: Shaco Mains: wow our champion was gutted, literally unplayable
Generally speaking, when discussing the balance of champions and how strong they are, it's useless to discuss the level of play you see at any elo except high diamond through challenger. A challenger player can have winrates like that on ANY champion in ANY role in silver elo. It's just not worth discussing the balance of champions in low elo because the players in these elos don't understand nearly enough about the game itself; and as a result, they don't have the information necessary in evaluating champion strength. It's not to say that low elo players *can't* discuss balance, but it has to be understood that A) personal experience in these elos is worthless, and B) low elo examples (winrates, play rate, etc.) don't matter. There is perhaps a discussion about champions that tend to steamroll in low elo (the Yi effect), but that is typically a separate issue from balance, and more to do with champion design. And Ryze is legitimately a fairly strong champion; but as unfortunate as it may be, low elo players don't perform well on him. Whereas champions like Garen work quite well in low elo but fall off heavily in the highest ratings, Ryze is the opposite; he can be an absolute monster in high tier play such as challenger, but falls off heavily in use outside of the top 200 mid players. I want to reiterate that you can't use your gold level experience on Ryze when discussing balance; you just don't understand enough about the game for that discussion to be useful. Instead, you can discuss the extremely high skill cap of Ryze, and that you'd like to see him dumbed down so that lower elo players can be effective with the champ.
Netorare (EUNE)
: Meddler and the whole balance have no idea how to balance and yet people defend them... Riot itself forgot that the playerbase made them who they are now, but i guess it's normal for a money hungry company to sell their playerbase to the sweet LC$ money and the so called "pro play"...
It's opinions exactly like these that create the issues that we see with the Boards. There's a reason why nobody uses the Boards anymore; there's a reason why Rioters don't use them anymore. It's because the people on this forum, on average, don't care for rational discussion about the balance of the game. They're instead predatory, and only serve to underhand the balance team or Riot. If you're really going to tell me that the balance team has no idea how to balance the game, the only information I can gleam is that you're either ignorant or malicious; I think the latter is more accurate.
Wind234 (NA)
: To be fair, Trinity bruisers like Irelia and Camille feel like they need a nerf anyway. Irelia's a god in like two lanes and potentially a third if she gets brought bot more now that we've gone full anarchy here. lol If it helps a bit, I wouldn't mind if the AD that was gained was increased to compensate and help out Cleaver bruisers if they're struggling, but I still think the true damage needs to be lowered. As for the rune's duration when it's active, I'm not sure about touching it. Even if it isn't ideal now, letting it come online more often or for longer could be an outright buff instead of just a power shift. Maybe if once it activated it lasted for 5 seconds instead of 3, that'd be reasonable, but I don't think it should be easier to proc. The last thing we need is level 1 true damage melting people because they dared to fight the bruisers.
I'm fairly skeptical of nerfing Camille and Irelia outright because in my experience, most of the best top laners on NA server don't consider them overpowered in their respective top lane role; I think a large issue with Camille is that she's viable in the jungle (due to the kind of insane base damage on E, which I do think should be nerfed in scaling to encourage Q maxxing). The issue with Irelia, from my reckoning, is that her weakest position is in the top lane. Obviously not ideal considering she's designed for the role. Instead, she finds far too much success in the mid lane. And we have to ask ourselves why that is. I would estimate that Irelia is effective in mid for a few reasons. Firstly, she has a load of dashes, hard cc, and good stick onto ranged targets; this isn't really new, the Old Irelia had that too. What's different now though, is that the new Irelia does very little AD damage, and does far more AP damage than the old Irelia. Mixed damage isn't particularly effective versus top lane fighters because they start off with higher amounts of Armor and MR. This also means that Conqueror isn't as effective on Irelia as it is on other bruisers (her AD ratios are less and her auto attacks are less frequent). This pushes her out of top lane. Mixed damage, however, is phenomenally effective versus squishy targets such as Zoe, who mostly see play in mid. I think that her mixed damage nature is really to blame for how disproportionately weak she is top; and vice-versa strong mid. Luckily for us, it seems that Riot is indeed lowering her total AP damage, which is hopefully a blessing to us all (source was a tweet from a balance designer who works at Riot, I don't have the life in me to find the tweet so sorry!).
Wind234 (NA)
: Conqueror - true damage conversion lowered from 20% to 15% I feel like Conqueror might be a bit too strong at the moment, and it's part of the reason why so many bruisers are running around everywhere. Toning it down would give other champions a fighting chance without being deleted in an instant, but I don't want to completely kill the keystone since it's nice that bruisers are finally having their time in the sun, so to speak.
I was actually having a discussion with a playtester after-game about the state of Conqueror and he said pretty plainly that Conqueror is, if anything, _underperforming_ compared to other runes. It's real problem is its unnatural effectiveness on certain champions that can utilize it best (really just Yasuo). A large issue with Conqueror is in how it's activated; gating it behind 4 seconds means that it can very often be entirely unused in certain teamfight scenarios. The true damage is also negligible in effectiveness versus squishy targets. Perhaps there's a discussion around tanks being pulled out of top by these fighters, but considering the recent popularity of Ornn and Singed; I'd say this absolutely isn't the case. Poppy is also becoming increasingly popular. I think the way to solve the tank crisis (so to speak) is by changing some of the itemization of tank items. The primary issue that tanks have currently, in my opinion, is that they aren't really tanky; and that's not so much because of runes like Conqueror and damage increase over time. It's mostly because of the consistent changes made to tanks over the years. They've really only been nerfed. Itemization is probably the first issue to tackle. Sunfire Cape needs to be a stronger minion killer, and tanks in general need to build tanky again. Items like Righteous Glory and Banner of Command aren't very tanky compared to more standard tank items like Randuin's Omen, Warmog's Armor, Frozen Heart, etc. But these items aren't really popular because the alternatives give more utility and are cheaper. I'm not entirely sure how tanks should be changed, but things need to change for tanks if we want to see them being played more often (at least in the top lane, where discussion about tanks and conqueror are most pertinent).
: Irelia, Camille and Fiora in "Most played champions". Ahahahahhahah ;-) Nice one though
I don't legitimately think that my playing of the champions in question means I'm biased as to their strength. I won't deny that they're strong champions, but I don't think that they're particularly overpowered (at least in the top lane). I've played countless champions throughout the game. I have a high diamond Jax/Renekton only account that I've been playing on. And if you look at just about any top laner in high MMR, Irelia and Camille are played pretty often, along with champions like Jax, and Ornn. Instead of invalidating my points via telling me what my most played champions are, go through my points and try to counter them. I'm looking for reasonable discussion, not non-sequiturs left and right (perhaps I should expect this behavior on the Boards, though).
: What is Riot's excuse for not nerfing Camille and Irelia?
Beware of discussing balance changes when your skill in the game isn't sufficient enough to truly understand the game and how it functions. This is common advice that I'd give to anyone, and it's especially relevant on the Boards. I also want to mention that any discussion that revolves around changing the balance state of a champion is inevitably a discussion about the current power level of the champion in question. With that said, I don't think Camille is overpowered or too strong. I think she's more than balanced in the jungle, and her laning is phenomenally weak versus most matchups. I do think that her E max is too strong; I think they should remove 40 base damage from her E and add 20 damage to her W. This would encourage more diversity in skill leveling while lowering the base damage of the ability that jungle Camille maxes first (this would probably kill Camille jungle, and it's definitely not a necessary change). Irelia is a different story, in my mind. I think that in the top lane, she's more than balanced. Most of the fighter matchups she straight loses. It's in other lanes that she's truly a terror. Her mid lane matchups are far easier to handle, and I think that she's quite unfun to play against in the role. The issue is that there's perhaps no clear solution to fixing that issue. If anyone here has a good solution for how to better force Irelia into the top lane, I'd like to hear it. The first idea that comes to mind is to remove her mixed damage nature. That's something that makes her disproportionately strong versus squishy champions. She would need to be compensated somehow, but I'm not entirely sure how. I just don't think it's as simple as nerfing these champions; especially in the case of Irelia. I don't think she's overpowered; I think that her power is disproportionately strong in one lane over another (the one she was designed to be used in). Instead, that power should be shifted, instead of just removing power from her kit entirely (making her unviable in mid when she's barely floating above water in the top lane is a bad decision).
: Can you PLEASE get over this true damage fetish?
There used to be a lot of discussion around true damage and how broken it could be back in 2012-2013. The best user of true damage at the time was Vayne, for perspective. Most people thought that the damage type was simply too strong. However, if you really consider what true damage DOES in relation to other forms of damage amplification, then you'll discover that it's a phenomenally well-balanced solution to the "damage problem" that exists for many champions (mostly melee bruisers). True damage is at its core, the equalizing damage source. It disproportionately affects tanks and squishies, but on opposite ends of the spectrum. Traditionally, standard penetration options were really common for bruisers and assassins alike, but traditional penetration is phenomenally limiting in its overall usage. Firstly, flat armor shred is not a true equalizer; it doesn't affect tanks as much as it should, and it affects squishies more than it should. % armor shred is a good option, but true damage effectively does the exact same thing, and does it in a more transparent manner; it just depends on how the true damage is applied. The largest issue that bruisers had isn't that they had a hard time killing squishies; it's that they couldn't effectively kill tanks even when they create a game state that should allow for it. An example: Jax pre-conqueror simply couldn't effectively damage out a full tank Maokai top in the split push. It was so bad that the Jax had to completely ignore the tank, while taking damage, to try and destroy the turret. That's not particularly engaging nor fair; the split push champion should have an advantage on the teamfight champion in the split push. But Jax's advantage was practically nullified because he simply didn't have the tools to actually win. With additions like Conqueror, there are more tools. True damage simply doesn't affect squishy champions very much; it is mathematically designed to impact tankier champions the most. If you're a Draven, it doesn't matter whether Darius is doing 20% true damage or shredding 25% of the armor; he's going to overkill you if he has the opportunity with his base damages alone; as he should. I think the major problem is that people conflate the introduction of tools that implement true damage with tanks being poor options in the meta. That narrative completely lacks the depth of the actual issue. Sure, true damage hurts tanks, but it's far from the main offense. Tanks have been systematically nerfed out of the meta mostly through itemization, but also through individual nerfs that targetted specific champions such as Maokai, Sion, and Nautilus. Tanks don't really exist in the game anymore; and you can see that in the itemization alone. Tanks don't really build tanky anymore; they build utility items like Banner of Command, Righteous Glory, Abyssal Mask; none of these items are remotely as tanky as pre-existing options. But those options simply aren't as effective as the current options in their utility. Removing Banner is a good start, but I think that Riot should reintroduce Sunfire Cape as a wave pressure tool so that tanks don't have to completely seed wave manipulation. They should lower the cost of a few select armor items like Randuin's Omen. That would go a long way to helping tanks make a return. And while we're at it, perhaps we can lower the cost of Nautilus's E.
: "If You're Good Enough, You Will Climb"
There's a fairly simple ode to this phenomenon that's existed for some time. Three out of five games, out of your control. Win or lose, you won't decide the match. It's the other two games where you have the opportunity to shine.
: >The first is that the baron changes created an environment where actually just taking baron while the enemy is around is just about impossible. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT. You should not be trying baron unless most of the enemy team is either in botlane or just got aced. Nobody's going to bother with it when the other team can swoop in with a smite and steal the last hit.
In my opinion, both in solo queue and in competitive play, the baron dances and fights are often the most exciting portion of the game. I can't tell you how many times I've flipped my shit when I watch my favorite team desperately trying to rush the baron while the enemy team comes and is JUST about to fight them. The smite fights are insanely hypey, and that's something that I don't personally think should be removed from the game outright. I want to see baron as a more contestable objective, because I think that at Gnashor's core, that's what it's meant to do. I don't think that neutral epics are designed to be taken solely *after* a fight, but rather an objective to be taken when your team sees an opportunity; regardless of whether or not the enemy team is alive. If every baron dance results in a teamfight, then that limits diversity in strategy, which I'm opposed to.
Altiverse (EUNE)
: Baron was finally in a reasonable spot... for two patches.
I personally believe that the old baron was far too punishing, and disproportionately hurt split pushers. There were a few problems. The first is that the baron changes created an environment where actually just *taking* baron while the enemy is around is just about impossible. The odds that you'll lose the ensuing fight are so high that it's effectively pointless to try. The only viable option is to play around vision and get a pick; a fine option, of course. But it's fairly binary. If the enemy team can fight you even after you get the baron, you will lose. The second issue has to do with top lane split pushers, primarily. But this also applies to other split pushers. One of the major advantages that a split pusher can bring to a team is drawing pressure to a lane. If I'm playing Fiora and I'm insanely strong, I ought to pressure my lane and force two people into my lane. Let's say that the mid laner and top laner come to fight me. I might die 1v2, but under normal circumstances my team would secure baron. The baron changes make this far more difficult to accomplish; because despite the fact that your split pusher has drawn two players to the opposite side of the map, you will most likely lose 4v3 on the baron. This makes split pushing far more difficult, because drawing pressure doesn't necessarily equate to a secured baron.
: For once, let's blame Ghostcrawler for something he's actually responsible for!
Your opinions seem absolutely backwards even on a cursory read of your ideas. The game has very fundamentally always, by design, been intended to be a semi-independent experience. That is one of the defining traits of League of Legends as a moba; that you can create an individual lead and use that lead to win the game in an individual basis. This creates a specific playstyle in the game; that players should generally be looking to create leads based on the tools that they and their opponents have. Time has proven that this is by far the most successful philosophical build in the MOBA industry. Sure, it can be really unfun when a Platinum 5 Soraka main gets killed by Zed; but your suggestions are patently invalid because how you see the game is fundamentally opposed to how League has been *literally* since it was made. This isn't about Ghostcrawler, or the "new Riot team". This is about what League of Legends has been for a decade; how it was fundamentally built. If you can't understand the underlying premise of the game, then you have absolutely no right to suggest that the current Riot team is straying away from it. You mischaracterize the game and how it was "meant to be", and use that as a basis to attack Riot. But your premise is bluntly wrong. I'll try to be specific in my analysis so that anyone who reads this can hopefully understand what League was supposed to accomplish. When Dota was becoming a popular game, it was a fairly collectivist based game; that is to say, it primarily focused on teamplay (less so than now, but I'll get into that). League as a game was designed to appeal to the individual, because the founders of the company thought it would be more popular if individual elements of success could be better implemented into the genre. They were right; and there's no question about it. League of Legends is by far the most popular MOBA out there, and is likely the most popular competitive videogame *in existence*. As I said, this post is entirely backwards in its fundamental assumptions; because if anything is the case, League of Legends is slowly losing its individual carry elements in favor for a team-based experience. This is for a few reasons; players are improving globally and regionally, which leads to a more homogeneous skillset. This means that the leads that you were able to contend for in season 2, you might not be able to in season 7. In season 2, you could legitimately "out-mechanic" your opponents even in the highest level of play, but in the current landscape that isn't a particularly reasonable or consistent strategy. As well, the Riot team has specifically entertained the idea of creating a more team-based experience for years; from dev blogs to "anti-snowball" campaigns to the patch notes themselves, the past couple of years have changed League into a team-based experience rather than an individual-based experience. Most of the high elo players don't like this change, and I don't assume that low elo players are particular fans of the change either. Seriously, your post is absolutely backwards; and it seems very obvious to me that your playstyle and your frustration with your skill set has heavily motivated this post.
: > [{quoted}](name=Usernamehere1235,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ahAk2MrP,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2018-05-22T21:06:28.335+0000) > > I think a knowledgeable player could far easier make the claim that Irelia is overtuned, but definitely not Camille. She has a pretty awful laning phase vs most of the fighters and tanks. She has good scaling, and can be a menace in the split push, but even then she loses out to champions like Fiora and Jax. > > The claim that Camille is overtuned has been echoed a few times though, in the comments section of my post. I'm kind of baffled as to why. Hashinshin, Weeknd, IreliaCarriesU, Wickd, Tony Top, just about *any* high elo top laner will tell you that she's very well balanced in the meta. So I wonder where this sentiment comes from specifically. Is she particularly obnoxious in lower elos, or do other roles feel frustration when they die to Camille; it could be a host of things. I'd love some clarification. Well personally, I'm a Darius one trick. I have seen mixed opinions on how Darius does vs Camille but I just get stomped everytime. Her W stun into q aa q again + her passive shield just always out-trades me and then she all-ins and I die. Darius, as most people know, thrives on extended fights, but Camille is the exact opposite. I have struggled against Camille since her release, but just within the last few months has she really just started roflstomping me. Now you could say that I am biased because of this, but I disagree. I think her passive shield scaling needs to be lowered and the second proc damage on her q needs to be lowered. Getting hit for 800 true damage every 5 seconds late game doesn't feel very good. As far as Irelia goes, it's the EXACT opposite. I roflstomp her anytime I see her, save the few times I have played against an experienced player. That is to be expected though, if you practice any champion, you are going to have more success. I'm kind of on the line with Irelia, whether she's a tad overtuned or not, but I 100% think Camille needs some decent/sizeable nerfs. Camille is always my permanent ban and I am silver 2 so yes, I'm low elo.
That's actually quite funny because in my experience, Camille gets destroyed by Darius in the early game, and just has to farm as best she can so that she can eventually outscale. Because if Camille ever E's onto Darius, he just wins the straight 1v1. As well, you're supposed to start Doran's Shield on Darius every time, and you want to rush tabis and phage as quickly as possible. The differences in experiences based on rating seriously matter, and that means that balancing the game can be quite difficult, I imagine.
: Camille is still disgustingly overtuned and Irelia can be pretty ridiculous if played well, but as a whole it does feel pretty balanced.
I think a knowledgeable player could far easier make the claim that Irelia is overtuned, but definitely not Camille. She has a pretty awful laning phase vs most of the fighters and tanks. She has good scaling, and can be a menace in the split push, but even then she loses out to champions like Fiora and Jax. The claim that Camille is overtuned has been echoed a few times though, in the comments section of my post. I'm kind of baffled as to why. Hashinshin, Weeknd, IreliaCarriesU, Wickd, Tony Top, just about *any* high elo top laner will tell you that she's very well balanced in the meta. So I wonder where this sentiment comes from specifically. Is she particularly obnoxious in lower elos, or do other roles feel frustration when they die to Camille; it could be a host of things. I'd love some clarification.
: > [{quoted}](name=Usernamehere1235,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=6XUrTg2e,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-05-22T05:32:33.509+0000) > > This definitely doesn't seem like the appropriate response to any issue at all. > > Creating a queue that is fundamentally designed to allow toxic behavior is like segregating a portion of a town for criminals to roam freely. It's a bad idea and there's absolutely no reason to believe that it would actually reduce toxicity in the "normal queue" overall. Sure, if you want to compare criminals to people who swear. We can't let people rob and rape, but I think we can concede letting people say what they think? No? Oh Ok. We're not segregating anyone if it's queue you go into your own volition. People who are banned are just going to come back with new accounts and keep talking shit in norms and this essentially solves nothing. They're literally coming back with new accounts, or botted accounts, or stolen accounts (creating a market for cracked account btw) You're giving them a second option now if you're letting them queue in a game where they can say and do what they want, naturally people will follow the path of least resistance.
> [{quoted}](name=cybercloud03,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=6XUrTg2e,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-05-22T06:45:44.416+0000) > > Sure, if you want to compare criminals to people who swear. We can't let people rob and rape, but I think we can concede letting people say what they think? No? Oh Ok. > > We're not segregating anyone if it's queue you go into your own volition. > > > People who are banned are just going to come back with new accounts and keep talking shit in norms and this essentially solves nothing. They're literally coming back with new accounts, or botted accounts, or stolen accounts (creating a market for cracked account btw) > > You're giving them a second option now if you're letting them queue in a game where they can say and do what they want, naturally people will follow the path of least resistance. I just don't think you fundamentally don't understand how humans behave. If we create another queue for toxic behavior, it will *under no circumstances* reduce toxic behavior in the regular queues. At best, it will create absolutely no change. But more likely, it will *increase* toxic behavior. Because toxic people don't WANT to queue with other toxic players. And if they ever do queue there, their behavior will be reinforced by other players and the queue's existence in and of itself. Toxic people aren't sympathetic; they aren't going to queue in "toxic queues" because they care about other people. Your idea might be a decent sounding idea in a vacuum, but if you have any understanding of human psychology and clinical psychology, the idea becomes bluntly bad.
: I think Camille needs to be tuned down especially with the Conquerer but mainly her Q. Other than that everytime I get top I have fun.
If you see Camille going Conqueror in games, they don't know what they're doing. No one goes Conqueror because it's not NEARLY as good as PTA and Comet.
: Yeah meanwhile removing the viability of a shit ton of junglers. Top may be better, but not without a cost.
It's not just about jungle! It's about the slew of changes to top, including rune changes, Conqueror being released, some quality of life changes to champions like Jax and nerfs to champions like Jayce. There are so many changes aside from just the last patch.
: Please add a Toxic queue
This definitely doesn't seem like the appropriate response to any issue at all. Creating a queue that is fundamentally designed to allow toxic behavior is like segregating a portion of a town for criminals to roam freely. It's a bad idea and there's absolutely no reason to believe that it would actually reduce toxicity in the "normal queue" overall.
: Two simple changes to the game that I think will make it a lot more bearable.
I heavily disagree with you that Conqueror is too strong a rune. If anything, statistically it's an underperforming rune compared to its competitors. Every single champion that takes it now was objectively too weak before it was released. The two most successful top laners that take the rune are probably Jax and Darius. Irelia does take the rune, but that's mostly because there's nothing else great for her to take at the moment. Press the Attack is bad on her because of her target-switching nature, and nothing else is particularly fitting, including Conqueror (it's just the best fit). But I don't think these champions are overtuned. I think Darius, Jax, and Irelia are phenomenally well balanced and fun to play as and against. I do agree that Yasuo may be overtuned with the rune, but considering the major Yasuo players aren't particularly insane with him, and considering he hasn't picked up TOO much traction yet, I wouldn't make any early judgment calls. As a top lane main, I feel like I can discuss very clearly my opinions on the runes related to the role. Guinsoo's though, I won't even try. :)
Rioter Comments
: ***
Again, it's not about his individual performance, this isn't a vacuum incident nor should we treat the system in such a way. It's clear that this individual has already been punished *several* times for toxic behavior. He deserves it. I recently had a smurf account of mine temporarily banned. Although I feel fairly confident that the individual game I played wasn't nearly toxic enough to warrant a ban, I understand that my past behavior affects how Riot is going to treat my account going forward.
GodCarry (NA)
: Riot Support's Response to my Permaban Ticket
Again I think the primary difference is that you're a repeat offender. You don't simply get permanently banned out of nowhere; you receive two chat restrictions and a temporary ban before a permanent ban is issued in most cases. If that's the case for you, then don't be surprised that being even mildly toxic or negative in your games might result in a permanent ban.
: So... are you saying you'd be cool with a revert to old Malzahar who was never played in pro league except in the 1v1 tournies (Unfortunate that many lost to Lucian)?
No. I think if they want to solve Malzahar's underlying problem, they need to remove his ultimate. There's just too much power associated with his ultimate, and it forces his tuning to be R-heavy, and unsatisfying for those who play him and play against him alike. Reverting him won't solve that problem.
Risen29 (NA)
: Orrn's unstoppable nerf was so unnecessary
I would like to mention that his W still *acts* in a way similar to being unstoppable. If you cast the animation before the CC comes through, the breath will not be cancelled. You can buffer your ability such that you're still doing stuff while being hard cc'ed, which is in my opinion a more balanced form of the unstoppable effect.
: Malzahar no longer competitive at high ELO
If I'm being entirely honest, thank riddance. Malzahar is simply an unfair champion to play against. Even in the World finals, Faker was almost completely negated even though he is the best League player to ever live, simply because Crown would pick Malzahar, auto shove mid, and ult him if he ever saw an opportunity. Malzahar just isn't fun to play against, or watch. He's boring and unfair.
: @Riot What happened to the potential yasuo changes from 2017?
I personally believe that this mentality is primarily a lower elo mentality. And that's not a bad thing, but you should temper your expectations for change with the understanding that you might lack some tools necessary to stopping the Yasuo terror from occurring (low elo players held the same beliefs for champions like Master Yi only 4 years ago, and still might to this day). I suppose I would appreciate some context. Why, specifically, do you not enjoy Yasuo as a champion? What about him is fundamentally wrong in your eyes? In what ways is he not fair, in your mind?
: ''yasuo was designed to be weak early game and be a hyper carry late game''
I think Yasuo should fundamentally be reworked to be more viable as a top laner rather than a mid laner. I think his kit is far better suited for long lanes, and I know that when Riot designed him, they specifically put in obstacles to make him *worse* in the top lane such that he goes mid the majority of the time. I think that he's a fine addition to the fighter roster in the topside of the map. It's just a shame that he loses 1v1 to almost every fighter top, mostly due to the useless nature of his windwall.
: Kass plays more like a vlad and leblanc had a baby. Jumping in to do burst damage or poking with Q E. There is nothing fighter about him besides being a melee champion. Diana is the closest we have to an ap fighter because she wants to AA, she gets in close and has the tools to survive. The issue is that her damage is tied with her defensive stats. Similar to riven with her AD scaling sheild this makes it much harder to work around without making her feel way to overbearing when fed because you cant burst her through her shield but at the same time not making her feel too weak with the shield not mattering when diving in. She just doesnt have enough tankiness in her kit to warrent building for AA over straight burst. If her E had a similar effect to leona W or her shield was stronger then maybe she could be more of a fighter. Diana needs damage to be tanky. She cant afford to build any tank items because then she will do A LOT less damage. Akali is the burstiest of the three you mentioned. She can fight top laners because she can get the jump on them with W and sustain really well and has no meaningful resource management. Her ratios are good enough to where she can go tank items and be effective similar to fizz or ekko. The problem isnt so much the champions as it the items required to play that kinda of playstyle. Kass and akali are fine as is and do their jobs fine. Diana on the other hand doesnt. She goes in, kills maybe 1 or 2, then dies because you arent tanky enough. Best example I can relate diana too is VI. She does everything Vi does but doesnt have the same items or scaling as her so she cant do her "designed" role's job correctly.
I agree generally. I do think that itemization is the largest factor in what holds back a more AP fighter-oriented playstyle, as I mentioned in the post. I suppose it depends on who you would want to see as an AP fighter, and how you classify the champions that are discussed. The primary reason why I see Kassadin as a more fighter-oriented champion is because of his tendency to dive into fights, and burst down targets with fairly short range abilities. Another point to mention is that Kassadin has fairly low AP ratios across the board, which is usually indicative of a more skirmish-oriented champion rather than a burst-oriented one. Naturally, AP champions are going to be more bursty as a result of how AP and AD are fundamentally balanced in the game (AP items have more AP than AD items have AD). I would say that I think Akali is less bursty than Diana. In my experience, a Diana with 3-4 items can literally one shot people, which is something that Akali almost never does. Akali usually needs to set up for her dive, and needs to utilize her shroud in order to get as many abilities off as possible. It's not to say that Akali *isn't* bursty, but rather that she is less bursty than Diana in a mid/late game situation vs squishy targets.
Doge2020 (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Usernamehere1235,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pPyvu4TI,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-05-11T19:41:59.302+0000) > > Yeah, I could see that argument being made. My only issue is that in my mind, fighters tend to be melee champions. Swain is more of an AoE control mage in my mind, because he fundamentally doesn't have to trade off range for power, which is what fighters inevitably have to do. Urgot is a Juggernaut which is basically a fighter that is generally more tanky than other fighters, and he is ranged which is something that makes him unique among juggernauts and other fighters.
That's a phenomenal example and point. Of course, there will always be more niche champions that exist beyond the strict boundaries of class, and this is a good thing. I suppose Swain is most similar to a juggernaut in that sense, because he doesn't have consistent gap close and doesn't have any mobility inherent in his kit. That being said, there is still room in the game for melee-oriented champions, and perhaps even more skirmish-oriented AP champions (in the same vein as Camille or Fiora).
Malak (NA)
: A lot of mages are basically AP fighters (swain, karthus, etc)
Yeah, I could see that argument being made. My only issue is that in my mind, fighters tend to be melee champions. Swain is more of an AoE control mage in my mind, because he fundamentally doesn't have to trade off range for power, which is what fighters inevitably have to do.
Rioter Comments
GodCarry (NA)
: I truly believe I was wrongfully banned. Please tell me what you think.
You most definitely shouldn't be permabanned for this game alone. I would like to know if you're a repeat offender. If you've consistently been found to be toxic in your games, then a permanent ban is perhaps more justifiable because the system has detected for sometime that you're naturally negative in a portion of your games. A permaban for this chat log alone isn't justifiable, but the big picture may tell a more convincing story. Sorry for the permanent ban though. :l
: As a {{champion:254}} main, but I can imagine a lot of other champions that don't do well before level 3 as well, I really dislike this change. Others have said it before me, champions like {{champion:19}} {{champion:59}} {{champion:48}} are going to 100% demolish you at scuttle in a level 2 fight. Killing krugs on {{champion:254}} will take me ages so it's not a viable route. The scuttle crab giving this much experience and especially the fact there will only be one on the map at a time will most likely make the jungle matchup too snowbally. I think a better option to reduce early game jungler pressure would be to just delay the first camp spawns by a few seconds, have junglers start without a leash because laners don't have any time to give one. Jungle clear will start later, and take longer.
If lvl 2 champions are going to prioritize scuttle early, they lose their other buff. I feel like this incentivizes teams to heavily ward entrances to whichever river has scuttle such that it's easily noticeable exactly when the enemy jungle goes for scuttle, and with what buffs he possesses. If you want to clear one side of the jungle and take scuttle crab, won't you simply lose the opposite side of the jungle, or at least the buff on that side? I'm not a jungle main, so I really would like clarification. And perhaps it would be better if scuttle spawned at a more appropriate timing, around the time junglers will hit lvl 3. Again, I'm not a jungle player, but I do have a lot of knowledge of the role as a top laner.
GozaRuu99 (EUW)
: But intoducing rng and clear favouritism to duel early game bullies is an extermy toxic mechanism that will push utility and mid game junglers out of the meta at any decent elo. Getting destroyed by a xin or ww as Eve or rengar lvl2 because of contesting scuttle is not fun nor interactive to play
I mean, isn't that how laners already work? Dueling focused early game bullies can create consistent leads in lane through denying CS and outtrading. Why is it that early game jungle bullies only have one option of getting ahead; ganking lanes over and over? That seems like a more stale, less satisfying form of gameplay than a minor mob spawn that an early game jungler can consistently get, and thus consistently get early leads from. I feel like that's how design should work, but perhaps I'm wrong.
: I love how the ideas of those of us who have been here for nearly a decade and blown away by newer players telling us 'what we know' about the game. This is hilarious. Right now the state of the game IS fair, if you play one of forty champions... oh wait, that's how many we started with, so I suppose that is seen as fair in some way?
I mean, I've been playing the game for 6 years now, so I wouldn't consider myself a new player by any margin. I haven't been here since beta, I'll fully admit, but I don't think that lambasting people for "being new" or disagreeing with your points is anywhere near respectful and productive discourse. I generally find the Boards to be full of players who are constantly resentful at the game or any changes. I see this form of behavior often in the Boards and it's really discouraging. People won't use the Boards if they're constantly attacked by people who tend to dislike whatever current state the game is in.
: New Dev Team vs Old Dev Team
I admit, the old dev team had some advantages. Morello wasn't afraid to make Teemo a god awful pick because he recognized that the champion was fundamentally flawed, and wasn't fun to play against. The largest difference between the older and newer development teams is that the older team prioritized fun, and the newer team prioritizes competitive integrity. I personally prefer the latter, and League of Legends as a casual game isn't as sustainable unfortunately. The worst thing we can do as a community is romanticize an older Riot Games development team when they ruined game balance far more often than today. From Black Cleaver to the absurd AP ratios on champions who absolutely weren't designed to build AP. The old development team created the Atmog's nightmare. If you want to talk about HP metas or sustain metas, the older Riot Games created the archetype of what you think when you hear those words. There's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the current state of the game is far more balanced and fair than any other iteration in League's history.
: Did Sudden Impact just get gutted because of Irelia?
For most ideal users of the rune, it's not designed to be used every 6 seconds. It's designed to give a substantial amount of lethality on your dash as an assassin. Other champions with really repeatable dashes abused the rune.
: From a Bronze point of view, the snowballing in high-elo play is... tedious.
If you're bronze, and you're losing lanes, something is seriously wrong with your level of play. If this happened in challenger, then I'd say, yeah, this is to be expected. Challenger players have always been the most adept at abusing minor advantages as much as possible. That's how the game is played in the highest elo. In bronze through low diamond, your decision making and lack of mechanical skill is what's holding you back. It's not the game's fault in bronze that you got cheesed in a brush lvl 1 and died. That's always been a common strategy that's existed for years, a strategy that pros have been abusing literally since the start of the game. It's not about playing safe, it's about playing smart; acknowledging the potential actions of your opponent, and playing accordingly. The reason pro players play "safe" isn't because of meta shifts. It's because the natural tendency in competitive play is to individually play safe and outperform as a team. In a competitive environment, it's inadvisable to rely on your individual skill to win matches. It's unreliable by its very nature. Teams practice together for a reason. They don't spam solo queue all day to get the best they can mechanically, because it's inconsistent and limited. In season 3, Faker legitimately did outskill every player in the LCK individually. Now, that's simply not the case.
: Agency = / = Power. Crit Hypercarry ADCs have too much power but too little agency.
I think that ADCs have gotten the shaft, although that's because their expectation - an expectation created by the game's core design and meta - has been changing. Most ADCs would center themselves as the center of the game, the most important role in the game by far with the most impact. It's fairly obvious now that this isn't the case. Supports and junglers, I agree, have been receiving buffs for a while. While I don't think that ADCs have been getting weaker directly, I think that the increased power creep in jungle and support have effectively made the ADC role less impactful comparatively. Unfortunately, ADCs have to deal with the fact that they no longer have the same influence over games because their teammates just matter more now. I think that's the case for top and mid as well, except the ADC role has arguably felt the most of that burden, because as I mentioned earlier, the expectation for the role is changing. It wouldn't be so amiss to remove the term 'carry' entirely.
: Used to be I could die to a gank top lane without TP and make it back to lane to defend my tower. Now I'm lucky to make it back to my tower by using TP. Depending on the enemy jungler I can lose my tower so freaking fast as a top laner, to the point where my regular lane phase is thrown out the window entirely due to one single mistake. That is why turrets need to be tankier.
Honestly I can't think of a time in high elo where that was ever different. If you get ganked by a jungler after lvl 8 and your turret is 75% hp, it's gone. That's been the case forever.
Rioter Comments
: We are not the LCS
I think Baron has seen a far lower value recently with the increased amount of waveclear that most champions have access to now. The general buffs to supports over the past 5 years mean that teams either have stronger ADCs who can clear baron empowered minions absurdly efficiently, or another tank to stop tower dives from occurring. Baron is designed to **end games**. I think in 2018, it does a significantly worse job at that than it ever has before. So I welcome the changes, personally.
: Riot only did the same mistake like thrice. This time it will surely work. Removal of wards so pro play becomes more risky and exciting. Pros stop going for too risky plays. Let's just remove even more vision from the game. Well pros play even more safe. Let's just give every lane a jungler non stop so there will be more action---> even less action. Let's just make adcs the most broken class in the game spiking at two items so games will end sooner--->pros completely stopped playing the game, pick the most overtuned rightclicker and stall until lategame where everyone has the same odds. I'm sure THIS time it's going to happen and pro play becomes a big clownfiesta. Meanwhile riot introducing stopwatch so noone dies anymore or goes for plays or ganks or anything at all. I wonder where 90 minute games come from. Meanwhile soloq is complete and utter dogshit garbage piece of shit dirt shit. Where people literally give up and open at a game being 7/1 because that especially for dia+ often means it's over and not worth to fight to the last bullet for that 50%50 chance of a comeback. Games being a coinflip on whos jungler is not a retarded piece of shit. Stopwatch killing the opportunity to deal with champs like GP and vlad and AD carries where you only have a certain window to put them down anyways until they win the game eventually.
I entirely disagree with why you think pro players play safer now. You can ask just about any veteran player why players play safe, and they'll say it's because they value teamwork above individual skill and risk taking. The natural form of League of Legends requires passive individual play because at the highest level, you can't bank on your individual skill to win you games. In 2013, Faker could get solo kills because he was far above his competition. Now, it's phenomenally rare even in regular split games to see any solo kills at all, especially in the most developed roles, simply because players have gotten better at the game. When the entire scene gets better, it becomes increasingly difficult to identify and execute the proper play. That's why teams play more passively, I think.
: I agree with a lot of the points, with the exception of a few of the ADC ones, also, fighters actually do have a keystone in the works, if I am not mistaken, they have released it onto the PBE as of time of posting, and i can see if i can try to find a post about it. But back to ADC, I do understand where you're coming from, and i agree with you, as a self proclaimed Jhin main, I think that ADC needs some changes, because like everyone else I'm tired of the Dravens and MFs dominating the lane, mid game, and mostly late as well, with very comfortable win rates at the time of posting around 51-52 if i am not mistaken, while Jhin, is overall useless, unless he gets fed, which even then, there are easier champions to get fed with, and ones that snowball harder, ones with higher than a 47% win rate, which is abysmal. As Jhin, I can't build these on-hit, crit builds like everyone else does, and if I do, I literally just lose stats. So I agree, bot lane right now is a rather large shitshow of attack speed and on hit, which is no fun, for anyone I think. (Thank god relic shield bot is gone, that made me wanna die) Good post though OP!
Jhin is certainly a special case, because his itemization is far more unique. I'd say Jhin is by far the most distinguished "ADC" because he's really not much of an attack damage carry at all in the traditional sense. He has very low DPS output compared to other ADCs because of his fundamental design, he's much more akin to a ranged spellcaster than a DPS marksman. And yeah, Meddler has discussed testing for a new keystone for fighters, but I believe they're more or less aiming for a tankier keystone, aimed at juggernauts perhaps. Last I heard, he discussed a hybrid penetration keystone in the resolve tree, which absolutely boggles the mind. Perhaps I misread what he was talking about though. Edit: I did reread the ADC part, and I should have really mentioned that ADCs aren't really so strong purely because of the changes to itemization (although I do think on-hit builds are too strong), but moreso because they often have enablers as supports who can simply buff them up to absurd levels. I just got out of a game where post-nerf Kog'maw Lulu literally ran people down with effectively no counter play possible. Kha'zix wants to dive? Poly'd. Kog'maw gets low? Ulti, Locket, Kog heal, Kog flash, another Lulu shield off cooldown. It is seriously overwhelming to deal with as an opponent. In those moments, ADCs are far too strong. Even then, I think there is an argument to be made that certain items turn ADCs into entirely different monsters from what they used to be (Tristana with extra range auto can take a carry out of a fight with one hit, and isn't counterplayable at all).
Rioter Comments
: Why does it always take me like 50-75 games to get out of silver but
If this is legitimately the problem for you, then there's a severe issue with your gameplay. Every time I've been in silver on an account, I tend to get out of the division in 20 games or so, and that includes this most recent season. Perhaps you're simply not trying very hard in the games, or you just don't know how to carry games on your own. In gold, players might be better at aiding the carry whereas in silver they might not have that ability.
Ąkąli (NA)
: A lot of runes are just "more damage"
Yeah, a lot of runes give damage, similarly to how the old runes/masteries gave damage. I think the difference is that the forms of damage amplification in these new runes allows for more interesting gameplay decisions to be made. If you do hard cc, and want to do early true damage, take cheap shot. If you're a lethality user with a strong dash, take sudden impact. You might notice how these forms of damage aren't as simple as the 9x ad runes might have been back then, or the 5% bonus attack speed in the masteries. They're significantly more complicated, and give unique forms of damage amplification to suit the champions that want to play around them.
: Gathering Storm should work every 5 min. instead of every 10 min.
I think it's designed around long, incremental bonus AD/AP. If it was given every 5 minutes, that would reduce the risk associated with taking it naturally, because overall through the game you'd have more bonus AD/AP with a 5m increment vs a 10m increment. Gathering Storm is supposed to be a risk, specifically taken by late game scalers. When you change that increment to a lower value, it becomes less risky as a result.
: Why does Riot sacrifice gameplay experience for balance?
I think this pattern you're noticing is actually symptomatic of the companies organization, i.e. how they structure their teams, and what those teams do. Just about every example you listed (except Elise) were reworked, and subsequently nerfed in numbers. Here's the process that Riot goes through such that the pattern you're noticing occurs. Riot has a reworking team, and a champion team. Both of these teams create what is fundamentally new abilities through reworks or new champions. Not once has a champion been released, or a champion reworked, to have an ability of theirs fundamentally changed shortly after (to my knowledge). This is because the Champion and GU (gameplay update) teams don't stick around much with the champion after they're finished. They finish the champion, and they move on. So, if certain abilities happen to be fundamentally overpowered by nature of design, the guys who nerf those abilities are the Live Balance team. These guys don't change abilities, and they don't revert fundamental changes to kits (i.e. reverting new abilities to old ones). They mostly deal in nerfing numbers, and perhaps scraping off excess strength that one ability might have (a good example of this is Kassadin's Q silence; the silence was removed, but the core identity of his Q didn't change much). Usually, if a champion is a miss instead of a hit, it takes months or even years (hello, Aatrox) for that champion to see actual gameplay updates (new abilities, or entirely reworked abilities). I agree with you that this is a problem, and I think there's a fairly simple solution. I think that the GU and Champion Creation teams should stick around with their work after it's been released. They shouldn't be so hesitant to change these champions after they've been released, because often changing these broken abilities into balanced abilities is better for game health. So why don't they do this? A big reason, I think, is that champions and their kits directly tie into Riot's income source. Zoe might have a really broken CC ability, but changing that one week after release might be a huge hit to her sales, purely because it's been changed. This could also cause a huge backlash, because one player might examine the release kit of Zoe, and decide to buy her with RP; only to find that one week later, her kit has changed in some way that he didn't like, and so now he regrets buying the champion with RP, and might furthermore complain about it. By admission, this doesn't apply as much to GU champions, as a significant portion of players might already own the champion who's been reworked, but it still counts, even a little. Another reason why they might not change these champions fundamentally after release is because it's risky. There's no guarantee that number changes won't solve the problem, and adding new abilities into the game, or entirely reworked ones, is always a balancing issue. They could just as easily make a champion worse, especially if they jump the gun only a week, or even only a month into a champion release.
: > [{quoted}](name=Usernamehere1235,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7T49kb1y,comment-id=000f,timestamp=2018-01-12T02:01:54.933+0000) > > I'm going to disagree with this post, and I might say some things which sound mean, but really are not ill-intended. > > I think that the problem you have with vision comes with the misconception that support isn't a fun and unique role BECAUSE of the need for vision. I can already tell you from the beginning line that you have largely if not completely miss-assessed my position and intentions in regards to the support role. >I think that you're idea to remove Sightstone is more of a thought that comes from inexperience, and low-elo experience (and I'm not saying this to be mean, I will explain what I mean). Yea, you just confirm'd my original suppositions. Also, i don't believe you. Let me make it clear that no. You are wrong. Sightstone's issues aren't arguable. My stance on the item has nothing to do with my personal opinion of the item or how i feel of it personally. The issues of the item are inarguable facts. Sightstone from a game design standpoint exists as a way for Riot to gate the bulk of the vision on the team on 1 player, as a necessity because if everyone had equal reason to get Sightstone and its breadth of wards, vision would be utterly broken. Whatsmore is having vision gated behind 1 player allows them to better control the "levers" of the vision game so to speak. There is nothing inherently intrinsic to warding and the support role beyond the Support role from a fundamental standpoint. The Support role exists with the purpose of being as useful as possible while making due with the least as possible. Since there are 3 lanes and 1 jungle, and 5 players, 1 lane by necessity has to have at least more than 1 person. Therefore it is far more efficient to have the fifth player be the guy who works on a limited budget and feed the entire lanes source of income to the 4th player instead, because having 4 well-fed players and 1 underfed one is better than having 3 fed players and 2 malnurited ones, especially with how gold dependent the ADC is. **That's what the Support role is at its core.** Your worth as a support is propositional to how much burden you can take off your teams shoulders. And so sightstone , being stupidly powerful but terribly slot inefficient, is put on the support because it is the most efficient way to access and use the power of the vision it provides. Sightstone itself isn't compelling, fun or even unique or engaging an item. It exists and is bought as a necessity, and little else. Now that I've given you a bit of a refresher/history lesson, i just want to open a capsule here to say, none of this is really relevant or important to the grand scheme of my post here, so i fail to see why you are even making this post outside of personal posturing. > Vision is something that has been core to support as a role for a long time, but I'd argue that vision fundamentally has become less of a support-only job over the few years. Vision has never been intrinsic to the Support role. Vision was designed as a team wide endeavor. It simply became defaulted to the support via the meta because funneling the bulk of the expenses of warding to the one player was far more efficient. Sightstone was then introduced to make the burden on the Support less bad until Season 4 where wards were removed entirely in favor of trinkets to make warding more team oriented . as well as balance the vision game ( since literally the only thing making vision balanced to any degree back then was the player base' own unwillingness to ward in the first place, lol) as it was intended, and Sightstone was kept as a crutch because they realized that they still needed a way to condense gate vision. There is nothing truly linking the support role to vision fundamentally. If Sightstone was a good item that was interesting to buy, everyone would buy it. The reason it is exists, the reason it bought is because it needs to be. Not having Sightstone is an inherent handicap because of the power its vision provides. Making someone that isn't the support buy it is a handicap to their builds than just making the support buy it. Supports wouldn't change at all if warding were magically made the Junglers job for example. It's just no one is gonna do it because it is strictly not as effective. > There are a few reasons; vision elixirs were removed from the game, same with regular wards. As well, trinkets were added to the game, which means everyone shares at least some part in vision. There's also a limit on warding, meaning that other roles do need to contribute, and lastly control wards are stronger and cheaper than they were in the past. Dude Ive been playing since late Season 2. I don't understand why you'd instantly assume I must've started this game yesterday beyond some vein attempt at propping yourself up. > Now, support as a role has objectively become more unique item-wise since season 2. If you watch a season 2 competitive match, you'll notice that supports will often never complete more than three items at most. Most of their inventory is dedicated to oracle and pinks/greens. Once sightstone was introduced, you'd see them rush that as well. In the current meta, supports have far more items which they can buy, from lvl 1 to lvl 18, all of which provide fairly interesting and dynamic actives. The support items are a part of this, but aren't really interesting purchases anymore because fundamentally they don't provide awesome actives like other support items do. They're less impactful, as well. yea. I know. I was there. I played it. i lived it. I was there. > Firstly, I'd argue that vision is a core gameplay mechanic to supports. Well you'd be wrong. >The reason why specifically low elo players don't really care for vision is because to them, it really isn't as impactful. It's harder for low elo players, even up to platinum, to effectively place, and use vision (there are a plethora of reasons for this, map awareness, lack of game sense and knowledge, etc.). I do care about vision tho. Im a damn support main. I've made peace with that a long time ago. Can you go look for somewhere else to posture please? > Secondly, I'd argue that because of all of the other interesting support items that now exist, that support as a role is far more impactful in an active sense than it ever has before. Who said otherwise? Im beginning to wonder if you ever even read the whole post. >I'd almost go as far as to say the support role is broken because of how strong these characters can be, specifically because of how cheap and effective the items they buy are. Im aware. I've been saying this since the beginning of last season. This isn't even a nerf tho. i'd argue its a buff purely from a statistical perspective. The problem is that this change is bad because it makes the support role less enjoyable and compelling, not whether it make sit weaker or stronger. > I think that Riot is trying to actively balance support through vision and itemization, and I think that's the best option, because that is historically what the support role has always been about. And it's not because Riot deemed the role to be so; it's because that's the most optimal strategy in League of Legends. No. What Riot is doing it shoehorning Sightstone into a place wher eit feels more intrinsic to the role and less of a forced arbitrary burden. Currently there is little to no reason you would actually want to buy Sightstone as an item outside of the knowledge that someone has to because of how impactful and powerful it is, and that as the support, you are the one that is expected to do so. it's a crutch and chore by design, and from a game design perspective it is incredibly flawed, and Riot is aware of that. By introducing the EYE items, Riot introduced an alternative, but that wasn't good enough, because you still had to make the arbitrary choice of buying Sightstone out of necessity for the team as opposed to because it compliments your champion in a way that helps you win. Again, if the job of Sightstone carrier were magically ok on any other role without negatively impacting them, that role would do it. The only reason the support is left with it is because its simply more efficient. SOMEBODY has to carry it and it's simply better if the support does it than the ADC. With this change, the idea is now there is no sense of "being forced to buy this deadweight for arbitrary reasons" because you aren't actually physically "buying" it now. The problem is all the changes they made in the wake of doing so outweigh the positives of the change. In the process of doing so, the option of actives on top of support quest buffs were removed and all the depth and nuance it the choosing of support starter items has been removed. > My opinion is that support as role needed a nerf, and I think this is a slight nerf. it isn't tho. Supports will now be getting their core items even faster now. >What I do agree with, is that this does take away options from the support. But I think you underestimate just how powerful vision really is, and just how impactful it is at the highest level. I suggest you reread my post because i make it more than clear that i am are how powerful vision is. if it wasn't powerful, Sightstone would never be bought in the first place, nor would it be a mandatory purchase every game. >Just the fact that supports get sightstone makes them one of most powerful roles in the game, if used properly. No it doesn't. All it does is make them incredibly important. What makes supports so powerful is how much they bolster and influence the game as a whole, and how much freedom and agency they have in their ability to do so due to not having to do things like manage upkeep of farming minions, and how they have some of the most powerful force enabling abilities bar none. > I'd love to have a discussion, so if you have any counter-arguments, please respond. {{champion:33}} ok just read the above.
As a preface, please don't attack me personally, and don't make attacks at my character. I'm not posting for postures' sake, and I really just want to have a reasonable discussion without the Boards'y feel that tends to propagate. My opinion is that sightstone, as you put it, was a crutch because it was effectively a forced buy. If every support builds it every game, it might as well be a passive. Item costs and gold generation have been balanced around the 800g purchase for some time, and so it's definitely a buff in the sense that supports will be getting their items faster (albeit losing the old actives on their gold generation items). I think that the change is good, because effectively it is becoming a passive now. I think that on a fundamental level we disagree about what support is. > Vision has never been intrinsic to the Support role. I think, again, that vision is intrinsic to the support role. Support, as a role since it was created, has always been the leader of vision. The reasoning was that it was most efficient, as you pointed out. Now though, that's not necessarily the case, because other roles are simply limited in their vision options. Your viewpoint would seem to be that supports shouldn't be the vision leaders of the team (otherwise, where would you put sightstone, or any strong vision tool). My viewpoint is that they should be, because that gives the role immense power and skill curve, and is effectively definitive of the role since season 1. But I don't understand > No it doesn't. All it does is make [supports] incredibly important. Yes, it does. It really does. Vision is objectively a powerful tool, and as such any role that has strong vision tools is powerful. I don't really understand what you mean by no. When it comes to my original post, I likely shouldn't have posted. I assumed a lot of your intentions, and I was tired so I mostly just ranted, even if there are some nuggets of meaning. I want to say that I think the sightstone active is best put in the support slots because supports now have a variety of items to buy, thus making the unique gold generation items less interesting (there was also no skill expression, and the actives were often a balancing issue because of how they could be stacked easily with other items/effects). For the second point in your original post, I think that Riot is opting to make sightstone a gated passive because they would rather have supports building unique items. It's not so much about the lack of necessity for an early sightstone, but more about creating more interesting early purchasing options for supports. In the past, any Lux who skipped a sightstone for damage would have been flamed, because of how powerful and important the tool is. That can't happen anymore, given they start a support item and upgrade it (which they will hopefully do, the stats are not bad and gold generation is core).
: Riot, it's time to stop. The support changes are unacceptable.
I'm going to disagree with this post, and I might say some things which sound mean, but really are not ill-intended. I think that the problem you have with vision comes with the misconception that support isn't a fun and unique role BECAUSE of the need for vision. I think that you're idea to remove Sightstone is more of a thought that comes from inexperience, and low-elo experience (and I'm not saying this to be mean, I will explain what I mean). Vision is something that has been core to support as a role for a long time, but I'd argue that vision fundamentally has become less of a support-only job over the few years. There are a few reasons; vision elixirs were removed from the game, same with regular wards. As well, trinkets were added to the game, which means everyone shares at least some part in vision. There's also a limit on warding, meaning that other roles do need to contribute, and lastly control wards are stronger and cheaper than they were in the past. Now, support as a role has objectively become more unique item-wise since season 2. If you watch a season 2 competitive match, you'll notice that supports will often never complete more than three items at most. Most of their inventory is dedicated to oracle and pinks/greens. Once sightstone was introduced, you'd see them rush that as well. In the current meta, supports have far more items which they can buy, from lvl 1 to lvl 18, all of which provide fairly interesting and dynamic actives. The support items are a part of this, but aren't really interesting purchases anymore because fundamentally they don't provide awesome actives like other support items do. They're less impactful, as well. So Riot wants to turn a gold generation item, with a fairly neat active (albeit not entirely useful or sometimes even worth building into) into a gold generation/gold efficiency item. Firstly, I'd argue that vision is a core gameplay mechanic to supports. The reason why specifically low elo players don't really care for vision is because to them, it really isn't as impactful. It's harder for low elo players, even up to platinum, to effectively place, and use vision (there are a plethora of reasons for this, map awareness, lack of game sense and knowledge, etc.). Secondly, I'd argue that because of all of the other interesting support items that now exist, that support as a role is far more impactful in an active sense than it ever has before. I'd almost go as far as to say the support role is broken because of how strong these characters can be, specifically because of how cheap and effective the items they buy are. I think that Riot is trying to actively balance support through vision and itemization, and I think that's the best option, because that is historically what the support role has always been about. And it's not because Riot deemed the role to be so; it's because that's the most optimal strategy in League of Legends. My opinion is that support as role needed a nerf, and I think this is a slight nerf. What I do agree with, is that this does take away options from the support. But I think you underestimate just how powerful vision really is, and just how impactful it is at the highest level. Just the fact that supports get sightstone makes them one of most powerful roles in the game, if used properly. I'd love to have a discussion, so if you have any counter-arguments, please respond.
Show more

Usernamehere1235

Level 97 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion