: Highly respectable high elo top laner Hashinshin would disagree with you. Singed is op.
> [{quoted}](name=Worst Brad Japan,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=U7gcVPnA,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-10-08T01:21:45.227+0000) > > Highly respectable high elo top laner Hashinshin would disagree with you. Singed is op. That comparison makes zero sense for several reasons: Champs that are good at low Elo and high Elo are very different. In particular, champions that have a slow/weak early game but become really strong in the late game (like Singed) are particularly weak in low skilled play, because very often the game is basically decided in the first 15 minutes. In low skill games, champions that excel in picking off stray targets, or snowballing out of control are particularly strong (relative to high Elo play). That's simply because as skill goes up, the odds of a game being thrown by a particularly lobsided matchup decrease some (it still happens, but frequency changes). Second, telling a low-skill player "you should be able to carry on Singed because a top-skill player can" is lunacy. Or should I give you a rifle and tell you that you should be able to hit a bullseye at 500 meters "because some people can do that". Finally, my point had absolutely nothing to do with Singed in particular. I could have been playing any champion. I could have been winning my lane or losing it. I could have won those games or lost them. My point was that 7 games in a row, I had teammates lose their lanes (mid, bot, and as best I could tell jungle was behind/losing as well). It stood out so much that a year later I still remember it.
: Pretty common complain you can face in almost every game. Well go play jungler and gank effectively if you don't want your lanes to lose. Plus I believe Singed can be a jungler Or play assassin on mid and gank bot/top peridically. The problem maybe if you had high win ratio and you get matched against higher elo, while your allies stay same elo (usually though they should be higher too). Or you are a top lane, ask bot to place good ward and if they get pushed use TP and assist your bot. There are many ways to work out this issue, just need to think instead of complain.
> [{quoted}](name=ScoundrelRuffian,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=U7gcVPnA,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-11-14T00:33:16.948+0000) > > Pretty common complain you can face in almost every game. > > Well go play jungler and gank effectively if you don't want your lanes to lose. Plus I believe Singed can be a jungler > Or play assassin on mid and gank bot/top peridically. > The problem maybe if you had high win ratio and you get matched against higher elo, while your allies stay same elo (usually though they should be higher too). > Or you are a top lane, ask bot to place good ward and if they get pushed use TP and assist your bot. > There are many ways to work out this issue, just need to think instead of complain. Came back to the forums due to Worlds going on - thought I'd clarify. I'm not worried about winning or losing. I'm not worried about how well I do in lane (I try to do well, obviously). My complaint was that I had so many games in a row where every lane on my side lost hard during laning phase. It simply isn't fun when - however good or bad you do - the game is basically lost because by the time you can influence things, the house already burnt down. If I do well, I'm not good enough to carry an entire team of lost lanes. And if I do mediocre, it's a lost cause. And if I feed, well, that's 5 for 5 feeds. And sure, that'll happen occasionally. But it shouldn't be happening 7 in a row, and leads me to suspect that there's something going wrong in how matches are decided.
: 2018 Academy League + Roster Rules Update
I'd love to see the Thursday games offered by Riot via fan (commentator enthusiasts) submission. Sadly, I don't think that there's a good way to handle the "check for quality/profanity/etc" without being highly resource draining as well.
: That's been my experience as a top laner. Mid and bot (and sometimes even jungle) lose lane and then the enemy just rotates up top and free their top laner from me. That or the enemy jungler just decides to chain gank me into oblivion.
> [{quoted}](name=redniwediS,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=U7gcVPnA,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-11-13T18:31:14.607+0000) > > That's been my experience as a top laner. Mid and bot (and sometimes even jungle) lose lane and then the enemy just rotates up top and free their top laner from me. > > That or the enemy jungler just decides to chain gank me into oblivion. I've been mostly doing Singed top. But I did a couple games mid. I got exposed to the broken-ness that is current Udyr and bent over the barrel one game. Other game I did fine (was 1/0 vs the midlaner 1v1, and 0/2 vs getting ganked, total of 1/2/0 at around 12 minutes). And had a game bot as support and one as ADC (where my support fed first blood, then I got killed, and realized that my lane was 0/2, but within 5 minutes our team score was 1/9)... I'd like to be able to legit blame myself doing bad on team struggles. Not look at the score after I die a 2nd time (with 0 to 2 kills) and realize that I'm the *best* lane on my team with an even or losing record.
Audhulma (NA)
: Dude you're probably playing with a bunch of wood10 players atm if you're in ranked, and if you're in normals there's no semblance of team balance to begin with since those fuckers don't take ranked MMR into account for normal matchmaking. It's easily possible to be a bronze player and end up with a plat/diamond player on the other team who doesn't play normals often enough to raise MMR in them, and they'll shit on every lane with ease. If you're in boosted queue (flex) it's only slightly better than normal matchmaking, but still objectively worse than solo queue if every post about it ever made is to be believed. Of course you could just have a really, really unlucky string of matches where everybody is having a bad game. Improbable but not impossible.
> [{quoted}](name=Audhulma,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=U7gcVPnA,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-11-13T18:45:05.970+0000) > > > Of course you could just have a really, really unlucky string of matches where everybody is having a bad game. Improbable but not impossible. This is what I was assuming at 3-4 games in a row. I mean, it's pretty normal to have a lane win, but then get ripped apart by the enemy lane that got fed 6 free kills. Or to win lanes then lose lategame. Or to have a game occasionally where nobody wins lane (ignoring yourself). But when I hit 4 in a row it started feeling ridiculous. Doesn't matter if I was doing well or feeding (hint: I lost lane more often than went even) - my teammates weren't winning their lanes. And, to be clear, I'm okay with that when it feels like it happens in both directions. But at 7 games in a row, I just want to throw in the towel and uninstall again. What's the point if I can only get "fair" games if I hardcarry 1v5 every single time?
Rioter Comments
: Dead link. Error 500. Top notch work guys.
When you're the only one having an issue, perhaps you should stop to consider that the problem might perhaps be on your end, not Riot's. Just a thought.
: Group Stage Pick'em Update
This article is missing one VERY KEY statistic. Each group had 24 possible outcomes. With 4 groups, that is a total of 331,776 possible permutations of team rankings. If every person that did pick'ems just used RNG to select their results, only 14 people would have succeeded. Instead, 43 did. We are better at prediction that blind guessing! Go us!
Cheryl Cole (EUNE)
: So Riot. Becouse Forgiven is a dick, you had to come in and delete Gambit chance for worlds. Hope you realise, there are another 4 guys. You kinda ruined their dream. Same as you did to SK. Same as you did to NIP. Im not saying any of them didnt deserve some kind of punishment. Just not that kind that punish another innocent guys. And im not even talking about your timing. You did punish Nukeduck and Mithy right before playoffs. You did punish Sven right before group stage. You did punish Forgiven right before deciding matches and playoffs. Ok that punishment is wrong, but let's say you simply can't come out with anything smarter. Ok than. But timing of your restrictions is just disgusting.
Forgiven has a LONG history of behavior issues. SK Gaming knew that when they picked him up (after his long ban ended). Gambit Gaming knew it happened when they picked him up this split. When a team picks up a player with issues like this in their history, the team (coach, manager, teammates, etc) should be keeping the problem in check. He should have been forbidden from solo queue (only duo with a teammate). He should have been sat down with a counselor (team psychologist) to try to fix the causes of his toxicity. Neither SK nor Gambit did this. SK got lucky (or smart) and parted ways with him before his behavior hurt them like this. Gambit deserves to have this happen to them for enlisting a toxic player and doing nothing to work on those issues. I predict that he will not be on any LCS team next spring split. Unlike IWDominate (another player who has major behavior issues in their past), Forgiven has shown minimal reform, and seems to think himself "above" Riot's behavior expectations.
: Power Rankings - 6/30/2015
Fnatic belong +1 at number 5. Until they play the top 4, though, its really impossible to know how they compare. But after having seen them in MSI and now acquiring Rekkles, plus their EU performance, I strongly believe that they are "just under" those top teams - closer to the top than Snake. And TSM/NA belong about 5 places up. Yes, NA is looking weak right now, but relegating a team that regularly takes games off of the top teams (even if they failed to get far during MSI) to 20th is a bit cynical. Yes, they are not a top 10 team given their summer performance. But I'd put good money that they can take down most of the 11-20 teams in a best of 5.
Ixnay (EUNE)
: Key word: was. NA HAD good mid laners like Hai, Voyboy, Reginald, Mancloud etc.. But none of them play in the LCS anymore. Now that the "old elite" is gone i hoped they would replce them with soloq or challenger series talent like EU has (Febiven, Fox, PoE...)
NA *has* good mid-laners. Watch the Challenge Series some. The problem that is keeping them out of the LCS is that the dominant teams have not been looking for new blood, and most good players would rather stick with their CS team (if they believe in them) rather than jump on a sinking ship that is a low-ranked LCS team. EU is definitely a stronger mid-lane breeding ground, but the players ARE there in NA. And I want to point to the primary reason for this: USA + Canada population = 353 million Europe + Russia population = 850 million Right there, raw numbers suggest that EU will produce 2 stellar players in any role for every 1 that NA produces. Now, of course, there are other factors as well (or else, China would be even more dominant, and Korea would be a non-factor). But you have to remember that EU has twice as many potential "mid lane gods" as NA does. That's why EU players move to NA - EU is a bit more crowded.
: Alright EU Fanboy first off the reason SK is not at the top is simply because its not where they belong at the moment. SK is not better than Fnatic,H2K, or UOL so i dont want to hear it from you. do you understand that BOY!!!!!!!
^This. So much of this. SK were a 1-trick pony. It was a really good trick, but it only worked because EU was generally weak (Fnatic had a new roster, UOL and H2K had just joined, Gambit was on their own slump). Fnatic found their groove quickly. Gambit took longer. UOL and H2K solidified their position as middle/top class. SK got dominated by international teams at Katowice, showing that their 1-trick strategy (and absolutely abysmal warding) couldn't keep up against teams that properly prepared to face them. The one I disagree with is placing them below Elements. I still think SK have the edge in power there. But that still leaves 5 teams SK need to beat. They need to show that they can play other strategies. They need to show that they can actually create vision control outside of power-bot-lane Dragon scenarios. They need to show that they can win from behind. For now, they are a low power team with a good trick that other teams need to continue learning from.
: Shiphtur helps turn Dignitas around
I think this goes to show how deep some of the conflicts in Dignitas were, since Crumbz was the captain, and the primary point he made in his departure was that his team wouldn't listen to him and respect his shot calling. The fact that they're bringing in a completely new player, and Shiphtur is (according to him) enjoying the loud, aggressive shot calling tells me one of a few things: a) Shiphtur is full of **** (and is just making stuff up for the interview) b) Shiphtur hated Crumbz enough that there was nothing that could be done and/or c) Shiphtur can't listen to someone unless that person is yelling in his ear.
: Well at least our pro's pretty much agree that Riot didn't do so well in adding to the Jungle diversity. And with that hopefully they get a clue and do something about how weak jungle early game is, the latest PBE "experiments" don't seem to address that at all; rather they seem to exasperate it.
Actually, Riot did do a good job adding to jungle diversity. The problem was simply that a few champs that needed preemptive nerfs (like Amumu got) didn't receive them. Tier S junglers are leaps and bounds above tier A currently. But if you look at Tier A and Tier B, there's actually a lot better diversity in champion roles. Warwick got a direct nerf. The OP enchantment got a major (37% of its initial bonus damage) nerf. 4.22 should see a series of small buffs to jungle oriented champions that still aren't seeing play. IMHO, the only mistake so far in the jungle is that the Smite buffs are not all created equal. Krug's buff is designed for dps champions, and really powerful mid-game and later, but very weak early. Gromp's buff is designed for tank champions, and strong early but weak later on. Wolf buff is trash unless you're being counter jungled extra hard (and even then it doesn't help enough). And raptor buff is insanely good once you need to establish vision control. What all that means is that you're pretty much forced into starting Gromp or Krug. And when you're duo-lane wants to clear one of them, you have to clear the other. Which is the core problem. The meta shifted from "always start red or blue" to "always start gromp or krug", but with the added duo lane complication. If wolves and raptors gave the clear-speed buffs, and krugs and gromp gave the utility buffs, it would increase jungler start options (back to 2), and decrease the tell given by duo lane's start strategy.
: I've heard - stated by another Riot employee - that Syndra's passive was a mistake to begin with since it feels like she is denied a part of her kit. It however is considered fine since her abilities are powerful on their own. The feeling of getting denied access to your power is also what Cassiopeia's passive feels like. --------------------------------- It's even easy to explain why it feels like that! Damage is a result of "Base Damage +Scaling". Scaling is AP*Multiplier. So we have: "Base Damage +AP*Multiplier" So by lowering base damage and increasing the Multiplier an ability can be kept weak early, but strong lategame. What your passive does is adding a Multiplier to the AP. "Base damage +AP*Multiplier*Multiplier" Multiplier*multiplier remains a multiplayer. ---------------------------------------------- So what does this mean? **It means that 0 gameplay is added.** Without the multiplier gained through stacks the the power of the initial multiplier is extremely low. That's everythign that is gained through this concept. **It's a passive completely designed to hold back your champion. This is the most unrewarding design one could ever think off!**
Have to agree with this. It feels simply like an artificial "you should be weaker early, stronger late" mechanic. It encourages a specific laning playstyle. This itself is fine. Nasus' kit tells him "sit in lane and last hit", and he's okay. Rengar's kit says "get kills", and he's okay. Cass' kit says "poke and harass, but don't stress about securing kills". On its own, that's okay, too. But how can that be *interesting*? A scaling % boost to AP certainly isn't it. I sat down to play a few rounds as Cassiopeia to get a feel for how I was thinking, and it boiled down to this: Is my mana over 200? If so, try and land some poison onto my lane opponent, and build stacks. Meanwhile, use E to last-hit when able (for the mana return), and auto-attack for any other last-hits I can get. If my mana is under 200, wait for a fresh wave of minions, and let the melee minions get a little low. Then drop W onto them, and last-hit with E to recover mana. If an enemy champion happens to get down under 40%, and mana is over 200, start looking for kill potential. If an enemy champion is low and mana is under 200, push the lane a bit, drop wards, and play passive while mana recovers. So, to me, the real question is "Is this the desired lane play style for Cassiopeia?". If so, then a new passive should continue to reward harassing the opponent. If not, then there's a TON more work to do (determining how she should be played). So, for a new passive, here's what I see there is to go on: Poison/harass mechanic She's a mage snake What if her passive gave her a short term bonus for each nearby poisoned champion? >Cassiopeia gains (level * 3) ability power for each nearby (600 range) poisoned enemy champion. or >Cassiopeia gains 2/3/4/5% spellvamp for each nearby (600 range) poisoned enemy champion. What about keeping the "earn stacks" mechanic, but evolve it to something that feels more engaging to the player? > Cassiopeia gains 1 stack each second that at least one nearby enemy champion is poisoned. These stacks decay 1 every 5 seconds (adjust this number for balance). > Any time a champion dies while affected by Cassiopeia's poison, they release a cloud of poison around them (radius 200), and Cassiopeia loses half of her stacks. The cloud lasts for 10 seconds, and slowly drifts towards the enemy nexus (50 move speed). Any enemy minion or champion touching the cloud becomes poisoned, taking X damage over 2 seconds, where X is 20 per stack. This idea would remove a lot of power from her kit (no more scaling AP), but still encourage her to build and maintain stacks. If she manages to hold 50 stacks up when she kills a champion, that's a 500 dps poison cloud about the size of Zigg's minefield. And if another champion dies with one of her poisons, that'll spawn another cloud, for at least 250 dps.
: Why do people on boards hate Darius?
Garen was at release (and to some extent still is) "easy mode". His passive allows him to recover from bad trades faster than his opponent. Only one of his skills can "miss" (his spin), and even that is really easy to do well with. Plus he can build tanky and still deal respectable damage. And he had an execute. When he came out, he was overwhelmed by players who could suddenly do really well on him (because of how easy he was to play well), which often led to a lot of immature trash talking, misplaced ego, and so forth. On top of that, as I mentioned, he had an execute. And from what I've seen so far, champions with an execute style ability tend to attract players who play very selfishly. These are the type of people that whine about "he stole my kill" in a team game. Darius arrived, and really was Garen Mk 2. With incredibly strong trading potential, and massive snowballing, he was a shoe-in for unskilled players to do well on. His bleed meant that against clueless opponents, you'd wind up steamrolling the lane, simply because they'd bleed a while, then trade again (and get stacks of bleed again), quickly leading them to be low health. Plus, even more so than Garen, he had a major execute mechanic. However, unlike Garen, his included a reset (further encouraging KS whining).
: Here's a pro tip for you. Never ever insult your teammates.
It boils down to one thing: Are you antagonizing your teammate? If you are purposefully trying to do any of the following, you're automatically lowering your chances of victory. 1) Make them feel bad 2) Irritate/troll them 3) Get them to go afk, quit the game, uninstall LoL, or "just go die" If you have noble intentions (helping them improve), but poor wording, you can also be a net negative. A few key ideas when offering criticism in-game to strangers: a) Use positive messages, such as "When we respawn, can you keep a ward in the tri-brush?" instead of "No ward in tri-brush makes you a bad support." b) Don't tell them things they already know, such as "You need to stop dying." (if they're 0/6, they already realize that they're feeding). c) Offer to help (in-game). Things like "you're way behind, and not much use right now. do you want to farm top to try to catch up?" works much better than "you might as well afk, you're useless", or saying "its usually better to gank the winning lane, not try to save a losing lane. but if you want, you can farm my jungle camp for a bit extra gold/xp." is much more positive then "no, you suck". Of course, this all goes out the window when someone ELSE on your team starts provoking whoever is doing poorly. In that case, my only advice is to come to the harassed player's defense ("hey, bad games happen, lets stay positive") and encourage the other player to use Mute. Silence implies consent of the bad behavior, and many times simply knowing that the rest of the team are all "cool guys" is enough to keep a player from raging under the abuse of a single negative teammate.
Meddler (NA)
: Sorry, unclear example here on my part. A better example would be a stun and a displacement of equal power. Under many circumstances the displacement will feel more powerful, even though it isn't, thereby making the champion more satisfying to play overall. Finding ways to make champions feel satisfying that aren't reliant on raw power's really valuable. Some mechanics have a poor ratio of satisfaction to power (e.g. Yorick's damage reduction based off the number of ghouls he has out is powerful but hard to appreciate directly) and as a result make the champion less enjoyable to play as than others of equivalent strength.
> Sorry, unclear example here on my part. A better example would be a stun and a displacement of equal power. Under many circumstances the displacement will feel more powerful, even though it isn't, thereby making the champion more satisfying to play overall. Finding ways to make champions feel satisfying that aren't reliant on raw power's really valuable. Some mechanics have a poor ratio of satisfaction to power (e.g. Yorick's damage reduction based off the number of ghouls he has out is powerful but hard to appreciate directly) and as a result make the champion less enjoyable to play as than others of equivalent strength. Except that a displacement and stun of equal duration are not equally powerful. Even if its just a "minor" displacement (like Maokai's Q, or Draven's Stand Aside): The displacement can interrupt movement abilities. The stun cannot. The displacement can set up Yasuo for an ult. The stun cannot. The displacement is not affected by Tenacity. The stun is.
: As much as I love your in-depth review, I have one issue. Kass and LB losing silence can't possibly make total champions with silence go from 3/8 to 5/8. Maybe I'm missing something basic and am retarded, but that's how that reads to me.
> As much as I love your in-depth review, I have one issue. Kass and LB losing silence can't possibly make total champions with silence go from 3/8 to 5/8. Maybe I'm missing something basic and am retarded, but that's how that reads to me. Kassadin was "first 40". LeBlanc was not. And you misread the numbers slightly. Before they lost their silences, there were 8 total silences in LoL, 5 of which were on champions in the first 40. Thus 5/8. After they were removed, there were 6 silences left in the game, of which 4 were on champions in the first 40. Thus 4/6, or 2/3 (which is what I stated).
: The jump distance is approximately Quickdraw distance. The distance itself really isn't the problem as her AS. It really makes the effective movement speed scale out of control.
2.5 AS is only 4x as good as lvl 1 (.6 - .7). Thus, simply making her jump distance be impacted by slows does provide a solution. Probably not the optimal one, but it'd at least help.
Kuroi86 (NA)
: {{champion:266}} {{champion:12}} {{champion:268}} {{champion:53}} {{champion:201}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:122}} {{champion:131}} {{champion:119}} {{champion:150}} {{champion:79}} {{champion:120}} {{champion:40}} {{champion:59}} {{champion:126}} {{champion:429}} {{champion:64}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:54}} {{champion:57}} {{champion:111}} {{champion:61}} {{champion:78}} {{champion:102}} {{champion:27}} {{champion:14}} {{champion:72}} {{champion:134}} {{champion:412}} {{champion:18}} {{champion:67}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:254}} {{champion:106}} {{champion:62}} {{champion:5}} {{champion:154}} {{champion:115}} {{champion:157}} {{champion:143}} Displacement CC, SUPER RARE!!!
Put together a spreadsheet for myself to see what the ratios looked like, and the mobility and cc creep is VERY apparent. I split the champions into 3 groups. First 40, middle 42, and last 40. I tallied each champion in terms of: Dash (can't cross walls, these are rare) Leap (free movement abilities) Charge (movement ability that requires a target) Hastes (movement speed buffs) As well as each type of CC (displacement, root, silence, slow, stun, charm/fear/taunt, polymorph, and suppression). Here are the totals. Format is # / # / # (First/Middle/Last). I've bolded the numbers that are significantly (50% or more) higher than the other 2, and used strikethrough on any numbers that are significantly lower than the other 2. Dashes: 1 / 1 / 0 Leaps: ~~5~~ / 9 / 11 Charges: ~~4~~ / 8 / 10 Hastes: 18 / 18 / 20 Displacements: 12 / 12 / **32** Roots: ~~4~~ / 8 / 6 Silences: **4** / 2 / ~~0~~ Slows: 26 / 23 / 27 Stuns: 9 / 12 / 8 Blinds: 1 / 0 / 1 Charms/Fears/Taunts: 3 / 3 / 2 Polymorphs: 0 / 0 / 1 Suppressions: 1 / **2** / ~~0~~ So, looking at the periods relative to each other, the champions post-release of the game are FAR more mobile than the initial 40. While movement speed buffs and slows remain fairly constant, the number of leaps and charges seen a huge increase (doubling in frequency). Also of note is that the first 40 champions only "excel" at silencing champions, with 2/3 of the game's silences between them (it was 5/8 before Kassadin and LeBlanc lost their silences). In every other category, the first 40 champions are equal-at-best in terms of mobility AND crowd control. Finally, the only CC category that has a truly major change in frequency is displacements. In the first 82 champions, there was roughly 1 displacement ability for every 3.4 champions. In the last 40 champions, there is 1 for every 1.25 champions. That's a 170% increase in frequency of abilities that forcefully relocate another champion, or simply knock them up into the air. Or, expressed another way, if you played when the game came out, the average game (with randomly chosen champions) would have 3 abilities capable of displacing your champion or an enemy champion. If you play the game with only the most recent 40 champions, the average game (same random champions) will have 8 of them. If you combine suppressions, roots, silences, stuns, charms, fears, taunts, and polymorphs ("hard cc" without displacement): Non-displacing Hard CC: 21 / 27 / 17 Displacements: 12 / 12 / **32** Slows: 26 / 23 / 27 Even merging Displacements into the Hard CC category, you end up with a noticeable spike in the frequency of heavy cc effects. Hard CC: 33 / 39 / 49
: @CertainlyT: For the love of all that is purple, make Kalista's innate jump scale cleanly with MS
I agree with this, but use a bell curve (to prevent abuse). If her current jump is 150 distance, then base that around 350 move speed (so she gets a small buff once she gets boots). All these values can be simply swapped with the current value. Move speed // Distance jumped 000 // 20.3 050 // 30.3 100 // 42.4 150 // 56.8 200 // 74.2 250 // 95 300 // 120 350 // 150 400 // 180 450 // 205 500 // 227.8 550 // 243.2 600 // 257.7 650 // 269.7 700 // 279.8 750 // 288.1 800 // 295.1 So at 0 speed, Kallista still hops 13% her current distance (or the distance she is balanced to at 350 speed). At speed 200 (about a 50% slow, with boots), she hops 50% the distance of current, and 41% of her pre-slow speed (400). Speed 350 is the "balanced" level. Speed 450 (boots 2 plus a single minor speed boost) lets her leap 33% further than currently. Going from speed 500 to 800 (which takes a massive amount of effort) yields a further 29% increase in range. If she's jumping too far with these numbers, just trim them all by a bit to get her to the "ideal" spot. But she'll at least be vulnerable to slows - enough that a good slow can catch her. Right now, the only slow in the game that can catch her is Nasus' slow (because it also hits movement speed).
Lyte (NA)
: We'll keep an eye on how leaving/afk rates change as a result of the new system and more aggressive penalties. If the frequency of these incidences remains higher than we are comfortable with we'll investigate some more solutions. One idea that we're tinkering with is if a player fails to connect to a game, we allow players to "reset" the match without any penalties to the players in the game. However, the player that failed to connect gets the same LeaverBuster penalty.
I think "optimal" would be if you were returned to the queue with your prior wait counting, but that would be icing on the cake. At 1:30, if a player has not connected yet to the game, enable surrender. Any game that is surrendered before a player connects triggers leaver buster for them (ie, if you're going to d/c, try to do it after loading the game, or get back in before minions spawn). As a surrender, this would trigger a loss normally, but loss forgiven is triggered if the d/c'd player is still missing when the game loss message appears (Nexus exploding). Winners still get a win (maybe half LP gain?). Losers get loss forgiven. Leaver gets leaver buster'd.
Lyte (NA)
: Rewards for positive play
I'd love to have some of mine shared, Lyte. I know I'm not perfect. I received a warning quite some time ago (lost a ribbon for it), but thats it over the course of the games life (been a player since launch). Was a great case of a bad week IRL mixing with some harassment in-game, and me lashing back. The worst was a 4-man premade being total ***holes to me (and then reporting me after, and the game landed on my report card). But that's why I think I'm a good example of "what you can get away with". I make an effort to be positive (and actively try to dismantle negativity) in 90% or more of my games, and quiet/neutral in the rest (usually how I respond when more than 1 person on the team is trouble). My question for you, though, is: Are people actually still earning ribbons? I almost never see anyone with them anymore. When the system launched, I'd get 1-2 honor per game usually (if I was being vocal and pleasant). By the time I got my warning, I was probably only averaging 1 honor every 3 games. Now, I'm lucky to see 1 honor every 10 games.
: One simple fix is to have an option when you first log in on a new account: **I'm a new player to League of Legends** *Choose this option and you'll receive 50% more IP but 34% less XP until level 20* **I'm not a new player to League of Legends** *Choose this option and you'll receive 50% more XP but 34% less IP until level 20* This'll make smurfs likely for choosing the last option. And yes it might be a bad idea but I don't care because someone might come up with a good one when reading this.
> One simple fix is to have an option when you first log in on a new account: > > **I'm a new player to League of Legends** > *Choose this option and you'll receive 50% more IP but 34% less XP until level 20* > > **I'm not a new player to League of Legends** > *Choose this option and you'll receive 50% more XP but 34% less IP until level 20* > > This'll make smurfs likely for choosing the last option. > And yes it might be a bad idea but I don't care because someone might come up with a good one when reading this. This wouldn't work. IP is more important than XP. And most people smurfing care more about unlocks than leveling. However, the concept of your idea is good. Right now, you get to select your skill level, but all that does is help the system get you playing versus the right people faster. If that system gave +25%/+50% xp until level 15, it would get those players through to the higher levels faster. Maybe give people who say their new to get a 20%/40% xp boost after level 25 (takes similar time to go 1-15 as 25-30).
Spiroo (EUNE)
: Don't be mad because NA team can't and won't beat a KR team ever like EU one can and will :D
Hmm, would I rather be a team that lost to a Korean team, but is 2-1, or a team that got an underdog victory vs the top team, but is 1-2? Maybe Fnatic go 2-0 vs SSB, but can't win other games. 2-4 record doesn't get them out of group stage. Meanwhile, going 4-2 gets you out of group for sure. I think I'd rather be 2 wins than have a win vs SSB.
Morello (NA)
: It's definitely scary - on this we agree. I think there's three conversation points: 1) I fundamentally believe if Soraka is allowed to get tanky, we'll have to gut her. This release valve is there to prevent this and allow her to be good. 2) New Soraka is both more narrow and more unique. Picking Soraka is very different than picking another support. If we want champions to have a unique strategic identity and have a reason "to be played," this is important. 3) The current passive can be tuned into obliteration if it's actually a problem, but we need a release valve. I know Soraka wants AR/MR/HP - that's why we have to discourage it or it will run afoul of 1), and Soraka will be gutted, and we might as well have not done anything and left her in the dumpster. Tradeoffs are a huge component of good design, and sustainable champions. We've chosen these ones because we believe it will allow us to actually make a real healer character.
My primary concern is value. As given currently, this is how I perceive Soraka: 1) I can heal fast, but it uses my own mana. 2) I have to risk myself to harass in lane in order to recover my health. 3) I have some decent harass options, but the range isn't anything impressive. 4) In addition to risky play, I'm also mana-gated. So I not only have to out-play my opponent (by landing Q's), but also have to manage the *rate* of trades (since I need my mana to be regenerating fast enough). **Or, in summary, it feels like I'm beating myself in the face by picking Soraka.** And, on top of that, I'm told that any tank stats I buy (health, armor, MR) are actually BAD for me. Health scales up the cost of my heal, which in turn means I have to land more Qs, which means I have to use more mana, which means I can't cast as many heals in a given time period. Which means I actually heal LESS if I buy health. Armor and MR convert 20% to AP. For 860 gold, I can buy 40 AP. For 720 gold, I can buy 40 MR/Armor *(before passive)*. So, in terms of raw value, this is a gain. I get a bit higher gold-worth of AP than the MR/Armor that I lost. However, when I feel like I'm already paying a heavy price in skills (not feeling super powerful), having a passive that essentially states: > You can run faster towards almost-dead allies, if you're already near them, but still have to get so close that you're easy to kill... > And you are prevented from being tanky in general, and actively harmed by building health... > So if you run in, you're likely just going to die... > And the passive doesn't do anything except make you more likely to die, but maybe you can save an ally first. That just doesn't ENTICE me to play the champion. Now, she may end up balanced. But I honestly think that even if the #s balance out, as long as her passive is a giant "suicide" pact, and the rest of her kit provides her with such low damage, she won't *feel* fun to play.
: I'll submit that despite it reaching 97 upvotes or whatnot, Corporate Vayne is most likely not going to happen. Something that despite that thread showing community support for, to me doesn't seem in line with what we'd do for a Vayne skin. Cute idea but I don't see it happening. I won't assume to know what the CB team is planning for GD, but I don't think it's going to be nuked from orbit. Currently I will tell you with confidence that GD is difficult to parse. Right now there's no real advantage someone has posting on GD versus over here. Things are equally hard to sort through there due to all the noise. Also, in terms of my areas of interest, I've seen more positive and productive discussions pop up here as of late. Fears might be real, it doesn't mean that they're necessarily valid however. I'll say it again.. if someone wants a direct line to me or my team, the best way they can achieve that is through the new boards. That's not me being prickly, it's me saying that the new boards work WAY better for me to glean the feedback I'm looking to deliver to my team. That's just the reality of the situation.
Wouldn't it simply be best to look at the "problem" from a solution perspective? Posts after the thread reaches, say, 100 posts are highly unlikely to be read, and thus garner minimal upvotes, and thus stagnate or take forever to percolate upwards. I'm sure that you guys can analyze the data to view the percentage of thread readers that upvote a post, sorted by its distance from the top of the page. Then its just a matter of providing upvotes increased power on new posts, based on their distance from the top of the thread. So if the average post in a "hot" thread, with 50 posts above it (including nested) gets 2 upvotes/hour, while the top 5 posts accrue 10-30/hour, then the system could simply apply that to a new thread as such: If a new post is made 90 minutes after the thread become front-page material, and is deemed to gain upvotes at about 10% the speed of top posts, then if it receives 10% as many upvotes during the first 30 minutes of its life, than the board can elevate it to within the top 10 posts. Once this "potential" post has been elevated, the system merely needs to compare the votes it gets to the votes the other top posts are receiving, and move it up/down based on that. Once moved, an arbitrary number of upvotes is the threshold (lets say 50). After any top post receives 50 upvotes, the "potential" post is checked for its votes, and moved to a proper position in the thread based on that comparison, with its upvotes artificially adjusted to make it have the right number for its new position. No further attention needs to be paid to that post, since it has the proper votes for its position, and will receive the attention it has earned.
: @Riot----Im making jam.
You're making jam? I'm jelly.
2xHero (NA)
: I think the main problem is that it is an old item. My guess is that it was designed to be a "high-risk / investment" item - you spend more gold now on an overpriced item in order to farm up a more powerful item, more quickly. But, the items that it upgrades into aren't **that** powerful - especially for carries that have the best chance of making use of the Avarice Blade. {{item:3005}} Atma's Impaler really is a fighter item, and the original recipe didn't even have an avarice blade. It should have attack speed instead of critical chance anyway, since fighters like attack speed and don't care much for critical chance. {{item:3123}} Executioner's calling really isn't that powerful. It is gold efficient and has a useful passive, but it is really not slot efficient for an ADC. It needs an upgrade path or something... but it also relates to the problematic state of heals in LoL. That's a another topic. {{item:3142}} We're getting warmer. I could almost see you getting an early Avarice Blade for this - but Brutalizer is so much better. {{item:3087}} Statik Shiv - the one time it can be useful. An early avarice blade sometimes works as an investment item if you plan to upgrade it into a Statik Shiv. I don't play carries enough to know how viable of a strategy it is; but if you can get away with a lot of farming, you can possibly get away with buying an Avarice Blade shortly after your first BF Sword and then upgrading to a Statik Shiv after upgrading your BF Sword and possibly buying a Last Whisperer. In my opinion, Riot should just dump the item, modify existing recipes to use Brawler's Gloves or Cloak of Agility, and do a rework on Atma's Impaler. On the other hand, Riot could embrace it and include it in more recipes to try to push it as an investment item and try to make a farming strategy more viable. I am not sure if that would be healthy for the game, but at least it is a pretty horrible item to rush for farming since Critical Strike is expensive, does not add sustain, and does not make last hitting easier.
Completely agree on Atma's. Not really any champion out there that wants armor and critical, except for an ADC (who is needing some defense, likely due to a 3x or 4x AD threat enemy team). And a carry who is in that position is better served with a Randuins, because it also gives some health, and a great passive for denying enemy AD champs. Switching it to AD/Armor (with its passive intact) would just make it grant too much AD, though, so attack speed would work well (since most fighters benefit more from aspd than crit%. Executioner's Calling is just bad. The champion that it is strongest against is Mundo (a tank with insane regen), and it still doesn't see any professional play, despite the frequency of Mundo picks. Exactly for the reason stated - no upgrade path, and crappy slot efficiency. Mundo is a late game champion, so an item that wimps out after mid-game is pointless. The problem with Youmou's is that the other half (Brutalizer) is insanely powerful in the early game (flat pen and flat AD). And the completed item's active is insanely powerful (not OP, but compared to Brutalizer + Avarice, Ghostblade is insanely strong). So there's really no scenario where you have an Avarice in your inventory for more than one trip out to lane, because you'd have to be crazy not to finish the item. 1 lane trip is usually 5 minutes or less. 5 minutes = 90 gold from passive, plus up to 126 gold from minion slaying. So, best case scenario, its saving you ~200 gold (and, usually, far less than that). Which leaves Staikk Shiv. Here is an item you can rationally build Avarice on first. Zeal is nice, but not a huge power spike. Zeal doesn't give AD, so you're not forfeiting anything there. And its early game, so you don't have any crazy ADC multiplicative stats hitting their peak yet (so that crit% is fairly weak). But that early game scenario is exactly where Shiv goes wrong. Shiv and PD fill the same general item slot, with Shiv having an early game and split pushing advantage, while PD is more of the lategame max dps item. Or, in other words, 6th item PD = good, 6th item Shiv = bad. What that means is that if you build an Avarice Blade to turn into Shiv, just like the Ghostblade, you're pressured into upgrading it, because Shiv provides something major to completing your goals. So, while you're more likely to have an Avarice Blade sit in your inventory for a while if Shiv is your goal, its still an item that you're rushed to upgrade. So, how this bothers me: Every other gold item in the game has 3 tiers. Tier 1 is a "meh" gold generation item, designed for supports. Tier 2 is about twice as good as the tier 1. And Tier 3 adds another side item in, and an activatable item, but still holds onto its gold generation. Avarice blade is a tier 2 item with tier 2 gold generation (or tier 1.5 maybe). This is cool. Giving ADCs/fighters a tier 1 gold gen item could be really bad. But when you upgrade it, no aspect about it having been Avarice is kept. No passive gold. No gold bonus for farming. And you're actively pushed into upgrading it, because the (useful) items it turns into have amazing actives/passives. **So, in all honesty, the item simply shouldn't exist.** If you're going to have a farm-centric item, it should continue to have a farm incentive when upgraded. If you're not going to have a farm-centric end-tier item, don't make the mid-tier one upgrade into anything, and give it better numbers.
: As someone who lives on the US east coast, I'm pretty disappointed that most of the live games will be happening while I'm asleep (5am-11am EST; 4am-10am EST; 3am-8am EST). Any chance we might get to have full replays stream the following afternoon? They could start at 1pm PDT (4pm EST), which would allow most of us in NA/SA to watch all the matches without having to sacrifice sleep to do so, and without interfering with the live schedule. Hopefully Riot will consider this as a possibility, because I'd love to be able to see these matches.
They really can't start any later than 5pm (if they did, it would be past midnight when they finish, which isn't fair to all the people who are just doing normal jobs). If they start at noon, that's a midnight start for East Coast USA (worse than 5am). If they start at 10am (starting earlier isn't reasonable, for the same reasons as after 5pm), then its a 10pm start. East Coast USA is just in the worst location relative to Korea in order to have viewable times. As a West Coast viewer, I really wish they'd have some 10am starts, though, since that would be 7pm (and done by 1am), which is within the realm of reasonable viewing. Just be glad you don't have to be up at 2am to watch. You can just "wake up a couple hours early". I have to stay up all night, or go to sleep 4 hours before the sun goes down.
Pushover (NA)
: Also things like Wind Wall stoping Viktor's laser... the wind is so strong it stops light.
Some people want realism only when it works in their favor. Why does blind affect Lee Sin? Why can't Lee Sin see stealthed champions, wards, etc? How come Taric's gems can't reflect or refract all of Lux's abilities? How come Brand's spells don't set Maokai permanently on fire until Nami throws water on him? How come a silence can stop Caitlyn from using Piltover Peacemaker? How come it can stop Singed from throwing you? How come you can still spam /laugh when you're silenced? And so on.
Rioter Comments
: Why Sona's rework is a failure - A discussion about identity
> I'd like to discuss the latter issue, as it's the bigger concern for me (numbers tweaks can happen after the rework anyways, but a total failure of kit is much more severe). This is from today's post going over the rework: > >Instead of hanging back and winning a war of attrition during laning... > > To me, this sums up the entire reason this rework has gone so badly. The team in charge completely abandoned Sona's identity. Sona [i]is/[i] the attrition support. Well, to me, you are completely wrong. To me, Sona was not a "make laning boring and never do anything but heal" champion. And that's the only part of her that they got rid of. Her spells are more impactful, but higher cooldown, which means she trades BETTER. More frontloaded effects. Her heal is better when your ally is low, which means you operate best in a lane that is actively trading. Her auras are smaller but stronger, which means that she is best when she sticks up close to her ADC, instead of passively hiding in the bush spamming heals.
Gabagël (NA)
: These guys aren't OP, they have a way to be countered. Such as Master Yi, he can be easily countered with something like stuns, or Jax's E. Plus he's squishy.
Stuns OR Jax's E? Jax's E (Counterstrike) is a stun. Should read "like stuns, like Jax's E". Of course, that's also ignoring that you completely missed the humor here.
Pika310 (NA)
: Well this seems like a simple solution, the only way to balance those champions is by nerfing {{champion:39}} Problem solved! Everyone happy!
She'd still be OP, even if beat to a bloody pulp by the nerf bat. Better to just remove all these champions from the game. Then we can all just play Purple Caster Minions (which are also OP, obviously), and die while suiciding into towers.
: Ahri isn't OP... 10 tails would make her OP, she's perfect the way she is. D: Also, quite funny, have an upvote :D
So 90% OP is the "right" amount of OP-ness?
: you realize hes joking, maybe not?, it's a satire in case you didnt know
I understand sarcasm and satire can be hard to identify online... But I'm still amazed someone could think listing over 100 champions with OP whining could possibly be serious.
: You make me look like I have a life.
: Your days *are *numbered ಠ_ಠ Edit: gramamamer
: Haha funny. How long did it take to type all that though?
About an hour. And another 10 minutes to get all the champion icons and bolding added.
  Rioter Comments
: no name & shame policy is removed for people that call riot out on the forums and try to argue publicly. It is still against the rules for average players to call someone else out.( i do not agree with this rule but I am just a player).
But simply posting a link to a ranked game summary qualifies as "name and shame", because the summoner name is included automatically. If you post for a normal game, identities are hidden. That's why I'm curious whether calling someone out for behavior/etc in a ranked game is still taboo or not. (I know Lyte is on today, maybe he'll show up and help out).
: define intentional, and how it would be detected. temp ban, maybe only if it consistently shows afk, but its already like that. Permaban is way to harsh of a punishment for something that can happen to anyone once in a while. One time my router broke and was without internet for the entire day.
>All permabans are automatically reviewed by Riot. So, no matter whether the punish was automated, for a permaban, a Riot employee would have to agree with the punishment. In this case, a simple review of the game shows it quite well. In the game, I could tell you that he never d/c'd or reconnected (hence, was in the game all game). Included in that is the fact that when we broke past the first inhibitor, we spotted him running around before hiding in the well for the last minute. However, just from the game summary, you can see: > 22 minute game > 0/0/0 score, zero Cs (indicates never entered lane) > Bought more than starter items (indicates that he was active) > > Reviewable by Riot would include: > Game chat logs > Pre-game chat log Obviously, I don't think that there should ever be a system that is fully automated to hand out bans. My question is whether behavior like this deserves being permanently banned after the single game (ignoring all other games) is reviewed by Riot. Honestly, I'm pretty sure that this guy will get his just dessert through the system anyhow. If he behaved like this in a game I seen, he has done it before, and will do it again. I'm just asking what everyone thinks is a "proper" punishment for intentionally ruining an entire RANKED game like this (not that its okay to do it to Normal games either).
L4T3NCY (NA)
: Featured Game Modes are designed from the ground up as short-term engagement experiences. This short-term window affords us the creative wiggle room to try new things and see what works, listen to your feedback, then pull back and iterate before re-releasing. Trying to build a long-term sustainable game mode would actually constrain us from doing things like Doom Bots, URF, etc. Featured Game Modes have also been shown to taper off in popularity sharply after a short period of time. Riot Brackhar actually made a great post on this topic late last year titled, "Behind the Scenes on Featured Gameplay Modes", explaining many similar points with some cool graphs. We're keen to re-release and bring back popular modes. When we do, they should be better experiences than the original version, with everyone's help. ^_^o
> Featured Game Modes are designed from the ground up as short-term engagement experiences. This short-term window affords us the creative wiggle room to try new things and see what works, listen to your feedback, then pull back and iterate before re-releasing. Trying to build a long-term sustainable game mode would actually constrain us from doing things like Doom Bots, URF, etc. Featured Game Modes have also been shown to taper off in popularity sharply after a short period of time. Riot Brackhar actually made a great post on this topic late last year titled, "Behind the Scenes on Featured Gameplay Modes", explaining many similar points with some cool graphs. > > We're keen to re-release and bring back popular modes. When we do, they should be better experiences than the original version, with everyone's help. ^_^o I know I'd love to have URF mode available, even if just 1 or 2 months out of each year. Perhaps have a month each year (right before or right after a LCS split) with 4 "returning" game modes, for 1 week each?
: Our goal is to make fun experiences for people that are rewarding in their own right (yes it is about the journey). Our hope is that replayability will come from players being excited to try new champions and challenge themselves to beat the bots in interesting ways. If we do decide to focus on rewards for participating in game modes it is unlikely that they will be IP based, we could certainly come up with some systems to celebrate game mode related achievements. That said, we could have done a better job of tuning the IP as compared to other COOP vs AI queues, we'll try to be more mindful of that going forward.
I don't think that they need to be particularly rewarding. But when the IP gain is SO abysmal, you are actually giving something up in order to play. That's - you know - the opposite of a reward. You are effectively PAYING IP to play the game mode, because if you didn't play it, you'd be earning more IP no matter what you did. If the game mode at least gave the same IP as playing vs Intermediate Bots, it wouldn't feel like a total kick-in-the-nuts, but would still be less IP-favorable than playing normal games.
Rioter Comments
: Bot queue's have no matchmaking. They probably never will. Since this is a bot queue, just deal with it.
> Bot queue's have no matchmaking. They probably never will. Since this is a bot queue, just deal with it. How about, instead of "deal with it", those of us who want to play special map modes with people of our own skill level speak up, and voice our concern to Riot? It can't change if people don't speak up. And you can just deal with that.
: How to win doom bots: -Pick a champion that scales well off of attack speed or attack damage (basically anybody with pushing power) -Bring Teleport -??? -Profit
> How to win doom bots: > > -Pick a champion that scales well off of attack speed or attack damage (basically anybody with pushing power) > -Bring Teleport > -??? > -Profit This fails when your other lanes go 0/13. 1v5 you can't win vs Doom Bots. Even vs Intermediate bots, 1 player can't carry. But fewer people lose their lane to Intermediate bots.
Show more

Viro Melchior

Level 32 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion