Rioter Comments
: I agree with this post. What could it have instead though? I like the idea of it having as, Ms, and maybe CD reduction. That might be too useless on too many champs to make it worth it though.
I admit I don't like the three-item build of Dagger-Recurve-Dagger, but that would be better than the current Dagger-Zeal-Dagger that's currently on the PBE. Three item recipes like that feel clunky and bad to me especially considering how small of an impact a single Dagger has just sitting in your inventory. I think most ADCs feel the same way: there isn't much incentive to buy every component to your IE once you get your BF Sword, as opposed to just staying out and farming/killing enough to get the gold to finish it in one back. At most you might get your Pickaxe for the extra AD but very few people buy the Cloak. Anyway, I think it would interesting if Runaan's built out of two Recurve Bows. I think that would thematically match the idea of Runaan's being an on-hit-centered item and having the twin bolts passive. I don't think movespeed is a stat Runaan's needs tbh. Kalista has insane mobility already. Twitch either gets movespeed from Q resets or doesn't move at all during his ult. Caitlyn probably doesn't need it given her zone control with traps, and she has her E as well for limited mobility. I think the only on-hitter I mentioned who might desperately need movespeed would be Varus, but I think his immobility is intentional given the power elsewhere in his kit. It might be worth looking into if Recurve and Stinger as a recipe, as CDR isn't a bad stat on the one-hitters and Essence Reaver's current iteration isn't a viable buy for them. I think in the days where Brutalizer was around, Black Cleaver was a viable buy on the "Red Kalista" build for the armor shred on top of Last Whisper, the tanky stats of the extra Ruby Crystal, and the CDR.
Rioter Comments
: Lulu polymorph goes through Morgana spellshield.
Can confirm; I've been on both sides of that bug.
Rimi (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Riot GMang,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=jun5Iyp4,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2016-04-19T21:24:35.269+0000) > > In some ways that may be true, but since both sides always see them, warding ends up gaining importance in other ways. > > 1. They will be contested more often, so having vision just for tactical advantage becomes important. > 2. Both sides should expect more invade steals, so vision wars around those buffs will increase. > 3. Invade steals will get more precise in timing, so playing the vision game around river becomes more critical in giving you time to intercept. > > In our playtests, strategic players (especially supports and junglers) have tended to like the change, since they create more opportunities to make and deny plays and control vision **around** the objectives (instead of directly on them). Setting up that vision is really difficult though since you can't buy wards...it really locks junglers into trackers now..
I wonder if building Sightstones on Cinderhulk junglers will become A Thing(TM) in response to these changes. Warding one's own jungle will have to be necessary before approaching a major buff. Smiting Wolves within blue buff's 60-sec timer will also become really important as well.
: General Changes to Objectives for Mid-season
Would the jungle timer UI changes reward teams that don't ward as well as they should, considering they will be able to coordinate an invade for a buff steal and possible a kill basically for free, given the new "about to spawn" icons and global timers on sided buffs?
: While Tryndamere may need something to balance him out, Yasuo is quite the opposite. Yasuo has been nurfed enough, he's in a good (maybe too low) of a spot right now.
You understand I was addressing the first iteration of changes immediately after the introduction of the new masteries... three months ago on the very first preseason patch, literally last year. This topic is no longer relevant given numerous changes to all masteries since the first preseason patch.
: Marksmen trade barbs on Twitter
@ThePlagueRat #theunseenratisthesmelliest {{champion:29}}
: The jungle got nerfed dude.
So why am I getting executed on my third camp when i could very comfortably solo three camps before?
Rioter Comments
: I agree with your points. It's important to me that I playtest it before I cry foul, but I have similar concerns about early game champs benefiting too much from this. If nothing else, those pushed lanes are going to make it much easier for them to take Baron and Dragon, which, being ahead, they were already more likely to take.
Exactly. If waves are pushed up to inhib towers just by being ahead naturally, neutral jungle objectives like Baron and Dragon were already lost to the losing team. I also fully agree with your points that you made in your separate post, gave that my upvote as well. Like you said, if the winning team can't close it out despite being ahead, do they deserve to win? I suppose we'll find out tomorrow. I hate that this was sprung on us out of nowhere though. This is exactly the kind of change that needs to be previewed before it hits live, even if it's inaccurately balanced a la the Skarner rework.
Retillin (NA)
: This is a very quiet buff to all early game lane bullies. (ie Rene/Lee/Rek/ect...)
Damn right it is. It's also a nerf to late-game hypercarries, or any team-comp that wants to win through stacking Dragons. Like, who'd want to pick Vayne or Kog if the enemy is running Renekton, Lee, Zed, and Draven?
: > [{quoted}](name=frigginmurlocs,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=PZhzJfXY,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-11-10T21:37:14.098+0000) > > And to think this is exactly what they didn't want to have happen in season 3 ( super minions buff to regular minions applied to all lanes, now just the one with super minions Indeed, and then look at how they made Baron buff absurd with minions. It's clear that Riot now wants Nexuses dying in fewer than 20 minutes.
"How do we lessen surrenders?" "Make the winners win before the enemy has a chance to surrender" "SHIP IT"
Rioter Comments
R110 (EUW)
: You can also remove runes by right-clicking them :p
Rioter Comments
: Between Two Turrets - Come chat with Bioluminescence! [COMPLETED]
I'd like to ask some more specific questions about your involvement in some recent League events, see if we can get a better understanding of your job title by what you've done in some recent events, if that's cool. 1. Were you involved in the Juggernaut update, and are you involved in the ADC updates? If so, how/what did you do? 2. Were you involved in the *Shadow and Fortune* Harrowing story? 3. What aspects of Preseason that have been revealed so far that you've been involved with? 4. Of the features revealed on the PBE or on the website so far, what are you most excited about for Preseason/Season 6? Edit: didn't even finish writing an introduction v.v
Konzo (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=RiotScruffy,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=whbJ5lH1,comment-id=008a0000,timestamp=2015-10-28T19:58:48.564+0000) > > Twitch is the "assassin like" marksmen with his stealth and surprise! Have you considered giving Lucian more of an assassin feel to him? It would probably require changes to his ult, but i feel like thematically and gameplay wise it could be a great fit as a role overall.
I kinda disagree. I mean, I can see what you mean in terms of Lucian working more from the shadows to purge Valoran of evil while Demacia is that more heroic front-man. But Lucian's not afraid to take bad odds square on. Just yesterday, in chapter one of the new Harrowing story, Lucian openly takes a fight against six pirates. He doesn't really use any assassin-style moves or skills against them; he just has better training, more confidence, more skill, and better equipment than the pirates do, and he doesn't need to surprise or ambush them in order to end them. I think Lucian's ult as it is now is pretty good in terms of his theme. There comes a time in his work when he just drops all pretense of subtlety and precision (chaining his abilities and passive together in a careful pattern to damage and kite his foes) and just lays waste to all the evils and monsters in his path with brute force of will. The Culling is exactly that.
: Patch 5.21 notes
Riot: "Fixed a sneaky bug where Scrying Orb had a smaller radius after levelling up" C9: "That's so troll" Sneaky: "Same"
vrki (NA)
: get the fuck out here dude, trash talk and gestures happens all the time in professional sports. riot should be less butthurt. this is the dumbest fine in the history of esports. downvotes = proof the retards that GOBBLE this stupid shit up.
Remember this is the company that banned Dunkey for trash-talking a feeding jackwagon.
: Rest In Peace Mordekaiser
Morde was doomed from the beginning. Trying to make him both a necromancer from the Shadow Isles and then some weird metal-based, magnet-using, pun/reference-laden champ simultaneously was a terribly flawed, arbitrarily contrived champion concept. In terms of lore, I generally agree with Riot on the changes to move him away from the metal/magnet theme, but I definitely agree with the community that "Lord of Death" as a title is so wildly unoriginal and uncreative. Like I said, Mordekaiser's original release had too many incompatible concepts crammed into one character. It would probably have been better if Riot had opted to keep Mordekaiser metal-themed, give him new lore that actually revolves around metal and magnetism in some arcane, badass way, and then release a new champion that better fitted Mordekaiser's "Lord of Death" character. But that of course begs the question, would Mordekaiser deserve to keep his name, having nothing to do with the "Lord of Death" his name implies? That's a catch-22; everyone would have still called the metal man Morde because that's his established association/identity/name even if the new Lord of Death character was named Mordekaiser and Mordekaiser was re-released with a cool metal/magnetic name. As it is, Morde keeps his name, commits to the Lord of Death theme, has his abilities updated to the Lord of Death theme, so generally that's all consistent... *and Riot keeps the metal names on his abilities. Ok.* Nothing about this situation is going to make anyone happy, but considering the hole Riot dug themselves into with overloading Morde's character, I can at least give them some credit for recognizing that he needed to be streamlined and acting on it. Whether or not we agree with the direction they took, we can debate until the cows come home and beyond, but at least they did something.
PaladinNO (EUNE)
: No objections from me on the other ones - you just mentioned Janna, so I stuck with her alone in this case. Regarding Katarina, she was first introduced to me after signing up as "the boobs of Noxus", as well as several mentions of "dat ass irelia" - made me wonder at the time what kind of game this was. As for the cigar, I seem to remember that had something to do about a certain country who's laws didn't allow the display of smoking in games. So Riot had to either skip that country, aka being denied access, or take steps to ensure LoL would be allowed there. And they claimed it was easier to just remove the cigar from Graves' splash in every region, other than just that one specific region.
So why does Esquire Gragas still have his cigar? Riot hasn't done a total pass to remove all smoking references from League. So yeah. I call bullshit. Also, if Riot is concerned about censorship/age ratings as Riot Silver claims and standardizing the game across all regions, then what prevents, say, Iran or Singapore from taking issue with Gragas's drinking and threatening to ban League in those countries that have strict laws about alcohol and alcohol advertising? How far is too far? I think Riot should have let the cigar stay and admit they wouldn't have a large a market in some areas. That's money lost, but there is no pleasing everyone; [see Australian censorship laws and how gaming is affected by that](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games_in_Australia). It's better to develop the market you already possess than to water it down to force a wider appeal, imo. Edit: [Oh look, Iran banned League female champions from Iranian esports events because the outfits were too revealing.](http://www.kotaku.com.au/2013/08/female-league-of-legends-characters-banned-at-an-iranian-tournament/)
PaladinNO (EUNE)
: Janna as a character is just a fanservice, albeit an overdressed one. _"For just $2.95 a minute..."_
And Nidalee, Ahri, Evelyn, Elise, Ashe, Katarina, Leblanc, basically all adult humanoid females in League *aren't* fanservice? League is pretty clearly rated T for the drug references and suggestive themes. I'm 100% okay with all of that. My issue with removing Graves's cigar is that League isn't meant to be played by little kids. If I wanted a "safe" game to play I'd be playing Animal Crossing or some other Nintendo title, not a fairly violent fantasy brawler.
: Hate to pop your hate bubbles but that's not a alcohol bottle she's shooting. It's called a molva cocktail. It's a mix of gas and detergent. Time to get out of your mom's basement and learn the world :p
The initial complaint was about Riot's blatant and hypocritical double standards regarding depictions of drugs in media, not about whether someone is actually chugging a molotov. Drop the cynical superiority complex. Regardless of the composition of the chemicals that make up the molotov, it's common to use a glass alcohol container (beer bottles, etc) as a delivery system. Slayer Jinx's Zap clearly uses an alcohol bottle as the delivery system of the molotov. It's not like Riot designed a custom projectile or explosive that avoided the alcohol reference; they embraced the stereotype of using a beer bottle as the projectile, which is hypocritical to Riot's censoring of Graves's cigar as a removal of a drug reference (and the subsequent absence of censorship regarding the alcohol usage of Gragas and Yasuo, or the non-removal of the cigar on Esquire Gragas). Don't distract from the issue with whether you can drink a molotov. The issue is Riot is being hypocritical and arbitrary with their drug censorship.
: Well, {{champion:79}} drinks, {{champion:103}} preys on sexual desire, {{champion:76}} pole dances on her spear AND has a dialogue that says it's mating season (unless this was removed), and everyone fights and kills each other in a game where it is all about fighting and winning against the other team. Yet, the Cigar was the final straw. I'm trying not to sound like an ass, but it's coming out really sarcastic and assy (heh, assy). I just find it silly that a game with fighting, scantily clad women (and yes, some scantily clad men), drinking (Gragas), sexual innuendo's with Nidalee, Ahri who uses her body (lore and her charm ability) to fight, as well as the countless other adult like aspects to this game (Aatrox's dark obsession with war, Vladimir's obsession with blood power, Reanimating the dead Aka Sion, countless wars and killing, trapping souls, vendetta's against dark creatures, etc.) draws the line at smoking. All of that is fine, but Graves having a cigar is a no no. Why? Truly. Why? Is it because you think kids playing this will think "Awesome! Graves smokes, I should too!" because if that's the case then you should also be worried about them thinking "Ahri uses their body for gain? I should too!" and "Gragas drinks? Awesome, I will too!" or even "Woah, Talon is so cool and same with Katarina. They love killing. I wonder if I kill will I be that cool?" See my point? It's silly. Just silly to detract something that was visually unique to a character based off of whatever when there are other champions with similar things. I don't want you to get rid of anything so don't take it that way. I just want champions to stay true to themselves because taking away from them is silly. I love all the champions and their uniqueness. Even though it wasn't a big change gameplay wise it was a big change character wise. Bring the cigar back Rito. Pls. It won't harm anyone. I don't even play Graves that much, but still. This coming from someone who doesn't play him often.
One of Janna's jokes is pretty obviously sexual too, referencing adult hotlines.
: [NEW] Having issues Patching 5.20? Click Here!
So in the middle of patching, I also attempted to download Google Drive on my Windows 10 machine. The computer froze on the dialogue window of where to store the Drive installer, accepted no input at all, eventually going to the Blue Screen of Death (some driver failure related to power?) and automatically restarting. I then installed Drive fine on its own, and then attempted to resume patching League, whereupon I immediately and consistently get "PVP.net Patcher Kernal has stopped working" error and forces to close the program. I'll uninstall/reinstall League, since that seems to be better than trying and failing to force the patcher to work correctly right now, but I just wanted to let you know that happened. I doubt there's much anyone can do to fix my copy of League but it was a weird series of events.
: Here's how it works: right now league is a closed sourced game, meaning all items and spells and all abilities are on a set code and set sequence, For example, the game is made so when [a player clicks X Only then will Y appear] with Y being the item or ability. This makes it near to impossible to hack the game because of the fact that there are no codes to hack with per-say. Most games are hacked by changing the codes of a game and opening up a way to actually perform a game altering hack. Programs such as cheat engine are used for this. However, in league of legends right now, it is impossible to change the codes because they are closed and literally have no other codes to change them to. If the sandbox mode is released, codes for the items will be released also. After this, players can use THESE codes to alter the game. This is how an average game is hacked however, I can't say this is 100% accurate because i don't know what engine or hack shield league of legends has, but that's how league COULD get hacked by a sandbox mode, but most likely won't.
You make no fucking sense. Halo 3 and Reach were both closed source games only on Xbox, yet players could create and share maps and gamemodes that had nothing to do with the official playlists and didn't compromise the competitive integrity of the official playlists. I don't care if they were on different engines. Bungie proved it could be done, and therefore other multiplayer games don't have any excuse. Your example also makes no sense in regards to things like cooldowns. If I press a button with no cooldown runes, masteries, or items, I have a set time that ability is on cooldown. Purchasing an item or equipping a rune/mastery page with cooldown lowers the cooldown time of the spell. I can mix up page and builds and achieve the 40% CDR cap however I want within the confines of the runes, masteries, and items I have available to me through Riot's provided tools. I can't edit Morellonomicon to give me 50% CDR, and that's not what we're asking for. I feel like you're thinking of Skyrim modding or console editing when you are thinking of your "codes" or whatnot, but you don't need to dive into the guts of line codes to make a custom game. Riot proved it's possible with all their different game modes (URF, Black Market, Ascension, etc). Just give players *some* of the tools and restrict its access to one queue (customs).
: Vanilla league of legends has no working hacks as of this moment. If you can show me proof of one that'll be great but other than that you're arguing based on solely assumptions. Like i did state if you were to read the entire reply, If there were any hacks for sandbox OR vanilla, riot would patch them up in no time. So in a sense, you were assuming on your information AND assuming on the fact i was arguing against a sandbox mode. Assumptions are a dangerous thing my friend
These technically probably wouldn't meet your definition of hacking, but I tend to lump scripting, exploits, DDoSing, stream-ghosting, and any action involving technology made to alter the playing field to favor one side over the other in anything not related to in-game skill as a loose inclusive definition of hacking. Technically I suppose I'm referring to cheating, not hacking *per se*, but to me such actions have interchangeable names. So let's presume you are correct and vanilla league has no working exploitable hacks. How would Riot's inclusion of custom game options like Smite (being able to change starting gold, starting levels, spell cooldowns, etc) open a door to hacking the vanilla game?
: The two games use totally different engines, and are frankly completely different with nothing similar to each other besides the fact they are video games. There WILL be ways to hack and there WILL be bugs if there was a sandbox mode BUT, I'm sure riot can patch them up in no time
"There WILL be ways to hack and there WILL be bugs" As there will with any freaking game nowadays, including "vanilla" League, so again your argument against a sandbox mode holds no water.
: "We don't want a sandbox mode because we don't want players to be expected to grind it"
Okay. Sandbox Mode. Riot thinks this is a bad idea because it will create the expectation to grind. But League is a game of grinding. No player starts League as good as an LCS player, much less Faker. You have to play a few games just to figure out the controls (I recall quitting the first time I played because I literally couldn't make the jump from WASD-moves/click-action to click-moves/QWER-actions my first few games), and then another few to actually learn the value of last-hitting (not that you'll be ever half decent at it for another year or two), and then a few games on a few characters apiece to learn their abilities and builds until you hit the point of "mechanically semi-proficient" and can simply read an champion's abilities in-game to figure out their scaling, combos, buys, and build orders and not be feeding bots with it. Everything about League is a grind. I'm not going to get out of Silver 5 if I don't grind some games to improve concepts like positioning, learning not to overextend, roaming to get proper vision, and so on. To learn a new champion takes a few games--grinding--to figure out the feel of the champ: for instance, Sion's last hitting is god-tier, but if you miss, his recovery animation takes forever to complete; by comparison, Caitlyn's basic attack animations are garbage without an attack speed item to help you out, and it takes playing a few games (grinding) to even recognize what is so different about farming between the two and why it feels different. Trying new builds or even build orders on champions you are intimately familiar with is also a grinding festival, because you can't judge a build or build order on one game alone. So any time you have to play more than one game to figure any concept out about the game, is by definition, grinding. Riot even featured a player-made guide about improving one's CS'ing. It was a serious of drills under different conditions: with or without runes, with or without lane opposition, with or without pushing or freezing the lane, and so on. The player spent ten hours performing the drills. If that's not grinding, I don't know what is! So I can't say I buy Riot's excuse about Sandbox Mode promoting grinding. League is inherently a grinding game, and more importantly, that's okay. I think Riot needs to offer a space for players to practice and improve some of their skills outside of matchmade play, with more control over certain aspects of the game than customs currently allows. Playing Custom games can be good for some skills, but as mentioned, that's still grinding. Everyone can acknowledge that League has one of the steepest learning curves in gaming, but that hasn't prevented League from being one of the most played games in the world. Turning down the idea of a sandbox mode doesn't make any sense in this context. [crossposted from Riot Pls announcement](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/riot-official/VcbeEAoy-riot-pls?comment=0160)
: A sandbox mode would open up maany doors to bugs and hacks. Not that i'm against a sandbox mode, but we do have to understand the trade offs
No one said sandbox mode needed to be hackable to work. Look at Halo 3/Reach custom games. There were ways to change some game behavior (increased damage, movespeed, etc) without making some things broken or buggy (making an assault rifle spray rockets or sniper bullets). So yeah. You're full of shit.
: Riot Pls
Okay. Sandbox Mode. Riot thinks this is a bad idea because it will create the expectation to grind. But League is a game of grinding. No player starts League as good as an LCS player, much less Faker. You have to play a few games just to figure out the controls (I recall quitting the first time I played because I literally couldn't make the jump from WASD-moves/click-action to click-moves/QWER-actions my first few games), and then another few to actually learn the value of last-hitting (not that you'll be ever *half* decent at it for another year or two), and then a few games on a few characters apiece to learn their abilities and builds until you hit the point of "mechanically semi-proficient" and can simply read an champion's abilities in-game to figure out their scaling, combos, buys, and build orders and not be feeding bots with it. Everything about League is a grind. I'm not going to get out of Silver 5 if I don't grind some games to improve concepts like positioning, learning not to overextend, roaming to get proper vision, and so on. To learn a new champion takes a few games--grinding--to figure out the feel of the champ: for instance, Sion's last hitting is god-tier, but if you miss, his recovery animation takes forever to complete; by comparison, Caitlyn's basic attack animations are garbage without an attack speed item to help you out, and it takes playing a few games (grinding) to even recognize *what* is so different about farming between the two and *why* it feels different. Trying new builds or even build orders on champions you are intimately familiar with is also a grinding festival, because you can't judge a build or build order on one game alone. So any time you have to play more than one game to figure any concept out about the game, is by definition, grinding. [Riot even featured a player-made guide about improving one's CS'ing](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/tips-tricks/EAmcPEEw-improve-your-last-hitting). It was a serious of drills under different conditions: with or without runes, with or without lane opposition, with or without pushing or freezing the lane, and so on. The player spent *ten hours* performing the drills. If that's not grinding, I don't know what is! So I can't say I buy Riot's excuse about Sandbox Mode promoting grinding. League is inherently a grinding game, and more importantly, *that's okay*. I think Riot needs to offer a space for players to practice and improve some of their skills outside of matchmade play, with more control over certain aspects of the game than customs currently allows. Playing Custom games can be good for some skills, but as mentioned, that's still grinding. Everyone can acknowledge that League has one of the steepest learning curves in gaming, but that hasn't prevented League from being one of the most played games in the world. Turning down the idea of a sandbox mode doesn't make any sense in this context.
: {{champion:122}} : I got a pentakill! {{champion:86}} : I got Justice! {{champion:82}} : I got a Dragon! {{champion:72}} : I got a rock... {{champion:54}} : I'm taking your rock. {{champion:72}} : ok...
Rioter Comments
: Wouldn't each player just ban the best counter to the champion they intend to play? I think it would force a lot more reflex picks / people snatching up champions the other players intend to play based on there bans. It sounds cool in a way when you put it like that BUT I predict chaos and bad times for all.
> Wouldn't each player just ban the best counter to the champion they intend to play? I don't see why not. Taking the *best* counter off the table is still perfectly viable today with only 3 bans, you just can only knock off three of the five counters available, assuming you are nice enough to ban for only three players on your team and maybe not even your own lane, which other commenters agree is an overly generous assumption: most captains either ban what is most OP at the time or give themselves three bans. But we already see the flaw in that logic: even when Sejuani was queen of the jungle, banning her meant you just moved down the tier list to Gragas and Rek'sai, who are now king and queen after Sejuani was nerfed. It's no longer a question of balance and game-health: it's just going down the tier lists, and very little innovation being done. (The most innovative thing I have seen this year was Urgot mid into Zed right at the end of the assassin meta and we haven't seen much of that since. Cho'gath into Lissandra wasn't bad either.) > I think it would force a lot more reflex picks / people snatching up champions the other players intend to play based on their bans. This also happens regardless of the number of bans: [Hai discussed this phenomenon as a partial reason as to why C9 didn't do so well at IEM Katowice](http://www.dailydot.com/esports/cloud9-hai-lam-lcs-interview/).
Avios1 (NA)
: {{champion:245}}{{champion:67}} {{champion:79}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:55}}{{champion:64}} {{champion:7}} {{champion:76}} {{champion:412}} {{champion:113}} {{champion:92}} {{champion:429}} {{champion:238}} It would be a shame if at least one of us appeared in each game of yours....
I don't mind Thresh because he's usually built tank on a high-utility kit, but there's at least opportunities to escape him once he's blown all his cooldowns even if he lands his hook. He also relies on having at least one teammate to provide enough damage to kill the target off; he doesn't have the stats to solo anyone unless you built him pure damage which is a very dumb thing to do on him. {{champion:53}} is another story: if you get hooked, you will 100% get knocked up, silenced, and instakilled and you couldn't even flash out and his ult's on like a 30 second cooldown.
: I never liked having a captain in the first place. You always get that guy who mains one role then bans only champions that counters their main while ignoring their teammates' input completely (bonus points if they never respond in chat, and then bitch at the jungler to win their lane for them anyway).
: ***
Again, that has more to do with the maturity of the player base and not the amount of bans (3, 4, or 5 per team) or who is banning (1 captain vs 5 teammates). I've played under troll captains who ban the champs their teammates want, I know the feeling. But I'd rather report those people for trolling instead of having to play against broken champs that Riot refuses to balance because "ASSASSINS SO FLASHY AND KEWL WOW #LCSBIGPLAYS"
: New account. Has 1 char. That char is also in free week. All ten free week champs get banned. Well, shit.
There is already a minimum requirement of champions owned (not available, OWNED) before you can play ranked, I know that for sure, and I think it's 16. I don't know if that same restriction exists in normals draft, but I assume it would. You could only play normals blind, ARAM, coop, etc prior to that threshold.
Nahara (NA)
: If memory serves, the reason the bans are staying at six is because they're not really intended to be used to ban out whoever people think is OP or frustrating to play against, but to shut down specific team comps or strategies that might adversely affect your team comp/strategy. I could be wrong here.
Even if that is the case, the fact that Riot keeps releasing new champions and reworking old ones to function in new ways warrants giving players more bans. For instance, a poke-siege comp consisting of Jayce, Rek'Sai, Ekko, Jinx, and Lulu can feature any number of replacements in any position. A completely different comp that's still totally viable in the same strat is Gnar, Nidalee, Xerath, Caitlyn, and Karma. I can think of many more mids and ADCs to replace in that comp. So yeah, you can ban out three champs of a comp. Great. Thanks to constant releases, we can replace anyone in a lineup to achieve the same strat with a slightly different flavor that still has a ridiculously high chance of being successful, so in that sense, bans are practically useless for banning out compositions. You can try to ban out specific players, like in today's BF Game of the Week Fnatic vs Origen, all three of each teams banned were targeted at Mithy and Huni, respectively. But if your champion pool is deep enough, you can make bans thrown your way a waste (as Huni proved today when he got three top lane bans and pulled out Ekko for the win). I think the more common and practical use of bans at this point is to deny specific champions whose kit you just don't want to face. And honestly, it doesn't matter which reasoning Riot uses for having bans: because the champ pool is growing and never shrinking, the players just need more bans at this point.
: Sure sure. Pretty hard to ban: Fizz Hecarim Annie Gragas Sejuani Vi Ryze With only six bans. And just think- most people are wasting bans on Ekko.
Cool. Let me just pick: Rumble/Maokai/Gnar Nidalee/Rek'sai/Lee Sin Kassadin/Cho'gath/Yasuo Kalista/Jinx/Corki/Sivir Alistair/Morgana/Thresh ty Oh I forgot: Shaco/Xin Zhao/Wukong/Zac to the jungle list Azir/Viktor/Kog'maw to the mid list
: I mostly dont want 5 each. Why? Because then i'm almost certain a lot of my champions will be banned out or is more likely to be banned. Since i main assassins and most people hate them so. Edit: downvoted for what? for saying i think 5s to much or generall saying id rather not every assassin i enjoy playing be banned out every game? Honestly don't know which if the two its downvoted for. You act as if i disagree with increasing the ban rate which im all for.
The hate against assassins is simply because assassins as a class lack counterplay. They're flashy and cool looking, but they aren't fun or fair to play against. Not even a shift in the meta from assassin to Cinderhulk and the restoration of mana regen letting mages back into the game could stop low-counterplay assassins like LeBlanc and Fizz being pick/ban. Part of me understands your concern of being banned out. Another part of me says that's precisely the point of increasing bans. Another part of me says that's just an inherent problem of assassins that Riot has to work out for themselves: either they commit to assassins and accept the fact that players are going to ban them out for entirely valid and appropriate reasons, or they concede that assassins don't fit in their vision of the game and change things accordingly. Whatever decision Riot makes won't be overly popular, but people will deal.
: 8 bans in total would be great and the number of champs doesn't have anything to do with it. The real reason is that FINALLY every champion is viable.
I don't have a problem with everyone being viable, but I have a problem when there are so many OP champs and only 6 bans to get them off the board. It's not possible, so abusive champs with low counterplay still slip through even after 6 bans.
: I think 4 bans each team will be enough. 5 is a bit to much honestly. Why would 10 champs need to be banned. also if one ban each there is a chance a guy gets upset he didnt get his lane so he bans the champion you want (lol rare case but im sure it'll happen) Other then the basic fact i think 10 is to much but 6 is to few id cut it in the center and say 8 bans total is enough.
The guy in your hypothetical honestly is just being immature, which happens in League anyway and doesn't have anything to do with the number of bans. Also, if you increase the bans per team from 3 to 4, that still means that one person per team controls the entire ban phase, and Riot recently did research that shows most captains go into draft knowing what champs they want to ban and ignore suggestions from their team. If you give each player one ban, it makes the draft more democratic and gives each player the chance to deny the enemy one champion the player doesn't want to play against, or the option to contribute their ban to another lane (I like banning assassins as an ADC even though I don't lane against assassins, for example). And I don't see how 5 bans apiece is too much: like I said, 10 bans is still less than 10% of the champion pool at this point. Remember, Riot is constantly releasing new champions and simultaneously updating old ones with more synergistic kits that are worthy of pick/ban (Sion, Ryze, etc). The viable champion pool is growing, which is fine, but the broken champion pool is also growing and there aren't very many answers to those.
Rioter Comments
: Donating 2014 LCS fines to a good cause
I personally like those statistics that actual bullying gets more reports than swearing. I also approve of the consideration put into the charity selection and the final choice. One earlier comment didn't appreciate the fact that LGBTQ youth face far more bullying and rejection from peers and family than "normal" teens. Heck, I'm not square with my family's religion and THEY have bullied and rejected me on that alone and it's pushing me towards the brink of insanity myself. And I only have to live with them four months out of the year nowadays. If I had to live with them full-time now like I (obviously) did as a teenager with my new ideology, I would be in a really bad spot. Yet, I _still_ would be better off than some LGBTQ teens out there. So yeah. No one deserves to be bullied, whether you're LGBTQ or straight/cis/whatever, or whether you agree or disagree with your parents on morality issues (like how to treat LGBTQ folk), or whether you're a feeding silver 5 scrub in League (me) or best-mid-world (Faker, probably). No one, end of story. Just so happens that LGBTQ kids don't have a lot of support, and this charity is working to address that. Kudos to the Trevor Project for their work, and kudos to Riot for supporting them.
Eggbread (NA)
: I don't know. Infinity Edge and Lord Van Damm's Pillager on someone like Yasuo would break the game in my eyes, especially since it gives them magic damage.
It's only a problem on Yasuo because Yasuo's broken, not because there's too much crit already in SR. Besides, once he reaches 100% crit, he's capped like every other champion (except Ashe) so he's only be getting it for the raw damage and non-crit passives anyway, just like any other champ at crit cap. It will be really interesting to see Ashe's interaction with the new Pillager, considering she is the only ADC that benefits from going over 100% crit.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Nural (NA)
: If this is the case, then it may be best that **You dont run pobelter or HuHi**. Unfortunalty in fantasy, once your roster locks for a week, it is locked. No exceptions. So knowing that CLG can change out their midlaner at will during any given week, it will be WAY to risky to run either one of them. Even if they both are playing out of their minds, it wont do you any good if you only get one games worth of points out of them. Simply put, if you are running pobelter a given week, and they decide to switch to HuHi, **You will then have pobelter scoring you zero points for his second game** (Because... well he's not playing). Based off of the rules and such, this is the way I see it as of now.
Alternately if you can draft both of them, you can use your Flex to start them both and make sure you get 100% participation from CLG no matter which mid they start. Odds are that's still not a great strategy because pobelter and HuHi could effectively/possibly get only half of what single-mid team mids like Bjergsen or Incarnati0n are pulling because CLG's mids could literally get only half the playtime as Bjerg or Inc, so overall CLG mids aren't going to be great for drafts simply because they aren't getting as much playtime (fantasy points) as single-mid team mids, even if pob/HuHi wind up individually outplaying/scoring their single counterparts.
Show more

SquirrellyOtter

Level 100 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion