: I find that it appeals to the mind set. People with flash on D seem to be more of a reactionary flasher...while people with it on F are more prone to plan out their flashing.
> [{quoted}](name=Malfectious,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QLPkKcEt,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-04-17T17:40:26.008+0000) > > I find that it appeals to the mind set. People with flash on D seem to be more of a reactionary flasher...while people with it on F are more prone to plan out their flashing. Huh, That's interesting. I use Flash on D (with four fingers). However, for me it's because I *do* want to plan it out more. My F spell is things like Heal, Ignite, Barrier, things that I would need to use in the middle of a fight, so I keep it on the key easier to press
Krayzie (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Timethief49,realm=EUW,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=GNPtELKY,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-17T14:59:30.483+0000) > > Works completly normal for me. So gaining 16 LP and losing 20+LP is ok? While yesterday i win 21+LP and lose 16-18LP
Yes. LP gains are based on MMR. If your MMR is higher then your current rank, you will gain more than you lose until it equalizes. If it's the opposite, then you will lose more until you reach the proper ranking.
: a) Since a large proportion of feedback who were AGAINST bans is represented by non-ARAM players, it is by default logic to claim that they did have major impact on the outcome. Since the outcome of the feedback considerations made by Riot came out by making a decision in favor of the opposition, it is only logic to say that Riot leaned towards those who provided feedback against it. Riot takes into account "winning" feedback against bans -> feedback against back composed of a major amount of people barely having knowledge on actual ARAM balance -> Result is Riot using faulty feedback I didn't declare under any way that they "only" surveyed non-Aram players, what I did claim is that the outcome was made into favor because of them even if its plain wrong b) Using Boards/Reddit as standards is the most accurate a normal user can get. As I said, feedback is feedback as soon as it is observable, and a majority of the observable feedback concerning a gamemode who has nothing to do with LCS, pro play comes from, surprise, the boards and Reddit. I don't have access to further data manipulation that Riot might have and I'll never suggest that I might do, so I base my results on what I can see and spread my opinion on it based on the observable popularity. You could make this argument about almost every single piece of feedback Riot might ever had, its like saying "Wow, you are basing yourself on people talking about balance to influence your decision, but you are evidently biased since some people just play and don't provide feedback!!". There is no evidence that feedback from Boards and Reddit are representative, but there is no evidence at all either that shows it isn't. If we apply the common [Occam's razor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor) logic, the simplest solution is considering observable data true until it is proven entirely wrong, which has never happened. Simply going around and claiming that feedback coming from two major sources of it because it isn't 100% of the community is just an excuse to keep any progress to be made. This kind of argument is very popular here whenever something contradictory happens here or on reddit to just shut up a lot of people in hopes they start to believe their own opinion doesn't matter because they aren't on a website recollecting absolutely every single feedback pieces in the world, so I,d like it to stop thank you.
So why should Riot not take into account all players? If some think that a change would cause them to use a mode less, then that means the change is ineffective for the overall health of the game mode, does it not? And again: You have no basis of any kind for the assumptions you are making. That's my entire point. Yes, you don't have access to all the stats. That doesn't mean you get to make what is in all likeliness an accurate conclusion. You can be against Riot removing bans. That's 100% completely and totally fine, and your post is a fair representation of your sentiment. But what you don't get to do is make assumptions of why those changes were made based on completely fabricated "results". > but there is no evidence at all either that shows it isn't But there is. Just look at the size of the user base. The most *votes* a post gets here on the boards is in the lower hundreds. On the sub-reddit only in the couple thousands (unless it's some kind meme-y shitpost that all of Reddit likes). The population of this game is in the *hundred millions*. There's just no way to gain any kind of significant data from these sites to use in analysis (and especially not from votes on the boards right now with voting bots of some kind running around).
: First of all, Riot did say in the patch notes doing this removal that it was partially based on feedback and discussion between themselves. This does confirm that opinions from the community were taken in charge. Now, add the fact that an huge proportion of players were welcoming the bans with open arms (on here and Reddit at least) and we can already see a tendency in favor of keeping them. Even now, it has not even been a full day since the ANNOUNCEMENT (not even the implementation!!!) of these changes that the hot section of the boards already have several threads including mine **showing exceedingly positive scores**, even if anything related to ARAM barely gets any attention in normal circumstances. From this, we can see a strong leaning towards the apprectiation of bans in the gamemode. You can always say that this represents only a vocal proportion and it doesn't actually represent the demographics or whatever, but literally anything can be negated by this same thing to the point it isn't relevant at all and is really tiring to always see here on the boards (such things as saying "Riven and Vayne are perfectly fine, since the boards is the vocal minority and shouldn't be taken seriously at all") Feedback IS feedback as soon as it is observable and should get the considerable weight its worth for, and the observation we can easily set is that *Riot went against the popular feedback to make changes that are unwelcome for the majority said feedback*. How do I know that the negative feedback is coming from people barely playing ARAM usually? Well, I feel that you would simply point at an X player saying he is against the bans and point out his game history showing clear evidence of several past ARAM games just to say "haha! I've proven your point wrong by cherry picking amongst an array of possibilities a single occurence that says otherwise!", but I'll still explain myself. As I already said, the proportion of positive feedback against negative one was utterly crushing, meaning that the actual number of occurences of people arguing AGAINST aram bans is actually quite low, low enough that you can literally just show any occurences of "Howling Abyss" in one's match history and it'll show you information that can be applied to quite a big proportion of the feedback (lower occurences of said persons providing such feedback does mean that they represent a much bigger proportion of the opposition themselves when compaired to those going with the trend). So, by simply doing a research within the the match history of some accounts, you can see some pretty interesting things. What a surprise to see amongst most people some tendency to have between about a single game of ARAM or ten each months, depending on how much they play as a whole and still representing a very small proportion of their games played. Personally, I made the assumption that most people giving negative feedbacks and showing those kind of match history play ARAM as something to relieve frustration from normal gameplay. While this is quite understandable, this also means that those kind of people will most probably not experience what frequent ARAM players do experience, since a random game mode that you are unfamiliar with requires more iterations of experimentation to see a trend (such as ARAM accounts and frequent picks who were both aimed at by the ban changes), hence how their feedback is extremely, well biased. Try it: dig up some threads from the last weeks and identify key threads and comments providing negative comments about the bans, since most of them have a solid negative score, you can easily spot them by the furious red colored numbers. Check the users, and while you WILL end up with some results showing guenuine experienced feedback (after all, most feedback were in favor of the ban implementations, but it wasn't under any way exclusively in its favor), you will also end up with some occurences that would bring some thought on "do they really understand what the gamemode is about?" This and, well, a "new" occurence of type of players. In fact, I will kinda change my first statement that was "based on the feedback of people who played ARAM only for the event" to "based on the feedback of people who most probably have no specific knowledge on its inner workings **and those who were actually aimed at by the changes**", admitting that I was partially wrong in the first place. You see, while there's some people out there who do have an impressive ARAM history who are also against the bans in it, their picks in it are quite...odd. In fact, you see them playing, yes, an HUGE number of ARAM games, but their picks are, for someone who play as much, quite frequent and weirdly consistent. What a surprise to see people who usually get several champions from the top 10 winrates in ARAM, then get a very frequent number of free-rolled picks after the introduction of bans protest against them. Weird indeed, its almost as if...
If all you are considering as “huge proportion of players” is here and reddit, then that isn’t a huge proportion of players (like, almost as far as you can get from it). The populations of both these sites is just massively smaller then the actually player base, such that you can’t get any really kind of significant data from them. I’m not denying that people wanted them. Nor am I saying that there have been multiple people that don’t play ARAM complaining about them. All I am saying is that a) you have no evidence of Riot only surveying non-ARAM players, and b) using Boards/Reddit as your standards is not accurate in the slightest.
: A lot of the complaints against bans are clearly coming from people who have no idea why the bans were added in the first place. They seem to think the banning 10 champions somehow made the game mode "not random" and don't understand they were added to deal with ARAM accounts attempting to spam the same few champions over and over again. this is just as bad as Riot refusing to give us 10 bans in SR for years, except worse because they'd barely even been balancing ARAM at all until recently. Imagine SR being overrun by 60-70% winrate champions, and not being allowed to ban them.
And where are you getting your idea of “most”? Here on the Boards? I can say with near 100% certainty that Riot isn’t getting their full statistics from here. The population is just way to small to really get anything significant.
: what is the reasoning for removing bans? we should at least get context; because imo i saw the same 10-20 champs banned every game. and lookie it's the champs that are busted on the mode
: Riot recently made the best addition ARAM ever got just to remove it mere days later...
> based on the feedback of people who played ARAM only for the event and you know that how exactly?
Spotty (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Z3dVEAsA,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-14T22:57:07.696+0000) > > What? they play a recorded track of people cheering in the arena to make it sound like the crowd is actually enjoying it, its common practice in football games but i see riot is starting to do it too
> [{quoted}](name=Spotty,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Z3dVEAsA,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-14T23:17:44.565+0000) > > they play a recorded track of people cheering in the arena to make it sound like the crowd is actually enjoying it, its common practice in football games but i see riot is starting to do it too .....No they don't... You can see video of the crowd at the events. The NA Finals was a basically sold out crowd. What are you even going on about?
Spotty (NA)
: Riot LCS is so pathetic
jurrrr (NA)
: they are both tied for most finals won.
> [{quoted}](name=jurrrr,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAy71XAm,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-04-12T20:43:54.296+0000) > > they are both tied for most finals won. Bingo. I mean, in addition to what others have mentioned of them being the biggest stars, it’s also right now the showdown for who is the most prolific champion in NA
: Can I even call this bad hit boxes?
It's caused by the difference in the height between the river and the bank. League technically has 3 dimensions, although the height of something really doesn't affect much aside from rare cases like that.
: Some of them don't, ghostcrawler even went on to say that you do not need to play the game in order to balance it...
No, he did not. I thought this horrible misquoting had died out by now, but apparently not. What he said was that someone who is good at *playing* the game isn't necessarily going to be good at balancing it, and vice-versa. A good football (either) coach doesn't have to be good at the sport. Likewise the star player could be really bad at giving direction to other players. The two things are entirely different skill sets, and while there is overlap, they aren't one and the same.
Rylalei (EUNE)
: How would you nerf the following
Well since I've commented on other's, figured I should throw my hat in the ring. And, uh, apologies now for just a monstrous nightmare of a post length. Can't really do a TL;DR here, as each section is its own thing... (disclaimer: I consider most of these champs pretty balanced as they currently are. However, as it would be against the spirit of the post to just say "don't do anything", I'm going to be making changes I feel would be the best if something *had* to be changed) --- ##Yasuo By far the one I consider the most balanced on the list. Changes I would make are light, focusing more on external feel rather than any actual balance difference. * Decrease Windwall size at higher ranks. * Remove auto-placement when ulting near turrets. Instead, it simply puts you where your cursor is, similar to Kai'Sa ult. This allows players to still express skill in where they end up (such as avoiding turret range or putting yourself behind the enemy so they can't escape) without immediately granting it to them. --- ##Zed Yeah this one is pretty much fine with what's on the PBE. --- ##Riven So this one is a bit tricky, as the balance issues that have come about recently are not actually from Riven individually, but rather the meta (items and runes) around her. I will be addressing some changes I think could be done to some of those things in later sections, but for now, I'll suggest the one thing I think could be done for Riven. * Decrease the amount of time a passive charge is stored for. This is to encourage her to be all about the constant in-and-out small trades, rather then readying up before hand and then going in. You have to have fast actions to take advantage of them, or else they're lost. The goal of this is hopefully to move her back towards the bursty, more assassin like builds that were around back with Thunderlord's Decree, as those help to emphasize her weaknesses of losing in longer trades. --- ##Jax This guy. I'm gonna try here, but my personal bias may end up showing through still and I swing too hard at him (I really do not like playing against Jax). This one is gonna be a sub-list. I don't think all of these should be done, but at least one of them I think would be a good idea. * Counter Strike: either... a) remove the complete negation of auto attack damage, instead going to the same reduced damage as AoE (25%), with perhaps more reduction if necessary. b) remove the AoE damage reduction, so that while he can dodge auto attacks completely, he still takes full damage from AoE, making that the intended counter to the ability. c) remove the increased damage from the ability for things dodged. d) if reactivated early, it does the minimum damage of the ability. d) Jax can no longer attack while the ability is active. --- ## Vayne This one is gonna be pretty simple. Any additional change would be done by items. * Reduce/remove the CDR refund for using Tumble during Final Hour at early ranks, scaling up to the current value at max rank. * Reduce the amount of AD she gets from Final Hour at early ranks, scaling to current values at max rank. --- On to items! ##Spear of Shojin I have a couple different ideas that this item could go in, depending on what the ideal use case for this item should be, so this section's points are more of options, not a detailed list. * If the idea is for the item to be more for bruisers that want a longer, drawn out fight, rather then an instant kill mode, then lower the AD, increase the health, and increase the cooldown on the passive * If the item *is* for more bursty, light fighters (which I think are technically called slayers) then lower the health, increase the AD, still increase the cooldown on the passive. * An additional idea would be to possibly make the item itself an active, rather then a passive effect. This would allow a greater usage case, as it's open to almost all bruisers and fighters, and not just the ones that have an empowered mode ult. However, you could then run into issues that the item is *too* open-ended and not as limited in it's usage (and then the problem that people just tend not to use active items as much) --- ## Guinsoo's Rageblade Alright, I'll admit it. Phantom hit was a larger contributor to the imbalance of the item then what I had always thought (I always held that it was the stacking stats effect that really made the item broken so often). However, I do still think that the effect is an interesting one, and could still have a place in the game. Changes for this one a bit harder, as it's already remarkably gold-inefficient with just the base stats on the item (although that's rectified once it's stacked up), so you can't really nerf those without changing the recipe or cost of the item. There's really only one thing that comes to mind that could *maybe* help, but I'm not entirely sure how exactly you would apply this. * Essentially, bring the Phantom Hit part back to it's Sated Devourer roots. How it would work is that you would still get the ramping up attack speed (and maybe throw in the armor and magic penetration so that it's not entirely worthless early on). HOWEVER, you wouldn't have access to the Phantom Hit yet. That would require farming up to some *x* number of something, most likely minion kills, plus a higher amount for champion take downs. Once that threshold was reached, then you get Phantom Hit at max stacks. This number would of course be much higher then the 30 it was back on Devourer, but the important thing is that **the** \#EndGameFantasy of on-hit champions does indeed not happen until the late game. Rushing the item would surely get you the best head start on getting your stacks to build up that power. On the downside, it is undoubtedly an incredibly weak item to rush, as its stats are just shitty. This helps to create the trade-offs that are necessary for good balance. Double down on early(er) late game? You pay for that with a much weaker early. Want to coast through early game with more supportive items like lifesteal or raw stats? Well then you will take longer to reach your true late game power level.
Syrile (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gAEJvfgU,comment-id=00060000,timestamp=2019-04-10T18:13:38.796+0000) > > That would absolutely gut Yasuo, Riven, and Vayne. Completely. Not really. Yasuo would require actual skill to use, similar to Fiora and still be more mobile than her. Riven... Honestly, I am not sure? Maybe a little too steep. I think she is overrated right now, to be honest. She is too strong but not quite as strong as everyone seems to think so maybe you are right here. Vayne? Honestly, %Health true damage should /never/ exist on a ranged champion. I have a hard time buying it on Fiora even but that is just nonsense. Especially with Rageblade and Blade of the Ruined King. Vayne should not be hyper-mobile, unable to itemize against her, perfect-killing machine that has nearly limitless outplay potential with such high stats that even new players can wreck on her just buy proc'ing silver bolts. Either make her skill floor go up significantly while getting rid of that obscene %health true damage or just remove that whole concept from the game. Mind, I love Vayne as a champion. And I would probably like Riven.. But Vayne especially is just too much. There should not be champions that are must-beat-in-draft.
If you don't consider Yasuo as requiring skill to play now, then you really shouldn't be attempting to make balance decisions for him. Everything in his kit works exactly how it is supposed to. You take out some aspect, be it his mobility, his defensive options, whatever, then you need to amp up some other aspect in order for him to even perform moderately. If you want him to actually do his job (that is, a high damage fighter that builds few defensive items so he's still squishy, but has in-built tools in order to function as a fighter), then the kit you suggested just straight won't work. Riven is simply you nerfing every aspect of her kit with no compensation. Of course that's going to gut her. Vayne: I've already said it once on this thread, and I'll say it again: Not everything needs counterplay directly to the other party. Macro counterplay is just as important and just as viable. Lane management, proper ganking and flanking, etc. Vayne is beatable in game. Quite simply. She is a duelist champion, who thrives in one vs one encounters, as if she switches targets, she loses her big damage source. If you attempt to fight her as one person, 9 times out of 10, **you will lose**. That's the intended interaction, that's what she is supposed to (that 1 other time is divided between you playing another duelist, her being very far behind, or you just being super far ahead). What you are supposed to do is bring friends, use the buddy system. Once she has to start focusing on more than one target, particularly if both of those enemies are threats in their own right (be that damage or crowd control), then her advantage starts to fall hard. Not every champion is designed to be beat one against one. This isn't a fighting game, where you are only against your one opponent the entire time. This is a 5v5 team game. You have 4 other teammates. Use them.
Syrile (NA)
: I like this challenge. :) Yasuo 1) Remove Windwall entirely. Give him an ability that can block projectiles for 0.75 seconds. If he blocks a projectile with this ability, he gains a damage boost for the next X seconds based on ranks. The ability does not have a cast time and can be used while moving. Cooldown should be similar to the Windwall. 2) The dash. Give it a real cooldown of 2.5/2/1.5/1/0.5 seconds based on rank. When Yasuo kills a unit, this cooldown resets. Do not remove the cooldown that is per target though. Alternatively, if that actually made him too weak, just remove the escalating damage from it. 3) Ultimate: Stop making the positioning of this perfect. If he ults you under tower, make him take the hits from it. Also, Give it a damage decrease of 25% if the knock-up was caused by someone else. Yasuo should not be such a good duelist and a good teamfighter and a good ganker and a good bully and.. you get the point? Zed 1) Nerf all damage (not just his) by a noticeable amount to stop the hyper-mobile burst nonsense. Alternatively, if you want a Zed specific nerf 1) Increase the duration of his shadow by 1 second. Make his shadow not be able to mimic abilities for 1/0.9/0.8/0.7/0.5 seconds. He can still switch places with the shadow instantly. This makes him a lot more skill based rather than you not being allowed to actually dodge his "poke" that shreds half your life off instantly without counterplay. Increase the Cooldown by 3 seconds. 2) Compensate for the cooldown increase by adding another second to the CD reduction on Shadow Slash, making it 3 seconds instead of 2. 3) Decrease the pass-through penalty of Q. Make the damage 70% instead of 60%. Those compensations should make the abilities more skill based. This is assuming that damage in general is at least somewhat nerfed though. otherwise he needs a total damage nerf like almost all other bursty champions. Riven 1) Nerf passive down to 20-45% 2) Nerf Q Base Damage down to 10/25/45/65/85 3) Nerf stun CD up by 3 seconds at all ranks 4) Nerf shield base amount down to 80/105/125/150/175 and increase AD% by 10% up to 110% and increase CD by 1 second on each rank. 5) Increase Ulti cooldown by 20 seconds at all ranks. Jax This one is interesting. To keep him a late game monster, you would need to nerf his early game significantly if this were to be fair. So, I would approach this similar to a Rakan style thing. 1) Leap Strike, I would change the range from 700 to 500-700 based on level (not rank) against champions with a set value of 700 for targeting wards and allies. I would also probably shave off 5 or 10 base damage from all ranks. And increase all CDs on this by 3 per rank. 2) Empower, I would just nerf the CD by 1.5 seconds per rank. 3) Counterstrike needs work.. I dislike how it affects both autos and AoE. However, if we maintain this, I think a CD increase of 2 seconds at all ranks along with a base damage nerf of 10-15 damage on all ranks should help. I think that should be enough. If not, I would change the bonus damage from the ulti from magic damage to physical damage so itemizing against him would be more possible. Vayne Oh boy... Haha... You could go about this in about 90 different ways and it would still work. Funny how Riot has no interest in doing so. 1) Remove the true damage from Silver Bolts. Make Silver Bolts not work with Rageblade. 2) While in ultimate, Vayne takes 25% increased damage from all sources. You are almost permanently invisible anyway... Another way to do this: 1) Silver Bolts do not work with Rageblade. Silver Bolts do not stack with Blade of the Ruined King. Lower %Health damage to 3/5/7/9/11% 2) Put invisibility on a 1.5 second cooldown regardless of CD. Meaning she can use Q but will not become invisible unless she has been visible for at least 1.5 seconds. Probably not enough here, to be honest and not my favorite way of doing this. Another way: 1) Remove %Health damage and make it a flat amount of bonus True Damage (I hate True Damage buuuut). Make Rageblade not work with Vayne. 2) As above with Ultimate. Increase damage from all sources by 15% instead though.
That would absolutely gut Yasuo, Riven, and Vayne. Completely.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gAEJvfgU,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T17:47:01.390+0000) > > The counterplay is that you bring multiple people, don't engage them one on one. > > Not everything needs counterplay directly to the other party. Macro counterplay is just as important and just as viable. Lane management, proper ganking and flanking, etc. Then explain to me why everything in the game has some sort of direct counterplay except for true damage. True damage in unhelathy and needs to be removed. Ask anyone they will agree, just look at the boards there are tons of posts about how true damage is unhealthy and how there is too much of it.
Plenty of things don't. Spells like Trundle ult, Zed ult, auto attacks, direct targeted spells. In any case, True damage is *specifically* designed that it is above all else something that is harder to counter. It's the great equalizer. And sure, you could have a problem that there's too much true damage. You'll find people that agree and disagree with that. But that's not what you're saying. You're saying that it simply shouldn't exist. That's something else entirely.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gAEJvfgU,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T17:34:49.997+0000) > > The point of true damage is that there's no major counter to it (more specifically in the case of Fiora and Vayne's %HP, as they aren't supposed to care about who they're hitting, it will deal about the same percentage of damage). And that is unhealthy. You need a way to play against something or it’s unfair. Just look at the true stealth Akali had, it was contentedly unfair so it was removed.
The counterplay is that you bring multiple people, don't engage them one on one. Not everything needs counterplay directly to the other party. Macro counterplay is just as important and just as viable. Lane management, proper ganking and flanking, etc.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gAEJvfgU,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T17:21:19.391+0000) > > And what is the reason for that? Why is it unhealthy? It’s unhealthy because there is no way to counter it.
The point of true damage is that there's no major counter to it (more specifically in the case of Fiora and Vayne's %HP, as they aren't supposed to care about who they're hitting, it will deal about the same percentage of damage).
: [Discussion]: Morgana Nerfs
Nerfs likely will be reverted: https://twitter.com/RiotRepertoir/status/1115840329779904513
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gAEJvfgU,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-04-10T17:18:52.790+0000) > > So then what is the point of picking Vayne? That's her intended niche. She's a target agnostic duelist that *will* kill anything if she gets enough time at it Giver her another nice. The same thing goes for Fiora or pretty much any champ with built in true damage. True damage should not be in the game, it’s unhelathy and needs to be removed.
And what is the reason for that? Why is it unhealthy?
: Yasuo is fine, the zed nerfs on pbe solve his problem, get rid of spear and riven + Jax are fine, get rid of Vayne’s percent max hp true damage it’s unhealthy.
> get rid of Vayne’s percent max hp true damage it’s unhealthy. So then what is the point of picking Vayne? That's her intended niche. She's a target agnostic duelist that *will* kill anything if she gets enough time at it
Rylalei (EUNE)
: How would you nerf the following
..... You do realize a 5% reduction in win rate is incredibly huge right?
: Can we talk about Invictus Fiora's recall?
theShy (the player the skin is for) wanted to pick Riven for his skin, but since he never played her during the tournament, he couldn't.
Quáx (NA)
: Why me?
Oh, misread your comment. Thought you asked if the toggle had recently come to the game. My bad
Quáx (NA)
: His W becomes at toggle at max rank. Did you recently come back to the game?
[Patch 9.6](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-96-notes)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7c4ZNq0i,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T15:02:36.688+0000) > > I'm pretty sure it's just building Lux as a tank thanks for the 0 insight
> [{quoted}](name=strygwyr3,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7c4ZNq0i,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T15:05:48.135+0000) > > thanks for the 0 insight You said explain the strat. It's just going to be building Lux as a tank and then doing what Lux does, except not bursting people. You just use your CC to be a nuisance to the enemy and set up your team, like any tank would.
AIQ (NA)
: Assuming you mean "doesn't have a chat?" Yes and no. While chat is primarily used for flaming and being toxic there are rare occasions that people actually use it help/communicate game strategy. While a feature to disable chat for the convenience of not having to mute all every game would be nice, getting rid of chat entirely is not an option. To "change your mind" (or try to). Chat is not the problem it's the toxic people using the chat removing it just makes them find another way to be toxic.
> [{quoted}](name=AIQ,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qc0U3RtL,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T14:31:41.045+0000) > > While chat is primarily used for flaming and being toxic there are rare occasions that people actually use it help/communicate game strategy. Switch those two things around. Toxicity is much rarer then other usages.
ISmurfy420 (EUNE)
: Morgana New Nerfs incoming.
For all the people that immediately jumped on the first tweets about 9.8 PBE balance changes, you lot have been incredibly lax on going back to see that they are likely pulling the changes: https://twitter.com/RiotRepertoir/status/1115840329779904513
: FTL please explain the strat a little bit I main lux and think that would be fun if partially effective
> [{quoted}](name=strygwyr3,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7c4ZNq0i,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T14:58:55.458+0000) > > FTL please explain the strat a little bit I main lux and think that would be fun if partially effective I'm pretty sure it's just building Lux as a tank
: > [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5NnEB3QB,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T11:03:29.701+0000) > > boards likes to pretend that juggernauts oppress all melee champs so that they don't have to admit that they play terribly vs them I read somewhere here that the class Juggernauts ruined the game since S5. What the fudge
> [{quoted}](name=Abibyama II,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5NnEB3QB,comment-id=000100000000000000000002,timestamp=2019-04-10T12:19:59.413+0000) > > I read somewhere here that Juggernauts ruined the game in S5. > > What the fudge That’s when the juggernaut concept and reworks were released, and most of them were incredibly overpowered (like Darius getting picked in the World championship and still getting a pentakill oveepowered)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:28:52.287+0000) > > Then we lose position select, and it goes back to pick/call order. > > AKA "everyone is autofilled" Where the hell do people keep pulling this shitty excuse from? Please, enlighten me on HOW we'd lose positional select? Don't say "because queue times would be too long because nobody picks X role!" because that's not true for any rank before diamond/masters.
> [{quoted}](name=AngusBoomPants,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=00000003,timestamp=2019-04-10T05:25:12.471+0000) > > Where the hell do people keep pulling this shitty excuse from? > > Please, enlighten me on HOW we'd lose positional select? Don't say "because queue times would be too long because nobody picks X role!" because that's not true for any rank before diamond/masters. Why do you think auto fill is on at all ranks in the first place? Do you really think Riot just has it on for no reason? There was no auto fill in the middle ranks at first. Riot found that it was making queues too long, and so they had to enable it.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:28:52.287+0000) > > Then we lose position select, and it goes back to pick/call order. > > AKA "everyone is autofilled" how about giving players the option to wait more for the role they want?
> [{quoted}](name=AlexTheGrandWolf,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=00000005,timestamp=2019-04-10T10:59:37.060+0000) > > how about giving players the option to wait more for the role they want? Because you aren’t the only one waiting to get in game.
: Chat PermaBan instead!?
Riot had what was essentially permanent chat bans in the past, as chat restrictions would stack up ad infinitum. What Riot discovered was that it did essentially nothing to discourage toxicity, and that when people were unable to express their toxicity through words, they instead turned to gameplay toxicity, which is significantly harder to track. Riot decided that the best way to cut out toxicity from the game was to give a few warnings, but then if it became clear that the offender would not change their actions, then they would simply be removed from the game.
Colte (NA)
: i just wish those tilted inting trolls that run it down mid would get banned as easily as people who talk in chat.
Do you have a solution then to how to create an automated system that has a near zero false positive rate at catching inters and trolls? Because of you do then I can guarantee you that Riot would love to hear it. Interpreting typed out text is *incredibly* simple to program. You do it every time you google something. Programming a machine to interpret actions though is significantly harder, particularly when those performing those actions frequently don't want to be caught and make an effort to conceal their behavior.
roughvan (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:44:37.761+0000) > > 1. We already lost position ranks. That was a new introduction this season that Riot reverted. > > 2. We would lose position *select* because the only way to keep queue times in any modicum of timeliness, it would need to just take 10 people in similar MMR and place them in a match together. There is no time to find people going for specific positions, particularly with low population rules like Support. That system was better then the current one but its not here to stay. Having rank on every role would make it much less frustrating if you get autofilled and it would also allow you to play to the best of your ability in the given role, because you'd get paired up with players with the same skill as you in that role. Problem is people found it too grindy, it would've been fine for me, i just didn't read up much on the system as i didn't get to play in na as if i remember correctly it was tested there so im not sure how decaying system worked. As i said above didn't riot decide that its not rolling out that ranking system?
> [{quoted}](name=roughvan,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:54:52.832+0000) > > That system was better then the current one but its not here to stay. Having rank on every role would make it much less frustrating if you get autofilled and it would also allow you to play to the best of your ability in the given role, because you'd get paired up with players with the same skill as you in that role. > > Problem is people found it too grindy, it would've been fine for me, i just didn't read up much on the system as i didn't get to play in na as if i remember correctly it was tested there so im not sure how decaying system worked. > > As i said above didn't riot decide that its not rolling out that ranking system? I'm not talking about position *ranks*. I brought them up as the person I was replying to seems to have confused position select with position ranks.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:44:37.761+0000) > > 1. We already lost position ranks. That was a new introduction this season that Riot reverted. > > 2. We would lose position *select* because the only way to keep queue times in any modicum of timeliness, it would need to just take 10 people in similar MMR and place them in a match together. There is no time to find people going for specific positions, particularly with low population rules like Support. "modicum of timeliness" English?
> [{quoted}](name=WarnercBbT,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:46:29.243+0000) > > "modicum of timeliness" > > English? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/287799626168401921/565383834753826817/Capture.PNG
roughvan (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:28:52.287+0000) > > Then we lose position select, and it goes back to pick/call order. > > AKA "everyone is autofilled" If i remember correctly, the team builder worked fine. It showed the roles that were in high demand and people could pick to fill them. Yes, we had to wait for a long time to get into the game, but its much better then having players that have no clue what they are doing in a given role.
> [{quoted}](name=roughvan,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=00000002,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:37:18.279+0000) > > If i remember correctly, the team builder worked fine. It showed the roles that were in high demand and people could pick to fill them. > Yes, we had to wait for a long time to get into the game, but its much better then having players that have no clue what they are doing in a given role. As someone who used to use team builder for nearly all his matches, it most certainly did **not** work fine. Queue times were astronomical, as basically no one wanted to play support (or wait out the time to find a support). Now take that same wait time, and try to stick it into all ranks and MMRs, and making it the *sole* way to play ranked, it just isn't feasible.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:28:52.287+0000) > > Then we lose position select, and it goes back to pick/call order. > > AKA "everyone is autofilled" How did you come up with that?? The only change would be is wait longer in q Can you please explain how we lose position ranks?
> [{quoted}](name=anatasjhsh01,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cAYeBjZY,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-10T03:35:10.570+0000) > > How did you come up with that?? > The only change would be is wait longer in q > Can you please explain how we lose position ranks? 1. We already lost position ranks. That was a new introduction this season that Riot reverted. 2. We would lose position *select* because the only way to keep queue times in any modicum of timeliness, it would need to just take 10 people in similar MMR and place them in a match together. There is no time to find people going for specific positions, particularly with low population rules like Support.
: Get rid of autofill
Then we lose position select, and it goes back to pick/call order. AKA "everyone is autofilled"
Jamaree (NA)
: You know when you write out a kit like that, they all sound OP right, here watch: Why does this champion get passive heal, an ad shred, and mr shred, and amor shred, the largest unconditional AoE in the game, true damage, and AoE slow with a knock up attached to it? Also, that argument falls apart a bit when Sylas has a lower win rate then Singed and champions with simple kits tend to have far higher win rates, case in point Ashe and Sona who both respectively have 53% globally at Plat
For the life of me I can't think of what champion that is
Cloud273 (NA)
: So apparenly Steam can just delete any review it wants now...
They are deleting ones that aren’t actual reviews.
Why2Rods (NA)
: To add to this, while amumu's pick rate may only be around a 4.5% across all ranks, anivias is only a touch over 2% which could also factor into anivias skin pricing (or any skin pricing based on play rate of initial skins release)...I imagine in 2012 amumu's pick rate was significantly higher than right now.
Anivia's skin was also made for a special celebration in Brazil. As such it's possible it was discounted for that (Riot has done that in the past. Both Surprise Party Fiddle and Primetime Draven are technically 1820 skins, but are permanently discounted to 975 for Riot's birthday and eSports success, respectively)
Ziven (EUW)
: aatrox revert?
Almost assuredly not.
: I don't get why Riot invested so much into Nexus Blitz, but removed it.
Because enough people weren't playing it after the missions were done. Simple as that. Other modes *do* have more players.
: Daily reminder that "Focus the ADC" is not always the best option
As someone who has been that 0/5/4 ADC, please for the love of god people I just want to play stop insta-targeting me (and then *still* losing the fight since I wasn't contributing anything, except I also haven't gotten anything from the fight since I died so early on any assist credit has worn off)
: Riot, Inting come in different shapes and sizes
1. That's inting 2. That would mostly fall into trolling 3. That could be trolling, but the jungler also has no obligation to gank 4. That's called AFK, and the Leaverbuster system accounts for that. 5. If they are legitimately trying, then there is nothing wrong. There is no command that you have to play the meta. No if they actually *are* trolling, then yes, that's a problem. But simply playing a champion in an off role is not that. All of this is completely secondary to the fact that it is *incredibly* hard to accurately judge true trolling or intentional feeding aside from the most obvious of cases, as much more often than not, it is simply a player who had an off day, or wasn't entirely comfortable in the champion or role, etc.. And because Riot **must** err on the side of caution so that they don't punish those innocent players, it takes a significantly longer time to catch true trolls. However, once they *are* caught, it is an instant 14 day ban.
: From the Wikipedia page: "Riot Games was majority-acquired by Tencent in February 2011 (93%) and fully acquired in December 2015 (100% of the shares of Riot Games)."
> [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ApucurI4,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-08T17:00:31.182+0000) > > From the Wikipedia page: > "Riot Games was majority-acquired by Tencent in February 2011 (93%) and fully acquired in December 2015 (100% of the shares of Riot Games)." For those reading, that means the answer to OP’s question is no. Tencent has had a majority holding in Riot since early it’s inception (and in any case, Tencent’s MO was to buy into western companies and then let them run and earn them money, **not** to try and take over them.)
GigglesO (NA)
: People that Watch League of Legends piss me off.
Bit confused to what you're talking about here. Do you mean people that watch the game through like videos and streams? Or do you mean people that are in your same match, but that don't pay attention to their own champion?
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LAAdWRI0,comment-id=0001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-07T23:22:00.308+0000) > > **If people are not reporting it enough to make it a significant issue, then it isn't a significant issue** > > The Leaverbuster system works much the same way as the IFS, where it take player feedback from reports, and then adjusts its parameters if enough people are having an issue with it. Oh, then I guess trolls and intentional feeders aren't that significant of an issue either considering how often people get away with trolling games. Tell me; what IS a significant issue when it comes to games?
> [{quoted}](name=Wave Burner,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LAAdWRI0,comment-id=00010000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-07T23:25:07.512+0000) > > Oh, then I guess trolls and intentional feeders aren't that significant of an issue either considering how often people get away with trolling games. Tell me; what IS a significant issue when it comes to games? ????? People that troll and int get punished. People that AFK get punished. If people not being there at the immediate start of the game is causing significant issues in your games **REPORT THEM**. That’s the way the system learns. That’s the way people get punished. I’m not sure what exactly you want. You have something that is clearly an issue to you, and you have the correct course of action to get your desirable result. Right now you’re the equivalent of a dog that won’t give up the ball because it wants it, but at the same time wants to play fetch. If you’ve done this, and it still hasn’t produced your wanted effect, then it can be concluded that either a) most people don’t actually have an issue with this and don't feel the need to report it or (much more likely) b) it happens to such a low extent that there really isn’t much justification to adjusting the system for it.
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LAAdWRI0,comment-id=00010000000000010000,timestamp=2019-04-07T23:10:49.293+0000) > > Then it isn't causing a significant impact on games. That's how the systems work. If it's causing harm, it gets stopped. And who decides if it isn't causing harm? The automated system? You think the artificial system can make nuanced choices like that? Do you have any idea how long 5 minutes is in a ranked game? How much stress that puts on the other 4 people on the team? How much can be lost in that time? And don't bring up remakes because all that does is waste everyone's time, even the enemy team. Don't come to me and tell me the system works. It does't. And that's why so many people get away with it.
> [{quoted}](name=Wave Burner,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LAAdWRI0,comment-id=000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-04-07T23:14:47.226+0000) > > And who decides if it isn't causing harm? The automated system? You think the artificial system can make nuanced choices like that? Do you have any idea how long 5 minutes is in a ranked game? How much stress that puts on the other 4 people on the team? How much can be lost in that time? And don't bring up remakes because all that does is waste everyone's time, even the enemy team. Don't come to me and tell me the system works. It does't. And that's why so many people get away with it. **If people are not reporting it enough to make it a significant issue, then it isn't a significant issue** The Leaverbuster system works much the same way as the IFS, where it take player feedback from reports, and then adjusts its parameters if enough people are having an issue with it.
Show more

Wilk Łucznik

Level 81 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion