: Download the 3 minigames we made in 48 hours, with your input! (Team Jam Packed - Thunderdome XI)
Extremely legitimate and official Super Zac Ball [strategy guide](https://i.imgur.com/hQKobtS.jpg) https://i.imgur.com/hQKobtS.jpg
: Make it happen GMang! :)
Was able to whip that up pretty fast, should make it in! Decided on Nocturne ult being worth 1.0, and designed backwards from there. The rule is: **+3 points per minute of Nearsight applied to enemy champions** (allows fractions). LATE EDIT: Unfortunately we've run into some performance hiccups for CC score. This will probably be postponed. :(
: Since you separate "soft CC" and slows, what exactly are you considering to be "soft CC"? Blinds, silences, etc?
For this system, if you are A) unable to issue move commands OR B) unable to issue spell commands, you are hard CC'd. Soft CC includes Blind, Nearsight, Grounded, and Disarmed.
Gandlos (EUW)
: Shouldn't the Safety modifier also depend on which turrets of yours are still standing? If you lost up to t2 turrets maybe the scoring should get better instead of staying worse cause you actually provide useful vision cause the enemy has access to your jungle?
Ya it's possible that it's overly harsh. In general, we were ok with "if your team is losing and in base, you will have a hard time getting a high vision score, because you will have a hard time having actual vision control over the map. Your score will still be high compared to your team, but the fact that your score is getting strangled is probably reflective of the reality of your game state." We might wanna reopen that discussion tho...
: The lane vision ward score-reduction seems unnecessarily punishing to in-lane ward techniques. This is especially relevant in mid lane, as warding just outside the enemy turret tells you which direction the enemy is going to path in to roam potentially.
Which part are you referring to? The way nearby friendly lane minions can reduce score?
: I think the direction of having this additional metric is great. However, while it's good for helping players who want to improve, are you guys looking to find ways to encourage (or even reward) more warding/vision? This question is mostly for those auto filled supports who refuse to buy sightstone....Which is a very frustrating experience to deal with.
Making strategic contributions (and the support slot) feel more compelling and require less personal sacrifice is a big topic for us. I suspect it will take a long time until we're happy with it. I agree that buying Sightstone (and autofilling support in general) can be a big buzzkill, and things don't have to be that way. I don't have much to add atm other than what we're already showing for Midseason, but we are definitely thinking about that particular problem and consider it a high priority for LoL core gameplay. Vision Score barely scratches the surface imo.
: This vision score is cool and interactive. I like how it emphasizes the need for a support and encourages AD*cough cough* the rest of the team to place down some wards for once. How is the other score for CC going to be calculated? Is it going to be based off of seconds you CC'd the enemy or what?
**CC Score:** Hard CC duration applied to enemy champions (in seconds), plus half value for most types of soft CC, plus 1/6 value for slows. You can score off multiple champions at once, and allies can overlap their CC with yours without reduction; but if _you_ apply multiple simultaneous CC to a single target, it only chooses the highest scoring CC you have on them for score. People with heavy teamfight CC or who have repeated lane CC tend to get top scores. DPS carries tend to have lowest scores.
: Will there be points added to the Vision Score if you deny enemy vision with certain skills such as Quinn's Q or Nocturne's R?
Currently we don't give points for applying Near Sight, though that's a pretty reasonable suggestion. Hm...
MysterQ (NA)
: https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/k9MXINfa-idea-postgame-ward-map Good direction. I think vision awareness needs to be a thing to increase level of play at all levels. I am sure this was in production before my suggestion. Also ADD team total vision score. This is important to promote the team aspect of the game and vision. If you are losing every game and have a lower team vision score, hopefully that can be a message to vision more, etc. Pointlessness: A ward that's very close to a friendly structure or inside your own base will have a -100% modifier to its point value. I get this. But what if I don't have red and bought Control to clear an enemy TP ward into our base.
Ya we started playtesting vision score in January. Posts like these are still useful though, any feedback for what you're working on can be a good data/discussion point. I think if Vision Score ends up being a useful metric for people, we'll look to expand it further. Being able to find your score mid-game, seeing team score, or knowing your career score is sort of "next step" territory to explore. Edit: In that particular case you'd get Ward Lifetime Denied points for the ward takedown. The Pointlessness modifier may deserve more some special casing based on the state of your actual base, though we haven't noticed it heavily influencing score or behavior in our playtests.
: What about abilities that grant vision (but aren't solely for that purpose)? Lux's E, Nid traps, Zyra seeds, etc.
We talked about this and decided to draw a line at those tactical multi-purpose spells that don't focus on vision. At the extreme end, almost any line skillshot can be used to scout brush, but incorporating this into the system made complexity explode pretty hard (both from a code/performance standpoint and design/comprehension standpoint). We may look to add a few more cases (traps stood out as more meaningful) but it's still being discussed (and we're interested in player feedback).
patmax17 (EUW)
: The first thing I thought was "It would be cool if I got bonus points every time my ward reveals an enemy champion", but I guess it's more or less factored into the "staleness" modifier?
Yeah we wanted to promote general trends, not specific game events. This is both to avoid cheese (only placing where I already suspect enemies are) and also because the value judgement on individual vision choices is so nuanced (a ward can be perfectly placed and utilized even if there's nothing there to spot). That said, the act of dropping a ward can still give you some score for revealing unseen champions (as mentioned in "Vision Mechanics" sub-bullet). We did this (in combination with the minimum ward lifetime) because reasonable wards are sometimes placed with the understanding that they'll spot something and die quickly, and that seemed like it shouldn't be heavily disincentivized in the system.
: How can vision be real if our eyes aren't{{item:3187}} {{item:2045}} {{item:2049}}
I dunno {{champion:64}} can get pretty good vision score
: Can we have a damage dealt to Structures stat? Smite has it, so I can't imagine it's really that hard for league to be able to figure out how to make it.
Check out this thread to see other stats being added (I think it may interest you hah): https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/xE35BtAR-midseason-update-utility-contribution
  Rioter Comments
Wygol (EUW)
: I'm glad to see that you guys are responding to community feedback, it really means a lot! However, should there be a continuous negative response, are you still open to the idea of removing Plants altogether?
Nothing's off the table, though I don't think we'd rush to that. First impressions can get messy, especially if you have communication issues (which we've had on Plants imo). Last midseason, for example, randomized dragons and red/blue camp respawn indicators drew massive criticism before ship. While some people still don't like them, I think it's fair to say they at least didn't turn out as bad as pre-release threads indicated. A personal tangent from my experience: As games evolve, "obvious wins" become rarer, and the philosophy of "the riskiest thing is to not take risks" starts emerging (you see this in other long-evolving games like MTG). Plants are a new design space in many ways, and it's possible they won't work out. But after playtesting them in various forms over the past several months, we think there's something valuable there.
  Rioter Comments
: seems interesting, my main comment would be that as per the "Gank Blast Cones" if they intend to somehow teleport you into the epic monster pits or something akin to that, they aren't equal dependant on which side you are on. Quick explanation: the blue side baron gank and the red side dragon gank are heavily favored towards their respective sides. Furthermore their distance is extremely long and normalcy of warding there is extremely low. Additionally, if i were to say that baron is more impactful for the game, blue side would have an extreme advantage using the gank into the baron pit from a normally unwarded, far away position. Just some thoughts, let me know what you think @Riot GMang @SAFELOCKED
Strongly agree that we need to keep an eye on that asymmetry. We're committed to ensuring both teams are fair over the course of a game. If it appeared to be unfair, I think we'd first tune spawn frequency. The system is pretty flexible under the hood, we could even say something like "blue team's dragon-wall Gank Cone respawns slower early game, red team's baron-wall Gank Cone respawns slower late game" if it comes down to it. We'll be watching that data closely!
  Rioter Comments
: first a question. do the enemies also get this timer even though they haven't seen the blue buff die? if yes then what's the reasoning behind this. if you don't "know" when the blue, red, camps died then why should you know when they respawn. i don't really see as to why you should be "rewarded" even though you didn't have vision to see the buff die.
Yep. Just because one instance of skill expression and reward is being de-emphasized, that doesn't mean overall skill expression or reward is reduced. We're putting more emphasis on maximizing your team's objective participation across the map, while removing emphasis from certain forms of scouting. Will invading enemy jungle be easier? Well, it will be less dictated by certain kinds of vision play. But that doesn't mean there won't be skillful interaction there, it just means it might be more about optimizing map position to coincide with respawns, and actually fighting in jungle, moreso than gaining/denying vision coverage We've felt in most cases that giving players information about things to fight over tends to be net positive in the game being fun and, often, in being skillful. That's not to say no skill has been removed, but the skill check of "what do you do with this information" can often be more interesting than "can you get this information." In mechanics like timer tracking, we tend to value the former over the latter. Though that's not true for ALL mechanical spaces. To do a simplified analogy: if we were both playing darts, I might suggest "we should play blindfolded and spin around before throwing!" Does this make the game more skillful? Well, it applies a kind of skill test that wasn't here before (spacial memory and managing vertigo), which might be neat. But it does so at the cost of another skill value: rewarding actual throwing precision. There's a good chance that the game is worse at testing skills you care about, even if it tests more skills on paper. In this case, we're saying "let's drop this blindfold." Both in theory and in playtesting, we find the game more fun that way.
doing ok (NA)
: any concerns that more invades=less slow tank junglers and more lee sins?
Definitely a concern. It does also have some rubber band effects though. Enemies who steal your buffs don't get a monopoly on your own camp respawn timers. They also tend to facilitate team coordination in both invades and defenses. Teams without as much vision snowball can also do counter invades more easily than before.
doing ok (NA)
: I gotta say that I really don't like the auto timers. For example, let's say I'm consistently shutting down their vision by taking scuttler, killing their jg, killing wards etc. And then they know when my red spawns anyway, and invade me with their dynamic q buddies while the strangers on my team don't help me :^). I feel like this rewards less skilled players...(not that i'm very good but just sayin)
Whether a certain piece of information should be a reward or a baseline can be pretty debatable. Should we show you the expiration timer on enemy scuttle crab? The death timers on enemy champions? Spell cooldowns on allied champions? Buff durations on enemy champions? There are skill and reward arguments to be made about all sorts of things. Sometimes you say "play *for* this information," sometimes you say "play *with* this information." The cost benefit has to be weighed in each case. In the case of red and blue buff, we found that games had more strategic variance, coordinated playmaking, and exciting mid-games when both teams played **with** this information instead of **for** it. There is de-emphasis on scouting camp takedowns and a greater emphasis on both sides fighting to contest those camps as they respawn. It is a tradeoff for sure. But in this case we feel it's worth it. Tangentially, there's also the question of whether information that can be derived should just be clearly shown. Red and Blue respawn, technically speaking, can be derived from looking at someone's buff bar while they hold the red/blue buff. It can also be derived from spectating the game. A similar thing happened with Baron timer: while we can make people calculate this stuff, it's basically public knowledge for those willing to do book keeping on it. How valuable is that to ask people to do?
: > [{quoted}](name=Riot GMang,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=jun5Iyp4,comment-id=00030002,timestamp=2016-04-19T21:15:55.603+0000) > > We've been very careful about tuning the snowball and lane-ending concerns on it. That's a big part of why it spawns later, scales with champ level, costs much more health/time to take, offsets its power into a duration that's longer than lane phase, and has a discharge mechanic that gets spent when last-hitting. We're prepared to go harder on those mechanisms if we see the buff deciding lanes too much, but we haven't been seeing that in playtests. And, if those aren't enough, we probably will try more direct mechanics like the duration-reducing death penalty you described. so what would your team want to do if the enemy gets this?
You play around it like someone earning a small gold lead. It will help them in fights, but doesn't mean they auto-win, and it doesn't affect their allies' strength. It's power budgeted around a Keystone mastery, but the encounter is pretty costly and a lot of the power is deferred. If we see it deciding games too much, we'll adjust with patches. Ultimately, if the enemy team is trying to dominate the top half of the map, you can either work to prevent it, or focus on winning other areas of the map. During playtests it hasn't seemed to need a silver bullet for playing against.
Pikmints (NA)
: I think I'm missing something on this part; > AP Damage Conversion > When your attacks trigger AP damage conversion (occurs when attacking a turret while your AP is more than double your bonus AD), the converted damage is now magic instead of physical Why does damage type mean anything here? Turrets seemingly have equal armor/magic resist at all points in the game, so wouldn't the net result here be the exact same as before? The only thing I can see is how it would display post-game "Magic Damage Dealt" as a smidge higher.
Penetration now applies. This particularly affects mages, who tend to have a decent amount of magic pen.
: With all the changes happening such as Zigg's satchel executing towers under 25% health, or Dragon buffs that increase damage to turrets I think that the towers will still feel a little weak. Especially with a wave of minions to take aggro they will probably still fall fairly quickly. I like that tower diving will be a little harder but not impossible. But I am not sure the overall health should have been nerfed. I guess this will help with the early game and probably have a trickle down effect. Guess I will have to wait and see.
We're aiming to buff more than nerf towers overall. If they end up dying too fast we'll try to adjust in a timely fashion.
Rimi (NA)
: Can you explain the blue and red buff respawn timers more? Will it show on the map when the camps are taken too??? This really sounds like it's going to be a big deal..
When a Red or Blue has 1 minute left to spawn, BOTH teams update respawn timers and get a minimap icon indicating it will respawn soon. No matter what their vision has been during the game. And ya it definitely changes things, expect more invades and steals.
midorii (NA)
: Do the elemental dragons have reduced respawn timers than from live? Also does blue buff no longer grant CDR?
Nope, same respawn as Live. Elder will likely have a longer respawn than regular dragons though. Blue buff has same CDR as Live.
: Would the jungle timer UI changes reward teams that don't ward as well as they should, considering they will be able to coordinate an invade for a buff steal and possible a kill basically for free, given the new "about to spawn" icons and global timers on sided buffs?
In some ways that may be true, but since both sides always see them, warding ends up gaining importance in other ways. 1. They will be contested more often, so having vision just for tactical advantage becomes important. 2. Both sides should expect more invade steals, so vision wars around those buffs will increase. 3. Invade steals will get more precise in timing, so playing the vision game around river becomes more critical in giving you time to intercept. In our playtests, strategic players (especially supports and junglers) have tended to like the change, since they create more opportunities to make and deny plays and control vision **around** the objectives (instead of directly on them).
: Thank you. Just thank you. Rift scuttler is actually worth a lot, turret aggro juggling much less effective, turrets are tougher but you can build to counter act this, and blue/red are much more impactful later on. Wonderful changes! This will make a lot of people happy. I was initially worried about elemental dragons making rift scuttler even less attractive, but this makes up for that fact. Edit: I mean rift herald, not scuttler!
Thanks. I assume you're referring to Rift Herald and not Scuttler? I don't recall any Scuttler changes. :P
: Im going to have to say no to that herald change. that looks to be flat out broken. Instead of it lasting 20 minutes and through death, do you think that maybe killing the buff holder could instead reduce its duration by a few minutes? The way you guys are currently pitching it makes it look like if the enemy top laner gets that buff you automatically lose lane, which is not fun gameplay
We've been very careful about tuning the snowball and lane-ending concerns on it. That's a big part of why it spawns later, scales with champ level, costs much more health/time to take, offsets its power into a duration that's longer than lane phase, and has a discharge mechanic that gets spent when last-hitting. We're prepared to go harder on those mechanisms if we see the buff deciding lanes too much, but we haven't been seeing that in playtests. And, if those aren't enough, we probably will try more direct mechanics like the duration-reducing death penalty you described.
: Yes, this is exactly what I want. More reasons for my top laner to pretend the rest of the map doesn't exist. Also: Are you supposed to get the timer for blue/red buff when you didn't see it die originally? Because on the PBE, that is currently the case on PBE and it is dumb.
While the reward has a top-staying-top focus to some extent, the fact that the objective is more impactful and contestable means mids and jungles get drawn into fights over it, so we haven't really seen it increase isolation play too crazily. We've also seen some jungles and mids actually want the buff. Will definitely keep an eye on it though. Yep. Enemies will see your buff respawns no matter what. Prepare for invades accordingly.
: > Blue Buff- AP per level replaced with +15% total Ability Power (like Rabadon’s Deathcap effect) multiplicitive or additive with deathcap?
Currently additive. So 35 + 15 = +50% AP overall.
  Rioter Comments
: If you Q then E, will it follow or simply move to where you were when casting Q?
It's homing and will keep tracking you. When it reaches you it will drop on the ground right then, so it's possible it ends mid-E if you time it wrong.
: Champion Update: Shen
To clarify Spirit Blade idle behavior: * Spawns next to you at game start and respawn * Despawns on death * Snaps to your position when using any global teleport (Shen ult, recall, Tahm ult, etc.) * Snaps towards you (but still pretty far away) if you move very far from it (talking off-screen distances here--keeps Q cast times manageable without affecting on-screen play) * Q turns it into a homing missile towards you, and it lands on the ground when it reaches you
: Are there any plans to add items or abilities to counter %max hp true damage, or any way to counter it?
I don't believe so. If a champ is dealing %max true damage, the designer probably was shooting for "if you can deliver this, it WILL hurt. No matter what." So the design is trying to emphasize the "deliver" part of the counterplay instead of champ select or item build. This carries risks of course (doesn't have the mitigation release valve that physical and magic have, nor the HP that flat true damage does), and it's possible we've made mistakes here. But in general, you should feel empowered to respond to the delivery: if Vayne is hurting, get Frozen Heart, or keep distance, or lock her down, or focus her, or hit-and-run, etc. If the delivery isn't giving sufficiently counters, then we've probably failed on the design or balance. It's possible that we could make a counter to %max true damage (giving heavy shielding and healing comes to mind), but afaik nothing is in the works.
: Cycles of overusing dank memes. Starbomb album on loop keeps me sane while I feed in solo queue.
+1 We've literally had retrospectives where an action item was "use more dank memes" because they help keep spirits up.
: Well, after you managed to "miss" this on the last Q+A, I might as well have another go. I think the changes to Zilean's passive are interesting, though I still think there are a lot of passives that are incredibly outdated or are just downright bland. Is there any chance you are reviewing things like this to make the game more interesting? Here's some of the worst offenders IMO {{champion:74}} His current passive (techmaturgical repair bots) has neither interaction or impact IMO. When his gameplay was reworked, the only interesting thing about it (the unique ability to heal towers) was stripped away, and that was really it. All we're left with is half an Aegis aura that also heals your turrets absurdly slowly. Is this really the best thing the inventor can come up with? {{champion:102}} I know this is partially because of the clarity demanding you shift the wording, but this is really little more than a ball of stats (which I'm pretty sure you're not too fond of, right?) Again, can't we make it more interesting. {{champion:43}} {{champion:126}} I'm pushing these two together because for me, they both suffer from the same problem. Their passive is literally an extension of one ability (both being their "not" ultimates). It feels like a band-aid fix to a problem you had in development of putting too much "power" onto their active abilities then compensating by effectively giving them no passive at all (even if this isn't true, that's the conclusion I've drawn). How is this right in a world when there are new champions with effectively two passives? {{champion:143}} You've probably heard about this one a few times already, but I'll throw in my two cents. The problem here is that plant thematic cohesion aside, this passive just doesn't work. Apart from Karthus, all the other "strike back after death" abilities allow the player to chase down their killer or allies to some degree. Karthus still works due to his devastating E damage and uninterruptable Requiem making dying a viable option. None of this is true for Zyra. You get one restrictively narrow skillshot on an immobile mage who is trying to be as far away from the enemy as possible. It is way too easy to sidestep them attack with the time before you can make the shot. Not too mention her lore specifically highlights the new risk of dying. Why should anything in her kit require her to die if this is the case? That's probably not an exhaustive list, but that's the ones I personally dislike the most. I doubt anything's going to change from this, but I'd like to at least know some of the designer's thoughts on these particular abilities.
Good question, and I agree that there are plenty of passives that leave something to be desired. **Regarding your examples:** Some of the champs you mentioned have also been singled out internally and gotten some experimentation (like Heimer, Shyv, and Syndra), though I can't speak to how they are prioritized among other projects in terms of urgency and which ones are planning to move forward (within our team specifically, the only one that springs to mind is Syndra, though no promises on exact ship date atm hah). **Regarding passive quantity:** This is a controversial topic, but I wanna just share a bit of context here. It's important to keep in mind that we don't design passives in a vacuum and then decide how many each champion gets. Passives are designed to serve the needs of a particular champion. Say I'm a champion designer making a new kit, and I start with a particular gameplay loop that fits nicely on Q W and E slots. The kit is somewhat functional and unique, but there are still things to figure out (let's say the W and E have some usability issues, certain lane matchups are very one-sided, my abilities late-game are confusing team mates, my spell rotation feels too unreliable, wave clearing is too easy, and my build paths don't scale right). What I do with the Passive and R slots--indeed, what I do with **all **slots--are going to be about problems like these or addressing other higher levels goals (like delivering the fantasy better or more unique or something). The answer to those problems might involve any number of changes, possibly demanding 0, 1, or 2+ passives. If I do add 2+ passives, it's **not **because I just want the champ to be cooler or have more stuff than others. And it **is** going to come at the cost of power budget and complexity budget, not just added on top of an otherwise finished, balanced champion. A solution might even involve removing/nerfing passives so that we have more complexity and power budget to put on actives! In the end, individual slots are not supposed to be balanced between each other, nor are "my champ passive(s)" vs "your champ passive(s)." **Entire kits are supposed to be balanced between each other.** "2 passives > 1 passive" doesn't always follow. It's very possible to design a kit with high agency, complexity, and fun with just actives, and it's also very possible to design a super lame kit that has several passives! And it's those kinds of properties (agency, fun, complexity, clarity, etc.) that we care most about: if a champion's multiple passives leaves them with too much control over the game, or too much complexity, or something like that, **that** is a big concern for us (and we definitely aren't perfect about these things!). But the actual quantity is usually not inherently good or bad. **Regarding passive quality:** Lemme give a different example: say we have a high-complexity champion who has everything BUT the passive slot locked down (you might have even had an awesome passive during development but it ended up being extraneous as other slots developed further). As in, "if our game hadn't already set the precedent, I might actually give this champ 0 passives." This can be a tricky spot: players expect each of their slots to feel fun and distinct, including the passive slot, but you don't want to disrupt the balance and fun of your existing pattern/slots. A lot of these passives end up being lower-budget passives: we could have made Jayce get multiple intricate passives, but he's already so complicated and multi-faceted that it would probably detract from the kit to do so. Sometimes you make the call, "this champ is about these cool actives, and we should avoid detracting from that here." This isn't to say that "lame passives" are a good thing, but sometimes the cost-benefit of trying to discover a perfect passive is outweighed by the value of delivering the champion to players with a not-stellar passive. The opposite is also true: sometimes we have a champion that's bloated in complexity/abilities by the time we're reading to ship, but we're willing to make the trade-off for the sake of delivering what we feel is a good product to players. All that said, improving lame slots is definitely on our radar; I just wanted to give context. I hope that provides a little clarity for why passives compare/contrast in the way they do!
Bïrdman (EUW)
: Hi there and thank you for doing this. Are there plans to normalize Jaxs Dodge and Teemos+Quinns blinds regarding on hit effects and also buff blinds timing to make it more consistent in blocking AAs or is there a concern that changing a mechanic (in contrast to just changing numbers) may interfere with balance too much?
We actually have been investigating this fairly recently, though by "we" I mean LoL Gameplay Design and not us Live Gameplay people specifically, so I don't have all the details off-hand. But yes, we are looking into what expected behavior should be for on-hits during dodges and blinds. There's a lot of debt in that system because a lot of champs were designed in a world with lots of dodges (used to have dodge runes, boots, etc.) and on-hit effects were made entirely case-by-case. I imagine that at some point in the future (probably at a season or midseason patch if I had to guess), we'll probably apply some consistent rules. I would also guess that such a change would probably be a generally pro-dodge change, where you actually avoid the attack instead of just the AD portion.
: Another question (this one is more directed to champion design, but still): How do you decide which role in the game is allowed to have what power. For example: We all know that giving an assassin a silence is a bad idea, which is why you removed it from every assassin. On the other hand supports are allowed to have an aoe zhonyas, ally untargetability, aoe silence, a 10 year root, etc. I am not complaining about these design decisions. As a support player i like having this much power in my hands and i really like the current state of the game balance, i am just curious as to how you determine what champions are allowed to have what kind of power.
> [{quoted}](name=BlackquillEUW,realm=EUW,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=vWEoZ6X0,comment-id=001c,timestamp=2015-10-16T19:52:43.795+0000) > > Another question (this one is more directed to champion design, but still): How do you decide which role in the game is allowed to have what power. Good question! Just wanted to add a bit to Scarizard's answer. During the pre-production phases of a champion, we pin down what class+subclass the champion fits into. Champ classes have baseline strength/weakness profiles that include things like damage profiles, CC profiles, mobility profiles, etc. These are definitely not set in stone (champs can be multi-class or even completely unique, champ class can change over time, our understanding of the classes get more refined over time, and the classes themselves can evolve over time), but they provide good baselines for roster-healthy champions Throughout development, we try to validate: * Does this champion's strength/weakness profile actually align with the class? If not, we should be careful, because there won't be standard itemization/tactics/strategies to fall back on to make sure they fit well into our roster and are (counter)playable. * Does this champion have unique strength/weaknesses within the subclass? If not, the champion is probably not distinct enough and risks getting into arms races with other members of the class ("arms race" is when you're too directly comparable with others in yours subclass and you're only picked based on meta favor). This subclass uniqueness space is where you'll see characters splashing outside their subclass; Ekko having some CC, for example. A lot of things don't really have class definition. Bard's AoE stasis wasn't a cornerstone of our support definitions or anything, but it fell within the utility, safety, and teamwork space that supports occupy. And that's good--we want to be adding new things to the game that don't fit old molds! The actual criteria we use to evaluate champions, the models we use to analyze them, and the processes we use to develop them are constantly being iterating on, so things will be fluid and not always perfectly aligned across time. Bard would have looked very different if we made him a few years ago, and my guess is he'd look very different if we made him a few years in the future!
: Gang Plank new ultimate
Hm, do you have any details for this? I'm hearing the voice, and also hear it when I watch online videos of him. O_O AFAIK, the laugh behavior shouldn't have changed. Keep in mind that the laugh spawns on the zone, not the cast. So, if you target it and look away before the zone spawns, or cast it via minimap, you may never hear it.

Riot GMang

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion