: I did. Well, I have to mod the boards still, and I talk about League... ... ######...fuck.
Why would you mod the boards of a game you quit?
: Why what will rune reforged Change it's not like Evelynn is the only one who can use them.
It's laughable this got upvoted. *You can't just waste time rebalancing a champ around systems that won't be here in a month.*
: Susan is a Juggernaut. His only CC is a slow and death. Tank cho has 2 hard CC and almost no damage outside [near-]instant death to a squishy of his choice (in range).
Dodge the knock up and Cho is literally unable to do anything. He could buy RG, but so could Nasus, anyway.
Ponderss (NA)
: I hope this is true. Would like to play her, viably, in ranked matches.
I'm starting to see people get the hang of her. I say don't buff until after Runes Reforged.
Ahris (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=MysterQ,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=bpn6Zvcj,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-10-21T15:53:16.997+0000) > > Morg stun is too long. 3 seconds? Ok gg. > Likewise, Blitzcrank is too feast/famine. > > Both of them are kind of if you land the "skillshot" the enemy can't do anything. If you miss, then you just wait until you can shoot again. > > I know this is too general. I have played both and many times your team can't followup for the kill. But that style is not too fun. It feels terrible to be on the other side of a stupid skill. Is blitz really feast or famine? As long as he lands his Q he will always be useful
In lane: If you can't land them you're famined. Out of lane: Blitz doesn't scale into fights for shit in most instances. Competent comps have front liners that don't mind a free gap closer.
: I think a lot of this comes down to the perception of how much more gold you **feel** coin is actually giving you versus how much it actually gives in comparison to other support items. When you are collecting gold from ancient coin, there's far more visible ceremony that both the holder and the opponent can see. 1. I walk up to a coin and it jumps to my champion 2. you hear a little *klink*..tried to spell that with a c but it got censored 3. You see the +25/+40 pop up above the **holders** head. For the STE line I think the perception that it gives less gold comes down to a few points. 1. When you proc the charges the gold value is broken up into smaller values 8/15 per target, as opposed to 25/40 from one coin 2. The gold gained displays over the **enemy** as opposed to the support - harder to attribute where the gold is going. 3. There's a lot of additional noise that can cause you to miss the fact this was even proced. When harassing in lane phase you pay attention to it, but in fights you're caring about killing, not the little yellow numbers popping up over their heads. I have a graph shows the gold gained from each of the support item lines that I'll link here, but first I want you guys to try to; 1. Rank the support items based on your perception of which gives the most gold 2. Take a stab at guessing what the gold differential between them is.
1) Does that graph include the gold gained for kills and assists on coin? I see Rioters talk about how coin doesn't offer that much more than the other lines, but those claims constantly run counter to my experience *unless* I feed. So if the comparison is being made, wouldn't it be best to compare the gold gained by *winning/losing* coin games vs. comparable STE games, rather than just unfiltered averages? Of course if I win with STE, I'll have more gold than if I lost since I have more freedom to get more gold, right? Something needs to properly explain why Rioters can make this claim about the gold gen of these items when I don't see STE users running around with 2.5k+ gold on their item in comparison to me. 2) On top of point 1, if we're just overreacting to anecdotal evidence and perceived gold gain, why is the pro scene completely wrapped around gaining gold super fast with coin + gold runes? If STE gave the fastest gold, they'd just AA each other with STE as aggressively as possible while using gold runes, right? Hell, Lulu has like 650 range spells to use, herself. As for answering the question: No doubt, I think coin makes the most gold, due to its consistency. Spellthief's should make the least since you can't use it while you aren't fighting champions, so its gold gain decreases after laning and all that jazz. As far as average differentials, I'd assume coin gets at least around 500 gold on STE, give or take 100 gold, assuming coin gets near 2k and STE gets 1.5k (which is kind of generous to STE if you ask me).
: > [{quoted}](name=Maple Nectar,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EMqpe7dX,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2017-10-20T23:42:39.865+0000) > > I have a graph shows the gold gained from each of the support item lines that I'll link here, but first I want you guys to try to; > 1. Rank the support items based on your perception of which gives the most gold > 2. Take a stab at guessing what the gold differential between them is. * At max you can get 48 gold a minute with spellthief's edge, this is increased to 90 for the upgrade. However if you can't trade back, the value drops quickly. * Coin gives you a 25 gold pick up every 90 seconds, plus another 25 pickup every other wave. So about 37.5 gold per minute. * Relic has a lot of variance based on what you proc it on. You get more charges that come faster as you level it. I don't want to do the math but it's good enough pro ADCs rush it. I'm guessing the spellthief's line is best if you make full use of it, relic shield isn't that far off, and coin is the worst.
Coin upgrades to 40 per wave + 40 per kill and assist after 650 gold. That's not even close to a fair comparison.
: Make Yi great again!!{{sticker:sg-shisa}} o wait Make him and actual assassin first!! {{sticker:sg-shisa}}
Yi is a skirmisher.
Mizaya (NA)
: I was confident in my ability to dodge his ult. It was a normal, I took the risk. Just saying though, if he actually managed to hit it I would have died, despite being up 1 level and 5-6k gold.
So you get in range of the *anti-carry class,* WIN, then go "Man, I should have won that harder..."?
: Why lux is consider a support role champion?
: Yeah, but what else changes if Thresh is counted as melee? Like seriously, it doesn't change anything much. He's not abusing Deadmans or Hydras. Relic Shield at most, but minor nerf in return if necessary. I'm saying the game is less fun if everyone was a broken as Fiora. I'd rather have more proper balance.
1) Fiora isn't even broken. 2) **NO CHAMPION AT 400 OR HIGHER RANGE WILL BE MELEE RANGED.**
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jvyEdWAq,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-10-20T02:26:42.511+0000) > > Syndra isn't in need of nerfs... She has a 19% ban rate rn
And? What is her win/pick rate? And what elos are you looking at?
Mizaya (NA)
: Well, then it's time to design an item for enchanters that a. encourages dynamic gameplay, not just plain stat boosting. b. isn't geared specifically for ADCs, or isn't such a constant stat boost to ADCs to the point where the enchanter is more or less buying into the ADCs power budget.
You should probably start with designing enchanter CHAMPIONS that are dynamic in game play before worrying about enchanter ITEMS that are. Itemization reflects its buyers.
Durzaka (NA)
: At least Redemption and Locket dont give hyper carry ADCs basically a full item for free. Time to go back to lane bullies I guess.
So we go back to whole teams having a ton of gold in bonus health per team fight? THAT'S the greater of two evils?
: If you want to nerf Syndra?
Syndra isn't in need of nerfs...
Mizaya (NA)
: Agree largely with everything except for ammo systems. Why? I think it's a very black-and-white way of adding counterplay, if you understand me. They have designated periods of doing damage... and not doing damage. IMO, the more a player can influence the impact of their champion (either by playing good or bad), the better. The idea is that if a marksman plays everything right, he should be able to deal a ton of damage. If he plays like shit, he shouldn't do much damage at all. Conversely, enemies should be able to outplay their damage as well. Think of skillshots (Take cass Q and E as an example) and very precise timings. Also don't really understand the downvotes... this has to be one of the more insightful posts I've read, but then again this is boards.
> [{quoted}](name=Mizaya,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2017-10-19T23:37:02.168+0000) > > Agree largely with everything except for ammo systems. Why? I think it's a very black-and-white way of adding counterplay, if you understand me. They have designated periods of doing damage... and not doing damage. IMO, the more a player can influence the impact of their champion (either by playing good or bad), the better. We did the same thing to assassins, though. Because people thought they were "anti-fun" because they would get popped by fed Rengars and Talons, the assassin update threw off assassin damage patterns. It's more fair to fight around from a personal perspective, but it's actually a glorified assassin nerf from a holistic perspective. Assassins don't have the means to really do their main jobs anymore as a class unless they snowball *very* hard...or it's Faker playing Fizz. > The idea is that if a marksman plays everything right, he should be able to deal a ton of damage. If he plays like shit, he shouldn't do much damage at all. Conversely, enemies should be able to outplay their damage as well. Think of skillshots (Take cass Q and E as an example) and very precise timings. This post is basically saying "Add a new element to the concept of 'playing a marksman right'". If you get to a point where you can just right click the world and win, I think something's just down right wrong. > Also don't really understand the downvotes... this has to be one of the more insightful posts I've read, but then again this is boards. If I don't post something that's easy to wrap the circle jerk around, I get down voted. That's just how it is. No one cares for legitimate discussion or actual balance here. Just the circle jerks.
: Who cares about thematics or anything? Just balance the game. My point is you could make every bruiser as good as fiora/renekton/j4, but would that really be fun?
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=00010000000100000000,timestamp=2017-10-19T21:57:53.525+0000) > > Who cares about thematics or anything? Just balance the game. THRESH HAS OVER 400 RANGE. HE JUST IS NOT MELEE. > My point is you could make every bruiser as good as fiora/renekton/j4, but would that really be fun? ...it would be fun if you could have more champions be good in the game...I don't get this post...
: > No, I'm saying he has too much range to even be considered melee. Does it matter? Does thematics or anything really matter towards balance? > It's not all the items. It's just Censer and Coin. Knight's Vow on most tanks, Locket on just about every tank (because HP ratio for some stupid reason). Bruisers can't even hurt tanks let alone attempt to be meta. Only Fiora and Renekton and J4, but why should the world be dictated by these 3 champions?
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=000100000001,timestamp=2017-10-18T21:52:25.363+0000) > > Does it matter? Does thematics or anything really matter towards balance? Are you TRYING to make me say something bannable? Like...WHAT? > Bruisers can't even hurt tanks let alone attempt to be meta. Only Fiora and Renekton and J4, but why should the world be dictated by these 3 champions? Fiora isn't a bruiser.
: Damn dude, I almost upvoted you, aside from that first paragraph you did a pretty good job explaining things. Maybe next time leave out the prejudice and just focus on your idea for ammo and why it works. > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-10-16T22:04:50.247+0000) > > I'm legit tired of seeing people getting mad over marksmen. The role isn't that easy. It's super stressful with a target on your back, being super-dependent on *hoping* that your team realizes they need your ass to win the game, and on top of all of this, your support could just be one of those e-girl types that just want to get carried instead of actually be good.
Hello? I'm a support main? WHAT prejudice?
: If Thresh gains too great of advantages from being melee, then you could just nerf him. Locket being an issue on enchanters is too great. Supports are arguably the most important and strongest role right now. Their items are so broken that tanks are beginning to use them. > You forget that adcs have the damage they have because tanks are as tanky as they are. I thought nerfing tanks as equally, as they are part of fucking bruisers, was implied.
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=0001000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-18T21:40:18.637+0000) > If Thresh gains too great of advantages from being melee, then you could just nerf him. Locket being an issue on enchanters is too great. No, I'm saying he has too much range to even be considered melee. > Supports are arguably the most important and strongest role right now. Their items are so broken that tanks are beginning to use them. It's not all the items. It's just Censer and Coin. > I thought nerfing tanks as equally, as they are part of fucking bruisers, was implied. Tanks aren't bruisers. And if you make them less tanky, the whole meta will be swept up in bruisers.
: > Why is the least risky item to use the undisputed champ at the primary reason we buy gold items? Because it offers the least in terms of combat stats or immediate benefits.
*The primary reason to buy a gold item is to GAIN GOLD. Who cares about the excess stuff if you build your real core significantly faster?*
: > [{quoted}](name=Jo0o,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EEr4VJAZ,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-10-18T16:26:39.994+0000) > > Makes perfect sense to me. After all, part of champion design involves flavor consistency. Anybody familiar with how mounted knights functioned in reality will understand how much more damage a mounted fighter is capable of than a foot soldier. > > In terms of balance, it's not like Kled is weak right now. A knight wasn't exactly the fantasy that riot was going for with Kled though. A Knight would be considered Heavy Cavalry. They are heavily Armored, but maintain their mobility simply by being mounted. And using weapons that facilitate the speed and power of their mount. (A Lance) Herc would probably be a better fit for this fantasy, as his power increases with MS. (Though he's not technically a mounted champion) Kled was more designed as light cavalry. Which don't necessarily make full use of a mounts charge. Rather they are skirmishers who rely on their speed to make surgical attacks. (not necessarily turning that speed into power.) Realistically, the reduced damage on Kled's dismounted attacks, is likely their as a balancing leaver. Riot was probably worried that a Kled with his Full AD, would be too good at farming minions. (OR regaining his mount in ways, other than attacking enemy champions.)
Think of it like this: - I grab a 2 by 4 and hit you with it - I grab a 2 by 4, get on top of a horse, have the horse run at full speed, then hit you with the 2 by 4 as I'm speeding past you on top of a horse. Which one's gonna hurt more? The one that's moving faster into your body.
Weedbro (NA)
: Why does Kled have 80% damage auto attack when dismounted?
Because if he manages to remount he gets all of Skaarl's health back and basically auto-wins the 1v1.
: I could reply point by point, but it basically boils down to 2 main arguments: 1. Sona's Kit is indeed quite easy to master (even if the proper use of the various Power Chord bonuses requires some nuances), but the game as a whole is so complicated that **it's still interesting to play an easy kit**, especially a *reactive* kit. Sure, everyone has to time and position, but it's not because everyone has to do it that it's not interesting to do it as Sona. And when it's bad that a champ like old Xin Zhao had a braindead kit because he just clicked all his buttons at the same time and bashed on you, the fact that Enchantress are mostly reactive means they can't just push all their buttons and fire-and-forget. 2. Sona is **simply NOT weak**, no matter how much people complain about it on the boards. You find her weak? That's not true, but by all means, just don't play her and be done with it. But don't come here and complain about how weak she is when she has a perfectly healthy 8% pick-rate, very low ban-rate indicating that she's not frustrating to play against, and a 50+% win-rate. If you can't appreciate the power her auras and AoE give, go play Soraka with her single target heal, but you can't seriously claim that she "ALWAYS feel underwhelming to almost the entire community" when she has an 8% pick-rate.
1) Sona doesn't have to be super complex. The issue is that she's so simple she's doesn't even require basic LoL fundamentals outside of positioning and timing. That's ridiculous and I'm not apologizing for it. Also, how are you gonna compare Sona to old Xin being a button masher when Sona's a button masher RIGHT NOW? 2) If you think this post is about how weak Sona is, I suggest you actually read the post.
Pika310 (NA)
: It doesn't take coordination to right-click on Sona. She walks up, you punish her. Simple as that. Sona can't defend herself: she doesn't do damage and she completely lacks CC pre-6 and has practically zero mobility, all on top of being arguably the squishiest character in League. Sona has to realistically be in 550 range to do ANYTHING, even just press Q since it only prioritizes champions within her own AA range. Literally every support and ADC in the game can punish her at 550 range, you don't even need follow-up since Sona has practically zero presence in-lane. So yes, intelligence is matter-of-factly the whole issue. This is how Sona's full lane goes: 'walks into 550 range to do 40 damage; 'roll d20 on enemy laner intelligence check; 2 or higher, Sona loses half her HP. Unfortunately, so many solo-queue knuckle-draggers have bought into the herd mentality regarding Sona; the mass majority just slap down a 1 on that d20 without even for half a second, having an original thought in their head. Rolling constant 1's on a **LOADED **d20 doesn't make Sona "super strong;" it's just abusing scrubs too dumb to realize you're using a weighted die.
If it were THAT simple, we wouldn't have a challenger Sona player in the top 10 or so, now would we? Disorganization is what allows Sona's kit to slide. If it's *just* intelligence alone, I wouldn't be D3 playing her, given that elo range is like less than the top 1% of the NA ladder. I'm not saying her kit is well designed, but I am saying that the fact that her kit "floats" is something to pay respect to when posting.
: Locket doesn't scale with HP anymore and is melee only; Rakan and Thresh are considered melee now. Solves so many issues. > You also don't realize how dumb it is to suggest a complete nerf to most of the itemization for one role. Just undoing what Riot did purposefully: making supports too strong. Less ADC damage gives bruisers and assassins a better time stop to where they aren't completely outscaled.
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-18T02:53:48.404+0000) > Locket doesn't scale with HP anymore and is melee only; Rakan and Thresh are considered melee now. > Solves so many issues. Thresh has too much range to EVER be considered melee. Also you can't just make everything "melee only" all over the joint. > Just undoing what Riot did purposefully: making supports too strong. If anything, the role was hardly noticeable before now. You SHOULD actually be wary of the enemy support as a player in the game. Supports shouldn't be afterthoughts like they were up until now. > Less ADC damage gives bruisers and assassins a better time stop to where they aren't completely outscaled. And then tanks run EVERYONE over and what do you do then? You forget that adcs have the damage they have because tanks are as tanky as they are.
: was Hecarim put in the dumpster or something?
Fighters *in general* are doing poorly atm.
Paroe (NA)
: Can we rework the coin line?
Kinda lends itself to auto pushing the wave...and you'd get 60 gold a wave. However, if you tone it down and give it a proper cd...this isn't that bad sounding...
Pika310 (NA)
: Here's the thing, you're just saying exactly the same things I'm saying, but wording it differently. While I have the balls to put it all out there bluntly; you're choosing to sugar-coat your words and intentionally pander to the herd mentality. "Sona doesn't work against intelligent opponents, thus she's unplayable professionally." "Sona is OP in solo queue, cause the mass majority are boosted knuckle-draggers that don't realize Sona is ACTUALLY unplayable." That doesn't make Sona OP; a champ can't be OP if it's 100% dependent on your opponent being uneducated.
Yeah, OBVIOUSLY we're "around" the same page. The issue is your framing. Sona's not "unplayable, low tier garbage" as far as almost any normal player goes, even in Diamond elos, because there's very crucial elements missing...primarily communication for coordination. Yeah, she's not ACTUALLY much of anything, but because of logistics, she's "super strong". If you'd actually pay respect to logistics perhaps you'd cause less friction with your posts. Also, it isn't *intelligence* that's the issue (well, not all of the issue). It's *coordination.* Kinda different.
: Last time ADCs sucked because their items were too expensive and tanks were broken. Now we buffed them up equal to tanks. I personally think, instead of keeping ADCs late game's insane but feel terrible to reach, we just nerf the late game. (and nerf tanks obviously) Sure I can! Nerf Ardent, Redemption, Locket, and KV. Especially Locket and Redemption. Enchanters shouldn't be allowed to get both, and both are too strong. Tanks shouldn't be able to abuse Locket either. Tanky supports would technically have the weaker active because tanks get to ALSO be tanks on top of their CC peel. I think your idea just creates more problems and feels terrible to play.
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-17T22:38:29.620+0000) > > Last time ADCs sucked because their items were too expensive and tanks were broken. Now we buffed them up equal to tanks. I personally think, instead of keeping ADCs late game's insane but feel terrible to reach, we just nerf the late game. (and nerf tanks obviously) It's *possible* to do this, but this doesn't solve the issue of assassins and divers struggling to be useful after a time stamp. Sure, your late game damage isn't as big by a bit, but you're still gonna be leeching off of them under a ton of peel. I don't think there's a "just right" spot for that type of late-game power output. It definitely doesn't solve the issue of the class revolving around 3-4 champs at a time. > Sure I can! Nerf Ardent, Redemption, Locket, and KV. Especially Locket and Redemption. Enchanters shouldn't be allowed to get both, and both are too strong. Tanks shouldn't be able to abuse Locket either. Tanky supports would technically have the weaker active because tanks get to ALSO be tanks on top of their CC peel. Locket/Redemption as a combo hasn't been a major issue for months now, now that Riot has nerfed their synergy together. You also don't realize how dumb it is to suggest a complete nerf to most of the itemization for one role. You also have no idea how to keep tanks from using tank support items to begin with, given that tank supports itemize basically the same way as actual tanks. > I think your idea just creates more problems and feels terrible to play. It'd be rough to get used to, but the overall result would make something that's easier to balance around.
: Sad, but true. Doesn't mean I'm not going to try again in a month or so.
Just read the thread. Man, they gave you a good run through the stupidity...
Escheton (EUW)
: {{item:3092}}. It even scouts out and slows people for you to kill. I mean, for real. Just build it.
: What you meant to say was thank you America, for saving us from Nazis, and keeping us from being swallowed up into the USSR. What can I say except your welcome.
Just because one is true doesn't mean the other isn't true.
: Sit down and get comfortable; let me tell you a tale of seasons past: Damage scaling used to not be everywhere on melees so no one ever really could nuke from stealth ever unless they got Deathfire Grasp (the old item) and then that was what their gameplan entirely revolved around. Then, Evelynn was found to be "unfun" and was nerfed practically to the point of unplayability and left that way for years. Seasons afterwards, Rengar was released, and his scaling was even more obnoxious but at least his stealth was tied to his ult which was very similar to DFG, and also was physical damage which there were still good armor items for protecting oneself from. Riot eventually decided that that was "unfun" as well so they both nerfed his ult to announce himself to everyone when he uses it and then removed DFG from the game altogether. Veigar was sad. Weird Garen players were also sad. LB pretended to be sad. Then, a season ago, Riot started reworking many older champions and seriously changing the game's item pool; Veigar was changed to no longer be able to instagib at all as they made his stun no longer instant. They gave eve a giant shield upon ulting. Rengar was eventually given some goofy changes and nobody was happy. There was a huge Rengar discussion among mains hoping that any of their ideas or guidance would help Riot at all; unfortunately, it didn't. They changed his main damage-dealing ability to a melee-range goofy-looking skillshot. They reworked every other assassin to some degree as well with mixed results. Fizz was relatively untouched aside from his ult; LB's damage disappeared just like she did from the meta, and Zed no longer deals quite as much damage as he once did making him. Talon was generally received well. Now they've come to Evelynn and the made her into an assassin again...sort of. There's a lot of song and dance to playing her now - much moreso than there has ever been - but she does more potential damage, eventually, than she ever did before as well. You're all caught up! The new eve makes me wonder why I shouldn't just pick Twitch lol. Or I could play Rengar as something that definitely isn't an assassin, or maybe just a very opportunistic one; full damage Rengar is still mechanically broken. Alternatively still I could play Fizz or Akali and just 100-0 people whether they like it or not. However I think assassins in should be about finishing people off, moreso than dueling people into submission in lane and diving carries, so I'm not a huge fan of the AP assassin outliers who can still reliably blow people up...but then again that's a niche in and of itself to explore. My favorite assassin of all time is Shaco because he's mobile and exploitive without being backbreaking to fight directly, if you can catch him. Also his burst is all in his goofy traps and getting backstabs rather than frontloaded into a point-and-click move like Fizz or Akali or basically Katarina, Zed and Rengar.
LB is relatively fine. The fuck you on?
kalima994 (EUNE)
: did you see the damage on the w? you lose a lot of damage if you don't proc it
He's saying that, in some cases, you don't need the *charm* on the W more than you just need the damage and slow. If you settle for the slow, you give them less time to react before you wail on them, except you lose the hard cc.
GoatPope (NA)
: eve the snowbally stealthed assassin..
Counter-play to Cho's R is to not get cc'd by his knock-up and walk away from him...
: There should be a support-oriented AP Mage item for champions who don't heal or shield their allies.
I made this type of post ages ago. You're wasting your time if you think anyone cares.
LankPants (OCE)
: >which would obviously screw up the pro scene and send it back to low-interaction tower trading strats. That's inherent to the pro scene. Go watch some games in KR, this is all they do already, it's just the most efficient way to play League. >You'd effectively make assassins and divers worse since they just throw out their rotation and sit there with nothing else to do. Last I checked most divers are AA based or at least rely on a spammy low CD spell like Hec's Q. Based on [this page](http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Diver_champion) the only champs I'd see who'd be liable to spend a long time sitting around are Rengar, who's barely if even a diver and Pantheon. The rest of them already have very solid DPS. As for assassins, yes, this is a defining trait of the class. If they can't kill someone they're shit till their CDs come up. It doesn't matter if they kill you in half a second or 2 seconds, this is a fact of the class. The only assassins who get around this do so by not actually being assassins like Akali, who plays more like Fiora than Zed. >Just now realizing, you'd also make catcher supports worse since it's easier for enchanters to just shield off damage now that there's less damage to shield. Riot's already talked about adding a 'shield breaker' item, but what you're talking about is basically boiling down to "It'll break some champs and hurt other". The answer to this is yes, it probably will, that's what persistent balance changes are for.
> [{quoted}](name=LankPants,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=bPE1A1gi,comment-id=000500000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-17T08:26:17.742+0000) > > That's inherent to the pro scene. Go watch some games in KR, this is all they do already, it's just the most efficient way to play League. There was a time where this was more heavily emphasized. It's the reason towers are made the way they are today. > Last I checked most divers are AA based or at least rely on a spammy low CD spell like Hec's Q. Based on [this page](http://leagueoflegends.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Diver_champion) the only champs I'd see who'd be liable to spend a long time sitting around are Rengar, who's barely if even a diver and Pantheon. The rest of them already have very solid DPS. No, many divers are primarily based on rotations of skills. *Some* use AAs, but most are primarily focused on skill rotations, otherwise you'd see attack speed Lee Sins and Wu Kongs. And you're legit daft if you think divers have "solid dps". They do...for the first few phases of the game. Tanks outscale the builds of divers in the long run. Giving tanks less damage to worry about does *what* for divers when divers are meant to build **freaking damage?** > As for assassins, yes, this is a defining trait of the class. If they can't kill someone they're shit till their CDs come up. It doesn't matter if they kill you in half a second or 2 seconds, this is a fact of the class. The only assassins who get around this do so by not actually being assassins like Akali, who plays more like Fiora than Zed. ...so if you globally nerf every champ so everyone does less damage, how is this NOT a glorified assassin nerf? If they can't kill someone in their first rotation, they're usually just done fighting, period. You literally aren't even thinking. > Riot's already talked about adding a 'shield breaker' item, but what you're talking about is basically boiling down to "It'll break some champs and hurt other". The answer to this is yes, it probably will, that's what persistent balance changes are for. Catcher supports don't build damage items for shit. Also, if you *nerf damage across the board, you do less damage to shields across the board, thus buffing shields.* Your idea is bad and I'm not going further with this. This is simpleton talk.
: DO NOT BUILD EVELYNN AP (Read before downvoting)
Makes a massive post about Eve being built tank. Tested in only 4 ranked games at Gold 5...where he went even. Guys...keep building her ap until further notice.
LankPants (OCE)
: I thought it was implied that in this world all champions would lose damage, not just high damage ones. To extend the example if it takes a tank 2 seconds to kill a carry now, it would be 4 after.
Then supports and defensive strategies are generally stronger since you have longer to peel enemies off of you, which is STILL a net buff to tanks since they have longer to be healed. You'd effectively make assassins and divers worse since they just throw out their rotation and sit there with nothing else to do. You also make stall tactics in pro games significantly more effective, which would obviously screw up the pro scene and send it back to low-interaction tower trading strats. Just now realizing, you'd also make catcher supports worse since it's easier for enchanters to just shield off damage now that there's less damage to shield. Despite what simpletons clamor for, a net increase or decrease to damage dealt is an extremely dumb solution to in-game woes. Normally you need a set target at what needs fixing and how, not just number changes at random.
GigglesO (NA)
: We could make an item that makes tanks tankier against sustained auto attack damage, to help keep adc's in check...
We have so much of that already... Randuin's/Thornmail/Ninja Tabi all are designed with AD carries in mind. Even Frozen Heart if you actually buy that item still (for whatever reason).
LankPants (OCE)
: To me the solution to this seems to be to translate all damage into being slower and have durability be generally higher. For example if a burst champ were to go from killing you in 1 second to killing you in 2 a sustained damage champ also needs to pay the same cost, going from killing you in 2.5 seconds to killing you in 5.
Then tanks just run you down and you have no answer for that since you just nerfed it...
: > How am I gonna type all this out and your response is "W is targeted"? I chucked a bit there. As I think I said, rather than ammo, just nerf ADC items and support peel.
Then we go in a vicious cycle like we've been doing. - You can't really call for a *role-wide* nerf on the primary function of the role. How are you just gonna nerf "support peel"? - If you nerf adc items, either we go back to lethality adcs AGAIN or we go back to "ADCIN20XX" AGAIN and then we class-wide buff them AGAIN. It isn't about temporary relief. It's about a long-term solution that truly finds a middle-ground to the problem.
Rebonack (NA)
: I've pondered what Kog would look like on an ammo system before. Turn his W into a toggle (Koggle-toggle?) that runs off ammo. When it is off, Kog is a melee champion that takes bites out of things. Each melee basic attack gives some ammo. Lasting hitting a minion gives more ammo. Biting an enemy champion gives even more ammo. A takedown on an enemy champion gives a TON of ammo. If he kills a unit from range, it leaves Delicious Snacks on the ground that he can walk over to regain ammo.
I imagine he'd need to gain some sort of bonus strength for being tied to in-lane fighting like that, but if it's a late-game marksman that's strong at prolonged sieging, that doesn't sound half-bad as a way to get that across. Issue is that "sieging" is already done for Tristana and now Caitlyn.
: You know Maokai's W is targeted, right? You don't dodge Maokai's Q, he misses it. It's that kind of ability where the burden of skill is on the user to aim properly. Tank rework made tanks have too much CC and that's about it.
How am I gonna type all this out and your response is "W is targeted"? My response before this already covered that. Same for his Q. You literally did not add to the conversation with this reply. Also...*this thread isn't about Maokai regardless of how mad you are about Maokai's W.* It's about marksmen, a little bit about assassins, and providing a more fair window to actually deal with marksmen outside of "make them not play the game". Scaling power is fine, but scaling power to the point of nearly being unstoppable is *not* fine. That makes you generally good, and the point of strategic games is that certain pieces will be weaker or stronger in certain areas than others. As it is now, because marksmen scale into doing high damage and *never* stop outputting damage, they eventually become "the absolute best damage dealers". If people are serious about class diversity in the game, something about that needs to change so they aren't the undisputed best damage class after they land some items, and having *some* form of downtime in their damage output **like every other ranged class in the game** is an actual start to reaching that point.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Ixsw2Zqb,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2017-10-17T02:47:10.572+0000) > > You can't just special case one singular champion "just because". > > If you don't want to fix the issue, don't complain about the issue. I've offered multiple, meaningful fixes to the fucking problem. If you can't be arsed to read the thread, don't bother posting. Like it matters. Riot doesn't give a fuck about anything not SR. That's why Dominion and Crystal Scar was killed. That why 3s and TT will die. Eventually, it will kill ARAM.
Banning her from the mode or special case nerfing her in the mode are both shitty ideas, too. ARAM's a permanent game mode, so it's different from URF where they do actually use specified cases (and even there it's random now so people can't just abuse the "next best choices"). Also, when it comes to jumbling up values based on the game mode, it opens up potential cases where information for one game mode can accidentally be put in another game mode. To avoid jumbling up versions of champions, Riot keeps as few iterations of the roster as possible. You could *change the champ* to something less brain dead, however.
: > [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Ixsw2Zqb,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-10-17T02:06:19.941+0000) > > Personally I'd want her reworked. >_> I don't think it's that necessary. Complete ban from HA, nerfs across the board, or simply a map-specific nerf to her Q would be absolutely fine with me. Clearly, something has to be done though.
You can't just special case one singular champion "just because". If you don't want to fix the issue, don't complain about the issue.
: If the enemy gets a Sona in ARAM
Personally I'd want her reworked. >_>
: His E still zones and he can Q you into it. His R being outran means he performed the job of zoning you away for that long. Mortal Reminder is good, but doesn't justify it being broken. Assassin rework gave a delay; they still mostly assassinate. Tank rework upped CC in placement of small damage, despite tank damage just needing an overall nerf; a big fuck you to bruisers. Marksmen are supposed to be reliable. That's perfectly fine. I'd rather just see damage nerfs than be balanced around counterplay when still broken when said counterplay doesn't matter.
> [{quoted}](name=AirKingNeo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=IGi2LQ3o,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2017-10-17T00:19:50.410+0000) > > His E still zones and he can Q you into it. Maokai has to land W just to get into Q range. If he's Q'ing you into E, you already got caught by W. E by itself, however, has *plenty* of counter-play. Same for his ult, which is best used as follow-up engage or as a flanking option, rather than a strong initial engage or peeling tool (due to its scaling root duration). He also lacks full-on stuns, so people can still cast spells and autos unless he's Q'd them, and that only lasts for a tiny while. The thing about counter-play is that it doesn't mean you get to blatantly invalidate the enemy's move. It means you have viable responses for their action(s). The counter-play to certain elements to Mao's kit is *obvious.* You can't just whine for no reason. > Assassin rework gave a delay; they still mostly assassinate. Tank rework upped CC in placement of small damage, despite tank damage just needing an overall nerf; a big fuck you to bruisers. Tank rework wasn't even about damage (well, it was a little, but not a lot). The tank rework was about reducing how front-loaded the tanks in question were. To this end, they were more successful than not (Zac is the REAL failure rework, here, cause he's still really damn front-loaded). Sej lost her immediate, aoe cc in exchange for single-target efficiency and prolonged usefulness in fights, while Mao lost his ridiculously tanky ult for a potentially powerful team fight tool (you can't play around numbers, remember. You CAN play around a skill shot, even if it's big, so long as it's not insanely fast). Assassins assassinate, but by later stages in the game the gaps in their offensive patterns just allows marksmen to kill them in the middle of their rotations as long as they're with their team. It may have been unfair before, but the point of assassins bursting the way they did in the past was so that this wouldn't happen. Now that assassins, the primary anti-carry class in the game, has delays in their burst rotation, there needs to be a similar approach taken against marksmen to even the playing field again. > > Marksmen are supposed to be reliable. That's perfectly fine. I'd rather just see damage nerfs than be balanced around counterplay when still broken when said counterplay doesn't matter. Nothing about adding breathing room between sprees of bullets makes marksmen LESS reliable. You aren't even using the term *reliable* correctly. Lastly, reducing the damage of marksmen outright as a class either calls for tanks to be less tanky in general as well, and thus why use them...or tanks just become top tier because no one can kill them well.
: Disagree. Counterplay isn't everything nor should be. Also Maokai doesn't have counterplay (outside of flash). Maokai has to miss his Q; you don't dodge it. His W is targeted. His E is a zoning tool. His R, if you run away, means you wasted time running away. His passive really needs a nerf.
You can avoid or just straight up outrun Maokai's E. His R can also be outran. We also have Mortal Reminder that runs his passive into the ground for you. You don't need counter-play in *every aspect* of your kit, but to be devoid of it is just as problematic as having too much. Just cause Ornn's kit was a bad idea doesn't mean current adcs are justified as they are now. If we have no way to play around marksmen, the only means of beating them is to make the game unfun for them by blowing them up before they get to play the game themselves. Is THAT your idea of "a good idea"? With this said, hyper-carry marksmen have so much power to them that the least they can be expected to offer their opponent in return is the promise of SOME opening to get a clear shot and doing something back to them. Otherwise, what WAS the point of the assassin and tank reworks? Why ease up on front-loaded damage if we aren't adjusting adcs and their steadily increasing fixed damage?
Show more

chipndip1

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion