: Petition for Mordekaiser to get a special Voice line when buying Tear of the Goddess
: Watching the Mage Nerfs as a Talon Main
OP nailed it. I have given up maining Talon for all those reasons. The best way to sum it up is that it requires way more effort and skill to be successful on Talon than it takes to stop him. Add to all that the fact that games have sped up about 10 minutes faster from what they use to be. With a shorter lane and mid game phase. This basically shortens Talons timeframe of power down to nothing before the adcs become unkillable lifestesling monsters. What is the point of even playing Talon anymore?
Almighty (EUNE)
: Why are "Rotating game modes" not rotating weekly anymore?
I miss dominion. I like playing dominion reborn when it's on rotation. I think I would have played it a lot more if 95% of the dominion games I was in weren't filled with bots. ARAM use to be like that too, but it's not like that anymore from what I've seen. Maybe they cracked down on the bots?
Ada Wong (NA)
: In 6 days I will hit 2 years without a suspension or ban.
I often fullmute all, especially in ranked. About the only thing low elo ever uses pings for is to spam question marks as a way of being toxic about your plays. Or I have bronze scrubs trying to tell me to back when I know full well what I'm doing - they just become a distraction I don't need in the midst of battle. And it happens enough that I can't be bothered to individually mute all of them each game. Things will probably be different once I'm in gold. Players may have meaningful input to offer that makes it worth keeping communication open. I've seen high elo smurfers make the same assessment - just mute your ranked games in silver or below because your teammates will never say anything worth listening to.
: Assassins suck because Mages are strong
I play mainly both mages and assassins when I can get away with it, and as an assassin player the least of my concerns have been mages. It's always the ADC that can kill me faster than I can kill them in the mid game. The fact that I no longer have mid game powerspikes to leverage before the ADC comes online. And the fact that supports can so easily save the ADC from my delayed burst, giving them time to heal up to full off auto attacks.
: they were trolling from the start y not dodge
> [{quoted}](name=progect k,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OvFsu4vq,comment-id=000c00010000,timestamp=2018-04-23T14:30:40.944+0000) > > they were trolling from the start y not dodge I didn't notice what they picked until it was too late. Apparently I put too much trust in people to pick proper champions for thier role. Of course, I shouldn't have to be the one dodging. If the tribunal were around still you wouldn't see people doing this as much in the first place.
GreenLore (EUW)
: Because some people bought it because they wanted an exclusive skin that is not always avaliable and if Riot would make Hextech galio avaliable again,then they'd take that away from these people. Also if you really wanted to buy the skin so badly,then why didn't you do it last year?If I'm not mistaken,you had 2 chances to buy him(first when the Galio VGU came out,2.during the christmas event)
> [{quoted}](name=GreenLore,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=WgAGR8Or,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2018-04-23T17:58:28.823+0000) > > Because some people bought it because they wanted an exclusive skin that is not always avaliable and if Riot would make Hextech galio avaliable again,then they'd take that away from these people. > > Also if you really wanted to buy the skin so badly,then why didn't you do it last year?If I'm not mistaken,you had 2 chances to buy him(first when the Galio VGU came out,2.during the christmas event) I would have if I had been online during those times. Not everyone has the time to play every week throughout the entire course of a year. I missed his rerelease and didnt expect it would be available for christmas. More inportantly, exclusivity is not a valid reason when the only reason it was pulled from the market in the first place was low quality work. Many skins have gone back on the market after getting a visual update. It makes no sense to continue hiding them anymore.
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3inQ28E3,comment-id=0023000000000001,timestamp=2018-04-21T18:15:05.373+0000) > > Your premise is wrong to begin with. You absolutely can ignore how players feel if it's not based in reality. > Dota didn't care how you felt as a no-knowing newb crying about dying to something you don't understand. What matters if the reality of whether or not there was a legitimate counter for what you died to. If the hero could legitimately be countered by something that is in you or your team's power to do, then you have no one to blame but yourself. > > Fun is subjective, and nobody likes losing. If you try to balance around making the game so padded that nobody ever gets their feelings hurt because it's so difficult for them to get punished for their own mistakes, then you'll end up eliminating, one by one, all the ways a player can leverage their skill over the other and dumpster them. But by doing that you flatten the skill expression of the game and make professional play as boring as watching paint dry. > > You absolutely must ignore how ignorant players feel if you genuinely care about achieving real balance. Because I can tell you from experience that any hardcore game is going to make newbs cry and whine about things that kill them, because they aren't good, but they don't want to accept that them not being good was to blame for their failure. > If Dota were to nerf a hero that can be countered because you can't be bothered to learn the game or get better, then it would be disastrous for legitimate balance as the hero becomes useless against players who know what they are doing. > That is basically what happened with Teemo, and many other champions, that low elo players complained about because they can't be bothered to spend gold on vision or think strategically. Even though Teemo was already irrelevant at high elo and in pro play. You're missing the point. Yes, some players don't take the time to learn how to play against the character, but when winning lane against a target and still does not provide a fun or complete gameplay experience because that character just feels that dead-beat and kills the lane, that's a problem. If every character were capable of being played in pro or high in competitive, then the lack of growing curve would be atrocious. There's a reason Dota isn't comparable to league because the learn curve between characters is insane, and none of the characters ever achieve true balance because there's usually a character to counter another specific type or even a specific character archetype. League doesn't design those exact champions, or if they have, they've been nerfed into the ground for a good reason ({{champion:38}} anti-mage mobile assassin, {{champion:20}} for counterjungling, {{champion:268}} as the perfect siege and control mage against other mages, {{champion:238}} being the perfect anti-ADC assassin) though some are unwarranted due to the character only showing success in very rare occasions (zed, and kassadin after his series of nerfs that were certainly necessary). I won't deny you that there are people who straight up need to learn the game because certain characters are just not that strong. But absolute balance cannot be achieved by not caring about how a character feels to play against. DOTA is certainly not a good example either, as the balance style is based on character specific counters, rather than a varied style of gameplay for each character. but there are changes that sometimes have to be made because it feels horrible to do a certain thing because the character forces the lane to be that way. {{champion:84}} is getting reworked because she is a "hit 6, go in" and that feels horrible for mages, high elo and low elo. You can barely prevent her from just comboing a target into oblivion. {{champion:91}} oh hey heres a champion that needs buffs because he feels horrible to play in almost any situation due to bugs and his lack of interaction for either player. {{champion:74}} nerfed into the ground reasonably because he sucks to fight against if you don't have long range abilities that can remove his turret pressure or your early is too weak, and usually you'll be pushed in thanks to his lane shove presence. "Getting gud" and "newbs" are certainly things each player should deal with. When i was early on, i can agree, i might've seen some characters as "GG OP CHAR RIOT STUPID". I've grown. there are characters i laugh my ass off at because i know they're weak as hell, but some, that i can beat usually with ease, still irk me because its not a challenge, its an annoying road bump that forces a player to stop enjoying the game WHILE playing around the character, and solely play around the character, and when you succeed, it still feels annoying and bad to fight because the fun was taken out of the game. Yeah, you're winning, but it wont feel satisfying. That character simply gives very little interaction for either player. To give an example, Dark Souls 2. Lightning on release was insane, and while it was a limited spell, and there was "counterplay", it provided a very one dimensional response from an opponent besides dodging and charging their own laser spear, and mobs didn't stand a chance. Feeling does matter, because it means there's very little interactivity if a large majority of the playerbase agrees. I think each character should be given depth, but you have to remember how much response another player can have. I shouldn't have to worry because i'm first pick top, and i pick someone like {{champion:58}} , i shouldn't have to worry my opponent picks {{champion:80}} and is almost guaranteed the lane win because he can block and stun me before i can avoid anything. That's unfun, that's not enjoyable for a player. You cant say "get gud" and move on, because how am i supposed to predict my opponent's pick before? I haven't seen their team comp, and bans can be very personal, or straight up random. You say "genuine balance", but its not genuine balance. You can't just throw numbers or a single tiny change and now say "don't worry, the numbers look fine". Because that's hilariously poor at design, some of the best fights in video games had to be nerfed or changed because the players could not beat the fight, or it was so ridiculous players legit couldn't find any enjoyment in the challenge. I feel like you don't understand what its like to be a developer or someone who has consistently critiqued lots of games. Because it means a lot to a dev to hear "this /blank/ isn't fun to play as/against" from a large majority of players because it means the character has failed to provide interactivity between players. Even high ranking streamers have gone on to say Teemo is a problematic champion because his kit is so uninteractive that even high ranking players despise playing against him because it feels like a waste of time. Maybe you should take your over-elitism and leave, because not everyone enjoys feeling miserable even when they're winning.
> [{quoted}](name=CoeAstral,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3inQ28E3,comment-id=00230000000000010000,timestamp=2018-04-23T16:57:48.111+0000) > > You're missing the point. You're confused. I didn't miss your point, I rejected it as being a logically invalid argument. The premise you base your conclusions on has not been established to be true. You don't "need" to always change your game based on how certain types of players feel about something. You don't need to make players feel good about facing something in order for the game to be a commercial success or competitively successfully. Plenty of wildly success things have elements that players don't like facing for one reason or another. Whether it be stealth heroes in Dota, or the AWP in counterstrike, the list is endless of potential examples. And how people feel about something has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it is objectively balanced or not. Bad players always feel bad about game mechanics that allow them to get crapped on because they lack game knowledge and skill. That doesn't make it unbalanced, and it doesn't mean the game needs to be changed to accommodate their egos. They need to get good and then they'll feel better. Feelings have nothing to do with balance, because not all feelings are accurate. > I won't deny you that there are people who straight up need to learn the game because certain characters are just not that strong. But absolute balance cannot be achieved by not caring about how a character feels to play against. Logical fallacy. Merely repeating your original conclusion doesn't make it anymore true than the first time you said it. Balance has absolutely nothing to do with feelings, and you need to stop pretending it does. Balance is an objective thing. It can either be countered or it's can't. Feelings are subjective, they will vary from person to person even though the circumstances of the game's design hasn't changed. You have not provided any real logical reasoning as to why we must design a game around how newbies subjectively feel about it. Much less have you established what feelings have to do with actual balance.
Elisheva (NA)
: Now i just picture {{champion:238}} wearing {{item:3089}} for a Definitely not an Assassin skin.
> [{quoted}](name=Elisheva,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=U0pq8pEK,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-04-23T02:00:05.664+0000) > > Now i just picture {{champion:238}} wearing {{item:3089}} for a Definitely not an Assassin skin. 10/10 would buy
: what happened to riot's report system? i get people giving up and raging in every game i play including the wins. even if we are overtly winning and end up winning the game somebody finds some reason to flame and im so confused?
> [{quoted}](name=Kayn x Xin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OvFsu4vq,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2018-04-23T02:04:36.970+0000) > > what happened to riot's report system? i get people giving up and raging in every game i play including the wins. even if we are overtly winning and end up winning the game somebody finds some reason to flame and im so confused? This is what drives people to be toxic. There's no justice. They start taking things into their own hands and troll or flame back. You can report people all day long, but unless they use certain keywords they will never get punished.
Banuvan (NA)
: I walk away go make a sandwich when my teammates troll me like this.
> [{quoted}](name=Banuvan,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OvFsu4vq,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2018-04-22T23:44:45.322+0000) > > I walk away go make a sandwich when my teammates troll me like this. Then you get banned for afking in a game you were being trolled in, instead of wasting 30 minutes of your life staring at the screen. I just had a braindead duo go Katarina and garen in bot lane, feed out their ass, then refuse to surrender holding the team hostage for 50 minutes because the enemy team either was stalling the game out for kills (they had over twice as many as our team) or didn't know how to push lanes. 50 minutes of my life wasted pointlessly when the game was really over at 15 minutes anyway.
: {{champion:98}} Riot why does he have that stupid "spirit sword" ~~mechanic~~ gimmick? Hell, Riot even admitted that his rework was a failure. Shen revert when?
> [{quoted}](name=FurorDivinus27,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=bKFRydRU,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-04-22T06:06:08.635+0000) > > {{champion:98}} > > Riot why does he have that stupid "spirit sword" ~~mechanic~~ gimmick? Hell, Riot even admitted that his rework was a failure. > > Shen revert when? I forgot about Shen. Yes, I don't play Shen anymore after his rework. I miss his harass, offensive capability, and split pushing. The spirit sword always felt tacked on, and not a natural expression of the character that made sense.
Rioter Comments
: I hope mages end up really bad after the mana changes
Stop with the crybabying already. Mages have been without unlimited mana before. They are reverting some bad changes and moving in the right direction. it's not just about waveclear. It's about mana ceasing to be a real resource. Poke. Roaming. Teamfighting. Siege. Whatever. Unlimited mana plays a role in all of it not playing out like it should.
A Nunu (NA)
: @Riot What you should know when giving Nunu his VGU.
I don't play nunu, but I like the idea of keeping a macro champion a macro champion. Too many of the new champions are all about micro, and mechanics, and flash. I prefer champions where I can out-think my opponent strategically, not just out-click them and make split second tactical calls.
: Climbing in ranked be like .
Inaccurate depiction. He has safety hooks.
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3inQ28E3,comment-id=00230000,timestamp=2018-04-15T06:26:11.660+0000) > > Using terms like "anti-fun", and talking about how you "feel" about laning against Teemo, is the kind of talk that got LoL into this mess to begin with. > We can't have an objective and real discussion about genuine balance for any champion if that is your frame of reference. > It's a problem for genuine balance and competitive viability when you start swinging the nerf bat around based on what low elo players feel about playing against something, instead of taking a hard look at what really is a problem from a competitive standpoint (and by competitive I don't mean professional, but competitive in terms of ranked people who actually want to win. People who are motivated to find a way to adapt and overcome. They generally aren't just going to make excuses and demand the game change to accommodate them, because people with that mentality don't successfully climb competitively to begin with). > > Your assessment of Teemo hasn't been true in years. Or, to be more precise, it's only true in bronze and silver. Gold+ Teemo gets increasingly difficult to play in toplane because so many champions can either out-trade him with ranged abilities or dash onto him and win the trades, once they know what they are doing. That's why in Diamond 40% of Teemo players don't even go top lane at all, and of those that go top lane they have a dead average winrate. And he only has a 1.83% pick rate on top of that. Not the worst but not good either. If Teemo were half as good as you claim, against competent players, then the numbers would show it. > He's never been that competitive to begin with. It's not like his nerfs were needed to address genuine competitive balance issues. > > This goes back to the whole issue of is this a casual game or a competitive game. It can't be both. Either you want to make bad players feel good by changing the game so they don't have to get better or you let them get smacked around until they learn to overcome and adapt. Casual games cater to people who don't want to put in the effort to get better but want the game to make them feel like they are great players by having a very high skill floor and low skill ceiling. A competitive game is designed with a very high skill ceiling by definition. My point seems to be overlooked very clearly. Teemo is in that desperate need of a change, but cannot change. If you want to make him high elo viable and competitive, you have to be willing to take the sacrifices necessary that will make low elo hell for certain players, or his fanbase. You cannot throw out how it feels to lane against a character out of the window in terms of raw balance, because when there's a large consensus that a certain character is just hell to lane against, its usually a sign that not a single player is having fun in the matchup, or the fun of the game is pushed out in favor for the fun of one player. And note how i never claimed teemo was good. I make a point to say Teemo is not good, nor has he ever really BEEN good, its just that when he starts approaching that stage, he becomes nightmarishly annoying for lower ranking players. I occasionally feel frustrated because a teemo lane, even when i'm winning **_is not fun to play against_**. He's not overbearing, nor too many stats or anything. He's just straight up not fun. That, as a game designer, is a MASSIVE flaw, and the problem that teemo also retains is a meme status. If riot changes him majorly, the fanbase will be upset, because they've been using him for years. So what do you do? Screw over a passionate fanbase for a balance towards competitive, or new casual play? Because its clear you want that, but you don't want teemo's identity getting screwed in the process, which is a major problem since that's teemo is all about, solo-carrying in a casual setting. So if you want every character to become more casual play, you now force a champion with a very simple kit into a point where no one wants to play against him because no one is going to have fun besides the teemo player who is winning. I'm not defending riot here, because they got themselves into this situation in the first place, but if you've designed even the smallest amount of text adventure, when something is not fun for a large majority of the playerbase (note almost a whole 90% of league is usually in the first 3 ranks give or take a few percent), you are forced into dealing with it. If you want the game to lose incoming players, then yes, change every champion to have a massive ceiling, because then Riot can build their place around that, but if you want it casual, then you have to make sure any casual player can not only express skill against teemo, but both players have fun within the lane, even if one is losing horribly. To it clear, my point is: Teemo, and other characters ({{champion:11}} {{champion:23}} , {{champion:86}} ) all these characters have a very similar problem, where they are catered towards a solo type playstyle. There isn't just competitive and casual, but also solo and teamplay. You're looking at only two sides and not considering how other characters work. It does adjust to what you say, it has to be competitive or casual, but you're complaining about multiple characters having each of their kits being taken away for being competitively ridiculous (kassadin, Azir, Viktor, Malz, and GP) but also some solo carry power like Teemo and fiora. You do need to take in newer playerbase, and feeling into account, but don't take it as once or twice. Very few of Riots changes before 2 years ago were based entirely around feeling, so don't get me wrong when i say i agree, don't change a character because they "feel bad" to play against, because that might be playstyle/player preference, but when a massive majority of your playerbase says its not fun, changes must be made.
> [{quoted}](name=CoeAstral,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3inQ28E3,comment-id=002300000000,timestamp=2018-04-15T18:51:50.962+0000) > > You cannot throw out how it feels to lane against a character out of the window in terms of raw balance, because when there's a large consensus that a certain character is just hell to lane against, its usually a sign that not a single player is having fun in the matchup, or the fun of the game is pushed out in favor for the fun of one player. Your premise is wrong to begin with. You absolutely can ignore how players feel if it's not based in reality. Dota didn't care how you felt as a no-knowing newb crying about dying to something you don't understand. What matters if the reality of whether or not there was a legitimate counter for what you died to. If the hero could legitimately be countered by something that is in you or your team's power to do, then you have no one to blame but yourself. Fun is subjective, and nobody likes losing. If you try to balance around making the game so padded that nobody ever gets their feelings hurt because it's so difficult for them to get punished for their own mistakes, then you'll end up eliminating, one by one, all the ways a player can leverage their skill over the other and dumpster them. But by doing that you flatten the skill expression of the game and make professional play as boring as watching paint dry. You absolutely must ignore how ignorant players feel if you genuinely care about achieving real balance. Because I can tell you from experience that any hardcore game is going to make newbs cry and whine about things that kill them, because they aren't good, but they don't want to accept that them not being good was to blame for their failure. If Dota were to nerf a hero that can be countered because you can't be bothered to learn the game or get better, then it would be disastrous for legitimate balance as the hero becomes useless against players who know what they are doing. That is basically what happened with Teemo, and many other champions, that low elo players complained about because they can't be bothered to spend gold on vision or think strategically. Even though Teemo was already irrelevant at high elo and in pro play.
Risen29 (NA)
: Streamer quits, outlines some key problems with direction of the game
It occurred to me recently that the reason people accuse the game of being too snowbally has nothing to do with any actual snowballing mechanics (only the first tower gives gold, and dragon gives no real gold), but the lack of viable solocarry potential gives the impression of the enemy team snowballing against you because the weakest overall team is doomed from the start with little means of overcoming that deficit no matter how long the game goes on. I say this because I observed the same phenomenon in HotS. Because of the limited solocarry potential you were often only as strong as your weakest member. I was experienced enough that I could tell in the first 2 minutes whether or not our team was going to lose because we got one complete newbie on our team. You could just tell by the way they moved they were a clueless potato, so the game was going to be 4vs5. THe HotS matchmaker was pretty bad in that regard, pairing inexperienced players with experienced players. Given that, if you weren't doing well in the initial stage of the game, you would be unlikely to ever start doing well because team levels are shared. Your whole team would eventually be minus one level to the whole enemy team, re-enforcing the snowball.
Azadethe (NA)
: Yes and no on the global drop. {{item:3165}} change resulted in a moderate need for less AP. However, while they dropped some item's AP, they introduced {{item:3907}} for super cheap, {{item:3027}} is going back to a 120 AP item, {{item:3030}} was given 20 MORE AP, {{item:3089}} was given 5% more AP boost for 200 LESS gold, {{item:3116}} was given back 15 of its Season SIX lost AP. {{item:3146}} {{item:3151}} {{item:3100}} {{item:3115}} {{item:3135}} haven't been touched in ages in regards to their AP amounts. Losing 109 AP is NOTHING like the 10-20 AP other items have lost/regained. Here's an idea: Non Mages use their Base AD outside of farming. Maybe that's why most on hit items do not have the AP that mages can gain..... Yet somehow {{item:3072}} {{item:3074}} {{item:3053}} {{item:3139}} {{item:3031}} {{item:1412}} {{item:3812}} have all creeped up to AP levels of stats in AD. The major difference between the two damage sources has pretty much been reduced to {{item:3089}} 's passive. You'll notice a full build mage atm without a Death Cap often only gets to around 550 AP. AD builds are pushing 440 AD. They didn't used to get close to that. They're basically bringing the two stat types in line so they can tweak kits the same. The problem with this is..... Mages fundamentally have less defensive options, face both % armor reduction AND flat reduction, face critical rates, Duskblade, and are also prone to each other. They also have much less access to HP, and if they get HP, {{item:3036}} just shreds any advantage that gave them. _**Mages don't have a Lord Dominik's.**_ That's why assassins are whole category killers right now. All mages are more or less prone to whatever an assassin does, because if they do what protects against the base assassin kit, the assassin just buys {{item:3036}} and is right back to 1 combo kills. And vs compositions who have bruisers, which are designed to gain substantial stats from their own kits to substitute for items, and buy items like {{item:3800}} {{item:3083}} {{item:3075}} {{item:3065}} {{item:3742}} , because they can, Mages who have to buy all AP or just do no damage, don't stand much of a chance, because all it takes for a bruiser to itemize damage is {{item:3078}} {{item:3053}}, and they easily have the equivalent of 500 AD. ({{champion:122}} actually gains that on 5 stack) So while they become raid bosses, Mages are pretty much killed off by anything that can get close enough to use a couple skills. That's pretty much why I {{champion:267}} . She can heal out of it and last longer. I often go over 10 deaths on {{champion:143}} , because every one of her skills has a delay and skill canceling champs like {{champion:92}} can just abuse the living crap out of that, and that's about half the current roster.
> [{quoted}](name=Azadethe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=qxj6jLbL,comment-id=0009000100000000,timestamp=2018-04-21T04:36:59.633+0000) > they introduced {{item:3907}} for super cheap, Still less AP than Seraphs. And 100 AP use to be kind of normal. High AP on an item was 120 or more. >{{item:3030}} was given 20 MORE AP, Missing the point, it's still relatively low AP. > {{item:3116}} was given back 15 of its Season SIX lost AP. No. It use to have 100 AP. It's still lower than it was. > {{item:3146}} {{item:3151}} {{item:3100}} {{item:3115}} {{item:3135}} haven't been touched in ages in regards to their AP amounts. They were all only moderate AP to begin with. The high end items got scaled down. For instance, Ludens use to be 120. They decided at some point that they were going to scale down all the high end AP items to be closer to the moderate AP items. That point, again, is this: Seraphs was, relatively speaking, the highest AP item in the game after rabadons, but had tons of other stuff to go along with it. **The fact that Seraphs lost AP is irrelevant considering the fact that, compared with everything else, it was still the second highest AP item available.** Seraphs managed to remain unnerfed for a very long time while everything else was getting nerfed around it (because without CDR it wasn't a popular pick). When they gave it CDR they just scaled down it's AP to line up with everything else more.
Rioter Comments
Azadethe (NA)
: The problem with that premise is the fact 10% of that CDR is a unique, and in exchange they dropped its AP by friggin 30 base AP. Now they've dropped its base 30 AP, 9 AP in overall mana from base level stats, and 70 AP for MOST of a game while you try to charge it up to Seraph's. 109 AP lost...... for 20% CDR..... and 10% of that is UNIQUE.
> [{quoted}](name=Azadethe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=qxj6jLbL,comment-id=00090001,timestamp=2018-04-21T01:55:53.678+0000) > > The problem with that premise is the fact 10% of that CDR is a unique, and in exchange they dropped its AP by friggin 30 base AP. Now they've dropped its base 30 AP, 9 AP in overall mana from base level stats, and 70 AP for MOST of a game while you try to charge it up to Seraph's. 109 AP lost...... for 20% CDR..... and 10% of that is UNIQUE. You fail to realize that the AP of every item was dropped from what it use to be, so Seraphs was just coming into line with them. So despite the drop, Seraphs was still the best AP item after Rabadons - but it does so much more with tons of CDR and mana that you can't afford not to take it first. Ludens has such a marginal little extra burst damage that there's just no incentive to pick it over Seraphs (which gives you more AP, more mana, mana sustain, and a shield). I think nerfing the mana/ap/shield of seraphs is a mistake though. They are nerfing what makes it unique instead of tackling what made it so ubiquitous in the first place: all that CDR. They are nerfing the wrong things on seraphs in order to hold onto that CDR, when it would just make more sense to scale back the CDR on it. Ludens was said to be the item that was suppose to be for poking champions, so why does seraphs give just as much CDR as ludens? Just because you can't allow mages to go without having a stat stick item that gives them the trinity of things they want in ample quantity (AP/Mana/CDR)? But you're going to pretend there's itemization variety by giving them two somewhat different types of stat sticks that both give you comparable levels of the trinity? Here's a crazy idea: How about we force mages to make some real itemization choices. You can focus on max AP, max CDR, or max mana sustain. Or maybe combining two of them together. But maxing all three? No. At that point you really aren't itemizing and making choices, you're just flat scaling like levels and may as well do away with items as a concept. I'm not a fan of all this CDR creep that has infected every class's itemization. Tanks, Assassins, Mages... Someone decided that everyone should have easy access to 40% CDR without having to sacrifice anything.
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=00030003000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T19:34:52.003+0000) > > "Easy to play" and "easy to win" are not synonyms. > > Unless you easily achieved a 50% winrate over dozens or hundreds of games, you haven't proven anything. > > Go ahead and try it. You won't be able to do it. > > Others have done it, because they have reached a skill level you don't even know exists. > > You're displaying the same mentality towards fortnite seen in bronze league players when they accuse the game of being a random coin flip like Mario party, impossible to climb out of, never realizing that the capability exists for them to win 80% of their bronze level games if they only had enough skill and game knowledge. I’m saying it’s easy to play AND easy to win. I always make it a point to try and win 10 matches of any multiplayer game before I make a final, personal judgement. That’s always been a personal thing. Did I play only ten games of fortnite? No, probably 25-35, I know I played a game a day for a month. Did I get in the top ten many times? Yes. Have I won ten times? Yes. After that last game, I honestly felt no point to continue. But if it takes a lot of skill and brain power for you to win, and you find it rewarding, by all means, keep playing. I think it’s easy as shit and I honestly don’t see much value in it, even though it’s free. Some people try and make a career out of mini golf, so hey, if you like fortnite, then enjoy. Even though I think it’s ezpz, you’re free to have your own opinion and judgement. Now for your epic, college thesis reply, and don’t worry, I’m not petty enough to need the last word. You can have it. Defend fortnite’s honor, you shining white knight.
> [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=000300030000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T19:49:24.909+0000) > > > Did I play only ten games of fortnite? No, probably 25-35, I know I played a game a day for a month. Did I get in the top ten many times? Yes. Have I won ten times? Yes. Let's be generous and say you only played 40 matches. We can't be sure if you don't have accurate data. So maybe you have a 25% winrate. That's like reaching silver V in LoL and declaring you've seen all the game has to offer, that there's really nothing more to the skill ceiling. The top player in fortnite has a 50% winrate. The top players are of the opinion that fortnite has a very high skill ceiling - and if you can't even approach what they are doing then you have no basis to claim they are wrong.
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=000300030000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T18:03:15.012+0000) > > The look of someone who doesn't have the intelligence to undertand what is going on. > > A fitting portrait for you to post. Reddit.com/r/iamverysmart Look I found a sub reddit dedicated to you. Tell me more about the “intelligence” required to play fortnite, because when I played it, it was the easiest shit in the world. It was like Mario Party easy.
> [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=0003000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T19:10:08.394+0000) > Tell me more about the “intelligence” required to play fortnite, because when I played it, it was the easiest shit in the world. > > It was like Mario Party easy. "Easy to play" and "easy to win" are not synonyms. Unless you easily achieved a 50% winrate over dozens or hundreds of games, you haven't proven anything. Go ahead and try it. You won't be able to do it. Others have done it, because they have reached a skill level you don't even know exists. You're displaying the same mentality towards fortnite seen in bronze league players when they accuse the game of being a random coin flip like Mario party, impossible to climb out of, never realizing that the capability exists for them to win 80% of their bronze level games if they only had enough skill and game knowledge.
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=0003000300000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T17:48:47.516+0000) > > You seem incredulous, but this betrays your lack of analytical intelligence. Mathematically it is impossible to consistently beat 100 other players, having a 50% winrate, unless there is a high skillcap to leverage against others. The same reason is why some people can achieve absurd winrates in pubg, which may have an even higher skill cap. > If a game had no skill to leverage then its a dice roll and mathematicall everyone would have a winrate of 1%. > > But, going beyond the math, you find the following in fortnite: > Tactical decision making. > Strategic planning. > Overwll game knowledge level. > Aiming skill. > Rapid building skill. > The game is decided as much by how you build as how you shoot. There are both mechanical and tactical concerns. http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/005/498/1300044776986.jpg
> [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=00030003000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-20T17:51:31.205+0000) > > http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/005/498/1300044776986.jpg The look of someone who doesn't have the intelligence to undertand what is going on. A fitting portrait for you to post.
Vizulix (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-04-19T15:23:19.248+0000) > > Fortnite is a fun game, but it reminds me of TF2: it has a low skill ceiling and no one really takes it seriously. > > Fortnite is like Mario Kart. Fun, unpredictable, but it gets boring as hell after awhile. Nah as a chap that plays TF2, I'd say Fortnite is extremely different. Also TF2 has a massive skill ceiling. The different forms of rocket jumping and trimping are not easy at all to master.
> [{quoted}](name=Vizulix,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=00030001,timestamp=2018-04-19T16:48:02.444+0000) > > Nah as a chap that plays TF2, I'd say Fortnite is extremely different. Also TF2 has a massive skill ceiling. The different forms of rocket jumping and trimping are not easy at all to master. This is true. People who claim games have low skill ceilings are usually bad players who just write off thier losses as a coin toss. We see these players do the same thing in league when they say its impossible to carry thier team.
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=00030003,timestamp=2018-04-20T13:03:20.901+0000) > > Neace was saying that fortnight has an extremely high skill ceiling. > > If that wasn't true then it wouldn't be possible for the best players to win half thier games with 100 people in each match. That doesnt happen by luck. > > But I can see why you'd think that. When I watch the game it looks pretty simple. But its not. http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/005/498/1300044776986.jpg
You seem incredulous, but this betrays your lack of analytical intelligence. Mathematically it is impossible to consistently beat 100 other players, having a 50% winrate, unless there is a high skillcap to leverage against others. The same reason is why some people can achieve absurd winrates in pubg, which may have an even higher skill cap. If a game had no skill to leverage then its a dice roll and mathematically everyone would have a winrate of 1%. And mathematically a minor skill cap can't get you to 50% winrate because too many other people you'll face will also be able to achieve it and match you. Getting 50% winrate in a team game like TF2 is mathematically easy, as you have a 50% chance of winning each game if all things are equal. In fortnite, you have only a 1% chance of winning if all things are equal. In TF2 you dont even have to be the best player on the team to have a high chance of winning. In FN, you will be unlikely to ever win without being the best player in the match. Tactical decision making. Strategic planning. Overall game knowledge level. Aiming skill. Inventory management. Combat building skill. The game is decided as much by how you build as how you shoot. There are both mechanical and tactical concerns.
: Fortnite is a fun game, but it reminds me of TF2: it has a low skill ceiling and no one really takes it seriously. Fortnite is like Mario Kart. Fun, unpredictable, but it gets boring as hell after awhile.
> [{quoted}](name=Quiet Dude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=17Rnoj0J,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-04-19T15:23:19.248+0000) > > Fortnite is a fun game, but it reminds me of TF2: it has a low skill ceiling and no one really takes it seriously. Neace was saying that fortnight has an extremely high skill ceiling. If that wasn't true then it wouldn't be possible for the best players to win half thier games with 100 people in each match. That doesnt happen by luck. But I can see why you'd think that. When I watch the game it looks pretty simple. But its not.
Aptest (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Bioluminescence,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=TdKr8oVU,comment-id=00050000000100000000,timestamp=2018-04-19T17:49:35.364+0000) > > See? Contentious. > > What's a one-true-pairing to one player (or Rioter) is another person's most hated ship EVER. Heck, even talking about 'shipping will piss some folks off. > > Countdown to someone getting annoyed that a red name is discussing 'shipping rather than~~ balancing their main ~~ fixing ADCs in 3... 2... 1... you had some grammar errors there. I hate to be a grammar nazi, but it had to be done.
> [{quoted}](name=Aptest,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=TdKr8oVU,comment-id=000500000001000000000006,timestamp=2018-04-20T12:48:05.916+0000) > > you had some grammar errors there. I hate to be a grammar nazi, but it had to be done. It didn't *have* to be done, but you are indeed a grammar nazi for thinking that.
: > [{quoted}](name=Terozu,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=TdKr8oVU,comment-id=0005000000010000,timestamp=2018-04-19T17:41:51.752+0000) > > Haha. But this is a serious question on canon, please don't joke around with me. º`_'º See? Contentious. What's a one-true-pairing to one player (or Rioter) is another person's most hated ship EVER. Heck, even talking about 'shipping will piss some folks off. Countdown to someone getting annoyed that a red name is discussing 'shipping rather than balancing their main in 3... 2... 1...
> [{quoted}](name=Bioluminescence,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=TdKr8oVU,comment-id=00050000000100000000,timestamp=2018-04-19T17:49:35.364+0000) > > See? Contentious. > > What's a one-true-pairing to one player (or Rioter) is another person's most hated ship EVER. Heck, even talking about 'shipping will piss some folks off. > > Countdown to someone getting annoyed that a red name is discussing 'shipping rather than balancing their main in 3... 2... 1... The Talon main boards have already decided him and the new Irelia are a ship. https://www.reddit.com/r/Talonmains/comments/862p6c/i_really_want_this_ship_to_be_a_thing/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Talonmains/comments/869f27/steel_flows_through_my_body_and_fire_courses/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Talonmains/comments/85v2hq/new_waifu/ "I'm not quite getting this Irelia and Talon ship She hates Talon as demonstrated in the video as well as all Noxain. Am I missing something?" "So what they are star crossed lovers. Somebody's gotta protect that smile and admire her blades, and Talon is the man for the job."
: Since Riot is ramping up the VGUs even more...
You throw out way too many champions that are perfectly fine, you aren't very discerning about what truly needs a rework. As someone who plays Quinn: Get away from her. She's already been reworked and she's in an excellent spot as far as kit synergy and uniqueness goes. Nobody else can do what she does. But not everyone appreciates what she can do. No one else can apply the kind of map pressure she can. And no other ADC has so much roaming/ganking potential. Few ADCs can also be built effectively like an assassin. And almost no ADCs are viable in other lanes. The fact that she is played toplane is more a testament to her versatility than a downside. ADCs tend to want max range and DPS and don't really understand how to play roam/gank or split push. Quinn is a better ADC in the hands of players who are good top split pushers or good mid roamer/gankers. Being able to play from the ADC role and gank mid with a roam, and then pressure the map and be everywhere at once is a huge deal. There's also nothing wrong with Rammus. His kit is fun and unique. I would be open to his R getting a change, because it doesn't have the most synergy with his playstyle - but the rest is perfect. Rolling around into combat at mach speed is fun and effective, especially when you can counter ADCs or gank with his taunt and ball curl. Simple, effective, fun. One of the few tank junglers I actually enjoy playing. He's one of my preferred champions, and I wouldn't want to see him lose the parts of his kit that make him unique and fun. Teemo also should not get any major changes. Teemo has a unique playstyle that must be preserved for variety and fun in the champion pool (similar to the reasons Rammus and Quinn should not lose what makes them unique). Teemos kit works together well and is effective, fitting his theme as a hit and run scout. Putting mushrooms everywhere is fun. Hit and run tactics are fun. Stealth tactics are fun. I don't want him reworked because I enjoy him the way he is. He has a decent winrate and a respectable playrate. There are two dozen other champions in far more need of attention. Viktor was already reworked and his kit was fine in terms of design. They just gutted his numbers to stop him from being played effectively in LCS. Now he's trash tier. He doesn't need another rework, he just needs some buffs. I don't believe there's anything fundamentally wrong with his kit's design that forces him to be trashed so that he won't be overpowered. He's not like some other heros that just do too much too effectively to be allowed to have good numbers. He's immobile with high cooldowns, and not the best CC. He's pretty focused in what he does, has very clear drawbacks, and doesn't have an overloaded kit that does a little bit of everything. Master Yi is fine. His kit works well together and it's fun to execute when you pull it off. It can be very difficult to pull off when CC is around, but you CAN still play him at high elo if you really want to. Cowsep plays in high diamond as a Master Yi one trick. Hecarim's kit is also fine. He's also fun to play. I love speed based champions. Which is probably why he and Rammus are two of my favorite junglers. But his numbers are trash right now, which is why he's no good. It's not a problem with his kit design. He just needs some buffs. Ivern doesn't need a rework. His design is a brilliant idea. The problem is he was nerfed into the gutter. And he was never really retuned after all the jungle/item/rune changes that now make him even more unviable. Ivern just needs to be tuned up and buffed. His design itself is fine. I can really only speak to those because they are champions I play a lot, and I play them a lot because I like their designs the way they are. I don't really care much whether they rework the other champions you listed because I just don't play them enough to miss their existing kit, but I can say that most of the ones you listed, especially in the last tier, are doing fine. The only two I no longer play much are Hecarim and Viktor due to overnerfing making them unviable for climbing. Don't get me wrong, I will still play champions even if they aren't the most powerful, but both of these two got dumpstered so hard with nerfs that it's just not fun even trying to play them anymore. They just can't function like they were originally designed to. Ivern is someone I always wanted to play a lot, but I never acquired him until recently. I realized my mistake, that I was a season too late, because he is in an unplayable state right now. Ivern is the only one of the champions in my post that even has a remotely potentially problematic kit design. In the sense that it could be difficult to balance him because of his camp taking mechanic. It's could be difficult to get that right without him being overpowered, but if you don't get it right then he's trash tier because everyone clears and fights better than him.
: Riot, I'm concerned that the mana changes will put us back where we started.
> [{quoted}](name=Masala Chai,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=qxj6jLbL,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-04-19T16:55:19.695+0000) > > Where Archangel's (or to a great extent, Tear) becomes a mandatory buy for mages and some supports such as Sona or Nami, similar to how Morellonomicon was a mandatory buy on nearly every AP midlaner barring more obvious exceptions, such as Katarina, and Vlad. > > This would effectively negate any possibility that Hextech GLP or Luden's could vie for top tier since Archangel's would be the only mana item that would have enough mana to adequately support a poke based champion (the niche designed for those champs), and the same to apply for GLP for certain control mages. > > So this now leads us to the same old Morellonomicon to whatever AP item your champion needs. You're wrong, because mana use to be more limited but archangels was rarely built in that time. Because it didn't use to have any CDR. Archangels is only the go-to item because it gives mages the trinity of stats they want: AP, CDR, and mana. Take away the CDR if you don't want people buying archangels all the time. Of course then they'll just all buy Ludens. Luden's didn't use to have CDR either. Before that it was Morello, for the same reason. AP/CDR/Mana. No matter what item it is, if it has those three stats in abundance it's always going to be the go-to mage item. So, limited mana is never the problem with the design. The problem is with overloaded items that do everything you want in large quantity, so you aren't forced to make real choices between AP, CDR, or Mana itemization.
Terozu (NA)
: I dont understand why Riot balances around pro play at all.
In my observations; one of Riot's problems with balance is that they don't have a single standard they adhere to. They try to have their cake and eat it to by making the game more balanced for bronze/silver, but also plat/diamond, and also LCS. You can't do it all at once. Dota does balance for pro play, but for the longest time that was all they balanced around. They didn't care if Riki was terrorizing new or low skill players with permastealth. He was never in pro play because he's easy to counter with some game knowledge and teamwork. They didn't care if omniknight was crushing winrates in soloque, because he never saw pro play when his ultimate is so easily countered by one item purchase. They didn't care that people cried about techies ruining their games (the Teemo of Dota), because it was a nonfactor in pro play. This gave the game a sense of consistency and logic behind what they were doing. Pro play represented the very best of teamwork and individual skill, the way the game was meant to be played, so the only proper way to truly balance was to look at what the best were doing. You cannot truly balance a game around low skill players. All you're doing is giving them a crutch for their low level of player, instead of calling them to improve and raise their game up to unlock the full potential of a hero. They also were able to freely take an approach of pick and counterpick towards their balancing. There was never an expectation that every champion would have the same pick and winrates evenly across the board. Trying to balance that way is folly, doomed to failure. Especially across so many skill levels. A particular hero may rarely get played, but it was considered not in need of tweaks because it was still viable in certain circumstances, team comps, or matchups. LoL doesn't work that way, because people don't have access to the entire roster. They get attached to a few characters and expect them to be playable in every game with at least a guaranteed 50% winrate, and they cry foul if that's not the case. It's not a very good foundation from which to balance a game around. It forces you to make all the heroes too similar in order to meet that 50% winrate goal with average playrate. You aren't able to make niche designs. You are forced to hammer down heroes that stand out too much. All this makes for boring pro play. That's why Dota2 was always riveting to watch for me, but I can't be bothered to watch LCS.
Lakrosin (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XJQ31OJx,comment-id=00100000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-19T00:39:42.142+0000) > > No, I never did. Try quoting it. > > You can't defend bad mage design by pointing to other bad design as an excuse for it. You are saying it's a bad design without getting rid of an atrocious design. It kinda doesn't work that way. And I'm not saying it is a bad design to give mages something they need TO DO DAMAGE. However, nerfing MANA without touching DAMAGE when MR hard COUNTERS AP hard is really stupid.
> [{quoted}](name=Lakrosin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XJQ31OJx,comment-id=001000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-19T01:16:31.289+0000) > > You are saying it's a bad design without getting rid of an atrocious design. It kinda doesn't work that way. And I'm not saying it is a bad design to give mages something they need TO DO DAMAGE. However, nerfing MANA without touching DAMAGE when MR hard COUNTERS AP hard is really stupid. Nothing you just said made any sense. You produced no quote of me saying what you accused me of. It doesn't exist.
Lakrosin (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XJQ31OJx,comment-id=001000000000,timestamp=2018-04-18T22:35:42.629+0000) > > Two wrongs dont make a right. You can't defend bad design by pointing to other bad design. > > Inifinite easy mana sustain on every mage hits at the core of the game depriving it of essential strategy - resource management. Without that the game just gets closer to being an action brawler that will drive away long time players. > > Whats worse is that the game use to have mana be a serious resource. So its not like they are taking the game in an unkown direction. They are just reversing a mistake. Actually I'm not defending a bad design. You are.
> [{quoted}](name=Lakrosin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XJQ31OJx,comment-id=0010000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-18T22:43:12.773+0000) > > Actually I'm not defending a bad design. You are. No, I never did. Try quoting it. You can't defend bad mage design by pointing to other bad design as an excuse for it.
Lakrosin (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Risen29,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XJQ31OJx,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2018-04-18T18:26:26.658+0000) > > It's not the end of the world. Mana use to be a resource you had to manage. They need to go back to that. > > Mages have become seriously spoiled by easy access to mana and cdr **without sacrificing AP**. You use to have to make real itemization choices about whether you wanted max ap, cdr, or sustain. Now you just get it all effortlessly. That AP meant nothing against the MR hard countering AP. Meanwhile ADC's get: Lifesteal Increased range Shields Revive CDR Mana Rengeneration Armor Magic Resist AD Critical Chance Critical Strike Attack Speed Health Etc While sacrificing almost nothing. With armor barely doing anything against them.
Two wrongs dont make a right. You can't defend bad design by pointing to other bad design. Inifinite easy mana sustain on every mage hits at the core of the game depriving it of essential strategy - resource management. Without that the game just gets closer to being an action brawler that will drive away long time players. Whats worse is that the game use to have mana be a serious resource. So its not like they are taking the game in an unkown direction. They are just reversing a mistake.
: So all mages are getting nerfed hard on the PBE
I do feel like endless mana is part of the reason laning feels so pointless in midlane and its better to just roam. You can't wear your opponent out of mana by pressuring them and hinder thier ability to roam. It's too easy to endlessly shove the lane out and roam. Top lane also feels like it's pointless to lane for sustain reasons, but that has more to do with all the easy access to early health regen and healing. However, I think the problem is less pronounced than mage mana sustain issues - because the later is something that will impact all stages of the game in a big way. Easy access to health sustain in toplane ceases to be relevant outside the early levels. Both of these issues undermine tactics and strategy by making it too easy to recover wasted resources. Mana and health are a resource. In any RTS game you cannot expend resources without accomplishing something or you'll lose to those who make better use of thier resources. And you have certain kinds of champions of playstyles while undermining the designs of certain champions that are meant to have better sustain.
: Please don't go through with the mana changes
It's not the end of the world. Mana use to be a resource you had to manage. They need to go back to that. Mages have become seriously spoiled by easy access to mana and cdr without sacrificing AP. You use to have to make real itemization choices about whether you wanted max ap, cdr, or sustain. Now you just get it all effortlessly.
: So all mages are getting nerfed hard on the PBE
You've all been spoiled by every mage effectively becoming manaless. When I started, mana meant something and you could run out of it. It was a better, more strategic, game for that reason. They need to get back to that. Maybe abilities or AP levels can get buffed to compensate. But I'd rather have more powerful abilities I have to think about using right than have weaker abilities I spam 24/7 in lane and all game long. It's also important to be able to waste the enemy's mana by smart play in lane.
: I agree, but champions who actually need mana gutting are ADCs and bruisers, mages kind of have infinite mana atm but they are the last class that should recieve these nerfs, not the first, because they solely depend on mana. As for tanks and assassins they seem to be going oom rather quickly so they are fine imo. And then of course you have the braindead manaless champions, but they are the problem that can't be handled because RIOT not only won't rework them into having any gating but also keep releasing more and more.
> [{quoted}](name=DoktorKaiser,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ENUXm2Ym,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2018-04-18T02:00:11.091+0000) > > I agree, but champions who actually need mana gutting are ADCs and bruisers, mages kind of have infinite mana atm but they are the last class that should recieve these nerfs, not the first, because they solely depend on mana. As for tanks and assassins they seem to be going oom rather quickly so they are fine imo. > And then of course you have the braindead manaless champions, but they are the problem that can't be handled because RIOT not only won't rework them into having any gating but also keep releasing more and more. Manaless champions have no real advantage anymore with mana becoming near infinite. That's not good for the game or those champions. Mana gated champions are suppose to be more powerful in exchange for that. But magic damage is not as good as it should be when ADCs come online 10 minutes earlier than they use to. Now there's no reason to even have an AP carry or AD caster mid in the game because that window of power you use to have mid game is completely gone.
Zed genius (EUNE)
: Popular league youtuber breaking the rules
Bronze to diamond climbs are generally very educational in how to climb out of low elo. Although it sucks for the bronzes getting smurfed on. Using an existing bronze V account is actually a far better option than creating a new account and purposely losing matches in order to make it bronze V.
: Riot wants mages to roleplay as DoTA champions
It's not much of a strategy game without limited resources. You don't have to make smart decisions about when and where to use your abilities, you just spam them whenever they are up. This game was better back when running out of mana was a real concern for every champion.
Bioness (NA)
: Show the in-game model in the store when buying skins
Better yet, let us trial them in the practice tool like HotS lets you do.
: Considering that the honor bonus pops in your face right after the game finishes, nobody is able to forget to honor their teammates, they're choosing not to.
> [{quoted}](name=Postal Badger,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=TueeAFGW,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-04-17T17:37:48.679+0000) > > Considering that the honor bonus pops in your face right after the game finishes, nobody is able to forget to honor their teammates, they're choosing not to. Not true. I never knew what that text meant until recently. Now that I know I make sure to honor someone every game. In some cases it's just whoever was the least troll/toxic.
Rioter Comments
: >But the system will never catch or punish those people unless they say something in chat to prove they were acting malicious on purpose. That's not even true. Feeding detection is a lot less hard and fast than bad chat detection (and false positives are to be avoided at all costs), [but people *do* get banned for inting.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AIK2Vl4uvU) >When you run into people like that all day long, you might be inclined to rage at them at some point And you resist that inclination because you realize your rage won't actually accomplish anything, is likely to tilt the rest of your team, and is only going to hurt yourself. And unless you have a history of bad behavior, a bad game here or there isn't a problem. It's not one report=one tier up the punishment ladder. If you're constantly popping off (or using slurs or telling people to kill themselves), then yes, you have a problem. >The new system is not an example of true justice, for the reasons I outlined. Whatever. I'm tired of re-litigating this issue. You don't have to like it, you just have to comply. Like 99% of the player base does without issue, because "not flaming other people" isn't equivalent in any way to a crime.
> [{quoted}](name=Karunamon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zFvsF0kd,comment-id=000800020000000000000000,timestamp=2018-04-17T16:03:08.533+0000) > > That's not even true. Feeding detection is a lot less hard and fast than bad chat detection (and false positives are to be avoided at all costs), [but people *do* get banned for inting.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AIK2Vl4uvU) You just proved me right. He only got banned because the stream provided proof of his intentions. Nobody will ever get banned in this game for obviously malicious behavior without some kind of proof of intention. People know this and abuse the system, which then drives otherwise good players to anger. > And unless you have a history of bad behavior, a bad game here or there isn't a problem. It's not one report=one tier up the punishment ladder. If you're constantly popping off, then yes, you have a problem. That is exactly how it works. Each punishable offense escalates the ladder. That's why it's unjust. It's like getting life in prison for stealing something minor from a store, just because it was the third time you did it. The same thing that can get you a 10 day chat restriction is the same thing that can get you a permaban - the only difference between them is that you did that same thing four times in a space of 3 months. That's not what justice looks like. The punishment of a permban doesn't fit the crime. Nor is this even indicative of a pattern of behavior that refuses to reform. Because it doesn't care that the person has hundreds of other games during that timeframe without any problems.
: >But there's no grace for having a bad day or being trolled by other players. There's no grace for "being trolled by other players" because the universal answer to that is /mute, not trolling yourself. That just makes you a troll. As to having a bad day, unless you're literally telling people to kill themselves or using slurs (which is zero tolerance for a reason - it shouldn't be tolerated), you're not automatically punished for every valid report. http://tkwa.re/leaguereporttiers If you got a perma, you were told between one and three separate times that your behavior is inappropriate and to change it. >A just judge MUST take into account time invest and money invested - Otherwise you are using unequal punishment. The person who has their main account with $1000 invested into it is losing a lot more than someone who just has their month old smurf permabanned. Responding to this other thing - the IFS is not a court of law and that's not how the system works. Riot has specified what the acceptable behavior is and the consequences for not doing so. You either comply, or go play something else. You don't have an inalienable right to play League.
> [{quoted}](name=Karunamon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zFvsF0kd,comment-id=0008000200000000,timestamp=2018-04-17T15:54:54.522+0000) > > There's no grace for "being trolled by other players" because the universal answer to that is /mute. Wrong. Mute doesn't stop them from banning your pick, stealing your CS/camps/buffs, and purposely dying and being useless - all because they wanted jungle but didn't get it. But the system will never catch or punish those people unless they say something in chat to prove they were acting malicious on purpose. When you run into people like that all day long, you might be inclined to rage at them at some point - even though you have a thousand games of being an upstanding player under you. However, even if a player is inclined to respond to flames with flames. If they are drawn into it one out of two hundred games, that should never be elgible for a permaban just because it was the fourth time it happened in a space of 3 months. That is not taking into account that this is not really routine behavior for them, which is the only time you should ever hand out a permaban. >the IFS is not a court of law and that's not how the system works. It doesn't matter what they are - Justice is a universal concept with universal guiding principles. Riot is either acting justly towards their players, or they aren't. The new system is not an example of true justice, for the reasons I outlined.
: I was a zyra main in season 6, I do not want to see her like that again. These new changes are so much healthier for the game. Why should I be able to 100-0 one shot the enemy adc/support with nothing more than sorc boots, and full magic penn? Also, I disagree with where power should be in her kit. she is one of the only characters in the game with a turret system (her plants), I think it would be better having those be strong while her abilities doing mediocre damage. ATM both are very strong, so any changes that are made will not be that great. That old circle Q was boring, ubiquitous and uninspired, this new Q is so much cooler, though it may be harder to cs with in midlane. That's more of a power trade off than anything. Its similar to how brand's w doesn't work that well at farming, but he is such a good lane bully. That's a big reason why they are played support, they are good at lane harass but aren't great at farming. Also, her ap ratios are fine. Remember that all of her abilities are AOE, so any round of abilities have the potential of hitting multiple people. Her kit is fine, she is balanced enough as it is. As for plant health, its too easy to 1 shot them in the late game, but they are extremely tanky in the early game. Tanky to the point where its a better trade to just run away from the plant rather than auto them to death in a lot of cases. Maybe their hp should have some sort of ap scaling.
> [{quoted}](name=NovemCaudaVulpis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Ov6feHE,comment-id=0017,timestamp=2018-04-17T11:42:05.172+0000) > > Also, I disagree with where power should be in her kit. she is one of the only characters in the game with a turret system (her plants), I think it would be better having those be strong while her abilities doing mediocre damage. ATM both are very strong, so any changes that are made will not be that great. > ... > As for plant health, its too easy to 1 shot them in the late game, but they are extremely tanky in the early game. Tanky to the point where its a better trade to just run away from the plant rather than auto them to death in a lot of cases. Maybe their hp should have some sort of ap scaling. I would be inclined to play Zyra if she were changed to be like that. Up the duration and durability of her plants. Give her the potential to have more of them. But reduce their damage. I think they made the same mistake with Zyra they made with Heimer - They allow their summons to be super annoying early on, but they make them feel near useless outside of the laning phase. This is completely the wrong way too approach these champions. This is a key and fun aspect of their kit that should always be relatively strong for them throughout the game.
: >There's no chance for him to come back a month later and say, you know, I'm sorry my behavior was out of line for that period of time, but given that I've been an upstanding customer for 10 years, can I make this right and be forgiven? "Permabans" only apply to accounts. Really permaban is a misnomer since Riot doesn't make any attempt *whatsoever* to stop banned people from signing up again. What really happens is you lose everything. You can still play League. >The current system is more like the black and white "justice" of Judge Dredd, with no explanation, no leniency, no second chances. Are you being quite serious? In order to get a permaban, you have to: * Encourage suicide or use slurs twice (the second time after a 14 day ban) * Show other toxicity on five separate occasions. People are given *plenty* of time to change their behavior.
> [{quoted}](name=Karunamon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zFvsF0kd,comment-id=00080002,timestamp=2018-04-17T15:15:53.885+0000) > > Are you being quite serious? In order to get a permaban, you have to: > > * Show other toxicity on five separate occasions. That's the problem. You could play three thousand games in 3 months, but have four bad games where trolls drive you to the breaking point - and your toxicity doesn't even cross the automatic red lines. But you could still be permabanned. That is not what justice looks like. There's nothing to "change", because obviously that kind of behavior is not normal for them. But there's no grace for having a bad day or being trolled by other players. 14 day ban? Ok, fine. Might be harsh in most circumstances, but at least you'll be able to come back. But permaban? No, not for those circumstances. Especially when you have so much invested in your account over years. The severity of the punishment is far too higher.
Sarutobi (NA)
: But that is not at all how the punishment system works. You do have second chances, the only time you are ever permaban right off the bat is when you break zero tolerance rules, which shouldnt give you a warning because it should be common sense. Other than that you are given at least three other chances to make up for what you did. Thats more than enough chances to change your act if you really mean it!
> [{quoted}](name=Sarutobi,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=zFvsF0kd,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2018-04-17T11:26:01.840+0000) > > But that is not at all how the punishment system works. You do have second chances, the only time you are ever permaban right off the bat is when you break zero tolerance rules, which shouldnt give you a warning because it should be common sense. Other than that you are given at least three other chances to make up for what you did. Thats more than enough chances to change your act if you really mean it! It's not really an example of justice. The punishment can easily not fit the crime. That's why the three strikes law is so controversial as an example of injustice. http://articles.latimes.com/2004/apr/20/local/me-strikes20 You can commit three minor shoplifting crimes but be treated as though you committed murder. That is how the LoL system works now. Someone can get permabanned for committing four relatively minor crimes. Nobody should ever get permabanned because they have one bad game out of a hundred - but they just happened to have four bad games in a space of a few months so the black and white system escalates them each time towards a permaban. True justice doesn't work that way. That's why we have judges who look at all the circumstances of a case and, you know, actually make a judgement. They don't just rubber stamp what the law says has to happen. A just judge MUST take into account time invest and money invested - Otherwise you are using unequal punishment. The person who has their main account with $1000 invested into it is losing a lot more than someone who just has their month old smurf permabanned. The threshold for banning someone who has more time and money invested in the account MUST be higher IF you care about handing out equal levels of punishment for the crime. Because permabanning the first account is a drastically more severe punishment.
Show more

Risen29

Level 58 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion