CLG ear (NA)
: I have some questions for the people who are outraged at the PAX riot event
1. No, but it's not really relevant, because there is absolutely no reason that I can't disagree with a company's decisions even if they don't directly affect me. 2. See my response to item 1. That said, I probably would have forgone the whole event if I were there even though I qualify as non-binary by most standards. 3. Well, let's see, not announce it the day before, have all the details finalized and properly stated publicly before the day of the event, and not imposed a constraint on attendance that was not realistically enforceable (enforcing 'no cis-gendered binary males' would require a psych evaluation to even come near being enforcable, and even then would still be a joke). 4. Daifuku. 5. No to both, but just as much because I've been unhappy with the direction of the game recently as any political reasons. For what it's worth, it was the thing with DZK, not the PAX event itself that finally got me to leave (even if the general point of the rant was right, there is _zero_ excuse for insulting the player base).
: >Lets handle our current PR situation by punishing our innocent male customers that had nothing to do with it and try to pass it off as the ''trying to recruit more women into gaming'' virtue signal which are already attending a gaming event to begin with. >''we're doubling down and arn't afraid what we'll lose in the process'' Say hi to Battlefield 5 for me. Lol. By the way, isn't what they're doing illegal?
> [{quoted}](name=yaboydanny,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zftRsAT9,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2018-09-02T07:31:47.159+0000) > > Say hi to Battlefield 5 for me. > > Lol. By the way, isn't what they're doing illegal? Potentially. It kind of depends on the exact local laws, because they aren't a governmental organization. If it were anywhere in California, then I'm pretty sure it would indeed be illegal. Not sure about Seattle though.
: > [{quoted}](name=Lil Grizzles,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=R3EqewTu,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2018-09-02T14:43:12.395+0000) > > I'm probably the only person on this whole thread that will agree with the original rioter XD > > Like, yeah. Hate begets hate. If he is hateful, that's bad. But, he is responding to hate, which makes him feel justified. He isn't justified in the very small instances that he shows hate, but it's ok, cuz his actual comments are pretty common in the actual fields of queer theory and feminism and race theory. > > The biggest issue is that people sometimes think if someone else is given rights, that takes away from your rights. Equality isn't a finite resource that we have to portion out. It isn't the case that if you take from one person's rights that other will lose the ability to have rights. > > Y'all should read some actual theory of this like Mary Wollstonecraft (a very very mild version of feminism over 200 years ago) or some bell hooks. You might start to look at it from someone else's point of view and see that life isn't roses for everyone else. ;) Except they did take away. This was a panel, that allowed everyone except males. There was no alternative. It's not like this was an additional panel. This was the ONLY panel. And it was denied to people based on their gender. Which in any other case would be means for a massive drawback against the company. But it was against males and therefore society finds it okay. Because sexism is okay as long as it's against males for some reason.
> [{quoted}](name=DotEleven,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=R3EqewTu,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2018-09-02T14:47:18.750+0000) > > Except they did take away. This was a panel, that allowed everyone except males. There was no alternative. It's not like this was an additional panel. This was the ONLY panel. And it was denied to people based on their gender. Which in any other case would be means for a massive drawback against the company. But it was against males and therefore society finds it okay. Because sexism is okay as long as it's against males for some reason. For the same reason that racial minorities being racist against caucasians is OK. People conflate the concepts of 'justice' and 'vengeance' (which are two different things), so they view it as OK.
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=NotSid,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xmaZmRGo,comment-id=00040000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-01T14:00:50.884+0000) > > Ok here is the official Riot Twitter commenting on it. I don't know much more confirmation I can give you. > > https://twitter.com/riotgames/status/1035571981251301376?s=09 Okay, that's more like it. Fire away. But with civility. I've had enough with the recent reactionary nonsense the Board has been having the past couple days. ...... Also, I tend to wonder, so if you don't mind joining with me on this: Is it always exclusion if a whatever event is specifically set up to cater to a certain demographic and thus prioritises the seats of their target audience over the non-target-audience group? * Let's say, if you're operating a soup kitchen or whatever; is it really exclusion to forbid non-homeless people to join in and get the free food and prioritises on using their resources on providing the homeless people who are their actual target demographic? * Is it really exclusion of the boys to only allow say, girls to participate in a girl's 100m sprint? * Is it really an exclusion of girls to host a speech that raise awareness about for instance, men-specific diseases, and so they want to get as many male audiences as possible at the expense of female audience who don't really have those health concerns in the first place? * Is it really exclusion to hold a party and you choose which people you invite into the said party? We've been sort of bashed constantly that "exclusion is bad, everyone should be included", which while yes, that is indeed very true, but at the same time, is having an event that decides to cater to its own audience really such a bad thing at the idea of its core? I mean, if people are constantly saying that "SJW are ruining things by asking for things to be catered for them even though they don't even care about the actual product unlike the actual fans", then wouldn't demanding to be allowed into an event that may or may not be structured in a way to specifically cater for a demographic that may or may not even be relevant to you nor do you even really care about it, kind of the same as the often criticism we constantly barraged at the so called "SJW"? Wouldn't that just mean we're all making the exact same mistakes together? And if restricting things and choose to serve your choice of audience is at its core and base not a problem, then shouldn't we stop shouting "exclusion" just because not EVERYONE is invited any given events?
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xmaZmRGo,comment-id=000400000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-09-01T14:19:30.549+0000) > > Okay, that's more like it. > > Fire away. But with civility. I've had enough with the recent reactionary nonsense the Board has been having the past couple days. > > ...... > > Also, I tend to wonder, so if you don't mind joining with me on this: > > Is it always exclusion if a whatever event is specifically set up to cater to a certain demographic and thus prioritises the seats of their target audience over the non-target-audience group? > > * Let's say, if you're operating a soup kitchen or whatever; is it really exclusion to forbid non-homeless people to join in and get the free food and prioritises on using their resources on providing the homeless people who are their actual target demographic? > * Is it really exclusion of the boys to only allow say, girls to participate in a girl's 100m sprint? > * Is it really an exclusion of girls to host a speech that raise awareness about for instance, men-specific diseases, and so they want to get as many male audiences as possible at the expense of female audience who don't really have those health concerns in the first place? > * Is it really exclusion to hold a party and you choose which people you invite into the said party? > > We've been sort of bashed constantly that "exclusion is bad, everyone should be included", which while yes, that is indeed very true, but at the same time, is having an event that decides to cater to its own audience really such a bad thing at the idea of its core? > > I mean, if people are constantly saying that "SJW are ruining things by asking for things to be catered for them even though they don't even care about the actual product unlike the actual fans", then wouldn't demanding to be allowed into an event that may or may not be structured in a way to specifically cater for a demographic that may or may not even be relevant to you nor do you even really care about it, kind of the same as the often criticism we constantly barraged at the so called "SJW"? Wouldn't that just mean we're all making the exact same mistakes together? > > And if restricting things and choose to serve your choice of audience is at its core and base not a problem, then shouldn't we stop shouting "exclusion" just because not EVERYONE is invited any given events? Context and motivation are what matters here though. They got caught out being misogynistic, and it looks like they're going super aggressively in the other direction here as an attempt to compensate. Unless they can conclusively prove that they're trying to exclude people trying to shoot down their attempts at remediation (and a better way to do that is to let everyone in and say that you will be thrown out if you act like a misogynistic pig), then this looks more like a trivial knee-jerk reaction typical of upper management in most companies to what happened, which may or may not be _motivated_ by a desire to discriminate, but in this context _looks_ and _feels_ to the community like discrimination by way of negligence. In comparison, of your examples: * The soup kitchen example technically is an example of discrimination, though it's one which is largely tolerated in most societies because of the practicalities of running a charity and the number of people who will just take advantage of it and thus take resources away from those who actually need it. This is why context is important. If effective use of resources were not a factor, this would not be tolerated. * The athletic example is tradition (which is one of the strongest forces in the known universe), and whether or not it's discrimination hinges on whether or not the classical basis for it (which I will not get into here, as that's not the point) is true or not. If we assume that the classical premise that women are in some way athletically inferior to men is false, then it's discrimination. If we assume that it's true, then it's not discrimination. Note that the same can be said about separating groups of athletes based on age, though that has a significantly greater degree of scientific background indicating that the premise (namely that age matters for athletic performance) is true. * The lecture example is usually not discrimination, dependent on _how_ they go about it. If it's a case where they are actively excluding women, then it's absolutely discrimination (except possibly if it's kids they're talking to, in which case whether or not it's discrimination is dependent on the social expectations in that culture). If it's a case though where they're just not really providing anything to specifically appeal to women, then it's not discrimination any more than something like a radio station playing only one genre of music (they're not discriminating against listeners who don't like that music, they're just not actively trying to have them as an audience). Motivation comes into play here too, but motivation is very difficult to prove. * The private party example doesn't hold up here at all, regardless of whether it's discrimination or not. You have a _right_ as a private citizen to hold such a party. Riot is not a private citizen, they are a business, and businesses are required by law in most first-world countries to not discriminate on most grounds (biological and physiological gender at a minimum, and psychological gender identity in some locales as well).
: If you are so afraid of a champion that you can't stay in lane with them then you are either counter picked super hard like Yasuo vs Renekton. Yasuo legit can't sit in that lane or you have no clue how to play defensive. Every plays to minimize their champions vulnerabilities or you are playing wrong. Yasuo doesn't straight up shaft that many champions people just play poorly against them. Also Malzahar and Kayle shaft Yasuo without being a melee bruiser.
> Yasuo legit can't sit in that lane or you have no clue how to play defensive. Yeah, no. Playing defensively against people with that much mobility largely means sitting under turret, which in turn means they usually have an advantage. Yes, he can't just sit in lane and do nothing, but if you play defensively, he will have an advantage. It's also not just _you_. Your jungler has to know how to fight him properly, and so do any of your other allies who decide to come and help during the laning phase, and _that_ is just as much of an issue. > Yasuo doesn't straight up shaft that many champions people just play poorly against them. Yes, he's not inherently broken against most people mechanically, but that's _not_ all there is to this. He's a remarkably effective pick against a decent percentage of the playerbase for psychological reasons (frustrating gameplay usually makes people emotional and error prone), and once he has an advantage he can utilize it arguably more effectively than a lot of the roster (so you doing well in lane is also a bit more dependent on your team not being idiots than many other champs). You can't just evaluate champs on mechanical strength of the character. Psychological impact on the players needs to be considered (this is actually part why some of the more eccentric off-meta picks work reasonably well, especially when they first start getting played, nobody expects them to do well, so they don't give them proper consideration until it's too late). Same for how well they can capitalize on an advantage in lane, and how easy it is for people to actually execute counterplay against them. > Also Malzahar and Kayle shaft Yasuo without being a melee bruiser. So does Brand. All three fall under the 'people who can just ignore wind wall' category, which is a much smaller group than bruisers and tanky melee. They're also usually riskier picks against him because they're easy targets until they get a few levels and an item.
: But if they dodge the actual blade but stay too close it still makes sense for them to be sent flying yes? ^^ Like when you hit a water surface, the immediate area of impact will cave in but the surroundings will rise up and wave out before the surrounding and mostly unaffected water flows back in to fill the vacuum left by the moving waters.
And given Aatrox's canonical size, this will happen even with stone when he swings his sword downwards.
: Playing against Yasuo is not that bad people just don't like that they can't sit in their minion or run away straight to tower they have to take alternate routes. Yasuo has very obvious times where he is vulnerable just learn to play against him. Akali IMO is only obnoxious because her restealth time is too short. It needs to be 50%-100% longer and she would be easier to handle.
Except that good Yasuo players minimize those times of vulnerability to near nonexistence. The issue with both is that you pretty much have to counter pick them to be able to stay in lane at all. In the case of Yas, it's bruisers and tanky melee (or people who can just ignore wind wall). With Akali, it's AoE and skillshots. Both are technically balanced on paper, but it's a case where they're really weak against most people who counter them, but oppressive against those who don't, which is not a good design when the goal is for everyone to have fun.
: Akali is just like Yasuo. Even with a low win rate she's awful to play against.
And how exactly is this significantly different from pre-rework Akali? I mean, what you have to do to counter has changed (slightly), but even before the rework she was not fun to lane against as almost anyone.
: > [{quoted}](name=ahferroin7,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=G46m6kil,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-08-26T18:25:56.823+0000) > > It won't get them any profit, but it's also at most a dozen lines of UI code, which translates to about 50 USD cost between implementation and testing, which is _nothing_ compared to how much money they make. > > Realistically, between this and a number of other things, I'm starting to think that they have a phobia of implementing features that are considered standard by pretty much every other online multiplayer game in existence. Or...becouse the new client can't handle it couse its code is spaghetti {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}}
> [{quoted}](name=HungryAngry2SPP,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=G46m6kil,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2018-08-27T00:32:56.108+0000) > > Or...becouse the new client can't handle it couse its code is spaghetti > {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}} That would be a much more valid argument if they hadn't been refusing to implement it in the old client too. Seriously though, the new client is essentially a web app, so there's absolutely no reason it can't.
: Ward Randomization?
Or, you know, at least do what SMITE does and give you the option of having it be a random one from your whole set each time you place one...
: Or use another program. Anyway, RITO would not profit implenting this, I dont think they will do it anyday
> [{quoted}](name=HungryAngry2SPP,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=G46m6kil,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-08-26T17:33:59.196+0000) > > Or use another program. > Anyway, RITO would not profit implenting this, I dont think they will do it anyday It won't get them any profit, but it's also at most a dozen lines of UI code, which translates to about 50 USD cost between implementation and testing, which is _nothing_ compared to how much money they make. Realistically, between this and a number of other things, I'm starting to think that they have a phobia of implementing features that are considered standard by pretty much every other online multiplayer game in existence.
: I don't understand why it was changed like that, and then on top of that I don't understand why there isn't an option to put it back or keep it that way. Like what business meeting did someone pitch this idea in the first place? it seems extremely counter intuitive and I've not run into a single person who's said "yes I like it better this way" everyone complains about reserving it by hand at the start of each match.
> [{quoted}](name=FrozenFrostFyre,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=89bZYz47,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-08-11T04:27:49.220+0000) > > I don't understand why it was changed like that, and then on top of that I don't understand why there isn't an option to put it back or keep it that way. Like what business meeting did someone pitch this idea in the first place? it seems extremely counter intuitive and I've not run into a single person who's said "yes I like it better this way" everyone complains about reserving it by hand at the start of each match. And on top of that further, why there was no indication of this in the patch notes.
Verxint (NA)
: In my opinion role queue was a huge mistake. I also feel like Riot has supported a "just keep doing the same thing over and over until it works" style for the average player.
Declaring roles has hurt individual versatility, but it's also significantly improved the experience most players have in this game.
: > [{quoted}](name=MrHaZeYo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=RBtmqvTj,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-08-09T20:22:50.663+0000) > > Who would of thought that a bunch of champions who fight each other would need to be ripped to keep up. I know I personally would run into battle with absolutely zero protection covering my vital organs too
> [{quoted}](name=WhoIsThisDude,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=RBtmqvTj,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-08-09T20:24:28.700+0000) > > I know I personally would run into battle with absolutely zero protection covering my vital organs too They have plenty of protection. Muscles actually make rather effective composite armor if they're properly toned and thick enough.
Fluffeh (NA)
: I dont know why they gave her "true" invisiblity. My only guess is that they wanted her to be able to towerdive but all it does is make it incredibly frustrating when abilities that apply TRUE sight dont function agaisnt this stealth champ and only this champ. It also means that she gets to zone the adc from the teamfight for 6 seconds lest they get instantly deleted and nobody can stop it, you cant even catch her out because she can slap it down and wait for her team and you just cant do anything about it.
It isn't 'true' invisibility though. She's untargetable, but she's still revealed by true sight (even if she's untargetable.
YuGiHo (NA)
: yea, champs with aoe destroy her when she uses shroud. Darius an riven especially in my experience. darius q bonus damage area is perfectly aligned with the shape of her shroud and riven is all aoe with 2 stuns so once sh learns where akali is sh can unload all her damage in that area. Im sure there are other champs that have ways to counter akali shroud but people have to actually figure out what works and then pick it over the champion they are trying to 1 trick
Ziggs is my personal favorite, all his stuff is AoE, plus he can easily force her out of shroud. Anivia works well too, though not as well as she used to. Sol is just plain funny (though he has serious issues with her other than effectively countering the shroud.
Malak (NA)
: Akali Stalling with her smoke is really annoying
This: > nothing anyone can do about it Is patently false. Unless you have no untargeted abilities that either do damage or have associated hard CC, you can do something about it. Fun fact, even though she's concealed and untargetable, you can still hit her with skillshots and AoE effects (same goes for anybody under a real invisibility effect). You even have a reasonably good idea _where_ she is, simply because there's smoke there (unlike Shaco for example, who could be anywhere after he uses Deceive). This: > sit there waiting for her to reappear Is your issue. This tells me you're either playing someone with exactly zero untargeted damage or CC (and thus should generally not be fighting her solo to begin with), or that you've already burnt all your CD's trying to kill her (and therefore probably would not have killed her anyway if she didn't have the shroud).
: Does anyone like spellbinder?
TBH, it's not a particularly attractive item for multiple reasons. * It's only got AP and MS (as compared to everything else that builds out of Aether Wisp). * It takes _forever_ to charge up to a reasonable boost unless you're playing as or against certain champs. * The boost doesn't last long enough for most people who can charge it fast to really benefit. I've used it on Karrthus once or twice to decent benefit, but not the way it was meant to be used (I build up max stacks, and then pop it right as I die to give my ult a boost), but not really on anybody else.
: Realistically the old rune system didn't give people much to work for either, with the exception of completionists who actually derive joy from getting every piece of available content. For most veteran players they just had massive IP banks that they never spent because they had the needed armor/mr/cdr/ad/as/ap/scaling hp runes. Ideally we can find some other form of meaningful progression, but old runes really weren't it.
The inability to spend IP further is not something that was caused by the old runes system. It's just as much of an issue now as it was then, and actually I'd argue it was _less_ of an issue then (because you could spend all that IP on a bunch of rune pages). The bigger issue with the old rune system was the insane cost of things. It pretty much meant new players were at a competitive disadvantage even once they hit level 30 for the next few _thousand_ games they played.
: Akali's Smoke Kills Counterplay
Well, yeah, if you play someone who pretty much has to be able to target his opponent, you're going to have a hard time...
: i know the feeling. even though i can't do it blind yet, if i know enemy is at baron i will go backdoor and when low enough use mf's ult to steal baron from behind. did it with Dinger and ult rockets too.
The thing is, it was just as much luck as getting the timing right. I've never managed to pull it off again.
Danjeng (NA)
: Are the other languages correctly translated? If so, impressive range of languages.
Most of them appear to be the result of using Google Translate, which is notoriously bad at getting anything but really simple stuff and isolated words correct.
: I like how you written it in almost all languages lol.
Uh, no, not even close. Not even close to the offerings of most online translation services (Google Translate has over 50). There are over 7000 spoken natural languages in the world. Notably missing are: * Most Germanic languages (Dutch, Swedish, Afrikaans, Danish, Norwegian, Yiddish, Scotts, etc). * Any Balto-Slavic languages (Russian, Polish, Czech, Ukrainian, Serbo-Croatian, Lithuanian, Finnish, etc). * Any Armenian, Celtic, or Indo-Iranian languages. * Greek * Korean * Japanese * Anything from the various African language families (seriously, there's over 3000 to choose from here). * Anything from the various Asian language families except Chinese (which is only technically a written language). * Anything from the various Oceanic (Australia, New Guinea, Polynesia, Micronesia, etc) language families. * Anything from the various North and South American language families. * Probably quite a few things I'm not thinking of right now.
: What is the meanest (legal) thing you've done to an enemy team to get a win?
My favorite so far was back in S4 when I was just starting to play Ziggs. Third PvP game I played with him, about 25 minutes in it was just me and our Master Yi left on our team after a particularly bad teamfight (which I will admit was largely my fault, I still hadn't gotten the hang of anything more than wave clear and dueling with Ziggs yet). I was trying to hold off a monstrous wave at our inner mid turret, and our jungler was doing likewise with the outer top turret. And then I noticed Baron was up and none of the enemy team were anywhere to be seen on the map. On a whim, I did some quick math to try and estimate how much HP baron had left at this point, and lobbed my ult at Baron pit. That single move turned the entire game around. With what is still one of the best ults I've ever had on Ziggs, I stole baron, and reduced all the enemy team to low enough health that our Master Yi (who had not gotten a kill the entire game) was able to pick off all five of them with just an Alpha Strike and a single auto-attack. About 30 seconds later, the enemy team unanimously surrendered despite the fact that they had been steamrolling for the entire match up to that point. After that game in all chat, nobody (my own team included) believed that I had done the math to figure out when the best time to throw my ult was until I explained it in long-form in chat to them (and even then, the enemy jungler, who had been camping me mid all game, still swore that I must have been cheating).
Jetva (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jetva,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=EMxxE9Ex,comment-id=000500000000,timestamp=2018-07-29T17:21:34.637+0000) > > Right? It blows my mind how amazing Howling Abyss and Butchers Bridge are as ARAM maps when they have fully voiced shopkeepers that speak to specific champs and talk of lore at regional places in Runeterra. ARAM maps people, in the main map the shopkeepers are completely bankrupt of any speech or lore. Give SR a home on the map. When Blizzard released Heroes of the Storm the explanation was a simple excuse of cross dimensional Nexus where champions from Blizzard’s various IP come together to do battle. See, people don’t need a complex explanation to get into a game, even the most simple of backstory lore fills it all in.
They don't need a complex explanation, but they at least deserve a consistent one, and we don't have one for League right now. The old IoW lore was limiting in what they could do with it, but it made sense, was self consistent, and gave a lot of interesting options for events.
: Why the hell would it be? You have to be **really** stupid to conceive the idea of a flat planet.
There's high magic involved, there's no reason that it has to obey our laws of physics. For that matter, there's high magic involved, it _doesn't_ obey our laws of physics.
: You know what really pisses off guys who do that to you? Tell them you're going to force them to win.
Doing this just vindicates their behavior though if you can't back it up.
: Brand should have its base damage nerfed and its scalings buffed
His current design relies on two things to be an effective pick: 1. He has to have certain items. He needs _something_ to deal with mana consumption, and additionally usually needs either high CDR (further increasing mana consumption), or Liandry's plus Rylai's (so that catching someone with one ability lets him reliably unload a whole rotation). The need for Rylai's and Liandry's would not be as bad 2. His enemies have to either have zero magic resist, or they have to group. Neither of these are really related to his current bases and scaling. In fact, if anything, the first item is _why_ he has high bases and low scaling, because that way he's still playable before he gets to half build. Both of these points are much more related to the fact that he's mid-range, has high mana costs and CD's, and does a lot of multi-target stuff. In mid, the second point is rarely the case, and the first point has a couple of issues: * He can't realistically build mana regen. Ardent Censer is just plain bad on him mid, and Grail, Mikael's and Redemption are mediocre picks at best in most situations. FQC is functionally worthless unless he's playing really aggressive and ignoring minions (which are essentially mutually exclusive in mid). * Building straight mana on him is hard mid. About the only mana items that really benefit him mid are RoA and Archangels, which are rather expensive and are gambles in the current meta to begin with (you're betting on the game being long enough for them to be gold efficient). Spellblade items are worthless for him, Frozen Heart and Abyssal Mask are too situational, Manamune and Essence Reaver are obviously pointless. GLP might be worth it, but that gives up RoA's scaled bonuses, and the active is mostly only of use for him to deal with short-range mobile targets. * Most of the items that are generally considered good for midlane are not particularly amazing on him. Zhonya's doesn't give him much of value except the active. Protobelt is questionable even for the active. Morellonomicon is actually decent, but only if you're dealing mostly with people who aren't tanky. Spellbinder takes too long to stack for a mediocre benefit. Twin Shadows is actually decent, but not great mid. Deathcap is OK, but not worth as much on him because of his low scaling. Banshee's is actually reasonably good, but is not as valuable in many matchups. Void staff is about the only one that really makes sense all the time. As a result, his core build mid (usually RoA, Liandry's, Rylai's) is expensive and isn't really a power-spike so much as a slow buildup over time. This would still be the case though even with lowered base values and higher scaling, because he needs mana management tools and some form of more reliable CC than his stun. If they toned down the mana usage a bit too, he might get away with GLP in place of RoA, which would open up better options for him otherwise, but reducing that core requirement from 3 specific items to one plus some extra AP would also make him more oppressive as a support. In contrast, the second point is regularly the case in support, and the first is easy to deal with because: * Mikael's and Redemption actually make sense on a support, and he can reasonably go with FQC. * Stacking mana is still not as easy, but GLP, Frozen Heart, and Abyssal Mask are realistically viable for a support Brand. * Beyond that, he just builds what he would otherwise build mid, which still has just as much benefit because he scales more off of item effects than stats. Toning down his base values and improving scaling would not really deal with any of these points in favor of him being a support.
Glory97 (EUW)
: Dear Riot, Here is why I think that making games shorter and more casual was not the right decision
In general, I agree with what you're saying. However, dragon is a bad example. It's _more_ complicated now than it used to be. FOr the original dragon, you only had to care about how many each team had, and you knew without having to look at dragon pit what the result of them getting the next one would be. Now, you have to care about how many of each of four types each team has, and what type is present, and on top of that it locks in bonuses past a certain point.
IainG10 (EUW)
: I think it is also an amount of trying to keep what I suppose are 'natural assassin players' interested in the game; dealing an unfunny amount of damage to a target without needing the backup of other people appeals to the fantasy of a lot of people. The damage bit certainly applies to me in MMOs: I was a Fury Warrior in WoW (a 2H weapon in each hand and plate armour, with an 'I win' macro that increased dmg by 40% and gave guaranteed crit) and I'm a Holosmith Engineer in GW2 (Sword + offhand melee with a damage-amping stance). Whilst both of these pump out unholy damage, and are very flashy (especially the Holosmith), they remain balanced because they have low mobility (1 gap close each, with a mid-length cooldown relative to their respective game's combat), and have at most a single cc-break. Yes, you can 100->0 a squishy in seconds, but only if you can a) reach them, and b) they then stand still and let you.... As you say, a balanced assassin needs an opening, and still might not get out after the deed is done, it's just you'll lose a lot of assassin purists if you make them like that. As a slight aside I do occasionally play assassins here, but the only ones I've managed to get the hang of are Pyke (who is more like that mythical balanced assassin of other games) and Blue-form Kayn (because any time it looks like an assassin would be less than ideal, you just go Red-form).
I'd argue though that it's better for the game to just lose those assassin purists. The playstyle encourages a holier than thou mentality that contributes significantly to toxicity (right alongside the same high-mobility out-play playstyles like Riven, Yasuo, and Vayne), and having it in the game doesn't really make the game itself any better, while making it less fun for other people even aside from that toxicity.
: no, just no. Gankplank and syndra used to be classified as supports in the old classification system because they were played there (and pre rework gangplank had an aoe attack speed buff and damage increase, which fell under their support classification because it helped {or supported one could say} other people) However in riots classification system currently there is not a such thing as a support. for reference here is the list of classes and subclasses in riots classification. class - subclass Tanks - Vanguards, Wardens Fighters - Juggernauts, Divers Slayers - Assassins, Skirmishers Mages - Burst Mages, Battle Mages, Artillery Mages Controllers - Enchanters, Disruptors Marksmen - Marksmen source https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/gameplay/dev-blog-classes-subclasses syndra would probably be a burst mage and gangplank would fall into a skirmisher i would assume. And no, I dont have to respect that you see them as assassins because riot has specifically given them subclasses that they fall under. For fiora and yi they are skirmishers. Not assassins. They have the same class of a slayer, however they are not under the subclass of assassin. And in this case riot has the final say. Not you.
Riot's subclasses are based on how they think the champ should play, not necessarily what all the possible playstyles on that champ are, or even which is optimal. Realistically though, Yi plays somewhat similarly to an assassin (Fiora not so much though, though it can feel like it when she nukes you in a couple of seconds), and is actually classified as one as-per the in-client classification (listed as a secondary role). Other champs that either play like an assassin or can be played as such (that is, using some ability or abilities to jump in, nuke a priority target, and jump out) but are not classified as such include: * Lee Sin (assassin tactics work surprisingly well on him if you do it right) * Rammus and Warwick (both using MS focused builds and frontloading damage on Q and ult respectively) * Tristana (Riot has pretty much said she's supposed to be right on the line between Assassin and Marksman) * Twitch (reasoning should be obvious, though he's more of a brawler style assassin like Ekko or Diana) * Pantheon (technically a fighter, but can use assassin tactics very effectively because of the passive on his E) * Yasuo (super mobility plus ridiculous damage output).
: Atleast make it so if you ban "none", one of your teammates get the ban instead of you. The current thing we have now is stupid.
FWIW,about 95% of the people I see ban 'None' do so at the last second. As in, they couldn't figure out who to ban, or were distracted, and wanted to make sure that they didn't accidentally ban something an ally wanted to play. In that particular case, giving it to an ally isn't exactly going to help.
Saletty (EUW)
: Fire that guy i hate all those champions. Zoe had too much dmg for a long time. Kalista had too much dmg for a long time. Yasuo had too much dmg for a long time. Tresh is tresh. Cant play against Darius if you dont have something like a Morgana in your team to stun him. Graves has too much dmg, Warwick is over 50% since Season 5 or something like that.
Zoe is an issue almost entirely because of the bubble and the fact that her Q is an AoE. Remove those, and she's still hgh damage (and likely plays very similarly), but isn't too hard to fight. Kalista is an issue almost entirely because of the reset on rend when it kills something other than a champion, and the fact that it can stack infinitely. Her hops really aren't too bad once you get used to them (other than people who are _really_ good, you can usually predict where she's going to hop if you pay attention). Retune the E, and she's likely to be fine. Yasuo is a pain in the arse for multiple reason, but none of them are really inherent to his playstyle. Namely, his double crit (not quite as broken now because of the IE changes), his passive shield (it's too easy with his mobility to recharge it), and the fact that his wind-wall comes from behind him (originally a training-wheel type thing, now just BS). Fix the windwall and remove one of his passives (I'd vote for the shield, removing his double crit would require re-tuning the entire rest of his kit), and he should be fine (albeit still somewhat frustrating to play against. The only issue with Thresh is that he's got so much utility compared to people who can do any one of the things he can. Darius I don't fight enough to make a good argument, so I'm not going to try. I actually haven't seen him much recently (either being played, or being banned) TBH, so I'm inclined to believe he's not really an issue right now. Graves is only an issue once fed or if you're melee (no, seriously, if you have issues with this guy as any ranged champ without him being fed, you're just not fighting him right, almost every ranged champ in the game has a way to deal with him, and those who don't have direct options out-damage him when equivalently fed). He could probably use a little bit of numbers adjustments, but his mechanics aren't really the issue here. So, overall, I actually agree with your assessment that his damage output is the issue. I would like to comment that that's not a Warwick is also mostly only an issue if fed. Without being fed, if you play intelligently, he's actually rather easy to kill. The problem is that when he's jungling, it's hard to keep him from getting fed (although one of the typical jungle builds on him is less powerful than it used to be now that Runic Echoes got nerfed). Also, if you can make him miss his ult, he's generally screwed.
HàrrowR (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=saltran,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=F7qOFKRr,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2018-07-06T21:20:18.212+0000) > > Not me, I want them to be lategame. when most games end at around 25. minute mark,why?
Most games are around 25 minutes _because_ ADC's are not consistently late game. Most marksmen (what you're calling ADC's) spike around the end of laning phase these days. Back when games were longer, they spiked later (partly because of item costs, partly because of stats on items, partly because of how stats were balanced, and partly because there wasn't so much free damage in the form of Runes and Masteries (there was free damage there with the really old (S4 vintage) system, it just wasn't anywhere near what it is now)). Personally, I miss those days. It was actually possible to shut out an enemy ADC who was ahead an item or an item and a half without needing your whole team to pile on top of them. Now, even having the entire team go after them together can't reliably stop them.
darkdill (NA)
: There's still no Champion who uses an actual whip as a weapon. Thresh doesn't count.
In addition to this, I'd love to see someone wielding an [urumi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urumi) (even if it's just as a skin for someone with a whip).
: Thresh weapon is a flail which is used for what he is named after: threshing
Strictly speaking, it's most consistent with a Japanese kusarigama in most cases, which consisted of a kama (a japanese sickle, which looks like a miniature European scythe) on one end of a chain, and either another one or a heavy weight at the other. Some of his skins make it look more similar to a European chain-sickle (which is the same general idea as a kusarigama, though they were not as effective and therefore much rarer). None of them fit the standard definition of a flail however ( a heavy weight of som sort attached to a handle via a short length of chain).
: > Sickle and chain I prefer the term "Kusarigama"
Actually, the style is more consistent with a kusarigama in most cases, not a more European chain-sickle (which is similar, but was much rarer than a kusarigama).
: 3D model for the skin before buying it ?
OK, so, the real issue here is not the lack of a model, it's the fact that some skins look _NOTHING_ like their splash art. Take for example Dragon Fist Lee Sin. The picture looks like it was drawn by an angsty teenager, but the skin is super bright and colorful in game. Similarly, there have been multiple times where Xin Zhao's base skin looked nothing like his splash art, Firefang Warwick used to look significantly worse than it's splash, most of Zyra's older skins look better in the splash art, etc. The reality is, it's a completely different group who do the splash art from the ones who do the skins, and it quite often seems like they never even look at each other's work.
: Exploring hidden meanings revealed by Sir Tahmold Kench The Second
Your explanation for Blitz is off, gold is more malleable than tin. Tin is, however, the least valuable of the three metals, so I'd argue that this is really a fancy way of saying Blitz is an idiot.
: > [{quoted}](name=Kuronii Lumiira,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ht3xEF2V,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-07-06T13:27:24.292+0000) > > Like when ghost was used in most games, so they adjusted it to ramp up more slowly, destroying the reason Ghost existed. Yeah. It was supposed to be an escape on par with flash but that change pretty much ruined that. now you basically see it on only jungler's and that is not even a guarantee. {{champion:33}} {{champion:120}} {{champion:2}} {{champion:27}} {{champion:106}} are the only champs i would argue it is even common on anymore. I made this thread about the tele changes though particularly. As if Top isn't enough of an island without making the cool down a minute longer. We actually see mid taking it occasionally now and people using it more often for counter-play but rito can't have that.
> [{quoted}](name=TheRiddum,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ht3xEF2V,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-07-06T14:10:19.817+0000) > > Yeah. It was supposed to be an escape on par with flash but that change pretty much ruined that. > now you basically see it on only jungler's and that is not even a guarantee. > > {{champion:33}} {{champion:120}} {{champion:2}} {{champion:27}} {{champion:106}} are the only champs i would argue it is even common on anymore. > > > I made this thread about the tele changes though particularly. As if Top isn't enough of an island without making the cool down a minute longer. We actually see mid taking it occasionally now and people using it more often for counter-play but rito can't have that. Used to be on WW, not as much anymore (the whole hit-and-run build on Rammus works on WW too, it's just not quite as good without Runic Echoes giving a MS boost, because it relies on frontloading as much damage as possible on the WW's ult).
: Or they could nerf Wukong?
This is what they'll do, but it's the wrong approach. The stacking aspect is the issue, not the fact that he can easily proc it.
IainG10 (EUW)
: People seem to forget that there are other class games than MOBAs, and assassins are toxic as fuck in all of them. Having played PvP in WoW and Guild Wars 2, I can safely say that assassins are horrible there as well. Now WoW has its' own other problems as well as Rogues (like Blood DKs, *looking at you Ghostcrawler*) but GW2 it's pretty much limited to Necros (read {{champion:8}} or Rhaast) or Thieves. Now there are varieties of Thief, and which ones you see is determined by which ArenaNet have currently failed to balance. Currently in are dual pistol ({{champion:29}} with Ult), staff Daredevil ({{champion:105}} ) and Rifle Deadeye (now {{champion:202}}, weaving spells and autos at long range; but it used to be {{champion:142}}, one careful setup then *BOOM*). Past iterations were sword/dagger (dual or mixed), which played like {{champion:91}} or {{champion:238}}. The one thing they all have in common is/was they are/were molten liquid AIDS to fight against; the only allowed any fun is the person playing the Thief...
Yeah, no. Assassins are often a problem in mainstream games because developers care more about being flashy than being balanced. GW2 and WoW are really good examples of cases where devs are trying to draw people in with cinematic fight scenes instead of good gameplay. Assassins are _NEVER_ balanced in games that take that marketing approach, because balanced assassins are _boring_ to watch (but can still be very fun to play). Once you give up on assassins being flashy murder machines, they stop being a problem. Look at some of the less widely played MMO's, assassins are only generally an issue there if you're squishy and don't have proper backup. Look at any number of tabletop RPG's, assassin's are not an issue there either (the turn-based nature makes it easier to balance them, but is not _why_ they are balanced, they're balanced there because their damage is insanely conditional (as any good DM will tell you who has made the mistake of giving an invisibility item to a Rogue in D&D).
Solitair (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Mãrth,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=GAEWpPVZ,comment-id=000e000100000000,timestamp=2018-07-04T15:26:57.177+0000) > > Yo, did you read his comment? In the end, you're agreeing with him while you tell him he's wrong, so I'm completely confused where you're getting at. > > If I'm getting this straight, your second paragraph follows what he was saying about failed design implementation on Kha'Zix, where his neat concept doesn't carry through and he becomes a balanced problem akin to numbers 3 or 4. You both said the same things about Shaco and Rengar, although I'd personally say Rengar is even worse in design that he shouldn't count and should be replaced with someone else. > > So, in the end, this guy was not stating examples of balanced assassins, so please make sure you know what you're responding to. I mean, hell, when you mention 3, you both mention it being a poor design. > > Now, you have an argument here. Focus on this. You have an argument on whether the MMO design is flawed. You say it is, he says it can work. I agree with him on this one. It totally works, and usually isn't a crap design (if it is, it's the champions most of the time that's a balance issue, not the class). He stated Pantheon, which I agree with. His one issue is his laning phase but that is a champion issue, not a class issue. He mentions Pyke, and I 100% agree with that one. This class is a class that focuses on scoring "picks," something that definitely should exist in League, and has never been a huge balance problem. Issue comes into play that, of course, being the developers they are, Riot makes a mistake, and doesn't give them a proper identity and overloads a champion in this way. Good examples of this are Elise and Camille, where they've got the same underlying mentality of Pyke and Pantheon but they have more options and can cover a wider variety of things. But any class has this issue, as you can see in divers such as Gnar, or tanks such as Ornn. Even marksmen such as Vayne maybe, I don't know, just throwing names into the air at this point. > > My personal opinion on that argument aside, respond to the bits you actually disagree with, rather than just argue because someone commented to you and for some reason think it's an aggressive/argumentative response. He had amazing reasoning, his whole argument was that "hey, assassins can be implemented correctly, but Riot's not good at that." Next time, focus on that, stick with your original bit on "assassins can't work in League." Focus this, my guy. > > Also, none of this is supposed to sound rude, please have a good day, I don't want to really cause harm here. Yes, I read the comment. No, I did not agree with his thesis-- which was essentially that assassins are not problematic in team-oriented, class-based multiplayer games. At no point do I or did I agree with that. There is no presentable, specific example to demonstrate a well-balanced assassin. I broke this down. What makes assassins problematic, is the premise of their identity. You cannot balance them without removing their assassin identity. Pyke is not balanced. Pantheon is also a bad example of balance around a team-based games. Why? He's an extreme lane bully. Completely aoppressive to 1v1, but struggles to find a role in team play unless he is allowed to take over the game. That's not good design. end point.
You seem to have misunderstood why I made those examples though. I'm not saying that any of the champs I mentioned are good examples of that play style, let alone examples of it being done right, just that they're the closest things League has to those playstyles. I absolutely agree that Kha, Rengar, and Shaco are problematic. Same with Pyke and Pantheon (though I'd argue that Pyke is largely problematic only because of his ult, but that's beside the point here).
Solitair (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=ahferroin7,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=GAEWpPVZ,comment-id=000e0001,timestamp=2018-07-02T23:03:06.267+0000) > > It really depends though on how they're implemented. > > In general, 'assassin' usually means one of four play styles in video games: > > 1. Highly conditional burst damage, usually with high secondary utility, who tends to be very easy to kill. > 2. A scavenger who picks off weakened targets after a fight or while they are disengaging. > 3. A suicide bomber who is entirely centered around eliminating either the enemy DPS or healer. > 4. A god who looks cross-eyed at people and makes them disappear, then can do so again after a short amount of time. > > The first case is the classic D&D and RPG rogue or assassin. It actually works very well if implemented properly, even in a team game. Kha'zix is a decent example from League, but he's not limited enough by his conditional damage that I would consider him a good implementation of this play style. Renger and Shaco are also theoretically examples, but their damage is functionally not conditional right now. > > The second case is the typical MMO design. It also works reasonably well, provided the rest of the game is balanced around it and the execution potential is gated sanely. Pyke and Pantheon are examples from League, but they have way more utility than a good implementation of this approach should, and have almost nothing gating their execution potential. This is also, coincidentally, how many champs who are not tagged as assassins play if you go for an assassin build on them. > > The third case is an infrequent design seen in some MMO's with short death timers, and is the primary design in MOBA's. It can work, provided there is sufficient means to protect against it that sacrifices something else. This appears to be the intended play style for most 'assassin' champs in League, except things are usually such that you either can't defend against it, or you lose nothing for defending against it. > > The fourth case is what things are like in League right now. Realistically, it should only ever exist in single-player games or PvE games. This is functionally how some shooter games implement snipers. and it can kind of work there, provided the maps are designed to account for it. With a significantly longer recharge time and less mobility, this is the classic mage play style. You say that, but your examples only work against you. I believe that no example can help you because there is not a good example of assassin balance in multiplayer games compared to other classes. Kha has always been a balance nightmare. So has Rengar. So has Shaco. Kha has a history of being extremely snowbally and nearly impossible to play against when even a little ahead. He has never been balanced. He has always either been way too strong and bursty, or too nerfed to be viable. he was your decent example, but he's actually a terrible example. Still, he's arguably better than the other two, because that's just how bad the assassin situation tends to be. Rengar was probably the most iconic offender for having no real counterplay to a 100-0 one-shot pattern that required quite a bit of practice to master. Even though he was "gated" by skill requirements, it was not enough to justify the completely frustrating experience he brought to other players. In order to balance him, riot basically removed his identity and turned him into a "diver" instead. This is *extremely* telling of why assassins are impossible to balance. The only way to balance them is to remove or tone down what defines them as assassins in the first place. That's because the things that define them as assassins are what makes them problematic. In other words: The assassin class *is* the problem. You cant fix their problems without destroying their entire class identity. We could also go way into Shaco's long history of balancing issues, but I think you can probably infer the issues from the entirety of the rest of the assassin class's history. The typical MMO Design is probably the worst assassin design out there. These have the greatest and most shameless escape advantages. They can either come back and try again with impunity, or they are completely useless. Team-based games do not need scavenging classes that can only serve to scavenge. Those assassins still need enough damage and cc to be independent agents. Either way, they throw a wrench into the whole system--whether they were to be balanced as strong enough to be independent(too strong) or weak scavengers(useless). Your league examples, again, were not good examples of balanced assassin designs. I also do not have any good exampled of balanced assassin design for this. I only have really, really bad ones. For 3. That's what Rengar was supposed to be. It's a toxic, anti-fun design. The assassin has to die to do his job, and so does any squishy he clicks on before he dies. There is no point in this design. If the design is successfully implemented, not even the assassin enjoys it. It is plainly bad design.
You read almost none of what I said. I explicitly stated that I did not consider Kha a good implementation of that first style, and that Rengar and Shaco are theoretically supposed to be conditional damage dealers like that, but just aren't right now (and depending on who you ask, may never have been). As far as the MMO design, it's: 1. Not the worst, the fourth is. I'd much rather die because someone caught me out when I was weak then because I just happened to get too close to someone. 2. Actually a rather important role in games where you have very large groups of people fighting. If you _don't_ kill that enemy DPS who's escaping to the back line, he'll just heal up and come back with a vengeance. Having someone who is good at picking off kills no one else will get is important in cases like that. It's debatable whether or not it's viable for a game with small teams. I'd agree that that should not be their only purpose, but it _should_ dominate what they do, in the same way that aiding allies dominates what a support does. Pyke's design fits this, and it can work, it's just that his execute is too damn reliable and has almost no drawback. If he didn't get a functional reset on his execute and the target area was smaller (requiring more effort to position), I think he'd be fine in terms of functioning as a good example of this playstyle. Pantheon on the other hand plays like this, but doesn't really fit it, he's just got what amounts to a free execute tacked onto one of his abilities. As far as the third, I don't think Rengar's kit really fits this (whether it was his original design intent or not), and I don't entirely agree that it's inherently toxic, or even 'anti-fun'. Implemented properly, it's a feast or famine playstyle, and there are some people who like that. Such playstyles may encourage people to be toxic, but that doesn't make the playstyle toxic _if_ it's implemented well (most feast or famine playstyles in league are not). As far as the assassin not enjoying it, I also don't agree. I know quite a few people (myself included) who would happily wait out the death timer if it meant eliminating the biggest threat on the enemy team for the same period of time.
Solitair (NA)
: I've been saying this shit for years: ASSASSINS DO NOT FUNCTION WELL IN MULTIPLAYER GAMES WITH MULTIPLE CLASSES. They just dont. There's a class dynamic that kind of works between rangers, mages, tanks, fighters, and "healers"--and assassins are a wrench in that dynamic. I have never ever, not once, seen this class balanced and executed in a good way in any multiplayer game. What I HAVE seen time and time again is that assassins just ruin games by sacrificing the fun of everyone else. Their basic premise is not a viable model for a game with class dynamics. How can you possibly balance a class that is defined by killing others quickly and disappearing without being noticed? It is not possible. The assassin fantasy is great for single player games, but it does not work in games based around team play. I've seen them make every other damage dealing class unviable, I've seen them take over PvP and PvE, I've seen them make people stop doing open world PvP altogether en masse, I've seen them ruin countless league games for everyone who isn't them. I've seen them consistently attract the most toxic players. I have NEVER seen them balanced.
It really depends though on how they're implemented. In general, 'assassin' usually means one of four play styles in video games: 1. Highly conditional burst damage, usually with high secondary utility, who tends to be very easy to kill. 2. A scavenger who picks off weakened targets after a fight or while they are disengaging. 3. A suicide bomber who is entirely centered around eliminating either the enemy DPS or healer. 4. A god who looks cross-eyed at people and makes them disappear, then can do so again after a short amount of time. The first case is the classic D&D and RPG rogue or assassin. It actually works very well if implemented properly, even in a team game. Kha'zix is a decent example from League, but he's not limited enough by his conditional damage that I would consider him a good implementation of this play style. Renger and Shaco are also theoretically examples, but their damage is functionally not conditional right now. The second case is the typical MMO design. It also works reasonably well, provided the rest of the game is balanced around it and the execution potential is gated sanely. Pyke and Pantheon are examples from League, but they have way more utility than a good implementation of this approach should, and have almost nothing gating their execution potential. This is also, coincidentally, how many champs who are not tagged as assassins play if you go for an assassin build on them. The third case is an infrequent design seen in some MMO's with short death timers, and is the primary design in MOBA's. It can work, provided there is sufficient means to protect against it that sacrifices something else. This appears to be the intended play style for most 'assassin' champs in League, except things are usually such that you either can't defend against it, or you lose nothing for defending against it. The fourth case is what things are like in League right now. Realistically, it should only ever exist in single-player games or PvE games. This is functionally how some shooter games implement snipers. and it can kind of work there, provided the maps are designed to account for it. With a significantly longer recharge time and less mobility, this is the classic mage play style.
: Why is it called Warmog's Armor
Because it's a suit of armor? I mean, given the appearance, it's a magic item designed to look like a suit of armor (well, more accurately, the breastplate from a suit of plate armor). Just because it looks like armor doesn't mean it gives any actual protection, but looking like armor is generally enough for something to be called armor.
Kivolan (NA)
: Can Riot Put Some Effort Into Finally Fixing Death Recap?
Yeah, this is one of those numerous areas where pretty much every other MOBA in existence does better than League. It's starting to get hard to tell if Riot have a near terminal case of 'not made here' syndrome, or they don't care about improving QoL for existing players, or are just incompetent.
Snowman Arc (EUNE)
: Well, ARAM is not the place that you learn a champion.
Just starting, yeah, it's not the best place. Once you have a decent idea of how to play someone though, it's a reasonably good place to learn how to effectively team fight using them because you're teamfighting all the time. My point though was that if you just want chests, playing premades on ARAM is a reasonably reliable way to get them.
Snowman Arc (EUNE)
: That's the point of the chests, though. They force you to learn and play different champions.
: I think it's wrong. If crowd control *doesn't* counter some champions, then what is it good for? In a design space with this much variety, some champs care more about being cc'd than others. I see nothing wrong with that.
While I generally agree, I would argue that it should by no means be the _only_ means of countering a champ, just like staying out of their range should not be the only means of countering someone.
Show more

ahferroin7

Level 70 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion