this: PLEASE consider that your changes to Morello to move grievous wounds away from being a core item MAY NOT BE ENOUGH.
Rioter Comments
CritDoge (NA)
: Let's talk Grievous Wounds (Again!)
I just realized that ZenonTheStoic advocated my stance WAY long ago here: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/live-gameplay/obkTq9My-lets-talk-grievous-wounds At this point it feels like a problem Riot is refusing to address because it's not as exciting to players when it gets 'solved,' even though the whole heal/drain tank/grievous wounds problem is a fundamentally problematic interaction. More thread necroing for visibility!
: Looking for Plat+ Toplaner for LCS style tournament
http://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=CritDoge
CritDoge (NA)
: Skirmishers, Fiora, and the True Meaning of Target-Agnostic
I get your concern. However, I believe that the lever that makes it so that she HAS to build squishy in order to up her Vital procs to 25% makes it viable. I agree that it would be incredibly difficult to balance. However, the upside is that her damage would be the same % of someone's health bar invariant of itemization changes, which means that you can balance her against basically her own metric: time to kill, because defensive itemization changes wouldn't make her either stronger or weaker. You can give her Riposte a shorter cooldown but also a shorter window of invulnerability if we wanted to pursue that route, but all in all this was more of a thought experiment than anything. Something rather far-out that I'm not expecting to be implemented at any point in time, heh.
CritDoge (NA)
: Skirmishers, Fiora, and the True Meaning of Target-Agnostic
It's entirely possible that major adjustments would need to be made to the vital spawn rate, etc. in order to let this no-basic-damage iteration work. I think the important thing to get out there is that it CAN work given some thought, and making a champion's only damage source %health true damage without anything else would actually make them truly target-agnostic. In a reply to Muzet's comment above, I think that saying 'this is what Fiora is supposed to do' is something that can only really be dictated by Riot. I'm hoping to instigate some thought into what champion identities ARE. Is the fact that Fiora can delete a squishy just a SIDE-EFFECT of the fact that Riot wanted her to be able to duel anyone in the game, and forced her to build AD to scale her Vitals so she couldn't just build tank and become an unkillable duelist? Or was she MEANT to delete squishies? Riot likes to say that they build target-agnostic damage into champion kits to allow them to deal with sturdier targets, but this pose asks the question of what that would actually mean if ALL of a champion's damage were target-agnostic (in other words, it took them the same amount of time to kill a stationary tank as a stationary squishy)?
CritDoge (NA)
: Skirmishers, Fiora, and the True Meaning of Target-Agnostic
You're correct to a certain extent. Implementing something like this will probably not be for everyone; I only singled out Fiora because she already had a mechanic that gave counterplay (as opposed to counter-build) inherent in her kit, so it was easy to take it a step further and wonder what would happen if that were her ONLY means of dealing damage. I think the balance team actually briefly considered making crit armor shred as well. But the fact is that, just because of the way stats are arranged, pretty much any damage enhancement is going to be more effective at killing squishies than killing tanks. I'm not saying that %armor shred would be more effective against squishies, I'm just saying that the lower kill time that sort of mechanic would bring (especially now that GA is an armor item and Zhonyas is an armor item) would end up just making it faster to kill squishies, which is, what we really want to avoid in terms of people who don't care who they're shooting. ADCs, I would say, aren't target-agnostic by design. They're target-agnostic by necessity. Their role in a team is to basically kill the tanks that other people cannot (similar to the other melee carries, and to a certain extent people like Azir and Cassiopeia). However, that doesn't really make them target agnostic, it just means that they can kill tanks in ADDITION to blowing up squishies if they get crits on them. But this is another discussion, since I think the whole 'what purpose does the ADC role serve' is an entirely different animal. I would say that Crit and %health true damage aren't really the same solution at all. Taken by itself (without any additional damage), %health true damage takes you no longer to kill a tank than a squishy, and conversely, you wouldn't be able to kill a squishy faster than a tank. Crit in its current iteration just...makes you deal more damage, period, so you'd still be killing squishies faster than the tanks. And I guess my last question to you would be why you think that having all your damage come from autos is any less binary than the issue of what you mentioned with Fiora before. In my opinion whether or not someone's autos will kill you is even MORE stat-checky and binary than positional play like Fiora's vitals - you either win the auto-duel or you don't. You can even give her E a mechanic (now that her autos don't do damage) where hitting with both hits spawns a new vital in her favor, or something like that. Details unclear - I haven't put much thought into exact skill specifics. But I believe there are ways to give both her and her opponent more ways to play around the Vital mechanic than there are to having 3 or 4 champions that are based around auto-attacks for their "target-agnosticity" (Yi, Trynd, Irelia, Yasuo, etc).
: This is a fun thought experiment, but there's a pretty clear reason it isn't going to work in game. This takes almost *all* of the opponent's agency away from them, *especially* if they aren't a mobile champ. If you can't run away from her in time when she ults you, you just die. Period. This game *needs* levers that you can pull to defend against a fed champ, and there is *nothing* to do if you're playing an immobile champ against a fed fio in that instance. This is a fun thought experiment, and a cool thread, don't get me wrong. I enjoy a good discussion about it, and it's not my intent to shut down conversation. But it would take a *ton* more convincing for me to believe this would be healthy or balanceable at all. It seems to me it would simply come down to mobility only, and that's not a healthy thing.
> [{quoted}](name=KempyreanPirate,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hmaTRM6z,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2017-10-19T19:47:20.367+0000) > > This is a fun thought experiment, but there's a pretty clear reason it isn't going to work in game. > > This takes almost *all* of the opponent's agency away from them, *especially* if they aren't a mobile champ. If you can't run away from her in time when she ults you, you just die. Period. > > This game *needs* levers that you can pull to defend against a fed champ, and there is *nothing* to do if you're playing an immobile champ against a fed fio in that instance. > > This is a fun thought experiment, and a cool thread, don't get me wrong. I enjoy a good discussion about it, and it's not my intent to shut down conversation. But it would take a *ton* more convincing for me to believe this would be healthy or balanceable at all. It seems to me it would simply come down to mobility only, and that's not a healthy thing. Thanks for the thoughts! Yeah, it was originally intended as a thought experiment to see whether a 0 basic attack damage kit would really work. Fiora just ended up being who I picked to do this because her Target-Agnostic damage is very clearly gated behind cases of success and failure. It's entirely possible that in this instance her ult would need heavy modification. But I've seen Garens and Dariuses out there that will currently just hug a corner or wall when they get ulted so she cannot access the two remaining Vitals easily. Also remember that under this new system FIORA CANNOT DAMAGE YOU WITH BASIC ATTACKS. That means that even if she has procced 3 out of 4 vitals on you in a duel, and you can hug a wall and stop her from proccing the last one somehow, YOU WILL WIN. The goal of the Fiora, then, would be to identify which Vital you are trying to hide and try to proc that one first. Obviously, we can adjust tuning (Like removing the default movespeed from being in the ult zone again).
: Let me give you a proper fiora update - from someone who actually plays toplane and knows a thing or two. This is my secondary account for smurfing to try new things (not boost people as i don't really duo, nor to just smash people to be a jerk), so it is lower elo and I don't want to bother signing out and signing in again. Fiora drops either the %hp damage in favor of flat damage (scaling with ult level) for her passive. Or she drops the sustain from hitting vitals. This passive of hers gives her insane power and sustain early for such a strong late game champion it is absurd. Especially when you consider that her q isn't even really a skillshot. It allows her to proc the vital, get some very strong damage in combo with her q damage, and use the movespeed to prevent many opponents from trading back on her. Fiora riposte gets fixed. It no longer can be activated during an enemy cc animation to block said enemy cc. It can block future cc if cast during this time, but not cc already in progress. For comparison, right now fiora's ability to do what I call retroactively blocking cc is like morg being able to pop black shield on a target in the first second AFTER malzahar ults a target and the shield actually stop malz's cc. It doesn't work that way because there would be no skill involved. Tahm can eat said target to rescue them from malz cc, but morg cannot do that with black shield. Fiora riposte needs to work like morg shield - not tahm eating people. It's supposed to express SKILL, but right now is way too forgiving. Fiora e could use some improving or something more interesting. Fiora ult gets %hp damage dropped to 18-33% of a target's max hp as true damage. Or, it stays at 55ish percent hp damage, but is changed to PHYSICAL DAMAGE. Why? She already has strong dps. She doesn't need to delete someone's hp in 4 hits via ult regardless of them itemizing against her as best they reasonably can. For another context that puts the retarded level of excess damage in fiora's kit into perspective, let's look at mordekaiser. One of his most op things is his ult. It deals huge damage. Huge as in - around 35% hp damage... as MAGIC DAMAGE. First off, this is about 20% of hp LESS damage for mordekaiser. Secondly, his damage is MAGIC DAMAGE which can be ITEMIZED AGAINST; fiora's damage is TRUE DAMAGE, which has no counter. Secondly, mordekaiser lacks the safety of mobility while fiora has both riposte to RETROACTIVELY dodge enemy cc AND high mobility via proccing vitals and via her q. And her dps outside her ult is by no means weaker than morde's. Put quite frankly, fiora can currently match early game bullies at all ranks from bronze to challenger or at least stay close to even early if she plays properly. If they mess up even once, the lane is over for them. If they make one mistake, they lose at their strongest point. Meanwhile fiora can make 5 mistakes in a fight mid/late game at her strongest point and STILL EASILY win 1v1. This is not balanced. Either the other champ needs much better scaling so that fiora must win out with as much difficulty late game as the other champ wins out early, or she needs to be as garbage early as the other champ is late vs her. Yet it is not even remotely close to that now - and claiming "weaker in teamfights" bs is untrue to any meaningful degree (living another 2 sec and dealing probably less damage doesn't make you strong in teamfight).
> [{quoted}](name=terribleplAyr,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hmaTRM6z,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2017-10-19T16:47:56.934+0000) > > Let me give you a proper fiora update - from someone who actually plays toplane and knows a thing or two. This is my secondary account for smurfing to try new things (not boost people as i don't really duo, nor to just smash people to be a jerk), so it is lower elo and I don't want to bother signing out and signing in again. > > Fiora drops either the %hp damage in favor of flat damage (scaling with ult level) for her passive. Or she drops the sustain from hitting vitals. This passive of hers gives her insane power and sustain early for such a strong late game champion it is absurd. Especially when you consider that her q isn't even really a skillshot. It allows her to proc the vital, get some very strong damage in combo with her q damage, and use the movespeed to prevent many opponents from trading back on her. > > Fiora riposte gets fixed. It no longer can be activated during an enemy cc animation to block said enemy cc. It can block future cc if cast during this time, but not cc already in progress. For comparison, right now fiora's ability to do what I call retroactively blocking cc is like morg being able to pop black shield on a target in the first second AFTER malzahar ults a target and the shield actually stop malz's cc. It doesn't work that way because there would be no skill involved. Tahm can eat said target to rescue them from malz cc, but morg cannot do that with black shield. Fiora riposte needs to work like morg shield - not tahm eating people. It's supposed to express SKILL, but right now is way too forgiving. > > Fiora e could use some improving or something more interesting. > > Fiora ult gets %hp damage dropped to 18-33% of a target's max hp as true damage. Or, it stays at 55ish percent hp damage, but is changed to PHYSICAL DAMAGE. Why? She already has strong dps. She doesn't need to delete someone's hp in 4 hits via ult regardless of them itemizing against her as best they reasonably can. For another context that puts the retarded level of excess damage in fiora's kit into perspective, let's look at mordekaiser. One of his most op things is his ult. It deals huge damage. Huge as in - around 35% hp damage... as MAGIC DAMAGE. First off, this is about 20% of hp LESS damage for mordekaiser. Secondly, his damage is MAGIC DAMAGE which can be ITEMIZED AGAINST; fiora's damage is TRUE DAMAGE, which has no counter. Secondly, mordekaiser lacks the safety of mobility while fiora has both riposte to RETROACTIVELY dodge enemy cc AND high mobility via proccing vitals and via her q. And her dps outside her ult is by no means weaker than morde's. > > Put quite frankly, fiora can currently match early game bullies at all ranks from bronze to challenger or at least stay close to even early if she plays properly. If they mess up even once, the lane is over for them. If they make one mistake, they lose at their strongest point. Meanwhile fiora can make 5 mistakes in a fight mid/late game at her strongest point and STILL EASILY win 1v1. This is not balanced. Either the other champ needs much better scaling so that fiora must win out with as much difficulty late game as the other champ wins out early, or she needs to be as garbage early as the other champ is late vs her. Yet it is not even remotely close to that now - and claiming "weaker in teamfights" bs is untrue to any meaningful degree (living another 2 sec and dealing probably less damage doesn't make you strong in teamfight). I'd like to remind you that the purpose of my post was not to 'fix' Fiora or propose a comprehensive rework to her, but to take an existing idea, take it to its furthest extent, and hopefully instigate some thought about the nature of 'target agnostic damage' and the skirmisher class in general. That being said, I can find a few really weird things going on with your proposal. Fiora's Riposte cannot be used to block CC that has already landed on her. In the example of Malzahar Ult, there's an annoying cast time right before the suppression hits where the target can still act, if you're using that as an example. It's led to a lot of people being CCed out of casting Malz's ult because the brief cast time allowed Syndra to Q->E or something. Fiora's Riposte cannot retroactively block CC. If a CC hits her before she pushes the button, she'll be affected by the CC. Regarding your comparison with Mordekaiser: Mordekaiser has already been acknowledged as problematic, and I don't really believe comparing a Juggernaut to a Skirmisher is an apt comparison in the first place. Besides the damage that Mordekaiser's ult does, it has a lot of auxiliary effects (like healing him and providing a ghost if the target dies). Final reminder that Fiora's sustain is countered by Bramble Vest and that this post was not intended to discuss the BALANCE of Fiora, but rather a concept in general.
Muzét (EUW)
: On paper this is fine. But in fact it doesn't. Except if you put a instadeath if you received 4 vitals procs. This won't work simply because "some" classes get access to constant heal. Furthermore you have support that can provide shields. I get your idea but if proccing 4 vitals leads to an instadeath I can foresee Fiora full Tank. You know what I mean? So how would you fix that?
> [{quoted}](name=Muzét,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hmaTRM6z,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2017-10-19T12:31:54.801+0000) > > On paper this is fine. But in fact it doesn't. Except if you put a instadeath if you received 4 vitals procs. This won't work simply because "some" classes get access to constant heal. Furthermore you have support that can provide shields. > I get your idea but if proccing 4 vitals leads to an instadeath I can foresee Fiora full Tank. You know what I mean? > > So how would you fix that? The vital procs would still scale off of AD, so in effect, she would still need to itemize offensively in order to properly achieve her target-agnostic chunking fantasy. In fact, taking damage AWAY from her basic attacks would force her to itemize even further into AD depending on the scaling set, given that it is her only source of damage now.
: you've put a lot of thought into this? the only issue I see is that if this were to be implemented then fioras counterplay simply becomes avoid her because as your proposed changes state she would be unable to damage champions. her effect in a teamfight would become zero unless she was able to single out a target and her early game would become unbearable because she would have no way of trading with her lane opponent pre 3 unless she was willing to risk significant damage for the attempt to 4 shot them. everything you said was well thought out except the consequences of such a design change on her laning phase and team fight effectiveness
> [{quoted}](name=Requiem of Bones,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hmaTRM6z,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-10-19T00:17:26.793+0000) > > you've put a lot of thought into this? the only issue I see is that if this were to be implemented then fioras counterplay simply becomes avoid her because as your proposed changes state she would be unable to damage champions. her effect in a teamfight would become zero unless she was able to single out a target and her early game would become unbearable because she would have no way of trading with her lane opponent pre 3 unless she was willing to risk significant damage for the attempt to 4 shot them. everything you said was well thought out except the consequences of such a design change on her laning phase and team fight effectiveness So Fiora's main counterplay is already "do not allow her to proc Vitals." The mini game is an essential part of her kit, and without proccing Vitals she's normally not as good as the other champions in her category. However, the current issue is that a sufficiently fed Fiora ceases to CARE about Vitals, she just dashes onto a squishy and autos three times and the squishy's dead. The hypothetical change would shift all of her power into the Vitals mini game. You can obviously tune her numbers so she has ways of dodging in and out of a trade early (speed boost from vital procs, for example), but honestly, even at level 2 you could probably trade fine as long as you utilized Riposte correctly. To allow her to have this sort of no-attack-damage pattern, you'd probably have to lower Riposte's cooldown by a fair amount, but obviously, there are clear levers around this to pull. In terms of team fight effectiveness, I think Fiora proccing a single vital and instantly nuking 1/4 of ANYONE on your team's health would be enough to be wary of her, since if she does this to a tank she's effectively chunked them for a high amount of help. Fiora's current play pattern in a teamfight already involves dancing in and out of the fight, seeking opportunities to proc vitals and otherwise all-in. This just shifts the focus from her being able to ignore this part of her design if she's overly fed to having to pay attention to it all the time.
Rioter Comments
: Is this confirmation that there IS a stochastic component to honor level then...? Update: Friend I play 95+% of games with is now Honor 4 and I am still Honor 2. Update 2: I received key fragments this morning for the first time in 3+ weeks, but still not Honor 3, so maybe the key fragment part isn't bugged?
> [{quoted}](name=FeralFennec,realm=NA,application-id=osqw6G4M,discussion-id=cW4zhNvz,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2017-08-11T22:59:42.867+0000) > > Is this confirmation that there IS a stochastic component to honor level then...? > > Update: Friend I play 95+% of games with is now Honor 4 and I am still Honor 2. Can confirm. I've played basically ALL of my games with FeralFennec, and she's still Honor 2 while I've just dinged to Honor 4. Given how little time the honor system has actually been out, have we been misled about how much being honored actually counts towards leveling up?
CritDoge (NA)
: Let's talk Grievous Wounds (Again!)
In light of a [recent post by Riot Fearless](https://fearlessdesign.tumblr.com/post/162098921538/why-is-grievous-wounds-needed-as-a-mechanic-in), I'd like to see if I can get a /dev response to this, and why they've resisted making Grievous Wounds a less all-or-nothing effect, to say nothing of the fact that Morellonomicon currently isn't something you buy to combat Healing, it is something you build by default because it gives everything a mage wants and Grievous Wounds is just something tacked onto it with no apparent tactical intent behind it.
Rioter Comments
CritDoge (NA)
: Let's talk Grievous Wounds (Again!)
Quick note here (and also shamelessly necroing a thread because I would really like @Meddler to weigh into this). All of the other current "ANTI-X" items ({{item:3110}} {{item:3143}} ) or "PRO-X" items (Any of the {{item:3114}} builds) seem to be positioned towards incremental advantages (plus or minus 10-20%) to a certain effect in the game (crit, attack speed, heal/shield strength). I'd like to hear thoughts from a /dev about why Grievous Wounds in all its incarnations ({{summoner:14}} {{item:3165}} {{item:3123}} {{item:3033}}) have such a binary effect. I always feel like Vlad/Swain/Soraka are pretty overbearing if they're not horribly behind, but as soon as you build that one item, they're basically not a champion.
Rioter Comments
Show more

CritDoge

Level 311 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion