Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=00020001000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-22T18:03:55.019+0000) > > No. The minute real top/jg picks are buffed to a point of competency again, these guys will be straight out the door. You can't "buff" these kits into being good. There's nothing that they're good at that's worth picking them for to begin with. They're just here for a bit until Riot says "Aight, let's make top lane tanks champions again" or "Perhaps it's time to do something about how much we've done nothing but nerf junglers without buffing any of them at all to compensate". > > Think of it like Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike's Ken. He was lousy in SFIII: 2nd Impact, but Capcom nerfed everyone else around him while simply not touching him at all, and he became one of that game's top tier. That's basically what they did here, except they ALSO had to repeatedly buff these guys while nerfing everyone around them. They still aren't good. Everyone else is just bad. I'm confused, what exactly do you want here then?
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=000200010000000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-22T18:06:03.216+0000) > > I'm confused, what exactly do you want here then? For Riot to stop doing bad reworks. You can't make Yorick or Nunu ACTUALLY good characters at this point. Their kits don't have anything good in them. The only thing you can do is learn from this and make a better champion next time...and yet they keep making shit champions like Neeko and Sylas. If Riot would stop focusing on gimmicks and focus on *the reason why this champion should be desirable to begin with,* I wouldn't have to make a thread like this.
Kamille W (EUW)
: I think I was clear with what I want to accomplish which is having a conversation about Akali
> [{quoted}](name=Kamille W,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jU1gE5zf,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-22T19:10:38.291+0000) > > I think I was clear with what I want to accomplish which is having a conversation about Akali Why? You're talking to a community that can walk away from *some* spells and can't for others, because "reasons". You can't reason with a community that can't walk away from the lowest win rate champion in the game.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=000200010000000000000001,timestamp=2019-02-22T17:46:42.980+0000) > > That's bad in the same world where we realize that this is only possible because Riot's been steady nerfing literally everyone around them for months. JGs been nerfed for all ganking picks while we only have Sej for relevant jg tank picks, and top lane's fighter picks have all been receiving hits while the tank picks haven't been relevant for months, save Sion. > > They're on top because almost all top candidates have been shoved to the side manually by Riot for an extensive amount of time. They're both still trash. So what, even though they see above average play and win rates, they need buffs is what you are saying?
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=0002000100000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-02-22T17:50:43.644+0000) > > So what, even though they see above average play and win rates, they need buffs is what you are saying? No. The minute real top/jg picks are buffed to a point of competency again, these guys will be straight out the door. You can't "buff" these kits into being good. There's nothing that they're good at that's worth picking them for to begin with. They're just here for a bit until Riot says "Aight, let's make top lane tanks champions again" or "Perhaps it's time to do something about how much we've done nothing but nerf junglers without buffing any of them at all to compensate". Think of it like Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike's Ken. He was lousy in SFIII: 2nd Impact, but Capcom nerfed everyone else around him while simply not touching him at all, and he became one of that game's top tier. That's basically what they did here, except they ALSO had to repeatedly buff these guys while nerfing everyone around them. They still aren't good. Everyone else is just bad.
: Anyone else was hoping for a new Morgana passive?
They did this whole "double VGU" thing to give Morgana some MS on her ult. Like...I don't fucking bother to care when it comes to Riot and supports, anymore. I'm tired of being disappointed by how much they don't care.
Kamille W (EUW)
: Akali ideas to fix her
We live in a world where walking away from Trundle's W is counter-play, but walking away from Akali's W isn't. Like...Idk what you expect to accomplish with this post but it won't happen.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=0002000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-21T23:25:40.102+0000) > > I love Nunu's design. I was super excited for him. He's shit, and so is Yorick. 53% win rate globally with a 5% pick rate, and 53% win rate with an 8% pick rate on NA with Nunu 53% win rate globally with a 9% pick rate, and 52% win rate with a 9% pick rate on NA with Yorick. Uhhhhhhhhh, in what world is this bad? https://lolalytics.com/ranked/na/platinum/plus/champion/Yorick/ https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Yorick/ https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Nunu/ https://lolalytics.com/ranked/na/platinum/plus/champion/Nunu/
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=00020001000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-21T23:44:01.320+0000) > > 53% win rate globally with a 5% pick rate, and 53% win rate with an 8% pick rate on NA with Nunu > > 53% win rate globally with a 9% pick rate, and 52% win rate with a 9% pick rate on NA with Yorick. > > Uhhhhhhhhh, in what world is this bad? > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/na/platinum/plus/champion/Yorick/ > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Yorick/ > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/worldwide/platinum/plus/champion/Nunu/ > > https://lolalytics.com/ranked/na/platinum/plus/champion/Nunu/ That's bad in the same world where we realize that this is only possible because Riot's been steady nerfing literally everyone around them for months. JGs been nerfed for all ganking picks while we only have Sej for relevant jg tank picks, and top lane's fighter picks have all been receiving hits while the tank picks haven't been relevant for months, save Sion. They're on top because almost all top candidates have been shoved to the side manually by Riot for an extensive amount of time. They're both still trash.
Sicom (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=PH45,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WEoQeQEc,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-02-20T12:21:47.790+0000) > > Here are the Yasuo nerfs that potentially land in tomorrows patch: > Steel Tempest (Q) crit damage lowered from 180% to 160% That's a 12% damage reduction on a critical Q, so probably no more than a 5% overall damage reduction once he reaches mass critical items. In the early game his damage is reduced by a whopping 3.
> [{quoted}](name=Sicom,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WEoQeQEc,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-02-20T13:06:13.567+0000) > > That's a 12% damage reduction on a critical Q, so probably no more than a 5% overall damage reduction once he reaches mass critical items. In the early game his damage is reduced by a whopping 3. -3 is a lot when it's EVERY attack in the early game.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2019-02-21T23:13:42.143+0000) > > Yes, cause they both suck. As in you don't like them or they are bad?
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=000200010000,timestamp=2019-02-21T23:14:42.418+0000) > > As in you don't like them or they are bad? I love Nunu's design. I was super excited for him. He's shit, and so is Yorick.
: Hmm I've mained all three over the years and while I can say yoricks rework was disappointing and nunus rework was reprehensible, I don't really see how Kayles rework won't make her dps role better. Like yeah sure the early game is weaker and the ult is a flat nerf and they're needlessly ruining her support potential but her status as a hypercarry will go unmatched at level 16 and at level 11 only people like vayne and kog could compete with her. I do mostly agree with you but please explain the underlying issues you referred to.
> [{quoted}](name=JarodDempsey,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-02-21T18:16:34.780+0000) > > Hmm I've mained all three over the years and while I can say yoricks rework was disappointing and nunus rework was reprehensible, I don't really see how Kayles rework won't make her dps role better. Like yeah sure the early game is weaker and the ult is a flat nerf and they're needlessly ruining her support potential but her status as a hypercarry will go unmatched at level 16 and at level 11 only people like vayne and kog could compete with her. > > I do mostly agree with you but please explain the underlying issues you referred to. 1) The reason why her game play is so polarizing to begin with is because you can't contest her game play. It's all just AAs, and the intensity of this AA spam increases over time, complete with a guaranteed time frame to do so without dying. So, in this rework, Riot decided to make her *even worse* pre-11, then make her *even more broken* post-11. Thus, we've effectively created a champion that has to be absolutely exploitable until she's absolutely stupid to deal with. Basically, we made a marksman. 2) Problem with point 1? **We already have marksmen in every game.** We don't necessarily need a Kayle to hyper-carry with to begin with, and outside of that, she offers her ult, but her ult isn't a front line, nor is it engage. She's also liable to being eaten alive by poke and confirms in the mid lane. I guess she could try to farm from the jg, but then she's exp deprived. Overall, we have a 1-dimensional ap hyper-carry that lanes top reworked into...a 1-dimensional ap hyper-carry that lanes top that's even more ridiculously powerful or ridiculously useless at certain time stamps. Idk who was smoking what when this champ was made but if all we're allowed is shitty reworks, lest the masses cry the rework into the tier list grave, can we just never rework a champion again?
Jamaree (NA)
: Yorick and Nunu reworks were bad?
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TVBOLJHR,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-21T18:28:06.647+0000) > > Yorick and Nunu reworks were bad? Yes, cause they both suck.
Rioter Comments
: its not just vayne. i noticed a bunch of adc doing mediocre in games, and then suddenly wreck your whole team for seemingly no reason. they power spike too hard off crit items again. who would have thought. but apparantly there was supposed to be some sort of middle ground kek.
> [{quoted}](name=Critmaster Garen,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=dpZIWuVA,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-09T20:22:27.131+0000) > > its not just vayne. > > i noticed a bunch of adc doing mediocre in games, and then suddenly wreck your whole team for seemingly no reason. > >** they power spike too hard off crit items again. who would have thought.** This is LITERALLY what the old itemization change from 6 months ago was supposed to fix. Marksmen spiking super hard and murdering us all was THE EXACT REASON why "ADCIN2018LOL" was a thing to begin with. **The whole reason we changed IE to what it was was so it wouldn't be burst per second.** I've personally given up. Fuck these boards. There's not enough people with foresight and there's not enough people that learn from the past to hold a conversation worth having, and the game's direction is being piloted worse than Twitch Plays Pokemon because Riot does this constant tango of "trying to appease everyone" while everyone "blames Riot for not appeasing anyone". The lack of self-awareness around here is just too much to bear.
: I don't think the new system is why you have gold 3 mmr and a 30% wr despite being d3 last season. :B. If it's trully impacting you, then utilize op.gg and dodge the games your adc is autofilled.
> [{quoted}](name=Emelie Cauchemar,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Iue4k0d2,comment-id=0011,timestamp=2019-02-04T01:21:38.494+0000) > > I don't think the new system is why you have gold 3 mmr and a 30% wr despite being d3 last season. :B. > > If it's trully impacting you, then utilize op.gg and dodge the games your adc is autofilled. It isn't. I still don't like it regardless.
: People griefed autofill games before. This is nothing new, in fact I would say there's fewer griefers since you have a much higher chance of getting your main role now. If they do grief you, report them and move on.
> [{quoted}](name=Raymønd Åmantius,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Iue4k0d2,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2019-02-03T21:57:29.433+0000) > > People griefed autofill games before. This is nothing new, in fact I would say there's fewer griefers since you have a much higher chance of getting your main role now. > If they do grief you, report them and move on. But now there's no reason to even *consider* switching roles to try to deal with auto-fills and off-roles. The way the match is made is way too bungled up based on what's happening and it feels horrible when you don't get main role or get someone else that's not on main role.
Maelrus (EUW)
: Instead of just screaming "Remove it Already" you could help Riot SapMagic and all the other people working on ranked by giving constructive critism, like saying what people are abusing for better LP gains and so on.
> [{quoted}](name=Maelrus,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Iue4k0d2,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-02-03T16:48:06.023+0000) > > Instead of just screaming "Remove it Already" you could help Riot SapMagic and all the other people working on ranked by giving constructive critism, like saying what people are abusing for better LP gains and so on. ...? Remove it BECAUSE IT'S BEING ABUSED.
Rioter Comments
: WTF Riot? Why nerf a champion if you're going to overcompensate next patch?
- Overcompensate - Gut the absolute fuck out of W I don't like these boards. At all.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=00000000000000030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-01T08:01:02.685+0000) > > ...AND? > > Nothing about how old you are changes Mega Man X 3 Sigma's tiny ass hit box. > > Nothing about how old you are changes the difficulty of Super Nintendo platformers like Donkey Kong Country and Mario Bros: The Lost Levels. > > Nothing about how old you are changes the ridiculousness of rubber-banding in older racing game titles. > > Old school games didn't have super elaborate single-player campaigns in most situations. They produced game longevity *through difficulty.* That wasn't just an arcade thing. By the time we got to the GameCube, a lot of games were being tailored to a more casual market, so they started becoming easier and easier, with more flashy cinematic scenes and less need to actually execute to achieve the high points of a gaming experience, which hit a high point in the console generation after, where QTEs were infesting nearly everything. > > Like, many older games don't have massively long campaigns. They just felt like fleshed out experiences because it's a 2-5 hour campaign + all the hours you spent dying and learning the game's layout so you could steadily crawl to the end. Arcades did that, too, but largely by being insanely cheap with ridiculously large hordes of enemies and AI that'd basically read your inputs or even use blatantly overpowered kits (if they were bosses in fighting games) to feign actual skill. Like I said, many older games were coin-op, so they were supposed to be difficult and long/repetitive. Non-coin-op games kinda followed in the same vein, because 1) developers were used to that model, and 2) requiring a player to practice a level 200 times to beat it is easier than including 200 levels. But the basic idea, especially once there was room for a real game in there, was for the player to have fun. Examples include Sonic, Mario, and Zelda. But none of those games were deliberately adding bullshit just to make players rage about the bullshit and be so furious that they'd think about it all the rest of the day and log in the next day looking for the good feelings they occasionally get. And it's not even necessarily OP bullshit; Zoe's win rate is trash tier and yet she's super-aggravating to face (kind of like Akali). It's not even just an aggregate thing, either - you can win against one of these champions and yet still have a frustrating time dealing with them.
> [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=000000000000000300000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-01T08:21:57.303+0000) > > Like I said, many older games were coin-op, so they were supposed to be difficult and long/repetitive. Non-coin-op games kinda followed in the same vein, because 1) developers were used to that model, and 2) requiring a player to practice a level 200 times to beat it is easier than including 200 levels. But the basic idea, especially once there was room for a real game in there, was for the player to have fun. Examples include Sonic, Mario, and Zelda. Here's the thing: *Old Mario games weren't easy games.* We're not gonna say Miyamoto of all people didn't know how to design a good, fun game. It just so happened that they weren't exactly easy, either. > But none of those games were deliberately adding bullshit just to make players rage about the bullshit and be so furious that they'd think about it all the rest of the day and log in the next day looking for the good feelings they occasionally get. And it's not even necessarily OP bullshit; Zoe's win rate is trash tier and yet she's super-aggravating to face (kind of like Akali). It's not even just an aggregate thing, either - you can win against one of these champions and yet still have a frustrating time dealing with them. Sonic games are the definition of adding straight bullshit in the game. Think on it: A game about running as fast as possible, featuring hazards you wouldn't be able to react if you're moving as fast as possible. There's also another element you're missing in your comparisons: These aren't competitive games you're comparing League to. League's difficulty isn't just based on the game. It's based on the people playing the game. A match can be significantly easier or harder based on the chimps featured on your team or the enemy team. A match can be more or less frustrating depending on who everyone's using and how. A game of League is a very different experience from a platforming game. Regardless, when something is difficult to beat in a game, the emotional roller coaster we go through trying to beat it is part of the experience of the game, and part of what ties us to competitive games. It's not "wrong" or "out of touch" to say that. Also, Zoe's win rate *isn't* trash tier. It's like 50%-ish right now. Ban rate's like 10%-ish.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=000000000000000300000000,timestamp=2019-02-01T00:39:12.360+0000) > > So you didn't really get it. Aight. > > You also don't know shit about classic games. Not a single fucking clue, and yet you're telling me about how games were "back in the day". Oh, are we gonna have an old-off? You're talking to a literal greybeard, by the way, just in case you want to back out of that.
> [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=0000000000000003000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-01T04:54:00.596+0000) > > Oh, are we gonna have an old-off? You're talking to a literal greybeard, by the way, just in case you want to back out of that. ...AND? Nothing about how old you are changes Mega Man X 3 Sigma's tiny ass hit box. Nothing about how old you are changes the difficulty of Super Nintendo platformers like Donkey Kong Country and Mario Bros: The Lost Levels. Nothing about how old you are changes the ridiculousness of rubber-banding in older racing game titles. Old school games didn't have super elaborate single-player campaigns in most situations. They produced game longevity *through difficulty.* That wasn't just an arcade thing. By the time we got to the GameCube, a lot of games were being tailored to a more casual market, so they started becoming easier and easier, with more flashy cinematic scenes and less need to actually execute to achieve the high points of a gaming experience, which hit a high point in the console generation after, where QTEs were infesting nearly everything. Like, many older games don't have massively long campaigns. They just felt like fleshed out experiences because it's a 2-5 hour campaign + all the hours you spent dying and learning the game's layout so you could steadily crawl to the end. Arcades did that, too, but largely by being insanely cheap with ridiculously large hordes of enemies and AI that'd basically read your inputs or even use blatantly overpowered kits (if they were bosses in fighting games) to feign actual skill.
: were these comments made right after you played yoshi or were they constant as in "I never want you to play this, it's too broken" the difference is that peoples' opinions are weighted immediately after a loss, but if a thought is consistent then there is a problem, either with them or with what is involved zoe has been absolutely DETESTED since her creation. It'd be hard to say that she is more hated than yasuo, but ironically, she probably is given her popularity is only half of what his is. Both champs offer crazy advantages to only themselves and their team if you compare them to someone like kindred: she can make everyone within a circle immortal...everyone...friend and foe, no unfair bias, no unfair advantage, anyone that can stay in that circle gets to be immortal and even receive a heal afterward If you want examples in the previous smash games: meta knight was so problematic that he was banned from every competitive market for Brawl. In 3DS/Wii U , Cloud, fox, bayonetta and I forget who was the last one had so much of an advantage if you learned to play them that they were literally the only picks worth getting in competitive environments and the lesser picks usually lost in the first elimination round... sheik, captain falcon and I forget who else in melee... etc Ghostcrawler did not speak the truth. He was carefully selective with his words while trying to spread an agenda(you'll notice politicians do the same thing). There is a reason people offer criticism of him when every game he has joined as lead developer went on a near immediate decline after the initial phase...
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=0000000000000003000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-01T01:08:21.021+0000) > > were these comments made right after you played yoshi or were they constant as in "I never want you to play this, it's too broken" Usually when I started showing match dominance, so like a stock and 50% or so later, assuming I'm still at 3 stocks. One dude threw me off with how much he was complaining that I almost straight lost from being distracted by his bellyaching. That guy said he hated Yoshi since the very first game, though...still shocked me so bad I couldn't play straight for a minute. > zoe has been absolutely DETESTED since her creation. It'd be hard to say that she is more hated than yasuo, but ironically, she probably is given her popularity is only half of what his is. Both champs offer crazy advantages to only themselves and their team Not really. Zoe's ban rate plummeted after Riot did the "gut and buff" maneuver. Making Zoe cake to deal with, then buffing her back allowed people to get over their fears of the champion in a state where she was near powerless. Now she's in a pretty aight spot where she can be reasonably buffed and nerfed and her ban rate's like...10-ish percent. People clearly hate Yasuo more than Zoe at this point, and have for quite some time. > if you compare them to someone like kindred: she can make everyone within a circle immortal...everyone...friend and foe, no unfair bias, no unfair advantage, anyone that can stay in that circle gets to be immortal and even receive a heal afterward What does that prove or disprove? My ability *shouldn't have to help my enemies.* It just happens to for Kindred. Idk what this is supposed to be. > If you want examples in the previous smash games: meta knight was so problematic that he was banned from every competitive market for Brawl. In 3DS/Wii U , Cloud, fox, bayonetta and I forget who was the last one had so much of an advantage if you learned to play them that they were literally the only picks worth getting in competitive environments and the lesser picks usually lost in the first elimination round... Difference between Meta Knight and Zoe: Zoe and picks like her aren't always a balance problem, but a "salt problem". Meta Knight was a **major balance problem.** Like I said, you should address balance concerns. If your only issue is "I don't like having to fight you properly", you should rethink your position. That's something Low Tier God would say, and *no one* wants to be Low Tier God, the guy who legitimately complained that "no one wants to have to block pressure strings". As someone that has his foot in multiple competitive scenes, Idk why it's League where people legitimize the stuff that'd get people laughed out in other scenes almost instantly. > Ghostcrawler did not speak the truth. He was carefully selective with his words while trying to spread an agenda(you'll notice politicians do the same thing). There is a reason people offer criticism of him when every game he has joined as lead developer went on a near immediate decline after the initial phase... People criticize Crawler because people criticized Morello because people just want to pin their hate onto someone. Period.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=0000000000000003,timestamp=2019-01-31T23:00:22.368+0000) > > So what I'm understanding is that you don't really understand what GC meant, and when he asked "Do you understand", you'd say "No I don't". > > Cause he didn't say "We added her because people hate playing the game when they face her." They added her because it increases emotional involvement for those involved with her game play. A friend of mine has "increased emotional involvement" when he sees Neeko, and the same when he sees other champions. A champion he hates isn't justified in the game solely because he hates them, though, nor is a champion he likes justified solely because he likes them. > > But nice way to misconstrue what people say. No, I understood it perfectly. Facing Zoe produces high "emotional involvement" because it's a rage-inducing experience. QA hated it a lot. And that strong emotion - even though it was a strong _negative_ emotion, for the majority of players in a match - was seen as a justification to add her to the game. When I was young, video games were supposed to entertain people with an enjoyable experience, not addict people with "high highs and low lows." I mean, most designers didn't know how to do that (and the business model was often coin-op), which is how we have things like the AVGN, but it's a much more developed field nowadays. It's just too bad that that knowledge is being misused.
> [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=00000000000000030000,timestamp=2019-01-31T23:28:43.266+0000) > > No, I understood it perfectly. Facing Zoe produces high "emotional involvement" because it's a rage-inducing experience. QA hated it a lot. And that strong emotion - even though it was a strong _negative_ emotion, for the majority of players in a match - was seen as a justification to add her to the game. So you didn't really get it. Aight. You also don't know shit about classic games. Not a single fucking clue, and yet you're telling me about how games were "back in the day".
: considering by the comment listed, he didn't say what you said either, you're kind of both in the wrong. It still shows how disconnected they are from the game though when he comments **"When you win, it feels great, and when you lose, it can feel pretty terrible. I think that is part of the emotional attachment that we all have with the game"** he then goes on to say that this is for "champion development" and not for the game as a whole? many things have changed in the game to where it does not feel good to win or lose because instead: it felt awful to play against... then you often see fun and creative things being removed from the game, often as a result of Riot deeming them "unable to be balanced" when there are plenty of ways that they could and should have been balanced, or as another reason: because they are not picked often enough ?
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=00000000000000030001,timestamp=2019-01-31T23:29:57.689+0000) > > considering by the comment listed, he didn't say what you said either, you're kind of both in the wrong. It still shows how disconnected they are from the game though when he comments **"When you win, it feels great, and when you lose, it can feel pretty terrible. I think that is part of the emotional attachment that we all have with the game"** > > he then goes on to say that this is for "champion development" and not for the game as a whole? > > many things have changed in the game to where it does not feel good to win or lose because instead: it felt awful to play against... > > then you often see fun and creative things being removed from the game, often as a result of Riot deeming them "unable to be balanced" when there are plenty of ways that they could and should have been balanced, or as another reason: because they are not picked often enough ? The whole argument about "fun/not fun to play against" is *extremely subjective,* which is the problem with the argument and I'm still baffled by how many people that think it's some legit strat to making a point. Like, when I play Smash (for example), nearly anyone complains about Yoshi if I'm better than them. I wasn't hearing all that complaining in Smash 4 when people thought Yoshi was mild at best, and I don't hear about how "bs Yoshi is" when I'm *losing,* but if I'm winning games, everyone's going on and on about how annoying his armor'd double jump is, or how annoying his eggs are, or how op his forward air is, or how much damage his down air does. None of this stuff was a major issue in games where Yoshi wasn't a good character...*which is all of them up to this one*, though. Still, I get an ear-full about how much everyone dislikes fighting Yoshi *now.* Does that mean he warrants "massive gutting because he's unfun to play against?" I'd say no. It's better that their own characters gain redeeming qualities that THEY find fun, rather than shitting on MY fun with my favorite character in the one game where he's actually good competitively. Now, this doesn't mean that you can't EVER address things that frustrate players, but responding to player frustration alone without allowing players the time to at least try to learn and grow and adapt defeats the spirit of competitive gaming...and this is the biggest competitive gaming scene on the planet. The salt we get from losing to annoying bullshit, as well as the joy we get for winning against things that used to run us over for free, all that IS a part of the competitive gaming experience. Saying he's "disconnected" for speaking the truth is a very clueless move on your part. Maybe people just like taking the piss on Crawler by any means necessary at this point.
: Holy shit that's some of the most disconnected babble i've ever read... how did someone think hiring this guy was good idea
> [{quoted}](name=BestPudgeNA,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=0000000000000002,timestamp=2019-01-31T21:13:34.046+0000) > > Holy shit that's some of the most disconnected babble i've ever read... how did someone think hiring this guy was good idea You're not supposed to like playing against *every character in the game.* Sure there's a difference between "disliking something" and "something that's legitimately straight bullshit", but that's not as black and white as "If it's annoying, it's bad". If we were to have the whole game revolve around that notion, we'd have a lot of champs that play way too similarly. In other words, we'd have continued on with the issue that was festering up until Riot said "Aight we need to stop this" with the release of Bard, where they'd just slap champs into the game without thinking about how they do anything that effects the game differently in comparison to the rest of the cast.
: > [{quoted}](name=xDelightifyx,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-01-31T06:28:17.858+0000) > > idk why you would do that except for bias reasons..... They did it because playing against Zoe inspired feelings of anger and hatred, and those feelings gave people a closer connection to LoL and made them more likely to play again. ([source](https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/96922n/ghostcrawler_is_moving_off_of_league_of_legends/e3yw1p9/))
> [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=UKaosw5V,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-31T06:37:13.734+0000) > > They did it because playing against Zoe inspired feelings of anger and hatred, and those feelings gave people a closer connection to LoL and made them more likely to play again. > > ([source](https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/96922n/ghostcrawler_is_moving_off_of_league_of_legends/e3yw1p9/)) So what I'm understanding is that you don't really understand what GC meant, and when he asked "Do you understand", you'd say "No I don't". Cause he didn't say "We added her because people hate playing the game when they face her." They added her because it increases emotional involvement for those involved with her game play. A friend of mine has "increased emotional involvement" when he sees Neeko, and the same when he sees other champions. A champion he hates isn't justified in the game solely because he hates them, though, nor is a champion he likes justified solely because he likes them. But nice way to misconstrue what people say.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: January 30
Idk if you'll even see this, but since you guys are working on walking animations: Can you guys have someone look at Aatrox's walk animation? It doesn't fully loop and sort of cuts after a bit of walking. It's kind of a "hiding in plain sight" blemish that could be easy to miss, but once you see it it's super awkward. Someone should fix that loop.
Eyesack (NA)
: Why is phoenix stance not allowed to be playable?
Because it's mixed damage, dps, and aoe wave clear in one ability when it is playable. You must of not been here for that, but trust when I say it's absolutely horrible.
: > [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-01-26T20:38:48.101+0000) > > it does not break any rules. Any champion can possess the jungle buffs and the jungle buffs are almost useless to ivern because of his lack of offensive power... No, it clearly breaks a rule, because **jungle buffs give one buff only.** With Ivern on the field, he could *potentially* equip his entire team with jungle buffs of some kind (assuming he got access to the enemy buffs). He's the only champ in the game that hardly has to give a shit about losing out on exp to split buffs. He's also the only element in the game that gives allies a free dash into melee range, which I guess you could say breaks the rules of the game since he just gives every champ in the game a dash off his Q.
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-27T00:40:27.715+0000) > > which can only happen if ivern has set the entire thing up in adva... I told the mods I'd stop doing this, but I don't see how else I can get this across: No one cares about the logistics. Your claim is that "You are not supposed to break the rules of the game". That is YOUR claim. So when someone else does it that isn't a major damage dealer, you don't get to flip flop because "It's Ivern the jg support". Ivern breaks the rules of the game on multiple fronts. Bushes don't grant vision. Bushes aren't supposed to be smack dab in the lane. Blue and red are only supposed to give one buff. Darius is NOT supposed to be able to dash. These are fundamentals of the game Ivern breaks just by being Ivern. You can't just fumble some limp dick excuse as to why I shouldn't care if this concept is so important.
: it does not break any rules. Any champion can possess the jungle buffs and the jungle buffs are almost useless to ivern because of his lack of offensive power... it's literally as if he said, "hey, you can take my jungle buff but I get the gold" here is the definition of petty: petty (pĕtˈē)► adj. Of small importance; trivial: a petty grievance. adj. Marked by narrowness of mind, ideas, or views. adj. Marked by meanness or lack of generosity, especially in trifling matters.
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-01-26T20:38:48.101+0000) > > it does not break any rules. Any champion can possess the jungle buffs and the jungle buffs are almost useless to ivern because of his lack of offensive power... No, it clearly breaks a rule, because **jungle buffs give one buff only.** With Ivern on the field, he could *potentially* equip his entire team with jungle buffs of some kind (assuming he got access to the enemy buffs). He's the only champ in the game that hardly has to give a shit about losing out on exp to split buffs. He's also the only element in the game that gives allies a free dash into melee range, which I guess you could say breaks the rules of the game since he just gives every champ in the game a dash off his Q.
: I mean I've played as akali and I've played against it. Sure there are stronger champions than her there are some that are weaker too. I dont like playing against her new kit. I really just dont. I've tried to understand it and learn how to properly play against it. But it is so frustrating. Who would you suggest I play into akali that can poke her
> [{quoted}](name=ApollyonBainer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=4Eh9y6WW,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2019-01-26T18:04:59.753+0000) > > I mean I've played as akali and I've played against it. Sure there are stronger champions than her there are some that are weaker too. I dont like playing against her new kit. I really just dont. I've tried to understand it and learn how to properly play against it. But it is so frustrating. > > Who would you suggest I play into akali that can poke her Every mage in the game.
Fízz v2 (EUW)
: I mean she is still banned a ton in 9.1 pro play and in 9.2 lots of good mid laners got nerfed. pretty sure she is op still
> [{quoted}](name=Fízz v2,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=4Eh9y6WW,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-01-26T14:58:29.003+0000) > > I mean she is still banned a ton in 9.1 pro play and in 9.2 lots of good mid laners got nerfed. pretty sure she is op still Why do people only cite pro play for Irelia and Akali? If I say "Olaf doesn't need buffs because pro play" or "Kench doesn't need buffs because pro play", I get hit with the young "IT'S NOT THE SAME GAME" line.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=0004000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-26T16:07:43.694+0000) > > Can you clarify what's unfair about it? Can you clarify what's more unfair about it than say Zoe using multiple Summoner Spells, or Fizz avoiding everything, or Tryndamere being unable to die, or Kayle/Taric making allies immune to damage, or Morgana having the longest CC in the game, or Zed being able to miss all of his core abilities yet still one-shot you, or Garen being able to be behind the entire early game yet still 1v1 a fed top laner, or Neeko being able to perfectly mimic a champion, or Sylas taking someone's ult, or literally anything else that's unique to a champion or few or overall just unfair in general? > > Don't try and pull the "balance" card, because there's nothing unbalanced about Akali's Shroud. > > * She doesn't avoid damage > * If she takes damage, _which she can_, her position is revealed for a short time during and after the damage is taken > * When under tower you have 100% knowledge of where she has _and that's always been the case_ > * If she attacks you, she'll be revealed and will take turret shots so long as she's revealed > * She has low-end burst; there's a 0% chance that she'll one-shot you under tower unless she's _fed_ but in that case that's not a _shroud_ problem that's a _skill_ problem > > Please, educate me. What is so "broken", "unfair", "unbalanced" about Akali's Shroud that doesn't result in a singular complaint of "It's not fair towers can't target her" because towers can't target Fizz when he uses E, something on a comparitively low cooldown, and Pantheon can be literally immune to 3 turret shots in a row. Let's compare Fizz to Akali's Shroud, shall we? Playful/Trickster allows Fizz to bounce up on his trident for up to a maximum of 0.75s. He becomes untargetable during this time, but he's forced to come down eventually. Twilight Shroud drops a shroud that lasts for 5 seconds, up to 7 at max rank. If Akali is in it, she's untargetable by turrets and champions. If she exits and re-enters the Shroud, it's duration INCREASES by 0.5s each time she does it, for a maximum of 3 extra seconds added on. So going in and out she can turn her 5-7 second shroud into a 8-10 second shroud. So do tell me how you can validly compare a 0.75s untargetability with a 5-7s or 8-10s untargetability that she can dip and and out of. Sure, Fizz messes with core tenants of the game, but it's _for less than a second_ and he's still in absolute danger when his time is up. Akali, if she breaks her cover, can easily fall back into her cover. The two are _incomparable_ because of the sheer differences between the two abilities. You're trying to claim that an ice cream scoop in summer is the equivalent of a blizzard in the middle of summer.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=00040000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-26T17:54:31.575+0000) > > Let's compare Fizz to Akali's Shroud, shall we? > Playful/Trickster allows Fizz to bounce up on his trident for up to a maximum of 0.75s. He becomes untargetable during this time, but he's forced to come down eventually. > Twilight Shroud drops a shroud that lasts for 5 seconds, up to 7 at max rank. If Akali is in it, she's untargetable by turrets and champions. If she exits and re-enters the Shroud, it's duration INCREASES by 0.5s each time she does it, for a maximum of 3 extra seconds added on. So going in and out she can turn her 5-7 second shroud into a 8-10 second shroud. But she has to come out, and that tells you where she is (or was) and allows you to hit her with targeted abilities during that time. Just like how Fizz has to eventually drop from the pole, Akali loses max output from shroud if she just sits tight in it without exposing herself somehow. She ALSO has the slowest burst among assassins at a base level, so she *needs* to master this mechanic if she's going to properly avoid taking serious damage with it (since it doesn't cancel incoming damage). > So do tell me how you can validly compare a 0.75s untargetability with a 5-7s or 8-10s untargetability that she can dip and and out of. Fizz outright nullifies anything and gets free movement during his E. Akali doesn't nullify incoming attacks, can't stray from the premises or she loses her stealth outright, and doesn't have mobility and damage tacked onto her W (she used to have a blink, though). Where Fizz gets part of his damage rotation and engage, as well as his primary means of escape and defense, off E, Akali's W is significantly stronger on defense by means of disregarding targeted damage, mixing up her positioning, and giving her an escape route (she can E into it), but offensively it doesn't do much of anything except a MS boost. That's how you compare the two abilities. Is it a 1:1 trade? I wouldn't say so. Fizz is significantly more 1-dimensional than most modern designs at this point. His whole kit is designed to only be good at E'ing away from danger until his R is up since his R is a pretty decent engage tool, which is incredibly strong utility for an assassin. However, you don't really draft assassins to engage team fights most of the time, so "The reason why you pick Fizz" doesn't really outweigh "The reason why you'd pick Akali (assuming you're not ass at Akali)" or "The reason why you'd pick LeBlanc" or whoever else. Still, if we're looking at their defensive tools in a vacuum, that's how you'd compare them.
: Ivern has almost no offensive presence and a motif about being peaceful to the wildlife. He gives his buffs to an ally but he has to actually give something up in return: his offensive power coincidentally, although this increases his allies power, it DOES NOT break any gameplay rules. If desired, an ally may ask to take the jungle buffs by killing them in the jungle. Buffs are also transferred upon killing an opposing jungler or champion that has the buffs
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-01-26T02:41:16.301+0000) > > Ivern has almost no offensive presence and a motif about being peaceful to the wildlife. He gives his buffs to an ally but he has to actually give something up in return: his offensive power > > coincidentally, although this increases his allies power, it DOES NOT break any gameplay rules. - Doesn't break any game play rules - Jungle buff gives two buffs instead of one for no reason other than Ivern being present. If you're going to be petty, AT LEAST be honest. Period. That's all I ask.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T22:26:55.278+0000) > > I don't see anyone bitching about Ivern or Ornn when they say this shitty line. Because Ivern and Ornn do not break the game in a frustrating way when they bend the rules. Key word, _bend._ Akali's shroud outright breaks the rules in the most frustrating way possible. Fizz, Elise, and Zhonya's _bend_ the rules when it comes to how towers operate, and Akali took that and cranked it to 11.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T22:28:17.467+0000) > > Because Ivern and Ornn do not break the game in a frustrating way when they bend the rules. Key word, _bend._ This is the hypocritical bullshit that I hate the most on these boards. Turning one red buff into two because "I'm Ivern"? No one says shit. Being able to just make items outside of lane and have items exclusively locked unless that champion is in your match and on your team? No one says shit. Being able to just randomly make bushes anywhere on the map or grant all your allies an instant gap closer into their AA range? No one says shit. Why? **Because these champs are fringe champs.** It has nothing to do with "bending and not breaki-" wtf is that? There is no disparity between "bending" and "breaking" a rule. What type of 7th grade schoolyard nonsense is this? If a *late game carry or an assassin* had the ability to just split a buff into two, none of you guys would have stood for it. Yasuo's windwall is bitched about to this day and we have **plenty** of abilities that block and nullify damage in different ways. If you're gonna be petty, at least be honest.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T21:10:17.116+0000) > > So instead of making her usefullly unique, you make her a copy+paste of every other burst champion? I don't understand the logic here, at least on a developmental standpoint. Wouldn't it be better to just tone down it's reliability instead of merely removing it? No, because it was a stupid mechanic that completely shat on basic principles of the game - like _towers see everything._ I don't care if it is unique, it broke fundamental rules in a god awful way that wasn't innovative. It was frustrating, it removed the defense towers are supposed to provide you, and offered her way too much of a safety net. If the next champion had an ultimate that 1HKO the next enemy champion that appeared within a radius, it would certainly be unique - but that doesn't mean it's healthy or needs to exist in the game. Her Obscure consumed WAY too much of her power budget, and I'm glad it's gone since they can now properly rebalance her kit.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T21:13:59.456+0000) > > No, because it was a stupid mechanic that completely shat on basic principles of the game - like _towers see everything._ I don't care if it is unique, it broke fundamental rules in a god awful way that wasn't innovative. I don't see anyone bitching about Ivern or Ornn when they say this shitty line.
Alzon (NA)
: Then how does someone like Talon do it, with no snapbacks or untargetability? Not all mobile melee damage dealers need to have dive pressure in the early/mid game. Their strength can be much more macro-oriented, which Akali’s clearly is - her ability to zone entire teams is about as good as Rengar’s, and she has more ways to escape afterward. Talon’s strength lies in his map mobility and stealth. Wukong’s strength is in his stealth and AoE ultimate. Kha’Zix’s strength is in his stealth and (later) resets. These champions are known to 100-0 people vey suddenly, yet they’re not known for doing so under the enemy turret against 75%-HP targets because they don’t have the tools to handle the buffed turret fire. I personally do not mind the Obscure effect - in fact I find it a unique tool with clear uses and misuses. Yet the community seems to overwhelmingly disagree. My suggested changes are simply what would be easiest for Riot to implement in order to somewhat mollify the Akali players who want her stats brought up to par.
> [{quoted}](name=Alzon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T21:18:02.618+0000) > > Then how does someone like Talon do it, with no snapbacks or untargetability? Simple: Talon's level 6 damage spike is still there and he can jump over any neighboring wall to escape no matter how thick it is. Akali can't do that and her burst is way slower than Talon's or anyone else's in her sub-class. > Not all mobile melee damage dealers need to have dive pressure in the early/mid game. Their strength can be much more macro-oriented, which Akali’s clearly is - her ability to zone entire teams is about as good as Rengar’s, and she has more ways to escape afterward. She zones *the marksmen* in teams. The issue is that nearly everyone plays marksmen constantly. If we had a world where people actually switched out marksmen with something else, Akali's effectiveness into those targets would be weaker. You know...strategic decision making. > Talon’s strength lies in his map mobility and stealth. Wukong’s strength is in his stealth and AoE ultimate. Kha’Zix’s strength is in his stealth and (later) resets. These champions are known to 100-0 people vey suddenly, yet they’re not known for doing so under the enemy turret against 75%-HP targets because they don’t have the tools to handle the buffed turret fire. ALL of them can dive at 6. Akali *still needs shroud to dive post 6.* She also has way less burst *than all of them.* If we go with your suggestions, it'll be another case of adding generic power (damage and cc) while removing unique strengths, but I don't think we have much choice at this point.
: Couldnt you ahve solved the Irelia issue by just making her E conditional again?
Why is it that whenever we remove toxic bullshit from the game, we can't go even one year without people trying to steadily revert back to it? **Who wants to be punished for winning lane?**
: Why would people complain about getting what they wanted?
> [{quoted}](name=Auroramancer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cGdIA30W,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-01-25T20:31:41.921+0000) > > Why would people complain about getting what they wanted? I'm surprised no one's celebrated about getting what they wanted.
Alzon (NA)
: Reverting the duration nerf in compensation would just buff Akali for pro play without affecting sub-masters performance much. She doesn’t need more burst damage. Meddler was concerned with her sustain being too high. Her target access and mobility are already excellent. That just leaves her DPS, CC, and durability. She could probably use a flat HP or armor buff. Something that helps early without affecting late much. The microstun could be increased, or the shroud could get its slow back. Q could also apply a lesser slow to targets not affected by the 50% slow. Her Q could have some of its damage swapped to %HP. The passive damage could be decreased but apply to the next two autos instead of one (this one’s kinda out there).
> [{quoted}](name=Alzon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T20:18:22.013+0000) > > Reverting the duration nerf in compensation would just buff Akali for pro play without affecting sub-masters performance much. She doesn’t need more burst damage. Meddler was concerned with her sustain being too high. Her target access and mobility are already excellent. That just leaves her DPS, CC, and durability. > > She could probably use a flat HP or armor buff. Something that helps early without affecting late much. > > The microstun could be increased, or the shroud could get its slow back. Q could also apply a lesser slow to targets not affected by the 50% slow. > > Her Q could have some of its damage swapped to %HP. The passive damage could be decreased but apply to the next two autos instead of one (this one’s kinda out there). So your solution for removing her ability to turret dive literally ever is to make it harder to escape her by inserting random slows into her kit? That or just more damage? Like, all of this is just insanely clumsy. It's like no one's ever thought this far ahead when complaining about the mechanic to begin with. If she can't turret dive, she needs more than "a little slow" to make up for it or she's as useless or more so than before the rework, where she could at least dive after level 6. An assassin not being able to dive *almost at all* would need major compensation buffs for that fact, not just "some harmless tuning".
Dynikus (NA)
: Fucking finally. Half the balance team, a lot of the boards, and a lot of akali mains have been saying to just do this for a long ass time. Now she might actually get some buffs to other, more fair parts of her kit and be a real champion again
> [{quoted}](name=Dynikus,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7Kep0qKg,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-01-25T18:47:35.475+0000) > > Fucking finally. Half the balance team, a lot of the boards, and a lot of akali mains have been saying to just do this for a long ass time. > Now she might actually get some buffs to other, more fair parts of her kit and be a real champion again What "fair" parts of her kit? Her burst damage?
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cGdIA30W,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-01-25T18:18:14.735+0000) > > It isn't entirely removed. Only under turret. > > Now, it might as well be removed at this point, and I doubt that the compensation for removing it will bode well, because she now needs a means of properly turret diving or compensation for not being able to at all anymore, but the desire of being able to target her under a turret is being fulfilled. No, Akali has plenty of tools to turret dive you as it is. She has both her E and R to be maneuverable underneath turrets. What they need to do is now start to backpedal on some of the other nerfs they did to her since they hit one of her most controversial strengths.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cGdIA30W,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T18:21:23.135+0000) > > No, Akali has plenty of tools to turret dive you as it is. She has both her E and R to be maneuverable underneath turrets. You're joking. Do you know how to turret dive? No one cares how much you move if you don't drop aggro. No one cares how much you drop aggro if you still eat 50% of your hp in turret shots while dancing around and repeatedly taking hits. The way most assassins turret dive is through *high burst damage* and the leaving the premises before taking too many hits. Akali's damage is *intentionally gated through multiple means.* Unless her target's on like 65 hp, she's going to take too long jumping around to properly dive and escape without dying too. That was the point of Obscurity, so she'd have time to execute dives even with her gates to her damage.
: There's no one saying that because literally ever since she was on the PBE, people had been calling for Obscuring to be removed from her shroud. It's been THE #1 requested change about Akali's kit, and Riot's been consistently like "Lol, nope. Let's hit her MS" or some other dumb "nerf" that didn't actually address any of the concerns with her.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cGdIA30W,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-01-25T18:14:47.963+0000) > > There's no one saying that because literally ever since she was on the PBE, people had been calling for Obscuring to be removed from her shroud. It isn't entirely removed. Only under turret. Now, it might as well be removed at this point, and I doubt that the compensation for removing it will bode well, because she now needs a means of properly turret diving or compensation for not being able to at all anymore, but the desire of being able to target her under a turret is being fulfilled.
Rioter Comments
Yenn (NA)
: Getting counter-jungled is now significantly worse than it was before; you're completely and utterly fucked with no way to catch up if you/your team can't defend your jungle, which isn't okay, because being counter-jungled is less of a result of skill disparity and more a result of team compositions. These changes were overall not good. Reducing aggression towards lanes was fine, but it just increased aggression towards the other jungle and destroyed the ability to catch up from behind.
> [{quoted}](name=Yenn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-01-25T05:06:02.807+0000) > > Getting counter-jungled is now significantly worse than it was before; you're completely and utterly fucked with no way to catch up if you/your team can't defend your jungle, which isn't okay, because being counter-jungled is less of a result of skill disparity and more a result of team compositions. Then don't draft dumb. I thought you guys wanted this game to be "strategic"?
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T01:17:24.428+0000) > > Like I said: You're only thinking about success cases. No. I’m not. The failed case in this situation is the laner backs off and you take the turret or a few plates. You’re still getting more xp than a camp will give you in about the same time.
> [{quoted}](name=The thigh guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T02:00:57.893+0000) > > No. I’m not. You're lying. > The failed case in this situation is the laner backs off and you take the turret or a few plates. That's why you're lying. Conversation is over.
EasyMid (NA)
: How did Akali not receive any nerfs?
You can say the same thing about any champ in the game. Any champ in the right hands will run you through.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T00:57:53.857+0000) > > ...you DIDN'T do Krugs? That's where it came from before. NO. It came from forcing the enemy laners out, if not killing them (granting xp) forcing down their turret (granting xp) then Rotating and killing the laner (granting xp) and likely taking the turret (granting xp) etc etc. all while sharing minion xp. All of this total wound up being more than the current jungle xp.
> [{quoted}](name=The thigh guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T01:00:27.569+0000) > > NO. It came from forcing the enemy laners out, if not killing them (granting xp) forcing down their turret (granting xp) then Rotating and killing the laner (granting xp) and likely taking the turret (granting xp) etc etc. all while sharing minion xp. All of this total wound up being more than the current jungle xp. Like I said: You're only thinking about success cases.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T00:19:32.494+0000) > > So where's your exp going to come from? Putting your whole team behind while you constantly gank without ever returning to the jg? Where is it coming from now? Because it sure as hell isnt the camps.
> [{quoted}](name=The thigh guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-25T00:57:04.343+0000) > > Where is it coming from now? Because it sure as hell isnt the camps. ...you DIDN'T do Krugs? That's where it came from before.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-01-24T22:55:39.546+0000) > > They lose less, but their exp gain *comparative to the whole game is less.* They can't afford to lose too many camps or they'll be at the support's level by the time laning's done. > > If you chain gank and succeed, the reward is "not being affected by this change". If you *fail,* the risk is that it's going to be harder to bounce back into the game as the jungler. Except no? Spam ganking is risking even less. Yes there’s less xp in the jungle, but when they invade you, you’re still losing less than if you just hard ganked before this change.
> [{quoted}](name=The thigh guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-24T23:15:44.578+0000) > > Except no? Spam ganking is risking even less. Yes there’s less xp in the jungle, but when they invade you, you’re still losing less than if you just hard ganked before this change. So where's your exp going to come from? Putting your whole team behind while you constantly gank without ever returning to the jg?
: Problem being perma ganking a lane is hardly punishable now, and this will make it even less so. I used to play kayn and if someone ganked a lane I was able to punish by grabbing poachers dirk and instantly invading them. Now that tactic doesn’t work because pochers is gone and now they lose and I gain even less from this endevour.
> [{quoted}](name=The thigh guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B4y0LbqB,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-01-24T18:29:48.581+0000) > > Problem being perma ganking a lane is hardly punishable now, and this will make it even less so. > > I used to play kayn and if someone ganked a lane I was able to punish by grabbing poachers dirk and instantly invading them. Now that tactic doesn’t work because pochers is gone and now they lose and I gain even less from this endevour. They lose less, but their exp gain *comparative to the whole game is less.* They can't afford to lose too many camps or they'll be at the support's level by the time laning's done. If you chain gank and succeed, the reward is "not being affected by this change". If you *fail,* the risk is that it's going to be harder to bounce back into the game as the jungler.
Rioter Comments
Show more

chipndip1

Level 230 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion