: @People Who LIke Ashe Rework - Why do you not like Ashe now?
I expect to enjoy playing New Ashe a lot more than Old Ashe because her early game won't be so insufferably dull now. Q is a whole new button for trades and W's cooldown decrease will be quite valuable. I think Ashe's win rate will decline as a result of the rework. The current state with Ashe is that you mostly see Ashe mains playing her. With the addition of mechanics that make her more fun, I'd expect her to be picked up by more people and thus to see more positioning mistakes, bad arrows, etc in the average Ashe game.
Macilento (EUW)
: The Current State of Support Players
> Despite the changes, supports are still playing with too much gold deficit. I mean it's frustrating to play the game when you have to be so much behind your teamates in term of items, try to imagine how more cool it would be if supports got a gold income high as his allies. > > Supports are still under leveled for 85% of the games. This is another serious issue. I mean there is no reason for you to be so much behind the others. It sounds fun, but be careful. A support role that offers as much gold as a carry role will be dominated by high utility carries, rather than the support champions you are hoping would do better with the money. One of the defining characteristics of the classical support champion is that they have high bases and weak scaling. Basically, a fix for these things carries the risk that we see Orianna replace Nami in the support role.
Kouga (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WwlFhZ6w,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2015-03-26T01:03:07.562+0000) > I think Annie is actually quite hard to balance. Her kit is super binary. She will naturally tend towards being amazing or sucky because there isn't much interaction in flash Tibbers. Sorry I didn't reply earlier, I didn't get a notification and I try to respond to all thought out questions or comments on my threads. In terms of Annie - her kit, IMO, isn't that binary. When people say binary they historically either dominate a game or are a complete non-threat. This is problematic because it can be for a variety of reasons, including skill level, team comp, enemy team comp, etc. When I consider a Champion to be 'binary' its because their gameplay pattern or design relies very heavily on inconsistent factors or those outside of the players control. For example Akali was a very binary champion - her entire kit is based around her AD/AP levels. Therefore her ability to *anything* in the game was completely reliant on her being, and staying, ahead of her enemies in terms of gold. With 0 CC and very little utility outside of her shroud, she can either murderstomp the enemy team, or she can't. Annie, however, is still a reliable Champion even without snowballing ahead. Generally if a Champion makes a decent support (who, in turn, usually have CC or utility skills useful with or without excess gold) they aren't a particularly binary champion, in terms of design. They might feel binary - because if the enemy team snowballs ahead of you, there isn't much most supports can do. So Annie being "amazing or sucky" has more to do with the player being able to land it than Annie's kit. Even though its technically a skill shot, the fact that there is no travel time - that Tibbers just "appears" there - means that, for all intents and purposes, it can be considered a targeted ability once you get past a rather low skill threshold.
> In terms of Annie - her kit, IMO, isn't that binary. When people say binary they historically either dominate a game or are a complete non-threat. This is problematic because it can be for a variety of reasons, including skill level, team comp, enemy team comp, etc. **When I consider a Champion to be 'binary' its because their gameplay pattern or design relies very heavily on inconsistent factors or those outside of the players control.** > > For example Akali was a very binary champion - her entire kit is based around her AD/AP levels. Therefore her ability to *anything* in the game was completely reliant on her being, and staying, ahead of her enemies in terms of gold. With 0 CC and very little utility outside of her shroud, she can either murderstomp the enemy team, or she can't. I think you have the bolded backwards. Binary champions tend to be so because of the consistency of their play pattern. Akali is binary because she's unbelievably sticky. Annie is binary because she's going to stun you, and the question is whether that's going to be enough to kill you. Old Veigar had the same design problem. All three of these cases come down to the same thing -- these champions are extremely reliable. Their play pattern is going to work, which means that there isn't much counterplay. You're pretty much looking at "be a mile away" or "be tanky enough to survive the burst" as counterplay options. I don't see anything inconsistent about these play patterns, and that's more of a problem than a solution. > Annie, however, is still a reliable Champion even without snowballing ahead. Generally if a Champion makes a decent support (who, in turn, usually have CC or utility skills useful with or without excess gold) they aren't a particularly binary champion, in terms of design. They might feel binary - because if the enemy team snowballs ahead of you, there isn't much most supports can do. From where I sit, the support role is loaded with binary champions: {{champion:89}} {{champion:53}} {{champion:12}} {{champion:111}} {{champion:1}} {{champion:44}} Most of the hard engage supports become pointless if they fall behind, while they zone super hard when they get ahead. I don't understand the distinction between 'is binary" and "feels binary" you're trying to draw. > So Annie being "amazing or sucky" has more to do with the player being able to land it than Annie's kit. Even though its technically a skill shot, the fact that there is no travel time - that Tibbers just "appears" there - means that, for all intents and purposes, it can be considered a targeted ability once you get past a rather low skill threshold. Annie being amazing or sucky has quite little to do with the player being able to land it. At any level of play worth balancing for, Tibbers is going to land. The thing that makes that amazing or sucky is how valuable an AoE stun is in the game design at the time. That's what makes her hard to balance -- basically, she's all about the flash Tibbers in serious games, and flash Tibbers lacks both play and counterplay.
: Riot removed Veigars instant stun cage, gutting him. What is annie?
I am all but certain that, eventually, Annie will get an "Annie throws Tibbers at the target location" animation, with similar range and speed as Gragas R. Annie isn't as much of a problem as Old Veigar because range and cooldown. Riot has demonstrated some level of comfort with reliable CC on ultimates, and Annie typically needs flash to pick a fight with Tibbers anyway. I suspect this is not urgent for the rework team, as they have so many pressing design problems to solve from back in the 2 week release cycle era. Annie Q having a reliable stun is probably more troubling for the design team than the bear, actually. Annie Q is basically Taric E in the bot lane context, and we know Taric E will be changing with his rework.
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cIh69I4F,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-04-06T22:36:28.633+0000) > > No can do. Energy resource and healing mechanics cannot be on the same kit. > > Let me propose a Kog'Maw style stacking mana cost on repeated Q casts. Oh right, I forgot about her heal! Stacking Q cast seems wreck-less because doesn't anything that stacks mana also increase damage? Do we *really* think that will fix Nidalee? But yeah the main problem with energy is the heal now that you mention in, but maybe there would be a way for it to work if it costed half of her energy or even all of it?
I don't see much risk of Nidalee buying more mana items than she currently does. She already stacks mana quite hard on live; further item buys for mana would be stuff like {{item:3100}} {{item:3110}} {{item:3025}} and I really can't see any of them being very appealing to her. The main problem with a super expensive energy heal on Nidalee is that you need to tune it both for her jungling and for her sieging. Mana is much more convenient for this objective.
: Just out of curiousity, what has the Cass playerbase been asking for recently? Once she got her last "updates" they pretty much went silent as far as I could tell.
Things I've seen or heard: * Kit doesn't feel poisony enough, too much power budget spent on E * The E poison damage amplifier didn't really make the poisons feel stronger, and it's hard to read * Passive feels very mechanical, is just a ball of stats * The recent fix to AP %scaling multiplication really hurts Cass late game * There's no variety in build orders with New Cass * I thought the rework was about Cass being a lane bully, she still bullies lanes awful hard
: And yet instead of just saying they also do not like the role they typically flame me for saying I dislike it. I honestly don't give a f*ck if they do not like it either, that I can deal with, but AGAIN the issue is when people harass someone else for simply not liking a role.
I hear you. League community is sometimes like that.
: Roles some people just do not like!
> why is it so freakin hard for so many people to understand that not everyone enjoys playing all the positions? Because it turns out that most players agree with you. The average player doesn't want to play in the bot lane, so they're not going to be very interested in taking your spot in said lane.
: My Personal Guide to Fixing Nidalee
No can do. Energy resource and healing mechanics cannot be on the same kit. Let me propose a Kog'Maw style stacking mana cost on repeated Q casts.
tofutime (NA)
: I prefer assassin Ahri
> Now you can mindless go in with Ahri, doesn't matter if your charm hits. Your W and R will autolock onto enemies anyway. Damage from an Ahri that never presses E did not change at all with the rework. The original reason they added the charm amp was so that they could nerf the W and R damage to the current levels. Now they've found a way to make her balanced without the amp effect or W/R buffs. Seems like a good result to me.
: then stop complaining. If you feel leona or janna are easy mode then go play the easy mode champions.
That's what I do. Doesn't mean I'm happy with the current state of Zyra. Poke supports in general are really suffering right now, and you'd have to be a crazy person to think Zyra is a competitive solo lane pick.
: Why are they such a issue for you. Just counter pick them and win bot lane. Then carry that to mid game and win game.
Counterpicking Thresh isn't really a thing. He's like Zed or Lee Sin for support -- tons of tools, with his only real disadvantage being a high skill cap. Riot knows this but hasn't figured out how to fix it.
: im so tired of seeing thresh and leona almost EVERY game i play.
http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/support/diamond/by-global-popularity You seem to have forgotten Blitz. The support meta seems pretty wide to me. I do think that poke supports are too weak right now. It used to be reasonable for Sona to poke Leona down to the point that Leona would think twice about going all in at level 3. That's impossible now, with all of the sustain available to the kill laner.
: Why is the Price for IP boost so expensive and not balanced?
If you want to buy 6300 IP champions with RP, there is an extremely efficient way to do that. Don't use IP boost. The win IP boosts are reasonably efficient for buying runes or cheap champions in the 450 or 1350 IP category. The time-based IP boosts can be pretty efficient if you spam games over a weekend or something.
darkdill (NA)
: Lux vs. Zed: What a friggin' obnoxious lane matchup...
Lux doesn't have that bad a time against Zed. If you struggle with Zed in lane as a mage, try right clicking him more.
: What does a balanced champion look like to you? Which champion is in a balanced state to you?
I expect a balanced champion to have strong strengths and weak weaknesses. It should be obvious how you fight against them, and also clear why you would want to pick them. I also expect a balanced champion to have play and counterplay in their core play pattern. They should be able to do something awesome, but there should also be reasonable ways to mitigate the awesome. I think Xerath is a good concrete example of this. You pick him because he's good at zapping from a mile away. You beat him by jumping on his face and squishing it. Overall, the zapping and the squishing approximately balance each other out, and we're left with a good but not great champion.
: How good is a sixty percent win ratio with one champion?
http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/zed Scroll down to "Best Zed" section. I once saw a stat that said the average ranked player, playing a champion they'd played at least 100 times, had a 55% chance to win the game. I can't verify the stat, but certainly familiarity helps a lot. My best guess is that you are better at Zed (or worse at other stuff) than the typical Zed main.
: Any thoughts on Diana Jungle?
She has good jungle clears and is a very safe jungler. You can play her with confidence. You already know the main weaknesses, but she's viable. She's much better as a mid because she really really wants a fast 6.
Balareon (NA)
: Then why the fudge did you mention disappearing projectiles in server lag? You mention it in one poet and then in the next say it's not server lag, you just contradicted yourself. Also, yah they're more stable than last year, but they are still awful servers. Last year they were disgustingly terrible, constant loss prevention and server issues, this year they're bearable but still bad.
"Disappearing" and "invisible" are two different things. Invisible means you client never got the instruction to make the thing; typically this is simply a dropped packet. A disappearing projectile, like a minion or tower shot, means your client estimated that thing was going to happen, but then the next update it got from the server didn't have it actually happening. Honestly, servers have been pretty spiffy this year. The vast majority of people who are currently blaming "servers" should be complaining about their connection to the servers.
: The bug has been tracked down! We'll be hitting it with {{item:3134}} until it dies.
I can confirm this problem is now fixed for me. Thanks guys!
Balareon (NA)
: Oh i've had server lag, where everything freezes every couple seconds and invisible ezreal q's and ults hit me when i can't see them? yah, thats happened, server lag is real and don't deny it just because you haven't experienced it.
What you describe doesn't sound like server lag. If everything is freezing, that means your client temporarily lost connection to the server. A projectile that is never visible, but still registers damage, is also an indication that the server is processing things one way, but your client didn't get the memo and thus didn't show you the same picture. The defining characteristic of server lag is that your client's predictions of where things will be in the future get used for longer than is expected. For example, minions continue to move in a straight line after they should have engaged with enemies. Another thing that can happen is that autoattacks you started end up disappearing midway to the target or not registering any damage when they get there. The other thing with server lag is that it happens to all of the players on the server, which means that loss prevention will be on. If you see that the game completes and loss prevention is not awarded, it's about 99% certain that server lag was not the problem. I'm not going to say server lag never ever happens. Certainly it does. However, Riot's servers have never been more stable than they are today, while UDP internet connectivity hasn't been this unreliable since the days of dialup.
Balareon (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gNdto8ZK,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-04-01T17:44:31.074+0000) > > It's not the servers. Riot servers have never been better than they are today. So many players complain about lag and bad servers in games where I have absolutely perfect quality of service. > > It's about the internet connection to said servers. Just takes one machine along your 20 hops to get overloaded and your experience turns to crap. Not an easy problem to solve, especially in this era of over the top video causing peering wars. They are bad servers though, considering the fact that most of the time when my league ping goes crazy every single other game i play runs at 100 ping or less. I've seen way too many problems with these servers and times that they get overloaded for me to say that they're fine.
Ping is not a server issue. That's a measure of how long it takes stuff to get to the server and back. You probably have reliable ping to other games because their servers are located closer to you than League servers are, resulting in your packets not having to cross as many overcongested peering connections. Server lag looks noticeably different than interconnect lag. With server lag, you'll see things like projectiles disappearing and reappearing, groups of minions walk right through each other, and mobs not spawning on time. With interconnect lag, you'll see a delay between you inputting commands and your character doing those things, but the minions and towers will still be working fine. Server lag is almost always accompanied by an announcement on the client. Riot had a lot of trouble in Q1 of last year, but lately their servers are silky smooth. Never been better. I personally haven't seen an instance of server lag in at least 9 months.
: So is there a solution to the problem...?
Well, yes, but you're not going to like it. You'll get fantastic service if you move to Portland. In terms of playing on the east coast and getting reliably good quality of service to California, you're at the mercy of the big ISPs. They don't care about gamers as much as they care about Netflix, so good luck getting them to fix your issue. Practically speaking, there are a few things you can try to mitigate the problem. 1. Play at off-peak TV watching hours. By far the easiest way to convince the internet to behave for you. 2. Make sure you have a rock solid connection to your ISP. Don't use wifi. Verify that you have 0% packet loss on the first and second hop of your connection to anywhere. If you find that you do, call your ISP and they'll fix it. 3. If you're experiencing intermittent lag spikes, you can use a vpn service to reroute your packets across another leg of the internet. You can use [this map](http://maps.level3.com/default/) to get a good idea of where the backbone lines run, and you can use tracert to some random server in California to estimate which hop is sometimes dropping your packets. 4. Note that Latin America, for Riot's purposes, is actually located in Florida. If you live in the south and are reasonably comfortable with Spanish, consider playing there.
: Riot server's suck
It's not the servers. Riot servers have never been better than they are today. So many players complain about lag and bad servers in games where I have absolutely perfect quality of service. It's about the internet connection to said servers. Just takes one machine along your 20 hops to get overloaded and your experience turns to crap. Not an easy problem to solve, especially in this era of over the top video causing peering wars.
: Is banning champs away from your team toxic? @PlayerSupport
Probably wouldn't report, but don't be a jerk.
Visigoth (NA)
: Junglerism; Like feminism, for junglers
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3icWg3m5,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2015-04-01T02:25:30.680+0000) > > Sounds pretty impossible. > > Many times, a player disconnects for 10 or 30 seconds. You wouldn't want to kick a player from the game for a lag spike. So, you wait let's say 60 seconds before finding a new player of the right rating. That new player has to agree to join a game with an afk player (generally this is a bad idea, you're going into a probably losing game). Then that player has to play exactly the champion that was being played. Then that player has to load into the game. This whole process can't possibly take less than 2 minutes to do, and 5 minutes is a more realistic estimate. Paradropping into a game with a 5 minutes of AFk disadvantage sounds like a terrible plan for your ranking. > > Basically, it sounds like this feature will die a quick death. There are too many people who are apologetic for people who do not have the means of playing this game. I wouldn't mind so much if it was ARAM or Normal or something where at the end of the day it doesn't matter other than a terrible game... we aren't talking about that. We are talking about Ranked where there is supposed to be some level of association between a player's skill and their particular rank. The current state of this game is such that lower tiers are hell to get out of because better players have to play an ungodly number of games to make there way up or they are forced to duo queue with someone who isn't a foam at the mouth retard like most of the people who queue up for Ranked like it is their job. Promos exacerbated this problem even further by making bad luck streaks (afk, garbage team mates, what have you) an even greater factor in progressing forward. Failing to address the lopsided nature of this game in Solo Queue due to extreme random factors begs the question why a ranked version of it even exists in the first place. If I wanted to play a game where I extreme bad luck happens, then I would go play poker.
I wouldn't count on afk protection helping you climb out of low elo. You probably aren't seeing any more afks than other players at the same elo. In fact, afks probably help you climb. If you never afk, and we assume a 4v5 is a 100% loss, your expected win rate in games with afks in them is 55.5%. Easy to climb with that kind of win ratio, so if you only care about the LP, you'd want more afks rather than less. It turns out that promos don't have much impact on your long term ranking. You will get to the rank your MMR says you should be at. If your MMR is higher than your division's MMR, but you keep dodging promos, the system will keep giving you new series after every win. If you keep dodging the promo series, eventually the system will forcibly promote you. I know this because I had a friend who had a diamond MMR but used the promo dodges to keep his account in bronze rank. That no longer works; a diamond MMR account is going to be at the very least high plat. Poker is a pretty good comparison. Having high randomness in games does not destroy the validity of ranking systems. In any given game, you are a relatively small factor in winning or losing. Over the long run, your luck evens out and all that's left is your aggregate contribution to winning and losing. Some players are misrated by a couple divisions, but wide misrankings (e.g. a gold quality player in bronze) only exist where a player is actively trying to manipulate their ranking. > There are too many people who are apologetic for people who do not have the means of playing this game. Basically the whole east coast has occasional hard-to-predict connection issues. Can't be kicking them all out of ranked.
: Troll bullied me out of my lane
Don't AFK. Not an appropriate response to anything in game. Do try to figure out what you can do to maximize your winning chances. Don't get in a shouting match, either in team chat or /all chat. If pressed, explain your side of the story once, then go play as best you can. Do report the player after the game. Don't talk about reporting the player in game. Doesn't help, only riles people up. Do understand that trolls get reported all the time, even if you don't see it.
: > I see no alternative course of action. There is no plausible approach to ending AFKs. It's a question of mitigating the problem, not something with a solution. Could there not be a system implemented where if an afk occurs that a player waiting in que could join the game and receive the afk's gold amount and level and therefore the gap can be filled with a player who's not at a disadvantage for joining a game part-way through?
Sounds pretty impossible. Many times, a player disconnects for 10 or 30 seconds. You wouldn't want to kick a player from the game for a lag spike. So, you wait let's say 60 seconds before finding a new player of the right rating. That new player has to agree to join a game with an afk player (generally this is a bad idea, you're going into a probably losing game). Then that player has to play exactly the champion that was being played. Then that player has to load into the game. This whole process can't possibly take less than 2 minutes to do, and 5 minutes is a more realistic estimate. Paradropping into a game with a 5 minutes of AFk disadvantage sounds like a terrible plan for your ranking. Basically, it sounds like this feature will die a quick death.
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3icWg3m5,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-03-31T23:48:11.547+0000) > > You never answered the question you posed in your title. Technically I did, I listed how a person leaving impacts more than simply 4v5 team fights. An afk ruins every aspect of the game. I'm sick and tired of people saying "it happens to everyone" and just accepting it. You could win a 4v5 maybe 1 time in 50 but usually its just a waste of everyones time and a stupid reason to be losing LP.
> An afk ruins every aspect of the game. I haven't seen anyone disagree with this point. > I'm sick and tired of people saying "it happens to everyone" and just accepting it. I see no alternative course of action. There is no plausible approach to ending AFKs. It's a question of mitigating the problem, not something with a solution.
: Why one AFK is worse than you think.
You never answered the question you posed in your title.
: Is your main overpowered?
> "Power", reflects win rate after accounting for win rate deflation caused by high popularity rates. What formula did you use to compute this? I'm not certain that there has been any demonstration that win rates are systematically deflated by high popularity, or inflated by low popularity.
: I agree with your first comment. "If this AFK, rage quits within a certain timeframe, he will lose 2x the amount of LP if his team lost." With the "certain timeframe" I was talking about, being considered afk let's say...5 times from 5 different games within 48 hours.
> "certain timeframe" I was talking about, being considered afk let's say...5 times from 5 different games within 48 hours. Ok, I totally misunderstood =D At that point, shouldn't we be talking about bans, or at least bans from ranked play, rather than discussing how much LP the guy should lose?
: This is how LP should be balanced with AFKs.
I don't think you've thought this through. > If someone goes AFK on a team and they lose, the AFK should lose the full amount of LP, the winners should only gain 1/2 LP and the losers should lose 1/2 LP as well. So, you're winning a game convincingly. It's at 20 minutes and you're pushing the mid inhib. The opposing team tries to surrender and fails the vote. A player on the opposing team then goes AFK, and you wrap up the game 10 minutes later. In this story, why should you get any less LP than if that player stayed in the game? You won it fairly. > If this AFK, rage quits within a certain timeframe, he will lose 2x the amount of LP if his team lost. It's a close game and you're 45 minutes in, dancing around baron. A player lags out. The opposing team pounces on him, makes the kill, takes the baron, and pushes for the gg. Feels pretty awful to award that guy twice the LP loss for something that probably wasn't intentional.
: The purpose of my post was not to convince anyone of anything. I have been taking writing classes for all of my life so far, I'm well aware that I need to not have "I feel" in -- more or less -- all of my statements if I was trying to prove something, but I'm not. If you want I could spend a day gathering my thoughts and write a super stellar post on why tanks are "super broken m8."I feel like everyone got hung up on telling me things I already knew about how to deal with tanks. I was aiming for this to be a tell me what you think about the meta thread and not a "This guy thinks tanks are broken lets all tell him why he's wrong" What I stated in my initial post was my *opinion* *Mind blown* If i was trying to prove anything I wouldn't have started this thread off with anything close to resembling the initial post. Although good luck proving anything in League boards. As with Vayne, she is a skill match up in most of the games shes played in, Vayne is fine there is nothing bad about her. Just right now Vayne is not that good against Graves and his "Im'a blow you up" combo. Kog'Maw, I love Kog. He is probably one of the most fun champions that I have always been playing even since when I first started in early season 2. My complaint isn't the lack of peel, it's his lack of mobility. Sure he has a slow that is, fairly good IMO. But it's simply not enough in teamfights. A linear skillshot with only a 52% slow at max rank is fairly easy to get around. Buying {{item:3078}} and {{item:3252}} is the only way I've ever been able to kite with Kog, I've even considered {{item:3022}} in some cases. If you are able to have a team that by some miracle has more CC than the other team that is using that meta then good on you. This tank meta has always been around. I'm not referring to just this recent patch. Since the beginning of Season 5 It has been very good just underplayed. Now that tank junglers are being encouraged that's usually three BIG beefy dudes on their team, more if mid is playing someone like Swain, Annie, Diana, etc. who do tons of damage while being able to stack RoA's for days (kind of a troll thing to do, but it was just an example) A example of this being frustrating, try playing a assassin or fragile bruiser like Riven against a team with no one to assassinate and that has more than enough hard CC to deal with you and then move on to the rest of your team. Having 5 very tank champions really makes this game boring to play. Whenever I see a team going for that team comp it forces me to play champions I really would rather not play because the champions I would have played would have gotten slaughtered or would have just fallen off post laning phase. Or even imagine a tank team that has baron sitting in the back of y our base laughing while you have to deal with the baron minions, you can't get them out of the base and it's just a matter of time until you get over ran by the minions. My main complaint with this meta is the fact that I can't play anyone that isn't a "Tank Buster" in solo or blind queue's. Oh you want to play Ap/AD ezreal? Or full ad panth/lee top? Lol good luck vs our team that shits on anyone without built in armor pen/ HP shred.
> I was aiming for this to be a tell me what you think about the meta thread and not a "This guy thinks tanks are broken lets all tell him why he's wrong" What I stated in my initial post was my opinion Mind blown If i was trying to prove anything I wouldn't have started this thread off with anything close to resembling the initial post. Ok fair enough. You didn't come off the way you intended. You sound like a guy who doesn't like tanks and wants them to go away. > Kog'Maw, I love Kog. He is probably one of the most fun champions that I have always been playing even since when I first started in early season 2. My complaint isn't the lack of peel, it's his lack of mobility. Kog'Maw must be immobile. Can't have all the good stuff he has and also have a dash. > This tank meta has always been around. I'm not referring to just this recent patch. Since the beginning of Season 5 It has been very good just underplayed. This is objectively false. As recently as 5.4, the vast majority of tanks were stupid picks, and going with a 3 tank comp was just asking to get rekt. If you are feeling like tanks are always good against you, I think you should consider trying to figure out why your playstyle gets countered by tanks. > My main complaint with this meta is the fact that I can't play anyone that isn't a "Tank Buster" in solo or blind queue's. Oh you want to play Ap/AD ezreal? Or full ad panth/lee top? I really can't agree. I think the ADC meta has never been wider than it is today. Ezreal works fine right now; he's benefiting from a switch away from Vi and Lee to things he can poke more easily. The top lane meta is also quite wide now -- you can play a wide variety of different kinds of champions. Just to name a few: Hecarim, Riven, Lulu, Irelia, Lissandra, Vladimir, Rumble. This is the first time in a long time that we haven't seen one class of champions dominate top.
: Can we take a moment to talk about the current meta?
You really need to present more evidence and less "I feel" statements if you want to convince anyone of anything. Also, you say this meta is "frustrating", but I don't see much discussion of why you think that is. For example, you complain that Vayne is too hard to lane with, but she's a winning champion in every elo today. Admittedly just slightly, at 50.4% in diamond and 50.2% in gold, but she's working just fine right now. No need for changes on her account. On the Kog front, your complaint sounds more like "people need to learn to peel" more than any real balance problem. Let's get serious here, Sejuani doesn't stick to anything Thresh doesn't want her sticking to. With a hitbox that big, Q into E into R is basically guaranteed on a diving Sejuani. Pretty sure Kog likes this sort of jungler way more than he liked the Kha'Zix meta, and certainly the current stats say he's doing well. I think this "tank meta" thing is being way overstated. The only place tanks are any different from patch 5.4 is in the jungle, because Cinderhulk is really strong. That item probably needs some tuning downwards, but it's still only one champion different per team. We were already playing Thresh bot and Hecarim top patches ago, and it's not like the previous jungle picks of Jarvan and Vi were super squish or something. Doesn't seem like that big a change for the rest of the game if we swap out bruiser junglers for tank junglers.
: What is wrong with Ranked? Very dissapointed in placement.
http://na.op.gg/summoner/matches/userName=Electronicon This should help you understand what's going on. You played in matches with about a bronze 3 MMR, and you went 7-3, which means you're probably a bronze 1 or 2 player. It turns out that this season's placement matches are designed to systematically underrate players by 2 or 3 divisions. Thus, things are working as intended. If you play normally, you'll be back in bronze 1 pretty quickly.
: Warrior enchant: underpowered?
I don't see much evidence for Warrior being too weak. Gets bought all the time in competitive play. I tend to think Magus is not very good, despite its gold efficiency. AP junglers need mana sustain in the same way that tank junglers needed clearing speed.
: I think her main problem (and for many mobility champions) is that she doesn't have to rely on enemies making mistakes, while also being somewhat protected if she makes mistakes herself. The same could be said about pre-nerf Kassadin, Zed and Nidalee. I FEEL the difference when I play as them, since my mains are immobile mages. Basically, if I'm playing well as Anivia, or Brand, or Twisted Fate, I can only do so much until and unless my enemy makes a mistake. They let me land a Flash Frost, or don't avoid my Pillar of Flame -- there's my opportunity to punish them (but not kill them in one hit). Otherwise I'm limited to poking the best I can, but they can always recall if they take too much poke. Kill potential as an immobile mage is pretty predictable -- level 6, taking too much poke, or using flash. Conversely, if I make a mistake as one of those champions, I pay for it because I can't just dash away from the threat. Leblanc and Nidalee and Zed don't have to wait for enemies to make a mistake. They can FORCE a play because they are so mobile. Similarly, their mistakes are very hard to punish, because they can just dash away. A jungle gank against any of these champions is almost always a waste of time, unless you have point-and-click CC (so like Maokai or Vi). Mobility gives you the freedom to not worry about as many things. You don't have to care whether you're in position, or whether your enemy is within range of your harass. I think Riot chronically undervalues mobility, and Leblanc is just one example of it.
> I think her main problem (and for many mobility champions) is that she doesn't have to rely on enemies making mistakes I think LeBlanc relies more on opponents making mistakes than most mids. She can't push well. She's not a good teamfighter. She doesn't have much ability to trade. Her thing is catching people out of position and bursting them down. By definition, that means the target made a mistake. > I think Riot chronically undervalues mobility, and Leblanc is just one example of it. I think the community chronically overvalues mobility. We keep picking champions that are flashy over champions who are strong. http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/middle/diamond/by-winrate I don't see systematic dominance by mobile mids. Actually, it looks like we keep losing with LeBlanc and Zed, when we could be winning with Annie and Malzahar.
: How to fix Leblanc Solutions Thread
Before going to solution space, I'd suggest you better define the problem. I see little reason to believe LeBlanc is out of balance, so your concern is clearly for game health. That means you're looking to do a rework, not a balance tuning. In turn, this means that every unit of power you're taking out, you need to put back in somewhere else.
Kouga (NA)
: The Burden Of Balance - Skill Shots, Mobility, And You
> When you consider the Hard-To-Balance champions like Lee Sin or Zed, who require a huge amount of Player input, Riot's ability to balance them is a lot different...That isn't to say that a targeted mage doesn't require skill, but the gap between really good and really bad players are going to be much wider with these champions. I think the core story here is that Riot hasn't been clear about what level of play they are balancing for. These sorts of high skill champions are always going to be better in competitive than in casual play. Riot has historically been balancing for "all levels", which is a non-answer answer. The result has bee that these guys have been playable but honestly weakish in solo queue, while dominating the competitive scene. I don't think Riot has yet answered the question of how they intend to balance around the various levels of skill differentiation present in kits. > Riot will have a much easier time balancing a Champion like Annie, who has very clear power limits. Even though her ult is a skill shot, its pretty reliable. So making her stronger or weaker is going to be pretty easy - just change her numbers. I think Annie is actually quite hard to balance. Her kit is super binary. She will naturally tend towards being amazing or sucky because there isn't much interaction in flash Tibbers. > If Sejuani was a little overbearing, Riot can try pulling on exactly one lever and see how she does. But Lee Sin, or Zed, or Ahri - they have much more complex factors into their power level. You pull on one lever too hard, and it can completely change the way that champions functions. I didn't get your point. Sejuani has quite a lot going on in her kit. It's very easy to accidentally make the best Sejuani build an heavy AP mid laner, as happened last year. There are also quite a few balance levers you can pull; look at her rework to see some examples.
Trick1F (NA)
: New requirement - 1,000 wins in normal blinds or draft before being allowed to play ranked.
I'm pretty sure I don't have 1000 wins in normals even today, and I've played this game for years and years.
Pæan (NA)
: Galio :D would love to see more {{champion:3}} Or some AD assassins might opt for a null-magic vs a high poke AP laner so they can rush a{{item:3155}}
What's a Galio? AD assassins are quite likely to prefer the longsword/3 starts. Flask/3 seems more interesting than NMM/2.
Beats29 (EUW)
: A little change that would reduce LB power without changing her
I don't particularly dislike the idea, but I don't think it will do much of anything to check LeBlanc. What mid laner is going to start {{item:1033}} if given the opportunity?
: > [{quoted}](name=warpenguin555,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yhAuaFM4,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2015-03-25T17:29:56.607+0000) > > Cass is fun, his work is done I will accept that "his work is done" if and when he actually tells us that. Last thing he said was that it was NOT done so to arbitrarily decide it was and then disappear with no explanation really isn't acceptable. He should have told us he was finished working on her.
Yup, the communication problem here is a real one. If you say you're going to do something, you either do it, or you explain why you aren't going to do it.
: Did you even watch the fucking patch rundown. They gave a great reason for not doing anything to nidalee. Your point is completely invalid and I don't want to hear it...
I don't really have a problem with the reasoning Riot is using with Nidalee. The problem I have is with their terribly inconsistent application of design principles. It comes off as them just making it up as they go along.
: Can we Please address the ADC diversity?
The basic problem with ADC is that the role is super mathy. Too many ADCs are quite similar in terms of kit, which means that only one of them will see play unless that archetype of ADC is just dominating. For example, Lucian and Graves are basically the same guy. For this reason, buffs and nerfs don't tend to increase diversity in the role. We know how to swap Lucian out and Graves in, but not how to make both good. Probably the right thing to do is to push the ADCs with differing playstyles -- you can clearly see them doing this with Sivir, Jinx, and Kalista, and there's room to continue that strategy with stuff like Varus, Twitch, and Miss Fortune. That gives us the best hope of having a reasonably broad selection of viable picks and diversity of strategy.
: We should just label nidalee has resourceless
Approximately all Nidalee builds buy a mana item {{item:3040}} {{item:3027}}
: Blind Pick Needs To Go
I'd really like Team Builder to be good enough to do this. As it stands, I find that I can't play about half of the champions in team builder without 20+ minute queues. Team builder captains enforce the meta super hard, at least at my elo.
iainB85 (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=SmokingPuffin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=iqevFcmi,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-03-23T23:50:27.647+0000) > > Riot tries hard to segregate smurf accounts from the standard newbie accounts. It's a difficult technical problem. > > They'd really like to make noobstomping on a smurf account impossible, but it's one of the costs you suffer with a F2P business model. It's really not a difficult technical problem. Allow players with a level 30 account to make an account that's at least starts at level 15. Not that hard. This won't stop people who are going out of their way to stomp on low levels, but it would drastically reduce the problem as people who just want a second account won't be doing it accidentally. Then again, as someone else said, probably won't happen because Rito wants to sell as many EXP boosts as they can. F2P has really crippled our standards of games in more ways than people realize. Bad design choices are constantly made in the name of F2P these days.
> [{quoted}](name=iainB85,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=iqevFcmi,comment-id=00010002,timestamp=2015-03-24T13:31:48.312+0000) > > It's really not a difficult technical problem. Allow players with a level 30 account to make an account that's at least starts at level 15. Not that hard. > > This won't stop people who are going out of their way to stomp on low levels, but it would drastically reduce the problem as people who just want a second account won't be doing it accidentally. I don't think people who want a second account represent much of the problem here. Riot's current techniques for filtering such players out work quite well -- you can already check the "I'm very experienced" box, skip the tutorials, and end up playing tons of smurf vs smurf on the first day you have the account.
Show more

SmokingPuffin

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion