: This can't be happening riot... not balancing around top 10% is a mistake.
What they're doing is exactly what they should be doing (however - they should be doing MORE, will get to that later): 1. They are addressing Overpowered stuff in ANY group first This is the right mindset. Master Yi can't see play in high elo without being completely busted in low elo, so it makes sense that they would balance him around low elo. Ryze could never be strong in low elo without being completely busted in pro play, so it makes sense that they would balance him around pro play. Put simply: The negative effects of a champion being extremely overpowered are FAR worse than the negative effects of a champion being extremely underpowered. You SHOULD be able to depend on people not picking a champion that is extremely underpowered (and people that do will quickly drop in ranking until their poor pick is no longer a hindrance to their team). You CAN'T depend on people not picking a champion that is overpowered - in fact it's the opposite, you can count on them picking it. Further, you can't require players to use their bans on these things, as it means you can never ban counters or things you simply dislike. 2. They're addressing stuff that's underpowered in ALL groups second. Basically, every champion should be balanced SOMEWHERE. It's a shame if you really love Master Yi but are in challenger - yes of course. However Master Yi is still worth having as a champion if he can be balanced in average play. 3. They're attempting to bring champions into viability in multiple groups last. If everything in 1 and 2 is done, then this makes sense. It's a risky area (you might accidentally break the champion in the category it's currently viable in), but it's the only direction to continue to improve at that point. Now - as to what they should be doing more: The big problem is with their criteria for balance. It's not simply enough to identify a champion as overpowered in average play and top-10% due to extremely high win rate, or a high win rate with a high ban rate. I've consistently argued in the past that a champion's playstyle, place in the meta, and difficulty to play, should all factor in to balance. The article implies these things don't matter. Some clear examples of this: - in almost every meta ever, any AP damage comes from mid lane. AD Mid laners should satisfy a very useful role when they have allied AP damage, and have every right to be strong niche picks in these games. However AD Mid laners (especially Yasuo and Zed) are often so extremely popular that they are picked regardless of team comp. If this is the case alongside a >50% win rate, they are Overpowered. In order for them to have an over 50% win rate while being picked so often, means they must have an over 50% win rate in suboptimal games (e.g. 90% of their games are on all AD teams where they SHOULD be at a disadvantage). FURTHER, this means they likely have an EXTREMELY high win rate when they are in an appropriate team comp (making this up, but e.g. they might have a 60-70% win rate when the allied top lane is an AP damage dealer like Sylas or Vlad). This makes them super abusable in those cases, but more importantly unfair to people who have to play against them. It's NOT FUN to lose lane to a champion that's overpowered even if you have a 50% chance at winning the game because your tank can stack armor and become unkillable due to them not having magic damage. - a champion that is difficult to play shouldn't have a >50% win rate in low elo alongside a high play rate, especially a high inexperienced play rate. This implies that the champion is balanced around inexperienced players, but being difficult to play will be much stronger than this with experienced players. Players who take advantage of this state of balance can easily climb far above their decision making abilities due strictly to the power of the champion and their ability to play it well mechanically. When the champion is eventually moved out of favor, these players will be far weaker than their current elo and this issue is likely the source of people that you question why they're in your games.
Seoshi (NA)
: Sorry to say but that is a dramatic misconception. The FIRST FEW jungle camps definitely belong to the jungler. But come mid-game, the buffs belong to the laners. Period. It's not a junglers job to carry the game, its a support position meant to get the actual carries ahead. Which most junglers fail at because they would rather take the kills and try to carry themselves. Sorry not sorry, but i'm taking the blue buff come mid game as the burst damage mage on your team.
> [{quoted}](name=Seoshi,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VfFIaEUB,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2019-05-20T22:34:07.505+0000) > > Sorry to say but that is a dramatic misconception. The FIRST FEW jungle camps definitely belong to the jungler. But come mid-game, the buffs belong to the laners. Period. It's not a junglers job to carry the game, its a support position meant to get the actual carries ahead. Which most junglers fail at because they would rather take the kills and try to carry themselves. Sorry not sorry, but i'm taking the blue buff come mid game as the burst damage mage on your team. I disagree both with OP and this. Blue buff more-so belongs to the jungler, but there are a few things beyond that: - if your laner has time to go take blue by himself, the enemy jungler had time to do it too. If you don't want your laner to take that camp, don't leave it up for so long. - a jungler can (and probably should) smite away blue from a laner who appears clueless if he has any use for it himself. E.g. if the enemy jungler has a stronger early game and went for top scuttle, so your jungle tried to take bottom scuttle but mid had no priority and enemy mid forced him off it, while allied mid made no effort to punish enemy mid's over-extension - and this results in allied jungle being under-leveled and needs second buff to hit 6 and start getting back into the game - he should definitely take it. - otherwise (i.e. under most normal circumstances) a blue-dependent jungler and a mid-lane mage need to understand who needs blue more (read: who can make better use of blue) and the other needs to alter their gameplay to account for that. I used to play Hecarim jungle who really likes blue buff... yet I'd still give it to an Anivia in a heartbeat. She's going to make good use of that. However I'm not giving it to a LeBlanc that's going even in lane... she doesn't need it nearly as much and hasn't earned it from me. If she's 4/0 then she can have whatever she wants, that's another story. As an Ahri mid-laner, I'll happily take blue but rarely ask for it. I build lost chapter first and complete my mana item and don't terribly need blue in most games. However if I know I'm getting blue, perhaps I can go for a more aggressive build that doesn't prioritize early mana.
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Atqw9dqF,comment-id=0011,timestamp=2019-05-11T15:48:37.553+0000) > > The thing is, if this was true, the F- player would lose EVERY game and would quickly get to such low MMR that they would only be playing with other F- players. > > So, it's not true. The problem lies elsewhere. > > There are some feasible options: > - players in your elo may not care about playing their best picks. They are F- on some picks they enjoy playing, but sometimes go on their better picks and put in solid B+ performances to maintain their ranking > - performances are volatile. The player isn't an F- or a B+. They're a C+ and belong where they are, but on a game to game basis their performance varies considerably. Not even due to them individually (but partially), but also due to team comp, enemy champions, play style, etc... I agree, maybe they aren't F- overall, but for the purposes of this game, they are an F-. Be it autofill or counterpick, whatever the reason. And for the team stuck with this liability, it doesn't matter if F- will be a C- in the next game, it just matters that the game assigned them an instant loss outside of their control.
> [{quoted}](name=Kanyoupipu,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Atqw9dqF,comment-id=00110000,timestamp=2019-05-11T19:54:11.370+0000) > > I agree, maybe they aren't F- overall, but for the purposes of this game, they are an F-. Be it autofill or counterpick, whatever the reason. > > And for the team stuck with this liability, it doesn't matter if F- will be a C- in the next game, it just matters that the game assigned them an instant loss outside of their control. And what would you have Riot do about it? The very problem you identify, that the best player cannot carry and instead the worse player loses, is rather subjective. Who's to say that it's an F- losing to a C+, instead of a C+ losing to an A+? Just because you can outplay said player later doesn't mean he didn't play the early game well... perhaps he baited your ally well, perhaps he had jungle help, perhaps he only got outplayed later because he got cocky and careless? Everyone thinks they only lose because they personally are good but an enemy got lucky. You'll win far more often than not if you're the best player in your games.
: The worst player has more impact than the best
> [{quoted}](name=Kanyoupipu,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Atqw9dqF,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-05-11T08:18:56.014+0000) > > All that matters is the worst player in the game. Whoever gets to lane against them gets fed and wins. > > There is no opportunity for a A+ player to kill a B+ player, because the game is already decided when a C- player DUMPSTERS an F- player. > > The problem is, it is OBVIOUS who the F- players are, but Riot doesn't account for individual performance whatsoever, so the entire team is punished for 1 absurd liability, and then the matchmaking continues to deteriorate. > > In low ELO especially. It isn't a game anymore. Its a teammate dice-roll simulator. The thing is, if this was true, the F- player would lose EVERY game and would quickly get to such low MMR that they would only be playing with other F- players. So, it's not true. The problem lies elsewhere. There are some feasible options: - players in your elo may not care about playing their best picks. They are F- on some picks they enjoy playing, but sometimes go on their better picks and put in solid B+ performances to maintain their ranking - performances are volatile. The player isn't an F- or a B+. They're a C+ and belong where they are, but on a game to game basis their performance varies considerably. Not even due to them individually (but partially), but also due to team comp, enemy champions, play style, etc...
: With all of number nerfs to lethality but little ADC itemization nerfs, game is getting boring fast
If you're playing an Assassin and complaining about ADCs, you're not playing the Assassin right...
: The same can be said for seekers with dematerializer on mages. Except mages are inherently stronger throughout the game without needing much if any gold advantage.
> [{quoted}](name=The Chillin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3eAK3Xtw,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-03-19T18:21:13.294+0000) > > The same can be said for seekers with dematerializer on mages. Except mages are inherently stronger throughout the game without needing much if any gold advantage. Uugh I can't believe we're coming back to this. What part of "back for mana" do you not understand? If a mage builds seekers, they're not building lost chapter and thus are definitely backing for mana (even more). Zed can build Hexdrinker and still never needs to back for Energy. Anyways - it's nice to see that despite the lack of visibility, Riot is nerfing dematerializer. The nerf is even for almost the same reason (pros were using it to clear cannons to have too much wave control - my complaint was a manaless champion can use it to clear cannons and punish mana-champions too heavily when they back properly on a cannon wave). Having only 3 charges instead of 6 means they're only getting 2-3 plates and punishing me 2-3 times instead of 4-5 plates and 5-6 times. The "below" cases being that they may need to use it defensively if I get a good push on them at any point. So the issue is done now, anyways - 3 charges is something that should be possible to play around.
: My problem with your post is that you're surprised at the number of upvotes I'm getting. The goal of my post is to create a constructive discussion around dodging. It doesn't matter if what I say is completely right or wrong, what matters is that everyone sheds their preconceived notions of the system and we all arrive at a positive conclusion that results in action or inaction. Everything else I'm very happy to answer The system we have in place right now has been around for such a long time without being touched. It's also very very simple. This is why we cannot assume that Riot has done enough in regards to dodge penalties. You also have to take into account that with lower dodge penalties, there is a point where queue times will be long, making players overly eager to overlook bad matchups. The other thing you need to take into account is that with more even odds, players will be much much less likely to re-roll, than if they had a clear loss. I have to upvote you because I feel like you contributed to the discussion
> [{quoted}](name=RlCKY BOBBY,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IhnbqXAn,comment-id=000c0001,timestamp=2019-03-14T00:21:36.407+0000) > > My problem with your post is that you're surprised at the number of upvotes I'm getting. The goal of my post is to create a constructive discussion around dodging. It doesn't matter if what I say is completely right or wrong, what matters is that everyone sheds their preconceived notions of the system and we all arrive at a positive conclusion that results in action or inaction. > > Everything else I'm very happy to answer > > The system we have in place right now has been around for such a long time without being touched. It's also very very simple. > This is why we cannot assume that Riot has done enough in regards to dodge penalties. > > You also have to take into account that with lower dodge penalties, there is a point where queue times will be long, making players overly eager to overlook bad matchups. > > The other thing you need to take into account is that with more even odds, players will be much much less likely to re-roll, than if they had a clear loss. > > I have to upvote you because I feel like you contributed to the discussion Honestly, the reason I say I'm surprised with the upvotes sort of aligns with your opinion here - I feel like there are a lot of upvotes from people not thinking about the "flaws" of your suggestion and just blindly upvoting. So from that perspective - we both agree that discussion is needed on the matter. I also feel it necessary to say I didn't downvote you (because I wouldn't downvote a post that isn't a bad post, even if I disagree with the ideas). To one point in my post - I think giving an alternative way to get rid of the increased dodge penalty (from 10 back down to 3) by a player playing 3 consecutive games without dodging (or the current 24 hours, whichever comes first) and/or implementing an advance-earning of free dodges for a larger number of no-dodge games would be a better way to reduce the dodge penalty. I also feel like lowering the dodge penalty won't always make queue-trolls less common though. Dodge penalties will always need to escalate with additional consecutive dodges, and I get the sense that these dodge-trolls are the ones more likely to use up their free/cheap dodge pretty easily (or they're in promos and have a huge dodge penalty). So lowering your penalty just increases their success rate at queue-trolling because people feel less penalized for doing so. In a sense, I feel like we really need an official "I'm dodging this game because of X player" button and if the same player gets reported for that too much he can actually get punished...
: Why are dodging penalties and autofill bad for matchmaking?!
Have to say that I really disagree with you, and am surprised at the sheer number of upvotes this post is getting... Dodging is a balance equation - if you dodge to avoid a bad match, you contribute to improving your win rate. That's because if you're ALWAYS going to dodge bad matches, you'll never be in the losing side of a bad match. However it's still possible for you to be on the winning side of a bad match, as there's no guarantee your opponents will dodge a bad match. You make the claim that eliminating dodge penalties would self-correct this, and I agree that claim is accurate. If there was no dodge penalty, there would be no reason to play any match that you felt you had an under 50% chance of winning. However, once both sides apply that logic - no match would EVER get played. Someone is always going to be counter picked, or on an off role, or feel like one of their allies has been having a bad day, etc... and will dodge. So you don't get to play the game, and that's dumb. You further argue that we could reinstate a dodge penalty to counter that. Wow - so we're back where we started? You claim that the penalty should be much smaller than the current 10LP / 30min - however that's not the current penalty. The penalty is 3LP / 6 min. So... Riot has already done exactly what you're asking them to do. What exactly is the complaint? IF you're dodging 2+ times to get the larger 10LP / 30min penalty - you're either dodging too many games or playing too many games. In the former case - escalating the dodge penalty makes sense. You shouldn't be able to use dodges as a way to find favorable matches, which is what you're doing. You list in your post that one reason for dodging can be that a teammate has had some bad games that day. It's hardly fair to your teammate that he can't get into a new game because he had 2 or 3 bad games earlier that day. You weren't in those games, you don't know why he had 2 or 3 losses or why he may have had bad KDAs in those games. If everyone applied your logic, that player would never get to play - hardly seems fair. In the latter case - I can agree that dodge penalties resetting should be based on the number of games played between dodges rather than an out-of-game timer. That WASN'T your post. It IS a reasonable answer though. If you dodge, then play 3+ games without dodging, perhaps you should be permitted another dodge. Most players aren't playing 4+ games each day, so it works out for them the same way. For people who play a lot, it's understandable that they'd need to dodge more often. I ALSO agree with the sentiment that players should earn free dodges in some way. Especially for promo series. Being unable to dodge due to being in a promo series and getting a clear troll on your team is a terrible feeling - especially when I'm a player that has dodged a grand total of 2 ranked games over the last 4 years. I ONLY dodge clear trolls (and accept that I won't always have a favorable team comp), yet I've only had clear trolls in non-promo games twice and have gotten them in promo games far more often. It would make sense that playing 20, 50, or even 100 consecutive games without dodging should grant a free dodge in a promo series. Especially since when you're in a promo series it's more likely that you'll get the troll on your team (since other players can dodge the troll and force a relobby, the troll will eventually end up on your team. If you only have a limited time available to play then the option is to either not play at all that day [possibly that week] or to risk getting the troll on your team, which as mentioned is far more likely since you have only 3 allies that could dodge for you while the enemy team has 4). I don't think the dodging system is perfect - but I think your proposal doesn't help it.
Bopbants (NA)
: Rune Pages Are Too Expensive
I have 10 rune pages, all of which were bought when you couldn't edit your runes during champion select. They weren't for convenience then, they were an advantage. When the switch came out and BE was partially refunded for purchased runes and rune pages, I lost a net of about 30K Blue Essence in invested value (I believe the partial refund was about 50% and I got about 30K Blue Essence back). The runes are all gone, but the 8 extra rune pages are what I have to show for it. I got a small advantage for about 2 seasons, and it cost me 30K Blue Essence. Now I get a convenience. I think it would be a bit of a low-blow to now devalue that convenience as well. Especially with role-select now, where you can queue for 1 of 2 roles. Fill out the two pages you have for the two roles you will queue for and the champion you feel like playing in each of those roles that match before you queue up. Then only in cases where you got filled or your pick was picked/banned would you need to change (and if you're counter-picking or flexing your champion pick, then even with more rune pages you would still end up editing them in champion select).
: @Riot SapMagic, don't give in to peer pressure, keep positional ranks!
"On the matchmaking side, we’re happy with how positional matchmaking—not to be confused with position ranks—is working. Queue times have improved for many players and off-position win rates have gone up. On top of that, primary position rates have improved, and in many cases, autofill rates have gone down." My understanding is that they're preserving the positional matchmaking - meaning that when you get an off-role you'll be placed in an easier game - which should make your climb easier. I do think Riot is underestimating the impact of positional ranks and overstating the impact of positional matchmaking though. Queue times have improved: that should be a mix of both. Positional matchmaking as people are more willing to play other roles, and positional ranks as people are more **encouraged** to play other roles. Off position win rates: Obviously due to positional matchmaking, they're fine here. Primary position rates: Again a mix of both - people willing to play other (less popular) roles AND the positional rank encouraging them to do so. autofill down: Again a mix of both for the same reason. Without the motivation to queue for off-roles in the form of a separate rank, I don't think players do it nearly as much if at all. Unless you have a role with a significantly lower MMR than you really are in that role so that you can use it to raise your overall ranking easily - most players will prefer to play their main role and believe they have a better chance to win and climb in that role. That said - there's no downside to positional matchmaking (other than making it easier to rank up, possibly devaluing "ranks"). Positional rankings did have a large downside - mostly the overall increased grind-y-ness of it.
: I would play a few top games and try to get Gold 3. I had the biggest lp gains during the firsts games of the promo series. You have nothing to lose. I think Riot is going to view G4 0lp and G4 50lp the same way.
> [{quoted}](name=ll3lackbeard,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=quPfpn0G,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-12T02:12:38.312+0000) > > I would play a few top games and try to get Gold 3. I had the biggest lp gains during the firsts games of the promo series. You have nothing to lose. I think Riot is going to view G4 0lp and G4 50lp the same way. Played a second game and won, and got into Gold 3 top. Hope that will be enough for it to take precedence over my mid lane rank - although mid is still showing as my main role (unfortunately I can't get someone to hover over my name and see, as it shows my Gold 2 Flex rank). If I don't get it now, then they worded it terribly. Either way - no chance for me to play 6 more games by tomorrow.
: I would play a few top games and try to get Gold 3. I had the biggest lp gains during the firsts games of the promo series. You have nothing to lose. I think Riot is going to view G4 0lp and G4 50lp the same way.
> [{quoted}](name=ll3lackbeard,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=quPfpn0G,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-12T02:12:38.312+0000) > > I would play a few top games and try to get Gold 3. I had the biggest lp gains during the firsts games of the promo series. You have nothing to lose. I think Riot is going to view G4 0lp and G4 50lp the same way. Guess that makes the most sense. I only have 1 or 2 days to do it? (Not sure what time on the 13th it will reset...). Generally don't play much during the week, hope I can get a win in that time.
: Your gonna get placed into mid because you didn't finish your placements for top.
> [{quoted}](name=Prestige Vayne,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=quPfpn0G,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-12T01:25:07.834+0000) > > Your gonna get placed into mid because you didn't finish your placements for top. So the quote is just an outright lie?
Rioter Comments
ZR1999 (NA)
: Wanting to take objectives, is it wrong?
As a split pusher you also have to understand what to expect from your teammates and the enemy team. If you want to split, you either need your allies to have pressure and disengage (so if they send 2+ to you, your allies get something - if they 5v4 your allies they can get away) or your allies to have waveclear and safety to defend a tower. If your team lacks good disengage and/or the enemy team has really strong engage - what exactly do you expect your team to do while you split? You even stated in your post "get hard engaged". Like, should they just disappear from the map? You might have sufficient disengage or survivability to split and farm up there by yourself, but if they just sit in base to avoid getting engaged on, not only will you die 1v5 but they'll also fall far behind as they give up all the farm. It's not just on you, and not just on your teammates. It really matters what the game state is and what Champions are there. Like, if the enemy team has Camille/sejuani/kassadin against your lux/miss Fortune/Sona - you really shouldn't be splitting. They stand no chance at avoiding that engage / tower dive. Now if your team has Ahri/ezreal/Janna instead - that's an entirely different story (although without Janna or alistar it would be pretty tough to get out of Camille ult). If their team has Olaf/Lee/Anivia - likewise a different story where your team should be capable of avoiding getting engaged on. As the person making the decision to split, you should be aware of how the enemy team can engage and what your team would have to do to avoid the fight.
Barso55 (NA)
: yeah weirdest thing I encounter is a game going fine, no flame, no rage, no feed going on, and I'm doing a camp and one of my teammates decides to last hit it with some spells while walking by. Junglers really are considered 3rd class citizens. I feel like Cinderalla or something when that happens. Why do these people play a 5v5 competitive team game if theyre gonna try and fuck over their own teammates on purpose?
> [{quoted}](name=Barso55,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=eXVFHYOE,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-26T10:34:45.331+0000) > > yeah weirdest thing I encounter is a game going fine, no flame, no rage, no feed going on, and I'm doing a camp and one of my teammates decides to last hit it with some spells while walking by. > > Junglers really are considered 3rd class citizens. I feel like Cinderalla or something when that happens. Why do these people play a 5v5 competitive team game if theyre gonna try and fuck over their own teammates on purpose? Honestly sometimes I'll throw a spell at a camp my jungler is clearing not to steal it, but because I'm full mana and want to help him clear it faster so he can get on the map quicker. Sometimes I underestimate my damage and one-shot all the mini Raptors (or jungler doesn't understand how Ahri Q Works and uses his tiamat between my two instances of damage making me kill it when I wouldn't have). I pretty much never end up taking the big monster (which is the only one you get more from than me, so even if I was intentionally taking the small ones it should be okay if I'm contributing more to our win condition), but still get spam pinged by the jungler when I accidentally take the mini like that. In general I'd also assume teammates take camps if you're jungling too much and ganking/getting objectives/teamfighting too little. Really annoying to see red jungler doing krugs when infernal Drake is spawning. So if a Lane sees that on first Drake, why not take it themselves 20 seconds before second Drake? Likewise if a Lane is behind due to being camped and hasn't gotten any assistance from the jungler, they probably feel entitled to the camps. If you're not going to help me to let me farm my own Lane, then I'm going to take camps so you have to do something on the map. Always an awful feeling as a Laner to have been ganked 7 times and be at 1/2/0 and your jungler not only hasn't ganked for you all game but also hasn't gotten either of the other lanes a lead either.
Barso55 (NA)
: Riot did a pretty good job of trying to make Morde a bot lane mage - Why isn't he picked more bot?
Any reasonably high Elo ADC will know how to bully morde in Lane and basically get a big lead while morde is useless. Morde would be quite good in lower Elo, but most low Elo players will copy high Elo / pro, and therefore he's not played there either. He's too easily kited, and therefore zoned. He'd only stand a chance with a really aggressive tank engage support like blitz/thresh/Leona, but even then his win condition comes down to his support landing the engage AND the enemy support missing their peel - all before they get poked/zoned out. In addition to all of that, he lacks tower taking pressure late game. Sure, he can take them down with dragon ghost helping, but there's no guarantee he's getting dragon late game. I could see morde working in average-high Elo if he's got one of the above supports and either a marksman jungle or a hard engage cc jungle that can camp his Lane early. However such narrow win conditions make for an unpopular pick.
SIayton (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E3RqQ6Hp,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-24T20:11:53.168+0000) > > I don't agree... > > Every Drake changes gameplay. > > An ocean Drake early in the game completely warps Laning phase. You don't care as much about mana costs, you can recover better from bad trades. > > An infernal Drake changes the entire outcome of fights. I recently had a game where we had dragon control and were taking infernal. Our jungler failed smite and it got stolen by enemy support lux ultimate (at level 6 or 7). I subsequently charmed their ADC, and got him to 7hp on my combo before he healed and I had no cooldowns. He lifestealed long enough to get out as their jungler came in. At the same time my top/jungle died 2v2 with both enemies surviving under 60hp. If my jungler didn't miss the infernal Drake there, we come out with it PLUS 3 kills for none, but instead lost it and 3 kills to none. That's a 6 kill swing and definitely cost us that game, even though we were only levels 6 to 9. > > Mountain makes you get so much objective pressure. You can melt Baron way too easily and can rush it before your opponent can react even if they have vision. > > They all change the game. They can all also be dealt with. > > You can still counterplay cloud by flanking. It's not as trivial as just running away. Unless you're SUPER behind, I personally feel like you can overcome raw stats by just outplaying someone. At least in solo queue, I feel like those small advantages don't really matter that much and I can just ignore them, but cloud is basically impossible to ignore because the COMBAT actually changes. I think there is a big distinction there. I'm sure there are times where 10 AD makes a difference between life or death but I would wager that cloud drake probably makes or breaks way more engagements.
> [{quoted}](name=SIayton,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E3RqQ6Hp,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-25T11:24:10.292+0000) > > Unless you're SUPER behind, I personally feel like you can overcome raw stats by just outplaying someone. At least in solo queue, I feel like those small advantages don't really matter that much and I can just ignore them, but cloud is basically impossible to ignore because the COMBAT actually changes. I think there is a big distinction there. > > I'm sure there are times where 10 AD makes a difference between life or death but I would wager that cloud drake probably makes or breaks way more engagements. It's not 10 AD... it's 10% AD and AP... That's a gigantic amount, especially on certain champions (Jhin, Veigar, etc...). Likewise, the movement speed buff makes a bigger difference on some champions than others. There's an Udyr / Hecarim / Rammus / Olaf / Volibear / Singed in the game? Yes, that cloud drake is going to make a big difference for them. If every team has mobile champions though, it really doesn't make as big of a difference. Cloud isn't going to let you follow Ezreal or Zed over a wall. I'd argue it varies by champion and player/playstyle. If you're used to winning games by going mid as 5 and just teamfighting until someone wins - the infernal drakes are going to be way better. If you generally siege to win with a poke comp, Ocean drakes will matter most. If you generally Baron to win, Mountain drakes will reign supreme. And if you generally try to out-macro the enemy team and slowly take surrounding towers and force favorable fights, Cloud will likely matter most. In solo queue, that should put Cloud/Ocean at the bottom and Infernal at the top. However it would still vary by play style.
: Ranked is busted this season
Basically the game assumed you swapped with him on purpose, not role stealing. I hope you reported him either way - at least he'll get banned for the behavior.
SIayton (NA)
: Cloud drake affects gameplay too much compared to other dragons, I think it needs a rework.
I don't agree... Every Drake changes gameplay. An ocean Drake early in the game completely warps Laning phase. You don't care as much about mana costs, you can recover better from bad trades. An infernal Drake changes the entire outcome of fights. I recently had a game where we had dragon control and were taking infernal. Our jungler failed smite and it got stolen by enemy support lux ultimate (at level 6 or 7). I subsequently charmed their ADC, and got him to 7hp on my combo before he healed and I had no cooldowns. He lifestealed long enough to get out as their jungler came in. At the same time my top/jungle died 2v2 with both enemies surviving under 60hp. If my jungler didn't miss the infernal Drake there, we come out with it PLUS 3 kills for none, but instead lost it and 3 kills to none. That's a 6 kill swing and definitely cost us that game, even though we were only levels 6 to 9. Mountain makes you get so much objective pressure. You can melt Baron way too easily and can rush it before your opponent can react even if they have vision. They all change the game. They can all also be dealt with. You can still counterplay cloud by flanking. It's not as trivial as just running away.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: 0-6-2 yasuo with half of our mid lane dravens farm
Honestly - I wouldn't mind if Yasuo had this unreasonable strength when he has great setup from stuff like Alistar or Malphite. What bothers me is that he seems to have this unreasonable strength even when he's on a team that doesn't offer much in the way of knock-ups or allied magic damage. When a 0/6 bad farm Yasuo can get not only a positive KDA by the end of the game, but actually play an active role in winning the game, on a non-Yasuo comp - that's a huge ass problem. Especially since he has no inherent disadvantage in lane (and frankly has inherent advantages in most matchups mid lane against mages). He isn't MEANT to go 0/6. That's his misplay.
Shark5 (NA)
: Ban None No Longer Available
It's always super annoying when someone bans none. Like if an ally is showing intent, you know you can safely can anything else in that role. Even if the most diverse roles and excluding play rates, you have a 2% chance of banning the enemy's main and netting yourself a much easier game. Probably closer to 5-8% once you consider pick rates. And you can always ask. I play Ahri mid and always ban Fizz. Would gladly take bans on yasuo/zed/veigar/Annie/Diana/lux. Not that I can't beat them, but I do better in other matchups and if my opponent was going to pick that then as mentioned earlier we'll benefit from them not being on their main. Oh, and twitch. Like, if you want to ban none, why not ban a cheese/boost pick like twitch jungle?
: Seekers is a 1100 price tag that is worth 1800 gold and counters 6k gold worth of lethality items, try that.
> [{quoted}](name=The Chillin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3eAK3Xtw,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-02-21T03:37:21.407+0000) > > Seekers is a 1100 price tag that is worth 1800 gold and counters 6k gold worth of lethality items, try that. I think you're missing the point. The problem is when he has hexdrinker I can't kill him. With Minion dematerializer he gets free plates = gold every time I back. So he gets "fed" from tower plates. I'm not complaining that I can't survive him. I'm complaining that the counter to Zed is NOT dying to him (often using seekers) and thereby not letting him get fed to make him basically get free kills all mid game on your squishies. However with dematerializer I have no control over that. He gets 2-4 kills worth of Gold by taking my tower plates and not missing a wave of cs on his backs. With hex I can't force him out of Lane. He gets a free no risk Laning phase, where he's guaranteed to come out with at least 2 kills worth of Gold from tower plates to let him get the super free press R to kill adc mid game. Generally he doesn't get that mid game if you don't feed him kills.
: Okay. So you gutted one of two problem roles.
Strongly agree with the other post here. Like anyone else, a mid Laner definitely HAS THE TOOLS to hard carry. They have good access to the rest of the map. Unlike the jungle that may fall off in levels and get 1v2'd, a strong mid Laner can roam top with impunity knowing they won't get killed in a 2v1 or even 2v2, because they can take the fed enemy top themselves if they're kiting properly (/ get away if it goes badly). Likewise, a mid Laner can roam bot and shut down the enemy bot Lane in a 3v2 or even 1v2 if they over stayed. However roaming bot CAN still be punished, if the enemy bot is fed and engages on you 2v1 (without the element of surprise to burst the ADC it may not go well). Mid often carries THROUGH their teammates - they get their lead and then bring it to their allies. They use the lead to help the allies get a lead, and those allies help win the game. You're entirely wrong about mid Lane winning games by themselves though. There are VERY FEW mid Lane hyper carries - and those Champions shouldn't be getting fed early. Sure, Azir or Karthus can solo carry, but your typical mage gets hard countered by top Lane fighters and tanks. A single MR tank item pretty much shuts them down. Have you even ever tried killing a Mundo or maokai by yourself as a mage? Their base HP Regen pretty much outheals your damage (not really, but you get the point). If someone like riven or Jax gets near you, you're dead too. Most mids spike mid game and use that to give their team the lead to win late if it goes that far.
Saezio (EUNE)
: They introduced the same mechanic to darius where he can ult and get the reset even if the target dies shortly after.
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=QykV4Jpq,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-19T12:50:20.117+0000) > > They introduced the same mechanic to darius where he can ult and get the reset even if the target dies shortly after. But does he still get the free 5 stacks on the enemy he auto attacks after?
Saezio (EUNE)
: What if I am pyke tho. Shouldn't the darius learn to let me get the kill?
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=QykV4Jpq,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-02-19T12:21:20.662+0000) > > What if I am pyke tho. Shouldn't the darius learn to let me get the kill? Time it so your ult starts before the kill, but the damage doesn't apply until after his ult. You still get full kill gold if you ult the right place but someone else gets the kill just before. I think you still get your reset too. Pyke's is a lot more forgiving than Darius'.
Rioter Comments
Saezio (EUNE)
: I hope the ranks you are referencing are their past _flex_ ranks.
> [{quoted}](name=Saezio,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=aVbe10NV,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-18T13:45:40.403+0000) > > I hope the ranks you are referencing are their past _flex_ ranks. No, solo queue. Which is why I commented towards the end: if I had a regular LP loss I would have written it off as bad luck that these high ranked players had low flex ranks. But I only lost 5 LP. That indicates pretty clearly that matchmaking KNEW the match was imbalanced, presumably with their flex MMR vs ours.
: Why annie is a weak laner in this patch
Annie's weakness is lack of mobility. Her damage is incredibly strong. You should look to trade around her stun: last hit with Q to charge her passive, then you can use Q as a targeted stun and follow with W and an auto before backing out to avoid return damage. At 6, she definitely has the damage to burst people down with tibbers (who will also do damage over time to them if she doesn't quite finish them). With higher auto attack range Annie support gets too strong in pro play (and Annie in all levels of play tbh). As noted at the start, the lack of mobility means you need to be wary of ganks. Annie mid is a good Lane to camp as she wins most matchups 1v1, but is easy to gank if she's extended at all - almost guaranteeing she'll flash or die.
Seen (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6wEfKJHy,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-18T12:27:07.330+0000) > > I disagree. > > Taking an inhibitor is meant to be a big advantage. Trading an inhibitor for Baron is meant to be a reasonable option. > > Shortening inhibitor timers is just a buff to late game Champions, who already got buffed from bounties (getting their build faster). A lot of the time, an early game team that plays well and establishes a lead STILL gets outscaled. However they never give up pressure and win because of Map pressure, which inhibitors are a huge part of. > > Reducing the ability to maintain map pressure just makes early game Champions that much less viable (and late game Champions too strong). They would need to end in 20-25min or would get outscaled and lose. Getting 3 inhibitors would be insanely hard as you'd need to do it in one push, not resetting in between. I would say it's better to buff supers during the duration inhib is down and reduce the respawn timer. That way the it forces the leading team to capitalize on their lead while at the same time give the losing side a chance if the winning team does not choose to clench the game.
> [{quoted}](name=Seen,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6wEfKJHy,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-18T12:58:55.707+0000) > > I would say it's better to buff supers during the duration inhib is down and reduce the respawn timer. That way the it forces the leading team to capitalize on their lead while at the same time give the losing side a chance if the winning team does not choose to clench the game. It may be an improvement when the inhibitor is taken at 30+ minutes. When an inhibitor is taken at 12-20min, it would basically be an immediate game-over. Right now, losing a super-early inhibitor can be okay. E.g. enemy top is stomping yours and just splits in his lane all game. Your top abandons his lane (not safe to be there and feed) and helps the rest of your team win the rest of the map. Your bot lane was hard winning already anyways. Enemy top gets inhib as team collapses on him for the shut down kill. Your top can now safely farm up under double nexus towers with supers-farm, while the rest of your team can cc/kite the enemy top if he shows up and otherwise just play catch-up for a while. I've won a reasonable number of games from that situation. (I've also gotten top inhib pre-15min by having a small lead top, then jungler solo'ing Herald, ganking top for a kill when the enemy jungle is bot, the two of us finish the tier 1 turret, then drop herald for tier 2. Then enemy jungle/mid tries to stop us but we win the 2v2 and get the inhibitor with Shelly - and while we won that game the enemy team dragged it out to at least 25min). Now nerf the inhibitor respawn time? Your top doesn't get that free-farm for as long. Buff the super minions? Your top can't even kill them and may even be executed to them. Early super minions are already insanely strong. A buff to their power-level would just make an early inhibitor impossible to come back from.
Rioter Comments
Iustin (EUNE)
: Matchmaking System Report Option
In general this won't help anything. Most games that we view as imbalanced aren't due to matchmaking, but are due to snowballing, champion/role selection, or inconsistency. While there are obviously Smurfs, those players will typically quickly rise to their appropriate rank and only spend a handful of games at each lower rank. Exceptions aren't due to matchmaking, but due to content creators purposefully keeping their rank down (e.g. by dodging). Complaining about worse players, they got to the same Elo. While again some may have paid for a boost, in general it will just be someone having a bad game. Maybe they got ganked early or barely lost a 1v1 and then got snowballed on. Maybe their main was picked/banned. Maybe they aren't experienced against the champion their Lane opponent is on. Maybe they're tilted. There are plenty of explanations for why someone appears to not deserve the Elo you're in. They still had to win the games to get there though. It's far more likely that matchmaking is fine but the variance in game to game performance is the issue. Pushing that player down just makes them get a really big stomp in the lower Elo game.
Beiggar (NA)
: Inhibitor respawn time debate.
I disagree. Taking an inhibitor is meant to be a big advantage. Trading an inhibitor for Baron is meant to be a reasonable option. Shortening inhibitor timers is just a buff to late game Champions, who already got buffed from bounties (getting their build faster). A lot of the time, an early game team that plays well and establishes a lead STILL gets outscaled. However they never give up pressure and win because of Map pressure, which inhibitors are a huge part of. Reducing the ability to maintain map pressure just makes early game Champions that much less viable (and late game Champions too strong). They would need to end in 20-25min or would get outscaled and lose. Getting 3 inhibitors would be insanely hard as you'd need to do it in one push, not resetting in between.
: First time seeing this. :D
If you trade enough, all of your positional ranks will get brought to the same rank. Basically your best role will come down a little, and the rest will move towards that. It's basically opting out of positional matchmaking. The reason for this is that positional matchmaking is abuse-able otherwise. Let's say I'm a Plat 2 mid laner, Plat 3 top, and Gold 2 Jungle, Gold 4 ADC/Supp. meanwhile my friend (or random I got put into game with) is a Plat 2 ADC, Plat 3 support, Gold 2 jungle, and Gold 4 mid/top. If he's put in mid/top and I'm put in adc/supp we're in a gold 4 game. However if we swap roles we'll be mid-Plat in the roles we swap to, and just have a super easy game AND gain LP in those main roles. So if I do that too often, all my ranks will just coverge to Plat 3. I lose a little off my main rank (plat 3 instead of plat 2 mid) but my other ranks all come way up, so I can't get into easier matches by queuing for other roles. The whole idea of positional ranked is that you should be the right skill level for your game without switching roles. So while occasionally switching is fine (say, strategically, because you got counter picked but can flex into another lane), doing it regularly can deactivate positional ranked.
: would you say there should always be ad teammates?
> [{quoted}](name=Brony Gaymer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KRovQHAk,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-17T17:44:17.202+0000) > > would you say there should always be ad teammates? Yes. Definite, strong, yes. While Riot seems to be okay with letting ADCs or even fighters do real damage to tanks that are strictly stacking armour, the same is generally not true for AP. If a team is all AP and a tank stacks MR, they will become unkillable. Even with as few as {{item:3111}} {{item:3065}} {{item:3001}} {{item:3194}} (4 of 6 items) the tank will tank next-to-no damage from AP only teams.
del0 (NA)
: What happen to my rank borders in loading screen?
I agree that it's pretty dumb. I got plat pretty early last season and yet had the play the whole season with a gold border. Then this season instead of getting the plat border guess what? I'm likely to place in gold and get a gold border again until I climb again. Why do I need to get Plat in two separate seasons to get a plat border for the first time?
: even if they have MR or you can't hit your skillshots? I got 10 kills today with warrior enchant morg and going manamune
> [{quoted}](name=Brony Gaymer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KRovQHAk,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-02-17T16:47:13.462+0000) > > even if they have MR or you can't hit your skillshots? I got 10 kills today with warrior enchant morg and going manamune If they're building MR that means your AD teammates will do more damage. If everyone built ad, your opponents wouldn't build MR, they would just stack armor. If you can't land your skillshots, then you have two options: - practice - learn to land them - play Champions that aren't skillshot reliant There are lots of Champions that aren't skillshot reliant. Admittedly most are AD (your marksmen) and this wouldn't be a better pick if you're going to build ad because you can't land abilities. Some ap options that don't need to land skillshots: Teemo - you can build on hit (eg nashors and Lich bane) and do lots of magic damage. Azir - you're dealing basic damage by attacking with your soldiers (admittedly this Champion is much harder to play than landing your skillshots on any other champion would be though) Also tanks like maokai or malphite don't really have skillshots to hit (the latter's ult being important though).
: Are there any champions that don't benefit from mixing some ad items into their build?
Yes, pretty much any ap champion. If you have ap ratios on your abilities, then building ap will give you more damage (and more burst, front loaded damage is better as it gets your opponent dead faster to stop their sustained damage). Also, most tanks don't benefit as much from building ad as from building tank. They often have percent health damage (either their health or their opponents) and mostly deal damage from these abilities while living a long time to building full tank and using lots of crowd control. Ap champion examples: {{champion:103}} {{champion:34}} {{champion:1}} {{champion:69}} {{champion:55}} {{champion:13}} and many more Tank examples: {{champion:113}} {{champion:57}} {{champion:111}} etc.... Some tanks like{{champion:78}} {{champion:98}} or{{champion:72}} can and sometimes do build an ad item or two though (often of {{item:3078}} {{item:3748}} {{item:3053}}
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8irIT823,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-16T17:04:09.338+0000) > > The recommended builds aren't amazing, but they're probably better than what you're picking to go on your own if you're only using your own ideas and aren't very high ranked. > > Sites like u.gg or op.gg will generally suggest better builds for you. u.gg even lets you put in who your lane opponent is and somewhat customizes the recommended build to that. > > You should try to get an understanding of why certain items are built in certain situations though, rather than just blindly following a recommended build from the game or these other sites. then can you give me example of itemization for 1 champion and the reasoning behind the whats and the whens?
> [{quoted}](name=Brony Gaymer,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=8irIT823,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-16T17:08:03.220+0000) > > then can you give me example of itemization for 1 champion and the reasoning behind the whats and the whens? Well, I play a lot of Ahri. {{champion:103}} You always rush {{item:3285}} because you need the mana, AP, and cdr. You COULD rush {{item:3152}} at high levels of play if you're going to be really conservative with your mana and can reliably get blue buff from your jungler (to alleviate your mana problems most of the time). You'll generally want {{item:3020}} early to give you more damage. {{item:3111}} might be considered against a CC and AP heavy team, but even then you'd probably want Sorcs unless you're behind. After that is when it gets situational. {{item:3165}} is never a bad pickup as it gives you double penetration so you're dealing close to true damage against squishies. However if they don't have any healing you're wasting the grievous wounds. Against AD mid picks you probably should have gotten a {{item:3191}} before completing ludens (basically lost chapter > seekers > ludens), and you should complete Zhonya's here instead of Morello. 4th you either want the one of {{item:3157}} / {{item:3165}} that you didn't buy yet if they're both useful. Otherwise you might want {{item:3089}} if you're snowballing, or {{item:3102}} if they're AP heavy and/or you're behind their AP Mid, or {{item:3135}} if they have lots of tanks stacking MR. You could also go {{item:3152}} at this point.
: Are the reccomended builds good? people say not to use them so i kinda go on my own but idk
The recommended builds aren't amazing, but they're probably better than what you're picking to go on your own if you're only using your own ideas and aren't very high ranked. Sites like u.gg or op.gg will generally suggest better builds for you. u.gg even lets you put in who your lane opponent is and somewhat customizes the recommended build to that. You should try to get an understanding of why certain items are built in certain situations though, rather than just blindly following a recommended build from the game or these other sites.
: Cant have it both ways
> [{quoted}](name=XXXMurderPenguin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=NW9cZNaw,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-16T15:23:19.690+0000) > > Cant have it both ways Literally making a suggestion that would make it possible... Why are you commenting if you didn't even bother reading?
Ozu (NA)
: Banned For Taking Ghost/Cleanse Strategically
Honestly the whole banning system is ridiculous. All 4 of your allies should be banned (3 for afk'ing and one for griefing). You're the only person of the 5 that shouldn't be, and probably were only 1 of 2 that did. I doubt the 3 AFKs were even punished beyond a leaverbuster warning. Riot's team for bans is pathetic really. Seeing the automated responses to tickets, etc... it's sickening. I've never received any punishments or warnings, but if even 1% of the shit I read on these forums is true, then Riot's really not handling things correctly. Not to mention the actual shit I see in my games. Like a mid-jungle duo constantly over-extending without vision and getting caught and dying, then spam-pinging that I have teleport up. Yup, like I'm going to TP into the middle of a 2v4 fight when we're already down 7 kills. Probably just would get abandoned and die myself even if we could have taken the fight.
: > [{quoted}](name=oOBestEveNAOo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QzXJzljw,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-16T14:28:23.401+0000) > > I'm an idiot. I misclicked and was playing a normal. And it was a 4 man. Very not fun game, 4 mans should never be a thing. what would you do when you are a 4 man then? They already disabled it for Flex, so the only remaining option is normal.
> [{quoted}](name=Who Fed Ru,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QzXJzljw,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-16T14:33:37.149+0000) > > what would you do when you are a 4 man then? > They already disabled it for Flex, so the only remaining option is normal. Not be a 4 man. Either stop inviting at 3, or wait to get a 5th. (just the very literal answer, not necessarily the right one).
: You can turn off clicks to the minimap
> [{quoted}](name=XXXMurderPenguin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=NW9cZNaw,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-16T13:57:07.890+0000) > > You can turn off clicks to the minimap Literally my first sentence: I like to use my minimap to move most of the time, I don't want to turn it off.
Rioter Comments
: My team vs enemy team: always same story.
Maybe it's the champions you play? i.e. I find the same with my teams, but generally I think it's because I play tanks top and waveclear mid. So if I'm top, I can peel pretty well and the idea may be that we outscale since I'm a tank and if our ADC catches up we'll win. If I'm mid, the idea may be that if I don't get killed I can waveclear and stall long enough for our team to catch up and make the game a coin-flip on one fight. That being said, I like it because I AM one of the players that generally doesn't want to surrender. More often than not I have time to queue for 1 game, I have an hour or so that I'm able to commit to playing. I don't queue for a game if I have less than an hour to play it out. So once you consider queue time + champion select + 15min to surrender - I generally don't have time for another game anyways. May as well do the best I can to win the one I have time to play out.
Kazekiba (NA)
: There is a way you win the lane. It's called he took inspiration and you didn't. You had the upper hand.
> [{quoted}](name=Kazekiba,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3eAK3Xtw,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-15T18:41:59.661+0000) > > There is a way you win the lane. > It's called he took inspiration and you didn't. You had the upper hand. And exactly what do I do with that? Fight him? Great idea. Fight him pre first back, win hard. Regardless need to back for mana after he's gone through his 3 pots. He gets a turret plate because he didn't have mana to worry about. After first back he has hexdrinker. How exactly am I supposed to do anything against that - definitely don't have the damage to all in. Poke him down again, but doesn't matter I need to back for mana and he gets another plate. He gets a wave of XP, CS, and a turret plate lead each time I back for mana. After the first back (which I can't do anything about) that's already a 160 + 3x16 + 3x20 + 60 = 328g lead plus experience. And he gets to choose what to buy after seeing what I bought - so I come back with a lost chapter to resolve my mana issues and maybe he goes Dirk+longsword and destroys me as soon as he gets ult with his XP lead. I come back with 2amp tomes and a cloth armor (like I did) and he gets hexdrinker because he knows I won't be a free kill but he can just get the same result as the first back for free since I don't have mana sustain. So please, tell me what exactly is my upper hand?
Rioter Comments
Show more

ValyrianBlade

Level 120 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion