mSticky (NA)
: K/DA 8-Bit? Can we get this featured on the LoL Client?
2.4k views and no comments? Boys we gotta keep the dream alive. U P V O T E
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: I think the nerfs to the durations of the shields were deserving. It adds more skill expression that just "mindlessly spam this button on your carry over and over again and you win". However, the nerf to heal and shield power on support items were kinda uncalled for so I'd like a revert on that. And while we're at it, nerf assassins.
> [{quoted}](name=Warlord Rhinark,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=bgqRHzeI,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2018-07-05T15:52:48.382+0000) > > I think the nerfs to the durations of the shields were deserving. It adds more skill expression that just "mindlessly spam this button on your carry over and over again and you win". > > However, the nerf to heal and shield power on support items were kinda uncalled for so I'd like a revert on that. > > And while we're at it, nerf assassins. Duration nerfs are fine. I'm more worried about the overall power of shields in general. It makes sense for a shorter shield to be stronger (either a little stronger or moderately stronger) than a spammable idiot-proof shield, no? Why they left the base numbers unchanged for every shield champ is beyond me. The heal & shield power nerfs didn't really accomplish much. Most enchanters are still gonna build Ardent/Redemption every game anyways. They're still nerfs and they're not gamebreaking, but they don't change the build paths/playstyles of their main buyers, so I don't think the changes accomplished their intended goals. I guess they make supports who don't build those items every game comparatively stronger? (i.e. {{champion:432}} {{champion:497}}).
: I'm ok with Lulu being out of the most played support meta for a while considering she's dominated for a few years and is the one of the most annoying support to play against. Her win rate dropping by 3% with just putting a change on her kit meaning she has to think when to shield (let's be real... shielding should pop quick anyway with the damages these days so timing it right shouldn't matter if that's what you were doing) tells me lots of people were doing well on her despite being really bad at her.
> [{quoted}](name=Hethalean,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=bgqRHzeI,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-07-05T13:41:16.636+0000) > > I'm ok with Lulu being out of the most played support meta for a while considering she's dominated for a few years and is the one of the most annoying support to play against. Her win rate dropping by 3% with just putting a change on her kit meaning she has to think when to shield (let's be real... shielding should pop quick anyway with the damages these days so timing it right shouldn't matter if that's what you were doing) tells me lots of people were doing well on her despite being really bad at her. I normally don't take troll bait, but I'll do it anyway. "Dominating?" Lulu? Lol. She was barely at 50% WR prenerf. Last time she was really meta was during 2017 worlds, and that was because {{item:3504}} was broken. The idea that the shield nerf only punished players who don't "think" when shielding is pretty narrowminded. A 3.5s duration reduction means you can ONLY use her shield reactively, which limits your playmaking options when assisting engages and chases. Not gonna rewrite the rest of the argument - you can read it [here.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/Es7jEE4F-a-thoughtful-post-812-nerfs-shields-without-compensation-why-wait-until-813-to-fix-enchanters) And my dude, what is this argument about how "shields should be popping quick" and how "timing it right shouldn't matter?" If the counterplay to shielding is supposed to be "wait out the shield then go in," then, shields need to be something WORTH respecting in the first place. I'm not going to ELO-shame you, but I don't think you should be making such judgments without a stronger grasp on Lulu and support in general. http://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=hethalean
Rioter Comments
: Everything you said is pretty much as I expected, Karma's shield will feel the same at earlier levels because of the MS boost. Karma's has always been more of a reactive shield compared to a support like Lulu. Not surprised by it falling off later in the game for the reasons you stated and it's lower scaling. For Janna these changes just make her a bit fairer to deal with, but I don't imagine this hurting skilled Janna players much. Lulu would take this nerf hardest as she's coming from a 6 second shield down to 2.5. I could be wrong but it seemed to me that her 6s shield duration was to support the on hit buff, which to me seems like a spell to prep for an extended trade. The lower duration makes what appeared to be a proactive ability into a reactive one, which feels off. Conclusion: They all need reworks to varying degrees. Imo Janna could actually do with a VGU since there's so much that could be done (ability wise) with that wind theme.
> [{quoted}](name=IcebornKing,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=88AiTguR,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2018-06-14T12:16:40.350+0000) > > Everything you said is pretty much as I expected, Karma's shield will feel the same at earlier levels because of the MS boost. Karma's has always been more of a reactive shield compared to a support like Lulu. Not surprised by it falling off later in the game for the reasons you stated and it's lower scaling. > > For Janna these changes just make her a bit fairer to deal with, but I don't imagine this hurting skilled Janna players much. > > Lulu would take this nerf hardest as she's coming from a 6 second shield down to 2.5. I could be wrong but it seemed to me that her 6s shield duration was to support the on hit buff, which to me seems like a spell to prep for an extended trade. The lower duration makes what appeared to be a proactive ability into a reactive one, which feels off. > > Conclusion: They all need reworks to varying degrees. Imo Janna could actually do with a VGU since there's so much that could be done (ability wise) with that wind theme. Idk if they all need full reworks tbh (though there are a lot of people who liked Karma's old Shield Bomb design better). Riot just needs to decide where they want to place defensive enchanters within the meta. The new balance team clearly wants to introduce more weaknesses into the shield support rotation, but they haven't decided where their strengths should be. After all, if a shield support can't shield well, why play them over anything else? If Riot decides that they don't like primary shielders, then {{champion:497}} is a good template for what a "modern" shield support should look like. He has a shield and a heal yes, but it's secondary to his engage/disengage potential. If shield supports are going to have their shields redesignated as secondary mechanics, then they should each gain a new primary mechanic that displays skill and gives them a unique "support fantasy." Just my two cents.
mSticky (NA)
: 8.12 Shield Nerf Feedback & Discussion: Janna, Karma, Lulu
Rioter Comments
: 1) Focusing the supp is a valid strategy, except that the supp can shield himself, and in the meantime the enemy adc will attack you while you guys focus supp. Throwing a tank at the enemy backline is kinda difficult, and the only fighers that can consistently go to the backline, are divers. > force the support to use their cooldowns then blow up whatever target isn't protected In theory this is awesome. But in practice it doesnt quite work because killing the adc almost always is the best option. 2) Not really. Bard is a lot more difficult compared to janna,lulu, karma. 3) Karma will almost surely need buffs, but janna and lulu i highly doubt. Both lulu and janna have enough strengths to not really mind the lower shield duration. And the thing is that they wont pushed out. Both of them the thing that makes them unique. Janna god like peel, and lulu the ability to make someone a harmless cricket.
> 1) Focusing the supp is a valid strategy, except that the supp can shield himself, and in the meantime the enemy adc will attack you while you guys focus supp. Throwing a tank at the enemy backline is kinda difficult, and the only fighers that can consistently go to the backline, are divers. Any frontliner player who deserves to gain elo can make it to the backline {{champion:39}} {{champion:113}} {{champion:58}} {{champion:254}} {{champion:154}} {{champion:12}} {{champion:516}} {{champion:5}} {{champion:24}} {{champion:59}} . I'll put it this way, if they **can't** make it back there and provide the disruption and little extra damage you (as a mage) need to secure your kills, they're not playing their champs correctly. > In theory this is awesome. But in practice it doesnt quite work because killing the adc almost always is the best option. It is... If you CAN kill the adc. Trying to "steal" an adc while the support is standing right there is a gamble. If you're super fed and/or the enemy support sucks, blast that carry and make that cuck support watch you do it. However, if you're not fed and/or the support knows how to mitigate your rotation, blowing up the enemy support before they can get multiple rotations off isn't a bad investment. You WANT the carry, obviously, but sometimes you have to take what you can get and trust that your team can win the 5v4 until your abilities come back. Think about it this way - if killing the support means that the enemy ADC has less peel/shields, they have to spend more time running from your frontline and less time shooting, which lowers their damage. Assuming your own support is halfway decent, your adc should be dealing more damage than your opponent's ADC and your team should win that fight. > 2) Not really. Bard is a lot more difficult compared to janna,lulu, karma. Bard is also bigger than Janna/Lulu/Karma, and his lore is different, too. None of that matters. The comparison I was making was about how Bard has CC and weak sustain, not his relative champ difficulty. > 3) Karma will almost surely need buffs, but janna and lulu i highly doubt. Both lulu and janna have enough strengths to not really mind the lower shield duration. And the thing is that they wont pushed out. Both of them the thing that makes them unique. Janna god like peel, and lulu the ability to make someone a harmless cricket. Lulu is losing 60% of her shield duration. When have you ever seen a duration nerf that severe? For comparison, Rammus's taunt was nerfed from 3s to 2.25 s and Rammus mains lost their minds. The difference between Skarner being GODLIKE and just "okay" was literally .25seconds on his E (from 1.5s stun to 1.25). 3.5 seconds is a massive reduction for a mechanic that gets value when its target takes damage in a specific window.
: A lot of your assumptions here are flawed. > Gutting a champ's primary mechanic without redistributing power elsewhere is usually a bad idea. For which champ is this true? Shield is Ori's primary mechanic? Lulu doesn't max Q in lane? Janna's is, but she has the lightest nerf and has also been a top tier support for 3 seasons in a row! She *needs* a nerf! >you want faster, more snowball-y Meddler directly addressed this in a post *yesterday* and said fixing snowball was a top priority. So this is just wrong. >I personally believe this is the justified "enchanter fantasy" for a late-game defensive support with weak offensive potential Again, none of these champs classify as having "weak offensive potential." Even Janna does pretty good damage with Aery and W now. Having 100% shield uptime is the definition of no skill expression; I respect your opinion, but I think it's actually really bad for balance. This just means that assassins and carries have to have even more damage, and it starts an arms race with shields and damage trying to balance the two. That's exactly what we've seen, so hitting the uptime is a great solution. >Secondly, almost all shield supports have a secondary effect on their shield that will be negatively affected by the duration nerf, compounding the nerf beyond just numbers Also wrong, I think, but I'm willing to be corrected. Every post I've read says the secondary effects for Lulu, Karma, and Ori are unaffected. Only Janna's will be, and again, that's why she's getting the lightest nerf. If the basis for your logic were all true, I might agree, but as I've pointed out, a lot of your key assertions simply aren't true.
I'm not sure whether you're intentionally misconstruing my points for the sake of your argument or whether you actually misunderstand my topic. I'll try to clarify regardless. 1) Huh? Gutting (not just nerfing) a champ's primary mechanic without compensation is usually a bad idea for **every champ in the game, ** not just supports (see my examples, {{champion:107}} {{champion:222}}). Could you explain what you find disagreeable about that statement? Aside from obvious balance concerns, gutting a champ's primary mechanic without compensation risks obliterating that champ's identity. What's {{champion:67}} without her tumble and silver bolts? {{champion:31}} without his Feast and size growth? {{champion:17}} without his Shrooms and poison? {{champion:412}} without his... Everything (lol). Shielding is the primary mechanic for support {{champion:40}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:43}}, and their kits and playstyles are built around situationally buffing allies/debuffing enemies as their shielded carry outgrinds their opposition. I've recommended that all shields have more power early on and less later in some form, a point that you've mentioned that you agree with in your replies with ChaddyFantome. This is most definitely a type of compensation, and I'm glad we're on the same page. Lastly, you're right, shielding isn't {{champion:61}} 's primary mechanic, but frankly she shouldn't be on this chopping block to begin with. Balling an ally has the opportunity cost of not positioning it aggressively for zoning potential. Her shield isn't as "free" as the others mentioned. 1a) Janna's nerf is a SIGNIFICANT reduction in her shield and bonus AD duration from her live values. It is by no means "light," only less harsh than Lulu's 60% uncompensated shield duration reduction. 2) This statement was part of my biased rant that was intentionally sectioned off to separate it from the ACTUAL post. It's my gut emotional response to the state of the game that's clearly exaggerated. That's why it's called "THE SALT." 3) The rest of that quoted segment is literally "but that's beside the point." Why did you leave that out? Are you trying to derail the thread from the following analysis? I listed my opinion to fully disclose my predilections, but you made it sound as though I am advocating that shield supports remain as they are with 100% shield time at full strength. Why? I listed in the "Potential Alternatives" section that this is clearly not my recommendation for Riot or the game. Why did you leave those points unaddressed? 3a) An "arms race" between supports and assassins? What?... The S8 (and in years prior) have generally adjusted lethality and assassin base stats. If anything, the "arms race" is between assassins and the carry's base armor/ninja tabi, with both sides taking nerfs from their S7 values. 4) I have an entire segment about why {{champion:43}} {{champion:117}} have their secondary effects weakened by duration nerfs (inconsistent engage shield and Pix/Ardent upkeep, respectively). My argument is that it is more difficult for allies to use a shield's secondary effects when the shield itself is shorter, which makes this nerf bigger than what it appears to be. I think this might just be a misunderstanding between us. > Ultimately, you decided to reject my argument because you found my "key assertions" to be untrue. As I've pointed out, two (points 2 and 3) of the "assertions" you found were throwaway or disclaimer statements, one of them (point 4) is a misrepresentation of my argument, and one of them (point 1) is a disagreement where I sincerely struggle to understand where you are coming from. **Regardless, nothing you've said comments on my Potential Alternatives or my concluding argument, which is where the whole point of this topic (and my argumentation) lies. **After reading this, I hope that you will reconsider your position and give my topic a fair reevaluation. P.S. Kemp, you're a respected commenter and I'm glad you took the time to reply here, but I have to ask: **do you actually play {{champion:43}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:40}} {{champion:61}} ? **A lot of your comments about their respective kits (ex. "none of these champs classify as having 'weak offensive potential,'" Lulu maxing Q, unusual response to secondary effects, etc.) are just... Odd, to the point where it seems as though you are talking about a completely different set of champions than I am. When I check what is presumably your account, (http://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=kempyreanpirate), ** I find that you've played no more than two games of Lulu and Janna each for two seasons, **and that you haven't played Karma or Orianna at all across that same duration. I respect your opinion, but it's difficult for me to trust your analysis of these champions when they a) don't match conventional opinions and b) aren't supported by your play record.
: > How DARE those underleveled bot lane leeches have tools to disable the almighty on their welfare incomes?! You do know that overshielding affects just as much pretty much everyone. Although it does hurt more assassins since they rely on burst. > can feel suffocating for assassins and playmakers. Actually it can suffocate pretty much everyone. Trying to poke as mage only to see the target being shielding for 300 hp. Finally getting the adc low enough to be killed, only to be met by yet again another big ass shield. All that with a press of a button. > I personally believe this is the justified "enchanter fantasy" for a late-game defensive support with weak offensive potential It would be acceptable IF they didnt have other tools. Janna might have a strong shield (with late game being on a very low cd) but she has also one the strongest disengage kits in the game, thanks to the last changes she has decent damage (for a supp) while also having a decent aoe heal. Lulu has also a strong shield (-10% ratio compared to janna's), but she also has a strong skillshot aoe slow, atk speed and movement speed buff, being able to amplify ones damage thanks to her passive (albeit by a meager amount), being able to make a single target useless (polymorph) and an ulti that will grant them bonus hp, slow enemies close to the ultied champ and knock up enemies during the enlargement. They arent shield bots, as such if their shields were ever to become unbearable they should be nerfed. > For starters, there are no compensation buffs planned for shield supports alongside the duration nerfs, even the most basic one: increased shield value. With their current strengths they might not need compensation buffs (maybe minus karma). > s shield moves Pix around, enabling Pix to deal damage when its target autoattacks. I think i've read that pix will remain around for the full duration even if the shield expires Oh also i think lux didnt get her shield nerfed because its not point and click.
To avoid copying and pasting excessively, I've boiled down some of your main points. 1) Opponents are **supposed** to feel pressured by shields - that's the penalty for ignoring a "fed" support. Traditionally, the answer to such supports is to throw a bruiser/tank at the enemy backline and force the support to use their cooldowns, then blow up whatever target isn't protected. A support who shields their carry can't shield themselves and vice versa. However, Riot has been trying to make tankless compositions more viable since the Tank nerfs earlier this year, and I suspect these changes are another part of that. 2) You... Wrote a whole paragraph on my throwaway offhand comment? Okay... Anyways, of course shield supports have other tools, but they're still shield bots. All champs have four abilities and a passive, lol. Even so, a shield supports most important ability is, without a doubt, their shield, hence why the term "shield bot" exists at all. The "other tools" you describe in Lulu and Janna's kits exist to compliment their primary shielding mechanics, not eclipse them. The danger of a refreshing shield on a priority carry is the consistent threat that enchanters bring to teamfights, and gutting their shields essentially turns them into crappier {{champion:432}} s without meep scaling (high cc, big impact ults, practically nonexistant sustain). 3) Compensation buffs are definitely needed. Karma is losing 38% of her shield duration, and Lulu is losing 60%. On live with current shielding durations, Karma is sitting at a 47% winrate and Lulu is sitting at 50%. None of these champs are receiving increased ratios or aspects in their other abilities, so it's safe to say these numbers are going to fall if the patch goes live. Without compensation buffs, these changes will just push out Janna, Karma, and Lulu from bot lane while support players play other things that fill similar roles {{champion:267}} {{champion:37}} {{champion:16}}. If Riot wants Lulu, Janna, and Karma to stay relevant despite the nerfs, they will need to give players a reason to play those champs over other options. That means buffs, either to their shields or to other parts of their kit.
Rioter Comments
mSticky (NA)
: Laning Advice: How Aggro should I be in this situation? (Gold Support)
Also, this should probably be moved to General Discussion, if a mod could help me out...
ƒrostγ (EUNE)
: Sadly as a support there is not much you can do in a situation like this.
> [{quoted}](name=ƒrøstγ,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=nHgwvRO2,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-02-08T22:57:27.204+0000) > > Sadly as a support there is not much you can do in a situation like this. Yeah... I know that I’m picking between two bad choices here. I’m just trying to figure out which is _less_ bad.
Rioter Comments
InfiniX (NA)
: You're not "smashing jungle and bot every game" when you're dying so much in that trash elo. You should not have 6 deaths a game on Lee, there's no reason to. You're leaking kills and letting them come back into the game. It's always better to go for minimal risk macro plays rather than to go ARAM and then feed a couple kills because you wanted to go for that game winning kick into your team. No dying for kills early either, you don't scale well while they probably do, so you're actually just putting your win condition further behind because now you and the lane you ganked for has to deal with the lane you just fed with an extra item or so. Your job is to deny the enemy laner/jungler farm and get objectives, not trade kills and go for the LCS big plays.
> [{quoted}](name=InfiniX,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ooXHYbE6,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-01-23T18:49:28.691+0000) > > You're not "smashing jungle and bot every game" when you're dying so much in that trash elo. You should not have 6 deaths a game on Lee, there's no reason to. You're leaking kills and letting them come back into the game. It's always better to go for minimal risk macro plays rather than to go ARAM and then feed a couple kills because you wanted to go for that game winning kick into your team. No dying for kills early either, you don't scale well while they probably do, so you're actually just putting your win condition further behind because now you and the lane you ganked for has to deal with the lane you just fed with an extra item or so. Your job is to deny the enemy laner/jungler farm and get objectives, not trade kills and go for the LCS big plays. Outside of a few games where I got dicked early and didn't (or poorly) recovered, it's worth mentioning that most of those deaths came after the laning phase (20+ min mark). I'm usually not dying until the tempo is turned pretty heavily against us, but then I die over and over again (3-5 times in a row). A lot are from desperation baron/elder drag steal attempts (at which I suck, getting probably less than 1/3), trying to save teammates from overfed opponents, trade killing with opponents with much more gold/better scaling than Lee, etc. Recently, a lot of those deaths have been from trying to fight 4v5s under turret when someone afks/ragequits. FeelsBadMan. I should clarify - I'm smashing the LANING phase, taking most every early objective, and getting my laners fed, but basic macro rules don't seem to apply here. 4/1 splits fail when your fed Zed somehow loses 1v1 to the midlaner you shit on for 15 minutes or the AP Singed you camped decides to 1v5 without ult. The play falls apart if one person messes up and everyone has to back off, and after that happens 2-3 times Lee's weak scaling starts to catch up with him. People do stupid stuff in every ELO, obv, but it's more suffocating here than I've ever seen. I'm thinking I need to pick up a late game 1v5 champs like Shyvana so I don't need worry about this bullshit. Solution: Drop Lee, learn Kayn, scale up and hard carry, profit. Regardless, you make some good suggestions. I'll keep in mind how important maintaining my lead is if/when my team starts imploding.
LuckyGnom (EUW)
: I am sorry, but someone needs to tell you this. 1) First of all your statements are irrelevant due to you being silver player second season in a row. You have no idea how this game works and especially on a support role. http://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=MattUSticky 2) You don't even know right runes for the champions in todays meta. Almost nobody takes Revitalize on shield supports in KR or CN. Almost nobody takes Resolve on tank supports in KR or CN. This changes has no effect on supports, because this runes aren't used for supports. Now strike me down with furious anger, because I touched your ego, but it won't change the fact that I am operating with facts while you operate with random silver elo things.
No problem, my ego's in a good place when it comes to friendly game discussions. Moving on: 1) Eh, I didn't really play until the end of S7, but I won't make excuses - my rank is what it is. That said, if you have an issue with my points, you can engage with them on a point-by-point basis, not with ad hominem attacks. My arguments speak independently from my ELO, and if you took the time to read them, maybe they would speak to you too. I'll put it another way: If a kid with Down Syndrome tells you that 2 + 3 = 5, he's not wrong. The truth is bigger than the person conveying it - that's how objective logic works. 2) Now this is an actual argument. This post reflects the meta from when it was written (several weeks ago), and metas can change. Do you have a source for these KR/CN runes? I'd like to see if that statement about "almost no tanks running Resolve" despite Aftershock existing is more than an exaggeration. The sources I have come from Champion.GG. Support Tanks who run Resolve (ALL OF THEM RUN IT) http://champion.gg/champion/Taric/Support?league= http://champion.gg/champion/Leona/Support?league= http://champion.gg/champion/Alistar/Support?league= Braum, kench, etc. Enchanters who run (still) Resolve http://champion.gg/champion/Soraka/Support?league= http://champion.gg/champion/Nami/Support?league= Notably, Janna and Lulu show Inspiration as the most commonly-taken secondary as of NOW. When I wrote this post several weeks ago, Resolve was their most common secondary tree. If anything, this PROVES my point - Janna and Lulu have stopped taking what would be their optimal support path (Font of Life/Revitalize) for more laning presence through Inspiration's bonus AP and utility (i.e. Stopwatch). We will see if other Enchanters follow suit.
Rioter Comments
: Well in my opinion giving defensive enchanters like Janna options that allow them to be survivable and strong lane pressure at the same time is NOT balanced. I think the idea of Runes Reforged is to create specific styles of play based off your runes. So if you want lane pressure you build for it, if you want survivability, you build for it. In general you should not have both until items start coming through. If you buff Resolve as secondary without trading something somewhere else that creates an in balance. I believe Runes Reforged and the current game revolves around building with specific goals and playstyles in mind, and Riot does not want well round generalist builds that give the best of each word and end up getting built 80-90% of the time. So sometimes folks will go defensive and just try to live through lane. Sometimes they will try to pressure lane. The idea of balance under the current Runes Reforged is to create multiple viable builds. Not one build that can be played various ways. That is not balance under the "current state of the game". No more cake and eat it too.
We're talking ourselves in circles here. > If you buff Resolve as secondary without trading something somewhere else that creates an in balance. Not necessarily. Riot says that Resolve isn't an appealing secondary and wants to fix it. If the goal is to make it a better secondary without impacting primary Resolve users, then buffing it directly as a secondary rune is an obvious choice. The amount of HP provided can be tapered up or down to whatever is appropriate (prob something around 30-40). Raise the amount too high and the Resolve secondary is overpowered, but leave it too low and no one takes it. Let Riot fiddle with the numbers on PBE and we'll have a solid number a patch later. Taking power from a different rune and splitting it Resolve's HP bonus doesn't make the tree suck less as a secondary, it just makes it suck _differently._ That's sad for bruisers. > The idea of balance under the current Runes Reforged is to create multiple viable builds. Giving champs multiple viable builds was a design goal when Riot created the new runes, but it is NOT how Riot currently balances them. I'll expand on this later. Regardless, I agree that keeping multiple builds viable for as many champs as possible is important. As I wrote in my OP, my BIGGEST problem with the Resolve changes is that they LIMIT the number of optimal builds available to every champ who wants to use Resolve, not just supports. If game balance was determined based on the number of viable builds the new Runes Reforged system enables, then the Resolve changes should be revoked immediately because of the scope of the champs negatively affected. Shoehorning enchanters into a Sorc/Resolve tree is a small price to pay for enabling tanks and _every other_ Resolve user the flexible rune choices they deserve. > Riot does not want well round generalist builds that give the best of each word and end up getting built 80-90% of the time. This is incorrect - Riot is perfectly fine with generalist builds that work in most situations. Riot stated that they wanted the new runes to appeal to as many champs as possible. However, to my knowledge, they have made no statement that specific builds becoming "standard" for certain champions is a bad thing, and no decisions to suggest such. {{champion:64}} {{champion:121}} {{champion:107}} and other assassins will usually run an Electrocute Domination Page with Precision's Triumph and Coup de Grace. {{champion:41}} {{champion:81}} will almost exclusively run a Klepto Inspiration page with Sorcery's Scorch and Transcendence (?) because of how well it works on them. {{champion:202}} {{champion:21}} used to run a standard Sorcery/Precision page almost 100% of the time before the {{item:3302}} abuse started, will likely go back to doing so once it is nerfed next patch. Some champs like {{champion:77}} {{champion:59}} can build almost any combination of runes and have it work with their kit, and others don't have as much flexibility. **Riot's okay with that.** A build that compliments a champ well is just _a good build_ and is not inherently broken. Riot's rune balancing decisions (Buffing Fleet Footwork, nerfing Triumph/Coup de Grace, nerfing Sorcery bonuses, etc.) **have been based on how efficiently the runes empower their core users,** not the "number of available builds to X champion(s)." Even now, these current Resolve changes occurred because Riot felt that Resolve's supposed secondary users (read: Bruisers) weren't getting enough out of the rune to warrant a slot. Now that the runes are out, Riot evaluates them based on the champs who bring them into the game. They consider this to be a balanced approach, and their perspective matters. > That is not balance under the "current state of the game". No more cake and eat it too. This "cake and eat it too" mantra is misleading and makes little sense in the current play environment. It assumes that champs {{champion:267}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:37}} who spec into early damage (Sorcery) and defensive utility (Font of Life/Revitalize) have some undeserved advantage over champs {{champion:101}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:143}} who want to spec into early damage (Sorcery) and offensive utility (Triumph/Coup de Grace) assuming equal AP, and therefore deserve an accidental nerf. It assumes that supports with spec'ing into healing potential as their secondary (read: NOT PRIMARY) focus should not have a threatening presence during the laning phase. In a different, hyperpolarized League where tanks have less damage, supports do nothing but heal and peel, and the only champs who can swing the game are carries, it might be accurate... But that world isn't real. The current game requires parity between non-bruiser Resolve users and those who spec into other talents, which means rolling back the 8.1 Resolve changes.
: I got your answers right here: 1. Empower team fighting comps to team fight earlier so that the low damage tanks can get into team fights and do their job earlier. I'm not saying make team fighting comps hit power spikes earlier, I'm saying make it less punishing for them to leave lane so they are free to attempt team fights earlier. 2. Make Resolve so strong that taking it tier 2 can effectively neutralize the pressure of mage supports like Brand. So the answer to Brand is not to out damage him, it's to neutralize his damage and just AFK farm your lane. Sure you won't kill him, but he won't kill you , and as long as you kind of manage your wave, you free to just farm. Balance achieved
I'd like to emphasize that the point of this thread is to determine whether or not the 8.1 Resolve changes should be reverted (or at least adjusted for supports), not suggest ways in which every other aspect of the game can be rebalanced around them. Doing so simply derails the thread, as we are no longer talking about the state of the game as it is, but some hypothetical game with a bunch of theorycrafted patches tacked on to it. I don't know what that imagined League looks like, and I don't really care too much about it because it isn't real and likely never will be. Patch 8.1 did real, quantifiable damage to supports, tanks, and a lot of other builds that dabbled in Resolve. It needs to be fixed, preferably in a way that lets Resolve be a more compelling secondary tree for everyone (such as by putting 30-40 free HP on to it). See the problem, fix the problem: that's how efficient balance works. Without spiraling out into platitudes, I think it's pretty safe to claim that our focus should be on the present time and the present game. Gotta stay grounded, yeah?
: Then Riot should just buff the base healing and shielding, or buff their cooldowns so you can do it more often. If the problem is that a Brand can clap you for 160 damage at lvl 2 for example (this is not accurate I'm just choosing arbitrary numbers to make my point), the enchanter should not heal/shield for 60 and deal 100 damage. They should heal/shield for like 70-80 and deal 70-80. In pure early game trades mages are supposed to do more damage. As an enchanter you just need to not feed that lane with the mage support. Mage supports are gambles. They have no sustain or defense so they are very susceptible to ganks and TP plays as they push in generally. And if you manage to get through early game as an enchanter without dying or otherwise getting FAR behind, your base shields and healing combined with any support items you put together will outweigh the welfare AP items they put together. Yall know that point in the game when Janna is sitting there with SS, Talisman of Ascension, and Ardent Censor and you look across the river and Zyra is sitting on just SS and Liandries.
If Riot buffs base healing and shielding or cooldowns, it makes non-Resolve enchanter builds unusually powerful, especially in solo lanes. Everyone remembers the 5 position {{champion:117}} Top/Mid/Jungle/ADC/Support, right? Riot doesn't need to fix what isn't broken; they need to fix what they just broke this patch. Mages already do more damage than enchanters with equivalent AP (as they should), so why exacerbate the difference by giving enchanters 33% less AP than their mage opponents level 1? If you are able to go even in the laning phase as an enchanter against a mage lane, that means that you are trading appropriately and that you have presence in the lane, both of which are directly related to AP. If you want your carry to come out even in CS in a difficult lane, you have to fight for it, and you fight with AP. Unless you are playing something absolutely awful (like {{champion:40}} into {{champion:63}} ), the goal of the enchanter vs. mage match up is not to sit under your turret bleeding out farm, health, and mana until someone saves you. Freezing the lane in front of your tower require that you have enough pressure to stop your opponents from shoving you in and obliterating your carry (or you) with a full spell rotation, {{summoner:14}} , and a minion wave backing them up. This pressure is... Yep... Tied to AP. Sure, if your support mage opponent somehow manages to not pick up any kills or assists while building full damage through the mid game, you will be ahead as an enchanter (in which case your opponent is either inting, a potato, or an inting potato). However, none of that matters in the laning phase. All that matters is your carry's farm, your tower's health, and the k/d/a ratios for all 4 players in bot lane (also Infernal Drakes, buffs brought by suiciding junglers, and other oddities). To maximize all of those, you need AP.
: You are hitting everything on the head I'm talking about exactly. I'm not saying the things that happened to enchanters were intentional, I'm saying we should not complain about it as a community. Here's why: 1. The Poke n' Push style dominates bot lane meta. We could benefit a from opening the door a little for farm lanes and kill lanes to exist in bot. I believe this change to Resolve is just impactful enough to allow all 3 types of bot lane to exist without completely nerfing poke n push out of the game. 2. The Resolve change might suck for now, but like you said, pretty soon you will be getting your big game impact items 800g earlier after the SS changes come down. You might trade in a bit of lane pressure early, but you get GAMEWIDE impact earlier. This is a healthy and interesting trade because the point where you become a support for the whole team and not just a ADC babysitter comes earlier. 3. I agree the change sucks for Resolve primaries, at least in the support role. Tanks want tank stats, and I don't think Alistar, Leona, Maokai need to be given more damage. Top tanks should be specialized at neutralizing lane like Maokai did before Aftershock came down. Tanks putting out high damage and pressure like Titanic Hydra on Shen just seems silly to me. Just make tanks act as tanks from the beginning, give them more durability and stop trying to give them damage. It's ok for them to be glorified meat shields. Having said that, I think there are bigger issues to tackle for tanks (like Aftershock) so keeping in mind we are going to enter a realm where tank supports can start building items 800g sooner, I think this change might be minimal. P.S. Why can't we all just agree that having your cake and eating it too is a bad thing for LOL? You want good damage and pressure in lane? Well you're gonna have to go an offensive secondary Rune then, and you're gonna trade in some durability for that damage. You want to be durable in lane? Ok, you gotta go Resolve in one of your 2 runes, and then you're gonna trade in some damage and/or lane pressure in return for extra safety in lane. I don't see how that's not healthy...
In an ideal world, Revitalize would just be moved to the Inspiration tree (maybe replacing Minion Dematerializer?) and there would be no complaints from either of us (outside of the 9% attack speed Alistar stuff, which we both agree is stupid). Yeah, shielding melee champs like {{champion:111}} {{champion:72}} {{champion:59}} {{champion:516}} wouldn't be able to pick it up without taking Inspiration as well, but most of those champs are running Overgrowth over Revitalize anyway (if they spec'd into Resolve at all), and could still pick it up from the Inspiration tree if they really wanted it. Moving on... If you agree with my statements, then it is safe to say that we are approaching this game from two very different angles. It seems like you want these changes to be the start of some larger movement to move damage out of noncarries, while I want what is best for supports RIGHT NOW, in the _current_ meta we play in, which means ensuring that enchanters aren't punished in the early game for taking a rune (aka Revitalize) that was _designed_ for them. Furthermore, I do NOT agree with your vision that damage should be removed from noncarries as a whole, nor do I believe that Riot will ever push the game back in that direction for reasons mentioned previously. Because of this, I find that your solutions suggesting that we stop complaining about these changes and hope that Riot moves LoL back into a slower, shield/farm focused "defend the carry" game unacceptable. This isn't because they're bad ideas necessarily (S2 - S4 was the most fun I've had with League), but simply because Riot has written and stated publically that this is NOT the direction they want for the game. Practical change in TODAY'S game - +10 AP on enchanters, +65 HP on Tanks - is what matters, and so I can't entertain a "sit and do nothing" solution. I'll still go through your points in order, but most of our disagreements will likely stem from these core differences. > The Poke n' Push style dominates bot lane meta. We could benefit a from opening the door a little for farm lanes and kill lanes to exist in bot. THIS DOES NOT STOP POKE. Most of the heavy poke in bot lane comes from mages {{champion:101}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:143}} {{champion:63}} and ADCs {{champion:110}} {{champion:81}} {{champion:51}} {{champion:22}} {{champion:21}} . This change hits enchanters, or champs who spec'd into Sorcery and Resolve. These changes hurt full supports; poke as a whole is unaffected. In addition, poke was already addressed with cuts to the Sorcery's flat AP buff, Scorch, and lethality items. I'm no pro player, but seeing as support champion diversity has returned to high elo queues (no more Pick/Ban {{champion:101}} ), I'd say that they were somewhat successful. Kill lanes will exist as long as there squishies in bot lane, so they will likely continue existing (though they will be noticeably worse now they lost 65 HP for 9% AS/10 AP lul). Farm lanes, however, as we are now experiencing with the {{item:3302}} /Overheal/Fleet Footwork spam always strafe the border between "defensive" and "disgustingly noninteractive," and Riot knows this. The only true "farm lane" supports, {{champion:40}} and {{champion:16}} , were released early in LoL's lifespan and their roster has not been expanded since then. Even then, {{champion:16}} 's entire kit was reworked to force her to take more risks _because she was noninteractive_. Playing farm lanes isn't fun for the majority of players, and they're certainly not fun to play against. They should stay where they are, in a nice, quiet niche. > The Resolve change might suck for now, but like you said, pretty soon you will be getting your big game impact items 800g earlier after the SS changes come down. You might trade in a bit of lane pressure early, but you get GAMEWIDE impact earlier. This is a moot point, as EVERY champ building a support item gets the same 800 gold bonus, not just enchanters. In fact, this works out even BETTER for mage supports as it lets them rush them out more AP during the laning phase where it has a significant impact. When both enchanter support and mage support have to pick up a {{item:2049}} to defend their carries, mage supports take a larger hit because they are more reliant on that 800g to leverage their superior AP scalings. By the time the mage support can actually start building REAL AP, the laning phase is often over (or close to over) and the enchanter support's team-based utility {{item:3107}} {{item:3069}} {{item:3190}} can start impacting the map. However, when both supports gain 800g earlier, the mage support is 50g off of a {{item:1026}} while the enchanter support is returning with a {{item:3114}} (assuming they're still rushing a team utility item). Enchanter supports may have to start building an early AP item like {{item:3504}} to maintain relevance during the later part of the laning phase, but there's no point speculating while the new patch is in PBE. > Top tanks should be specialized at neutralizing lane like Maokai did before Aftershock came down. Tanks putting out high damage and pressure like Titanic Hydra on Shen just seems silly to me. Just make tanks act as tanks from the beginning, give them more durability and stop trying to give them damage. It's ok for them to be glorified meat shields.Having said that, I think there are bigger issues to tackle for tanks (like Aftershock) so keeping in mind we are going to enter a realm where tank supports can start building items 800g sooner, I think this change might be minimal. This is a philosophical difference between us, as it has little to do with Resolve changes and more to do with champ interactions in general. Anyways, tanks (and all champs, for that matter) need threat, which means some combination of disruption and damage. Forget about giving tanks even more tank stats, the strongest, stupidest tanks right now (aka {{champion:516}} ) are stupid because they simply WILL NOT DIE, even with crit ADCs and hypercarries being strong at the moment. As you mentioned, a faster 800g means that support tanks will hit their first major buy considerably faster, which means beefier, scarier {{champion:89}} {{champion:111}} {{champion:12}} {{champion:44}} {{champion:223}} {{champion:201}} . We'll see what happens. It is NOT OKAY for tanks to be glorified meat shields early in the game. By design, tanks power spike in the midgame and rely on cheap defensive items and base scalings (or ability scalings that scale with defensive stats {{champion:33}} {{champion:54}} {{champion:113}} {{champion:106}} {{champion:36}} to control the game. Remove this midgame threat and tanks lose their power window against {{champion:114}} {{champion:23}} {{champion:80}} {{champion:133}} and the rest of the damage-oriented top laners. If tanks are reduced to low pressure, afk farming "lane neutralizers" who allow their opponents to free farm and roam, their power window (and the whole reason for picking them) is unacceptably weakened. All full tanks eventually lose the ability to pressure carries in a 1v1, either because the carries have reached their core 3 item builds, the tanks have fallen behind, the carries have sufficient lifesteal {{item:3072}} {{item:3153}} {{item:3812}}, or some combination of the three, at which point they become team-reliant punching bags. This is fine during the later stages of the game, but should not happen early. The champs you dislike seem to be tanks (and some fighters/juggeranuts) who build an early damage item into full tank items. These tanks are sacrificing the raw survivability and faster power spike of other tanks {{champion:14}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:516}} {{champion:57}} {{champion:111}} for stronger dueling and late game threat, and they are (and should be) rewarded appropriately. {{item:3078}} tanks {{champion:75}} {{champion:39}} {{champion:83}}, {{item:3748}} tanks {{champion:98}} {{champion:19}}, and {{item:3071}} juggernatus {{champion:122}} {{champion:86}} {{champion:420}} exemplify this concept, and all of these tanks are much squishier than their full tank counterparts until they get their builds rolling. No one likes getting run over by a {{item:3748}} {{champion:98}} , especially not as an immobile carry, but a {{item:3748}} {{champion:98}} who falls behind will get steamrolled much more soundly by a 2-3 kill carry than a classic full tank. It hurts to be on the losing end of the match up (thanks, 0/9/1 Yasuo...), but the numbers do add up. > You want to be durable in lane? Ok, you gotta go Resolve in one of your 2 runes, and then you're gonna trade in some damage and/or lane pressure in return for extra safety in lane. I hope I didn't make a confusing statement earlier in our post chain, but I don't think that any enchanter support really wants to be durable in lane at the expense of stronger abilities except {{champion:44}} . All enchanter supports really want is Revitalize (+5% heal/shield power +10% heal/shield power if target is under 40% HP), and they grab Font of Life because it's the only other Resolve talent that works with their CC heavy kits. Considering that the majority of enchanter supports are casters, it makes no sense that Revitalize - a rune _designed_ for them - should be gated behind a +65 HP/ -10 AP trade-off they don't want in lane. > I don't see how that's not healthy... It's not healthy because nontraditional supports ({{champion:101}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:63}} ... you already know who I'm talking about...) DO NOT HAVE TO MAKE THE TRADE to reach their maximum laning potential. It would be healthy if ALL rune trees had this "half stat" system where you get half of your primary tree's stat and half of your secondary tree's stat, as now everyone has to consider their starting distributions when determining their secondary rune page. However, as I mentioned before. this considerably limits the number of viable secondary runes you can run on different champs and hurts player choice. Regardless, I truly appreciate your honest feedback. Much thanks.
: I know that's not what the intention was, but I'm saying Riot probably accepted toning down the offensive capabilities of enchanters as a side effect they can live with, and we as a community should not cry about Soraka and Janna losing lane pressure. Here's the deal. There idea of Resolve being a "more viable secondary tree" was not to just make it better in general, but to make it better as a DEFENSIVE option. So it gives you more defense, the tradeoff is less offense. Based on their earlier posts about Runes Reforged and the philosophy behind it, I'd say they don't want you to choose Resolve secondary if you are trying to pressure lane. If you are trying to pressure lane you take a more aggressive option. Resolve secondary is more geared towards just surviving a high pressure lane. They want to make defensive farm laning viable again, at the cost of having limited lane pressure. NO MORE HAVING YOUR CAKE AND EATING IT TOO...for anyone. I think you can see how taking Resolve second kind of helps the Targons/Overheal issue with ADC since taking Resolve second will significantly gimp their attack speed. As to your point of AP being part of their utility as well, this ties into the point I made above about damage being too important. The damage and utility should not be tied together. What we need is avenues to choose damage or utility in sufficient power to equal that damage, not ways to have both. Like guess what? If you go for something that give you more damage, your shielding gonna be worse, or you gonna get gibbed if caught out. Like say I choose Resolve second as Janna so that if I get caught by Leona without my flash up, it doesn't guarantee my death. The trade in return for becoming tough to all in is that it's tougher to bully the lane. I made a post before about how the obsession with damage is ruining the game. Items and runes that split damage and utility or tankiness. Remember back when ADC's or mid could take Banshees or GA (pre-reworks) as pure defensive items last? Going full damage items was considered a big risk, now full damage is standard cuz you NEED THE DAMAGE. And it was ok for you to do a little less damage cuz beefy champs did less damage too, so it wasn't a situation where you had to nuke down the front line or you were gonna die.
> I know that's not what the intention was, but I'm saying Riot probably accepted toning down the offensive capabilities of enchanters as a side effect they can live with, and we as a community should not cry about Soraka and Janna losing lane pressure. I just can't agree with you here, not without some kind Red statement specifically addressing this issue. Riot is not an omnipotent force, ESPECIALLY regarding the support role, and have made many unintentional balancing mistakes that they have admitted to and addressed in subsequent patch notes. Based on the patch note descriptions and the lack of discussion leading up to these changes, I think it's safe to assume that Riot just forgot about support champs in this instance. Minor sidenote: {{champion:37}} {{champion:40}} losing lane pressure isn't the focus here, since they're rare cases of support champs having almost zero offensive pressure in lane and still "working" as viable champs..It's {{champion:117}} {{champion:267}} {{champion:25}} {{champion:43}} {{champion:432}} {{champion:497}} {{champion:37}}, all the bot lane tanks, and most every Resolve champ in the game who needs to threaten the enemy laners to be relevant in lane. Think of it this way - if the supp takes spellthief or relic shield at the start of the game, this change hurts them. EDIT: If the recent PBE sightstone changes and statements tell us anything, it's that Riot wants supports to have even MORE gold and less deviance in their build paths from other players. They want supports to be able to rush impactful items and "feel useful" earlier, which means having big items like {{item:3107}} and {{item:3190}} before 20-22 minutes. The idea that Riot wants to "tone down" supports while ALSO pumping them full of gold is counterintuitive. The Riot mission statement is clear: they want supports to be BETTER, FASTER, and that's not what these changes are. You've mentioned how you believe that there should be less damage in the game outside of the dedicated damage roles, and I might have agreed with you 6 years ago when the game was centered around meaty, immobile, low damage tanks {{champion:33}} {{champion:36}} {{champion:31}} and squishy, high damage carries {{champion:67}} {{champion:18}} {{champion:22}} . ({{champion:67}} {{champion:44}} ... The good ol' days). From your perspective, I can see how taking damage out of enchanters might be seen as a step in that direction. However, with the huge amount of damage that exists in LoL today, specifically in bot lane, all these changes do is swing even more laning power towards the damage-oriented {{champion:101}} {{champion:143}} {{champion:63}} {{champion:161}} champs. I get that the game has more damage than you would like, but a roundabout isolated nerf like this doesn't fix anything. As for damage and utility not being tied together... This is League. You already have champs like {{champion:43}} {{champion:267}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:432}} whose champ design falls apart if they can't bring BOTH damage and utility to the early game. Furthermore, building AP on a caster of ANY kind should feel good, that's why supports gained AP scaling in season 3. It's also what makes full AP enchanters - either bot or in solo lanes - playable (still meme-ish but playable). As far as the support role goes, building AP isn't just about damage; it's about feeling your champ grow with items and feeling important, which also means a growth in utility (i'm paraphrasing but that's pretty close to the original Riot statement). Beyond that, the {{item:3114}} set of items already provide a unique boost to heal and shield power EXCLUSIVELY and is often the optimal build path for Enchanters anyway because of how cheap it is. When aggressive enchanters no longer have damage, we go back to the early Season 2 {{champion:40}} {{champion:16}} afk farming meta with kill lanes {{champion:53}} {{champion:89}} trying to push them out. Or we would, if the full AP poke in bot lane now didn't exist (as mentioned above). Correct me if I'm wrong, but if it seems like the League you are envisioning is very different from the League we are currently playing. If these Resolve changes push the game closer in that direction, then I understand why you support them. However, it is clear that these changes are bad for full supports in the way the game currently exists, and for that reason I can't back them.
: LOLWUT? Where were you for all the threads about tanks shitting on everything with Aftershock? Level 3 Leona does more burst than an assassin. Pretty sure everyone was complaining about how oppressive shit like{{champion:89}} {{champion:12}} {{champion:516}} {{champion:57}} is. The Enchanter complaint is laughable. Gain 65 health in exchange for sorakas heal giving 3 less health you can't be serious. Yeah hard nerfed kek. As we all know Enchanters are "aggressive" supports
If you don't think that {{champion:117}} {{champion:267}} {{champion:43}} {{champion:432}} {{champion:37}} are aggressive, then I really don't know what to tell you. 10 AP is a noticeable difference when laning, especially against Xerath, Annie, Zyra, Brand, and other mage supports in bot lane who aren't taking Resolve and can access Sorcery's full 20 AP. If you can't meaningfully threaten a mage opponent as an enchanter support, then you will just stand there and get pooped on until you run out of mana healing/shielding and get forced out of lane. AP is a necessity to win early trades for most aggressive supports, and an inability to trade means an inability to farm for your ADC. These advantages wash out as champs gain skill levels and gold, but every bit counts during the early game.
: I think the change to Resolve secondary is good, and the changes to Resolve primary bad. Here's why: 1) Enchanters like Soraka and Janna are not supposed to be oppressive in lane. They are defensive supports. The idea behind the new runes was to give people stylized play with a specific goal in mind. So if you want to play ANY support effectively in an aggressive fashion, you will have to choose to take a significant hit to defensive power. It's not an unforeseen side effect, it's an intentional change on Riot's part. They are trying to kill well-rounded "good 90% of the time" builds, in favor of allowing people to play more how they want to. I have been playing Janna at over 50% winrate since like season 2, and I have traditionally build her pure utility and defense. Last season I had 0 AP or AD in my Janna rune page and it worked just fine. Soraka and Janna should be like Tank tops, they just kind of neutralize lane, not actually win it. Soraka in particular is too reliably poking people out of lane right now IMO. Bullies like Nami, Lulu, and Karma already had more damage than the other enchanters to being with, and now Aeri gives more damage, so they don't need the extra 9AP or whatever to do their job. 2) The change to Resolve primary is mindboggling to me. Why is Riot obsessed with giving damage to non-damage carries? All last season people bitched about tanks doing too much damage, so let's give them some AP/AD? RIOT HAS TO START MOVING THE GAME AWAY FROM THE IDEA THAT DAMAGE IS THE ONE TRUE GOD AND THE ONLY WAY FOR SOMETHING TO BE VIABLE IS TO DO GOOD DAMAGE. Seriously, if you want tanks to be better early, make them TANKY early, not damaging. Don't give them a tool to win lane, they aren't designed for that. If anything, buff the HP from Resolve primary so it feels good to take it. I'd say remove Aftershock, and put Courage of Colossus in it's place again. Rather than giving them a tool to win lane and win trades, give them a tool to become that front line meat shield earlier with shitty damage, so they don't win lane, but rather tp bot right at lvl 6 for a team fight where they actually tank for the team. This is their identity and what they are built for, not bursting people. If utility supports are not strong enough, buff their utility, NOT THEIR DAMAGE. If tank supports are weak, make them tankier and/or maybe buff their utility a touch too. I know I know, the casuals will bitch and moan about how annoying it is to play against really strong utility. But it's better than making the game as one dimensionally focused around damaged and aggression like it is now (which is fun in theory, but becomes boring when every game starts to feel the same).
> The idea behind the new runes was to give people stylized play with a specific goal in mind. Yes... That's how Resolve operated BEFORE these changes, and how they still operate for every other rune page. Now speccing Resolve gives HALF HP and HALF some other stat. That's not a "specific goal", that's a divided focus. If I want AP as my laning stat, I should get AP. If I want health, then I should get health. I don't want half AP and half health, and want a full amount of a stat that I can make a playstyle around. Splitting the stat block makes playstyles less pronounced if anything. I see what you're getting at when you talk about empowering support utility, but AP doesn't just translate into more damage on enchanters... It also means stronger slows, bigger shields/heals, and other utility scalings (MS, bonus AD from shields, bonus AS granted, etc.). Support utility scalings rise with AP - it's been that way since shortly after {{champion:267}} 's release- and many supports have nutty AP ratios ({{champion:40}} {{champion:16}} {{champion:497}} especially). A {{champion:40}} or {{champion:16}} with 10 extra AP will have more supportive potential than one with 65 extra HP in most cases, which is especially important since both are likely starting {{item:3301}} and won't have access to much ability power before {{item:3504}} . > It's not an unforeseen side effect, it's an intentional change on Riot's part.They are trying to kill well-rounded "good 90% of the time" builds, in favor of allowing people to play more how they want to. Except that isn't the point of this change. They specifically said in the patch notes that the changes were made "in order to make it a more viable secondary tree." The goal here was to make Resolve a more attractive option, not to weaken other champs already taking it as some kind of weird, roundabout balancing. If you have a warrant that proves otherwise, I'd like to see it.
: It did not "ruin" supports. It reduces the power of tank supports.
Would you prefer "arbitrarily and accidentally weakened every primary support that doesn't rush morello's after sightstone?" But hey man, _vapes_ whatever you say.
Glory97 (EUW)
: Adc-, and (peel-)Support-Itemisation needs to be reworked
> A single peels support should not be able to completly deny any attempt of an assassin to kill the adc int the later-stages of the game, if not played completly wrong. Nope. Peel supports have value because they CAN nullify an assassin, bruiser, or other massive threat to their teammates, effectively minimizing the attacker's impact despite not having equivalent access to gold. Dodging tanks, outplaying supports, killing their targets, and escaping alive is what separates good assassins from the 0/9/1 Yasuo in our Solo Q games. If an assassin makes a mistake and eats a {{champion:40}} tornado, {{champion:117}} polymorph, or {{champion:16}} silence, their attack is ruined and they SHOULD need to retreat. To address the original statement, if a single peel support is completely denying an assassin in the later stages of the game, they are probably outplaying them (or the assassin doesn't have a good enough set up from teammates). > Maybe crit-items will get nerfed sometime, but as long as crit-items work the way they do right now, adcs are unbalancable. It's always going to be "stomp" or "get stomped". (addressing only the particular gameplay of a botlane combination: peel-supp+crit-adc). This statement assumes that bot lanes can only ever "stomp" or "be stomped." Going _even_ is a real thing. Whether this means an afk farm lane or lanes where both bot lanes kill each other (and other players) in equal amounts, bot lane can achieve an equilibrium much like any other lane. When laning is over, who power spikes (and when they power spike) is contingent on the champs being played and what items they have. From a strategic point of view, balancing a team's power spike windows (i.e. taking a {{champion:5}} jungle to help snowball a {{champion:96}} {{champion:117}} lane) is part of the beauty of competitive league meta. The inequities in power windows is part of what spurs dynamic movement in league (i.e. I'm going to gank for my {{champion:67}} {{champion:117}} [a late game lane] so they don't lose to {{champion:119}} {{champion:89}} [an early game lane]). For that reason, I don't believe your suggestions have a place in League right now. There are other games, however, that have built themselves on a more linear growth curve that narrows the power differences between champs of the same role at different points in the game. Blizzard's Heroes of the Storm comes to mind here. I can see that you've played League for a long time and will likely keep playing, but you might want to give HotS a try if you'd like to try a more streamlined MOBA.
Rioter Comments
Siyther (NA)
: of course riot almost never makes the right changes lol they should do something but i agree that this may not be the corrct answer. will upvote cause u seem like one of the few who can carry a conversation without coming across sounding like a dick lol or rging cause ppl might see things a tad diff
Thanks man. I'm really hoping I can get a Rioter on this, so I don't wanna look like a dick, lol.
Atanchan (NA)
: I mean ... it'd be their meta, too. The entire idea of both pre- and post-retcon lore is that our games do actually "happen," albeit in the post-retcon they're entire separate from Runeterra. Before that, though, they were actually there in-universe; while we never got many actual plot-relevant games ( I think only that one Noxus vs. Ionia happened? ) the others were basically exhibition or practice matches to improve the Summoner's control over, well, summoning and to entertain the populace. Hell, even the rank system fit, considering ranked matches could be used to determine who were the best Summoners and therefore those most likely to be called upon for matches to actually settle disputes. Which leads to the fact that, yes, the meta for us is the same for them. There's a reason why, even now, we're called Summoners; because we were meant to actually _be_ the Summoners of the League.
I like this kind of speculation. Seriously, it would probably make a great manga or fanfic if someone really expanded upon it. Still, with the retcon of "Summoners" as "actual in-game entities," it's hard to see Riot certifying any of this. I strongly doubt that Summoners will be reintroduced into LoL's lore, at least not without significant changes. When Riot makes a major design change, they rarely revert it, and that kinda sucks. Without going on too far of a tangent, the original argument was meant to emphasize that a MOBA map should have consistent elements, and one of those elements are consistent stats and behaviors across turrets of equal tiers. It's a static element of LoL, like having a square map and a river that separates both teams. It is, IMO, a building block of the game, and changing a core building block for something as dumb as forcing a meta shift seems like overkill.
Atanchan (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=MattUSticky,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=R6vNuuZZ,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2016-07-24T09:01:26.206+0000) > > As stupid as this might sound, what lore justifies having one gimpy outer turret on the Fields of Justice and asymmetrical minion spawns? I mean, in-lore, the games we play are basically just games that aren't even truly part of Runeterra and don't even directly summon Runeterran figures, but what're basically just phantoms of them, so ... Lore-wise, it actually does sort of just write itself. Hell, even before the League got retconned from Runeterra, it still wrote itself because the higher-ups of the League could've removed the fortification enchantment on the bottom towers and staggered siege minion spawns for the exactly same purpose as Riot.
I mean... I guess? Although doing so would imply that the League's Summoners are aware of not only LoL's meta, but also LoL's meta shifts. That would not only be mindblowing, but it would just be... Weird. Regardless, citing lore is dumb idea I pulled out of the moment, lol. A better idea would be "the difference between static and dynamic map components," but I mean, what can you do?...
Siyther (NA)
: dragon is not the reason for lane swaps. Most times it cause they picked a bad matchup in bot lane and they would lose lane terribly if they are forced into doing so, or some teams just have no confidence in their bot lane vs the enemy bot lane. Yes dragon is weak early game i conceid that point. Teams use lane swaping as a get me outta lane phase fast as possible cause our lanes suck strat. Lane swaps are boring and it looks like riot is trying to enforce standard lanes but that isnt the case. They are just making it cost something for that safety. Is it the right way to go ( maybe not ) time will tell.
I believe I understand what you're saying and I don't think our ideas clash. Your comment is that teams lane swap because they don't want their bot lane to get stomped. I wholeheartedly agree. My argument is that the reason why teams can even **consider** abandoning the laning phase is because they know that they can concede the early game mid map objectives (notably Dragon) without setting themselves too far behind. My argument is an extension of yours. TL; DR: " IF contesting Dragon < fighting a tough lane, THEN Lane Swaps == Good." > it looks like riot is trying to enforce standard lanes but that isn't the case. They are just making it cost something for that safety. These points are **not mutually exclusive.** RIOT WANTS TO ENFORCE STANDARD LANES, **therefore **they want to make atypical laning (aka lane swapping) cost more. Why is Riot making bot lane turrets weaker and not top lane turrets? What makes bot lane so "special" that it gets the first catty and the weakest turret? As stupid as this might sound, what lore justifies having one gimpy outer turret on the Fields of Justice and asymmetrical minion spawns? There is no unique justification for any of this other than that Riot wants players to fight each other by **enforcing the standard laning meta.** To me, that is not enough to warrant screwing with map symmetry. Look, I'm glad that Riot is making lane swapping "cost something," but I believe that they are changing the wrong thing. I think that Riot can mess with bot lane turrets and stop lane swapping. I also believe that they can change these garbage early game dragons and consequently stop lane swapping. When given a choice between "fixing something useless AND fixing a problem" and just "fixing a problem," the former should be the better choice. **Again, both choices fix the problem,** but one is WAY more clunky than its competitor. We don't need that.
Rioter Comments
: Pre-Worlds Early Game Update
I SERIOUSLY think that Riot is missing the big picture behind the lane swaps. **Players are lane swapping because the early game objectives suck. They're not worth fighting over compared to safe gold and map control.** Riot is trying to cover this issue by adding MORE early objectives (specifically, the bot lane turrets) into the game, but this is just clumsy design that doesn't address the core problem. Riot reinvented the laning meta with their objective changes, but when players adapted, they disliked the result and are now **forcing the old meta** through contrived means. I'm disappointed. In classic LoL, the point of sending two players bot lane was so your team could contest Dragon and get early team gold. The moment Dragon became an "arbitrary buff" creature that could be ignored, lane swapping became a viable strategy. Now, with Elemental Dragons, the once-formulaic arbitrary buffs are now RNG based and less consistent, making lane swapping even more lucrative. Ironically, while Riot desperately tries to remove "hidden power" from champion kits (Kayle, Taric, etc.), they've made every Elemental Dragon effect some microscopic garbage that doesn't actually mean anything until it's compounded by an Elder Dragon buff, _which players can't get until 35 min in._ In other words, **there is rarely any reward for an early Dragon kill, nor any penalty for giving up an early Dragon.** Killing Dragon does not give me a buff that IMMEDIATELY helps my team make a powerful follow up play (like Baron), nor does it give my team gold that also would let us make a follow up play (via team fighting). With no incentive to fight, safe, consistent play generally wins out in most shotcalling scenarios, and thus you have the LCS lane swaps you see today. If Riot REALLY wants to promote early game conflict, they need to give players a Dragon worth fighting over early on. Giving early Dragons team gold, a _noticeable_ team buff, or some combination of the two would work, but there are surely other ways to accomplish this. In any case, making bot lane turret "the new 'old' Dragon" and breaking map symmetry is an awkward design concept that introduces way too many arbitrary "answers" for a relatively simple problem. **TL;DR: Make early Dragons worth fighting over and lane swaps will disappear. Easy.**
mSticky (NA)
: SAVE OUR BOOTS! Patch 6.9 Boot Enchantments Gone?!
Shameless bump. I'd like to know how others feel about this.
Rioter Comments

mSticky

Level 246 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion