Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: August 9
Krugs have to be the most valuable camp or they aren't worth doing given the time/HP needed to clear them. Also, asymmetry in jungle can be good because it creates something to fight over/prioritize. It gives you a way to track and thus a chance to use that information for exploitative plays. Rather than nerf Krugs, why not just buff the camps on the other side a bit? Jungle is way underleveled anyway.
: It's getting really hard to take this game seriously anymore
Somehow, I don't think you'd perform if you tried to play these "freelo" champions you mention. The grass is always greener on the other side. Some champions are legitimately overpowered at times and Wu does have a dated kit but skill is still by far the most important factor. Unless we're talking about high ELO, it's not like playing Veigar is what's holding you back. I don't even think Veigar is bad, it's just not his meta and he's a situational pick. You shouldn't be playing Veigar into Kat (or in general if you don't know what you're up against).
: Galio has the lowest pickrate in the game and for some reason jax and lux deserves buffs before him?
I think they're not sure what to do with him and don't want to just do a lazy numbers change.
: I say leave em in. better yet, make any dodge at any time a loss. No dodging your way to the top allowed.
> [{quoted}](name=BigBellBrute,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=0017,timestamp=2019-08-07T17:31:48.969+0000) > > I say leave em in. better yet, make any dodge at any time a loss. No dodging your way to the top allowed. I'd love for dodging not to be necessary but there are too many troll comps, ragers or players on champions they're simply not competent on. At least this tends to be drastically reduced in high Plat+. I just hate playing games where we're at a clear handicap before it even starts. That's a terrible experience and feels unfair. It also wouldn't be realistic for the match making system to take into consideration the champion someone picks. There are 144 champions in the game and getting any meaningful sample size for ranked players on a variety of champions isn't realistic. How do you fix this without simply forcing players to take autolosses which aren't fun at all?
Aekami (EUW)
: That was already suggested, however this will never happen because it would open for people to pressure a player into leaving. Say you have a bad laning phase and go 0/4, people could start pressuring you into leaving, and that opens a whole new world of toxicity. And don't tell me this wouldn't happen, we all know how people are.
> [{quoted}](name=Aekami,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-07T17:19:53.955+0000) > > That was already suggested, however this will never happen because it would open for people to pressure a player into leaving. > > Say you have a bad laning phase and go 0/4, people could start pressuring you into leaving, and that opens a whole new world of toxicity. > > And don't tell me this wouldn't happen, we all know how people are. The thing is also that you may have bad stats occasionally even when playing well and giving your team a large indirect advantage. For instance, if you went 0 4 but attracted massive pressure to your lane, pressured the enemy jungler etc., it may actually be more useful for your team than had you gone 0 0 playing passively and not relieving any map pressure. It's rare that this happens but I've certainly seen it (especially from Singed players). KDA is meaningless in a vacuum. Of course, if you go 0 4 because you get solo killed or you die to predictable ganks and overstay at low HP, you're generally just a liability.
: > [{quoted}](name=astralwit,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=0010000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-07T15:54:27.573+0000) > > It's just a fundamentally broken approach. Imagine if you added this to sports rather than Win/Loss. You're letting an algorithm decide whether you played well or not. It solidifies a meta and may end-up punishing effective players with new strategies. The results will speak for themselves over a larger sample so there is just no need to have this black-box approach to LP gains. I hope Riot never does this and I think it would be terrible for competitive integrity. > > All it does is make you feel better about some CS stat, KDA etc. when it could be completely meaningless to the result of the game. Perhaps you have fantastic stats but you still misplayed a teamfight in a serious way or weren't where you should have been on the map. That can be game losing. > > I've lost track of how many fed carries made massive mistakes to lose a game (even if they didn't die) and they don't deserve to climb just because of stats. Many games wouldn't even have needed to get to a certain stage if they were played differently early. For instance if my bot is afk at a turret and doesn't watch jungle at the start, perhaps an invade bullies me out and I become suddenly very behind for no fault of my own. Maybe that bot player ends up 10-0 later on and we lose but he thinks he deserves to win. Meanwhile, here I am with my jungle ruined, my path revealed and my pace for map pressure greatly slowed. Had this player simply fulfilled his duty early, perhaps we'd win as a team even if he had a much worse KDA. In the first line you countered everything you used to try to explain why a system that takes into account how a player does is bad. Sports are made of teams that practice together, just like how premade teams work within esports. These premade teams are expected to play as a unit, and will win or lose as ONE UNIT. An all in win or loss system works perfectly for premade teams. From what I see, most people that don't think a system that takes K/D/A and other stats into consideration to dictate LP losses or gains will work don't understand the difference between premade team competition and solo queue competition. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Why do you think there are people at the top of the solo queue ladder that aren't invited into pro teams, or even collegiate teams? I'm sorry to say this, but your last paragraph is literally a statement to your lack of ability to adjust to the game, or to be a driving force to win yourself. You are literally blaming your team.....
> [{quoted}](name=Outrageously Old,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=00100000000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-07T16:28:20.261+0000) > > In the first line you countered everything you used to try to explain why a system that takes into account how a player does is bad. Sports are made of teams that practice together, just like how premade teams work within esports. These premade teams are expected to play as a unit, and will win or lose as ONE UNIT. An all in win or loss system works perfectly for premade teams. > > From what I see, most people that don't think a system that takes K/D/A and other stats into consideration to dictate LP losses or gains will work don't understand the difference between premade team competition and solo queue competition. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Why do you think there are people at the top of the solo queue ladder that aren't invited into pro teams, or even collegiate teams? > > I'm sorry to say this, but your last paragraph is literally a statement to your lack of ability to adjust to the game, or to be a driving force to win yourself. You are literally blaming your team..... It doesn't even matter that pro teams are a different environment and they also won't be getting anywhere near to the sample size of a dedicated SQ player. Guess what, everyone's in the same boat (other than duos I suppose) and the teams aren't holding you back long-term. This has been proven over and over with boosters, streamers doing unranked solo challenges and just high ELO players starting in other regions. So why would we introduce an incredibly meta enforcing and artificial system to fix a problem which doesn't really even exist? We don't need a mysterious algorithm to look at our stats and tell us if we're performing in the one true way to play League of Legends. There are so many pieces involved that the algorithm will always be inherently biased. The goal of the game is to kill the Nexus and gameplay decisions getting you closer to that goal will invariably lead to more wins over time -> more LP. Simple. For most players, it takes less than 100 games from unranked to get very close to the ranking of their main. I've even seen Challenger players solo from unranked to Mastes in literally less than 100 games. Meanwhile, you have guys like this with over 1000 games in Gold and 7.0+ KDA: https://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=cryocorebrand I've actually even played with him on a smurf and it was pretty annoying because he was afraid to go for any all-in play even when it was very favorable for us. He ran away from Baron when they started to come. We'd have burst it before the main fight started. A big "no, thank you" to encouraging this type of player. Anyway, with your condescending attitude it's pretty obvious that you are set in your thinking and have no interest in a discussion. I care so much about climbing through my own merits that I refuse to ever duo on more serious accounts and I don't think it should exist for Diamond+. I don't know if you're trolling or actually missing the point but blaming someone for something in the game doesn't magically make it false. The whole point in that hypothetical situation was that someone could have farmed nice stats but still been a detriment to the team due to decisions which would be hard to pick up by an algorithm. If someone refuses to watch the jungle entrances immediately early game, the consequences can reverberate for the entirety of the game and often go way beyond that player's lane. I also find the whole comment incredibly hypocritical. The very fact that you even suggest this sort of superflous system to pat you on the back for losses when you have seemingly good stats shows that you are blaming the team for the loss and your rank. BTW: There's already a smurf detection system partially based on stats. The way I understand it is that it starts testing you against higher caliber players and if you perform, continues doing so. This is the most that I'd consider OK based on stats. If your stats are great and you're underrated, perhaps it can give you the opportunity to prove yourself vs better players more quickly. I'm not sure how robust the current system is for this but perhaps it can be improved.
: Mundo doesn't need buffs. Leblanc doesn't need buffs. Ekko doesn't need buffs. Lux doesn't need buffs.
> [{quoted}](name=WoonStruck,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hfYeKPXv,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-08-05T23:24:25.905+0000) > > Mundo doesn't need buffs. Leblanc doesn't need buffs. Ekko doesn't need buffs. Lux doesn't need buffs. All of those had room for buffs. Examine Masters+ and what champions are mained/popular, watch pro play, check stats in Diamond+ for each role etc. None of those choices are surprising. Lux is probably the most questionable one there but the data does show she's underperforming in support and has some room for a buff mid lane too. For Diamond+, she's almost 50% mid and 48% support but her play rate is rather high. Personally, I'd rather have buffed something like Braum before I'd help Lux again. People think they know balance on here and they're always in an uproar about something but the vast majority of the time, Riot's buff/nerf candidates are very logical and it's more just a matter of degree for the changes. Of course, there are always exceptions. Kled didn't need special grievous on Q and Renekton didn't need to break shields. The way people see champions and reality is incredibly biased. Maybe it's just more memorable getting beaten by some snowballed X. The flashy champions or the duelists always seem stronger than they actually turn out to be.
: > [{quoted}](name=Rylalei,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=00100000,timestamp=2019-08-07T11:25:20.373+0000) > > The problem with performance based gains/losses is that they will be abused to no end. > > Players will stop caring as much for wins and play for themselves, you win the game? Cool, now you have a huge gain, you lost? Not losing too much. > > That system would simply make trolls and selfish players climb more than players who chose to play for the team. I for one won't jump to die if it gets my team no gain, but I'll be the first to go kamikaze if it means my team will win the fight, and if I win the game based on my plays, I'm fine with it, but your system will punish me for making the plays needed to win the game. I have seen the "players will abuse this system" myth all too often when people bring up individual performance dictating LP losses or gains, and I am honestly tired of it. Explain, in excruciating detail, as to why it would ruin the game? Sure, some people will play super safe, games might be a bit longer, but isn't that better than have a top lane die two times in 4 minutes and then continue to ram their face into the enemy team without thinking about how their feeding will hurt the rest of the team? I think a lot of people that are afraid of an LP gain/loss system that is effected by performance don't realize one simple thing...**The team that wins will still win, the team that loses will still lose.** GOOD PLAYERS will understand this and will be happy to sacrifice, if you can even call it that, their precious K/D/A to win a game. Players that play for purely K/D/A would most likely stagnate and stop climbing. The ratings on how much LP you gain and lose could simply be pulled from Champ -> Role stats within the players current rank/ranks around the player (for the rare cases of champs that are barely used). If you are playing a champ that can only win by going kamikaze it would be reflected in stats taken from the community and give you an appropriate LP gain or loss padding. If it isn't, than you are probably playing the champ wrong. Sure, there will be a few games where you literally have no option but to play outside of what is deemed "normal" for certain champs, but if you win, you still win LP.
> [{quoted}](name=Outrageously Old,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=js1ksEkI,comment-id=001000000000,timestamp=2019-08-07T15:29:16.915+0000) > > I have seen the "players will abuse this system" myth all too often when people bring up individual performance dictating LP losses or gains, and I am honestly tired of it. Explain, in excruciating detail, as to why it would ruin the game? Sure, some people will play super safe, games might be a bit longer, but isn't that better than have a top lane die two times in 4 minutes and then continue to ram their face into the enemy team without thinking about how their feeding will hurt the rest of the team? > > I think a lot of people that are afraid of an LP gain/loss system that is effected by performance don't realize one simple thing...**The team that wins will still win, the team that loses will still lose.** GOOD PLAYERS will understand this and will be happy to sacrifice, if you can even call it that, their precious K/D/A to win a game. Players that play for purely K/D/A would most likely stagnate and stop climbing. > > The ratings on how much LP you gain and lose could simply be pulled from Champ -> Role stats within the players current rank/ranks around the player (for the rare cases of champs that are barely used). If you are playing a champ that can only win by going kamikaze it would be reflected in stats taken from the community and give you an appropriate LP gain or loss padding. If it isn't, than you are probably playing the champ wrong. Sure, there will be a few games where you literally have no option but to play outside of what is deemed "normal" for certain champs, but if you win, you still win LP. It's just a fundamentally broken approach. Imagine if you added this to sports rather than Win/Loss. You're letting an algorithm decide whether you played well or not. It solidifies a meta and may end-up punishing effective players with new strategies. The results will speak for themselves over a larger sample so there is just no need to have this black-box approach to LP gains. I hope Riot never does this and I think it would be terrible for competitive integrity. All it does is make you feel better about some CS stat, KDA etc. when it could be completely meaningless to the result of the game. Perhaps you have fantastic stats but you still misplayed a teamfight in a serious way or weren't where you should have been on the map. That can be game losing. I've lost track of how many fed carries made massive mistakes to lose a game (even if they didn't die) and they don't deserve to climb just because of stats. Many games wouldn't even have needed to get to a certain stage if they were played differently early. For instance if my bot is afk at a turret and doesn't watch jungle at the start, perhaps an invade bullies me out and I become suddenly very behind for no fault of my own. Maybe that bot player ends up 10-0 later on and we lose but he thinks he deserves to win. Meanwhile, here I am with my jungle ruined, my path revealed and my pace for map pressure greatly slowed. Had this player simply fulfilled his duty early, perhaps we'd win as a team even if he had a much worse KDA.
: For the love of god please remove promos
Promos for divisions shouldn't exist imo
: this is just riot trying to ruin their game even more then it already is bc they fucked up adding all these new champs constantly instead of tweaking the champs they started out with and making the game a balanced game i dont get how dota can balance their game but riot can balance the issues on the rift when it is the same exact game
> [{quoted}](name=FiddleMyGoochh,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=8UmywbYH,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-08-07T15:19:31.420+0000) > > this is just riot trying to ruin their game even more then it already is bc they fucked up adding all these new champs constantly instead of tweaking the champs they started out with and making the game a balanced game i dont get how dota can balance their game but riot can balance the issues on the rift when it is the same exact game If you take more of a data driven approach rather than how you feel about balance, you'll realize that it's in a rather good state and win rates are actually closer than in DoTA. While that's not the end all be all of balance, it does suggest that the average game should feel mostly fair from a balance perspective.
Hordes66 (NA)
: How can anyone look at this Fiora buff
It's only for two autos. It looks more insane than it actually is.
: > [{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=8d2ARl6a,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-08-06T13:28:24.354+0000) > > Because support lux never needed nerfs. Yeah, that champion that see's pro play constantly as well as tons of play in high ELO while also being a low skill cap champion that low ELO also does well with, definitely didn't need nerfed. lol Insane playrate/winrate at all ranks and pro play
> [{quoted}](name=MorgManBasher,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=8d2ARl6a,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-08-06T13:41:04.383+0000) > > Yeah, that champion that see's pro play constantly as well as tons of play in high ELO while also being a low skill cap champion that low ELO also does well with, definitely didn't need nerfed. lol > > Insane playrate/winrate at all ranks and pro play She hasn't really been a thing in pro play after the last round of nerfs. Her support role is also performing poorly in SQ.
: The Reason Tanks Aren't Played Often
The main reason is actually just that you can't solo carry. That makes playing from behind feel worse and it also means you depend more on your carries to be competent when ahead. That's pretty much the crux of the issue. Even when they have above average win rates due to high base usefulness, they tend to be incapable of taking over the game to the same extent that someone could maining a damage champion. Bruisers are sort of a middle ground and thus easier to swallow for most players.
Barkley (NA)
: Please stop saying "I'm X higher rank on my main"
The whole point of smurfing for a lot of people isn't to beat on lower ranked scrubs but to test different styles/roles and expand one's champion pool (normals aren't quite as useful). Sometimes they may even be on that account due to being too tired to play on their main. Either way, judging them by a smurf is kind of like judging someone for their performance in normals. Although, you're right that ultimately no one cares if it's a smurf or not.
: Sometimes it just cant be balanced without gutting the main role so they gut the offrole instead. It hurts less.
> [{quoted}](name=Aatrox Airlines,realm=EUNE,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=jo628Zmn,comment-id=004a0000,timestamp=2019-08-02T20:01:14.760+0000) > > Sometimes it just cant be balanced without gutting the main role so they gut the offrole instead. It hurts less. Ideally, a champion will have at least 2 supported roles but you're right that sometimes it's not easy without making one much weaker than the other. In this case though, a complete non-reason was offered for nerfing his jungling. Being a Flex pick is not about objective power but rather about enabling more comps. and thus being picked more often. This shouldn't be a balance factor.
: Remove IRON elo!
The point is to make Bronze players feel better about their rank since at least they're not Iron. :D
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: August 2
I don't even play Sylas but being a flex pick should not impact balance. If a champion is balanced in multiple roles and not overly strong, it should not get punished. To me that makes no sense and actually seems antithetical to balance. It may serve to make a champion less popular but that shouldn't be a goal of balance as long as that champion isn't dominant due to raw strength. Also, why does it always seem that the jungle variants are the ones to get the nerf every time a mage jungles? It seems there's some inherent bias to keeping mages better mid. Almost every time one dares to venture elsewhere, the secondary role gets nerfed into oblivion and it becomes forgotten about instead of being balanced properly just like the other role.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Why are you buffing khazix?
I thought it was strange too when I gave my thoughts [here](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/lRAAmbnj-xerath-is-getting-buffed-but-ziggs-remains-the-same). Kha is doing fine even in high ELO. He's above 50% in both Diamond+ and Masters+ despite having an above average skill-cap. That Kha buff seems too big and there are plenty of weaker off-meta junglers who need it more. By comparison, Amumu is at 49% in Diamond+ and a pathetic 45% in Masters+ even though his skill floor is low so an above average base win rate should be expected. Nocturne is just under 48% in Diamond+ and ~45% in Masters+. I could find many other examples. I think this buff brings Kha to S- tier if he's picked situationally. In an ideal world there wouldn't be any tiers at all but let's not get carried away. :D
: ThornMail does not accomplish it's anti-aa function.
I actually think it's one of the better items. Maybe it can get a buff of another 25-50 HP or something like that but its passives are pretty useful and not just for dueling. Deadman's is in a worse spot imo.
: Xerath is getting buffed but Ziggs remains the same?
That makes no sense to me either. They're considering buffing high skill cap champions with high play rates and respectable win rates even in high ELO, such as Kha (52% Diamond+), Vayne (51% Diamond+), and Lee (49% Diamond+ but a whopping 23% play rate). Ziggs is not played competitively at all and is one of the lowest play rate champions in the game at 1.3%. Despite such a tiny play rate (indicating more mains/situational picks), his win rate is barely 50%. How does he not trigger their balance framework? Lee is 51% win rate and over 21% play rate even in Masters+ and is popular at all levels. He even gets competitive play. A lot of the champions lined up for buffs aren't actually weak but simply take a lot of investment to utilize well. Ziggs has a decent skill cap too but his skill floor is low and yet he's still not performing well. Champions without a high skill floor should naturally have higher win rates and he should be ticking every checkbox in their balance framework. I don't understand the point of that framework if they fail to utilize it and then do whatever they want anyway. It seems more like it's just creating the illusion of objectivity. Maybe blindly applying that framework isn't the right way to do things but it definitely feels like Riot's playing favorites to try to intentionally mold the Worlds meta to what they want. Ziggs is basically a unicorn in Masters+ (0.65% play rate including Bot) and yet we have Kha, Vayne and Lee buffs lined up first? Even Xerath is ~50% in Masters and 2%+ play rate. I also completely disagree with the idea of playing favorites with balance. That hurts a game's competitive integrity and there should never be an excuse for it. Riot's job is to properly balance the game so that we have freedom to do whatever we want. It is is not to decide what we should do and curate a segment of the roster. Anyway, I think your complaints would get more attention on Twitter. BTW: While I like Ziggs and used to play him, I've never mained him. I rarely play Mid/Bot. Still, I think this thread offers fair criticism. Ziggs is treated like a forgotten champion while those that have been meta breaking for years are still getting more attention. Another slap in the face is Graves being prioritized above Ziggs. Graves is 52% in Masters+ and almost 50% win rate with a 3% play rate in Diamond+. He's getting his second buff in a not so long time.
KOG IRL (NA)
: So, Riot just buffed the Baron without mentioning it in the patch notes?
Ekko has a weird W bug that shows his clone even when you cast from an unwarded bush. This was never mentioned in patch notes and it's a pretty massive nerf in specific spots.
Rioter Comments
: Will you ever consider to make ap scale with ap on spells because i feel rly bad to play ap champs and scale rly bad with it for example :anivia q is 60 / 85 / 110 / 135 / 160 (+ 45% AP)or ziggs w 70 / 105 / 140 / 175 / 210 (+ 35% AP) but draven q is 35 / 40 / 45 / 50 / 55 (+ 65 / 75 / 85 / 95 / 105% bonus AD). I feel like the ratio need to be fixed to 70%(for the spammable spells)/80%/90% and 100or more (for the ability with a high cd like ziggs r 200 / 300 / 400 (+ 73.33% AP) ty for your time and sorry for my english .
> [{quoted}](name=Nobuyuki91,realm=EUW,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=7Zmn3Jst,comment-id=0036,timestamp=2019-07-12T17:45:08.890+0000) > > Will you ever consider to make ap scale with ap on spells because i feel rly bad to play ap champs and scale rly bad with it for example :anivia q is 60 / 85 / 110 / 135 / 160 (+ 45% AP)or ziggs w 70 / 105 / 140 / 175 / 210 (+ 35% AP) but draven q is 35 / 40 / 45 / 50 / 55 (+ 65 / 75 / 85 / 95 / 105% bonus AD). I feel like the ratio need to be fixed to 70%(for the spammable spells)/80%/90% and 100or more (for the ability with a high cd like ziggs r 200 / 300 / 400 (+ 73.33% AP) ty for your time and sorry for my english . Yes, I think they should add something like this too to some champs. It can give a way to ramp up power mid to late in a faster way without also buffing early. Certain champions with mediocre early and low scaling abilities such as Ekko's E (40% AP) or Kog's R could maybe use this.
: Nothing feels worse than loving a champion who isn't on Riot's favorite list
I used to love AP Kog. Dream is dead though. I still like Ziggs, does that count? :D
Moody P (NA)
: Buff tank items
I think nearly every melee carry (AP or AD) can be far more useful with 2 defensiveitems (one for each type of damage). Otherwise, split pushing is often your only win condition since you're burst down by everything. It's just not very viable to go full squishy when melee. Even Rhaast, despite all his healing, mobiltiy and his R, still often goes Visage and Randuin's/Thorn (despite his build already including some HP from Black Cleaver/Sterak's etc.) They might be worried about buffing some carries more than tanks if they buff defensive items too much. These items aren't meant for only tanks.
Rioter Comments
: Client Hangs @ 14%
I've had it stuck at other values like 94% too. Worst of all, restarting the computer and client crashed with a "Critical error" on reconnect. After clicking it a few more times, it did finally connect me though.
: Blitz breaking shields in 1.14
This is just a terrible mechanic in general. It shouldn't exist in this absolute form. Shields are supposed to encourage going for plays you otherwise wouldn't (unlike the more static power of raw HP). This messes with the whole purpose of shields.
Rioter Comments
: Any changes planned for jungle? It feels like the worst role to play right now by far. The gameplay is very linear and it feels like you have no impact on the game past laning phase. So many junglers are quitting or role swapping right now, including me, it really feels like it should be addressed soon.
> [{quoted}](name=Black T Poison,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=17fpOPh5,comment-id=0056,timestamp=2019-07-05T21:15:57.509+0000) > > Any changes planned for jungle? It feels like the worst role to play right now by far. The gameplay is very linear and it feels like you have no impact on the game past laning phase. So many junglers are quitting or role swapping right now, including me, it really feels like it should be addressed soon. Jungle scaling, especially for APs suffered a lot from the DH rework. The AP ratio was hit harder than the AD one. Although, it's simply not a very good rune now and it went from being a scaling jungler rune into something that's bad on almost all junglers. The scaling in general is a lot worse even very late.
: Unpopular opinion: yes healing is too good right now, but so is access to practically unlimited mana
I don't even think there's an issue with healing. It's just that teams are refusing to itemize intelligently. I had a game vs 5 healers and not one person bought healing reduction besides me. They deserve to lose. It's not the fault of the game.
Rioter Comments
: You nerfed Inspiration sustain.. It's time for Domination
Ravenous hunter needs no further nerfs. It already got nerfed and hurt a lot of weak early junglers in the process. It's completely fine. Relentless and Ultimate Hunter even got buffed significantly. It's just a more general rune.
Rioter Comments
Meddler (NA)
: He was in a pretty weak spot there pre 9.12, agreed. Looking a lot stronger from what we've seen post patch though.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=PBPEGOHv,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-06-14T15:12:53.023+0000) > > He was in a pretty weak spot there pre 9.12, agreed. Looking a lot stronger from what we've seen post patch though. While Zac is inching closer to 50% in Plat+, he still seems to be on the weak side. The buffs only got him maybe 1% more. He has nice gank angles but his early is very weak and his clear speed is subpar compared to meta tank junglers. He can't duel anyone early and also gets low enough that he has to run from invaders. If you have weak lanes, it's extremely punishing to get invaded. He does get better with items but never seems to really take over a game like Amumu can late game. Why not add a bit more % HP on W to increase scaling and clear speed? Right now, purely for climbing, I don't think Zac is ever a superior choice to other options. Even vs the rare poke comp., Sej or Amumu can do mostly what Zac does while offering either a much better early or a much better late game. If you Flash Sej R or Amumu Q, it's as good as anything Zac can do and while Flash has a CD, you probably get such a big lead that it really doesn't matter. Even some more carry oriented junglers can mostly do Zac's job without early game compromises (Vi, Hecarim, WW). I'm not arguing that Zac's unviable, but it doesn't feel like he's quite competitive with meta junglers and with the R revert he also doesn't do anything as uniquely powerful. The old R made his engages way scarier for carries and offered him more outplay potential/safety too. It also synergized nicely with his new Q and I'm a bit surprised at the revert but I guess it does change his playstyle a lot from launch even if it is well-designed. BTW: Karma is likely overtuned at this point even if not by a large margin.
: When it spawns it will increase in its own level based on how long the game has gone when it spawns. Dragons and Baron do the same thing.... the difference is that the camps do not automatically get their level ups. Baron and Dragons do.
> [{quoted}](name=Silly Neeko,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uMQppLV7,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-05T04:55:07.533+0000) > > When it spawns it will increase in its own level based on how long the game has gone when it spawns. Dragons and Baron do the same thing.... the difference is that the camps do not automatically get their level ups. Baron and Dragons do. From what I read, it's based on the average game level (for both teams??) not time. If both teams afkd, it wouldn't increase in level. Anyway, it seems you're saying that the level check to determine respawn XP is right as it respawns.
Rioter Comments
: Game Impact By Role
mid->bot->jg=top->sup
: Maokai’s q buff is a perfect example of Riot’s horrible approach to balancing tanks
A tanky champion just being tanky is still useless and ignorable. Tanks need decent base damages to be relevant. Both ways have been tested and it's generally more satisfying and healthy for them to have some ability to lane rather than just being nearly unkillable (low agency on worse teams and the other player smashing their head against a wall attempting to do anything). Maokai's Q buff was aimed at jungling too not just laning.
: I believe it's over once you hit over 20 matches No one has the access to your deeper match history beside you
> [{quoted}](name=Kitsune Kawaii,realm=EUNE,application-id=LqLKtMpN,discussion-id=EOA0atFn,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-01T09:40:07.353+0000) > > I believe it's over once you hit over 20 matches > No one has the access to your deeper match history beside you No, you can see more than that if you scroll. I just tested and saw someone's matches from 2017.
: I’m not even sure its possible to give good scaling to junglers. The role is unique in that it is able to HEAVILY influences the early game, and so the meta will always naturally select for junglers with strong contributions to the early game. A scaling jungler by definition would be strong late. A viable jungler by definition is strong early. Thus, a viable scaling jungler would be a champion that is strong both early and late and that’s just OP. A viable scaling jungler that is weak early would have to be so giga-busted late game that you end up with a feral flare situation: It’s inevitable that the game will devolve into a 1v1, and what the lanes are doing at any point in time doesn’t matter.
> [{quoted}](name=Axel S359,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=wlGaL2WZ,comment-id=001d0000,timestamp=2019-04-12T21:51:12.247+0000) > > I’m not even sure its possible to give good scaling to junglers. The role is unique in that it is able to HEAVILY influences the early game, and so the meta will always naturally select for junglers with strong contributions to the early game. > > A scaling jungler by definition would be strong late. A viable jungler by definition is strong early. Thus, a viable scaling jungler would be a champion that is strong both early and late and that’s just OP. > > A viable scaling jungler that is weak early would have to be so giga-busted late game that you end up with a feral flare situation: It’s inevitable that the game will devolve into a 1v1, and what the lanes are doing at any point in time doesn’t matter. Of course it's possible, just like for any other role. I don't agree with this all or nothing mentality at all. A good example of this is Kayn. Another is Eve. There is always a balance point that is just right. Some level of early game is necessary but it can still be exploitable enough to allow a good late game. The old DH rune was exactly this concept and only became attractive after major Electrocute nerfs. The main frustration point seemed to just be that it was so front-loaded but I'm not even sure it was truly a problem. Personally, I'd rather get the damage directly early than be surprised when I'm half hp.
: Post MSI Gameplay Improvements
Please bring back a viable version of Dark Harvest for junglers (one that isn't inherently more favorable for laners and that has some tie in to camps + a more skillful soul pickup game like before.). Junglers aren't just lane dependent early due to scuttlers, they also tend to scale pretty badly and have no real late game rune alternative. They're forced to gank a ton because they can't carry themselves. Of course there are exceptions like Kindred, Eve, Yi, Kha but as a playstyle, I don't really have good late game options as jg like we used to in S8 with DH. The old rune had a totally different identity than it does now and it doesn't seem OK for me to have a rework of a rune with the same name and have it serve completely different users. I loved the soul pickup for allies (actually a good anti-tilt mechanism), camps and enemies. It actually affected the way I played fights, had true late game potential and was much more interesting than what it is now. BTW: Do you guys read the PBE feedback section much? I don't see responses there almost ever.
: New kayle nerfs will gut her entirely
Good, she's brainless autowin past 30 minutes and has less counterplay than almost any other late game champion. Her early isn't even as bad as people suggest. Most melees struggle vs her.
: i may be wrong, but i think increased penalty for multiple dodges is suppose to be the idea. riot doesn't want you to dodge. and if your LP is that important to you to where you will dodge to protect it then you should just not play ranked at all.
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=XccgZtO9,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-04-10T06:48:47.228+0000) > > i may be wrong, but i think increased penalty for multiple dodges is suppose to be the idea. riot doesn't want you to dodge. and if your LP is that important to you to where you will dodge to protect it then you should just not play ranked at all. Their match making is too shitty to not allow more dodging. If the system was better then perhaps it wouldn't feel like dodging matters so much.
BigFBear (EUW)
: Best example why matchmaking is broken (in lower elos)
As a fellow jg main, I agree and it's sad. You basically have to pick S tier 1v9 champs with great late game and not off meta picks like Ekko, Naut or Kench jungle. I literally first timed Yi by accident due to a client lag issue and 1v9d but can't do it on picks I'm extremely skilled on. It's just so tragic but the difference between champs in their ability to carry is just enormous. It's not just in jungle... I see my ADC pick Ezreal while the enemy goes Twitch, the game is already hard as hell. He can be really good on Ezreal and is still useless by comparison in teamfights. They generally don't do much in lane either. The better the ELO, the less you need to be raw DPS but it's very frustrating atm on a smurf. Without a 1v9 champion skill doesn't seem to matter much and I can't outcarry the coinflip even when I'm doing great individually.
: Morgana Mid Nerfing
She was performing extremely well mid and is still good. There's so little counterplay to it too. It's just waveclear spam and near complete safety.
: Tristana Mid is very good
Yenn (NA)
: What the fuck happened to Mundo?
He needs damage to not be ignored later on. He doesn't offer the utility other champs of his type have. It's a fairly unique kit. He's not even remotely OP in either top or jg atm. This is just boards being bad. Check stats with good players. He is finally viable. That is all.
Show more

astralwit

Level 31 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion