Meddler (NA)
: He was in a pretty weak spot there pre 9.12, agreed. Looking a lot stronger from what we've seen post patch though.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=PBPEGOHv,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-06-14T15:12:53.023+0000) > > He was in a pretty weak spot there pre 9.12, agreed. Looking a lot stronger from what we've seen post patch though. Zac Q is weird compared to 9.11 PBE and initial Patch Notes. On PBE it at some point said that while the slow was being nerfed, the CD was being buffed to 13/11.5/10/8.5/7. The [patch notes](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-911-notes) make little sense because they say the change is COOLDOWN 13/11.5/10/8.5/7 seconds ⇒ 15/13.5/12/10.5/9 seconds but I don't think it was ever 7. It was already 9 seconds to begin with so it seems like this Q CD buff was just miscoded or omitted and he didn't get what was intended from his testing. I'm not sure because it's quite confusing if his CD right now is the result of a change of course or an error. Gamepedia actually went with some PBE data and lists 9.11 changes incorrectly as: Q - Stretching Strikes SLOW : [60%] ⇒ 40% COOLDOWN : [13/12/11/10/9] ⇒ 13/11.5/10/8.5/7 Would like some clarity here. Is everything as intended?
: It's worth noting that, as Meddler's recent post pointed out, NA is the only region that values jungle this low. They aren't just balancing for NA... they can't afford to assume that our region is correct about everything and neglect the rest of the playerbase. I generally agree with you that there are issues with how it's balanced, but I think it's problematic to pretend the entire world is on the same page about this. We aren't at all.
> [{quoted}](name=KnightsKemplar,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EGAHMEbn,comment-id=0035,timestamp=2019-03-27T23:19:17.694+0000) > > It's worth noting that, as Meddler's recent post pointed out, NA is the only region that values jungle this low. They aren't just balancing for NA... they can't afford to assume that our region is correct about everything and neglect the rest of the playerbase. > > I generally agree with you that there are issues with how it's balanced, but I think it's problematic to pretend the entire world is on the same page about this. We aren't at all. That's a good point but it went down in every region, just no as much.
: The sharp spike in getting autofilled JG should be a wakeup call to Riot
The issue now is that you can only really carry as jungle by being better than the enemy jungle. What I mean is that the role itself is weak and has been nerfed in everything from early game impact to late game impact (xp nerfs, gold nerfs, item nerfs, red smite damage nerf (along with the utility and duration nerf to it), dark harvest gutted, JG oriented runes etc.). It is still a necessary role but it is weak at carrying relative to the other roles with equal gold. There may be some exceptions, such as Yi and Kayn but this is how it feels overall even if you try to to take scaling runes and builds. You win by being better than the enemy jungler or by having a better team but you do not carry yourself anymore. If am a strong jungler, I still cannot face a strong mid who is equally dominant in his role. He will have 2 levels on me and better summoners on champions which usually scale better as well. That's what's frustrating about the jungle. It's not that you can't win but that you feel at the mercy of your teams to do it. It lost its solo carry potential. With the old Dark Harvest, I had no problem carrying hard when ahead and I deserve to be able to because I played better to get there and was patient around my windows too. It was also very satisfying/detilting to pick up allied souls because in my mind, at least they didn't die for nothing. ;)
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: March 27
Are you guys following Ekko jungle? His performance seems to get worse each patch and he has received a lot of indirect nerfs too. Even minor stat buffs would be appreciated (or at least more scaling so he can occupy that niche). His play rate keeps dropping every patch and yet his win rate is actually decreasing. Almost no one plays him in high ELO anymore and the old Ekko jungle mains can't hit the top ranks anymore either.
Rioter Comments
: Phaze Rush Darius is really good on paper, if that helps. You'd still want Hail for hard matchups though
> [{quoted}](name=HKT Saber,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UFEua6lb,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-02T00:23:24.436+0000) > > Phaze Rush Darius is really good on paper, if that helps. > You'd still want Hail for hard matchups though On paper, like you said. Even though it's taken in only 6.5% of games (perhaps where it fits better), its win rate is only 49%. Conqueror is at 52%. Anyway, Darius sounds way better with it than Yi. He's actually the best melee user of it that I can think of since he already packs so much damage if he gets on you.
Rioter Comments
: Rito pls
The match making is absolutely god awful and I can tell from your teammate's scores just how imbalanced it was but luckily you're a laner and popped off I think it's partly because there are fewer players in NA but it really is just so terrible as a jungler I have so many games now where it's ff @ 15 with 5-20 scores I can't even play the game because everyone dies left and right To highlight just how bad the match making is, I have one new account with a ~65% win rate to plat 4 in ~100 games and another with a 50% win rate in ~80 games @ G3. Same player and champs more or less, not a huge time frame difference but just shows how random the team luck can be. I can't highlight enough just how freaking bad the match making is even in mid Gold. More than half my losses are basically awful zero agency games.
Meddler (NA)
: There'll be a nerf to Conqueror in 8.14 (AD 6-35 instead of 10-35). We'll see where it's up to after that before considering possible further changes.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=Ekj5nZEm,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2018-07-13T16:01:54.335+0000) > > There'll be a nerf to Conqueror in 8.14 (AD 6-35 instead of 10-35). We'll see where it's up to after that before considering possible further changes. So how is the scaling looking per level? Is it slowed down significantly?
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: July 11
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=7tEYw6Ij,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-07-11T15:27:34.790+0000) > >That temporary solution is heavily reduced gold from lane minions if you have a T1 or T2 jungle item and have the most gold on your team. This is a disgusting and unintuitive as well as inconsistent change. Don't do this. It's not even that bad. This is incredibly clunky and punishes champs who are ahead and not funneling. It is among the very worst changes you could ever introduce to the game and makes zero sense. It punishes even junglers who can split push. You cannot be seriously considering such an awful change with a straight face.
: Im glad Fizz is getting looked at. What about Ziggs? He has been in a forgetful uncared for state for quite the time by now, nobody considers the champion as worthy of picking up. Right now he is only playable in the bottom lane, and as a Ziggs main, i am glad my champion is somewhat playable, but thats because normal ADCs are bad, and i can fight weak with someone less weak, But if they pick a bruiser bot, there is no way im gonna do anything in lane as Ziggs, same for mid, probably is taht mid even mages just trash on him. Is any work ever going to be done on him? its been 4 years that Ziggs is in this state.
> [{quoted}](name=BïtterBlossom,realm=EUW,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=4h3pzjm2,comment-id=002f,timestamp=2018-06-15T16:16:00.618+0000) > > Im glad Fizz is getting looked at. > > What about Ziggs? He has been in a forgetful uncared for state for quite the time by now, nobody considers the champion as worthy of picking up. > Right now he is only playable in the bottom lane, and as a Ziggs main, i am glad my champion is somewhat playable, but thats because normal ADCs are bad, and i can fight weak with someone less weak, But if they pick a bruiser bot, there is no way im gonna do anything in lane as Ziggs, same for mid, probably is taht mid even mages just trash on him. > > Is any work ever going to be done on him? its been 4 years that Ziggs is in this state. Hey, I agree Ziggs is weak now (especially seems so in high Diamond+), partly because of so many assassins existing in the meta, but he hasn't been forgotten. He has received minor buffs over the last year. He's still not good but let's be honest. What do you think he still needs? I was thinking of a small AP ratio bump on W. Although, I think the issue with him is just his squishiness in general. To really use his passive and be able to land his Q, he needs to gets much closer but then he just dies to anything. It's thus hard to utilize him. He's really vulnerable and front lines are less common in this meta.
: Im tired of change, not game
agreed! I feel like I'm wasting time learning the game, theorycrafting, thinking about strategies and so on because next month it's probably going to be mostly useless. it's really unrewarding to take the game seriously and if I'm not playing a serious competitive game, I may as well pick something with more enticing graphics, story, etc. I pick League because I want something that I grow with and where I can get better with time, understand more, and so on. If we play roulette with changes every few months, that becomes untrue so why bother investing in it? The game was barely changing in the first few seasons while now we have more changes in a few months than entire seasons then. It also ruins balance and they destroy their own levers for it and can't even learn properly how to do it because they change all the systems. I don't think even they know what's going on half the time because all the lessons they learned from the past don't apply very much when everything is unstable. I want them to just balance the game as well as possible and leave it alone outside of that once a season starts. Let people figure it out and let a meta develop organically. I shouldn't have to relearn the game every 3 months and then have my champions also frequently become nearly unviable (hello Corki). Many changes don't even seem to really improve the game. They're just there for the sake of it. Riot needs to understand that a change during the season must not be neutral or just a slight improvement. Because the frustration caused by the disruption is quite significant. It has to be a really good change. This is why I see players who were Plat now in Silver 1 or G5 this season... the game does not reward mastery or time investment properly. That's just ridiculous. Even playing a shooter is more rewarding for my time.
: "This will let him more effectively finish off bruisers and tanks when he builds like a carry" {{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}} Assassins are not supposed to be able to kill bruisers and tanks...
> [{quoted}](name=SpecterVonBaren,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vGqrRT1f,comment-id=000e,timestamp=2018-06-04T04:14:59.031+0000) > > "This will let him more effectively finish off bruisers and tanks when he builds like a carry" > > {{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}} > Assassins are not supposed to be able to kill bruisers and tanks... No one said that Ekko should be focused on dueling the full HP enemy Mundo! However, an assassin, by definition should be opportunistic and low HP targets fall in that category, be it a bruiser, tank or ADC. Unfortunately, even in that situation, Ekko's finishing power isn't great vs these champions. Also, as others have said, Ekko's more of a skirmisher than true assassin.
YIZAKU (NA)
: I am not sure what it was the reason they couldn't make it, but ik the people in d5 are not special human beings or even smarter than other people. I am saying if you have the right mentality to improve, then you should climb, something was holding them back. There are people who have gotten masters with supp reksai, diamond with ap lucian, and diamond with Garen support. there are people in high elos, that play with a track pad, or with their feet. these are pretty big disadvantages these people put themselves in, and still get better, and climb. The people in diamond don't all just have a high iq. if you consistently work on your mistakes, and improve with a good mentality then you can make it to diamond, it may take a few season most do.
> [{quoted}](name=YIZAKU,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Kozz0rE0,comment-id=001000000000,timestamp=2018-05-12T18:12:59.732+0000) > > I am not sure what it was the reason they couldn't make it, but ik the people in d5 are not special human beings or even smarter than other people. I am saying if you have the right mentality to improve, then you should climb, something was holding them back. There are people who have gotten masters with supp reksai, diamond with ap lucian, and diamond with Garen support. there are people in high elos, that play with a track pad, or with their feet. these are pretty big disadvantages these people put themselves in, and still get better, and climb. The people in diamond don't all just have a high iq. if you consistently work on your mistakes, and improve with a good mentality then you can make it to diamond, it may take a few season most do. It doesn't mean they're smarter overall but it's quite likely that their brain fits the game better.
YIZAKU (NA)
: The #1 thing about climbing in leauge is mentality. IK what your talking about all too well, and it doesnt get better ever, d5 has to be the worst elo to ever play in. But its all about mentality, you cant play to win and focus on winning in this game because your team is too variant. Focus on improving, a win or loss should not be whether you gain or lose lp. Its whether you played well, and well enough to win in the rank you want to achieve. IK this is said a lot, but truely if you can adopt this mentality its the secret to climbing. For me when i was playing in diamond 2, and diamond 3 when i would play a game i would ask myself, would a challenger player have won that game that i just lost... and you have to try to be honest the more you are honest with yourself the more you will improve. And you should do the same ask yourself would a high plat player have won this? and how so, and then try to improve... And whenever i think to myself there is no way a challenger player could have carried these idiots, i remember all the accs. they have gotten to masters with 90% winrates and better, and then I realize they probably would have, tbh in silver faker could probably win in silver if there was an afk most of the time. So i always focus on that, just improving to be like them, and eventually you will be so good no bad teammate in silver can stop you Just dont get demotivated, and play flex/norms as break. Anyone can get to diamond with the right mentality if you stick it out.
> [{quoted}](name=YIZAKU,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Kozz0rE0,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2018-05-12T17:53:30.353+0000) > > The #1 thing about climbing in leauge is mentality. IK what your talking about all too well, and it doesnt get better ever, d5 has to be the worst elo to ever play in. > > But its all about mentality, you cant play to win and focus on winning in this game because your team is too variant. Focus on improving, a win or loss should not be whether you gain or lose lp. Its whether you played well, and well enough to win in the rank you want to achieve. > > IK this is said a lot, but truely if you can adopt this mentality its the secret to climbing. > > For me when i was playing in diamond 2, and diamond 3 when i would play a game i would ask myself, would a challenger player have won that game that i just lost... and you have to try to be honest the more you are honest with yourself the more you will improve. And you should do the same ask yourself would a high plat player have won this? and how so, and then try to improve... And whenever i think to myself there is no way a challenger player could have carried these idiots, i remember all the accs. they have gotten to masters with 90% winrates and better, and then I realize they probably would have, tbh in silver faker could probably win in silver if there was an afk most of the time. So i always focus on that, just improving to be like them, and eventually you will be so good no bad teammate in silver can stop you > > Just dont get demotivated, and play flex/norms as break. Anyone can get to diamond with the right mentality if you stick it out. That's a lie. I know plenty of people who got coaching, played thousands of games over the seasons and did everything they could. Perhaps they were playing the wrong champs for their strengths. Maybe they could main Janna, Nasus or something but they were not getting to Diamond on the champs they enjoyed even if said champs were in a good state. It is not guaranteed by any means. For any level of Gold, I'd agree with you but higher than that is not a guarantee no matter how badly you want it.
: Silver is so stressful.
I agree with this somewhat. You need to play 1v9 champs to get the hell out of Silver - ideally a bit tanky and with some poke too. It's 100% doable though and not that hard if you're truly at a level above low gold in skill. It does have more coinflip games though and can take a while. I recommend dodging more or just disassociating emotionally from outcome.
Jbels (NA)
: Alright I'm sick of this.
Yeah, Mundo's definitely not a tank. He offers almost zero utility to teamfights. He has a slow, that's it. Compare him to Naut or Mao. They offer so much more setup, peel, etc. Mundo's damage is good but he lacks all that other stuff.
: Lol, shaco isn't broken. You have other jg's like him with harder burst. A good shaco is something to be scared of, but you have to be good with him. Otherwise he is squishy garbage. I've beaten a shaco jg with Ivern, lol
> [{quoted}](name=El Dentistador,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=APEHEX1M,comment-id=000f,timestamp=2018-05-12T04:12:15.308+0000) > > Lol, shaco isn't broken. You have other jg's like him with harder burst. A good shaco is something to be scared of, but you have to be good with him. Otherwise he is squishy garbage. I've beaten a shaco jg with Ivern, lol His burst isn't the issue. It's the rest of his kit that he gets for free. The boxes for disruption, the invis, the amazing ability to escape from almost anything etc. You don't see people complaining about Rengar as much right? Rengar goes in, sometimes even 1-shots but at least he's a bit predictable and has almost nothing else to offer. Even Kha doesn't scale anywhere near as well, has to be on isolated targets, is much less "tricky" and so on. I'm far more terrified of a strong Shaco player than I am of a beast Kha player. They can both do well but Kha feels more manageable if my team is doing well and he can't just Q away from any duel either. He can jump, sure, but he's still catchable. I can use WW for example to Q-R him with my laner and get him. Shaco? He Qs and Rs... no way to even kill when ambushed.
: Can Shaco please be put in a reasonable place until you rework him?
I don't think he needs another rework but yeah, he's pretty strong.
wobaji (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=B3kWBlWr,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-05-11T15:52:53.734+0000) > **More solo carry potential work** > > We're continuing to work on changes that get a bit more solo carry potential back in the game. 8.10's got the bounty changes (solo gold, not team gold) and jungle changes (junglers not being able to level 3 gank as early). For 8.11 we're looking at shifting some tower gold, on both outer and inner towers, from team gold to solo gold, focus that increased power more on whoever's gained that advantage for their team. > > One important thing to note is that increased solo carry potential is going to result in more cases of single champions snowballing and deciding the game. We think we've pushed too far on teamplay, hence some movement back in the other direction. Does mean there'll be more cases of one person doing well, getting fed and dominating though. If your actions as a single player can carry the game, so can other people's. We think that’ll be good overall, but will come at some trade off. This is probably the worst aspect of the game right now. It's not fun feeling at the mercy of your team to win the game. That creates toxicity because people feel that they don't have agency to carry if they get 1-2 truly clueless players. Their performance is intricately tied to that of their teams and when there's a huge disparity, it creates enormous frustration. If you've got a troll or someone not really trying or playing in a selfish way (hello full AP Sona), it's even more demoralizing because it feels like you got trolled and despite being serious and doing your best - perhaps even playing near flawlessly, these players robbed you of the game. They have that power over you and in S4 it didn't feel like this was the case as much. I remember using hypercarries like AP Kog and being able to win 6-25 games if the enemy team was toying with us too long (hello Zeds spamming laugh in base for 5 minutes straight). It's also not fun to watch and makes people appreciate high ranked or pro players less. Even watching pros, it's often "oh, he gets the worse team so he loses" or "oh, his team is quite behind" so he's useless. No flashy plays, no outplay from a 5 year LCS veteran.. just waiting for the FF vote or trying hard but being ineffectual. On top of that, you've got this massive snowball meta where being behind is a death sentence (again making it really hard to win if you RNGd a worse team). It's not enough that the enemy team has way more gold/levels/dragons etc., they also get more pushing minions, nearly unstoppable Baron/Rift pushes and so on. Watching a tennis match with a lopsided score can still be exciting because each point exists in a vacuum. There have been comebacks from 2 sets down and match point. The better player that day wins but it doesn't feel like "because he won the first set" now his opponent has no chance. No, he won the first set because he was better but now if his opponent is better, he can just as easily lose the next set and the match. You're not artificially rewarded. League shouldn't be this extreme since you want players to be rewarded for good play/to be able to close out but the discrepancy created by Baron/Rift, the easily killed turrets, the pushing waves when behind etc. make comebacks few and far between even if the other team is playing like monkeys. It feels like getting ahead almost guarantees a win no matter how badly they play after that (as long as they don't get Baron stolen). They don't have to play well the entire game and this makes it a horrible match when it is a bit destabilized by one lane or something like that. It also makes luck far more important. A good player can only really exert his skill in the first 15-20 minutes because after that it just snowballs like crazy in either direction and the quality of decisions has little influence. In a tennis match or other sports, you have to play well the entire time to beat a player (no matter the score). You don't get to chill just because you're ahead. You can afford to lose more points but you're not handed free advantages in each individual point. Coming back even with a scaling comp. is not just an uphill battle but a near impossibility. Even competitive play shows this. It's just win early -> clean/efficient stomp, first securing baron vision + a pick if possible -> baron -> unavoidable game winning push. Comebacks shouldn't be artificial like how catch up XP made it a while back but they should ALWAYS be possible if the enemy team makes enough mistakes. Why would I want to watch or play a game where if my team is shit I'm useless and also stuck there another 10-15 minutes? If at least I feel there's a solid 10-20% chance to scale up, outplay etc. I'd have my head in the game more and people would rage/blame less too. Raging and blaming happens mostly because a player has mentally given up on winning the game. Right now, it's just terrible when behind. You can't even leave base or fight if you get the perfect engage. The base just crumples, the minions kill you during the fight etc. It's mentally draining and not fun. It also warps the meta for champions and strategies. S4 and S5 were both FAR more interesting to play and watch. I still remember the amazing CLG matches with split pressure. Now, competitive especially is like watching paint dry and that's coming from a devoted fan. I don't see the solo carries like in the past with SKT's Bang holding the base and acing the enemy team with 3 inhibs down almost by himself on Ezreal... amazing match and skill. I don't see the nail biters and the tension. I don't see the outplays (reducing JG gank options won't help this). I see one team stomp or one team get stomped. It's almost robotic. There were super tense matches I linked to my friends years back and I haven't for a single one this year. Even small leads snowball way too hard because you just can't do anything. Turrets are taken easily/dived, you're zoned from objectives, what do you even do? Every mechanism artificially makes the game unwinnable after a lead is created. That's the key word ARTIFICIALLY. It's not just their items and level advantage. You can try to play around that or scale. It's everything else. It's like if someone playing tennis and up a set then gets a "fun new mechanic" where his ball speed on hit is increased by 50%. Now, it's not just the opponent having to battle from behind a set. They are also having to play a really unfair match. This is how League games feel when behind. I think Baron and Rift probably just shouldn't exist in their current form. They make the game a lot worse. Even if you want minions to push/takedown structures, maybe don't make them do so much damage to champions too. Let the other team have a chance to at least fight and hold their ground rather than just autolose. There's just so much artificial help for the winning team and it makes the game much less fun on either side. Even removing base turrets completely but not having Baron/Rift or artificial super strong pushing would be so much better. Maybe at least give the enemy team some options to counteract it if you keep it the same? Perhaps something like shrines which can disable baron minions in a particular lane etc. Create ways to give the team from behind a chance to outplay. A fair chance that they need to earn not just "oh here's some free catchup XP and a lot of shutdown gold". Shutdown gold is maybe OK but it seems to overly punish you for being ahead and making a mistake. It's not an equivalent exchange. Your mistake becomes bigger than the enemy team's in the same situation even though I see no reason why this should be the case. It's another artificial mechanic. Your goal should be to make the game require fair but quality play at all points. No artificiality, just skill (with multiple dimensions required and less down time). When being ahead is all that matters, there isn't even much skill expression possible when significantly behind. It rewards getting a lucky lead rather than outplaying. This even makes matchmaking worse if a few players managed to RNG that 5-10 games in a row and are then placed way above their true skill. This reduced skill expression because of how critical it is to be ahead also makes it much more important to play meta junglers who are strong early/mid game. It all becomes so constrained. Being ahead needs to give advantages but nothing insurmountable and it shouldn't be this "oh, we get a free win now because we got baron/are ahead". The behind team should always have options to come back that if ignored/not managed properly will allow them to turn the tables. If your game seems like a foregone conclusion just off a rift or baron, there's something really wrong with it and it leads to the "I give up mentality" that's so prevalent. Players give up as a result of their experience and seeing that should be a huge red flag for Riot that the game is NOT fun when behind because the ahead team gets too many artificial advantages just by virtue of being ahead, not any real sustained outplay. The complaint will be that "how will games end then?" "won't people be really risk averse and just farm all game?" "won't teams outplaying for 20 minutes be overly punished for one mistake throwing it all away?" This is fair and that's why it has to be well designed so that there are important objectives for both sides and in both situations. I think fallen turrets providing some sort of shrine you can capture to offset baron/supers somewhat could be a way to deal with it. If the enemy team wants to keep pushing, they have to take over that area of control and fight for it. Right now the game is only fun in the 25% or so games that are balanced. The stomps are kind of fun but not really because they are just too easy to win. Getting stomped sucks and is draining, especially if you had no agency. 25% of games being fun is not good. I want this to be a high skill came that is worth mastering but artificially winning from an early lead isn't OK.
> [{quoted}](name=wobaji,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=B3kWBlWr,comment-id=006e,timestamp=2018-05-11T19:55:09.057+0000) > > This is probably the worst aspect of the game right now. It's not fun feeling at the mercy of your team to win the game. That creates toxicity because people feel that they don't have agency to carry if they get 1-2 truly clueless players. Their performance is intricately tied to that of their teams and when there's a huge disparity, it creates enormous frustration. If you've got a troll or someone not really trying or playing in a selfish way (hello full AP Sona), it's even more demoralizing because it feels like you got trolled and despite being serious and doing your best - perhaps even playing near flawlessly, these players robbed you of the game. They have that power over you and in S4 it didn't feel like this was the case as much. I remember using hypercarries like AP Kog and being able to win 6-25 games if the enemy team was toying with us too long (hello Zeds spamming laugh in base for 5 minutes straight). It's also not fun to watch and makes people appreciate high ranked or pro players less. Even watching pros, it's often "oh, he gets the worse team so he loses" or "oh, his team is quite behind" so he's useless. No flashy plays, no outplay from a 5 year LCS veteran.. just waiting for the FF vote or trying hard but being ineffectual. There's a lot of danger in changing a formula that more or less works for such a popular game with so much time investment from players over the year. It has the potential to alienate a lot of the playerbase, just like Dynamic Queue did when many of my friends quit the game besides the occasional weekend game. There can also be a lot of unintended consequences on balance. Champions with a certain style or powerspike window may become unviable and numbers tweaks may even be insufficient. Strategies from coaching videos and that player have understood well over the years may suddenly be totally misguided. It might be a good idea but it has to be thought over with a lot of care and there at least needs to be an end in sight for the disruption such constant changes cause. The other thing is that you don't want to make the game just about mechanics. That makes it far too unappealing to a large segment. Mechanics matter but strategic thought and good decision making should hold the prime spot. If you are not rewarded for good strategy and it's all just teamfight execution, that might narrow the game too much to only certain skills. This game's not in beta anymore so this stuff has huge consequences. Besides, you have data for a lot of the iterations of the game with more or less the same formula. Trying something too drastic puts you in uncharted waters and that can lead to really bad design mistakes. With the current formula, Riot at least knows what variables they influence and they have the data from other seasons to learn from mistakes. I don't think PBE would be enough to test such changes. It would have to be a whole new experimental game formula in the main client. Everyone has a balance opinion but no one really understands all the variables of what's going on. The players don't know and the developers don't know. We're all learning. To really understand it though, there needs to be a roadmap, a clear idea and probably less reactivity since then you just end up rudderless patching holes on the bottom of the boat but not realizing that it's taking you in the middle of the ocean. Something I've noticed over the years is that developers of popular games often develop a sort of arrogance where they think that because they had some initial success, which was often a bit lucky too, they really know what they're doing. Then they make big changes to the formula that worked very well and the playerbase gets annoyed. They change it so much and try to be so original that they ruin the very thing that worked, proving that their first successful formula was just lucky. It was good but they got there partly by luck and so when you get there by luck and then convince yourself it was skill, you make things worse. It's like if I play poker and beat some great player with a lucky hand and then decide I'm a great player so I sign up to every poker tournament. It's not going to end well. Maybe I even think my strategy is great and I doubledown on it even more due to the success. The other thing I want to say is that for me, LoL being a respectable eSport and having high competitive integrity, good balance etc. is what matters most. That's what makes it last the test of time like SC1 has. I'm sure casuals play it more but these casuals would probably not even have heard of it if they didn't have a friend who was super devoted to it and they'd also not bother if they felt it wasn't worth mastering since people won't respect your skill at it anyway. When I picked up StarCraft, I did so because of the difficulty in mastering it and Blizzard's reputation for excellent balance. I was not a good player but I felt like investing time in it sort of mattered anyway because it was stable enough, difficult enough and respected enough that being better at it was impressive to me and some others.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: May 11
------------------------------------------------------------------------- > **Sterak's** > > We'll be holding off on Sterak's changes (e.g. decoupling it from TriForce builds somewhat) until we know where other possible fighter item changes are up to. Will revisit in a few patches as a result. > I do feel that Sterak's is by far the most attractive if you have a Sheen item. It's pretty niche but is that so bad? It provides a really strong mid game spike on fighters. If it was that strong without TF, it would be OP and if it has no synergy with it, then scaling would be much worse.
KnifeCat (OCE)
: @ Mapcle Nectar - in regards to your response about jungle spawn timers
His comment is super ignorant about JG. That's like saying laning is PvE because you have to spend the majority of your time killing minions. The way you deny farm, pressure even as a JG is a huge part of the skill test. Do I path better? Do I optimize my clears better? Do I deny the enemy jungler in XP/gold possibly interrupting his paths while simultaneously being aware of my camp timers to be as efficient as possible? This isn't PvE at all, it's just a cerebral role. And making it harder to get level 3 certainly makes it more bland and offers fewer early game decisions to make. You just go smack another camp around because you're forced to. I hope at least they make later spawns give more XP if they nerf JG XP yet again when it's not even strong. If JG were strong, I as a JG main would play it in placements in Silver level games on new accounts but I've found mid actually is way stronger for that.
VI Radio (EUW)
: Riot destroying Jungle role once again
> [{quoted}](name=VI Radio,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3U7ErAo4,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-04-28T14:03:30.516+0000) > > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/MQob4lFt-upcoming-jungle-changes-for-810 > > > Basically for people who dont want to check the link heres what they want to implement. > > YET ANOTHER xp nerf to the jungle, you get level 3 after 4 camps/ 3 camps if you include krugs AND ALMOST NO ONE does krugs early game > and heres the thing >>> 2 camps and a scuttle. > > WOW, how can 2 camps and a scuttle be more xp than 4 camps :shockface: . > > well the thing is, riots idea of jungle balancing, they want to reduce the early ganks of the junglers and "increase jungle vs jungle interaction" > > HOW WE DO THAT? LETS MAKE SCUTTLE WORTH 170 XP INSTEAD OF THE ORIGINAL 10 XP AND NOW THERE WILL BE ONLY ONE SCUTTLE AT A GIVEN TIME. > > Only 1 scuttle at a given time that spawns randomly, so early junglers who can 1v1 easily and can farm jungle camps fast and healthily will benefit greatly from this so they will gank even more often now, while junglers who are weak duelists and farm slower will feel even more pressured and effectively be useless. SO WHAT HAS RIOT ACCOMPLISHED BY THIS? WHAT A %%%%ING JOKE > > The jungle role is already so weak compared to its former glory days, and with this its gonna be EVEN MORE SHITIER, there is no fun to play jungle under these conditions anymore. > > *Want me to fix your stupid game for you? you unprofessional company that only thinks random shitty ideas that is contrary to what LITERALLY EVERYONE wants, is a good and healthy change for the game?? > > *Reduce camp spawn time so that junglers can farm properly instead of relying on taxing and also balance between farming and ganking. > Remove catchup xp COMPLETELY (this also benefits other roles and a healthier environment where a skillful player can carry easier) > > ^ these 2 changes are enough but there are other suggestions that i THINK will be healthier for the game > > *Remove the current RNG drag system and return old dragon > > The idea behind that change if implemented, is to make the game more fair for teams to make a comeback using their skills, if enemy team had a small lead and infernal was up, they will take infernal and BOOM 8% dmg which makes a notable difference and might effectively secure the lead permanently if the team with infernal dont mess up much, such is the case with each dragon. > > *Return the jg xp back to the way it was > > That way junglers will have more of an effect in the game and with the removal with catchup xp completely, only skilled junglers will keep the lead and a skilled enough jungler can invade the enemy jungler and effectively shut him down. This change alongside the catchup xp removal, will encourage a jungle vs jungle matchup that requires skills and make players improve faster with trial and error, not the joke of a change to scuttle you want to make riot. > > This is my idea of how jungle can be better for each of us, for each role. > > ~~pleas of a lonely jungler main Does this mean they're buffing Krugs and will this be an overall XP nerf or just for early game? JG isn't even good no matter how much laners want to say otherwise.
: Upcoming Jungle Changes for 8.10
I hate permanently getting rid of 2 scuttlers because there are a lot of subtle skill elements related to using scuttler properly and taking it at the right time. I really dislike changes that reduce planning and skill expression. I miss the smites on monsters giving interesting buffs and this is more of the same. Stuff like this removes skill expression and I don't enjoy that at all. it makes the game more bland even if it's less complex and easier to pick up. It makes people who play the game like it less. This isn't even an interesting map feature with cool gameplay elements, it's just an asymmetrical RNG type of desperate attempt to force interaction and modify pathing priorities. Obviously when you do this you'll get some strategies to exploit it and they will become dominant because it's always better to have this compared to not. Instead of creative JG pathing, possible opposite map starts, you get pigeonholed into this or champions that can at least clear healthy to counter invade. This REDUCES options and flexibility. It reduces stylistic expression. There has to be something equally attractive at the other end of the map or you are forcing a solved type of pathing that isn't even based on lanes you want to gank or other factors related to the game you're playing directly. It's so artificial. The first one can be this RNG thing and I don't like that either because again, JG is a planning role first of all. It is more demanding intellectually than laning and you don't want RNG to reduce that. The whole goal of JG is optimizing/xp/gold while making the largest possible impact for your team. This means you plan ahead for at least a few minutes in advance. Secondly, don't go too overboard on mana regen buffs for talisman. There still has to be some consequence to using spells, some vulnerability. Plus, a lot of the AP junglers struggle with HP more than mana. I want to be able to take Machete on some mages like Diana still without being punished for it indirectly. Alternatively, you can make Talisman give the bonus damage if you have bonus AP. The AD junglers already have stronger autos for clearing. I'm not sure about this idea though with AP scaling. It might be really bad. BTW: I have stopped watching League tournament games outside of the semis and finals in playoffs. The meta is kind of boring and there's less skill expression than before imo. Legitimately imagine how much more interesting it would be to have the wolf buff patrol the jg or some other really cool things instead of just Trundle clubbing at shit. Competitive is too focused on reliability. They don't even necessarily go for the best picks in terms of objective strength. They go for what won't feed and won't be useless when behind. The new competitive scene is too solidified into this super fearful mentality of not screwing up. It wasn't like that in early seasons. There was more variety, more cool plays, more picks. I think maybe S5 was the most fun to watch but I'm not sure. My guess is that you guys don't have enough Challenger level players doing balance if you have this state. Honestly, this might be a horrendous idea but maybe champs that get ahead should get bonus gold when they continue their streak. That way stuff like Lee, Kha, Elise etc. would be more attractive as snowball champs. Again, this might be a really shit idea and Kha is already strong as is but even when I play ranked, I go for more reliable picks because teams are so hit/miss and sometimes they'll get so behind that I can't even do anything on something like Nocturne. At least with Trundle I have some usefulness when the team's feeding. I really don't mind tanks with skill expression though. Zac is a good example of this. So is Mundo in a sense because he has a spammable skillshot and he has to know how his damage varies based on different HP levels, when to R, when he can dive, manage his HP well with abilities.
Eedat (NA)
: This is NOT how you fix Jungle
Even as a laner, removing two scuttler as an option takes away some skill element in terms of planning when to take it before obj, reducing snowballing by at least taking scuttler near baron etc., using it correctly for roams/invades. It makes the game less interesting by far. They should never get rid of that imo.
VI Radio (EUW)
: Riot destroying Jungle role once again
It's pretty annoying that JG is changed so much seemingly on a whim. They don't do this shit to mid laners or ADCs. I don't want to have to relearn my role multiple times in the same year. Moreover, this change just makes you more dependent on lanes having priority. It also makes early game plays less attractive relative to farming because you won't have level 3 as early. 3 camp invades or super early ganks perhaps with an exploitable pathing are just going to be less good. Plus, having two scuttlers adds a lot more skill to the game and not just for junglers. Knowing when to take them, where to walk etc. planning an invade and escaping through Scuttler etc. all matters. Even if the first scuttler is this cheesy RNG thing, there should be two normal scuttlers after.
Rioter Comments
  Rioter Comments
AmazoX (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=SergeantScuttler,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=n4F4okor,comment-id=0028,timestamp=2017-11-29T12:49:38.564+0000) > > WW is a cool champion now but a bit like FIddlesticks, thrives in chaos. This makes him significantly better at lower ELO than higher - which is why you don't see him in competitive. It's not that he'd be unviable but he's primarily an early game champion now and his passive is less impactful vs players who understand it and adjust their play accordingly. Likewise, the best players probably understand that WW is a single target champion with great dueling so they don't underestimate him just because they see him at 1/2 HP. His tiamat reliance means that he needs to gank early because he can't compete in farm without it. If vs better players you can't find those ganks, he can become a bit of a liability since he definitely falls off 5v5 later on (especially vs high CC comps with mao and sej). Anyway, I like his niche and design. > > He's a decently reliable jungler with a lot of positives for newer players especially. His passive literally tells you where to pay attention and his weak farming early also guides you into that direction. Even a novice WW will be more useful than a mediocre Lee Sin. Although, a missed WW ult. can certainly be pretty costly when grouping happens. He's in a good spot, just balanced as he should be and he's somewhat viable top too. WW is played at competitive just not THAT much.
> [{quoted}](name=AmazoX,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=n4F4okor,comment-id=00280000,timestamp=2017-11-29T21:10:20.569+0000) > > WW is played at competitive just not THAT much. I've seen it only once in S7 and that was a challenger series game where he failed.
: Oh god, the boards think WW is balanced. Worse, they think he takes skill to do well with. All I will say is that WW is one of the most forgiving champions in the game if you're a braindead player and leave it at that.
> [{quoted}](name=DunkinNoobs,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=n4F4okor,comment-id=0024,timestamp=2017-11-29T11:15:30.157+0000) > > Oh god, the boards think WW is balanced. Worse, they think he takes skill to do well with. All I will say is that WW is one of the most forgiving champions in the game if you're a braindead player and leave it at that. That is true and it's why I doubt WW would ever have an abysmal winrate. For the best players he is not top tier but for novices he probably would be. No melee is really forgiving - especially one without a way out but he's certainly more forgiving than other junglers with decent damage. However, he certainly has a lot of outplay potential and little tricks. His kit looks much simpler than it is. He has a low skill floor but his skill ceiling is probably even a bit above average for JG. He's certainly a lot harder than Rammus imo.
WolfChases (EUNE)
: Am I the only one who thinks Warwick is actually one of, if not the most balanced champion in game?
WW is a cool champion now but a bit like FIddlesticks, thrives in chaos. This makes him significantly better at lower ELO than higher - which is why you don't see him in competitive. It's not that he'd be unviable but he's primarily an early game champion now and his passive is less impactful vs players who understand it and adjust their play accordingly. Likewise, the best players probably understand that WW is a single target champion with great dueling so they don't underestimate him just because they see him at 1/2 HP. His tiamat reliance means that he needs to gank early because he can't compete in farm without it. If vs better players you can't find those ganks, he can become a bit of a liability since he definitely falls off 5v5 later on (especially vs high CC comps with mao and sej). Anyway, I like his niche and design. He's a decently reliable jungler with a lot of positives for newer players especially. His passive literally tells you where to pay attention and his weak farming early also guides you into that direction. Even a novice WW will be more useful than a mediocre Lee Sin. Although, a missed WW ult. can certainly be pretty costly when grouping happens. He's in a good spot, just balanced as he should be and he's somewhat viable top too.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: He was also about the only tank that could tell Darius to take his axe and shove it up his rear end. Loved going top with release Tahm and destroying Darius players after all the hell they'd put me through with other tank champs.
> [{quoted}](name=SpecterVonBaren,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=m7mOQXvu,comment-id=000200010000,timestamp=2017-11-28T04:36:43.990+0000) > > He was also about the only tank that could tell Darius to take his axe and shove it up his rear end. Loved going to with release Tahm and destroying Darius players after all the hell they'd put me through with other tank champs. It's OK man, Darius and Tahm Kench JG are basically in the same tier now. :D
: Permanently banned (With Ingame log)
I think the "evidence" against you is certainly not valid based on that log and shows problems with the system. Even if you were toxic other games, clearly the game that put you over the threshold and made the automatic system ban you was not bad enough to warrant a punishment. Talking back to them is within your right and you didn't harass anyone or retaliate. You might find some useful points in this thread too (sort of similar): https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/JEOAcgnt-actually-penalized-for-stating-our-comp-was-unviable?show=flat Also, I don't think you can expect an objective analysis from Riot support. They're just there to tell you what an ideal player is like according to them and that "you must have done something wrong TM". They will basically never ever reverse punishment or admit a mistake was made. There really is no realistic outlet for a fair trial or any place to correct a mistake. Even if they do something for you, it's not like another player in your situation can expect 60+ upvotes etc. Even if they are just as justified, people's attention is a fickle thing.
MLT (NA)
: Is forcefully taking someones lane a banable offense?
It should be punishable and no, I don't think the victim whose lane is now double mid has ANY responsibility to let the bully have his lane. That player is doing exactly what's within his right and he does not control the other player so he's doing nothing wrong. People who report both in this situation are being extremely unethical and selfish.
: By the time I build Muramana the game is over...
Don't worry, Ezreal is useless all game.
gregab (NA)
: Runes Corner: Guardian Soul
All I care about is being able to have 30% CDR/lvl so I can use builds I like without being forced into Morello or Ionian (or possibly abandoning VS/Rabadon's). I wish there would be more news about that. I can't even run Sorcs on Zilean with what's being planned because I wouldn't reach max CDR (which is critical for him) or I'd have to give up a huge amount of damage. For example, this build is now useless: RoA Morello Sorcs VS Rabadon's Luden's/Liandry's. or what about champions who get both RoA and Tear (maybe only Anivia should but I like these fantasy builds): RoA Seraph VS Rabadon's Sorcs Zhonya's With 30% CDR/lvl runes, the above build reaches max CDR even if the lane would be absolutely terrible and it may not be a good setup. The point is I CAN DO IT! I can modify my runes to give me more build flexibility based on the tradeoffs that _I_ want to make. Likewise, I like playing Ziggs with 30% CDR/lvl so I can max out going: RoA Sorcs VS Rabadon's Liandry's LB Yes, it has big mana issues early and is very weak for 25 minutes. It's a super greedy build focused entirely on late game scaling (I know Ziggs is pretty mediocre late game but you guys killed my AP Kog so I'm trying to find something else fun). I am losing a massive amount of build flexibility if all we can get is 10% CDR/lvl from runes. I was using the runes the way they SHOULD be. Essentially, I was making all kinds of trade offs and adaptations to get the fantasy late game builds I enjoyed. I never employed the cookie cutter style and no one else had to either. The fact people did was because doing otherwise was riskier, expensive in IP, required more planning/rune pages and just overall didn't matter much to them. They took the lazy way to runes but it wasn't an inherent problem with runes necessarily. It was more an execution problem (especially with how many bad runes exist). I really want to continue to have huge flexibility on CDR and this is really important for build diversity.
Leetri (EUW)
: If a guy breaks into your home and you break into his home to get back at him, you're still breaking and entering which is illegal. It doesn't matter who started it, you don't respond to fire by throwing more fuel on it. You just mute them and report them at the end of the game, that's how it works in games. It's not about "tolerating bullshit", it's about being a mature human being and not resorting to name calling and aggressive behaviour because someone else used mean words in a video game. People who act like that aren't worth your time, just mute them.
> [{quoted}](name=Leetri,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2017-07-05T08:21:46.059+0000) > > If a guy breaks into your home and you break into his home to get back at him, you're still breaking and entering which is illegal. > It doesn't matter who started it, you don't respond to fire by throwing more fuel on it. You just mute them and report them at the end of the game, that's how it works in games. It's not about "tolerating bullshit", it's about being a mature human being and not resorting to name calling and aggressive behaviour because someone else used mean words in a video game. People who act like that aren't worth your time, just mute them. This was never about that. That analogy is totally out of place. Not one person argued in favor of retaliation. If the OP suggested that since someone talked shit to him, he's now allowed to, we'd be having a different discussion. This also isn't about the theoretically optimal response is for defusing the situation. "Player did not defuse the situation optimally when being harassed." is not a report option and nor is it a responsibility. Moreover, people with self-respect will rarely take that option because it indirectly accepts unfair characterizations. If someone tells you, "I saw you lick the shit in the toilet.", you are likely to say "I definitely did not do that." even though it's actually an escalation by the definition people use in this thread. After all, you're indirectly calling that person a liar and they'll likely respond with something like "I swear I saw you. Are you calling me a liar?" to protect their reputation. It's an endless cycle. A de-escalating response would be more like "Don't worry about it." or simply saying nothing. I doubt many people are willing to take this route. There was no retaliation in the OP's post. The idea argued against, which I find untenable is that someone cannot use facts or explanations to defend himself against an unreasonable assertion. Using a fact to counter someone's argumentation by saying it's internally inconsistent isn't "retaliation" even if you don't like the truth. If you tell someone "this idiot feeder is why we're losing" and they respond with "you died twice in a lane without jungle interference, stfu" that's perfectly fine in my book as long as it's true. If someone dies several times in a solo lane without jungle pressure, they have no business blaming others for the state of the game since it means they're also not performing up to par. That's called an incoherent statement. Even if the "idiot feeder" is removed, the consequence "we wouldn't be losing anymore" isn't guaranteed since the one who uttered the original statement died multiple times solo (creating a negative imbalance in the game). That's not retaliation. That's just common sense and logical thinking applied.
Chermorg (NA)
: The in game chat is for current-game related chat. If you want to offer advice for improving, make sure it's positive. Repeatedly commenting on someone's score, telling them they lost lane without any advice for improving (there's not much in OPs chat logs) etc. is not okay. Yes, there is something wrong with blaming others. League of Legends is a **team** game, and there are **very** few times that an outcome is solely one person's fault. Even if it was only one person's fault, it doesn't **matter** whose fault it is, what matters is what the team should do now and in the future to win the game. It's toxic to try and assign blame to people.
> [{quoted}](name=Chermorg,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=00010000000000010000,timestamp=2017-07-05T05:19:20.257+0000) > > The in game chat is for current-game related chat. If you want to offer advice for improving, make sure it's positive. > > Repeatedly commenting on someone's score, telling them they lost lane without any advice for improving (there's not much in OPs chat logs) etc. is not okay. > > Yes, there is something wrong with blaming others. League of Legends is a **team** game, and there are **very** few times that an outcome is solely one person's fault. Even if it was only one person's fault, it doesn't **matter** whose fault it is, what matters is what the team should do now and in the future to win the game. It's toxic to try and assign blame to people. I have entirely different standards for what I consider flaming and I outlined why. He's not a team's babysitter. He has no obligation to de-escalate anything. You're asking the victim to be incredibly magnanimous and Christ-like. It's an unreasonable standard and failing to meet it is not the same as being toxic. Also, the optimal method of doing so can vary a lot from person to person. Some people, legitimately do stop bitching when they're presented with facts and their hypocrisy is brought to the surface. He doesn't have to just accept blame and harassment when he doesn't think it's deserved. Likewise, he has every right to point out hypocrisy. To do so is not flaming unless it's spammed or otherwise made obnoxious. If he were to devolve into name calling or other more much more petty behaviors, maybe I'd see it your way. The OP presented his explanation for various actions and situations in the game. I see that as his right as a player. Moreover, If you harass a player for "feeding" and they point out, you're 0 3 too, it would be very hypocritical and illogical to get worked up over that. That is not flaming or harassment. That simply highlights the hypocrisy in the original comment. Basically, it says "If I'm a feeder, so are you because actually, we have the same score. Thus, try to improve your own performance before you berate someone else for theirs."). It's the same as the proverb "Those in glass houses should not throw stones." Someone's score in itself is just a number and unless it's spammed with the intention to annoy or is false, it should be entirely within anyone's right to point it out. I'm not saying it's useful, nor do I advise it but it's a far cry from flaming. Facts are facts and they don't have to serve any particular agenda to be used, just like most chat doesn't. They just are. To claim otherwise is like getting mad at the sky for being blue. What I consider flaming goes beyond facts and contrarian opinions. It's when a player is singled out with no provocation and attacked. The idea that he's not allowed to make any statement someone might dislike is extremely disturbing to me. I think by any reasonable definition, that was not flaming or harassment and someone has to jump through a lot of hoops to construe it as such. This is evident from most of the arguments presented which generally gravitate to the idea that the comments were "unnecessary" (says who? it definitely feels necessary for someone treated unfairly and what kind of standard is that anyway?) and "not positive" (sounds pretty unreasonable to try to stifle any negative opinion regardless of the situation). Neither of these is actually against any rule. The negative attitude bit isn't about ignoring the reality in a one-sided game and pretending it's an even game. It's about griefing and giving up. For example, "We can't win. I'm just going to farm the enemy's wolves while waiting for the FF." Another example which happens in my games after someone gets a double kill or a gank is turned "The jungler ruined my game/they're fed. I'm done." Now if instead, these players said, "We're massively behind and can't win fights." that's NOT the same thing. The latter is negative but not reportable. In fact, it may even be useful to understand how to direct the rest of the game (farm and stall it out). Also, **the OP definitely didn't repeatedly comment on anyone's score. In fact, he never once stated a player's score.** The only reference was to Renekton dying 1v1 twice in a lane without jungle pressure and it was in response to that player lashing out at him. As I mentioned in the case of the score, I definitely don't see responding with game events as any sort of harassment or negative attitude. You have every right to use facts to defend yourself from unfair accusations. By itself, that is neither flame, harassment, negative attitude or retaliation.
: You typed 450 words. Even if you were a fast typist (ie, 100 words per minute) that's still 4 minutes of gameplay devoted to typing.
> [{quoted}](name=GreatWhiteNorth,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2017-07-05T04:04:00.928+0000) > > You typed 450 words. Even if you were a fast typist (ie, 100 words per minute) that's still 4 minutes of gameplay devoted to typing. You're assuming he typed while actively playing and not while walking or dead. There also seems to be typing before the jungle spawned (refillable discussion). Either way, it's not against any rule.
: So first off, I think this chat is toxic. I think there is something wrong with constantly berating your teammates, especially coupled with not accepting any blame, and not attempting to come up with a winning plan. This person was harassing Renekton, and when that wasn't enough, he went to bard, then onto other teammates. Context would be nice with chat logs, as it does help to elucidate why someone started typing toxic chat, but others' logs do not help elucidate if the player's chat was toxic. Further, if that person is to not incur further penalties, then he needs to focus on what he said and what was wrong. He's not constantly interacting with that same "Renekton" from the game in his next game. How often do people ask questions that intentionally elicit toxic chat responses? Even still, there's leniency built into the system. No one's getting punished for saying "fatass" once in a game. If you or the one posting wish to discuss players' chat with context, you may find [The Verdict](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/player/NA/Ulanopo?content_type=discussion) useful.
> [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=000200000001,timestamp=2017-07-05T03:08:31.455+0000) > > So first off, I think this chat is toxic. I think there is something wrong with constantly berating your teammates, especially coupled with not accepting any blame, and not attempting to come up with a winning plan. This person was harassing Renekton, and when that wasn't enough, he went to bard, then onto other teammates. > > Context would be nice with chat logs, as it does help to elucidate why someone started typing toxic chat, but others' logs do not help elucidate if the player's chat was toxic. Further, if that person is to not incur further penalties, then he needs to focus on what he said and what was wrong. He's not constantly interacting with that same "Renekton" from the game in his next game. > > How often to people ask questions that intentionally elicit toxic chat responses? Even still, there's leniency built into the system. No one's getting punished for saying "fatass" once in a game. I don't see any harassment at all and there's really not much said about either considering the game was probably 20-30 minutes. First of all, it looks like Renekton and Bard are harassing him if anything and the OP just explained the situation in the game. He's behind. Every lane is behind. He can't be everywhere. Renekton has unreasonable expectations and is blaming him for the game despite losing his own lane 1v1. I don't see the problem with any of these statements. Is he not allowed to respond to them at all? It's very clear from the chat that the OP is just replying to others with how he sees the game. He's trying to play the game and being raged at. Let's look at the Renekton statements for example. > ToddlerPacifier: renekton you lost lane without interference stfu It's obvious that the OP is responding to Renekton. He isn't just saying "you suck and lost lane." The Renekton must have been whining and raging at this stage or he wouldn't be asked to be quiet. > ToddlerPacifier: renekton is super toxic I don't think calling someone toxic is against any rule and it definitely sounds like he's whining a lot. No one is told to shut up without talking. I know you're not allowed to ask for reports or threaten reports but that's different. > ToddlerPacifier: Renekton, you fed your own lane > ToddlerPacifier: who are you to talk? Again, it's clear that Renekton is raging at someone for being terrible at the game and so he is presented with his own performance in the game (pertinent given his statements) and asked what gives him this idea that he has the authority to talk down to others. It's not hard to piece together some context if you try. > ToddlerPacifier: look to yourself renekton Yet again, it appears that Renekton is blaming others and the OP just told him to focus on his own play. There aren't many comments on Renekton and I see no harassment in any of these statements. They also appear to be in response to him rather than aggressive. ___________________________________________ As far as him harassing Bard. It definitely seems like the opposite is the case. Let's put the Bard statements together: > ToddlerPacifier: mundo is weak early > ToddlerPacifier: I got baited by bard It's unclear if the OP died or not and whether or not he was harassed for it but the previous statement of "mundo is weak early" suggests a need to justify why something didn't go according to plan. This suggests that his team expressed displeasure and probably blamed him. Saying he got baited is pretty neutral to me but leans on the negative. However, I don't consider a negative opinion justification for any punishment by itself. In fact, the negative report option is abused frequently. It's meant for players who are unreasonably negative about the game and have given up, not just someone with a negative opinion. For example, "ff at 15, this team sucks" when it's 2-6 is negative attitude. "We can't win fights" is negative but not necessarily bad attitude. It's more a realization and could be due to gold, levels, comp. etc. suggesting other strategies. > ToddlerPacifier: should I NOT follow up on a Bard ult.? This clarifies the chat above and suggests he was berated for dying trying to follow up on a Bard ult. > ToddlerPacifier: why can't you be as useful as the Lulu Bard? > ToddlerPacifier: you had ult., you could have saved me This does qualify as negative/frustrated but the other lines do suggest that he was invaded without proper warding or signaling and died next to his teammates while Bard still had abilities up. It's not an unreasonable statement if Bard really made no effort to save him. The only other line about Bard is here: > ToddlerPacifier: actually I'm not at all, but Bard has been harassing me for 10 minutes straight OP mentioned Bard has been harassing him for a long time. A statement like this does NOT qualify as harassment and may be completely true if we were to see Bard's chat. It's unclear what the "I'm not at all" refers to but it's probably something like "Mundo's tilted." To claim that the OP harassed Bard based on these lines is overly dramatic and not supported by anything I read. There is barely anything even said. If these responses are considered unreasonable in the context provided, I don't know what reasonable is and I certainly don't want to be normal if it involves considering this chat log toxic. It's not even retaliatory. Retaliatory would be along the lines of "you're an idiot" when being called an idiot. If someone says "the game is all your fault" and he lost lane 1v1, that's just pointing out the discrepancy in the statement. It's not what qualifies as retaliation. It seems that many on this forum are actively hostile to victims of toxicity. The attitude appears to be: "If they get punished, it must mean it's correct and so let's find out how we can justify that outcome." It's a destructive attitude which doesn't encourage objectivity or discussion.
Chermorg (NA)
: First of all, your attitude sucks. If you're not going to be able to have a mature discussion, don't bother trying to post on these boards. Second, I will say it **one** (1) last time: **It does not matter why he is saying the things he is, it matters that he said them**. He is perfectly permitted to play his best, including ganking, not ganking, refusing to respond to gank requests, etc. He is **NOT** permitted to be negative by continuously berating his teammates for doing bad, **even if they are doing the same thing**. I'm done repeating myself. Until you have an argument I haven't already debunked, please don't expect any further replies from me.
> [{quoted}](name=Chermorg,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=00010002000000000000,timestamp=2017-07-05T02:31:01.575+0000) > > First of all, your attitude sucks. If you're not going to be able to have a mature discussion, don't bother trying to post on these boards. > > Second, I will say it **one** (1) last time: **It does not matter why he is saying the things he is, it matters that he said them**. He is perfectly permitted to play his best, including ganking, not ganking, refusing to respond to gank requests, etc. He is **NOT** permitted to be negative by continuously berating his teammates for doing bad, **even if they are doing the same thing**. > > I'm done repeating myself. Until you have an argument I haven't already debunked, please don't expect any further replies from me. You're just repeating yourself instead of dealing with any of the points made. That's not an argument. Just because someone strongly disagrees with you doesn't give you the right to call them immature and claim they have a bad attitude. Actually, this attitude of superiority is way worse than anything in that post.
Rioter Comments
: Patch 6.24 notes
Riot priorities.... #BetterNerfAPKog Speechless...
Dolasaur (NA)
: AP Kog'Maw? The R mana cost revert to season 5 levels and the halfway reversion on the increased mana cost are straight buffs. The damage is a bit weirder; It's stronger and weaker at different enemy health percentages; it's weaker than S5 Kog at full health and weaker than S6 Kog at <25%, and it's the strongest of the three from 25-40%. Do you see him making a comeback? His play rate hasn't been super high, but his win rate (on champion.gg) seems to have spiked last patch, and that's before these changes. And on Zac: Does the part about the indicator becoming visible .75s prior to landing have any interaction with his visibility? I think it's a very valid addition to the game when you see him charging up to initiate. But it seems to de-emphasize the importance of evading enemy wards for surprise engagements, and that's one part of Zac I really liked.
> [{quoted}](name=Dolasaur,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=2u9wA1NM,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2016-10-19T20:48:28.706+0000) > > AP Kog&#x27;Maw? The R mana cost revert to season 5 levels and the halfway reversion on the increased mana cost are straight buffs. The damage is a bit weirder; It&#x27;s stronger and weaker at different enemy health percentages; it&#x27;s weaker than S5 Kog at full health and weaker than S6 Kog at &lt;25%, and it&#x27;s the strongest of the three from 25-40%. > > Do you see him making a comeback? His play rate hasn&#x27;t been super high, but his win rate (on champion.gg) seems to have spiked last patch, and that&#x27;s before these changes. > > And on Zac: Does the part about the indicator becoming visible .75s prior to landing have any interaction with his visibility? I think it&#x27;s a very valid addition to the game when you see him charging up to initiate. But it seems to de-emphasize the importance of evading enemy wards for surprise engagements, and that&#x27;s one part of Zac I really liked. His winrate was literally meaningless with that pickrate and other sites with larger samples showed a bad winrate. He also had a low winrate in the patch before that (which changed nothing about him). AP Kog was extremely weak even as a niche pick last patch. There are people with good winrates on Teemo JG too but that doesn't say a great deal about the pick. AP Kog this patch is probably viable. Like before, AP Kog punishes bad comps without engage, assassination potential or a strong split pusher. Essentially, if your comp isn't built to do anything well, you'll probably struggle vs him.
Squad5 (NA)
: Someone already mentioned in this thread the fact that champions that weren't intended to want to go into the resolve tree felt forced to go into it to gain the raw stat power that SoA was offering. Whether the mastery was overpowered or not wasn't really that much of a factor when deciding to remove it honestly - SoA wasn't really fitting the goals we initially set out for when we changed to the keystone mastery system. A big reason other champions wanted SoA was the fact it was such generalist power. Health is almost always a good thing to have in league of legends, regardless of what champion you are (especially as a jungler). Resolve though as a tree is intended to serve specific playstyles of champion classes and subclasses (Juggernauts, Wardens, Vanguards aka tanky champions), especially when you get down to the bottom three keystones themselves. In removing SoA we want to sharpen the options available at the keystone level such that they feel more attached to what you're planning to do when you take them. In this case, we removed the super generalist health increase and put in something aimed at giving Vanguard initiators and tanky building Divers to choose and feel good about. Also just to add, SoA was boring. We wanted to replace it with something more fun.
> [{quoted}](name=Squad5,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OUwx6XQI,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2016-10-18T23:28:36.402+0000) > > Someone already mentioned in this thread the fact that champions that weren&#x27;t intended to want to go into the resolve tree felt forced to go into it to gain the raw stat power that SoA was offering. Whether the mastery was overpowered or not wasn&#x27;t really that much of a factor when deciding to remove it honestly - SoA wasn&#x27;t really fitting the goals we initially set out for when we changed to the keystone mastery system. > > A big reason other champions wanted SoA was the fact it was such generalist power. Health is almost always a good thing to have in league of legends, regardless of what champion you are (especially as a jungler). Resolve though as a tree is intended to serve specific playstyles of champion classes and subclasses (Juggernauts, Wardens, Vanguards aka tanky champions), especially when you get down to the bottom three keystones themselves. > > In removing SoA we want to sharpen the options available at the keystone level such that they feel more attached to what you&#x27;re planning to do when you take them. In this case, we removed the super generalist health increase and put in something aimed at giving Vanguard initiators and tanky building Divers to choose and feel good about. > > Also just to add, SoA was boring. We wanted to replace it with something more fun. Isn't this new mastery weaker on tanky junglers without high CC, such as Olaf, Sion or Mundo?
: > [{quoted}](name=TequilaZombie,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9fFWtNhb,comment-id=000200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-10-17T01:04:57.900+0000) > > Masteries, runes and such add MUCH bigger bonuses than 1 true damage mitigation from a specific supports ult. At tier 1 you already have 2% extra spell damage. Hell, if you put it all together, you gain something close to 12% extra damage with masteries. Not counting penetrations, mobility, tankiness or shit loads of dmg with the keystones. > > Runes can easily add 15 AD on their own. And they are considered to be almost worthless right now. > > 1 true damage blocked on Leona&#x27;s ult is so goddamn neglectable that makes absolutely zero difference being there, balance and rank integrity wise. > > Why is it there, then? For fun. League of Legends is a game. A game&#x27;s purpose is to allow the players to have fun. It&#x27;s a fun little thing that doesn&#x27;t make any difference in game play, but acts as an easter egg. Kinda like Ninjas (Kennen, Zed, Akali, Shen...) lose 1 max health when other ninjas are in the same team because ninjas work alone. > > Yes. If we&#x27;re going by the straight up &quot;this is a competition and shouldn&#x27;t have any sort of deviations&quot; mentality, having it is wrong by the principle of it. However it is a 100% harmless gimmick from the game and has no reason to be removed. 1 point in a mastery doesn't give you those numbers. For example, 1 point in Unyielding is 1% BONUS MR and Armor which for the first 10-15 minutes is usually not even a full Armor or MR point. Vampirism gives 0.4% Spellvamp and Lifesteal. Recovery gives 0.4 Hp per 5. Even this sunglass bonus will be worth more than one point in recovery over a typical fight duration. These masteries aren't even considered weak. League is a game of small advantages. You could use the same logic about how missing 1 cs doesn't matter and so on but it all adds up, especially in the context of 5 people and if even one game out of a million is affected by such nonsense, it's already one too many. If it's "for fun" and yet "isn't noticeable and doesn't matter at all," I don't see how it is any more interesting for those with the skin. It's certainly not more fun for Leona knowing her kit does a tiny bit less damage due to someone purchasing a skin. I think those other "easter eggs" are equally stupid if they exist in ranked and I'm extremely disappointed Riot even considered this, let alone implemented it. The fun part of cosmetic addons shouldn't be based on numbers in ANY way. They can add some voiceover like "Good thing I've got these shades." (hopefully something better than that) but touching the numbers is a fundamental and unjustifiable mistake for a competitive game. I will never agree about this and there is no valid defense for it. It is not harmless and is in fact a very worrying and dangerous addition, not only for its own sake due to the mindset which was necessary to consider this OK.
> [{quoted}](name=DeathBurs7,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9fFWtNhb,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-10-17T10:33:26.377+0000) > > Don&#x27;t try to argue, there is no discussion possible about the scale of the effect. The cosmetic buffs from skins are an order of magnitude below the effects of the Masteries or Runes systems. Last time I checked, you have 10 different Masteries, and you counted 1/5th of one of these 10 over the duration of a typical fight versus something that happens at most once every few minutes. Except that guess what, Recovery isn&#x27;t supposed to be an in-combat Mastery; on the other hand, even a single point of Vampirism is more than 1 HP &quot;over the duration of a typical fight&quot;, and you &quot;typically&quot; have 5 of those points. There is no common measure, the cosmetic buffs ARE indeed negligible. > > And for fuck&#x27;s sake, it&#x27;s a JOKE. It&#x27;s funny when you learn about it, it&#x27;s a bit of trivia you can chat about with other players, you can make memes and banter about it with your opponents. It makes the bloody GAME more enjoyable, without affecting the game play. For all I know, maybe Riot has been trolling us all for years and there is just some text in the loading screen and the actual in-game effect was never actually implemented. I never checked. Did you? > > (P.S.: and you seem to think they added that for *Skins*, as in, &quot;the stuff you pay for with real money&quot;, but most of the cosmetic buffs apply to champions (Ninjas work alone, The Piltover Trio, Ninjas vs Pirates, Volibear vs Zilean, etc.). Only the Sunglasses stuff applies **also** to Skins, but champs with sunglasses on their base skin are affected too. You can&#x27;t even say that Riot did that to promote the use of Skins, because it&#x27;s obviously not the case, or all the Pirate and Bilgewater skins would trigger the Ninjas vs Pirates buff.) Yes, I counted 1/5 of one because that's the unit assigned. You get one point per level. This skin buff has a chance to be more impactful than one level's worth of masteries. Are you willing to play every game with only 29 points in masteries? Don't worry, I disagree with most of the similar instances too. I value competitive integrity above gimmicks and ANY unfairness introduced by them is philosophically repulsive to me. Imagine if they did shit like this in sports tournaments. Instead of flipping a coin for who serves in tennis, they decide it based on whether you have a jersey they're selling. Does it change the outcome of the match? Unlikely, but does that make it fair and acceptable? It certainly doesn't to me.
: > [{quoted}](name=TequilaZombie,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9fFWtNhb,comment-id=000200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2016-10-17T01:04:57.900+0000) > > Masteries, runes and such add MUCH bigger bonuses than 1 true damage mitigation from a specific supports ult. At tier 1 you already have 2% extra spell damage. Hell, if you put it all together, you gain something close to 12% extra damage with masteries. Not counting penetrations, mobility, tankiness or shit loads of dmg with the keystones. > > Runes can easily add 15 AD on their own. And they are considered to be almost worthless right now. > > 1 true damage blocked on Leona&#x27;s ult is so goddamn neglectable that makes absolutely zero difference being there, balance and rank integrity wise. > > Why is it there, then? For fun. League of Legends is a game. A game&#x27;s purpose is to allow the players to have fun. It&#x27;s a fun little thing that doesn&#x27;t make any difference in game play, but acts as an easter egg. Kinda like Ninjas (Kennen, Zed, Akali, Shen...) lose 1 max health when other ninjas are in the same team because ninjas work alone. > > Yes. If we&#x27;re going by the straight up &quot;this is a competition and shouldn&#x27;t have any sort of deviations&quot; mentality, having it is wrong by the principle of it. However it is a 100% harmless gimmick from the game and has no reason to be removed. 1 point in a mastery doesn't give you those numbers. For example, 1 point in Unyielding is 1% BONUS MR and Armor which for the first 10-15 minutes is usually not even a full Armor or MR point. Vampirism gives 0.4% Spellvamp and Lifesteal. Recovery gives 0.4 Hp per 5. Even this sunglass bonus will be worth more than one point in recovery over a typical fight duration. These masteries aren't even considered weak. League is a game of small advantages. You could use the same logic about how missing 1 cs doesn't matter and so on but it all adds up, especially in the context of 5 people and if even one game out of a million is affected by such nonsense, it's already one too many. If it's "for fun" and yet "isn't noticeable and doesn't matter at all," I don't see how it is any more interesting for those with the skin. It's certainly not more fun for Leona knowing her kit does a tiny bit less damage due to someone purchasing a skin. I think those other "easter eggs" are equally stupid if they exist in ranked and I'm extremely disappointed Riot even considered this, let alone implemented it. The fun part of cosmetic addons shouldn't be based on numbers in ANY way. They can add some voiceover like "Good thing I've got these shades." (hopefully something better than that) but touching the numbers is a fundamental and unjustifiable mistake for a competitive game. I will never agree about this and there is no valid defense for it. It is not harmless and is in fact a very worrying and dangerous addition, not only for its own sake due to the mindset which was necessary to consider this OK.
> [{quoted}](name=TequilaZombie,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9fFWtNhb,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2016-10-17T10:40:35.967+0000) > > Leona&#x27;s entire kit will do 741 damage to her target at level 6. If by any chance she&#x27;s unloading her combo on someone with a commando skin, she will do 740. > > For all pratical means, there is no difference. It is not going to &quot;add up&quot; because it&#x27;s only for her ult, which has a 90/75/60 seconds CD. > > If you wanna worry about something regarding skins, worry about how Masked Shaco change his smoke color, making it harder to see. Or how some skins makes projectiles look smaller than their actual hit box. > > While I agree that the mindset is not the very best in a 100% competitive environment, the actual change is harmless. > > Hell, I&#x27;m more worried about the fact that when Chum the Waters is the killing blow on a Yordle (who&#x27;s not Rumble), he eats the body, which disapears from the map. That&#x27;s hiding information just because a character happens to have a certain lore. Yet, it doesn&#x27;t cause any problems. > > League is a game. You may not find it fun, but I assure you that many people find ninjas being stronger alone, taking less dmg because of sunglasses, and having a shark eat yordles a amusing addition to the game. It's not funny at all and is in fact absolutely awful design to ANY degree if it impacts a ranked mode. It terrifies me that this was even considered let alone implemented. Where do you draw the line anyway? 1 damage reduction is OK if you pay for a skin but 2 is not? Is that really such a bigger difference? No? Why not 3? It should NEVER affect numbers and again, the argument that "it doesn't matter," goes both ways. If it's true, why affect game integrity with gimmicks? There are a million ways to make the game more fun or a cosmetic addition more interesting. Touching numbers is the one thing you don't do. Just because League is a game meant for fun doesn't mean design and balance principles go out the window. The most fun thing about the game for me is the competitive element and that depends on being able to trust the company to do what is fair for everyone at all times. I think anyone who disagrees with this really doesn't care about this game's future or the competitive element very much (and yes, it's possible not to care despite being ranked highly). You can have all your imbalanced fun silliness, but just not in ranked. BTW: By add up, I mean that if this effect is run hundreds of thousands of times, it can sometimes lead to a person surviving when they otherwise wouldn't (especially in the context of a hectic teamfight where people at high levels push every drop of life they have left).
Rìcco (EUW)
: Seriously, can we stop pretending Mages NEED Rylais?
Wouldn't making Rylai's the same price as Rabadon's be sufficient? Although, I suppose that would turn it into purely a snowballing or late game item.
Show more

SergeantScuttler

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion