: Skarner should have his own trinket, so that he can place his own spires. Placed spires will act like wards until their expiration time, be able to be controlled by either team, and give him his aoe buff when owned (3 seconds after placing, can't just have him place one mid fight and instawin). This allows Skarner to strategically play in either lanes or jungle. After this change, adjust numbers as necessary. Also, potentially allowing his spires to have a limited time stealth detection after placement, or giving him the option for red ward effect with a max of 2 spires, green ward with the max of 3 spires, or blue ward with 2 spire max.
Don't love this idea. If it's a buff he's almost guaranteed to have in lane or whatever fight he wants, you can't have it be particularly meaningful or you end up with a major "good in it, fucking useless out of it" situation. Aside from that, it just doesn't seem interesting. That basically makes it a delayed trundle W, one that has to be gimped because of potential permanence. That's not very fun. Just write the spires off as a bad idea, prepare a rework, and revert him to the more-played crystal venom Skarner in the meantime.
: Laughs in 600+ Klepto gold at 9 mins.
Good thing that isn't enough to make him anything more than average.
: when ARAM buffs/nerfs don't make any sense
>Is his tank the issue? No. Yes, it was. Tanks are fucking strong in ARAM, and Maokai was nuts. AP maokai wasn't the target, tank Maokai was. His AP build hasn't been particularly notable in ARAM for years. LB got a damage buff because she, like most other assassins, sucks hardcore in ARAM. There's no way to flank the backline, no walls to jump over, almost no way to get a gold or level lead like a midlaner can more easily get in summoner's rift, etc. There are so many things working against her, that she needs a damage buff to work. >And why does sion even have a nerf to his damage? why not just his tank. Because he was really strong. Sion just sitting on mages and carries was a pretty major threat. he needed to lose both. I can definitely support bans though. Always a good idea.
: Hehe no ARAM Ez or Pyke nerfs tho. Feels balanced.
Because by winrate, neither of them is anything special. Ezreal isn't the best poker by a long-shot, and it's pretty easy for him to just not have the dps to break through a snowballing midgame frontline. Compare him to a poker like Xerath, who can dominate a game and is almost always useful, it's just too easy for Ezreal to do nothing. Pyke is annoying, but he's still an assassin, and they're the weakest class in ARAM by far. His sustain and pick-off makes him good enough to not need a buff like every other assassin, but it doesn't make him broken.
: > [{quoted}](name=Sightless66,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=H3rEAOQF,comment-id=000000000001,timestamp=2019-09-11T23:31:16.463+0000) > > Cait never had trouble late game. Safety is extremely important late game, and her E, traps and range give a ton of safety while items make up for the dps her kit otherwise lacks. > > Her classic winrate by game length was u-shaped; high winrate early (when she is a bully) low midgame (where her lack of dps hurts her) and then high again very late (where items give her all the dps she needs). She still fits that pattern just fine. > > She's never struggled late game, and there is no reason to expect her to now. I remember vividly back before her rework she was weaker than a lot of other ADC's late game due to her power being reserved early. Now she has so much base and scaling power it doesn't matter what point of the game she's in, she'll still easily poke you away and one shot you for a slight mess up.
>I remember vividly back before her rework she was weaker than a lot of other ADC's late game due to her power being reserved early. No matter how vivid your memory is, it's still incorrect. She's always been good late game. Stats don't lie, and her winrate always jumped up after 40 minutes, even back as far as season 2. Her scaling has actually been hit over time. Hell, she used to have an insanely high base attack speed (it's been reduced from 0.668 to 0.568, which is a major hit to scaling), and significant armor penetration on headshots. Cait is good late and early. That has always been true, and it still is. So long as she has long range and an escape mechanic, it will continue to be true for the foreseeable future.
: > [{quoted}](name=Eedat,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=H3rEAOQF,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-11T21:15:20.761+0000) > > I mean Vayne is still awful early. > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Vayne/ > > 45% WR in games under 15 minutes and doesn't cross the 50% threshold until 25-30 minutes > > Caits also lines up > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Caitlyn/ADC/ > > Highest WR early then falls off as the game goes > > Both of them line up with the descriptions you gave. Like I said, Vayne still isn't a god early since the initial nerfs. But Cait still doesn't have as much trouble as she should near end-game.
Cait never had trouble late game. Safety is extremely important late game, and her E, traps and range give a ton of safety while items make up for the dps her kit otherwise lacks. Her classic winrate by game length was u-shaped; high winrate early (when she is a bully) low midgame (where her lack of dps hurts her) and then high again very late (where items give her all the dps she needs). She still fits that pattern just fine. She's never struggled late game, and there is no reason to expect her to now.
: > [{quoted}](name=preternatural,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZTM8p0U8,comment-id=000600000000,timestamp=2019-09-06T19:10:41.913+0000) > > no dude, the mobile stuff is always more fun. > sorry for you. https://pics.me.me/thumb_yeah-well-thats-justlike-your-opinion-man-quickmeme-comm-15166091.png
It is just his opinion. However, the opinion that immobile champions are more fun is also just your opinion. What the Rioter was saying is that opinions like his are significantly more popular than ones like yours, and I think that is accurate. Most people do find mobility fun to use. It's a large part of why assassins maintain such a high popularity even in metas that actively screw them over. It's why a lot of immobile champions can't break into the top 50% playrate bracket even when they have top 10 winrates. People do generally like mobility more, and just disregarding that isn't going to help anything.
: > [{quoted}](name=Razelth,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JtLHQjap,comment-id=0000000100000000,timestamp=2019-09-04T16:53:28.715+0000) > > What? Click on matchups. > > Gangplank has a positive winrate against both Renekton and Jax. Time doesn't matter. He beats both more often than they beat him lmfao. Your link quit litteraly lists renekton as a counter to gangplank. *facepalm*
You're reading that the wrong way. It is saying that Gangplank has a 53.6% winrate against Renekton. You can see this even more clearly if you click on the "Counters" section, where it explicitly says that Gangplank counters Renekton
Ahris (NA)
: > Riot Repertoir straight up says the spires were not a success. In this same discussion, he also straight up said they have no plans to rework Skarner again. Sad. Riot did use A LOT of resources for Skarner, think about how much Riot spent developing Skarner into a cooler champ? I guess it may not have been to your liking, but Skarner is used pretty often in competitive. So one good thing there i guess. Many champs are never picked in competitive, so ya.
>Skarner is used pretty often in competitive. That's not an indication of interesting or fun design. It just shows that he can be powerful, and that's not good enough. It's not hard to be powerful. He has one of the lowest playrates in the game despite being professionally viable. He is, very literally, the least popular pro-viable champion in the game. Hell, on more than half of the stats sites, he is the least popular champion. Almost no one likes this champion. >think about how much Riot spent developing Skarner into a cooler champ? And it made him less popular. It failed. Time to write off the loss, and go back to something that worked better.
: > [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XfkPahMG,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-08-30T10:44:24.268+0000) > > I would trade most of my teammates for increased stats or for a good bot. > > Also getting increased stats as janna and getting increased stats as jax is not equivalent. > > There's no way to balance this kind of feature. Well, DOTA did it. But then again, they do everything better than LoL anyway
And Dota 2 doesn't, unless you count up splitting up an afk's passive gold gain 4 ways as a stat boost (I don't, and the game doesn't either because it lets you just leave after someone abandons).
: Why again does an AFK offer NO ingame-compensations in LoL only?
>DOTA gives remaining active players passive stat increases based on the number of AFKs, No, Dota 2 only splits up the afk player's passive gold and letting you sell their items. Neither of these are worthwhile. The main thing Dota 2 does is let you leave games people abandon (afk for 5+ minutes), but there is no real attempt to make games winnable in a 4v5. It would prefer you just leave. >Heroes of the Storm lets the AFK's champions play on the hardest difficulty bot to offer some consolation and contribution. Which is often considered to be an active detriment to attempts to win 4v5 because the bots are so bad that they'll accidentally feed at all opportunities. It's a token effort that definitely doesn't make 4v5's actually playable. I'd personally rather the bots just sat in base or behind a wall soaking exp instead of trying to help.
: How do you "make" someone afk when there's a mute feature?
In high elo games, you threaten to troll them every time you see them. You'll see repeats often enough that this is a meaningful threat. Don't want to lose more elo in the future? Be the only one to lose elo now.
Zed genius (EUNE)
: Like people are not already flaming the weakest link and tell them directly to go afk already
"People are already shitheads when they have no incentive to be, so clearly nothing could go wrong if we offer them a reward to be shitheads. It can't get worse!"
: > [{quoted}](name=Sightless66,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Lv0tHPLs,comment-id=000000000002,timestamp=2019-08-22T21:32:42.247+0000) > > You're mordekaiser. You can't run from anyone. A smite janna could do the same thing just as well. > > You're focusing on the wrong part of this. True yes. Though with Janna, I would venture to say that its not as bad with her, cause she cant be with you everywhere you go. I mean, she can, but not in the same capacity that yuumi can be.
>she cant be with you everywhere you go. Sure she can. She right clicks and she's faster than you. That could keep her on you for every camp. She even has more damage to try to steal camps with than Yuumi does, so she has even more potential to hurt you than Yuumi does. Sure, she's not physically attached, but that is very literally not a hinderance to her stealing camps.
: > [{quoted}](name=Lapis,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Lv0tHPLs,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-08-22T02:03:11.031+0000) > > I mean, that's not a problem with Yuumi, that's a problem with a troll. Trolls are always gonna find a way to troll. True. True. But, like I said, you cant run from her, and thats what makes it a problem.
You're mordekaiser. You can't run from anyone. A smite janna could do the same thing just as well. You're focusing on the wrong part of this.
: League doesn't have the population to fill these modes. It's just not what it used to be. Also TFT is a different game, not a different mode. So we have 2. Sr and ARAM. Riot resisted ARAM for a long time against community complaints so don't expect much from them. They don't even know how to design ranked ARAM, which is laughably easy.
Yes it does. This is one of the most popular games in the world. Games that don't have 1/10 of this games's popularity manage more game modes. We can handle a few more.
: Gathering Storm should stack every 5 minutes on Howling Abyss(ARAM map)
They're already gained every 6 minutes there. That seems good enough. It could be changed, but I don't think it's necessary.
GigglesO (NA)
: Either League is Dying or Matchmaking is really shitty.
>Are you telling me that there are so few of players that we can't have people playing their main roles, That's not how it works. You could 10 billion players, but if 50% of them want mid, then you're gonna have billions of autofills. Percentage of players wanting a role is what causes autofills, not raw player count. You play mid, the most popular role, so you're gonna get autofilled. No amount of extra players will fix that.
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Sightless66,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=orobgNQT,comment-id=000500020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-21T00:56:33.312+0000) > > I don't really see how this would help. The one new thing I can see it adding is that you'd want to stack up both before a fight, use the damage proc just like you used to, and then proc the healing mark when you were low enough to. That's a new thing, but that's not very much. After that, you'd want to keep stacking up whatever mark was better for the fight (which, unless the numbers or design are heavily changed, would continue to be damage), and rageblade wouldn't really change the decision-making at all. You end up doing the same thing you do now. I mean, if you used to just use damage marks in combat, why stack up healing marks in combat if they're not the better mark? You'd stack up the mark that was more useful. > > It strikes me as one of those classic Riot mechanics that would be overwritten and take up a huge text-box, but really not actually change how you play in a meaningful way. I don't mean that to be rude or insulting; I just don't think there are that many ways to make a toggle of damage vs healing on a bruiser or fighter champion a choice you actually have to put thought into. Rageblade helps because of Guinsoo's Rage being an thing that changes up how Aatrox in that design can change how stack his counters like how it change's Yi's Double Strike behaviours. Also I expanded on that in my "head-canon" Aatrox rework pitch on page 2 of comment page, where various things such as E and R are put into supplementing that main idea i pitched for W. Though I am not sure how effective it is. I also don't believe every and all champ should have the most intricate kit synergy and groundbreaking combo there is, especially since that is usually how we give birth to overloaded kits that can't be balanced. Champ should be focused on having a particular theme, be good at it, and be able to be balanced. My proposed realisation are written in that mindset. I designed my idea of Aatrox to be a machine of onslaught when played right, and that's precisely what he is; making him oh so special and full of meaningful split second decisions wasn't the top priority, and frankly shouldn't be for every champion. Champions should only have that when that's the main design theme of a champion; trying to make every new champ the next Ryze is precisely why so many newer releases have such a hurdle to balance. But then again, it's just some guy on the internet. My creative inputs can be bullshit and not very good.
>Rageblade helps because of Guinsoo's Rage being an thing that changes up how Aatrox in that design can change how stack his counters like how it change's Yi's Double Strike behaviours. Sure, but it doesn't change how he WANTS to stack his counters. Are there any situations where having rageblade makes you want to stack a different ability than you would if you didn't have a rageblade? I don't think so. It may be useful for him, but there isn't a situation where it ever alters his decision making. >Also I expanded on that in my "head-canon" Aatrox rework pitch on page 2 of comment page, where various things such as E and R are put into supplementing that main idea i pitched for W. I see how they support the w with extra stacks, but I don't see how the W's changed design changes the paradigm of "there is a best toggle for each situation". It seems like you were trying to address that problem, but I don't see how it does. Just to be direct, I don't think the toggles being on separate counters is necessarily a good idea. All you add with that is making it guaranteed that Aatrox will get one of each toggle off in each fight because he enter with one of each primed. However, once he's in a fight, I can't think of a single situation where you're going to switch away from the ability you want a cast of to stack up a less useful one. I think this actually decreases the ability for Aatrox to chose what toggle he wants to use, because he's punished in the short-term for not committing as soon as the W procs, instead of being able to switch at any time. Having one proc of each guaranteed in each fight could also necessitate slightly weakening them. Also, just as a very quick note regarding your rework idea: You have the R give AD, and AS, and MS, and range, two cooldown reduction effects, and an increase to his Q speed. Unless the numbers are so small as to be meaningless (in which case they shouldn't be there), that is the biggest steroid in the game by an insane margin, and you have a very large potential duration that isn't that hard to get. You could take half that ability off of it, and it would still be incredibly strong. Limiting it based on having to get 3 takedowns (which can be before the ult cast) for max duration isn't going to make that balanced. >I also don't believe every and all champ should have the most intricate kit synergy and groundbreaking combo there is, Sure, but your earlier statement was that the toggle can be a tool for skill expression, which I think does require at least a little bit of decision making. I'm not seeing that represented here.
: What a top tier champion featured in pro play and high elo and is constantly mentioned everywhwere is more popular than old aatrox gutted and never talked about? What kind of sorcery is this? Lets not forget the moment he became semi playanle his playrate skyrocketed to 8-10% without being OP right before the rework. People DO WANT OLD AATROX. Saying he was unhealthy when he had to choose in fight ifg he wants dmg or heal involving decision making while draven runs around full healing per AA and two shotting every non tank. Yeah right. The anti melee bias from riot and this community is insane really considering ranged champions do the same 'unhealthy' thing better with less counterplay.
>Lets not forget the moment he became semi playanle his playrate skyrocketed to 8-10% without being OP right before the rework. People DO WANT OLD AATROX. That isn't really indicative of people wanting old Aatrox. Playrates always jump right before reworks. Old Poppy's popularity went up to around 12% right before her rework, and there weren't many people who liked her. Hell, Urgot went from bottom 5 to somewhere around the middle of the pack right before his rework, and he'd actually been viable for the better part of a year at that point. It's also a little presumptions to imply that he was well-balanced before his rework. We didn't have pros touching him they very rarely spend the time practicing soon-to-be reworked champions unless there is a huge tournament on the line very soon, which there wasn't. We can even look back at the early time when Aatrox was OP and was in pro play, and his popularity wasn't exactly stellar back then. I understand that you liked old Aatrox a lot, and there are reasons to prefer him over the current Aatrox, but this is not a valid argument. It's grasping at straws to say that old Aatrox is more popular than this one. It's not even really justifiable to say that a very large number of people want old Aatrox back.
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Reaversal,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=orobgNQT,comment-id=0005000200000000,timestamp=2019-08-20T12:57:25.463+0000) > > His Q DID keep the "sweet spot in an AoE" deal, though. Like, that's literally the entire point of his new Q. They kept and expanded on this idea because it's infinitely more interesting than a toggled third-hit passive. > > Hell, his Q3 is literally his old Q but without the dash, and his E lets him add a dash to it anyway. That's very true that current Q is heavily inspired by old Q. But I wouldn't say making it a Riven Q v2 is a good starting point but that's me. > Sure, he doesn't have a toggle, but he does still get bonus damage and healing periodically on autos via his passive. Also, I don't get people's fascination with it being a toggle. You basically just used Price versus champions and Thirst versus minions, or if you drop low in combat. It's not exactly thought-provoking, but what do I know. I imagine it'd actually be pretty fun to master if the 2 features of the toggle are actually kept on separate hit counters. And if maybe 1 spell in the kit proc on-hit and thus count towards it which the player can play around. Now also imagine that Aatrox with Rageblade. It's math time for Aatrox players. It surely can be a good skill expression tool, while keeping things Aatrox's signature as his own. > Another issue I think is that there are a lot of AA-based champions older than Aatrox who also need updating. There are only so many ways you can make a melee AS carry functional, and using any of those ideas on Aatrox means less design space for when the older ones get updated. That's true, but with old Aatrox he certainly had enough distinguish factors of his own to not appear wholly derivative (even one of his distinguishing factors, the revive, was a terrible idea to be put with a drain tank). He certainly was a diamond in the rough and they should've have experimented with him more instead of outright changed him from the ground up. Aatrox is not to the extent of something like old Poppy that required an almost complete overhaul to actually fix; old Aatrox is actually really workable. > In fact, I'm pretty sure that if Tryndamere ever gets a rework, it might take cues from old Aatrox. Which would be really fitting considering his lore, and Tryndamere was doing the whole "high-AS undying bloodlusted berserker" thing long before Aatrox was made. So long the cues they took from old Aatrox isn't his passive revive, that is.
>I imagine it'd actually be pretty fun to master if the 2 features of the toggle are actually kept on separate hit counters. And if maybe 1 spell in the kit proc on-hit and thus count towards it which the player can play around. I don't really see how this would help. The one new thing I can see it adding is that you'd want to stack up both before a fight, use the damage proc just like you used to, and then proc the healing mark when you were low enough to. That's a new thing, but that's not very much. After that, you'd want to keep stacking up whatever mark was better for the fight (which, unless the numbers or design are heavily changed, would continue to be damage), and rageblade wouldn't really change the decision-making at all. You end up doing the same thing you do now. I mean, if you used to just use damage marks in combat, why stack up healing marks in combat if they're not the better mark? You'd stack up the mark that was more useful. It strikes me as one of those classic Riot mechanics that would be overwritten and take up a huge text-box, but really not actually change how you play in a meaningful way. I don't mean that to be rude or insulting; I just don't think there are that many ways to make a toggle of damage vs healing on a bruiser or fighter champion a choice you actually have to put thought into.
: Anyone who goes like 1-13 or 2-10 is intentionally feeding.
Bull. If they didn't do it on purpose, then they aren't intentionally feeding. You can't write off bad play, being outclassed, or even just being too tilted to play well as intentionally feeding. Stick to the strict definition of the term. "No one should he going 0-9 in a ranked game" eoes not justify the assertion that dying intentionally was what they wanted to do. You can see why those are two entirely different claims, right?
Bârd (NA)
: Banshee's needs a buff. It's designed for a different game than what we're playing today.
You say that like Banshee's has always had this cool down. Back in season 4, it had a cooldown of 25 seconds. It was nerfed to 40 seconds, and was generally mediocre afterwards until it was made an AP item. The game has never done the 40 second cooldown well, even back when it was added.
: You're the only one responding to me. Try again. Bye person who can't read.
> [{quoted}](name=GreenTeaAndPoro,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=2yGzh5Ph,comment-id=0009000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-20T11:15:35.715+0000) > > You're the only one responding to me. Try again. Bye person who can't read. I didn't know cabbysb was my name. I don't know how I could hace written that reply I clearly did not write. I also didn't realize that this account could downvote your first post multiple times. You've had only disagreement, and the entire thread is filled with people with the opposite opinion. At some point, you have to gave at least a little self-awareness, right?
: after you're first sentence I'm done with you. I don't have time to debate with a troll. Dark souls is considered hardcore by the community. It's literally a sub genre of videogames. Why would play aram besides for fun or just learning new champs or farming? There is no logical reason other then those. Good bye.
>after you're first sentence I'm done with you. I don't have time to debate with a troll. Funny, that seems to be everyone else's response to you in this thread. Maybe it's time to realize you're not on the right side of this. Besides, better to treat everything as casual than to decry good design because something isn't hardcore. That's way fucking stupider. >There is no logical reason Oh quit this pretentious crap. There is no "logical" reason to play any mode of this game whatsoever. You do it for enjoyment, not for any logical fulfillment. This shit wouldn't fly in high school philosophy classes and it's even less compelling here. If the downvotes don't make it clear enough, let me spell this out. YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHY OTHER PEOPLE PLAY THIS MODE. It is that simple. You are wrong, and people are telling you that. You can even read Riot's own posts about ARAM to learn that they acknowledge other reasons why people enjoy the mode, which is why they started balancing it in the first place. Even Riot knows your idiotic ideas are wrong, and that's a pretty impressive threshold to reach. >Why would play aram besides for fun or just learning new champs or farming? Who would play this entire game for any reason beyond fun? And since when did "fun" require imbalance and shitty design decision? Bans don't detract from fun, they increase it. Balance and good design doesn't detract from fun, it increases it. You have this idiotic concept that "fun" is something that requires bad design, and how you got that idea I will never understand.
Tomoe Gozen (EUNE)
: No, i don't think ARAM bans should be a mainstay of the mode. Because this will allow the meta to creep in and cause certain champions to almost acquire a permaban status. I don't think Lux is a major issue in the mode. But that depends on my and enemy team comps. If Lux is protected by a solid front line and has a team comp that can allow her to fire off spells without a second thought but my team has no answer to killing her but is forced to fight their tanks, when can i accuse Lux of being a problematic champion that needs not exist in that mode? But when the opposite happens and their team comp is entirely composed of backline mages while we have the engage and staying power in a teamfight, as we promptly kill them off one by one as they're mostly immobile - is she supposed to be buffed at that point? --- You cannot accurately gauge a champion's strength in a moshpit. Their strength relies heavily on the luck of the draw and whether they get to do what they do best without any interruptions. Both sides are going to get team comps that instant lose or win at some points, even if those situations are just terrible to play in on both sides.
>Because this will allow the meta to creep in and cause certain champions to almost acquire a permaban status. There is already a meta. You can see that in how certain champions are taken far more often than other ones. Just the ability to reroll picks has already established one that will never go away. It's like worrying about getting shot when you're already in the hospital getting the bullet taken out. You're a little late to the party. Bans aren't going to change that. There will be heavily banned champions, and they will be the ones who are too strong, just like the heavily rerolled champions are the ones who are too weak. Riot can respond with balance, and they will change. That's a good thing. It's supposed to work that way. >You cannot accurately gauge a champion's strength in a moshpit. Yes you can. It's very easy. It's measured by winrate, same as in summoner's rift. A winrate represents how well a champion does in an amalgation of every scenario they face. Yes, they may have weak scenarios, but they're clearly fewer and/or less significant than their strong ones. You can't just take the existence of strong and weak scnearios and use that to say that assessing strength is impossible. That's completely absured. Balancing in any game always has to take that into account. This is no different. Here's the thing; you can say "it's situational", but that applies to balance for all champions in all modes. That's just as true in summoner's Rift. If I pick a champion like Jinx who is generally strong in plat/diamond ranked, then I can certainly argue that team comp and enemy picks determine a large portion of strength (I want to take her with a peel support, I don't want to take her into reliable assassination), but that doesn't change the fact that in most scenarios, she's strong. I could whinge about and say "what happens if people pick her into a kill lane when she has an engage support of her own and is against a strong roaming assassin", but that's overfocusing on a bad scenario without picking up Your Lux example is the same. Before her nerfs, she was straight up broken. You could accurately say the scenarios where she just poked out the enemy or served as a burst/cc threat vastly outnumbered the times where she was weak. Even post-nerf she's still strong way more often than she isn't, as you can see from her 57% winrate. She's strong, and she'd get banned. That's a good thing. >Both sides are going to get team comps that instant lose or win at some points, even if those situations are just terrible to play in on both sides. And proper balancing and allowing for bans lower the number of those situations, which makes for better games overall. That's why it's a good decision.
: Thats actually an incorrect statment. Darksouls is considered hardcore and not casual. There are plenty of non casual games. And league is considered competitive. How ever the game mode aram is casual.
>Darksouls is considered hardcore and not casual. It's a videogame you're not earning money for, so it's casual as far as I'm concerned. If you're doing it for fun, you're casual. Seriously though, you can't just say "it's casual" as a way of completely dismissing quality control. That excuse will never justify poor design decisions. Right now, having no way to ban out things that annoying and cancerous is a very bad design decision. It doesn't make shit more fun. It just makes shit frustrating. Everyone is going to have a champion they dislike or just hate playing against, and Riot's statistic-based ARAM balancing won't fix that. It's not even intended to. It's much better to actually give a balancing mechanic to players, just like they do in other game modes. >A Game mode purely for learning new champs. If that's all it is to you, great. However, if you asked the majority of ARAM players why they play it, this answer wouldn't even be in the top 10. So, if you're talking about what most people do in this game mode, then you're objectively wrong.
Bonten (NA)
: lol u prolly wernt on the fourms but everyone was crying about it
Some people were crying about it. The majority of feedback, both here and on reddit, was extremely positive.
Glîtchy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Teh Song,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OFHhHYIb,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-20T03:05:08.200+0000) > > Not only is it entirely possible to put You behind, he can get there without you putting him there. But how do we do it if he catches up even if he did terrible at the start?
You take objectives and win the game. Yi can catch up eventually, but eventually can take a very long time, long enough that he doesn't even break a 50% winrate until after 30 minutes. Meanwhile, if your team has any lockdown, then you can keep a weak Yi weak by taking objectives and murdering him in the teamfights he isn't ready for. Seriously though, it's pretty easy for Yi to get behind. He can't powerfarm the jungle early game and just come out midgame farmed anymore because of all the jungle nerfs, so if you just don't die to his below-average ganks, then you're in good shape.
Manxxom (NA)
: They should make the hextech buff at first rank only seal off a single champion's items. At full rank it will seal off two champions' items. The champions selected to have items temporarily disabled by this buff are chosen by random, but only champions with items will apply, so if there is only one champion with items on the whole team, they will be targetted by the hextech synergy every single time since there is no other champion to apply to the pool. That way it won't disable items of a whole darn team.
If you don't group up your item carries, than it will only seal off a single champion's items. It hits in an aoe around whatever unit it targets. If you don't have them right next to each other, you'll be fine.
: That’s an absolutely valid point. However, it’s worth noting that the winning team would have to spend an incredible amount of gold to accomplish that. Wards were not cheap. And denying vision wasn’t done easily or for free via a trinket. You would need to buy even more expensive pink wards to find and clear enemy wards. The reality is the win more situations really did not change much. The winning team can still use all their wards in the enemy jungle. Now they can also clear the opposing team’s vision for free. They can dominate vision plants and scuttles and get even more vision. Now, the winning team does the same thing they used to do, but for free, and with even less recourse for the losing team. This is just the vision aspect of things. If you include changes to baron, dragon, rift herald, turret plating, and others, it becomes fairly obvious that the game favors the winning team more than ever. 30+ minute comebacks were fairly common until season 4, when trinkets were introduced. Don’t forget that spending all that gold on vision would curb your snowball. You could and would easily spend hundreds if not thousands of gold on vision back then. Vision wars substantially limited how much money you were spending on items. The only issue, which still remains with control wards, was that eventually you are going to get to 6 items and you would not be able to hold more wards, forcing supports to keep a slot open for tons of wards.
6 items supports. That's hilarious. I remember 3-4 items, none fully completed, and 2 stacks of wards. That's the way the pros did it, and it's damn well what solo queue expected of supports at the time too.
: Wards were limited by gold. Spend more on wards? Slow down snowball. Slow down snowball? Longer more strategic games. There _was_ a ward limit, and it was dependent on how much gold you could blow on the wards before you started to hinder your own progress.
>Wards were limited by gold. Spend more on wards? Slow down snowball. Unless you have the bitch role, support, just buy all of the wards possible. I remember playing games where I won because I was willing to have brown boots and 2 gp10 items up until 40 minutes while the other support had the gall to get 1 item, and that was the sole reason they lost. Hell, do you remember the season 2 CLG EU vs WE series? 60 minutes, and the Janna ends with heart of gold, philo stone, a ruby crystal, and brown boots. That shit suuuuucked. Being able to buy vision contributed to snowballing. You had longer games because everything was low risk given the infinite vision both teams had, but it was much harder to stage a comeback because the winning team had more money to buy the unlimited vision denial available to them through pinks or through oracle's elixir, and had more ablility to kill the oracle's holder. That map control turned into farm advantages, which turned into wins. Season 4 was much better for comebacks than season 2 because of this, particularly in competitive play.
Sherogarth (EUNE)
: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzAZWT0rcvo The problem is that in current form this rework is quite busted. His E applies all on-hit effects... its really funny to see him apply {{item:3748}} 3 times in one sec.
Any champion is busted when you have a challenger player up against bronzes and silvers, which is exactly what this game was. He's got dozens of videos just like this for as many champions. There's a reason every time anything new happens, these youtubers have a "MOST BROKEN THING EVER 100/2/30 NERF THIS NOW!!!!??:!?!!!" title on their videos. It's not because everything is broken, it's because they're playing against people who aren't anywhere near as good as them, and hyping shit up makes for a more popular video. Seriously, the guy had first blood and more kills fed to him by an Ekko who didn't know what his B button did. This is not representative of actual balance.
: pyke in aram
Riot was pretty clear that the criteria for aram buffs and nerfs would primarily be winrate based, and pyke has an average aram winrate. He doesn't meet the standard for nerfs there. It's also worth keeping in mind that assassins as a class suck in aram, and most of them have needed hefty buffs to compete. I don't think pyke is anything special in arams. He has healing, but without poke of his own there are relatively few opportunities to take advantage of it. He doesn't pose any real threat to the tank and bruiser frontlines in good aram comps, and he can't take out backliners easily like other (buffed) assassins. His advantages of pickoff, healing, and potential for teamfight cleanup are enough to keep him from needing buffs like other assassins, but I can think of a few dozen champs I fear more than him.
Kai Guy (NA)
: > First, I don't really think this was that much of an issue. I'd honestly be surprised if roster size increases resulted in even a couple percentage of difference. Not to mention, if you make rosters too big, you make the MMR of teams incredibly volatile because it's impossible to create a valid ranking. I will be open in my Bias, When it was still team 5 in the early seasons I found the issue with it was getting 4 friends online at the same time and able to invest time into a few games every week. Even with a full team it was pretty uncommon. So I might be overvaluing my perception. The Trick for Rooster size being to big is having restrictions on the top end of MMR for a team. Replacing a teammate with some one of equal or lower skill is not gonna be to negative for the system imo. I might be wrong about this. > Part of making it the most competitive experience would be having a playerbase to start with, which creates a circular problem. You can't just say "be competitive" and just make it work off of that. A tournament system might be nice, but again, it strikes me as being very niche. Eh, I think the server in NA at least has enough active daily to make it a viable que. The key is to make it attractive. Frankly I think the removal of the "RNG" Feeling of teammates would be a real draw for this games player base. Having tools to moderate teammates with out relying on luck of the draw or hoping that Riots automated system will reactively punish some one AFTER they grief a game should be pretty attractive to folks. Teammates are the most common complaint in the game. Its very much an On Paper approach. I lack way to much data to be able to set expectations for live. I see a lot of positives and methods of implementation, I don't feel its impossible. It would need player support and participation.
>Eh, I think the server in NA at least has enough active daily to make it a viable que. We didn't back then, and we don't have a much higher playerbase right now. I think that if it's just a ranked 5's queue, then this is just a factually wrong statement. You'd need something major to draw in players, and I've seen no proposals that I think represent that. > Frankly I think the removal of the "RNG" Feeling of teammates would be a real draw for this games player base. Again, that was a draw before, and it failed. That's not enough. >It would need player support and participation. And lacking that was the big problem in the past, so saying it needs something that it already failed because of a lack of doesn't inspire confidence. I really don't like this idea because I've seen games (including this one) fuck up their queue systems trying to make an idealized system work. Given that we've already tried and failed to make this work, we definitely need a much stronger hook than just retrying the old system with a minor tweak.
Kai Guy (NA)
: I think part of the issue was rooster size. There was just not enough players allowed per team for a realistic # of folks per day resulting in the early seasons Team 5 failure. Flex on the flip side does not reward being in a dedicated group all that well and runs as a slightly more competitive normal draft. Clash looked good but riot just failed to get that ball rolling. I think making Ranked 5s the most competitive experience and running a "semi-Pro" Tournament for the top team would be a good way to drum up participation.
>I think part of the issue was rooster size. Two things. First, I don't really think this was that much of an issue. I'd honestly be surprised if roster size increases resulted in even a couple percentage of difference. Not to mention, if you make rosters too big, you make the MMR of teams incredibly volatile because it's impossible to create a valid ranking. >I think making Ranked 5s the most competitive experience and running a "semi-Pro" Tournament for the top team would be a good way to drum up participation. Part of making it the most competitive experience would be having a playerbase to start with, which creates a circular problem. You can't just say "be competitive" and just make it work off of that. A tournament system might be nice, but again, it strikes me as being very niche. If you could actually prearrange times it would be good, but for a "play anytime" ranked mode, it's not going to pull in anywhere near enough people. Most people just don't have 4+ friends they want to play League with, and even fewer want to consistently match up with random fuckers they don't know or care about. That's the core issue, and it's going to be a massive hurdle for any mode of this type.
GilxeN (EUW)
: How player is snowballing being 0/0/0 with great cs amount, he is farming and growing bounty due his cs'ing. How that shit works?
Kills aren't the only way to snowball. If you're farming so much that you've got a bounty off of CS, then you're A. amassing a large gold lead through minions; B. amassing a large gold lead by denying minions to the opponent, and C. amassing a large gold lead off of objectives. The "large gold lead" is what makes a snowball, not kills.
: There is a big difference between a comeback and an anti snowball mechanic The current bounty system punished you for playing well even if your team is playing badly It's entirely possible for a player to go 4/0 and get a huge bounty while the rest of their team are all negative, this means that one player is punished for "carrying" the game But the anti snowball mechanic worked the other way round, as it is right now one player can kill a game by hard feeding, but before it was much harder to do that, as that one player would be worth a lot less gold, now they were worth the same gold as the rest of their team As a result it's now much harder for a single player to carry a game, and much easier for them to kill it, this is why we are in the "coin flip" meta, because it's entirely a tossup who gets that single player
> before... that one player would be worth a lot less gold, now they were worth the same gold as the rest of their team No they aren't. You are wrong. A player who dies a lot is still worth less gold, and the gold values are comparable to the past. A player who has died 6 times in a row right now is worth 100 gold. In comparison, back in patch 3.9, there was this line "A player killed six times in a row without resetting is now worth 112 gold (previously 62 gold)". 112 gold is more than 100 gold, so you're actually getting even less gold nowadays for killing a feeder than you used to. This mechanic hasn't been substantially altered. You're just incorrect.
Kai Guy (NA)
: That would work as well. I have a bias on the topic of Flex. My opinion is that removing flex for Ranked 5's with a consistent rooster would be by far the best MM you could have. Premade full teams who are used to playing together would be so much easier to rate and sort by skill. Shifting the community into less Me vs world and into Team Vs Team would lower a bunch of toxic behaviors, if only because you give moderation style tools to the player base rather then reliance on automated systems. I used to Do lots of Clan related gameplay back on Wc3 in Dota and that likely influenced my Views. Clan vs Clan was always more fun then random Pub games with massive RNG imbalance for players. The game was more fun with a community to play with.
> Ranked 5's with a consistent rooster would be by far the best MM you could have. If it would work, which is a HUGE if. We've done ranked 5s with flexible teams before (which allows more players in than consistent rosters would), and there just weren't enough players to make it functional. I remember the hour long queue times. I remember being a plat team and getting matched against bronzes as a regularity. I remember how shitty the entire system was. I mean, I'd play it if could work, but unless we really have a good idea about how to take it from completely nonfunctional to at least decent, then it seems like an effort doomed to fail and waste everyone's time. I could see a standalone clan system being a nice addition, but given the past failures of the ranked teams system, I just don't think it would be popular enough to design a ranked mode around.
: "Matchmaking is balanced, you're just too toxic"
I get the feeling that you did a whole lot of typing to your team that you're leaving out of this post. That title certainly seems like a response someone wrote to an ongoing rant. I also don't get the point of the Eve vs Jarvan comparison. Everything except the Eve going afk isn't really relevant to anything. Yeah, you had a worse player. Oh well. Shit happens. Everyone has shitty players in their games, everyone has games where the enemy has shitty players, and everyone has games where they're the shitty player. That's the nature of team games.
Wolfeur (EUW)
: Wasn't season 3 the almost literal "100% ban Kassadin/Shen/Rammus"?
Yes. It was also when playing supports meant you would likely go an entire game without building a single complete item, junglers were complete wimps who were underleveled and low on gold no matter how well they did, midlane was dominated by the nearly 100% p/b kassadin for more than a season (he had 2 patches in a row of literal 99% p/b), a ton of champions sat on near 40% winrates with no changes or hope of changes for years down the line, and so much other stupid shit that it's not even worth listing. People look at the past with rose-tinted glasses.
: Blitz breaking shields in 1.14
>they cant heal while silenced, Yes they can. Silence only prevents flash and teleport. Other summoners can still be used. >but now you cant even shield to save a hooked carry because that shield wont exist as soon as blitz ults Shield afterwards. If Blitz saves the ult, the ADC has the chance to use abilities and flash to leave. There will usually be a small window after the blitz ult to shield. Or, shield as the hook is hitting, and you can save from some of the burst from Blitz's allies (or even from the hook itself if you are watching for it). Realistically, the difference between shield and now shield isn't going to make a huge difference for a pull combo on a squishy. That much CC with Blitz's allies providing damage will usually result in a death either way. This change is more helpful in other situations, like removing a shield from a Camille after she goes in or something along that line.
man of tin (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=JackMcCarry,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=wJ0ZEAQW,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2019-07-04T18:18:56.809+0000) > > What stops you from taking anything else botlane? The enemy team having literally any 'normal' (support/marksman) botlane that can play half decently.*
Mages are played bot in pro play. It's viable. If you can't make it work, that's your fault.
: "Oh no, Riven got nerfed, what will us mains do???"
>Right, and people were screaming the nerfs were massive? That's a strawman. Almost no one said the nerfs were massive. The line from most people was just that they were actually nerfs, and not buffs as the Boards panicked they would be. The data bore that out, with a drop in both winrate and popularity.
Saianna (EUNE)
: Did you read the OP at all? Here's the important quote: > Tip: If you nerf the ADCs (strongest class in ARAM), Sona's win rate will also decrease. Her winrate isn't result of her own strenght, but the synergy with one of the strongest ARAM classes - ADCs. And because both sides have ADCs, their winrates are usually more in 50%s. Sona on the other hand is always only on 1 side.
That's horseshit. Everyone can use healing and the AOE shield. Any champion that autos once every few seconds can use her Q. ADCs are nothing special to her. OP is fucking wrong. Sona is strong because she provides a huge amount of AoE shielding and the AoE damage buff, while bringing sustain that is good enough to get through ARAM's healing nerf. There is no team that doesn't work for. She doesn't need an ADC, she just needs to be Sona in ARAM. Seriously, have you ever fucking heard anyone say "oh, you should reroll that Sona, we don't have an ADC for her?" No, and if you did, you'd get dodged because no one wants to play with someone who misunderstands the game that much. You just keep Sona, because she's fucking broken.
: Wow what an inaccurate comment That link only shows platinum+ players who got a brain to build her tank items but most ARAM players' ranks are lower than platinum. Notice how her win rate is much lower when she builds AP items which becomes more common as the rank gets lower. Since ARAM matchmaking is terrible they can't balance champions based on rank.
>That link only shows platinum+ players who got a brain to build her tank items but most ARAM players' ranks are lower than platinum. The winrate from the same site is also plat+, and it's crap. So, if these plat+ players have a brain and aren't ever buying AP, and those same plat+ players are losing, then clearly this isn't actually a case of bad data and is really a case of a champion who is shittier in ARAM than on Summoner's Rift.
: Yes, Riot balance team is so well-known for immediately nerfing Champions that have Winrates out of line. In actuality they don't always nerf a high winrate Champ right away, depending on a variety of factors. Stop insisting that they do. Or at least stop insisting that winrate is the end-all, be-all. I think everyone is aware that it isn't. I find Rek'Sai to be perfectly serviceable on ARAM, though she's more comp reliant and player experience reliant than Sona. Sona can work on basically any team. Rek'Sai can't. She's not horrible, she's just less reliable in a mode that values reliability in a variety of comps. Also, the site you linked (which I missed, sorry about that) uses Plat+, which seems kind of useless for ARAM. Feels like the majority of ARAM games (or at least ARAM players) are played below Plat. Not to mention I doubt MMR is very reliable. And to your last point, our entire discussion is how we disagree with Riot's decisions. We aren't saying that Riot is randomly "hating on Sona". We are concerned that they don't understand what is strong on ARAM. Winrates are only a single factor when it comes to balancing, and there is no way Riot is solely using winrate to nerf/buff ARAM. Even going by your precious winrates; there's Fiora, who was buffed, 58% winrate; Caitlyn, untouched, 57%; Urgot, untouched, 57%; I'm not saying we should nerf these guys, but my point is that we dislike the "nerf all poke" mentality that Riot seemed to be going for, because clearly poke isn't exclusively winning.
>Feels like the majority of ARAM games (or at least ARAM players) are played below Plat. Not to mention I doubt MMR is very reliable. The majority of all games are played below plat. Using plat+ is still a good metric because it tells you what is succeeding in games with players who have demonstrated they have a relatively solid foundation in the game. Also, MMR isn't exactly hard to track. Track wins and losses, compare against others and their wins and losses, and that's it. It's a pretty simple type of formula, particularly for wide generalizations like "who is plat+". >Even going by your precious winrates; there's Fiora, who was buffed, 58% winrate; Caitlyn, untouched, 57%; Urgot, untouched, 57% Fiora's buff was based on a time when she was at a 48% winrate, and probably could have held off until the poke nerfs went through. However, Cait wasn't winning as much before many other adcs got nerfed, and Urgot got much better after poke went down and frontlines became more prevalent as a result. There will likely be more changes. We're still better off than before the balance changes happened in the first place. >clearly poke isn't exclusively winning. No, but it's still the best thing to have, and that is despite this being post-nerf. Pre-nerf, Sona and Ziggs had over a 70% winrate. They were the best, unquestionably. All the champions near the top were either poke champions, or champions like Maokai who rolled poke champions. Also, poke is still great, despite the nerfs. Once poke with a basic frontline isn't blatantly the best strategy, then I'll worry about Riot's "nerf all poke" mentality. Until then, nerf poke more. I want to see more poke champions sitting in the middle winrates like Morg and Zyra (previous members of the top 15).
: > [{quoted}](name=Malix Farwin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=VwIEJcIu,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-05-25T00:17:20.039+0000) > > likely see her getting bard'd instead. So buffed only to get nerfed once he gets into proplay? Then slowly buffed over the next 3 seasons?
Bard never got nerfed. I mean that literally. He has literally never gotten a single nerf. Check out his patch history. There has been exactly one numbers change that wasn't strictly positive in his entire history (patch 7.7, Meep slow changed to 25 − 75 (based on Chimes)% from 25 − 80 (based on Chimes)%.), and that came in a patch that buffed the shit out of meeps in every other way. The closest thing Bard got to nerfs were bugfixes preventing him from stunning people off of GP barrel or Syndra balls or shit like that. Funny thing; I remember that after every patch, people were always saying "this is the patch, they've overbuffed bard this time". Then the end of season 5 came, and he was just kind of there until another buff in season 7, following by 2 smaller buffs in season 8. He's in the strongest state he's ever been in, and I don't think anyone would justify calling him overbuffed right now. Yuumi will probably be like that. Starts off really shitty (even crappier by release winrate than Bard was), ends up just generically bad after buffs, and gets buffed up over a year or more with everyone panicking about every buff thrown her way.
: I posted it somewhere and even a mod said it wasn’t even bad, it’s somewhere on the forums a MODERATOR even told me to try and repeal it because it wasn’t even bad, but riot needs to take this perm ban system away.
So, I just read what he wrote, and I don't think you're summing that up fairly. That's just not what he said. He said it's not the worst he's seen, which doesn't mean it wasn't bad. You're not as bad as the people who fill the chat with pejoratives and pure inflammatory nonsense, but your chat log is still a major problem. He explained why a punishment was justified. "With that in mind I can definitely see this getting a chat restriction under normal circumstances, but unfortunately for you since you had a 14-day ban and apparently didn't change/improve your behavior enough you were hit with the next available punishment-a permaban in this case." He also didn't tell you to try to repeal it. He said you could try that. That's different. He explained what your only option was. That doesn't mean he thinks they should return the account to you. It's just the only thing you have left to try.
Cruxious (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=DimPack,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LW9oE86E,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-15T04:55:44.230+0000) > > No you don't. She fucking sucks. You sound just like the Trolls all night, I dont care how she is, she looks fun and I WANT TO PLAY HER. you cant tell me who I want to play.
> [{quoted}](name=Cruxious,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LW9oE86E,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-05-15T04:59:14.543+0000) > > You sound just like the Trolls all night, I dont care how she is, she looks fun and I WANT TO PLAY HER. you cant tell me who I want to play. Then you need to play a game mode without bans. A lot of people don't want to play with new champions, particularly one they know is terrible. Kind of a dick move, but definitely not bannable.
Show more

Sightless66

Level 84 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion