: > [{quoted}](name=Caítlyn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JEka1AEA,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-06-15T02:23:36.018+0000) > > I agree remove snowballs. ARAM stopped being fun after they introduced those. say that to all the melee champ that dont have gap closers or ranged poke....so fun to run to the enemy team taking all the cc in the world I love to play tanks and melee fighter, it was a pain before snowball was introduced: all you do is taking poke and have no chance to tradeback; engage is impossible if they have cc ; you cant get in fight with low hp so no assist so no money to buy items. think about as a way to balance the long list of champ that have 1km poke (hello xerath,lux,nidalee,velkoz....)
It's frustrating but it's not balanced at all. Snowball just reverses the frustration. Try playing one of the weaker ADCs where positioning is already incredibly important, but now you have to worry about a fairly low cooldown, low risk, invulnerable dash. Riot just added increased money flow, which will help melees a lot. There were already a lot of items available to counter poke comps, especially mage heavy ones. No offense, but you just need to play smarter. Stop complaining about Nidalee. Her spear is smaller than a toothpick and she's sitting at a lower winrate than Tryndamere in ARAM.
Rioter Comments
Ralanr (NA)
: Why doesn't Sion get double stacking on howling abyss?
Sion is already one of the strongest champions in HA. He just doesn't need it: http://www.lolking.net/champions/sion?region=na&map=ha&queue=normal#statistics
: The Boards need to read this article by Riot's Tryndamere.
What the hell makes them think DQ was not only good enough to release, but good enough to replace solo Q and ranked teams? I couldn't care less if DQ was its own queue that didn't touch solo Q or ranked teams. Riot's claiming DQ is what we're going to have while they either make it better or realize that it's the wrong solution. What the fuck kind of philosophy is that? Do you seriously think it's worth screwing over solo players and full teams while you spend the next few months creating the next iteration? For all they spew about the integrity of competition they don't act on it. There is no possible way having different premade sizes on the same ladder can ever support competitive integrity. League is hard to learn because you refuse to release tools to help people learn it. Your tutorials are worthless, you don't have a sandbox mode or useful practice mode, your immediate feedback (death recap) is virtually nonexistent, etc. Even just speaking mechanically, how can you expect someone to learn Azir's combo when they can only try it once every minute or more? God forbid somebody needs to practice flashing because you're looking at a solid 5 minutes between attempts. In regards to the lore, Tryndamere is way off is in assessment. Yes, the stories are more interesting and definitely more detailed, but with virtually every lore release I still get a feeling of betrayal. I can never invest in the lore because it feels like they're just going to change it again. Every time I play Leona I get pissed at Riot's lore team. Better stories or not, the lore feels totally meaningless to me now. Especially as a solo player, Riot is just disrespectful to me. They focus way too much on the long term and don't put in enough effort to make sure the game is in a half decent state in the sort term. Most of what Tryndamere says just feels totally insincere. If it is sincere, then maybe you need to reevaluate your core values and what you think it means to deliver a product.
Rioter Comments
: I'd disagree vehemently on the point of "two people equally ranked in solo queue are close in skill levels" Aside from the people who made it to challenger, it was essentially luck that determined where you found yourself in the SoloQueue ladder; a roll of the dice on which team gets more trolls, intentional feeders, AFKers, functional retards, or toxic verbally abusive fucking assholes. Some people are just luckier than others. I'd make the case that your dynamic queue ranking is a better indicator of skill, since ideally, the best environment for you to show off your skills is one where everyone on every team is at least semi-competent and legitimately making their best effort to play well and win. If even one person on the team decides to give it less than their all (by intentionally feeding, ragequitting or just flaming in chat instead of playing) then the game loses all relevance, because it essentially turns into a 4v5 or worse. The more friends you have on your team, the less likely you are to get one of these toxic players on your team, and thus, the better you'll all be able to show off your skills. All of these problems are still present in Dynamic Queue, surely, but their effect is mitigated by the ability to have larger premades. And before you jump down my throat and say "Just mute them", muting someone only stops them from flaming you. It doesn't stop any of the other bad behavior I listed above. Personally, I think your ability to get and keep friends, and make plays as a team, is and should be just as much an indicator of skill at the game as mechanics. It's why CLG beat Liquid on the way to the finals last split. Liquid may have better mechanically skilled players, but CLG makes better plays together, and thus, they're the better team overall. But yeah, role selection is fantastic and I hope it never goes away.
>I'd disagree vehemently on the point of "two people equally ranked in solo queue are close in skill levels" Aside from the people who made it to challenger, it was essentially luck that determined where you found yourself in the SoloQueue ladder; a roll of the dice on which team gets more trolls, intentional feeders, AFKers, functional retards, or toxic verbally abusive fucking assholes. Some people are just luckier than others. There are statistical outliers, but nobody is is actually luckier than anyone else. In the vast majority of cases they're handling the situation poorly themselves. I have friends that do this all the time. They complain that their team is awful and the other team is always great, and then when I play with them I see them do petty things: Things like refusing to ever give blue, refusing to gank, assuming that they're beyond help, instantly muting them, assuming all pings are just spam, etc. Your attitude in dealing with people goes a long way, and that is part of solo queue. If you don't want to deal with that, fine. That's what separate queues are for. >I'd make the case that your dynamic queue ranking is a better indicator of skill, since ideally, the best environment for you to show off your skills is one where everyone on every team is at least semi-competent and legitimately making their best effort to play well and win. If even one person on the team decides to give it less than their all (by intentionally feeding, ragequitting or just flaming in chat instead of playing) then the game loses all relevance, because it essentially turns into a 4v5 or worse. The more friends you have on your team, the less likely you are to get one of these toxic players on your team, and thus, the better you'll all be able to show off your skills. All of these problems are still present in Dynamic Queue, surely, but their effect is mitigated by the ability to have larger premades. It's a better indicator of skill if and only if your team is a premade. That's just saying ranked 5s teams are a better indicator of skill than solo queue, and then swapping the words "ranked 5s teams" for "dynamic queue". DQ is not just the premades, it's premades and solo players together. FWIW I'm more impressed if a ranked team can rise through the ranks than if a solo player does. That ranking means very little to me though if I can't tell if a player got there via team play or solo play. >And before you jump down my throat and say "Just mute them", muting someone only stops them from flaming you. It doesn't stop any of the other bad behavior I listed above. I don't mute people ever. I don't have a problem putting up with stupid people if it means hearing the one important gem that comes out of their mouth that might win you a game. Again, that is a valuable skill in solo queue and in life. If you don't think so, fine. That's what separate queues are for. >Personally, I think your ability to get and keep friends, and make plays as a team, is and should be just as much an indicator of skill at the game as mechanics. It's why CLG beat Liquid on the way to the finals last split. Liquid may have better mechanically skilled players, but CLG makes better plays together, and thus, they're the better team overall. Sure, CLG does make great team plays. The thing is that CLG and TL are teams. I can't definitively say that Stixxay is a better player than Piglet because CLG won. I can only say that CLG as a team is a better team than TL. With SQ and full teams the actors are very defined; you're either solo (or duo) or you're an entire team. The actor is what's ranked, whether it represents you or your team. DQ ranks you based off the performance of the people you play with. I have no problem with that if who everybody plays with stays reasonably static, but DQ by its own name is not static. Your argument boils down to "I enjoy playing as a premade and I think that playing in a premade environment showcases your skill." I have no problem with that train of thought, and like I said I tend to agree with it. But that's not an argument for DQ, it's an argument for team queue. Remember, DQ is that aggregate of team queue and solo queue in the same ladder. That's what people have a problem with.
: I think you're a bit confused. It's Soloqueue that was shit. DQ isn't perfect, but it's far and away better than the shitstorm that is Soloqueue.
I think it's you that's confused. DQ was released alongside other queueing features that are better than the ones solo queue used, but the premise of DQ is not its features. It's that teams and solo players are on the same ladder. * If I look at two people equally ranked in solo queue I can be reasonably sure that they're close in their real skill levels. * If I look at two teams equally ranked in the full team queue I can be reasonably sure that the teams as a whole are close in their real skill levels. * How can you possibly look at two people with equal ranking in DQ and be reasonably certain that if you matched one against the other, all else equal, that they'd be evenly matched? You can't, and that's the fundamentally flawed basis of DQ. You can keep the rest of the nice stuff that that is not DQ itself. Role selection is great. It needs some adjustment, but at its heart it's great. This whole "everyone's on the same ladder" bull should never have been released.
Th4ren (NA)
: dude they went over the statistics and it is very unlikely that you even have to worry about being qued against a team. with how ranked has been for me lately and given their numbers on the matter you will likely deal with 4 or 5 hundred afk from start players before you run into a 5 que as a solo player. they aren't going to listen because they have raw data that says those complaints are statistically irrelevant. what they don't realize is what you said about the meta which they should probs do something about. the whole dog pile on bot lane thing should be situational not default. I like tp it fits my play stile perfectly but everyone has caught on and it's starting to completely sap the competitive nature of laning out of the game.
It's not about playing against them, it's that they're in the same ladder. If I look at two people who are equal in rank one of them could have gotten there by carrying himself and the other by being essentially boosted. One's ranking is purely his own skill and the other's ranking represents the average of the team he plays with. Riot's basically saying "Eh, same thing" when it clearly is not.
: Dynamic queue and the future of League
They're phrasing it as if DQ and role selection are the same thing. They're not. Role selection is a feature that DQ uses. DQ can exist without role selection and role selection can exist without DQ. Personally, my problem has nothing to do with role selection. All of my problems are with the fact solo queue and premades are ranked together: They "rank" two different things. I don't want to win against a premade team because I'm playing against a premade of worse players. That isn't a valuable experience at all to me. Just because you quantified the value of their "premade-ness" and adjusted for it doesn't mean we're equally skilled. It means the thing I care about in solo queue (mechanical skill, strategy, adaptation and coordination with strangers) plus this adjustment beats what I care about in a premade queue (mechanical skill and strategy given perfect communication tools) results in an equal win rate. Congrats, you quantified it. I don't give a shit. I don't want to see how good I am with that adjustment. In regards to the video, Riot spent half an hour trying to justify their decision when it's based off assumptions. For one assume they can project their values onto other people. Example: You're willing to trade these ladder issues to quell in game harassment. I'm not. For the most part I straight up don't care about in game harassment (no, I don't flame people at all). I'm not interested in everybody getting along; I'm interested in winning. Part of winning is being able to overcome those issues, which premades teams (shouldn't) have an issue with. You're implying you don't value that as a skill, so you're just going to adjust for it in your matchmaking. Don't pretend you know what I want, because you've been getting it wrong for years now. You also mention how you're trying to balance all these different levers (quality, time, etc.), yet the two people in the room that aren't from Riot disagree with what they want. You will never find one solution to satisfy us all. If you try to do so you're going to end up with the lowest common denominator and nobody will be very happy. If I care about my role then let me pick one role. I'll wait for the queue. If I care about time let me queue for more than two roles. Let me tell you what I want, not the other way around. Also, you're falling into the "when all you have is a hammer" problem: You're trying to fix a bunch of issues solely based on matchmaking. Look at the role selection chart you have. I'm sure you're aware, but it's inversely proportional to how many people want to play that role. Support has fundamental issues that you have no plans to fix any time soon. ADCs and supports are frustrated that they get 5 man turret dove constantly, and that their roles are way more team reliant than other roles. Just start by fixing the support role and I'm sure you'll put a pretty good dent in your precious queue times. After you look at the chart maybe realize why premades were so frustrated. You have one game mode that you give a damn about and it's 5v5. Maybe give Twisted Treeline some love and 3 man premades will be happier. And by "some love" I mean you treat SR and TT as equals. Dragon has been fundamentally changed and re-tweaked repeatedly for the last few years. Vilemaw hasn't been touched since it was added. You would never add an item to TT that would break SR, yet you've been doing the inverse for years. Personal anecdote: I've had three friends and all the time I think "Maybe we should play on TT," which is quickly followed by, "Fuck that, it's broken as hell." I would _love_ to play on a balanced TT. Too bad you made the decision for us that League of Legends is nothing but 5v5 on SR. I don't know if it's pride, putting too much faith into statistics, or what, but you can't seem to admit that you should undo your mistakes. You have this "roll forward" attitude that just digs you you into a deeper hole. I started playing LoL less and less over the course of season 6. I love some of the new skins, but my wallet has been closed to you for the past couple months. Now I have Overwatch installed and I'm having a blast. Let's see how much deeper you want to dig.
Volgaria (NA)
: Brace yourselves, there's a shit storm comin
Eyesack (NA)
: Riot finally did it. They finally said FUCK YOU to all their players.
WTF that argument doesn't even make sense. Solo queue doesn't limit competitive league to solo play, it just makes it a subset of the greater competitive scene. Riot, we don't just want solo queue back. We want solo queue AND the full 5s queue back.
: Ban phase just needs to be renamed to "What bullshit do I feel like putting up with this game?"
Ban phase needs to be redesigned, not just given more banes. I always thought something like the following would be really nice: 1. Each team alternates 2 bans. 2. Blue side picks a champion. 3. Red side picks a champion and bans a champion. 4. Blue side picks 2 champions and bans a champion. 5. Red side picks 2 champions and bans a champion. 6. Blue side picks 2 champions and bans a champion. 7. Red side picks 2 champions. Basically you start out with baseline bans, then weave the bans in with the picks phase so you can react to your opponent's team comp.
FoxPlays (NA)
: The Q range is actually realitivly short/the animation is slow enough to dodge .3. Plus it isn't that far compared to Talons W, Katarinas Q, and fuck Nid spear range zzzzz The reason why it is longer than Talons W is since it is a pretty thin Skill shot instead of an AOE.
Without his shadow, no, it's not that far. But he has a shadow.
Meddler (NA)
: Nice analysis and yeah, reducing frustration's definitely a big goal for these changes. We are looking to hit power to some degree as well though, laning power in particular (harass and shove/roam), which translates into lower late game power too on average.
Still think you should try nerfing the range on his Q if you haven't already. What's frustrating to me isn't just the damage he can do, but it feels like he does it from beyond "assassin range". IMO an assassin shouldn't be doing *anything* to me from that far away.
: Yeah I agree, there does seem to be a need to change him in some way. He is currently being worked on by the live balance team.
Reduce his Q range. It alleviates some of his low risk farm and poke.
Quepha (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=PoX Grimlic,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ImiYlUJq,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2016-05-16T05:59:06.466+0000) > > I thought that this post was very very very funny. You can ONLY que with people up too a full DIVISION above you such as bronze can only que with silvers. Gold can que with plat or silver players but not bronze or diamond. :) so they are always around your skill level if your Silver 2 ... GOLD is still in your skill group ;) He's probably talking about normal, non-ranked games. I think it's a small enough problem that it's worth just dealing with so everyone can have fun with their friends. Matchmaking is still set up so your odds of success are pretty even regardless of the disparity between those two team mates, meaning the diamond will need your help to carry the game. Whether that's through keeping the bronze from feeding too hard or enabling the diamond to snowball and then using the pressure they provide, it's still a game where you matter and a learning experience for all of you.
The odds of success don't represent the game experience. The game is much more strongly dictated by what the outliers do than what you do. If I do well in bottom lane it matters very little if my top lane goes 0-5 in the first few minutes. Besides, I'd be willing to bet that a lower ranked player can throw a game a lot harder than a higher ranked teammate can carry it. Someone in bronze probably doesn't have the game sense to stop feeding a gold lane opponent, but a gold lane opponent probably knows well enough to not let the diamond jungler take away the lead he accumulated. Likewise, if your lower ranked teammate tries to 1v4 defend a tower and dies, making it a 4v5 your higher ranked teammate's skill level matters a lot less. Part of what gets you to a higher rank is knowing not to take fights where you're at a disadvantage. Just because you have a higher ranked teammate doesn't mean you can take on a 4v5 fight, especially against someone who's fed. Regardless, it's just straight frustrating to deal with that kind of thing. I don't want to have to make up for a teammate, and I don't want to depend on a higher ranked player carrying me.
: He said in RANKED GAMES XD re read his post
Rioter Comments
: Observer Expectancy Effect (How it applies to League)
This is, not, how you use, commas. Unless you're, WIlliam, Shatner.
Death Ray (EUW)
: Zed has like a 49.9% winrate, straight out nerfing him would make him too weak i guess.
This isn't a power issue, it's a design issue. Fixing his design, even if it's a nerf, gives Riot room to buff him elsewhere in a way that doesn't make him broken.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Xengre (NA)
: That leaves me concerned when CDR isn't something you particularly itemize for, anymore, because it is on everything.
Riot nerfed DFG ages ago for this exact reason, and now they're going back on it. It feels like they're just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.
: The belt... it deals so much damage. Was that the goal for it? Or was it for mobility? I really dislike the idea of this item making it to live :(
The original reason they gave was that it was a small repositioning tool for immobile mages in a world full of mobility. Not sure why they strayed so far from it. Or why they didn't just scrap the idea in its entirety.
: I would reccommend you download the Forum Enhancer Kit, or F.E.K. It allows you to set custom avatars, blacklist people, customize which boards you see, and see the number of upvotes and downvotes (as opposed to just the net total). It is perfectly safe (even some rioters use it), and downloads/installs in a few seconds. I personally have found the boards to be far more enjoyable since I got it. http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/miscellaneous/3V6I7JvK Hope this helps. http://rs200.pbsrc.com/albums/aa101/PattyPruePiper/Gifs/tumblr_leacb7GQam1qcwsd8o1_400.gif~c200
Hey Laughing Fish. Thanks, but I'm not interested in FEK or any 3rd party stuff. Just because it's available from a 3rd party doesn't mean Riot shouldn't implement it themselves. Besides, I'm not interested in everything else FEK has just so I get one thing.
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=Mandaari,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zukAqAkR,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2016-04-23T07:43:40.128+0000) > > If actions that don't lead to winning are giving high mastery scores then Riot needs to change their mastery algorithm. But every action that can lead to winning can also lead to losing if done wrong or at an inappropriate time. A Vayne could end a game with a huge CS value, which is great - that means she got farmed and had lots of gold. However, she could have ignored her team completely at useful times to get that CS value because she wanted a good mastery score. She did something that's good (got lots of farm), but she didn't actually contribute to them winning. You can say similar things for a Lux who preserved her insane KDA by refusing to ever put herself in a dangerous situation, even though that would have been the best thing for her team. In extreme situations you could be defending your nexus from the enemy team but you decided to stay in the fountain so as not to add another death to your score, even though if you'd taken the risk you could have done something to stop the enemy team. I don't know how you could ask Riot to differentiate between people with high KDAs because they were smart and people with high KDAs because they refused to do anything with any element of risk to it. There are some ways (i.e. the latter might have lower kill participation), but that can't account for everything.
Because you're assuming that the individual values are looked at in a vacuum. You're entirely right that looking at KDA, CA, tower kills, or anything else alone is not sufficient. There's no reason an algorithm can't look out those values in the context of the greater game: When was each CS scored? Where on the map? What other events happened around the same time? Would it be easy? Hell no, it'd probably be incredibly difficult -- especially in a dynamic way that changes with the meta. Is it possible? Probably.
: So THATS what Pantheon dose when he goes AFK
And then you remember Panth and Leona hate each other now.
: Well I'm not sure what you want them to do. If they base it more on individual performance then you'll get people complaining that "people don't care about winning, they just want their KDA". We already saw that with the Hextech Crafting system. People don't want Riot to base mastery stuff on individual performance because it'll cause some people to care less about winning, so Riot have no choice but to make mastery very heavily tied to winning.
If actions that don't lead to winning are giving high mastery scores then Riot needs to change their mastery algorithm.
SrbLud (NA)
: Someone gave me a downvote for what....ok people i'm going out with it...been waiting for it acctually.... Galio is gonna be supper op if buffed. Most people don't realize it but go get your freelo. Sleeper OP for the win... check his win rate..it's 52% average and 56% in 30-35 minutes games... with the buff....boy... http://www.champion.gg/champion/Galio
Not that Riot balances around it at all, but it's already well over 60% on Howling Abyss. =\
Helmight (NA)
: 1) This game was played on an earlier patch, before death timers in the midgame were reduced. 2) Fnatic had a Graves, an Ezreal with Blade of the Ruined King, and a Trundle. Ezreal isn't exactly a tower-pushing nightmare, but Trundle and Graves certainly are. 3) Gamsu and Klaj were super tanky, so Fnatic didn't need to wait for minions other than to reduce the tower's bonus armor. It's a combination of a few factors that let Fnatic win the game so easily, not just death timers being incredibly long.
The fact that it was played on an earlier patch doesn't matter. That teamfight was about 31 minutes into the game. The difference in their death timers from 6.6 to 6.7 would have been negligible with only a minute to deviate from the old value. The point is that death timers are too long around and before 30m as well, not just from 30-55m.
SrbLud (NA)
: As i said...the timers are fixed and they were above 30 so if they were on 6.7 they would've been back earlier... The only reason why the outcome would've stayed the same at that point is the squishiness of the towers...
They amount the death timer scaling changes within that one minute is negligible. Just because death timers were changed between 30 and 55 minutes doesn't mean that the change is sudden. At 30 minutes and below it's unchanged, and 55 and above it's unchanged. Times just above 30 minutes are approximately the same as the previous patch. Times just below 55 minutes are also approximately the same as the previous patch.
SrbLud (NA)
: They were past 30mins so they would've changed... the only thing that needs to be fixed now is squishy towers...
They were at ~31 minutes. Death timers at and before 30 minutes were unchanged. Times just above 30 minutes would be approximately the same. An extra second would not have changed the outcome of the game.
SrbLud (NA)
: They are still playing on 6.6...reduction is on 6.7
Even if it was on 6.7 death timers at that point would have been unchanged.
Rioter Comments
: Ok, am I getting trolled by Riot or what? Decide for yourself guys
I can understand how this happens to someone who's level 29, but I've seen way more extreme examples. I once played a game on a level 19 smurf against people in diamond. Ever try laning against someone in diamond when you have no runes? Not fun.
TehNACHO (NA)
: An interesting thought: Tanky Assassins are inevitable
>unrelenting Burst That's an oxymoron. Assassin damage should relent the instant they fail to kill someone or even if they do kill someone.
: Why We Play Support
Just tossing out my opinions here on why I do and don't like supports: * I disagree that supports are (or at least should be) more about thinking of strategy more than any other role. * I disagree that supports should be more or less about warding than any other class. I really disagree that supports should have to spend a mastery to fix their XP problem. It should be fixed by fixing the system that causes the problem, not by compensating for the problem. That is to say supports should be rewarded for doing support things. The same goes for gold.
: This community is extremely toxic.
Poros are freeloaders. I go out of my way to sell the snack every game.
: Dynamic queue: Let Riot hear your thoughts.
The champ select is fine, but I think it's ridiculous that full premades and solo players are in the same ladder.
Nekusen (NA)
: > It's fun to play champions that you need to position perfectly with and that aren't flashy then don't buy the item and you'll keep your fun.
And put myself at a disadvantage? Not so fun either. Same thing happened with snowball. Riot "balanced" it, but if you don't pick it up on a lot of champions you're screwing yourself and your team over. Same with flash. If someone doesn't want to take flash then it comes at the cost of putting a gigantic target on your back.
SoMNia (NA)
: Mobility is a stat with diminishing returns. If you "globally reduce mobility", you increase the value of it even more on everyone who still has it, and it becomes even more overbearing. The only thing "mobility creep" really does at this stage is increase the granularity of mobility overall and make it more possible to balance. Especially if it comes in the form of a broadly available dash with a moderate cooldown, so-called "burst mobility" that doesn't simply make everyone faster all the time — and, mind you, comes at a cost. That said, mages are inherently bursty. They are tied to that infamous "windows of power" concept, and they are _supposed to make flashy plays._ So here's the thing. _You_ don't want this, and you are misrepresenting your opinion as some kind of consensus. A lot of other people aren't actually bothered by it at all, and some, like me, actually want to see whether it works. But if you are determined to play a low-mobility champion with large amounts of localized power, you'll still have Zyra, and juggernauts like Illaoi (or Darius, if you want someone without pets).
>Mobility is a stat with diminishing returns. If you "globally reduce mobility", you increase the value of it even more on everyone who still has it, and it becomes even more overbearing. That would directly work towards Riot's end goal of more unique champion niches. A small amount of mobility can feel good and unique. Years ago Kassadin was pretty unique for being an insanely mobile champion. It's what initially drew me to him. If everybody has mobility, and now I mean literally everyone has an item that gives them more mobility, there's no reason for that to feel unique. If individual champions still feel strong at that point you can balance it by addressing them on an individual level. >That said, mages are inherently bursty. They are tied to that infamous "windows of power" concept, and they are supposed to make flashy plays. They make plays that tend to be flashy. They are not flashy for the sake of being flashy. >So here's the thing. You don't want this, and you are misrepresenting your opinion as some kind of consensus. A lot of other people aren't actually bothered by it at all, and some, like me, actually want to see whether it works. Really? I don't? I wish I had know that before I made this thread. Would have saved me a lot of trouble. And when did I claim this was anyone anyone's opinion but my own? I gave _my_ opinions and spoke about why it's a bad idea. >But if you are determined to play a low-mobility champion with large amounts of localized power, you'll still have Zyra, and juggernauts like Illaoi (or Darius, if you want someone without pets). You think juggernauts are remotely like squishy immobile mids? You think changing how an entire class of champions plays and then telling anyone who enjoyed what was the status quo to deal with it is an acceptable response?
Meddler (NA)
: The Thornmail recommendation does feel pretty weird to people that know how the game's played, with you there. We haven't seen any evidence that it's confusing new players though, when we've looked into it they're not rushing Thornmail on everyone, going defense on Ashe more than any other champ or anything similar. Thornmail was originally recommended given the massive defence that much armor offers against physical damage and the way it ensures that even a player who's failing to click/kill minions still sees the tutorial proceed via the passive damage. TLDR: Thornmail on Ashe is weird, we're not seeing any evidence it's harming new players learning, it does help the tutorial proceed.
I obviously don't have statistics do back up my statement, but I've played my fair share of bot games with completely new players. A lot of them that are on their first or second game say they've played the first tutorial and then skipped the second. They generally have no idea of how items work or what items synergize with their champion. Why would you want to progress the tutorial if they're not succeeding at clicking/killing minions? Isn't the point of the tutorial to make sure they know what they're doing? If the minions just passively die for seemingly no reason then that's teaching them the wrong thing.
Stacona (NA)
: Then Flash has to be removed to, so take your fucking pick
Flash should have been removed a long time ago. It's too late now that the entire game is balanced around it.
Meddler (NA)
: We'll likely remove Ryze from the beginner champion pool at some point, he's definitely harder than a lot of other mages that would be better fits there. Annie's a likely replacement should we do that. She can be pretty tough to play in some match ups, but not in ways that are relevant to new players. Bots don't sit at range and poke masterfully, take advantage of her CD/passive windows, zone with kill threat etc. She's also pretty easy to grasp conceptually, which is often as important when first learning the game as actual ease of execution. Ashe by contrast we do think's a good fit for starting players. She is quite hard to play against experienced people, as with Annie though she's pretty easy to play against bots and has easily grasped skills.
Can you at least stop recommending thornmail? The first tutorial does more harm than good for new players.
: You dont remember aram before the snowballs do you? Poke champions were so stupidly strong there are still people thinking they are
Let's see. I played ARAMs back when they were on SR. I played ARABs on Dominion, I played on Proving Grounds... you get the idea. I remember it all. Poke champions were bad, but at least you could build against them and then just overrun them late game. Tanks will just overrun you after a certain point with very little counterplay other than "don't get remotely close to anything they can snowball to."
: > [{quoted}](name=Mandaari,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=fBaKyb9b,comment-id=,timestamp=2016-04-07T17:31:43.820+0000) > > How can you even consider something like this? I really hate items that give champions new abilities, but this is way over the line and a marathon in the wrong direction. Riot, have you ever realized that a desirable aspect of low mobility champions is their low mobility? It's fun to play champions that you need to position perfectly with and that _aren't_ flashy. It wouldn't matter if this item was perfectly balanced, I'm personally not interested in adding dashes to anyone's kit. I'm not interested in a game where Ekko is going to get yet another dash in his arsenal, and I'm especially not interested in a game where Orianna is going to get a single dash in hers. > > Speaking of a dash (blink) everyone already has: Flash. Flash has been in the game since alpha and early on in League there were pleas to get rid of it before it was too late. Well, it's _way_ too late and now everyone is balanced around flash. You tried to justify that by saying you wanted everyone to be able to quickly reposition. Flash already serves the proposed purpose of HRB. We don't want or need another flash. Honestly you should be looking at ways to globally reduce mobility, not add more. > > What I really can't believe is that you even tried to justify a change like this by saying that APs need a way to opt into flashier combat patterns. Get that BS back to the LC$ brainstorm board and then just light the board on fire. Oh how funny it is that this is being upvoted when the community *wanted* mages to be mobile to fit the meta, but now that it's coming true, there's a problem, lol. "We don't want or need another flash" You don't speak for everyone either. I would be fine with mages having more mobility. And you think Orianna is gonna be a problem with this item? {{champion:7}} Just you wait.
Where have you ever read people wanting mages to be more mobile? And understand that the community is not a single entity. Some members may have said they want more mobility, but they're clearly overshadowed by the recent community feedback. No, I don't think Orianna will be a problem. I think AP tanks like Amumu will be though, because this has happened before in ARAMs.
: How soon we forget. Most non-standard scaling is awful because there are very few items that support it. It's like asking for an ADC that scales with mana; It'll make iceborn/muramana/etc broken on fictional champion. Riot also tried making ratios buff the utility of a skill and they are STILL paying for it with Lulu since Season, what, 2? Furthermore, no, mana is not a requisite. Rumble? Morde? Vlad? Kennen? Mana is good on certain champions. Yeah, Karthus and Anivia want to itemize for mana because they have spam spells. Would someone like Malzahar build a tear? No, he has all the sustain he needs in his kit thanks to his E's passive. Mana is another lever to tweak and balance, making some items better. It's like CDR on Caitlyn. Does she need it? Absolutely not. Would it be nice? Perhaps. Am I going to take ER over Infinity? N O P E. And dude, items bringing out the power of a champion is a terrible plan. It's why Riot has to keep making more and more complex kits that people complain about. It also makes snowballing even more common because it's just a statistic power someone has over you rather than more tools power. Yeah, they can do five things and you can do four, but their stats aren't as good and they can't AFK steamroll. Mages need actives with powerful effects and they damn well should have them. It makes things more entertaining and it makes the potential skill of someone rise higher. Just because you dislike item actives doesn't mean league should exclude them.
I didn't forget anything. You're correct that release changes without items to support the changes is bad. In the case of supports it's not that there aren't items, but supports just don't have enough gold or experience to buy those items. I'd rather see support Lulu look more like solo lane lulu than the reverse. In regards to mana I'm talking about the champions that actually need it. Mana is the only stat whose sole purpose is to gate how long you can fight for. You either can get by without it or you can't, and that's not a very fun "choice" to make. By the way, most Malzahars rush RoA. How can you claim that items bringing out the power in a champion is bad? Do you not feel like you should gain raw power for getting ahead? Even if you think that, how can you not think that actives aren't the most extreme form of homogenization? If I pick a champion I want to have very clear strengths and weaknesses. If I pick an immobile champion I want to be immobile. If I pick a champion without waveclear I want that to have meaning. Actives remove all of that. Bad at waveclear? There's an item for that. Immobile? There's an item for that, too. At the end of the day champions feel so much less unique because they can fill in whatever they're missing with items that are available to everyone. That's already the been the case for supports for a long time and that's exactly why I wish Riot had gone all the way to make utility scalings work and feel good. Right now supports feel so homogenized compared to other roles and it's mostly thanks to items. Virtually every champion interacts with Sightstone, Locket, Banner, ZZrot, etc in the same way. It's completely unimportant who I'm playing. They will all do exactly the same thing. Hell, a LOT of the recent item changes go in that direction. Against a huge burst threat but still want to do damage? Here are Sterakk's and Maw. Even earlier was Shiv for ADCs with a lack of burst or AoE. Riot wants to make an item to cover up any kind of weakness, if that's not homogenization then I don't know what is.
: I really hate items that give champions new abilities AKA "If it's not a stat stick it shouldn't exist"
Honestly, I'd be a lot happier with that extreme than the extreme we're headed to. Items should bring out the power a champion has, not grant them different abilities or make up for their shortcomings. If Riot thinks APs feel the same then that's an issue with the champion design, not the items. ADs all have CDR, crit, AD, and AS to scale with. APs have AP and CDR where mana related stats are prerequisites. There are a lot more combinations of the former than the latter. You know what I'd like to see more? AP champions that have non-standard scalings. Make more AP champions that work well with AS. Make AP champions whose damage scales with crit (Preferably like Ashe, where it's not chance based. Chance would be miserable on a burst caster).
: reducing mobility is happening. They are literally adding an entire cc JUST to drop mobility.
And how does that make adding more mobility OK? They're taking one step forward and 10 steps back. One champion might gain the ability to drop mobility, but that really doesn't mean much if they globally introduce more mobility.
Show more

Mandaari

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion